congress' federal budget deal. then carrie lucas explains why she believes that women earn on average as much or even more than men. and later "washington post" financial reporter ylan mueie discusses the cost high gas prices has on spending. "washington journal" is next. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] . .

>> we know that reduce some of the uncertainty that is causing job creators to sit on their hands. i'm home the president will begin to get serious about the long-term fiscal crisis our country is facing. it needs to be dealt with now and we owe it to the american people and our kids and grandkids to begin to cut spending and transform these programs so that we can save medicare, medicaid and social security. it is a serious step in the right direction and i'm hopeful this the president will take his job as simple as we are taking ours.

host: this is in the journal. from the "washington post" starting in 2022 paul ryan the budget chair's plan would end medicare as an open-ended entitlement for new retirees and begin slowly raising the age of eligibility from 65 to 67. instead of getting government paid benefits retirees would choose a private policy on a newly established medicare exchange. medicaid would come in for sharper cuts exceeding $700 billion during the next decade. the g.o.p. plan would end the

financing partnership between the federal government and states replacing it with a block grant that would give states less money and free them to manage the program as they wish. other tax reforms would reduce the overall savings of the plan to $4.4 trillion. caller: i'm appalled that these people think they can even go there. we are the richest nation in the world. we should be able to take care of the people in this country

host: here is a photo of john boehner and his colleagues. he used the frist many times we are -- used the phrase we are broke talking about the country. what is your reaction based on what you initially said? caller: if we would go to single payer we would not be broke. we would not be paying insurance companies aural this extra money to make huge profits. it is ridiculous. i cannot believe they are going to make seniors, some who only get $400 or $500 a month as a social security check, pay extra money for their health insurance. caller: this is gabriel a republican from ventura, california. caller: my thuoughts on the stae

budget in california and federal budget, if you can compare, if the nation can compare their own personal finances through what the nation is going through on black and white, the checking account with x amount of dollars, you have banks and credit cards and you get further in debt it is black and white. you can't get out of debt. we can continue spending and with these programs but where does the buck stop? host: tom on the line for independents from sims, montana. what is your message for congress? and while you answer we will take a look at some other headlines. stpwhrao thanks for taking my call. i believe that there needs to be serious budget cutting. but the republicans don't want to cut any programs that affect

their base i.e. the farm program. it is out of control. the conservation reserve payment program where every acre we take out of production south america puts 10 acres into production. we assist farmers with their federal crop insurance premiums and we have numerous, numerous subsidy programs. but the midwest is a republican stronghold so they don't want to touch that one. another one is the defense department. we can't continue fighting these wars because they will ends up like vietnam. one of these days we will have to declare ourselves the winner around come home. so, i believe in a lot of the budget cuts but i think that they are staying away from some that they should be also taking a lack at.

thank you. host: that was tom in montana. here is the "new york times" write-up. house approves republican plan to cut trillions. they point out that almost as soon as the budget vote was approved senator harry reid democrat from nevada and majority leader vowed that the plan would never pass the senate setting up another tense showdown with house republicans over spending and administration request to raise the federal debt limit. not a single democrat voted for the proposal which will effectively serve as the house republican bargaining position in talks with the white house and democratic senate over how to reduce annual federal deficits and accumulated national debt. within minutes of the vote democrats began attack iing republican lawmakers for supporting the plan. unbelievable. dean heller votes to end medicare the democratic senatorial campaign committee headline. they call it a broad side against heller a republican running for an open seat in

nevada. here is chris van hollen. >> number one, we think it is going to hurt the fragile economic recovery and put more people out of work at a very fragile time for struggling families throughout the country. number two, we think it makes the wrong choice as to how we reduce the deficit because they choose to provide another round of big tax breaks for the wealthiest americans. host: back to your calls on the budget vote. atlanta, keisha. caller: good morning. i'm a huge fan of c-span. it is like to have my own c-span group on line. host: how does that work, a c-span group online? caller: you can have different

groups and i have a c-span giune group and everybody that likes c-span comes on and gives comments about the different shows. host: what is your message for members of congress following this budget vote? caller: my first comment is i'm very disappointed that c-span doesn't have another sort of african-american host. you only have one. so, maybe i want you to work on this one. my second comment is about the deficit right now and what is going on in congress. i think that the issues right now are more focused on the democrats cutting programs in our neighborhood and our communities. i think that we should really look at cutting more, like, agriculture programs they care about, farming programs, defense spending like the gentleman said earlier. we look at cutting these

programs also. why is it always the people who are struggling, the poor and middle class people, having to cut their programs. i think that president obama, on coming out on his run for 2012, should not focus the argument so much on the deficit because that is what the republicans want right now. host: here is the front page of the pittsbur"pittsburgh post-g." house passes g.o.p. budget bill. in addition to your phone calls and e-mails you can send us a tweet. cspanwj is our address. here is one message about cuts. both parties are a joke. we need massive cuts across the board. ridgeway, pennsylvania, steve a republican. caller: i don't really have a suggestion. i have demands out of my

representatives. i want them to stop playing around and actually work on a budget. it is unsustainable the way we are and the deficits -- the deficit is one thing. but when you look at the entire economic picture of our country we're doomed and this idea we can continue to support the programs the way they have been for years you have the republicans saying who just under george bush spent like they were democrats and now they are fiscally responsible. you have democrats who every time a republican makes a comment what they claim is all we want to do is kill senior citizens and either that or you disagree you are called racists. host: we go to tom from ohio, independent caller. caller: you know, i don't seem to remember the election the way

the republicans seem to remember it. i think a lot of independents voted republican because they promised jobs and told us obama was going to take all of this stuff from medicare. and now they have can done nothing for jobs and they are the ones that are going to take medicare away from us. i think they are saying they don't need independents, they have plenty of tea party people. host: the vote was 235-193 object t on the budget resolution. what happens from this point is that the senate may take up its own version of this. this is not an item the president has it sign, but it does put in action the appropriations bills, which as we know the president does have to sign. on the four republican no votes from yesterday politico writes it up as an explanation explaining the four no votes on

the ryan plan. just four no votes. the four joined 193 democrats. politico speaking as to why they bucked. rehberg is a senate candidate without a primary challenger in a state with a strong new deal streak and represents -- and respects the role government can play. they talk about ron paul the least surprising of the nos. he lambasted the plan. he is a libertarian who is toying with a presidential run. he said ryan's budget fails to dismantle the welfare state a long-time goal of his. as for david mckinley the west virginian he says it gave him pause when he told the state journal he was staying neutral until he saw the details. he was the only freshman to vote no. he may be worried about

redistricting in west virginia. walter jones, his office declined to put out a statement but the record shows he has been a growing thorn in the side of his party. he voted against legislation to end publicly financed presidential campaigns in january and has opposed the party on the iraq policy. so those four g.o.p. votes yesterday. buffalo, new york, frank, republican. what do you think of that vote? caller: it was basically typical. it is all yes, yes, yes and i'm a republican. or all no, no, no. and it goes back and forth for both parties. like they said, sometimes we can't even decide what to put on a pizza, the two parties. host: what is your message for the folks when they come back

ho home? caller: in our age group, around 60, our taxes got raised twice. we got raised twice when we were going to retire. and they seem to be looking -- they want us to pay for their kids and grandkids which we have already done for ours. if that is so important, then get $45,000 out of your pocket and put in the bank for them. we were in debt when we were born. they want us to put things on the table. i don't care if it is a smidgen of a budget. you get the money we're paying for foreign affairs around show the exact figures. let the american people decide whether we want a million spent here or a million spent there or do we want it spent in our own country. host: christopher is on the line from seattle, democrat. good morning to you. caller: good morning.

host: what do you make of the house vote yesterday? caller: the statement, thank you to the four republicans even though their reasonings were askew for voting no against this bill. two questions. one, why is more attention not being paid to the one point of contention that seems to remain in this budget plan and that is the tax cuts for the rich? my concern is that the republicans are still kind of jobbing the americans by claim being it is the small business, we are talk become the ma and pop corner store when it is the subsection s corporations they seem to be more concerned about. the coke industries, k.k.r.,

investment firms like representative van volunteeren and the -- van hollen was explaining about paul ryan. it is that 4% that they want to protect that is generating all of this revenue, it is not the ma and pop. why is more not explained to the general public so they are aware of what the republicans are truly protecting? host: thank you for your participation. this is marvin in travers city, michigan. what is your message? caller: how could they allow a group of people come in and group of corrupt financial institutions commit a coup on the american government, open the vaults to the american treasury and allow them to raid the treasury for $3.5 trillion and come to the poorest people

in the country to pay it back? that is effectively a coup. if that happened in argentina, that would be called a coup. why do we allow our financial institutions to come to the american people, throw open the public treasury, allow them to come in and loot the treasury with absolutely no recourse? thank you for taking my call. host: sure. here is more from "new york times" about the political part of this. democrats promise to press republicans hard. they say starting in the recess that began friday and continuing through the 2012 elections. this is a defining moment and we will go district by district to hold republicans accountable for ending medicare. this is from congressman steve israel. he say some republican house members said they had been contacted by alarmed constituents and party leadership urged lawmakers it be prepared to explain their votes over the spring break. we will continue it 25eubg your calls on -- to take your calls.

i want to point out a different part of the day yesterday, not on the big vote but on a different version put forth by the republican study committee. here is a head line from the hill. we can show you a piece of it. chaos on the house floor as democrats try to unsettle g.o.p. budget during vote. they point out the house floor erupted into a scene friday as democrats tried to upset republicans in planning, putting forth their machine. democrats unsettled the republicans by voting present in a vote on a minister conservative -- more conservative budget. they say several republicans including the rules committee chair and kathy mcmorris rodgers switched to ensure the more conservative budget did not win approval. so, the drama erupted when democrats began to shift their votes to present with democrats

and republicans alike standing to shout at one another and at the presiding officer. a scene more akin to the british parliament. here is one minute from the floor yesterday. >> no one presenter mr mr. mcinerney. mr. waxman. no unpresent for mr. waxman. mrs. mcmorris rodgers. no for mrs. mcmorris rodgers. mr. clyburn. no one present for mr. clyburn.

mr. rossman. no one present for mr. rossman of new jersey. host: we hope that gave you a flavor of what happened yesterday. but the hill goes opb n to writ the presiding officer tried to close down the vote about a more democrats chose to go from no to present. democrats vote present said steny hoyer shouting at his colleagues who tried one by one to switch their no votes to present. paul ryan the architect of the official budget shouted shut it down to close the vote and count the tally before democrats could switch enough to advance the amendment. at one point jesse jackson jr. stood on a chair and pointed at the presiding officer to keep this vote open. this was on the r.s.c. version,

republican study version of the bill. the vote failed. it was 119-136 with 172 democrats voting present. a little bit from the action yesterday. watertown, new york, william, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. i justment to say i think the -- i just want to say the biggest problem is the republicans have stopped voting. i quit voting when there wasn't a candidate worth voting for. mccain is a republican, but he is not from the republican party but we have the tea party speaking for the republican party and it is not very good for the people of the united states. i just wish the rest of us would go back to voting. i quit because i'm disabled and i collect social security disability and i have since i was 54.

and i still collect it. and that pays my medical bills for a while but then medicaid will start costing me more and i didn't have enough to live so i stopped medicaid. but what people don't talk about is medicaid still takes care of you because even if you don't pay in to them the $120 that they want you still have major medical through mediciaid and people should make sure they talk about that. host: patrick is on the line from l.a. caller: hello. thanks for taking my call. host: independent line. caller: with republicans the hypocrisy is so deep you could take 100 examples and 200 examples and it goes on and on. it is so frustrating. to take the he can about medicare, things could be done to raus the cost of medicare --

reduce the cost of medicare. but when there was talk about the death panel there was scare mongering then they want to scrap it. so i'm frustrated because they are hypocrites to the max. host: bradenton, florida. democrat. caller: i really love your show. it is the only show that makes my wife go back to bed and i get it hours of free time. host: wow! i don't know how to follow that up but keep going. caller: as much as she's apolitical she is very logical and has suggestion and a question and she is scared to call in. she was wondering why that the president just doesn't impose a fee of 5% on medicaid, medicare, housing subsidies, food stamps. let half of it go to the administration of the program and the or half to go into a fiduciary pool which would

support the program in case anything bad ever happened. and she is a math person and thinks that would work. and it wouldn't involve a bunch of legislation and arguing and stuff like that and maybe save some of these programs. then she had a question that i hope you don't block my future calls, but she was wondering about -- and i tried to explain but i didn't have a good answer. c-span is public access type of channel but what does it really cost the taxpayers for c-span to be on? and i understand she's not a fan but i love you enough for beth of us. -- both of us. host: we get no taxpayer money, no money from the federal government, right? caller: it is hard to believe. who pays for the micro phones and interviews? host: the money comes from the cable operators. they provide us with the money this makes up our budget. does that help clear things up?

caller: that is good to know. i can tell her that right now. host: appreciate it. here is another twitter emergency about the budget. from 2000 to 2008 we tried the republic way and got near depression and no jobs. why try that again? ron paul was up in new hampshire an event we covered live on c-span. he is looking at a presidential run. here is what he had to say. >> we were down there this week. we have two big deals the c.r. and the budget. as bit of information i didn't vote for the c.r., continued resolution. i did not vote for the budget because i don't think it will do anything to solve the problem. this year the national debt will be about $2 trillion and we are talking about $38 billion cut in the c.r. which wasn't real.

it was fictitious and it is nothing. that is why this will have to come to an end. host: ron paul in new hampshire last evening. a call from mississippi, red. caller: i want to say that i thank the republicans for what they have done, they have achieved a victory for the democrats in 2012. that is all i wanted to say because i love what they did. thank you. host: roy, republican from las vegas. good morning. host: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i think that the situation we are in now the american people are the ones to blame -- we have lived in more or less a time of plenty and people have been pretty complacent about what our government is doing and where the money is going.

new in a time of scarcity people are saying hey, where is all of our money going and we now have to start all over basically building up our coffers. but we need to pay more attention to where our representatives are spending our money and actually taking our money and sending it all over the world. host: joe, cleveland, on the democrat line. what would you like to say about the budget? caller: i'm 69 years old and i'm ready to retire. i had a slight medical problem. i had bladder stones. and just the diagnosis cost around $7,000. without medicare and without insurance how would i pay the $7,000? on the medicare vote, as far as i can see, that was due to the

problems financially. well, they don't want to raise taxes for the rich. i say let it be, don't raise taxes for the rich. if the rate is 35%, let them pay 35%. not 15%, not 10%. let them pay 35%. host: let me run this by you again. starting in 2022 paul ryan would end medicare as an open-ended entitlement for new retirees and slowly raise the age of eligibility to 67. they say instead of getting a government paid benefits retirees could choose a private policy on a newly established medicare exchange. does that mean anything to you? caller: that is just another ploy to take away whatever

little amounts of money that i might have in the future. host: diane from de soto, kan s kansas, republican. caller: this relates directly to what you were just reading. i got a notice yesterday from freddie mac shack.org president obama's budget speech regarding pao paul ryan. he, meaning president obama, said the g.o.p. plan with replace medicare with a voucher program that leaves seniors at the mercy of the insurance indust industry. that is an exaggeration. nothing would change for those 55 and older. kno those younger would get stped subsidies to -- federal subsidies to buy private

insurance from a medicare exchange set up by the government. host: keep going. caller: president obama said poor children, children with autism, and kids with disabilities, would be left to fend for themselves. that, too, is an exaggeration. the g.o.p. says states would have freedom and flexibility to tailor a medicaid program that fits the needs of their unique populations. it doesn't bar states from covering those children. there were several other things in this, but i wanted to point out those specific two items because people think they are going to be cut off and at the mercy of insurance companies and that is not true. host: more about medicare in this post story. democrats think republicans made a political mistake in embracing

the ryan budget and gives house democrats a chance it regin traction with senior citizens a critical bloc that swung by 21 percentage points. i want to say to republican cheeks do you realize your leadership is asking you to cast a vote to abolish medicare as we know it comes from the minority leader pelosi here. this was on the house floor. the democrats' top architect in the house was giddy at the thought of republican freshmen in elderly districts in florida, pennsylvania, ohio and michigan voting for the plan. here is one more tweet. with the republican vote yesterday they guarantee president obama's re-election for twelve. here is a little bit from the president's radio address followed by republican senator time coburn. >> one plan put forward by some republicans aims to reduce our

deficit by $4 trillion the next 10 years. i think their goal is worthy and i believe their vision is wrong for america. it is a vision that says at a time when other nations are hustling to outcompete us for jobs and businesses we have to make drastic cuts in education, infrastructure and clean insurance. the very investments we need to get those jobs. >> as a physician i know medicaid as currently structured is often a disaster for patients. tphaerpl half of physicians don't accept medicine kid patients because the reimbursement rates are so low. patients on medicine kid have poorer health outcomes, higher rates of infant mortality and more complications after major surgery than individuals with no health insurance at all. host: we have hudson, massachusetts, on the line, ron, an independent. caller: good morning.

thank you for taking my call. i want to make a comment about the cost of living and way it is calculated. a lot of people are not aware that when they put out that figure it does not include food or fuel. now, correct me if i'm wrong but that is two of the most important things. people heat their houses, use it to get to work, feed themselves. those are two of the major increases that have happened. i believe this change happened, i believe, during the reagan administration. host: link that to the vote yesterday and the budget of the future. caller: it sort of allows, i think, the republicans and corporate america to continue

pushing the labor wage down. they are basically trying to make a slave wage equivalent to what china, the people in china are making to try to compete, bring down those wages and increase c.e.o. and top 1% earners, the fat cats need to get tpafatter, i guess. the spin that it puts on it is, gee, you go to your boss and say i need a raise, gas is going up, food has gone up. i need a raise. no the figure is here. you only need a 1% raise. that is all it has gone up. if you don't include food or fuel, i mean it just skews

everything. and it keeps people in the dark as to what the cost of living really is. the cost of living has gone up dramatically. host: thanks for your thoughts. we want to get some other viewers it and we only have eight or nine minutes. the mayor of the district of columbia will be on at 7:45 to take your calls. we want to let you know that in addition to congress being on a two-week break the president is supposed to travel the country in the coming days to do some town hall type meetings on economic matters. when they are back together in washington in early may the big debate will start on the debt ceiling. the "wall street journal" has this headline. wall street presses republicans to reach a deal on the debt ceiling. during a recent series of meetings under top wall street executives and lobbyists ernie johnson republicans to resolve it or risk turmoil.

boehner explained the politics of the vote to investors telling them republicans won't approve an increase without a long-term deficit reduction plan. in turn the executive said delaying a resolution could unnerve skittish credit markets. that is the "wall street journal." the debt ceiling is also in the post. it is written that the deal to raise the debt ceiling with require spending cuts. this from president obama. he said friday congress will have to agree to make cuts in federal spending if it is to reach a crucial deal on raising this debt ceiling that has limited $14.3 trillion. fo fort lauderdale, melvin a democrat. caller: good morning. i have several issues to bring up. number one i want to talk about the deficit initiative. republicans continue to say we don't have a revenue problem.

we have a revenue problem because they give tax cuts in the rich in the 1980's we started running deficits. we have had deficits ever since. the republicans were in office and when clinton was in there he had a surplus. we have run deficits ever since and giving tax breaks tots rich. people continue to say about their budgets where we run the budget at home. who was running their budget at home when they take 40% of the money and put it in the lottery? that is what has happened because 40% of the wealth is owned by 2% of the people and we're giving them money become -- minute becoack. then you have the myth about small businesses. small businesses go anywhere

from 500 to 1,000 employees and even if they use that confining their total business income with their own personal income tax, still they were in the $250,000 category is the money after they wrote off the business expenses. because i had my own small business and i have done that, too. lastly, please, when people ask questions when do the democrats take full control of congress and when did president obama get elected la elected like you had. they say in 2006, 2010. they vote and went off in november. they are voted in in odd years. nobody takes office in even

years. host: silver spring, chris on the republican line. caller: good morning. i read yesterday that medicare was going to go bankrupt in 10 years, 2021. even under obama care. so, the democrats said nothing about the tax increases. when you raise taxes you have to have the consent of the governed and i think a lot of people are getting mad that their taxes are being taken away in frivolous programs. they ought to have a hotline for whistle blowers of government fraud. i will leave it there. host: here is an e-mail this morning from vermont. wonderful. just wonderful. republicans want to destroy medicare calling it socialism. they have --

hos host: we have more time to talk about budget matters in the days and weeks ahead. i want to drop in a couple other stories that are making news. it is the off lead in the insurance times and if you haven't heard gaddafi is using cluster bombs in a civilian area according to the story. forces loyal have been firing into residential neighborhoods in this city misrata with heavy weapons including cluster bombs banned by much of the world and ground-to-ground rockets according to witnesses and survivors and physical evidence. that is t"new york times." one of the load items in the post says the actual number of bombs available to nato is

running short. less than a month in the conflict they are short of precision bombs highlighting the limitations of britain, france and other countries in sustaining even a small military action over an extended period of time. the shortage of european munitions with limited number of aircraft has raised doubts among some officials as to whether the u.s. can continue to avoid returning to the air campaign if gaddafi hangs on to power several more months. we are down to our last couple of calls, independent from michigan. caller: i want to thank you for c-span. i love it and try to listen as much as i can. host: you make the program with your calls so go ahead. caller: my big concern is i think there's a lot of fraud going on as far as medicare. you have people in their early 20's that are filing for disability because they are a little depressed or have a backache or something.

i think that there needs to be more research and investigation done into all of the people that are on disability. there are people that truly need it, but there are also people that are really taking advantage of the system. they have found out how they can get on it and what they have to do to stay on it and get all of the other benefits that go with it. i think that that would help our budget considerably if we could get rid of the fraud. host: call from mayry, manchester, new hampshire. caller: for the conspiracy theorists that remain i would like it point out the falling. the new r.n.c. chairman from wisconsin, governor scott walker the republican of wisconsin, and paul ryan is from wisconsin where the koch brothers have a huge stronghold. i would like to point out if

they would like the country to go the way that wisconsin is goi going, just keep voting republican. thank you. host: one earlier call mentioned goes prices. we will focus in the last 45 minutes of the program on gas prices with a washington reporter 45 minutes from now carrie lukas the topic an op-ed titled there is no male-female wage gap. we will talk about what men and women earn with her. after this break vincent gray democratic mayor of the district of columbia. we will be right back.

>> on april 12, 1861 confederate forces attack the for the sumter, south carolina. this month the nation commemorates the 150th anniversary of the bombardment and c-span 3 brings you the sights and sounds from fort sumter and charleston with interviews of civil war scholars and reenactors from the north and south. get the schedule at c-span.org and press the c-span alert button and have the schedule e-mailed to you. >> to be apparent that you are training the people that you can't live without to live without you.

>> the s.a.t.'s, college ranking. financial aid forms. weekly standard editor andrew ferguson was not prepared for crazy u. >> nothing like that happened to me when i was looking for college in the mid 1970's. so, it was starting to -- dawn on me. >> find out if this dad catches up on c-span's "q&a." you can download a podcast of "q&a" at c-span.org/podcast. >> i think we are all ready, both democrats and republicans, to get the country on the right track. >> the debate ahead of us is about more than spending levels. it is about the role of government itself. >> lawmakers now turn their attention to the 2012 budget and debt limit. watch the debate from capitol hill, the white house and around

washington on line any time with the c-span video library. several, watch, clip and share. it is what you want when you want. >> now available c-span's congressional directory a complete guide to the first session of the 112th congress. new and returning house and senate members with contact information including twitter addresses, district maps and committee assignments and information on the white house, supreme court justices and governors. order online at c-span.org/shop. >> "washington journal" continues. host: at the table vincent gray mayor of the district of columbia, newly elected. we open with this recent shot in "the washington post." capital police officers arresting, searching you and several members of the d. krfc. counsel protesting restrictions that would be placed on the city as part of the federal budget

deal surrounding the potential shutdown. you said that the financial battle, the budget battle between the congress and city of washington, d.c. is only just begun. what do you mean? guest: well, i think that the reality is that waoerbld not be involved in this in the first place. we believe that we ought to be autonomous from the federal budget process. that we are not an agency of the federal government but we have been treated as such. we are not the department of justice or department of commerce or any other department of the federal government. so, we are seeking autonomy to make the decisions about our local funds. i think a lot of people don't realize that our budget goes up to capitol hill, up to the congress to be approved. what they really approve are funds that have been raised by other people. we raise $5.5 billion a year to support the services of our city

just like other states and localities do, yet unlike anybody else our budget has to be approved by the congress before we can spend a dime. that puts us in the situation where our government had to consider a shutdown when the federal government was considering a shutdown. we felt it was inappropriate and we should be given the aton my to make our -- autonomy to make our own decisions. so we are where we need to be separated. host: video of arrests last week. a lot of write-ups focused on the abortion issue. they talked about planned parenthood nationally. explaining the issue as it related to the district. guest: as it related to the district what was imposed on us is a prohibition against spending our local funds on abortion. and it is not the question of

who should the authority to make the decision. host: where does this go from here in terms of the district's relationship with congress? guest: i think we will continue to look at ways we can make the case. there have been continuing discussions throughout the week of next steps. i actually think this has been a unifying, has had a unifying effect on the district of columbia. people are talking about this. they want more action. i think that again people want to focus around the nation -- want the folks around the nation to understand our plight. we are not talking about spending federal funds. we are talking about spending our own dollars. host: the phone numbers are on the bottom of the screen for mayor gray from the district of columbia. he is newly elected beat the city mayor adrian fenty. what was your winning personal? guest: we got 75%. host: sixth person elected as mayor of d.c.

give us more insight into how this works, home resume. what does it mean to the way you operate? guest: what it means is we have some limited authority to make decisions for ourselves. but the rub comes in when every law that is passed in the district of columbia by our city council approved by the mayor has to go to the congress where each house has to adopt the resolution. they have to adopt a resolution of disapproval and has to be adopted by the president. no other place has to be subjected to that. the same is true of our budget. what the home rule act did is give the city permission to elect a mayor. we had no elected mayor before that. also the authority to elect 13 council members. the mayor had been appointed by the president and council members as well. host: how is the city doing

financially? guest: we are doing well. by comparison to others. we have had 13 consecutive boulevard budgets. like so many jurisdictions in america we have had the effects of the recession. i have now proposed a budget projecting a $322 million deficit for the fiscal year which begins in october. i have proposed a budget that will balance that. it is a combination of reductions in the budget and some revenue increases. host: what keeps you up most at night if anything? guest: what keeps me up most is the ability it be able to mcourselves. we -- to manage ourselves. we want to continue to have the sterling performance we have had on the financial front. our income tax secured bonds have triple a rating on wall street. i think we enjoy a wonderful reputation there and we want to continue that. host: to you yourself, not sure

if you read this in "new york times" this morning and about you and your city. in washington headlines that say bad memories and they have a shot of you here upon your arrest last week. when vincent gray campaigned for mayor he promised to bring character, integrity and leadership back to d.c. but 100 days into his tenure he is battling the perception that the administration has brought anything but because staff members have been accused of helping children get jobs in his administration and receiving inflated salaries. can you speak to the investigation into that being accused of helping kids get jobs and receiving inflated salaries? guest: well, it happened. and it was something that i was not aware of except in one case. there was a staff member whose child got a job, it was somebody that got on the campaign. so that is not the same situation. but there were some staff members whose children got jobs. i was not aware of that. we moved immediately to address that and all three or four of

them are gone. they were not young people without qualifications either. if you look at their backgrounds and education, they were eminently qualified but the appearance that is involved in that, it was bad judgment that was exercised and i moved to address that immediately and they are gone. the salary cap issue was a matter of negotiation through the department of human resources in the city. several people were hired over the cap. the amount by which they were hired over the cap is $912 in virtually all instances. there was a suggestion we ask the council to raise the cap. i refused to do that and work with the staff members to lower their sam religious. host: darrell issa from california chairman of the ov oversight committee is investigating the administrat n administration. what is the extent of communication between the congressman and your office, your administration?

what do they want to find out? guest: i haven't had any communication with them. there was a third somewhat also. that was the allegation of someone that he was given money during the campaign to stay in the race. and i was the one, when that story came out, i called for the investigation to look at that and that investigation is ongoing now. host: let's get our first call from our -- for our guest. ned on the democrat line. caller: i'm a very many era veteran. we are very pleased with the mayor's election. i want to ask what his thoughts are on the closure of walter reed where there is a group of both unions with an excellent project to work with veterans coming back from the various foolish wars we have gotten into. guest: the walter reed proposal is for closure and about half of the site has been turned over to the district of columbia for

development. certainly we want to work with the veterans in the city to make sure we have some kind of continuing presence of veterans activities and services at the hospital. we will control 62 acres and it will be developed as residential, as office, as retail. it will be a mixed use development. given the historic presence of military services there, especially a hospital, we want to make sure that that heritage, that legacy, is preserved. host: washington, mark, an independent caller. caller: mr. gray, i support your financial backing of charter schools in this city. but i think you are tremendously way off on the voucher issue. first of all, you keep saying that the vouchers are not supported by d. krfpc. you have

own chair of the d.c. council in support of vouchers and generally when the application process for vouchers goes through four times the number of that have spots. there is strong support in the city for school choice and it seems to me that your support of charters is not consistent with your opposition of vouchers because if you were true school choice supporter you would understand that vouchers contribute to competition for students in our city and will help improve all schools including d. krfpc.p.s. guest: firm, i think we have some -- first of all, i think we have some of the most wide-ranging choice of any public education city in the nation. we have 52 charter schools being

operated on 93 campuses and almost 30,000 students in our charter system and about 45,000 in our traditional d.c. public schools. one of the issues here is that the citizens of the city ought to decide whether we have vouchers. this is an approach that is being imposed on the city by the congress. there's been no vote in the council of the district of columbia. there's been no proposal by me to have vouchers in the district of columbia. when president obama became the president the voucher program was ended except i and others and the presidential supporters allowed the kids in the system to continue to finish. so we go back to who makes the decision pws what we do -- decisions about what we do. there is no place in america where a voucher program would be imposed by the congress. host: here is the district clause of the u.s. constitution. it says the congress shall have

power to exercise exclusive -- host: our guest was chairman of the city council of the district of columbia for ward seven. the next call is from oxford, mississippi. .

deeds. they learned about it through the media. let me tell you about the dirty deeds. guest: i think what he's talking about is it's opposed to columbia. on the district of columbia, spending our dollars on abortion. it goes back to the question of having the authority ourselves to make decisions about our dollars. again, i got no call. and this is something that we

should have been consulted about. when you read the budget that was submitted by the president, there is a line in there that says in so many words that the district ought to be able to control its own budget. here was an instant to take that statement, turn it into reality and it simply didn't happen. host: also writes about an issue over the use of the no taxation without representation license plate on the president's limousine. so we had seen it around the city, but it's not on the president's limousine, you've been pressing, others have been pressing the administration to do this. how come and why has it not happened in your view? guest: well, i don't know. i can't give you an answer about that. i think the president should put that on his car. i think it would demonstrate his

support of the city. he did as a senator indicate he supported voting rights for a non-voting delegate. i think it would be a symbolic way of showing his support. host: let's hear from danny, a democrat in georgia. caller: good morning. mr. mayor first of all i want to compliment you on the quality of the d.c. police department. i spend about a month every week in washington. and the d.c. police are everywhere. there's an overpowering presence and you can feel absolutely safe anywhere you go in washington, d.c. and i don't think the congress realizes how important their security is as provided by the city of washington. i think you should put an ad in the newspaper notifying al qaeda that if they want to blow up congress the d.c. police are going to look the other way and see how quick the congress reacts and gives you what you

want. host: what is the size of the police force? guest: we have little more than 3,800 members. host: you mentioned tactics, perhaps technology that have dropped the crime rate. tell us more. guest: i sat for an afternoon in an effort to do an analysis. what they did that particular afternoon was put up pictures of a lot of people who have been engaged in crime. they had thorry investigated the back dwrounds of these folks and were able to show some interrelationships between them that got to the bottom of what some of the motives may have been for the crimes in which they had engaged. they did a thorough investigation of the kinds of issues it led some of these folks to be involved in criminal activity in the first place. one of the factors was dominant in the background was school failure and truantcy.

it's clear we would have a chance of stepping the tide of these young people being involved in criminal activity. host: a woman named michelle reed made tons of news in this town as chancellor of education here in the district. she has now moved on. who is the new head of the education department and give us an assessment. guest: she will undergo a confirmation process by the council and hopefully will be confirmed. she's been in the interim role since michelle reed left. she worked as a deputy chancer in the d.c. public school system when michelle was there. i think also, one of the things we've done, and i'm proud to have been a part of this was had an adoptive legislation which really places an emphasis on early childhood education. we now, i think the first have

universal prekindergarten services that is a seat for every 3 and 4-year-old whose families want them to be in a program. we're moving now onto infantile services. the theory being, and i don't think it's rocket science. the theory being the earlier we can intervene with these kids, especially those who may be growing up in financially and socially challenged situations, the more likely they are to be successful. the less likely they are to wind up being truant, being involved in juvenile justice or other activities. host: back to your relationship with congress before we get back to calls. when you see the republicans on the house side, what do you see these days? guest: we see people who are opposed to the district of columbia having -- they were certainly part of opposing this on the district of columbia, the abortion prohobition. the vouchers came from

republican leadership. far from vouchers and abortion, there appears to be a real resistence of giving this city an opportunity to manage ourselves. host: do you ever see a statehood vote happening? guest: i would like to think so we certainly know it won't be tomorrow. but i would like to think so. we have 600,000 people who live in the district of columbia. we pay to support our services raise through income, property and sales taxes. in addition to that, the people of this city pay $3.6 billion. so it isn't as if we are on the public, we are working to support the federal government and do the lions share of services in our city. host: caller from vincent, virginia. michael, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. how you doing? host: doing fine. guest: good morning. caller: i just wanted to say

most of y'all, y'all are doing an excellent job. i want to say that i've been through washington, d.c., never stopped one time. me and my uncle and my aunt and my grandma and my mother. and anyway, i just want to say like the other gentleman said, it is safe. but at one time, before the civil war, virginia owned washington, d.c. virginia and maryland did. maryland owned the ocean side, and maryland owned the ocean side and virginia owned the land. so, that means if they ever go bankrupt, maryland and virginia can take it back. guest: i don't think it means that at all. if you go back far enough there

was no america. we were part of the british empire, if you will. and the revolution freed america from what then was ironically enough taxation without representation which is precisely what we have here in the district of columbia. i don't think maryland and virginia would take back anything from the district of columbia. we are now establisheds a a distint jurisdiction in america. you described it earlier as 10 square miles and that is precisely what we are. we're 600,000 people thriving, breathing, vibrant neighborhoods raising our own money to be able to support our services. host: one viewer wants a little bit more from you via twitter. in what way does d.c. not have representation? the constitution specifies how d.c. is represented. guest: frankly it's clear we don't have representation. again, if you pay taxes that's a fundamental premise on this which nation was founded, taxation without resistence to

-- we have no senator. we have no voting member of congress. as a matter of fact, mrs. norton who does an outstanding job representing us in the city had a very limited vote in the committee of the whole in the congress. that authority was removed back in january when the new majority took over the house of representatives. again, we pay the taxes but we have nobody who can vote on the interest, the national interest and certainly the interest of the district of columbia. host: caller from d.c., james, democrat, welcome to the program. caller: thank you. mr. gray, i understand you've been dealing with allegations of members of your administration. but i have friends in the department of housing who said your very son had a suspended drivers license and one even fired and was able to keep his

job, where as anybody else in that position would have been fired. guest: that's ludicrous. my son has worked for the housing authority long before i became a member of the council and certainly before i was mayor and my son never had a driver. host: fairfax, virginia, rich, republican, good morning. caller: mr. mayor, i take the metro into d.c., or near d.c. every week day morning. they have a newspaper that's handed out and i take two of them. and i hate to be the bad news reporter because you're hearing it daily, but there's articles daily, if not every other day that are reporting back on the negative, negative, negative of some of the leadership positions and how they're acting. and i know there's a lot of good workers in d.c. a lot of good. and it seems like that overshadows a lot of the good

things that are done in your city. i don't know how you're going to do it, but you've got to overcome the negative and highlight the sun that often shines on that city. so hang in there. host: let me add to that mr. mayor, "the new york times" writes that the heart of the criticism, mr. gray, a 68-year-old native washington has brought with him the aging but powerful system of pate tron age that prevailed in this city. they write both sides of the debate say one problems that mr. gray, a relative new comer to elected politics is not well known so people jump to conclusions, including it would not continue with past reforms. how do you shake that if that's true? guest: all i have to do is look at recent months during which i've been in office. people question whether i would continue with education reform. i think there's evidence that we would. first of all having appointed

henderson to be the chancellor of the schools. and secondly despite our financial challenges that i talked about earlier, we found out from the chief financial officer that we would get $105 million for next fiscal year. i took $76 million of that and invested it in the budget of public education. i have been a proponent of public education. i will continue to be. i've talked about my top priority being a zero to 24 continuing of services in public education. and what i've done certainly supports that. host: "the new york times" piece also points out that the city is changing demographic cli. blacks are now 50% of the population and actually dropping according to their numbers down from 70 ners in the 1970's. with more asian, hispanics and whites have moved in. marshall brown was quoted in the washington post saying quote --

tell us in your words what all that means? guest: i think we're a growing city. since for the first time in six decades the population has grown between 2000-2010. we added about 30,000 people to to the population. we have eclipsed 600,000. and frankly i look forward to this being a vibrant, diverse, breathing, living, active city. and there's so much evidence of that. you can look at many. for something like lead certified buildings which means we are moving rapidly to be much more environmentally energy conscious. we have the most lead certified buildings in the nation at this stage. and some of the most forward thinking building standards. we've been rated as the happiest

city in the nation. not sure what that means, but it sounds good. host: i was about to say, why do you think that is the case? good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. a couple of questions. how hard did you try to remichelle reed? and how much did the national teachers union give you for your campaign? guest: first of all, michelle made the decision to leave herself. she re-signed in october. she gave us notice and we worked together to make sure there was a successor that provided as smooth a transition as we possible could. that's when henderson was appointed as the interim chancellor. now i've appointed her as the permanent chancellor and hope she will be overwhelmingly confirmed by the council. i really don't know what the

national, the american federation of teachers gave to my campaign. but this was a largely locally run campaign. if you look at the volunteers who were involved in my campaign, they were local folks. so i take great pride in the fact that our campaign was run by people here in the local, in the district of columbia and clearly people who voted live here. host: we see in your bio that you were recruited at one point by two major league baseball teams. who were they and what position did you play? guest: i was first baseman and white sox and dodgers. host: you wound up going to college at george washington university and. more calls now. pittsburgh, kansas, don, independent. hi don. caller: good morning. i think washington has the most severe case of something we see in any state capitol or big university.

it has a huge government presence that doesn't pay any tax. so finally a fee is paid by the government but in the case of washington, intrusive, pushy, aggressive measures are taken by congress for the money they pay, which is in lou of what would normally be property taxes. also washington is a central city in a large urban area. and suffer from the same ills that most of our central cities suffered from the plight of the middle class and what have you. and is luckily one of the cities that now seems to be reviving as opposed to the big russ belt tech cities. guest: again, i appreciate the callers comments, because often times we're making the case that we actually pay. so he seems to be informed about the fact that the district of columbia not only supports services here in the city but also pays federal taxes in the form of $3.6 billion to the federal government to support the nations budget.

again, really about half the property off the tax rolls and substancal because of the federal presence, because of the presence of non-profits and other entities that are tax exempt. given the small size geo graphically of the city, we do have an enormous challenge. so he's absolutely right in the sense that our challenge is probably greater than others. host: back to your efforts and the battle as you put it with congress and the budget. what will these next several months look like as folks here figure out the federal budget. obviously d.c. is part of the action, part of the debate here. what will be your main focus area? guest: certainly focusing on our budget. our budget now is before the council. it will be there for probably until the end of may, early june. and then it will move onto the congress at that stage.

i think it will be focused in general on getting more in the district of columbia, but specifically focusing on the issues that have been so predominant in the last seven to 10 days. that is how do we begin to get the authority to make myrrh decisions about our dollars here in the city. host: gay marge has been an issue out there in the district with reaction from members in congress. what's the status of that issue? guest: well, we overwhelmingly passed a law in december 2009, the marriage equality act. it went before, as all of our legislation has to, go before the congress. there was no form reaction at all. it became law in march of 2010. we just celebrated the first anniversary of it and i think it makes us one of the most forward thinking jurisdictions in america. host: has medical marijuana been out there as well? guest: medical marijuana was actually stopped by the congress. there was an initiative that the

people voted on a number of years ago. and the congress didn't even allow the results to be reported. and it was just dormant for about 10 years. we're moving forward now. we just -- i just published regulations that are both opposed and interim. we'll have five dispenseries, people holy be authorized to grow marijuana for medicinal purposes and how people can access medical marijuana are part of the regulations as well. they will have to have a prescription from the doctor in order to do that. host: we've touched upon proom a number of times. what do you think of him? guest: i'm a supporter. he knows a lot about the district of columbia. i was very pleased with that. we talked about the department of homeland security coming to an area of the city that i think

will have a huge effect on economic development in that area of the city. so again, while i wish we had obviously been involved more than we were with respect to these recent federal budget decisions, i was and continue to be a supporter of president obama. host: let's hear from indianapolis, charles, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. i, first of all there seems to be -- why don't you just say pro and against instead of republican, democrat because most of the independents say they're independent when in fact they are democrat or leaning that way? but anyway, when i think grade schools, about 50, 57 years ago we learned the reason the district of columbia is not a state is because it would give a disproportional power. they could shutdown roads, they could put taxes on.

they could control the working of the government. physical working of the government, not the congress, but the physical working. if he really wants to be independent, then they should go back to virginia and maryland and have the federal property as the district of columbia and allow no residential housing, permanent residential housing in the district of columbia. i really don't want to see my vote in indiana deluded by not only would they have two senators and at least one representative, but they would have the power to shutdown roads, suers, everything else that feeds into the district of columbia. host: thanks charles. mayor gray? guest: well first of all i think there are certainly ways to work out the issues that the caller has cited.

there are servely ways to carve out a federal presence in the district of columbia. and certainly ways to address that kind of activity that he described. frankly there are ways we could do that now. we as a police force, it works for the district of columbia with the fire department that works with the district of columbia. there are ways that one can do that. i think that really describes the situation in the extreme. we're looking for the ability to be able to control those things we pay for every day. we pay for the police force, we pay for the firefighters. we play largely for our budget. the federal funds that come into this city essentially come into this city in the same way they go into the 50 states, the medicaid program, other federal programs. we do get a relatively small amount of money to support certain things in the city, like efforts to stem h.i.v. and aid's and homelessness and other areas that we try to focus on.

but the reality is that the lions share of what we provide in the city is always supported by the taxpayers of the city. host: jeffrey, democrat, you're on with mayor gray. caller: good morning. good morning mr. mayor. guest: good morning. caller: thanks to c-span, a pleasure to meet you and i think you're doing a great job. someone taking a cheap shot -- i just want to say the city of washington, well when i read my paper i see violent criminals. right here in my own city. there's one that shot and killed his own son, he was a caucasian male. so you know, this tax they try

to throw on us. but every time an african-american comes on you hear something like that. i think you're doing a great job and forget about violence started with slavery, jim crow, klan law, all that type of activity. so it's not like we have a monopoly on crime. one thing i would like to ask you, when the drugs started coming into the black community, a lot of people at the time believe that it was intentionally put in the block

community so they could destroy themselves. i think now all that's getting into their city, kids getting on weapons and things. host: thanks jeffrey. anything you want to add there? guest: no, i think what i want to simply reiterate is we are seeing a reduction of violent crime and we're working to try to stem that. we've gone from 400 homicide in the city down to about 140 plus. obvious think that's a 140 plus too many but we're going in the right direction to improve the quality of life. host: you mentioned the city is not doing too bad economically. and we know the d.c. region is doing fairly welcome paired to the rest of the country. in terms of the economic downturn, what specifically has happened, if anything you've seen in the district? guest: well, we certainly saw

income taxes go down. people experienced capital gains as a result. we saw a dive in the commercial property market also, which now is beginning to rebound. if you look at the new dollars that i mentioned earlier that will be coming next year, the lions share will be coming because now our commercial property market is on the rebound. we've got office buildings that are being built. people want to be in the district of columbia and i think some of our best days economically are ahead of us. host: caller, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. my question is there seems to be a lot of talk about drug use, crime-related issues, and the previous caller brought this up as well. my plan or idea i would like to see addressed, why don't the government buy up a large quantity of these drugs that are

being sold, poison them with something that would kill these people in a few days and redistribute it back out in the street. therefore it would automatically wipeout all the drug users, buyers and sellers without very little expense from police and totally eliminate that crime? host: mr. mayor? guest: i don't find that to be a constructive solution. i think the progress we're making in stemming violent crime and getting drugs off the streets really is the pathway we want to continue with. host: final thought from you as you move forward, relatively new to the mayor's office, what else would you like to accomplish this year? guest: we've talked about public education. we've got to get our people back to work. it's interesting, we are kind of the tale of two cities. in some areas of the cities, we have unemployment as low as 3%. on the eastern end of the city we have a couple of areas where, one where i live actually in wood seven where we have

unemployment that is north of 17%. and then an adjacent area, ward eight, unemployment that's north of 25%. working to get our people back to work again, working on public safety and we had a vigorous discussion about that this morning. and fundamentally fiscal stability. that's what we worked on with the budget that's been submitted to council. to get us moving in a direction where we spend only the dollars coming in the door. host: thanke this morning. we will take a short time mount and talk about the wage gap between men and women. what is out there and our next guest will take calls. the executive director of the independent women's forum carrie lukas will be our guest. >> and another top winner in the studentcam competition. students were as to produce a

video about an issue or topic that help them understand the role of the federal government. good to marietta, -- we go to marietta, georgia. robert johnson is a senior. why did you choose marijuana use, legalization, and enforcement? >> marijuana was a big issue in california with the legalization and the proposition coming up to be voted on back in last november. we wanted to see how marijuana affected our community and our state. we looked into it. >> what did you learn from the law enforcement officers and the judge with whom you spoke? >> we learned about the effect in our community and the day-to- day, overall, and the impact on our community which is more than i thought. the negative effects that it had on our community as a whole. >> are those in-a fax?

hasn't led to the introduction of other drug use in the county? >> it definitely has, almost every officer talked about how it is a gateway drug and how it leads to the introduction of other crimes and drugs into our community and how it causes problems with young people in their day-to-day lives. >> how do your fellow students feel about marijuana use was a margin their 50-50. some do not want the government wanted to -- want the government to control what they do in their own home. but they see the effect that it has on their fellow students. the ee want to stay away with that and do not want anything to do with it. >> do you know anyone who is used -- who has benefited from legalized medicinal marijuana? >> personally i do not. i have heard how it affects cancer patient. i do not see how those benefits outweigh the negative effects.

>> to you know someone who has suffered the adverse effects of marijuana use? >> i have seen people in our school go through it. i've done the opportunity to sit in on an. testimony about how it is torn families apart and affected their lives on hold. and i see how they're different services available in our community to help them through their problems and help them get back to the normal citizens again. >> what did you learn in the process of making your video? >> i learned that marijuana has a lot adverse effects in our community, and it causes a lot of problems. it leads to other drugs and other crime in our community. it is something that should not be taken lightly. and legalizing it is probably not a good thing at this time because it would just lead to other drugs and other crimes. >> always feel like people to come away with after having

watched this question margin i hope people realize the negative effects on our community and how it can lead to bigger and bad problems. and where there are some legitimate uses of marijuana, we do not believe that that outweighs the negative effects on our community. >> robert, thanks very much and congratulations. >> thank you. >> here is a portion of his documentary, "and at the gateway." >> i think of marijuana is used properly, it can be used for medicinal purposes. or even those who are more responsible could be used recreational it. >> 62% of adults used marijuana before the age of 15, accused cocaine is some point in their lives. >> marijuana is what we call them law enforcement as a gateway drug. it leads to bigger and better things. i've arrested people for heroin

and amphetamine use. you get to talking with them, we find out where they started, and it was with marijuana. >> the more that you have to buy illegal marijuana, the more contact you have with illegal drug dealers. the more you are around that, the more your descent size to other legal -- illegal drugs. >> if it is really easy to get into any of them because they are in the business. they will send you any drug. >> you can see the entire video and all the winning documentary's at studentcam.org. you can continue the conversation at our facebook and twitter pages. >> "washington journal" continues. host: at the table now, but carrie lukas, executive director of the independent women's forum.

iwf.org is the website. we're talking about the wage gap. two men make more money than women on the job and what are the differences? >> when people talk about what they really are focusing on, the department of labor statistics that is regularly produced. this compares the full time -- the average working of a full- time working men to the average wages of a full-time working women. it is always about three- quarters of what men make. but the thing that i find and that people need to know is that this is a misleading statistic. this does not mean that your co- worker is making more than you if you are a woman. it means that women take on different jobs in different careers and have different work histories which affects how much they earn. when you start control for those variables, the wage gap shrinks

and sometimes even reverses. in fact, women in some specific sections of the country and in different circumstances make more than men. this is good news for women. it is a problem when women are being told that we face systemic discrimination that will rob us of our equal pay. the statistics do not back this up this is an overwhelming problem. >> in some cases mem widget revenue making more than men. guest: we have two sources of information. one report looks at segments of the economy and specific jobs where women have higher starting salaries. for anyone who wants to know that tradeoff between how much you make and the type of job that you pursue, often specialty's matter alive. dentistry and some health professions, women in the same

jobs tend to make more than men. that's an interesting book that i encourage people to look at. another study they got headlines recently the looked at men and women who were single and childless between ages 22-30 living in urban areas. on average, women in urban areas are earning more than men. i would caution you, this is another one of those slightly misleading statistics. it is not comparing apples to apples. it highlights how women are increasingly more educated parts of our population. since the 1980's, they have been out earning meant in terms of bachelor degrees. it has been 6 and 10. it is not a surprise that women are making more money than men in this younger set, because women are and knowledge economy in the have better conditions as

than their male counterparts. we see how that works out in the work force. host: our guest was educated at princeton and harvard. she's the director of the independent women's forum and is a contributor to the "national review." the phone numbers are on the bottom of the screen. as we talk about the wage gap, republicans, democrats, and independents, our guest is making a different argument. before we start to get to the calls, women's choices of careers. life circumstances and what it means. guest: this is the kind of thing that people intent -- intuitively understand when they think about the decisions that they may. husbands and wives, women tend to have different priorities when it comes to work. but everyone knows when you are evaluating a job and deciding on a career, you take into account factors other than money. we're not all saying we want to maximize our earnings.

most of us think about things we enjoy, but kind of lifestyle we want to leave, the kind of powers we want to work, whether we want to travel, and the late nat work. what conditions we want to work in. it is not surprising when you realize that men and women make different choices often. and many men place a higher priority on earning as much money as possible, whereas women want to have a schedule of similar to their kids or they do not have to work after 6:00 p.m. or travel. when you take into account these factors, it affects how much you earn. and the big elephant in the room, women continued to take a lot of time, the work force and downgrade their work when they had kids. there's a robust debate about this because the societal pressures that women continue to assume the lion's share of child rearing, but for the purpose of looking at the

statistics, it should not surprise anyone that someone that takes five years out of the work force, they will earn less than someone who is have a continuous job cycle. women of the ones to take along a list time out of the work force. -- women are the ones who take a long this time out of the work force. host: a labor statistic talks about the number of hours a day that men are working versus women on average. 8.3 hours, women 7.5 hours. and before we get to cause, here's what the president had to say in a recent radio address that discussed women's paid. >> women still earn on average only 75 cents for a dollar a man earns. that is a huge discrepancy. at a time when people are struggling to make ends meet, and many families are trying to get by on one paycheck after a job loss, it is a reminder that achieving equal pay for equal work is not just a women's issue, it is a family issue.

when my first as as president was signing a law so that women who have been discriminated against in their salaries could have their day in court to make it right. there are steps which should take should prove -- to prevent that from happening in the first place. i was so disappointed when a women -- a bill, the paycheck fairness act, was blocked by just two votes in the senate. host: carrie lukas, the paycheck fairness act. guest: it is unfortunate that the president is parroting this statistic in trying to convince women that statistic means that women are receiving less for equal work. i do not think anybody would come out here and try to tell women that they are being paid 75 cents if you look to the data for the same job. and that is what the president implied. his turn to make a larger political point, but is about

litigation, making it easier for women to sue and having a longer time horizon for which they can sue their employer. there is already a lot of protections and the law for women. the money that is spent on lawyers is not spent on other jobs. and it creates a big hazard for companies having the potential specter of lawsuits out there. i'm concerned about expanding lawsuits, but even if we are having the discussion about the merits, people should be allowed to sue, i don't think you need to use these jokes statistics. that is what the president is doing. host: had democrat up first. good morning. caller: you are very interesting. i would like to ask, how is childbirth figure into the ratio of wages? because common sense, men and women, they are going to take

time off for that. how does that financially figure into the ratio between men and women? guest: thank you very much. it is interesting because it is not a surprise that as the caller indicated, women and give birth and tend to downgrade their earnings. they often take time off of the work force or cut back on jobs. they opt for careers that have that built-in flexibility. what is more interesting is that the response to men when they become falters. --fathers. they tend to earn more. is that a perception on our society? i think more likely, it is a decision that men make. they say that i have to provide

for a family. they take on jobs that pay more because of that. one thing that is important to understand. when we talk about the jobs that men take on to earn more money, there is almost a myth that they are smoking cigars and have these glamorous jobs. a lot of the jobs to maximize earnings have been down sides. they are working the night shift in driving trucks, their sanitation workers, working in prison. in teaneck -- they tend to take on physical risks if they can be physically uncomfortable. there's a premium that has to be paid for performing those tasks. most workplace injuries and deaths are suffered by men. host: michael, a republican.

caller: i am a longtime "washington journal" listener. i would just like to ask a very important question to mrs. lukas. we always talk about the gap between men and women and talk about what can and cannot be done. i am going to ask u.s. the professional, what you think they can be done? what can we as americans do to build the bridge between men and women and build in fairness and equality between men and women? guest: i think that a lot of this is a whole lot of nothing. very few people are looking at the economy as a battle between the sexes. as we've seen in this recent economic downturn, then suffered the majority of the losses. they had had a significantly higher unemployment rate and a harder time because of the downturn. i did not think women are out there thinking, could, our

employment rate is higher than men. they are thinking, my husband or my brother is out of work. my son is underemployed. there is no need to bridge the gap or to try to make things more fair. what we need is in an economy for job creation so that everyone has the type of opportunities that they want to have. host: independent college, from houston. caller: does she live in the d.c. area? i like that have her opinion about the michelle rhee, where the issue is adequately compensated? and if there was a gender bias against her for what she was trying to do? guest: this is not my area of expertise. but i think that she was pushing some pretty radical and much

needed and positive reforms in the district of a competent of columbia. i don't think it had anything to do with her gender or race, for that matter, that she faced opposition. i think it was because their interests as you is butting up against. i think that was at the core of that. host: we touched on the economic downturn earlier. can you tell during this downturn whether actual pay for men and women who continue to work has shifted? guest: i think that a lot of jobs that have been lost among men were good paying jobs. i do not think overall that that will be a major shift. where we do see shifting is among the younger set. is an interesting problem if we're going to view the economy nses of men and

women. many jobs are coming less prominent an automated. as the economy becomes more important, as a society we should wonder why is it that our sons are less likely to be going to college and being completing college? the 11 impact on the next generation, men and women alike. -- they will have an impact on the next generation, men and women alike. in our education system, school choice in what michelle rhee was pushing, less one size fits all education. in our public school system, teach to the -- they were overlooking the way that they have different brain structures.

i think that they're making it more difficult for boys who have not focused the talks -- the of the focus and attention on boys. we need to encourage boys to achieve more. host: a republican from illinois. caller: i have a question. i am a practicing doctor for about 15 years. i have noticed a couple of interesting trends. the obvious one is that there are great many more women going into the practice of medicine. i've also noticed that it is becoming very common that their spouses are taking on the domestic duties that traditionally have been the woman's duties. are you noticing this as the broader trend? are mint taking on more home domestic duties? is this affecting the wage gap in any statistically significant

way? guest: the portion of stay home dads is still growing. but it is still a small portion of the population. but some 1% of guys stay at home. i do not think it is having in big impact on statistics. it is interesting and there is a growing acceptance of the idea that the data may be the ones staying home. when it is byases choice. men are having more difficult times finding jobs and that is why it is ironic that sometimes the media tends to play this is a wonderful thing that they are increasingly prominent. if women are out there earning more and taking responsibility, that is good news, except when it is because their husbands cannot find work and which could

-- they wish they could spend more time with their kids. in a perfect world, you not have men and women having the same role. you have people lived alive that they want to live. if getting clues women staying home for kids, that is not a bad thing. host: the line for democrats, good morning. caller: i am looking at the website in the first article is forced renewable energy standards are more polluting and may even be unconstitutional. what is that have to do with this? did the inf koch brothers give you money? >> all issues are women's issues. it is a mistake and we assume we only care about social issues are things that affect babies. we care very much about what goes on in the economy and

energy policy. particularly energy policy has a significant women's ankle. women of the ones who buy most household products. that affects everyone and a particularly of figs -- and it particularly affects women who are trying to make ends meet. it is a very important issue. host: the differences between wages, and you spoke about education earlier. all but different parts of the country? what parts of country are the biggest differences? guest: the metropolitan area, it is not a surprise that people tend to be younger and more likely to be single and childless. that is where we see the real shrinking of the wage gap. but in parts of the country, hard hit by the downturn, particularly manufacturing

areas, and you'll see a real bump in earnings only because men are earning less. host: as cuts in new hampshire. pat, an independent. caller: that did happen to me. hi gentleman and myself were hired in the same week in manufacturing production. a year later, i have worked my way up to supervisory positions. a year after that, the same gentleman told me he made $1 more than i did. so there really is a great discrepancy out there. host: if you see a great discrepancy, why do you think that is? caller: i really do not know. he did not have a family. but he still made more money than i did.

host: do you want had something to do that? guest: i would never agree with discrimination in the workforce. there are bad bosses that mystery employees. i did not know that is predominantly against women and against anybody else. the unfair treatment is not a perfect world. there have been some studies that suggest that women could be responsible when you see evidence of our wage gap, decisions about negotiating for salary. studies have suggested that women are more reluctant to say that you offered me the starting salary but i think i am worth more, when men are more likely to speak up for themselves. that is the type of thing, if there is so wage gap, we need to know that. we need to talk to young women and tell my daughters that you

should be prepared to talk about money even if you feel uncomfortable about it. women need to stand up for themselves. that is important research that needs to be done. that caller, did she try to negotiate. it is possible that co-worker did. host: the bill that the president spoke of, narrowly defeated after was passed in the house. it was a strong bipartisan majority. you sit coming back up? guest: probably. this is been a priority for democrats for a while. i imagine there will not let it sit for long. host: explain what it would do. guest: it would change the terms under which someone could sue in their rigid sue their employer. -- under which some would could sue their employer. it also gives the department of labor collecting new data from

employers that would be monitoring how much everyone gets paid. i think that there is a danger in this. the government gets involved in micromanaging and overseeing how much employment compensation packages are. will find that imports become less flexible. women out there should think about what that means for me. there are a lot of women who say, i am willing to trade a little bit of my salary if it means that any time my kid is sick, i can go home and have the flexibility to work until 4:00 instead of normal business hours. i look at my own situation. i have degrees from fine institutions. but if you look at what i am making, i am making -- i am not making this hour that a lot of my peers are, but i have a terrific position.

i have a great about flexibility. i know i am fortunate and i am educated so i have a lot more options, but that -- there are a lot of women in that same situation. host: what if there are women that do not see it like you. something like a paycheck fairness act not in place for them, what are the alternatives? guest: discrimination is already illegal. you can sue people it very easily happen. it happens frequently. i would caution people that in high unemployment, to you want to make it harder for people to create jobs? the specter of litigation increases the work that comes from government. that is absolutely a barrier to job creation. you have a trade-off with these laws. host: washington, iowa, a republican form carrie lukas.

caller: good morning. i am very proud to hear of you. if there is one thing there i do not understand, what politicians keep trying to degrade the women? the pay gap is nothing. the women may just as much as the men. in most places, women will how do the men. -- outdo the man. host: are you done, homer? caller: yes. guest: thank you for your politics. focusing on politicians on this one specific, how much you earn, it does create a kind of strange lenses on which to focus all of your attention on evaluating how people are doing. we all know that there is a lot of factors one considers when they decide how much -- what

kind of job to take on. some work for nonprofits that make less but they had great personal fulfillment. or pursuing other activities, instead of focusing on wages. money is not everything. it is incredibly important and people should be able to earn money to support their families. but there are other factors out there. host:, stoughton, pennsylvania, john. caller: so you agree with wal- mart's stance on unemployment. the million or so women that did not get promotions, pay less, one woman and not paid as much as what has hurt equal male employers were making. how much was street speculation the think has to do with the rise in gas prices?

host: discrimination case may not go walmart's way. guest: the facts still lead to come out and they are considering that the merit of the claims but whether or not the 1 million women can constitute a costs. that is where we are. -- constitute a class. we need to wait and see what some of the day is. i would caution people that in calling that this was a slam- dunk that 1 million people were paid less, we do not know that. they haven't won a policy is just like everyone else that absolutely say no discrimination against women. -- they have policy just like everyone else. if you are a manager, one

department versus another, your responsibilities. we have to wait and see on the facts and really be careful before just assuming that there is any statistical difference in earnings that was based or caused on discrimination. host: our guest has worked as a social security analyst at the cato institute and worked as a senior policy analyst under chairman cox. carrie lukas is now the executive director of the independent women's forum. guest: we recognize that women are affected by a whole lot of issues so we write about taxes, the budget, education. healthcare is a big topic for us. please go and take a look.

host: however you find it? guest: private donations and individuals. host: republican caller, welcome to the program. caller: i appreciate the opportunity, first of all. i thank carrie lukas for the quality of reformation. america should be proud of what we are doing in the area of women's rights and opportunities. it is very good to hear her talk about the convoluted statistics that our president is trying to give to the american people. it clears that up for me. i sometimes hear in the tv or in the newspaper, but thank you for your good information. it sounds like we may need an independent men's organization to support some of the gunmen

here need a couple of things. the first as education and another powerful four letter word -- work. education and work would go a long way with both genders making it in life. thank you. guest: thank you for your comments. it is interesting when we look at the situation that women face in the united states that it is worth recognizing just how lucky american women are. we look around the world and there is a need for a robust women's movement in parts of the world where women still lack a basic human rights. i wish we could focus more of our attention on them. host: back to this country on education. you touched on this before. more women are entering college, completing, and perhaps doing better than men in the area of college. why is that? where are the trends of the way they are? guest: the education system may

be skewed in favor of women and the teaching styles that have become more popular in recent times. host: what do you mean by that? guest: if you look at some of the research on how little boys and girls learn, girls are ready to learn certain skills earlier and are more likely to take in information and are able to sit still and repeat things were boys are more action oriented. young boys have a difficult time sitting down and listening. they need to be more active and stimulated in different ways. our education system is mostly catered to girls. it is interesting. right now, if you look at the way that public policy has gone and what the government is focused on, on the white house and month or two ago came out with a significant report on the status of women in 20 years.

we often have reports about women and there has been a focus, and if you hear what the focus is from the department of education and college is that we need more girls in science and technology causes. that is one area where men are still numbering women. all other disciplines it is a women are over in rowling. why are there not as many female engineers? that is really telling. of course we want girls to pursue technology and engineering programs. that is a wonderful thing. we should not be trying to micromanage people's choices and we should now be consistently saying we need girls to be boys in every academic measure. more attention should go to getting boys up to speed in encouraging them to fulfill their potential. host: our guest wrote this piece which we are looking at from

the liberty news online published in "the wall street journal." if you want to read it on your own, you can look it up. joe on the line for democrats with carrie lukas. caller: thank you for taking my call. carrie sounds as if maybe her statistics are a little unbalanced. i have been in the workplace for more than 40 years and i have watched a lot of discrimination. i have adult daughters who are educated and continue to educate themselves who have worked in education and the business sector. i have watched and brought in people who have been hired at higher wages, less experience, and have come in with

promotions and have made less than people in those positions with less education and it continues to happen. lastly, even up to the master's level of education and have been told by superiors that because they have bettered themselves and educated themselves does not mean that you will make higher wages. i watched discrimination still happening. what statistics you are quoting an unnecessarily -- do not necessarily impact what i am seen on the ground level. guest: there are certainly bad employers are there. there is no such thing as a no discrimination. this book "white men earn more"

has a lot of information about this. -- "why men earn more" has information. some companies want to show that they have a female representation in upper management and give women a nod when they are equally or more qualified than men. that can end of the things like discrimination against women because a younger woman because a vice president and may still be making less than another male vice president. as debt of it looking like sending the benefited to help women, it looks like discrimination. it is really hard to capture a ring that goes on in the workforce. certainly discrimination exists but it is not all one-sided. host: whitewater, one person writes "responded to those who feel your spending in the face of those who came before you and fought for wage parity." guest: they should be proud, i

am thankful, and i applaud women that, despite discrimination, which has been allegal for 50 years now, o there's a lot of hard work done to eradicate discrimination. great job. the statistics are increasingly showing that it is not a factor. there are a lot of different studies that show different levels of the wage gap. not everything shows that it is zero. some show that men have the edge and some show that women do. we need to continue looking at that. it is incredibly misleading and disempowering to women to try and convince them that it is a work force that is inherently hostile toward them. host: you mention there are discrimination laws throughout the country. one viewer wants to know how women are doing in the courts with the discrimination lawsuits.

guest: i do not know, but often these are settled out of court. it is hard to have facts. a lot of discrimination cases are filed and are ruled in favor of women. there are certainly a lot of protections that exist. host: you can go to our c-span video library on a c-span.org to check out the walmart verses dukes case. last couple of minutes here. rachel, a republican. good morning. caller: i wanted to refer back to something that carrie lukas said. she mentioned that men and women view things differently. we were created differently and i see in my own family that my brother-in-law would not married my sister until he had a job that could support.

when they had children, my sister was cut back from work. i was shocked when president obama talked about pay discrimination for men and women. i learned in school that it was something of the past. i also found it interesting how she said about women's education -- i have my bachelors. i am working toward my masters. one day, when i get married ic see it has his responsibility to provide for the family and our job is to be flexible and take care of the kids. i have seen trends with a stay at home dads and i think that works great, but it is inside a woman to naturally take care of their children. host: carrie? guest: you represent a lot of

women out there who are, again, getting tremendous amounts of education but feel driven to take time out of the workforce and cut down on their engagement to care for kids. as long as that continues, women are not going to be making as much. that statistic that president obama "will not change that much. i do not think that is a bad thing as long as women pursue their dreams and have the opportunities available to them, we should not be worrying about these aggregate statistics and worrying about what the number is. host: one or two more calls. cape coral, fla., and dependence. -- independent line. caller: these studies that she's talking about, did they take into consideration the length of time that people have been in

the work? i work for the care to government now for 12 years and the job had a started salary and then you received a merit raise every year that you worked. if i work for 10 years, i would receive merit raises along with cost of living. for instance, a woman gets hired to do the same job and her salary would be lower than mine and would have to work 10 years -- 20 years to start equalling my wage. do these studies indicate an indication between marriage raises? guest: the statistic that president obama was quoting does not take into account for anything. yes, minute tend to have longer work histories and so it should not surprise anyone that people who were continuously make more money than those who do not. the department of labor is the categorizing people that anyone who works over 36 hours is

considered a full-time worker. that has a lot of variation. the department of labor has another study that shows a man, on average, work 10% more per day in the office for those categorized as full-time workers. it is not a surprise, and to be quite a surprise, that if those who do 10% more work make more than those who work less. the department of labor statistics does not control for any of this factors which is why it does not tell us anything about the role of discrimination. host: last call from florida. a democrat, hello. caller: i worked and in a custom case making plants. i found out that a high school teenager, a male, was making more per hour than i. i hollered about it. this was way back in the "keep

women in their place" era. they said he was supposed to work -- earn more. i asked why. they said because he was male. there was a husband-wife team of. the husband ran the plant. when he was promoted, she was promoted to take his position but she did not get the money to go along with it. i find that very sad. i have buttons galore. the little girl has her diaper pulled out and she's looking down and she says, "oh, that's why boys are paid more." i was going to make another point, but i cannot think of what it was. host: anything you want to respond to? guest: hearing a story from

several decades ago, there has been a discrimination against women and it is wonderful that it does not affect us as much today as it did in the past. to make a final point, it is interesting that today women are the majority of managers and are increasingly in the position of power deciding wages. this idea that it is only men making these decisions is becoming increasingly integrated into -- antiquated. host: our guest has been carrie lukas and the website is iw f.org. we will take a short break and spend the final 40 minutes on the saturday edition of "washington drop" talking about the rise in gas prices and what it means to our own pocketbooks. we will be right back.

>> to be a parent means you are training the people you cannot live without to live without you. >> senior editor andrew ferguson was not prepared. >> nothing like that had happened to me when i was thinking about colleges in the mid 1970's so it was starting to dawn on me that this is a very different process. >> find out if this is that it catches up sunday night on c- span's "q&a." you can download a podcast of our signature interview programs online at c-span.org/podcast. >> i think we are already, but democrats and republicans, to get the country on the right track. >> the debate ahead of us is

about more than spending levels. it is about the role of government itself. >> with the current year spending resolved, lawmakers turned their attention to the 2012 budget and the debt limit. watch the debate from capitol hill, the white house, and around washington online anytime with the c-span video library. it is what you want when you want. >> this weekend on booktv, in the politically correct a guide to socialism, kevin williamson defines as socialism and how it hais at work. carl peterson returns the lives of african american elites living in 19th century new york city. also, a look at first lady barbara bush, jacqueline kennedy, and eleanor roosevelt. you can find the entire schedule on booktv.org.

>> throughout the month of april, we will feature the top winners from this year's studentcam competition. the theme was "washington, d.c., through my lens." watch the videos every morning at 6:50 eastern just before "washington journal." you can view the videos online anytime at studentcam.org. >> pcs and networks provide coverage of public affairs, non- fiction books come and american history available on television, radio come on line. find our content than the time for c-span video library. -- c-span on the road for our digital boss, the local content vehicle. bring a resources to your community.

now available in more than 100 million homes. created by cable and provided as a public service. host: august now is financial reporter for "the washington post" is ylan mui. were prices now and where are they headed? what does the future look like? guest: the national average for a gallon of gasoline is about $3.79 which is significantly up from last year. we have seen sales rise 2.6% compared to the previous month. we know they are higher, but the question is how high will they go and how long will it take to get there? that is something being debated right now. unrest in the middle east, libya, this is all coming together to push gas prices up. are we entering a new era in

which rising global demand from emerging markets like china, india are going to be pushing a gas prices overall for quite some time? if that happens, that can mean big changes for the domestic economy. host: we will talk plenty about that. mentally, what does that for dollar average marked mean for this country? guest: we saw that back in 2008 when they hit historic highs. the historic high was $4.11. we passed that barrier. consumers change their behavior. we saw a lot of one-stop shopping were people consolidated their trips. we saw a purchase of hybrid vehicles to economize on fuel. many businesses had to pass along the higher cost of transportation to consumers so consumers were not only getting hit at the pump but also when

purchasing goods that had to be transported. for the consumer, it means more dollars out of your wallet. host: what is the impact on the economy overall blacks -- overall? guest: a $10 increase in the price carroll of oil -- in the price per barrel of oil means the higher they go, means a lower output in the u.s. which could potentially challenge the economic recovery we are trying to hold on to. host: we will take calls in a moment or two. ylan mui is a financial reporter for "the washington post" and has taught at university of maryland college park. she started in her post at to thousand two what started as an of the jury -- obituary writer.

the numbers are on the bottom of your screen as we begin the conversation on gas prices. we will take you deeper into why. which should people look for about things happening across the world and what this will translate into at the pump? guest: you'll keep your eye on the middle east. they are a source of oil for us. this increases the speculation over what the price of oil will be which could increase prices. there's also the situation where countries are locking down. that can also drive up prices, the fear over how much there will be. short-term it is driving up prices, a lot of speculation, concern, and worry. longer-term, are going to be entering an era of were gasoline

prices are more like europe? $5, $6, $7 per gallon? what will that scenario look like as we enter into a world were other countries may be the dominant consumer force in the world? host: on regular gas prices per gallon, this summer $3.86 is the projected figure. last summer was $2.76 so a $1.10 a difference. the average price in 2012 is a $3.80. we have some video that we have shot locally and gas stations as we continue to talk about gas prices. $4.29 and that was somewhere in the d.c. area. take as elsewhere around the country. where is it highest and lowest?

guest: it depends on where you are. one thing that you do find is that places that are highly metropolitan tend to have higher gas prices. i was in texas, and i could not believe how cheaper gas seems. they felt they had seen significant increases, but it felt like you're getting a break. but it does vary across the nation, but what is important is the amount of increase. consumers everywhere are feeling this. host: first call is from grand forks, north dakota. hello, mike. caller: good morning. in my part of the country, we have analysts looking at the price of fuel. the consensus among professionals is that qe2 has

brought down the price of the dollar in because oil is priced in dollars that me the price of oil goes up because the currency is based on is going down in value. that is part of it, but my concern is because the fed has released trillions of dollars into the economy that we are getting none of the benefit in the united states but all of the risks. our currency is going down, the price of oil was inflated but none of that is being invested in the u.s. economy. we are getting crushed in every way. it is a complete disaster for the revenue generation of our country. ron paul introduced legislation which forced the fed to release a report about what have been doing in lending since the 2008 collapse. guess what? caterpillar got $1.50 trillion in the interest. citigroup cut $2.50 trillion. goldman sachs had $1.20 trillion.

my point is none of this money is being invested in the united states because the corporate tax rates are too high. other conditions are great for investment and the government is to a very, yet if you look at where the government -- the money is going it is going to communist china. they require a 51% ownership of foreign companies doing business there. they take half of everything up front and they require a controlling interest. our american central bank is giving trillions to the big multinationals and 0% interest and half of the fortune 500 companies are paying $0 in taxes. if half of the fortune 500 is paying $0 in taxes and the american central bank is lending trillions, how can the american economy be more conducive to investment ta? guest: the caller has a good

point. what is the fed's role in curbing inflation? higher gasoline prices can lead to higher prices of other goods which leads to inflation. how will the fed address this? what we were talking about earlier in what are the causes of these higher prices and how long will they last, the answer to that question is to define how the fed addresses the problem. if the fed feels like this is a temporary spike driven by an unease in the middle east that will abate in the next couple of months, they will take in more hands off approach to dealing with the problems of rising inflation. however, if they do feel that we are entering a sursort of new world order, they will take action to rein in inflation. host: nashville, a democrat.

good morning. caller: your previous republican caller was right on the money. i did want to add one other thing. the taxes that are paid on a 1 gallon of gasoline is astronomical. a lot of people did not understand that if he lived, for example in tennessee, besides the 39 sense that the federal government or 41 cents, whenever it is now, that if you took that tax out -- i have never heard one politician, democratic, republican, independent, whoever, ron paul, anyone in the between say anything about the total elimination of taxes on gasoline for the consumer. not one person. not one politician. i suppose that is a fear of the big oil companies dropping the hammer on them. i wonder what your guest thinks about that and i will hang up

and listen to see if she has examined this idea and taken it fervor than maybe at the washington post saying to shut up. host: before you respond, explain the tax structure as it relates to gasoline. guest: when you buy 1 gallon of gas, there are fees in that. part of that is an extra fee that is paid to the federal government. there has been an effort over time to get rid of that tax actually. it has not gone anywhere. that is why you see the caller worrying about why we are still paying this and what role can this have on the price of gas. the issue that a lot of people feel when they go to the pump is that they look at the price, they fill up their gas tank, and

they are filling up twice a week and sometimes more. that psychological, that social behavior result of having to constantly see this higher price, constantly feeling that payne oftentimes makes the rise in the price of gasoline feel even worse than the rise in other commodities. it has risen by a significant amount. it is pennies compared to the price we as we see in other commodities like cotton and sugar. how often do you buy sugar? not that often. you go to the tomtom multiple times in one month. -- you go to the pump multiple times. host: will develop your tank at the higher price, what happens at home? what are they not spending money on? guest: the theory is that consumers will cut back on

discretionary purchases which can be anything from apparel, electronics, etc. what we are actually seeing is that even though consumers say they will come back because of higher gas prices, so far we have not reached that point. the commerce department just this week gave retail sales results for the man month of march. what they found is that even the people were paying 2.6% more and gas stations, they were still spending money in clothing stores, electronics stores come and home furnishing stores. we still not seen consumers reduced their spending at. host: does that mean we are going back to our credit cards? guest: credit cards have still fallen off, but aggregate, overall, the nation has increased savings. this part of spending may be coming into their savings account and spending more money. the other thing we may be seeing

is that the attitude and adding jobs in march. that means increased wages, increased income to spend. consumers say they do plan to reduce their spending because of these higher gasoline prices, but we have not actually seen that in the numbers yet. host: this story and a "the new york post" talks about gas brazing 24 straight days. our next caller is from new york city on the republican line. good morning. caller: hello. how are you guys this morning? i live in one of the poorest counties in new york state and gas prices are $3.99. we need to blame this on the global lists and the constitutional wars in the middle east. -- blame this on the globalists.

people need to be more aware of the new world order. host: the new world order is the cause of all of this? guest: 1 the issues facing the fed as they decide how to address this inflationary problem is what is called the sacrifice ratio. the sacrifice ratio is the amount of gdp, the amount of domestic output, that you have to give up in order to fight inflation by tightening monetary policy. the chairman is worried about the fact that if you try too hard to rein in inflation that you actually may end up curtailing the fragile recovery that we are in right now which is something that no one wants to risk. these are some of the debates that are going on right now within our government. host: here is a tweet.

"we are directed to oil. the fun part of our addiction is over and now we are hoped to." what does this mean for the alternative energy part of the business? guest: we have seen the initial buzz from hybrid vehicles dying off a little bit. that does that mean they are not selling as well as they have before. the volt is very popular even at a high price range. we are seeing the cost channels changed in the demand for certain vehicles change. there was a report put out by the department of transportation that found that americans are driving less than they used to and looking at places more close to home. i was on a conference call with family dollar, the retailer that caters to some of the most vulnerable consumers, and with

the have done is that rising gas prices was helping their traffic. frequently their stores are located close to the consumer, close to those communities and they are not willing to drive further out to purchase the products that they need. they are seeing a doctor in traffic because of the higher gas prices. host: "automakers still high on hydrogen cars" and this makes me want to ask you more about congress and the administration and this issue of the fuel, energy, gas prices. what have they been saying? guest: one thing that you will find is that they are in a quandary right now. the administration has been a very strong supporter of nuclear energy, but with the situation in japan there are obviously

many dangers and it is controversial right now. the administration look that -- looked at coal. what did we find? miners in dangerous situations. off shore drilling. then we are stuck with a big oil spill that got a lot of attention. that is a dangerous place. look at the picture. what resources are you going to tap that is safe, not controversial, and can sustain an entire nation's energy consumption tax there is time to navigate their right now, but all the avenues that they are looking at our uphill battles. host: an opinion piece in "the wall street journal," about the chevron ceo. its says that americans need to

stop taking affordable energy for granted. that is in the weekend edition of "the roster journal." -- "the wall street journal." our guest is ylan mui. catalina, texas. caller: good morning, ms. mui. the last, you just made -- comment you just made about shevron -- chevron takes us back to connect the dots with exxonmobil. in 2005, he made a comment that we were going to have to realize this in a world economy. this is a promotion -- fruition of the dick cheney oil policy.

right here where i live, 33% of the building is owned by chinese investors. chesapeake energy corp. is controlled, or 33%, is controlled by the chinese investors. i guess that is what we're living with now, it world economy. guest: the caller says he lived in an area where he can see the real impact of the debate over oil and where it should come from and who should be investing in this. last summer, i was covering the impact of the bp oil spill. one thing that really struck me is that when i spoke to the people in the community in

louisiana, what they told me is that even though they were in a situation weren't their livelihood, catching seaford, oysters, shrimp, it was all endangered by this bill -- the spill and the dangers of drilling offshore that they did not want to stop. those rigs were providing jobs in their community and that was very important for them. one person had put a mannequin outside of his store and he had the arms and legs cut off. he said, "ogle san cutting off our legs with the seafood industry and cutting off our arms with the oil industry. what will we have left? how will we survive?" that cuts to the heart of this debate which is american jobs, right? where are we going to find the resources to power this country?

who will be able to provide them to west? at the end of the day, who will be paying for it? host: we talk about the personal, family aspects. what about the businesses that rely on oil? what is the account? -- the impact? guest: in 2008 when we saw the oil record prices passed the $4 mark, there was a surcharge even just to order a pizza of $1 here and a $2 there. we are seeing them eat the cost. if they pass it to the consumer, it is not strictly price. they may change the product. maybe smaller products. maybe the can of tomatos shrings ounces.16 to 14.5

you will see companies pass this on and it will take a hit to the bottom line. host: the companies owned the rigs with no unions independent truckers are helpless. bob is on the line from missouri. good morning to you. caller: good morning. i am really surprised that they've are using this to account for the rise in oil prices. the prices started going up around christmas last year. they just stood around and scratched their head. it is the speculators. they are not in the oil business

but they are allowed to buy up the oil futures, play against each other, make a big profit and we all suffer. it is the same old thing. it is like when we invaded iraq. their oil was going to pay for the war. well, that is trillions of dollars. we have not heard of 1 barrel of and howing from irawq it has affected prices. we drill for oil in alaska and it does not make any difference if we "drill, baby, drill" in the waters. this has nothing to do with supply and demand. guest: the caller makes a good point in that we actually do not receive as much oil at all from libya.

the fear in libya is that this is a contributing to general turmoil in the middle east. libya itself is not a major producer of oil for the u.s. the other point about this being driven up by all speculators, if this is the case, it is potentially a better scenario for the rest -- the u.s. because the price can go up and come back down but it does not necessarily a structural change in global demand. if this is something that is really speculative, hopefully that means that it will come back down and prices can go back down. if it is more structural in nature, we could be in for more pain in the long haul. host: where do we get most of our gas from? guest: the middle east.

saudi arabia, iraq, etc. i do believe it is something like 33% is only produced domestically. that is something that is still a significant portion of our nation's consumption. that is why there has been so much interest in a drilling in alaska and the gulf of mexico. host: canada and mexico produced. norway and others. what other countries may be providing the rest u.s. besides the middle east? guest: you covered most of them. host: 4 myers, fla., on the line for independent -- fort myers, fla. caller: florida supposedly has oil. the u.s. has five times more oil than canada.

the thing is that we do not touch our oil. host: let me jump in. where do you get your information from? what are you reading? caller: this goes back to 1960 when i invested in a petroleum company. the thing is now that at the time, the government said we would have to go to 50 cents per gallon to be profitable. guest: i am not entirely clear on what the caller is asking. i think that part of the question is should we be using more of our natural resources. that is something under debate right now.

as the administration looks at this question, again, we talk about the different natural resources that they can use. oil, coal, nuclear. we wonder what the benefit is and each of those sources has undergone dramatic accidents and incidents of the past year. as you try to craft an energy policy, which one of those are you going to put your money behind? we have seen that all of them can be potentially fatal. host: larry, atlanta, republican. good morning to your caller:. -- good morning to you. caller: good morning. back in 2006, i was commuting back and forth to work about 30

miles and i decided that i was going to move closer to work. i took my gas consumption from about 60 gallons per week down to about 10 gallons. i now spend more money going to the grocery store and taking my kid to the park and i do going back and forth to work. if everyone in america would do something along those lines, we could become energy independent real quick. i wondered what your comments and what studies may show about where the fuel is going to. is it going back and forth to work? could be curbed a lot of it simply by moving the two closer together? guest: what you saw a few decades ago was the sprawl and in america in which we were increasingly see people moved out not just suburban but

exburban stores with big box stores further out. now there is a desire to contract. their desire to bicycle to work. people are walking. as the caller mentioned, these are behavioral changes that people may start to make as they start to see the price of oil increase. certainly, biking, what. -- biking, walking, ride sharing are all popular options to reduce the cost on your own personal finances. host: the atwitter, do you believe regulation is raising fossil fuels?

guest: that is a loaded question. certainly regulation has a role in which we focus on. whether or not data is driving certain competition or whether or not this is excluding certain types of resources is really up for the market. host: blaming the president for raising and gas prices is nothing new. speak to us more about the political play of this issue on the hill. can the president really help drive this up and down of gas prices? guest: it is more driven by monetary policy which is separate from the president does. certainly, this can be a political issue. it is a kitchen table economic issue that can become a real debate in any campaign. the issue of raising and gas prices and that impact people

are feeling contribute to the overall concern about the recovery going to be on track. army going to see job creation -- are we going to see job creation occur? what are going to have to sacrifice? this contributes to the overall feeling about what we are seeing in the economy. host: one thing that always comes out is the u.s. strategic oil reserve. any realism there? is this an issue that people like to bring up? guest: it is a constant concern. just like with the gas tax, we really have not seen it being used in the past. host: misery, democratic line. -- missouri. caller: i just had this same conversation with my grandkids

who were bemoaning the price of gasoline. no grand kid wants to hear about how bad it was back in the day. when i was their age in 1948, my dad had a new 1948 buick roadmaster convertible that got 8 miles to the gallon. i was earning 55 cents per hour and just do the numbers. the price of gasoline is 25 cents, so my one hour of labor bought 16 miles. do you follow that? guest: i guess you're not driving too far. caller: 1 grand kid is making $8 per hour. a new buick and gets around 32 miles per gallon. let's say it is even less.

let's say it is 25 miles per gallon. for their one hour of labor, they get 50 miles. that is way more we got and it is a factor in the cost of the upkeep of the car. these cars last way longer than they did then. it is not fair to just look at the price of gas and say how terrible is on less we make some comparisons -- unless we make comparisons. guest: memories are short. in 2008, i was writing stories about $4 gas and above and we are already worried about seeing that happen again. memories are short but there are ways consumers can try to

improve the mileage on their cars even beyond what the manufacturer says. and some people are doing hyper- miling to drive in a way to maximize their gasoline, derive a certain speed, not topping off between fills and waiting to go all the way down. not running your air- conditioning, which may be difficult. there are certain ways even within the car that you have now to maximize your fuel efficiency. host: ocean county, new jersey. on the line for republicans. caller: a few points. two basic points, much ado about nothing and voters, you get what

you deserve. it seems to me that we are overreacting to the price of gasoline rather than looking at the underlying problems, the politics of gasoline and republican, democrat and coast divide.heartland if the average driver is just using 1,000 gallons of gasoline per year, $1 or $2 and not going to break the bank. you have ways of getting that money back if you are a small business or just a member of a union in the bargain for a little bit more or year negotiate directly with your employer. the cost of living is it generally a bargaining issue or a motivation for bargaining.

regards to getting what you deserve when you vote, the coastal regions and the urban regions seem to democratic. the heartland which is spread out and it does not have the luxury of of mass transit and a subway system, they have to use the gasoline a lot more to get from point a to point b. they tended to lean toward republicans and the people who favor the oil industry. they have the appointments from republicans on the spring court -- the supreme court who say these big organizations are the equivalent of an individual, which is a joke, and they can spend the same to get more republicans in to get more republican appointees on the supreme court and the record and a rule accordingly to keep the masses divided and conquered.

are we looking at the right thing here? it is the actual cost of a gallon for gasoline or how these things are done? do you really think the average individual could approach the president of the united states the way the president of and i accompanied could it? it is very, very important for the masses to get together, think straight, and vote together for their best interests. guest: to the caller's first point, the idea of being able to offset the cost increase in gasoline by using that as a way to bargain for higher wages or a higher salary, personally i would love to see a raise to offset the cost of living, but when you think in a macro sense

inflation, that is what causes it. the wage-price battle. you see the price of gasoline go up coming to demand higher wages to accommodate that, therefore businesses feel like they can charge more and you see this go on and on. that is exactly the kind of thing that the fed is looking at in determining whether or not we will be able to curtail this and businesses will accommodate those requests and how long this will be going on. host: last call from raleigh, north carolina. caller: thank you for getting me in. a great guest. very attractive. i am concerned and would like to hit three points. i and understand that a lot of the oil and gas is not included in the power exchange and it is allowing the massive fluctuation in prices by the second -- by the speculators. when the domestic