political unrest in libya and other countries. then dennis caudchon talks about the 2010 census figures that shows only 45% of americans were working last year, and the host: good morning. live view of the capitol on sunday morning after pretty significant storms moving through the south and mid-atlantic states. sunshine in washington today. eastern passover holidays this week and next which is the reason congress is in recess. the president begins a series of town hall meetings. he will kick off in northern virginia and travel to reno and

san francisco. we will begin with a focus on presidential politics. speech yesterday by donald trump in boca raton, florida, renewed speculation on the republican field. donald trump for president. that is our question. our lines are on the screen. there is one survey conducted of 445 republicans from p.t.p. research showing trump beating the entire field by nine points this out on friday. it shows the real estate tycoon turned reality tv show hosting a large nine-point lead on the nearest competition with 26% of the vote compared to 17% for huckabee, romney and others

less. that is just one snapshot and one poll but a lot of as to whether trump will run. we want to find out whether you think he should run for president. we covered him yesterday in which he talked about the domestic agenda and president obama. here is a portion of his 45-minute speech. >> i'm pro-life. i'm against gun control. since there's been gun control, the bad guys will have the guns. people that are good and wonderful will get license and say they didn't make enough income or -- the bad guys will walk in with a gun and you will say i wish i had a gun, i will have a chance. the bad guys won't get rid of the guns. never has and never will. so, i'm against gun control.

i will fight and get rid of obama care, which is a total disaster. just a quick sideline, i went to the what the ton school of finance and i say i was like really smart because if you believe that obama should be giving his birth certificate the press goes crazy. they make you like you have an i.q. of 13. we have a man right now that almost certainly will go down as worst president in the history of the united states. host: tkopbldonald trump the en event at c-span.org and airing today as part of our road to the white house coverage. one note about the republican field in the "washington post"

"reality tv g.o.p. style" she points out if presidential sweepstakes go one could not find an odder but more predictable candidate than donald trump. one can hardly walk without seeing his name. he towers over all ours on a monopoly game board. he is inevitable the same way barack obama is, each tends to be a reaction to the previous commander in chief. george w. bush was the opposite of bill clinton and obama was nothing like bush as a candidate. mike from youngstown, ohio, welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. host: calling on the democrats line. caller: i think donald trump is a spokesman for special interest money. they have so much influence in washington that we have the best

government money could buy on both sides but especially the republican side and trump is a spokesman for them. god help us if he is elected. host: the republican line, susan from fort lauderdale. host: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i'm a small business owner and i have been a small owner six years. and i was originally a legal assistant. i have come to realize that the world is a business. this country is a business. and therefore i felt for many years we need a successful business person running this country. let politicians stick with enforcing the law. but we need a successful business person to bring this country back and run it. host: what do you think of donald trump as a potential candidate? and we have herman kane and

mid-romney also a businessman. caller: well, i'm more in with donald trump. while i don't know him personally and i don't always necessarily agree with everything that donald trump says, most of what he says and stands for i do. and i believe that he is a strong enough personality to possibly happen this country. host: thank you. we go to michael independent line from romulus, michigan, outside of detroit. caller: i want to make a comment about the birth certificate issue. host: sure. caller: i'm a disabled veteran and i'm in my 50's. i have a friend in his 90's who

is a world war ii disabled veteran. they give us goes mileage to go to the hospital when we go and my friend is 92 and didn't have a driver's license or state i.d. he had to show his birth certificate, original birth certificate to get gas money, $15 reimbursed. so, why don't the president have to show his? thanks. host: from our twitter page you can go to twitter.com/cspanwj. a tweet saying donald trump a n nonpolitician refreshing to hear somebody say something without tip toeing through the tulips of correctness. paula from appleton, wisconsin, democratic lien. caller: i think donald trump is probably as big a crook as bernie madoff. he made his money ripping people off. he declared bankruptcy four

times since 1989 and every business he ran had to declare bankruptcy on. i see why the tea party likes him. i think they like crooked people. this guy is ridiculous. host: another comment. president donald trump we have really fallen down the rabbit hole this time. got to blame this one on the ambulance chasing press. next is frank joining us from mount vernon, new york. the question is donald trump for president, his name has been out there a few months. he will announce officially next month on his "celebrity apprentice" program. cathol caller: i think he is a terrible idea and the last caller paragraphs why. he has too much baggage. he is a modern day p.t. barnum. he would be terrible for the party. whoever is stupid enough to nominate him we guarantee the re-election of barack obama.

everything the last culler said is -- caller said is true but it is not true that the tea party people like thieves and people like mr. trump. he is just an egomaniac who loves to see his face and name in the media. the sooner republicans understand that the sooner we will have a better chance of unseating barack obama. thank you for c-span. host: thank you for the call. this morning in the new york damely news donald dished -- dissed dems for dollars. a look at the money he contributed to democrats including charlie rangel $24,000, lautenberg $12,000. harry reid just over $10,000. former senator ted kennedy $7,000. kristin gillibrand of new york and anthony weiner. more from the "new york daily news". eustis from new orleans.

since we have heard from you. caller: been some time but i had to call in for donald trump. there was the statement by trump about obama being a crook or mobster in chicago but in new when the mafia control consumption i'm sure he had to meet some of the mobsters and he sounds like one. the image is not really good and we are just waiting for the nomination day. host: don't be a stranger. phone again. another tweeter saying yes another successful businessman for u.s. president as if bush wasn't enough. he bankrupted everything that he touched. kathleen parker reality tv g.o.p. says a number of republicans declaring themselves potential candidates is looking like a conga line without music

hopefully unnoticed is brilliant dark horse pwaebiding his time. schumer the miracle would occur and the candidate would emerge at just the right moment to rescue the hrbelectorate. we have a call from san antonio, democrat line. caller: good morning. i would like to say that i think donald trump for president is a terrible idea. i think that he should stick with trying to start businesses. i think he should stick with opening businesses, running businesses. i don't think he knows enough about government. he's never been a military person.

i don't think he has the or entials qualificationless. host: thank you for the call. dirk says how can anyone call donald trump a crook when washington is full of crooks with a $14 trillion visa payment? john from california, republican line. what do you think of donald trump and his potential presidential bid? caller: well, i don't think too much about it. i think he is really a democrat in disguise and he got bored with his reality show and he is posing as a republican because look at the people that he has given money to. they are all democrats. host: thank you. david brody sat down with donald trump. we want to air two excerpts. it is available on the christian broadcast network website. one issue focuses on his failed

marriages. here is more from that conversation. >> i have had the two failed marriag marriages. when you look at a failed marriage and so much 56%, 57% of people, but in my case i'm a very hard worker and i have always said it is very difficult for a woman to be married to me because i work all the time. and that is what this country needs. this country needs somebody that is going to work. i have always said it was always very unfair for my wife because i work all the time. i'm here, there, i get home at 10:00 in the evening. it is not an easy traditional thing but that is what the country needs. it needs somebody that really works. and something that knows what they are doing that. is a difficult thing from a but it is andpoint very good for the country. >> is there a lesson you learned in the two failed marriages? >> they were both wonderful women.

the message is that you do have to devote the requisite time to your marriage. but the thing that you really -- it is socially perhaps not the greatest thing to say but this country needs time also. was the interview was donald trump and back to the twitter page. joe says there is something appeal being about the idea of trump telling a lot of government pair sites "you are fired." other news from the national review the cover story is ryan's new deal and the caricature of roosevelt with his traditional cigar and ryan the chair of the house budget committee. from the weekly standard paul ryan's america. a look at the proposal put forth by the republican and voted on by the house of representatives. mark joins us from michigan. what do you think, donald trump

for president? caller: i don't think so, c-span. here is a little more about money in the white house. the global elite bankers have hijacked the global elite banking system and also hijacked the united states federal government. and they are using the power and technology of that government to benefit themselves. the last thing we need is someone like trump in control of this. host: thanks for the call. next is a caller from modesto, california, democrats line. caller: good morning. the birth certificate is old. he's already president. i have been married to a white guy 29 years. this is ridiculous. another thing. all he does is talk about his money. how is he going to make a good role model, all the times he has been married and all this to be a good role model for this

country? these people need to get a life, get off the birth certificate and worry about the country instead of a black man being seated. host: from the sunday democrat tallahassee state workers brace for the worse as the governor prepares for budget cuts. they say loss of positions could local economy. is tallahassee prepared? one look at one state capital and impact on florida. claude joins us from dalton, georgia. trump for president? caller: i like all of his ideas. he is a brilliant man. we need somebody that can take control of this country for the average man. we have had all of these people that don't know anything about handling money and i think that donald trump is real good on the gun control and all of this stuff and i think he is a real intelligent man that. is what we need. i think that the birth certificate issue everybody ought to have to hoe their birth

-- show their birth certificate. host: ben joins us from florida, independent line. go ahead. caller: i think donald trump may be good for the economy and all. some of his issues like going to iraq and take over the oil and take over libya and whatnot, that is not very realistic because we would never leaf tvee country. one thing that might be addressed as a v.a. and social security disability are tied to each other, maybe the cost of the -- maybe the cola for the senators and congressmen should be tied to social security and v.a. instead of letting them vote their own raise. i think we should all support whoever is in the presidency right or wrong my country as president kennedy said.

host: there is a story available on the politico website and a related story front page of the "washington post" focusing on president obama and washington, d.c. the headline is d.c. is angry at the budget deal and at obama. disappointment in the first two years of the administration and president specifically the first african-american am a city predominantly african-american. from our twitter page donald trump running for page is a joke. he bankrupted his own casino for god's sake where the house always wins. our twitter page is twitter.com/c-sp twitter.com/cspanwj or journal at-bat at-bat c-span.org -- journal y caller: i would vote for donald trump tomorrow. i would vote for him twice if i could. i believe that he scares the politicians to death. i think that they see some

energy from him that might just catch on like ronald reagan did. host: stewart from new york city. go ahead, please. caller: i'm a democrat and i just think that it would be fantastic news if donald trump ran for president. he's just a buffoon who is out for his own personal aggrand diesment and it is very sad that such a percentage of people have fallen for this. it just does not bode well for the fort of the country -- for the future of country to have people taking simple somebody who hasn't yet said anything serious. has he made one policy position? has he said anything intelligent about anything? he just goes on and that seems to work. to me, that really says something very sad.

very sad about this country. host: rick has this comment. into his has dug background more than obama and he hasn't even declared yet. if you are interested the speech will air tonight from boca raton at 9:30 eastern and in his remarks to tea party organizers he also discussing the president's handling of foreign policy including libya and nato's involvement in that country. >> the arab league composed of saudi arabia and richest nations in the world asked us to rid them of gaddafi who they don't like. why aren't they paying us for this? why didn't we ask them for payment? they would have paid whatever we wanted. if i would have said we want $5 million, that is nothing for these people. you the airport story. that is nothing for these people.

they should pay us. host: donald trump yesterday in boca raton, florida. some of the earlier callers asking about his views on position. one tweeter saying trump most certainly has made policy positions. we just heard some of them. at least he is understandable. bill, charleston, south carolina, independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. the first thing i would like to say is barack obama may be the president of the kwreuunited st but he is not a leader. he refuses to do anything about the price of gas and oil. there are millions of people on social security and disability that have not gotten a raise in last couple of years because there was no cost of living increase. tell me there is no cost of living increase when you go to the goes pump or grocery store. i have to go to food banks to get by. i'm fighting kidney cancer. there are millions of people that are going to vote barack

obama out of office and donald trump is an extremely smart hard-nosed businessman. he could possibly be the best thing ever to hit this country. host: thank you. kathleen wright had this. we murdered over one million iraqi and now donald wants to rob their i'm for the bill. that's touch! grace joins us from long island. caller: i think this whole thing is a joke. the republicans don't have anybody to put up against obama, so they are use using this. and this is stupid. we have to grow up. thank you. host: richard stevenson the budget debate reveals he points the democratic and republican parties have their own internal tensions to address as the debate goes forward. it is the liberals who are on the defensive. the aging of the baby boom

generation and cost of maintaining medicare and social security have put the two pillars on the table. the growing weight of the national debt is giving urgency to the question whether the government is too big and expansive and the tepid nature of the recovery followed by the stimulus packages has provided an opening to the challenge of economics and default policy of this government. as well the revived energy of grass roots conservatism has given clout to the intellectual and constitutional arguments. that is richard stevenson in e "new york times." shannon joins us from las vegas. caller: good morning, sir. i want to call to say it is a shame what obama is doing to the country and he is a globalist. i believe he has been put in there and i think that he crashed the economy to get

everybody chipped. i believe that is his sole goal. let me know your comment. host: mark is next from pennsylvania. welcome to the conversation. you are a democrat? caller: yes. caller: good morning. you are on the air. caller: i lived in hawaii for three years, and they have islands over there. so the live birth is where the hawaiian people have mid wives. they don't go to hospitals and stuff. and they have been bringing in filipinos and making them citizens and the hawaiian people were really getting angry at it. host: from our twitter page at to take ap won't have teleprompter to speaking

engagements. he failed in the past but his record is public. barbara is next from texas, line.ican good morning. ctually next to hannibal, missou missouri. donna on the phone. good morning. hello. i want to make a comment about donald trump running for president. i think it is all a joke because i don't think he would ever get nominated. we already have enough tyrants in washington. i don't think people would vote for him because we need a president for the people. host: will donald trump campaign in early states, iowa, new hampshire, south carolina. david brody asked him that question and this interview is posted on the web saoeufplt >> i see iowa and new hampshire

and south carolina and i see a positional path which is probably not a bad term. i think the people of iowa are great, they are hard working people. they really go out there and they get it. i hear i would do great in iowa. when i speak to people they give me good signs of encouragement. i'm a hard worker. i happen to be a very smart guy which in all fairness this guy really needs at this point. because we cannot continue to go down the path that we have been going down. the path has been ruinous. i think that i would do well in iowa. i think i would do well in new hampshire. have come out in new hampshire have me doing unbelievably well. and iowa and new hampshire, they are hard working people.

they are great people and they get it. i think i would do well there. host: back to calls, the question is donald trump for president. he was in boca raton yesterday and we covered it. it will air tonight 9:30 eastern and pacific and c-span.org and c-span radio. michael from buffalo. what do you think? caller: donald trump for president i have one reason why he should be president and one why he should not be president. i am a very business blooded guy. i have been in the business field and we do need somebody who can create jobs. but secondly i may be a republican but i'm not a tea party republican. i'm a progressive republican. and for donald trump to go out there and accusing president

obama of not being born in the united states and doing all sorts of things and carrying on about bullying the poor man when we should be talking about john mccain. i love john mccain but he was born on a ship. and people are not even questioning or saying anything. i think that there is something funny going on. so i think the tea party is just as bad as the far left. i think we should have progressives in this thing. would be good as a progressive businessman in the white house but i don't like his tea party stance. host: trump gets results another says. we cannot continue down this road. but does he understand the cause? another story is cairo. the headline is inmates 23 and focusing on moranubarak his two sons gunman -- gamal is

prosecutor number 23 and his older brother is prosecutisonerr 24. it says there is nothing agricultural about it. it is a two story block of poured concrete and the walls have held those deemed enemy of the powerful. mubarak is not there. he has been detained and if his health improves he is expected there soon. officials on saturday said the he would early -- elder memoranmubarak was moved it a hospital in cairo. that is in "new york times." one other reference to what is happening in this arab spring the view of toppling dictators is only one application of this movement. one is the most -- one of the most exciting trends in the struggle against poverty and social pathology is the use of

similar movements to change from -- ew orleans cultural new orleans -- norms from the bottom up. we have a call from wisconsin now. caller: good morning. i know we need someone who knows how to handle money, but i don't believe donald trump is the man. yes, the man is rich, independently wealthy. it is because of his business but i don't see him understanding the needs and causes of the everyday person. i'm an elderly disabled person and i don't think donald trump could represent me. like the gentleman said a few minutes ago, i really think he is just pandering to the ideas of the tea party inflating his ego.

host: a couple of e-mails from viewers. jack in new york city has this point for those that bring up the fact that trump bankrupted businesses at least it was his money. barack obama is bankrupting america and it is our money. from tom saying i heard they were asking if he would be a spoiler and i couldn't help to wonder spoil what. this from robert in south carolina, donald trump did for the presidency should be regarded with no more concern than seeing a child toss a pebble in the pool. splash, ripple. find another pebble. you can send us your comment at journal@c-span.org. >> i want to tell you that i would vote for him in a heartbeat. host: next is alex in bradenton, florida. caller: this is a guy who has

been around with ideas in the 1990's and he is brilliant and is involved with the democrats and saying all these people calling from the republican par party. host: another says he is telling the truth about obama. america is 40% liberal, 4% conservative and 20% in the middle. they will vote for anything lake they are texting in "american idol." next is chuck from chicago. good morning. democrat line. caller: yes rb, i'm 80 years ol small businessman in the area of retiring, veteran. what i would like to say if republicans are dumb enough to run donald trump, hooray. john, from seabrook, new hampshire, republican line.

what do you think? caller: i was just wondering i don't know how anyone can vote democrat if they are not in the union or getting a handout. and i had to get out of massachusetts because of the ha handouts and move up here. the illegal aliens are coming to massachusetts because the weather is nice. my vets are on the streets. that will tell you something. host: from our twitter page one viewer says trump will do to the country as he did with the businesses, run them bankrupt and steal all of the money. stupid american people. stupid. the chair of the house armed services committee is our guest on news makers which airs following the "washington journal" 10:00 eastern, 7:00 on the west coast. in this era of budgets and cuts everything is on the table including the pentagon budget.

here is more of our conversation. >> it is ludicrous to think that out of a dollar 550 billion budget you can't find some savings. has been to the pentagon said we can cut here, here, here. my concern is when we are fighting two wars and now engaged in libya that it is not a great time to be cutting the military. but i also understand how bad our financial situation is. when i came to congress 18 years ago the whole budget was $1.5 trillion. this year our deficit is going to exceed that. one year, over $1.6 trillion added to our debt. it doesn't take a genius to figure out we have serious problems. defense has to be part of it. host: our conversation airs at

10:00 eastern. also on c-span radio. next is a caller from ohio.nati, if you are joining us, we are asking about donald trump. was in boca raton yesterday. we covered it as part of the "road to the white house" and we want to find out whether you think his potential candidacy is serious. what do you think, malcolm? caller: i think he is serious but i don't think it is a serious proposition. i work all the time and work hard. that is what he said in the speech for the reason for the two divorces and turns it in a qualification for being president. what it really shows is and his continual harping on the nonissue of president obama's birthplace, what they show is he doesn't really know how to bring balance to his life and his priorities. america doesn't need a president who works hard all the time as much as it needs a prz who understa

understands -- president who understands the necessity of balance and strong family values because those are the cores of strength that expands in business and government. they are qualities that weigh on success. it seems everybody is forgetting as far as business goes that the republicans and tea partiers were saying let general motors fail, let one of the companies that has been a core of industry in this country since the industrial revolution fail. president obama didn't let it fail and look at what has happened. they have turned is around and started making cars that america wants to buy. they are listed on the stock market again. he saved the company and jobs and they blame him for the national debt when the republicans have ever since ronald reagan and string of republican presidents were for creating the deficit that you nonregulation

and -- that you nonregulation and trickle down. and it was the george bush administration that set up the tarp and bailout program that obama picked up when he came into office. host: joseph has this comment on the twitter page. remember when donald trump was pretending to challenge vince mcmahon for c.e.o. of the wwe. he is doing the same thing now. we have a piece commemorating the one-year anniversary this wednesday oil for ever. the gulf oil spill. the coast is no less dependent than it was before the b.p. spill last year. try as we might to wean ourselves we are stuck with oil. that is the national journal. and this from c.q. weekly urgency turns into impasse. 11 died, 17 injured april 20,

2010 when the deep water horizon rig sank. company officials were able to cap in after three months of alarming headlines but only after 206 million gallons of oil, 20 times more than the exxon valdez. congress proposed bills to tighten oversight of the industry. the house past d an oil safety package. the committee adopted its own version but as the summer waned so did congress's enthusiasm for measures to prevent another potential oil spill anywhere off the coast of the u.s. that is from c.q. weekly and national journalism wednesday is the anniversary. back to the calls, donald trump for president is the question. gabe engines -- gabe joins us from tampa. caller: good morning, c-span.

i think this is a big distraction. how can donald trump relate to a middle class guy like me who is struggling to make $40,000 a year? it is a big distraction and we are going to end up -- you watch -- four more years of obama. host: secretary of state hillary clinton in seoul, south korea, this headline on a visit to seoul she is quiet on the north korean issue. over the past two years ever since president obama's inauguration it has been challenging for u.s. diplomacy like the korean peninsula. in a short time north korea torpedoed a south korean ship and killed civilians in the south and detonated a nuclear weapon and six-party talks have remained stalled. this morning from the

"washington post." martin joins us from new jersey. caller: good morning. presidential candidates with tim pole le competitive against obama. i'm sake the republicans are not that stupid to consider trump as a presidential candidate. and a minute after i said that while watching "washington journal" you said unless i misunderstood the polls among republicans showed he was in fact in the lead. host: there is one poll conducted last week -- there have been a couple of. he is tied in new hampshire in one poll with mitt romney beth 17% of the vote. a new poll of 444 republicans shows donald trump up nine points above romney and huckabee

and huckabee so far makes no indication he is thinking of running for president. caller: well, it is early yet and if the republicans are sensible enough they will back mitch daniels. thank you. host: c.q. weekly the speaker's dilemma g.o.p. fiscal hawks might have the spotlight but social conservatives are letting john boehner know their agenda has not changed. another major vote when the house and senate come back after the recess in early or mid may voting to raise the debt ceiling. bloomberg's business week has the cover "don't play chicken with the debt ceiling." once it reaches $14.3 trillion they need a vote to raise it. it could go up another $2 they want to raise it through the ends of the campaign season of 2012 that. is an issue congress has to decide on how much they want to raise it and at what level.

bill joins us from san diego, republican lane. stkpwhra caller: i would like to comment on donald trump and big fiasco of trump plaza. i happen to know an investor who got hosed and trump couldn't make it in the casino business. just take a look back and the results should speak for themselves. thank you. host: jerry joins us from chicago, democrats lane. caller: you had a caller about three calls ago who is struggling to make $40,000 but he voted republican. i don't understand that. but on another level, the tea party is supposed to stand for certain values. trump's ideas are supposed to be contrary to what they stand for. his private life and multiple

marriages and things he has been involved in and i'm not putting him down but if you are going to take low shots at obama and question certain things, people are also going to my dirty politics with you. but for him to be a legitimate candidate you have to be putting me on. what is wrong with the american people. why don't we put anybody from hollywood up there with big name. and it trivializes. but you had a caller who said people can rewind the clock and look at two years ago when we were turning on the news and it locked like we were in a depression. people didn't know what to do. now obama came in and he stabilized a lot of things. things are not perfect but 25 months ago it was unbelievable what we were going that you. we thought banks were going to fold. he has stabilized a lot but he is being denounced on almost everything. the major reason we are in this

economic fiasco is because of the war. you can't fight wars and also have tax cuts. i do understand why we had to go to afghanistan. i'm a former military person. i do understand that rationale but iraq shouldn't have happened. it did but this is the ramification of going to war in iraq. host: one final comment from our twitter page. trump proving once again money is everything and you have money you can get exposure. thanks for helping to dumb down america. a look at some books that you may be reading from "new york times" best seller list. number one this week is onward. it is written by howard schultz. the story of starbucks. unbroken by littlen brand is two. you can check out all nonfiction books every weekend on c-span 2

and our website. later we will talk to the reporter for "u.s.a. today" who join us from columbus to talk about jobs and the economy and those who are out of work and having a difficult time trying to find employment and the impact on a number of cities especially in the northeast. that the is later in the program. also the former u.s. ambassador will talk to us about efforts in libya. and that op-ed written last we k week. up next is leslie sanchez and jamal simmons for the sunday roundtable but first a look at some of the other issues and topics. we have this report from the c-span radio studio. good morning, nancy. >> at noon c-span radio reairs the five network talk shows. they include the economy, raising debt ceiling, situation in libya and presidential

politics. we begin with "meet the press." david gregory interviews geithner, alan greenspan and lee and the former governor of michigan democrat jennifer granholm. at 1:00 is "this week" and we talk with geithner and congressional tea party members. fox news sunday begins reairing at 2:00. they welcome tom coburn and the ranking democrat on the house budget committee chris van hollen. she will then talk with secretary ray lahood on airline safety. at 3:00 p.m. it is cnn state of the union talking with republican senator rand paul. anthony weiner and former c.i.a. director general michael haden

and chairman of the trump organization donald trump. at 4:00 p.m. it is "face the nation" from cbs and talking with the house budget committee paul ryan and senate budget committee member democrat mark warner. the five shows are brought to you as a public service by the and c-span. the reairs begin at noon eastern time with nbc's "meet the press." 1:00 abc's "this week" 2:00 p.m. fox news sun, 3:00 state of the union and 4:00 "face the nation" from cbs. they are all on c-span radio on 90.1 f.m. nationwide on x.m. stimulate channel 132 and download or listen online at c-span radio.org. may 1 the questions for tibo tibor machan.

he will take your calls, e-mails and tweets. that is live sunday may 1 at noon eastern on c-span 2's book tv. >> to be a parent means you are training the people you can't live without to live without you. his son's college process. weekly standard senior editor was not prepared for crazy u. >> nothing like that happened to me when i was looking for or thinking about college in the mid 1970's. so it was starting to dawn on me that this is a very much different process. >> find out if he catches up tonight on "q&a." you can download a podcast of "q&a". it is available online. >> "washington journal"

continues. host: our sunday roundtable we want to welcome jamal simmons democratic strategist and leslie sanchez republican strategist. thanks for being with us. how serious is the president in reducing the deficit? guest: that is a good question for jamal. i think republicans are open minded and you saw two-thirds of the cuts were proposed by the republicans and the president after this election cycle is talking the right game but i think there is a lot of concern about the president's speech this week and his long-term impact. it sounds more like politics than it does good governance. i think they would argue that they are looking at all the different pieces of the component of a deal. you can't just balance the budget and deal with the deficit on one end of the ledger which is spending cuts. you have to look at revenues and

reduce spending cuts is not just domestic. you have to look at entitlements and defense cuts. and then you have to pay attention to the places where you can make up some of the money on the domestic side. the thing about the ryan budget, it is the only budget, whether it is any of the other plans or president's plan, it is the only one that doesn't deal with revenues. that makes it not credible. it is like the congressional black caucus budget that is all tax increase. so on the ryan side you have all spending cuts and black caucus side all tax increases. it will be between those two the. host: paul ryan is the cover story of the national review. this story gets to the essence of where the country is, the role of government. this is called "ryan's new deal." are we at the press piece

business -- precipice of where these programs are, medicare, medicaid, social security? guest: those of us who think the new de deal feels a good idea a ready to have that discussi discussionmediscussion. only 18% of americans think medicare should be having a major fix and 13% think it should have a total overall. that 31%. that leaves 69% of americans that think it should be left alone or have minor fixes. host: but two-thirds of the budget is medicare, medicaid, social security and defense. so if you look at a $15 trillion deficit the cuts have to come somewhere. guest: the president talked about dealing with it on the prescription drug side and there are things you can do that don't require you to turn it into a block grant that you hand out stipends to seniors and negotiate their own rates.

that will raise costs as much as $6,000 per senior. host: leslie, two wars. medicare part d that was not adequately fund and bush tax cuts that will cost the government $4.2 trillion in revenue. guest: i think there are two different parts i want to talk about. i don't think republicans and many conservatives feel the president is serious about reduction. there is a fundamental debate about that. he is not -- i think it was just this cursory illusion to -- to entitlements. that is the most significant aspect, a system that will not be solvent within nine years and as the ryan plan is taking a serious look at that based on recommendations that did come from conservative democrats. is a nonstarter. you talk about surveys.

i have 64% to 29% realize the deficit problem is a result of too much spending. it is government. you are seeing movement with this very difficult budget process to look at the ways they can cut this for long-term solvency. host: the president talked about it this week on the campus of george washington university in a speech in which he outlined his budget agenda. then yesterday in his weekly address. >> 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 win that competition and get good jobs. it is a vision that says to reduce the deficit we have to end medicare as we know it and make cuts to medicaid that would left millions of seniors, poor children and americans with

disabilities without the care they need. even as it proposes cuts it would give tax breaks to the wealthiest 2% of americans. an extra $200,000 for every millionaire and billionaire in the country. i don't think it is right to ask seniors to pay thousands more for health care and students to postpone college so we don't have to ask those who have prospered so much to give back a little more. host: your response to his comments yesterday which carried out what he said last week and he will talk more about them this week. guest: i think they are trying to paint this as more like a political speech than a realistic one in terms of leadership. we talked about one of the things is price controls. we know 50% of doctors who won't take medicine kaid or medicare

because of the reimbursement policy. it is a system that that is not going to work. i think the ryan plan is correct, it won't work as it is now and the president needs to be serious about it with respect to spending and transforming these pricing options. host: senator coburn delivering the republican response on the medicare and medicaid here is what he had to say. >> his plan includes a debt plan that fails to target the debt. entitle spending is more than 80% of the long-term debt burden exempts them from reform by saying they are sound when they are not. he is jeopardize being the benefits for the americans he says he wants to protect. host: jamal simmons, your response. guest: i think the president and democrats take into account entitlement spending has to be

dealt with. in all of the plans out of the house plan, the budget committee lead put out and president's plan they deal with spending and they deal with medicare and those issues. they also deal with the revenue side. the issue is the republicans are being given credit for taking this on but there is not a lot of courage to say let's cut domestic spending which the republicans have been against. let's reform entitlements which trying to have been take out. the question is because the currently is for the republicans who will say we have to deal with revenue raisers. i wrote a column in t"new york times" about saxby clam chambliss but i give him credit because he and co-burn and the gang of six in the senate are willing to use the word taxes in talking about the deficit. we have to have a way that

includes taxes and spending cuts some the problem. host: we will get to phone calls in a moment and you can send us an e-mail. or join the conversation online at twitter.com/cspanwj. i want to go back to something that is on the website at politico called d.c. is angry at the budget deal and president obama. there is a related story below the fold in the "washington post" d.c. right opponents to obama what gives? president obama's arrival two years ago inconspired un-abashed optimism in the district who yearned for their quest for statehood. it says they are disappointed. . they are. as a resident of washington, d.c. i'm disappointed. what you don't want to have happen is 600,000 or 700,000 be used as bargaining chip on capitol hill. the people who live in

washington ought it be able it decide their fate and apparently that is not the case the way things work in washington. people in the district are upset. we saw it the mayor and other officials were arrested protesting. host: mayor gray was with us yesterday. leslie, what does this tell you about the president and his base? guest: i think he has a big problem not only with the base but with independents. if you look at polls he is at a low but he continues to slip. a pattern we saw with republicans in april of 2009 and continues to fall in support of fiscal and spending issues with independents. we are still 18 months from the you have a lot of concern about the direction of the country. host: this morning monday can davy has this. madison, wisconsin, sarah palin at a rally yesterday her appearance offered an early hint at wisconsin's rising significance in the presidential

race ahead. the place has long been a battle ground but what seems clear is voters are energized and that offers prospects on both sides. guest: if you look at wisconsin we have to be serious. wisconsin has gone for the democrats in the presidential election i think in every election since ronald reagan's re-election in anyone -- since 1984. it is a state democrats ultimately do well in. what we saw last year is not the same democratic turnout in previous elections during the midterm and it is always a little dicier because you don't get the young performance, minorities who show up, all the women who support democrats that show up. that makes it more conservative. host: yet the president has been there more often than any other state. guest: else looking at the electoral map. it is always part of the

calculation in the white house. regardless if you are republican or democrat. what you are seeing is a catalyst for movement of how both the public sector and private sector are going to be dealing with an economic crisis. i think you are seek that spread across the country in terms of having a debate about collective bargaining, what should be on the table. host: we'll go to barbara. good morning. caller: good morning, steve. you didn't hear me last time. i tried to get in. host: yeah, i apologize. we're glad you're with us. you get the first call of the round table segment. the forum is yours. caller: that gentleman said that, too, to me, the receptionist. first of all, may i just make a comment on donald trump running for office? number one, he is a citizen. number two, he knows that there's only 50 states, not 57.

now, to this issue, i like both of them. by the way, you are so tall. you tower over these other two. but as far as -- >> it's a high chair here. [laughing] caller: as far as entitlements, i'm tired of the foreign entitlements except for israel. if we stop all of these trillions and billions -- whatever we pay to these foreign countries who turn around and stab us in our backs, then i think we could use that to help the entitlements in the united states. with that i'll leave you alone. thanks for taking my call. host: thanks for trying a second time. we apologize. i'm glad that bill was polite on the phone to get you through. was very polite. and would you write him up for being a professional, knowledgeable, conscious, polite.

he's an asset to "washington journal." host: you're not his mother, are you? caller: no. and he didn't even pay me. [laughing] host: thank you, barbara. bill is smiling right now. guest: yes. guest: that's a great recommendation. you hear this a lot, this question about foreign spending being a way we can make up the budget deficit. it's just really not that much money. it's not trillions of dollars, it's billions. and it's a small billions. the president talked about that in his speech, that you just can't get to where we're supposed to go. host: we have our own facebook page. and leslie sanchez, in this era of bipartisanship, you just posted? >> yes. host: where was this taken? >> in your lobby, in your greenroom. guest: i have to catch up with

leslie. host: back to your calls. frank, new jersey. good morning. caller: how are you doing? host: fine. you. caller: i think the that issue here on the budget is pretty simple in most cases. there is cuts that have to be made. but on the revenue side, i would bring the taxes up to 42% at the highest rate, for one. and on the other side, as far as medicare and social security is concerned, i would lift the cap completely off. just take the cap right off. and everybody pays the 8.2% or whatever it comes out to. and that will solve your problems with social security for the next century. the idea that you can make cuts in the armed service -- can't make cuts in the armed services is ridiculous. the boots on the ground in afghanistan, iraq, in the middle

east, is also ridiculous. i was in the service myself. i know a little bit about intelligence. that's where all the efforts should have been put. we are wasting money in so many areas. but the one area that you don't want to really cut off is the safety net for the old. i mean, here you're killing -- there's all types of ways of killing people. you can murder them. you can send them to war. you can, you know, plague them with diseases. but now you're saying you want to plague them with apathy. caller: we'll get a response what about that issue which the president outlined this week? >> i think there's a lot of common ground on the safety net issue. i was telling jamal about this. i had experience with medicare and my family. and my mother had to have an emergency bypass operation. and we've been dealing with all of these procedures. i tell you, it is a core tenant of what the fabric is of many of

our seniors and many of these families whether they're caregivers or parents. and i think fundamentally we need to agree as republicans and democrats, we want to make medicare stronger and solvent. to do it in a responsible way because there are many families across the country, much so like mine that need it. but it needs to be attainable. host: this past week we covered a number of events in new hampshire. including an appearance before the manchester public federation of women. haley barber talking about the president, politics, and 2012. here's a portion of that event. >> this is an administration that has a habit of politicizing every subject. and we saw that in spades yesterday. when the president valued paul ryan to sit on the front row for his speech and said that the republican budget was unmore

un-american, un-american, because in his mind not havin taxes $1 trillion in new on the american people was un-american. well, we could have honest disagreements about issues. easterand we do. and if we'll make the campaign about those, we'll win. because the american people know we're right. >> mississippi governor haley barber. that's new hampshire this past thursday, part of c-span's "road to the white house" coverage. publisher of the "union leader" joins us. thanks for being with us. guest: you're welcome. me begin with the flurry of activity from haley barber and others in your state over the last couple of days. it seems like there was a real up tick over the last five or seven days. guest: i think the snow started to recede up here, steve. that may be one reason. it's interesting you bring up

barber. he's the subject of today's front page story in the sunday news. he has a take on afghanistan that i haven't seen from republican candidates before. that is that he seriously questions the policy why we are there. host: and that, of course, is diametrically opposed to what john mccain and george bush talked about in 2008. guest: absolutely. and as i said, i met with several of the republican candidates. and none of them have been as strong, if they've taken that position at all, as barber. but we've had pawlenty, santorum, etc. it's getting closer i think our primary schedule for early february. people are testing the waters. but one of their concerns is ms. palin, that you had on the screen a little while ago, and whether she's going to get in and whether huckabee will get in. so it's still an unformed field.

host: we check in with you from time to time. on camera enoff camera. this year florida trying to move its primary potentially to january 31. what is in the state constitution in new hampshire? and what would an earlier florida primary mean for new hampshire in 2012? guest: well, state law pretty much gives the secretary of state, a gentleman named william gardner, the ability to set the primary wherever he thinks it is -- needs to be set so that it doesn't jeopardize the first in the nation's status that's been refined over the years. at the moment i don't get the feeling up here that there's a lot of concern about florida. there's been some talk in recent weeks that they may move back. i do think they're in a stronger position than some other contenders to the throne because of the strength of their republican population and that they're supposed to have the

convention there. i imagine things will work out. if they don't, we'll have you up for thanksgiving, steve. host: and we will be there. we were there for christmas last go-around. a link to the "union leader" website is available on spec on c-span.org. he was in new hampshire last wednesday and thursday. jamal simmons is here, as well, with a question. guest: good morning mr. mcquaid. >> good morning. guest: i look forward to getting back the next year or so. what's the role of the tea party in new hampshire? is there a strong tea party contingent there? have they started to move from one to another? >> as far as candidates go, i

think they are like a lot of republicans which tea party people really are, like a lot of republicans, still sorting it out among the candidates i think a lot of them have, you know, a love affair with governor palin, were she to get in. but otherwise it's pretty well distributed. host: leslie sanchez is also here, joe mcquaid with a question. guest: yes, sir. and you raised it yourself. a lot of people are curious how the attitude is toward governor palin and what has happened in the last few years, kind of watching her popularity. how do you feel that new hampshire feels about her today? >> well, i think if she got in the race, she would be one of the top three people in the race because of the name recognition and issues. i see no indication that she's coming to new hampshire. and if she doesn't come to new hampshire, i don't think she's in the race. host: and joe mcquaid, let me

ask you about governor mitch daniels, the governor of indiana, former o.m.d. director in the bush administration. he has announced that he will make his decision sometime in early or mid may. if you have somebody like him who has not made the effort like a mitt romney or others in this cycle, does that help or hurt him? >> i think because it's such a late start, mid may, june, july, is not going to hurt a candidate with street cred like a city governor. we've got ambassador huntsman coming up here next month to address southern new hampshire university's commencement. he's just now getting a couple of people started here. i think it's a wide open race. host: he's also going to be in south carolina. let's see, south carolina follows new hampshire. he'll be delivering a commencement speech there in may. joe mcquaid, the publisher of "the union leader." when will you come out with your endorsement for 20912 candidate

-- 2012 candidate? >> 2013. [laughing] guest: lead the way. host: we thank you for being with us. we'll check in with you many mornings over the next year. do it, steve. host: tommy is joining from us long island. good morning. go ahead, tommy, you're on the air. caller: hey. can you hear me? host: sure can. caller: leslie, i got to tell you, the republican party is being held hostage by the tea party. how can anyone rational cutting, one make the case to cut pell grants? that case was made 25 years ago during the reagan administration. you just can't do that. and then don't tackle any cuts in terms of military and, more over, don't raise any type of revenue from those at the top. you just can't. and, leslie, you talked about the issues you were going through in your personal family with medicaid, i believe --

guest: medicare. caller: you're absolutely right. people look at those issues, they personalize it and say this doesn't make sense to my family if it doesn't make sense in that regard, from a national standpoint it doesn't make sense. you just can't cut certain things. do you have to raise revenue, but there has to be some cuts. i agree with that. the complexity of the republican party is trying to distance themselves from the tea party that is too conservative. and i think, jamar, you're right when you talk about the congressional black caucus. they have to be a little more balanced. they have to. but what's going win this election is those who are in the middle. and i think obama is doing the best he can. he was dealt a very unfavorable hand. i think he has come in true to form. he's moving towards that center, trying to find common ground. so i do like his response as it relates to the budget. host: tommy, thanks for the call. while he was phoning in we had this from dennis lane. you can respond to these points

of view. republicans want to privatize responsibility to the very corporations which proved each and every day how irresponsible they are. so to both of these points? guest: the privatization, i think competition is what republicans are arguing for. that that is one thing that can enhance and equalize the system. i think with the other part, i a fair point to that, to look at with this the size. people have looked at insurance company that way. there's a high degree of skepticism, both about the government efficacy in the space. but also, you know, corporations. i don't think anybody h escapes that. i think that's a fair debate. part of this is to bring this out through transparency and have a real dialogue about it. this kind of campaign jockeying and these sound bites which we engage in all the time, but theslatively just down street is not taking us seriously. host: rach frel texas.

good morning, independent line. caller: yes. the republicans are talking cutting the debt by 38%. and the bush tax cuts to the rich has cost us $417 billion a year. you get a tax break if you own a business. and why should the rich people worry about opening a business when they're already getting a tax break. they spend most of their money on vacation homes in brazil. they don't invest -- like in jobs. most of the jobs are created by small people making less money than $250,000. host: we'll get a response. jamal? as i: well, as much think -- what i think is everyone in the country actually wants to be in the same pot together. and you talkound to people about this. what you hear the most often is people understand the fix that we're in as a country. and they necessarily want to

participate or are willing to participate. i was with the union leader, a leader of one of the major unions last week who said to me their union members are willing to take pay freezes, benefit cuts. but they just want to make sure that they're not the only ones paying the burden. they want to make sure that the wealthy are also going to be in the pot together. look at what's happened over the last few years where the united states bailed out the banks, and the banks went ahead and gave bonuses to their executives it it gives a lot of people in the country pause to say, wait a minute. we've got to cut spending and we've got to lower pensions and trench a little bit. where dot wealthy get in the pot with us and have to pay a little something extra themselves. so i think business people do create job. i think we have a tax policy that encourages growth and helps people to do more business. but we also have to make sure that everybody's paying their fair share as we deal with this big, huge mountain of debt. host: i want to follow up on your piece of the "new york times" website.

the group is looking at budget cuts. "political co-" this morning writing about the biden deficit pam which is already starting slowly. points that the president calls for a working group, but so far it's off to a shaky start. lawmakers in both parties expressing skepticism about another round of talks and the house already agreeing to reduce the number of participants after complaints from congressional leaders. guest: and we saw the democratic side, the senate proposed, nancy pelosi proposed chris van hollen and congressman clyburn to be the delegates on the democratic side. to hear theg republican names that will come out to be a part of this commission. and the president's going to have to -- i think the vice president is the one who's charged with dealing with this. and he's going to go up to the hill to be a part of it. we've all got to get serious. we'll see what happens if they can come together. host: another round of talks. another series. guest: we've been down that road. i think, again, there's a lot of healthy skepticism about this.

we saw the health care proposal, deficit initiatives. some of them never even got out of the starting gates. it's not always the best solution. i think there have been many plans on the table. people want to see get to the process of legislating a lot faster difficult to want to take issue with one of the points about i think it's a false argument about raising taxes on the rich because we know perfectly well many of the people based on the way they file their taxes, these small business owners file to proprietiers. they don't consider themselves rich. they have inventory, families, health insurance. have to provide for their employees. takes big burden. but it's also the catalyst for economic growth in this country. that is the type of red tape and deregulation that we're looking for, i think, overall to spur the economy again. so i don't think it's necessarily this big, false, rich wall street versus main street argument all the time i think many cases it's small businesses that are penalized the most. host: the question sufficient the paul ryan plan who give

people tax cuts. can you at least go to the position of a chuck schumer who says let's do something for people who make over $1 million a year. but at some point there's got to be a place where the wealthy are asked to do something to help resolve this problem and not leave it all on the elderly and the working people. guest: i think that's the same argument you see walter monday dale making even today. the idea of increasing taxes. the campaign argument i ran on 1984 didn't work then, i don't see how it's going to work now, you know, revenue raisers, tax decreases you saw them in the obama health care plan. you see that republicans and conservatives are trying to do something to mitigate that, increase in taxes, and the lack of economic growth businesses are concerned about the full effect of obama's health caver law. there is, i don't think, a strong appetite -- it's going to be part of what the gang of six is going take an. but there's not a strong appetite when you talk about tax hikes. host: how to raise taxes without losing votes.

it's pointed out that in 1994, i told the american people that i'd have to raise taxes. and, in fact i lost the election but won the argument because reagan ended up increasing taxes in 1984, 1985, 1986, and 1987 to mend the budget and also to tax systems. in the essence of what walter mondale is saying today is that barack obama is saying i'll raise taxes in targeted areas if the american people would support something like that. guest: i think it's still mixed. let's not forget that rage rage also reduced the mancheinal tax rates. you saw the 20-year period of economic growth because of his policies, more private enterprise, more growth in the small business sector. when you're talking about those taxings, again, back to the gang of six, i think there's going to be probably the biggest part of the debate on the senate side is whether or not to close these

loopholes. you're already seeing some of the conservatives pushing back on that. it's going to be a very difficult fight. guest: we do have to give the republicans credit. they want cuts for everybody, and state budgets, cut pensions for firefighters and cops they want poo cut medicare for social security. social security recipients are seniors. then they want to cut taxes for the wealthy. but that's not the kind of shared sacrifice people want. if we're going to cut things for people who are working and seniors, people on the lifeline of america, we ought to at least cut some of the loopholes and get the healthy and the people who have more assets to be able to participate more. where i thinkce you lose people in this conversation. host: let's get roger on the phone. he's been waiting from georgia, republican line with leslie sanchez and jamal simmons. good morning, roger. caller: good morning. i just have a couple of things i wanted to touch base on. first off, i paid social

security taxes in when i was working for other businesses most all my life. ok. and now there's a possibility that they may not be there whenever i get ready to retire. i'm 60 now. have just started a business of my own because the -- [indiscernible] a smart move -- [indiscernible] in that event, we lost a lot of small memberships which involved a lot of people that are ground floor, just like me. i'm educated automobile mechanic. in the event that we get up there, why can't we determine a way -- and i feel like you and congress, republican and democrat, are working on it. but why can't we develop a way to keep from taking from them? if you took the interest from what i paid all my life and gave

it to me as my retirement, me being conservative, and living on my means and not above them? host: thanks for the call, roger. leslie? guest: to some extent he's talking about the argument in the 1990's, private savings accounts, people invest their own money. after financial crisis people were skeptical, still, about that plan. but part of the reason is people are living longer, thank goodness, life expectancies. the amount of revenues that are going in are different. but the costs overall are a lot higher that we're paying back. it's not means tested. there's a lot of -- reasonable solutions we tend to have quick fixes for social security. but i think medicare and medicaid are much higher on the list of outgoing outlays, the government, the responsibilities that we have that are going to bankrupt us a lot sooner. host: and this twitter four, jamal simmons. which is worse, cutting social security by letting the dollar decline in buying power and give

no cost of living increases? guest: which is worse? i don't know that that's the choice we face. when we talk about social security, one of the callers who called in a second ago had a good idea, which is let's raise the cap on taxing social security. so right now i think we stopped taking social security taxes from people after a certain dollar amount. people want to raise that cap so that you go a little bit higher so the wealthier pay more into the social security system, which seems to make some sense. maybe you raise the retirement age a little bit. but you've got to be careful. because there are some people who work with their bodies, arms and legs not with minds mostly like us all day. there are some people out there in textile mills, auto factories, they can't work as long. so if we raise the retirement age, we have to deal the folks who can't work longer. we have to find a way to deal with the entitlements that is fair and equitable. but we can't do it all on the

cutting side. that makes people nervous. we have to look at closing some of the loopholes, getting rid of some of the bush tax cuts from a couple of years ago. certainly not cutting taxes more for people who make over $300,000. host: both of our guests have experience on the capitol hill and white house with respect to their political parties. jamal is a democrat, an analyst for cbs news and cbsnews.com. and leslie sanchez, i have to ask you about resurgent republic. what is that? >> it's a 501c4. it's a transparent organization. we do focus groups and research to talk about what the government is discussing. and we try to provide insight on what a lot of independent voters, voters 55 and over, small business leaders what america is really thinking. host: and your website lesliesanchez.com. the links available at c-span.org. ron, independent line from wisconsin. good morning. caller: yes. i'd just like to make a few

comments. and then i have a question for you. i think we need to take a hard look at who we run for president next time. the current tax and spend policies despised as investments that we're currently seeing here from our president just don't well with people in america here. currently in wisconsin, we're fighting a hard fight to separate our government unions from our politics. as you see with our last judicial election, that's still up in arms. we're trying to break that hole there -- hold there. host: jamal simmons, your response? guest: wisconsin is the hotbed of what's been going on in terms of state budget cuts around the country. but what's interesting about happened in wisconsin is it's actually brought a lot of people who maybe were sit on the fence over to the side of more

progressive policies. one thing that you've seen in that usually firefighters and police officers are among the most conservatives union members. and although they're members of unions, they don't tend to get out in the frontlines and join arms. but what we've seen in wisconsin is it brought firefighters and police officers into the same picket lines with teachers and with construction workers and all the other people in that movement. so in some ways, moving people who ought to be allies of the republican governor, moving them away. and if you look at scott walker and the governor 6 of wisconsin, look at his pole ratings, they are under 50%. he's losing more support the longer this goes on. so in some ways this may have been the best thing to happen from union movement, to give people focus. what they don't want to have happen is take collective bargaining and give working people no organized way tone gauge. host: and yet the gallup poll had the president's rating down to 41%. guest: i know. it's bad. guest: we agree on something today.

guest: it's bad. i think the president's got to -- i think they're focused on trying to deal with that. one of the reasons that's the case is the approval rating among democrats is going down 77%. that's the number, though, that i think he can make up in the end. but the independent reigning i think troubles the white house. you have to move the republicans. they still don't like them as the independents and democrats moved away. they've got to fix that. guest last week on spoil's "newsmakers" the chair of the republican national committee. the essence of the story is that he's brought down the r.n.c. debt to below $20 million. he's also made inroads with major donors, party leaders on capitol hill and k. street chipping away at the debt he inherited from michael steele. he had a payroll of $400,000 and only $350,000 in the bank. guest: very true. he hit the ground running. he came with a specific plan to restore kind of fiscal responsibility, come up with a vision for the future. and he gave a lot of

encouragement back to the donors whom are concerned about where the direction of the r.n.y. was going. they came back in a strong way. i think they're very excited about the opportunities for 2012. this comment from twitter, twitter.com/c-spanwj. shared sacrifice includes all, rich and poor, young and old, sick and healthy, public and private, union and nonunion. no more class warfare. i read that tweet because the president last week in his speech in chicago, a series of three fundraisers in which he helped collect $2 million for the democratic national committee as he makes inroads in what is expected to be up to $1 billion. at least $750 million that he will raise for his re-election effort. and here's how president obama frames the debate for 2012. >> that's why i'm going need your help now more than ever. this campaign is still in its

early stages. but now is the time when you can help shape it to make sure it gets out of the gate. strong. let me tell you. you know, i'm a little dinged up. [inaudible] [cheers and applause] >> i know there are times when some of you have felt frustrated because we've had to compromise with the republicans on some issues. there have been times people are frustrated because we didn't get the first twoe in years. there have been times where i felt the same way you do. but you i know what? we knew this would not leave. we knew that on a journey like this, there are going to be setbarks -- setbacks, detours. there are going to be times where you stumble. but we also knew that each and

every juncture in our history when our future was on the line, when we were at a cross roads like we are now, the country came together. we were able to make the changes we needed. host: michael len posted this piece -- michael len posted this speech shortly after the president's speech. the first job is to reconnect. guest: reconnect. revision history. i'm kidding. he's one of the most unique communicators. it's astounding, his ability to do that. the problem are the facts kind of have to come into the debate. there's a few different things. you talked about the lack of supported, the decrease in support, among the democrats. only 35% of independents support -- believe in the president's job performance so far. he has some significant challenges. it's all resting on the economy, fiscal responsibility, where the economy is in november of next

year. it's really going to dictate a lot of where this election glows. we've talked about the class warfare. i thought that tweet was very interesting. no class warfare. nobody should be left out. right i think this whole idea of pitting a working class is not part of the conservative movement of the republican party, this and that. those are old debates. they're tired. people want fiscal restraint, responsible leadership. even safety net programs continue to grow under the current budget that we just passed. they want to see the type of welfare reform that we saw in the 1990's when you had president clinton and republicans come together. it was very painful, having been there, but came together to have responsible government that powered back with the governors and allowed those governors to make unique choices to save their states. host: leslie sanchez, graduate of george washington university, attends johns hopkins university in the baltimore area. and jamal simmons, graduate of morehouse college and earned his masters from the kennedy school at harvard.

he's also a principal at the raven group here in washington, d.c. gordon joins us from columbus, ohio, for our two guests. good morning. welcome to the conversation. caller: thank you. and good morning to you all. thanks for allowing me to join before i get up and go to church this morning. host: certainly. caller: well, i have a few questions. first of all, ms. leslie sanchez, i believe you just talked about the governors and their plans. our governor here -- i just want to touch on one specific plan that he is coming about with that i don't believe is really -- i don't know. i'm a little nervous. i really don't think this plan is really good. he wants to take our liquor stores out of drink. but he wants to take our -- i don't drink. but he wants to take our liquor stores and defund them at the same time. so basically selling to wall street. and he wants to name his -- i'm

not too familiar. but i've heard something about this plan. and we've been talking about it at work. i work for a landscaping company. i kind of injured my back at another job that i had. so, you know, without having health care, i wasn't able to go seek some kind of help. so i had to just go straight back into work. so i'm working with a bad back. i do work 12 to 15 hours a day. i don't complain. i like my job. i like doing what i do because i'm allowed to do it. but if our governor is going to cut our budgets -- you know, i'm basically just saying what is the bigger republican plan? i don't hear anything good coming out of what they're talking about. host: thanks for the call. are you familiar with john caseic's -- kasich's proposal in ohio? guest: not that particular one. i think to your latter point, i think overall with republicans with conservatives, is to see the viability and strength of

our economy and to give more freedom and power to the governors, to be able to make choice that they need, to be able to provide consistent quality care, health care, education, and the resources, transportation, whatever they are going to need to do with those dollars, to give them the freedom to do so without restricting them based on what several folks and a lot of lobbyists think need to be happening in washington. but you do raise some really interesting points. i think the republican challenge here is you can say what we're doing. we've increased the number of support for safety net programs. we're talking about fiduciary responsibility. i think you're seeing independence like that but overall what is not getting out in that message is the amount of waste and duplication. i mean, it's one thing to say nobody should be immune from a cut. but we know perfectly well there's a lot of programs that are old, antiquated, wasteful that really need to be looked at. i think that's their point to

make. guest: i think the president would even agree with that. in his last budget he ha had $770 billion in discretionary spending cuts going forth for the next decade. he also talked in the400 billion security apparatus of the united states. sew talked about real cuts. but he also talked about putting everybody in i think we just can't get off that point. i know you want to talk class warfare. but they are the ones who have suffered while people in the top 2%, 10% have had their incomes go up and taxes go down. everybody else in the country is getting squeezed. so we can't get so disconnected. we've got to find a way to get everybody in to help fix this problem. host: mitt romney officially announcing the formation of his committee. committe he do so on the campus of new hampshire. he was in orlando, florida, over the weekend.

here's the former massachusetts governor announcing his committee. >> last week in nevada i talked through a neighborhood with homes vacant or in foreclosure. unemployment there is over 13%. across the nation over 20 million americans still can't find a job or have given up looking. how has this happened in a nation that leads the world anyone yo racing and productivity? the answer is that president obama's policies have failed. he and virtually all the people around him have never worked in the real economy. they just don't know how jobs are created in the private sector. that's where i spent my entire career. in 1985, i helped found a company. at first we had 10 employees. today there are hundreds. my work led me to become deeply involved in helping other businesses from innovative startups to large companies going through tough times. sometimes i was successful and helped create jobs. other times i wasn't. i learned how america competes with companies in other

countries, why jobs leave and how jobs are created here at home. later when i served as governor of massachusetts, i used the skills i had learned in 25 years in business to streamline state government, balance the budget every year, and restore a $2 billion rainy day fund. from my vantage point in business and in government i've become convinced that america has been put on a dangerous course by washington wash politicians. host: jamal simmons, as you hear mitt romney's speech and see where he's traveling, what's his strategy? guest: mitt romney didn't have a very good time in iowa last time. he spent a lot of money, didn't get a lot of votes. i think what you're starting to see is him piece together a strategy that keeps him from being so reliant on the iowa caucuses and maybe build more strength in new hampshire, his neighboring state from massachusetts. he talked about nevada in this ad that he just had. nevada has a huge mormon population also. he's got a little bit of a

foothold in nevada. so i think what you're seeing is romney trying to put all of it together. what's interesting to me, though, watching this as an outsider, looking at republicans, is that typically republicans tend to go after or vote for the next person. the person who did the second best in the last election. but you don't see that kind of reception from mitt romney. people have not quite bought into his 2012 strategy yet so it will be interesting for democrats to sort of watch the most wide-open republican nominating process i think we've seen in a long time. host: and this twitter from jan who says mitt has a plastic hair helmet. is the clothing supposed to make him look like an every man? that is an i shall yew that the romney campaign is dealing with. guest: normally it's female candidates i have to answer questions like that about. guest: john edwards did. guest: and al gore for his makeup application. interesting.

i'm a big fan, i will disclose, of governor romney i think he is one of the hardest working individuals who's truly committed to what he says. in the sense that he wants to see the economy grow. he has the resources. and he e graishated himself among conservatives after he endorsed mccain last time. people were skeptical of him, didn't know where he was coming from. did that have veneer about him. you i know, what were his intentions. which positions did he support? i think he's worked very hard to express his vision for economic growth in this country. host: you're saying mitt romney does not excite the tea party activists or the bible thumb%, he better skip iowa? your comment? guest: mitt romney, i think it was a conservative jewish group he was speaking at. i heard it on c-span radio driving around.

that's how cool i am, i listen to c-span radio when depriving around washington -- driving around washington. he said something about he wants to do tax reform, but he's not going to do tax reform to make rich people richer. he wants to do tax reform to make it simpler and encourage growth. i think if more republicans come out with lines like that, they would win over a lot of people who are more skeptical about their intentions. host: you can also listen to c-span radio on our website, c-spanradio.org. we are heard coast-to-coast on x.m.102. it's pointed out if congress fails to raise the debt ceiling, the treasury department and tim geithner specifically will be forced to default on some treasury notes and bonds as they come do so creditors would demand higher interest rates on the new bonds as they have done for greece and other heavily indebted nations. will republicans support increasing the debt limit or is this a game of chicken?

guest: unfortunately i think the later. overall, yes, i believe republicans will. this is not a game. there are very significant consequences if we can't go and sell our bonds and have our debt. we can't ignore the fact that, you know, what it, this week i.m.f. and the brit countries were all meeting, talking about whether or not the u.s. dollar should continue to be the world reserve currency. there are some significant concerns about people abroad, globally, understanding that the u.s. can pay back its debts. especially since so many of them are the lending authorities there. i think we have to take this very seriously. host: we're joined from north bergen, new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. this is for mrs. sanchez. i want her to explain to me about the health care bill, how

a person -- i'm very lucky. i'm 70. i'm retired. my income is $24,000 a year. so i'm not falling in that medicare proposal of the republicans mr. ryan. but it's many people who is going to be only 55, who are going make less than i do. and i want ms. sanchez to explain to me how that people is going to survive. not everybody is a genius. not everybody can go up like she did. host: how do you respond to that sentiment? guest: i think to speak directly to the caller, i think your concerns are valid. the point is not that the new health care initiatives are to look at entitlements and how to approach them, to make sure that

they're stronger. i think it's to break the system apart as much as it is to find a way to make the system better to make it solvent so that it can be there for the extended family that are dependent upon it. i talked about my personal experience with it earlier. navigating the system is poor. there's a lot of abuse in the system. there's a lot that can be done to make the system stronger, better, and viable so that people 55 over -- so that we're not indebting future generations to pay for benefits that we have to pay out today. there's a very real economic concern. host: jamal simmons, the last word. guest: the governor may have -- talking about medicare. the promise to seniors that they would be there for them in their senior years to make sure they got the health care they needed the paul ryan health plan takes away that promise. instead, you go out to the market like everybody else and buy your own insurance.

the costs go up more than out of pocket than today, then good luck. we wish you well, but country needs it i don't think the republicans want to throw all into the street. i don't believe that but i do think sometimes they don't think about how the policy they come up with impacts people in a general way. that said, at the end of the day, we're seeing the contours of a plan that's a gang of six, the republicans and democrats, and senate are coming up with, the president is trying to put together, various commissions trying to do it, and it will have spending cuts, entitlement reform, and revenue raisers out ofhost: leslie sanchez, a member of the border the resurgent republican. the websites are available through c-span.org. kurt volker will be joining us in a few minutes as we take a closer look at our involvement in libya and nato's overall

involvement. he is the former and ambassador to nato. we will be back in a moment. >> let's meet a top winner from this year's student can competition. today, we go to racine, wisconsin, and talk to the second prize winner. a seventh grader at mckinley middle school. hello. what is lead? >> leadership in energy and environmental design. it was started in 1998 by the u.s. green building council. it is designed to promote energy in the architecture.

>> why did you pick this? >> one of the crewmembers father's works for a company that is strongly involved in energy-efficient buildings. this has been a rising topic, so we were very serious and wanted to learn more about it. >> to discuss renewable resources in home building. how the policies encourage this? >> [inaudible] >> how do you conserve energy? >> i tried to take shorter showers, turn off the lights when i leave a room, and not years as much water. we have energy efficient appliances in our home. >> how does your community

conserve energy? >> we have the energy efficiency programs. they finance energy-efficient appliances to people in our community. >> you chose a leed certified builder to interview. what did you learn? >> to be leed certified, you have to meet a lot of standards. his home was platinum certified. >> in your documentary, you show how to be leed certified. >> it was constructed using a renewed and reusable materials. energy played a big role in the construction.

all of the energy-efficient appliances were put inside his house. >> are there any drawbacks to leed certified buildings? >> the biggest drawback is cost because it takes a lot of money to build. it is rapidly going down in price, so i think it will be much more affordable soon. >> what did you learn from creating your documentary? >> i learned about the importance of leed certification. i had not heard much about the topics before we were talking to the other crewmembers and we were picking our topics. i learned a lot about the buildings and standards. >> magazine, thank you for joining us today. >> here is a brief portion for her documentary "leed-ing the way." ♪

>> this little piggy seems to be thinking ahead. his house will be waterproof and fireproof. they affect termites, sound, and mildew growth of. >> it helps the, withstand tornado and hurricane force wind. very important in an area known for this population they will meet minimum requirements to have a leed certified hileman. >> you can see this documentary and others at studentcam.org. host: we want to welcome kurt volker, a former u.s. ambassador to nato and we focus on libya

and nato. good morning. the me begin with an editorial this morning talking about the be a stalemate from "the washington post. what is your response? what is the u.s. mission in libya? what is the role of nato? guest: there is a mismatch between what we want to see happen, gaddafi out of power. in libya, he has the preponderance of force at his disposal.

the rebels are disorganized and poorly armed. that is that the mission nato takes on. even though we knew the problem, all we could agree on was to say we could protect civilians. nato made a decision by consensus to get germany and turkey on board only to protect civilians, but that is not enough to make a strategic difference on the ground. host: limit of back to what the president, prime minister cameron, and president sarkozy said. they added it -- "it was the libyans that rose to take back their country and they must remain in the lead." can you be kind of pregnant? should we be in or out? guest: the libyans should be in

the lead. you have this libyan transitional council. you have former ministers and former generals willing to lead, but they need a lot more help. u.s. or nato troops on the ground can change the vision of what is happening, looking like an invasion. there is an awful lot you can do that we are not doing. we can do intelligence support. you can provide targeted assistance, training, advisers, we could jam gaddafi's communications in order to support the ground movement. there is an awful lot aggressive support for the rebels and we could very well be doing. host: on friday, the details about what rasmussen said nato's role in libya was. >> in a two-part officials made

clear the three military objectives made it clear our mission in libya. at the end of all attacks against civilians. secondly, the withdrawal of all of the regime forces to paris. thirdly, in immediate humanitarian access. we strongly endorse the call by the contact group for khaddafi to leave power. nato is absolutely determined to continue its operation for as long as there is a threat against libyan civilians. host: comments of the nato secretary general and also this editorial he wrote last week in "the washington post" saying our efforts in libya are not purely a military solution to the crisis. guest:sure. you need a political solution to

follow. right now, you have a situation where you have a dictator in power with military forces and his disposal willing to kill as on population or anyone who stands up against him. that requires force. it ought to be the libyan people themselves taking the lead but with our active support. want to get through that, the question is and who takes over in libya? what will be the succession? how do you bring different factions together? it is a complicated political test. there has got to be a strong military role upfront. host: from yesterday's could the new york times," this piece. sard that military forces loyal to gaddafi have been firing in residential neighborhoods in misrata. guest: it's terrible. the shooting against the civilian population is exactly the kind of thing that people find utterly appalling about

what gaddafi is willing to do. why the libyans have risen up against him and the internet community has joined. -- why the international community has joined in. host: they're facing the usual difficulties in persuading the other members of nato to join in the bombing operations. only half are active in libya and a number are quietly opposing the mission they see as ill-conceived. guest: there are a lot of different views in nato which is important to recognize. one is we will lead to as much as the u.n. resolution says which is to protect civilian populations and not engage in efforts to help gaddafi. another is the only way to protect the civilian population is to oust gaddafi and that is the way that the u.k. and france are looking at it. some nato members are taking part in an operation we have agreed on and others are not, and that is damaging to nato. the u.s. needs to be more

assertive. we are the leader of nature, the biggest military contributor, and the u.s. needs to play its role fully. host: our guest served as the u.s. ambassador to nato. how many nations are there in nato? guest: 28 right now. host: our first caller this morning. caller: i do not think we should have gone in libya. we should have stayed out. in addition, i do not believe i like the fact that powers would have obama a's eager to say we should go in when she worked for george soros when he has bigger to four companies -- four countries already. host: if you do get through, we ask that you turn the volume down. to her point? guest: one point was if we should have get involved in the other was a man the powers and george soros, which are will

leave alone. -- other was samantha powers and soros. when their people trying to bring about change that is based in the same values that we believe in as a country, freedom, democracy, justice in society, the ability to get rid of a tyrant, we will side with those people. that does not mean ground troops, but we should be on their side. we have seen the movement in the arab world the people demanding exactly those kinds of rights which is terribly important. we need to support that change. for governance, dictatorships, conflict have been there for years and years. this is an opportunity for something different finally, the doctor has sponsored terrorism against the united states and other countries -- gaddafi has sponsored terrorism against the united states and other countries. for all of these reasons, there is a u.s. interest. host: how long is the obama war on gaddafi going to last and

what is it costing us? he failed and gaddafi one? guest: we are there yet. gaddafi is hanging on. there are forces marshalled against him. we are not doing enough to punish the job of removing him from power by supporting the rebels. we cannot make that judgment yet. host: is that not part of the problem? the president said the mission was to protect civilians while the british and french are money to get him out of power. you have the three closest allies not agreeing. guest: the letter said they all wanted to see a regime change. we are not applying the means to that goal. in the means we are applied are far short of that, which is protecting the civilian population, which is why many to step up support for the rebel opposition. host: on the line from seattle, you are on the phone with kurt

volker. caller: good morning. and mike, real quick is that i think the u.s. should leave the middle east alone. i know we have obligations there and stuff like that, but we need to scale back our involvement and the intervention that we are doing in just messing with those countries. i also think that there needs to be something akin to nato but for the middle east countries to be more involved with the western countries. their role with respect to western countries is to detached and then me get these things like in libya where we are ambiguous to what our involvement needs to be. do you know what i mean? host: thank you. your response? guest: i agree with seeing arab countries more involved. the problem is that a lot of them are dictatorial regimes and

not open societies. they are very ambivalent about whether there should be a change with their members. that said, we do see a couple including qatar providing airplanes and request by the arab league to support the libyan population. after the broader point about u.s. engagement, i am very sympathetic to the idea that it would be nice if we did not have to get involved in everything around the world. we have big budget problems and make a focus on that. the reality is these things around the world really do affect our country and a mistake in how they come out. host: in the piece you wrote that was published in a lot of newspapers coming year state the obvious that removing the docca will not be easy. guest: we've tried to minimize what we're willing to do -- a no-fly zone, protect civilians, humanitarian assistance -- because those are easy things to agree on.

it is much harder to get u.n. or nato allies to agree to a more military task. there is a mismatch between wanting him to be gone but not willing to but the means behind it. host: from twitter, "the problem began when the rebels were equated to civilians by the u.n." guest: they started out as civilian protesters in tripoli. we saw this happen in tunisia and egypt. the that they could purchase in the capital, demand their rights, and there was a chance the regime would go away. unlike what happened in tunisia and egypt, gaddafi decided to fire on his own people which forced the civilian opposition and to a rebel movements in order to protect themselves and fight back. host: if libya did not have oil, would we be there? guest: i think so.

the proximity to europe, immigration, the country has previously sponsored terrorism and will likely do so again. these are all reasons. host: you look at what is happening in yemen and north korea. while libya and not somewhere else? guest: it is a judgment call when you do not have unlimited resources. with the revolutions we had seen in tunisia and egypt with the proximity to some of our other interests, this gets us engaged more easily. host: from pennsylvania on the democratic line, good morning. welcome to the conversation. caller: talk about the economy. i want to know about that. host: we are talking about libya and the nato involvement. caller: on our economy, if they stop giving all of our money to these four countries we would have been all right.

-- all of these foreign countries. how did obama get in there without going through congress? guest: on the congressional point, there were serious complaints in the congress about confrontations. that is an obligation of the administration and they reacted to that. it was not done in advance, but they tried to build greater support for this. there are differing views on the hill from people who would rather not have the u.s. involved in the villa. there are many in the center, from both parties, you would like this has stepped up the, senators mccain and liberman. host: the war would have ended within hours if we had just a dead third one more day. now it is a protracted war. -- if we had just dithered one more day.

guest: if we had acted faster, based on what we had seen already in tunisia and egypt, there was a fear in the regime that it would not hang on. but because we did not act quickly before they began firing on their own population, it gives hope to gaddafi that he would be able to hang on and for those people around him, they were forced back into supporting him and his regime even though they must know internally that he is crazy. host: from the bahamas on the phone with kurt volker. go ahead. tony? good morning. caller: thank you for the program. if they had acted earlier, that would have been key. it is a bit late. here is my question. i cannot believe the world is letting this massacre go on.

he has a record. he has killed americans, british, french. during the iraq coalition, they were talking about that but no one paid attention. gadhafi in's agent was recruiting them to go fight against the west in iraq. this guy cannot be trusted. the longer than he survives, the bigger the nightmare for the west and europe. but he has a proven record. maybe they should give more weapons to the rebels to finish this. i know there is paranoia about what they will do afterwards. give them enough weapons to finish the job. people who say we cannot be involved and why we should be

involved, there is a humanitarian interest. people are getting massacred. i hope the west does something because it gaddafi is an enemy of the entire world. guest: i have to say i largely agree with the caller. the me just mention -- let me mention one thing. he was responsible for the bombing of pan am one of three. as a younger and diplomat, that was one of the first thing i did to go to lockerbie, scotland. that was an awful, awful act which he deliberately committed. the guy who was held responsible, an intelligence officer from libya, was released on medical reasons and was given a hero's welcome by gaddafi's regime it. we have to think about what he is likely to do again in the

future. host: this is the end of the old nato and hopefully changes for u.s. voting. has our involvement has impacted the new relations are the structure of nato? guest: this has pointed out a lot of problems that we have in nato. they were not caused by the libyan crisis, but they are much more glaring. we cannot have a common assessment on the world. we did not share, descriptions about the use of force. we often do things down to the lowest common denominator. europeans have slashed their defense budgets and they do not have the capability to do this alone. that is a fact we have to deal with it we want to use nato. and the afghanistan, the u.s. was complaining that we needed to have more from the other allies. it is even worse in the case of libya, the number of allies that are contributing. host: our guest is a former

u.s. security officer and served as the u.s. ambassador to nato between 2008-2009 and is now by john hopkins university. only if you are familiar with quotesbewitched" will get this. fightneed to fund it, it. there is nothing that allows us to thbe the gladys kravits of te world." [laughter] guest: i would agree. host: from new jersey on the republican line. good morning. caller: [inaudible] europeans have slashed their defense budgets by a lot.

they have cut them to the point because they are a community of 800 million people [unintelligible] we should either have them carry their equal weight or get out. we have spent trillions in iraq. we spent hundreds of billions in afghanistan. we cannot continue this anymore. either they stand up or we should cut our involvement than turn away. we cannot carry them anymore. guest: i understand the frustration. in fact, we are spending a lot more and the defense and carrying a larger share of the burden than the europeans are across the board. there is no doubt about it. would you rather be in a world

where you have allies in the can do some things together even though it is not as much as you want or not at all? it is still worth the investment to the united states to be involved with the nato and encourage more. ultimately, the reason they are not spending more on defense is a democracy. they do not believe in the same solutions and want to fund military forces. the have to navigate around political waters. that is what is happening. it is a matter of constant tending. kissinger used the metaphor of tending a garden. host: "bring our men home from everywhere -- now. we cannot afford thet wars anymore." with the diminishing budget of the eu and nato members, can this function without the u.s.? our arab countries willing to finance the european restocking of their bombs?

guest: again, and made the point earlier, but i want to repeat this. if we brought all of our forces home from all over the world, the security problems and threats to the united states around the world grow and they will come to our shores. we are doing a lot of important work to protect our country by being abroad, even if it is expensive and difficult. i think we need to do that. the second point -- host: are the arab countries willing to pay for the restocking of their bonds? guest: i do not think so. they are not even willing to pay for palestinian-armenian relief. you will not see any thing from their countries. the question was cannonade to function without the u.s. and i would say no it cannot. -- can the u.n. function without the u.s.? it was not meant to function without the u.s. and we were meant to be there.

host: journal@c-span.org. "there is a very narrow line between doing too little too late and too much too long." guest: that's right. if you are going to do something, do it. host: jerry from orr, minn. go ahead. caller: they give for taking my call. the founding fathers are warned against these foreign entanglements and the meddling around the world. the war does not to get involved in that it receive deferred of our labors -- the fruit of our labors in the foolishness of staying in afghanistan and iraq. you talk about humanitarian issues. the middle east is full of despots who are abusing the human rights of their people. china is one of the biggest abusers of human rights yet they are our great friend and ally.

a president went to the united nations and nato before he went to the congress to get authorization and this is one of those on the clear boards again. it is something we should not be involved in. our defense budget is equal to all the rest of the nations in the world combined and we should bring our troops home from around the world to guard our own borders. this is not isolationism beta this is just take a in the admission of our founding fathers in looking at our best interests. thank you. guest: i think you can boy to a lot of positive examples. you mentioned vietnam and iraq as negatives. i iraq is changing. we will see how that comes out. we still do not know. world war ii and world war i were vital to our interests. we are seeing in the arab world beyond libya and looking at the

revolutions of taken place in tunisia, egypt, and the demand for basic rights that is coming out of the arab forces -- from arab voices is there. this is a real opportunity for change that we have not seen before. host: we spend more on defense or offense than any other countries in the world. cincinnati, ohio, democratic line with kurt volker. good morning. caller: jerry hit it on the nose. the reason is the military- industrial complex. it is the defense industries. it is not just the defense industries but also people like your guest, the state takes, sir congressman who supports military activity involvement around the world. it is certain military people themselves want to be involved in military conflicts and keep

this defense thing going. the purpose and go over all of this was in iraq when they finally came to an agreement to buy contracts to buy f-16's and tanks from american defense industries and that is what the point is. the military-industrial complex has been a problem since world war ii and can i use it for the justification of the continual sprawl of the military we have had ever since then. host: we are marking the 50th anniversary for president eisenhower's farewell address and a lot of comments on our trichet page as well to that point. -- on our twitter page as well. guest: there are a lot of people who work in defense and government making decisions. there is something to that and support of it exists. let me be clear about one thing applied in your point which is that the motives of the people

who make decisions about our country's national security, whether it is the president, members of congress, senate, or career professionals in the state department, defense department, national security council, wherever, they are motivated by one thing and one thing only -- their belief in what is best for our country. they are aware that threats exist in the world and are doing what they believe is best. you can disagree with that, but i do not believe it is fair to challenge the motives of those people. host: for martinsville, virginia. welcome to the conversation. caller: are you correct in saying that the united states is the largest funder in the equipment to nato? guest: the way nato works is that every country provides their own military capabilities and there are very limited, and capabilities.

when you look at the national defense budgets for each country, the u.s. accounts for 75% and the other 27 account for 25%. when you look at the common budgets nato has on whether it is for infrastructure, defense infrastructure, a civilian, military, the u.s. pays about 20% of those budgets. the national military capabilities are the things that really counts. host: to u.s. troops responded to? guest: the commander in chief is the president. there is a chain of command. the president goes to the secretary of defense who goes down to the commander in chief for each region, in the case of a europe, and he has two cats, commander of u.s. forces in the european theater and the supreme allied commander for nato. we have a u.s. chain of command that our forces respond to. host: so of there is a

disagreement between the british and french initiative, the u.s. troops responded to the u.s. military? guest: the u.s. always maintains a u.s. chain of command. there may be insubordinate to the admiral. i believe there is a canadian general in charge of libyan, but the u.s. has a chain of command in decision making. nothing is decided in nato accepted by consensus meeting every country has to agree. in particular, the u.s. has to agree. host: are you still with us, james? caller: there was a press release yesterday on fox news that the arab league was all for going into libya but they were not going to pay for it and the u.s. would bear the burden. that should not be correct, should it? guest: i agree that we would like to see more support by the arab countries, both political,

military, and financial support. we have to make our own calculations of what we believe is in our zero interest and to do what is necessary. if you remember the first gulf war, there was a financial degree of arab support after the invasion of kuwait. we should continue to maintain support. there is some, but there needs to be more. host: i am not sure this figure is accurate, but why do we have 80,000 u.s. troops in europe? guest: we do not at the moment. we have slots nominally assigned to be in europe, but the troops are out there and most are deployed in afghanistan. some of them have gone into iraq as well. we have smaller numbers than that. there are a few regions. it is not to protect the territory of europe, but it is a place where they have been deployed and can be deployed from there to go to places like afghanistan, iraqi, or elsewhere.

it provides it forward capability which remains very useful. it is a way to insure that our allies remain interoperable the with our own forces and that we are able to work together rather than having disparate capabilities. host: you talk about nato and its umbrella. "perhaps it is time for your to purchase their own umbrella." in denver, good morning. caller: i was wondering if that do you think this is the conclusion of world war ii and the strong influence that the nazis had in north africa and late setting up these despots, as the previous caller had mentioned? guest: i do not think it comes out of that. what i think it comes down to is where the lines are drawn under colonialism, the french and british in particular, and the italians. where were the lines drawn in the colonial period? after world war ii, they try to

solidify their power and you have a completely new generation. think about the ages. if you are talking about someone who is 25 years old in libya, that person would have been born in 1986. they have no recollection whatsoever of wall i wari - world war ii or even vietnam. these people are looking around and see and when other freedoms exist in other parts of the world with it is europe, the united states, latin america, or elsewhere. this is fundamentally new. it is well beyond the out of world war ii and it is now a wholly new movement. host: our guest is kurt volker, a former u.s. ambassador to nato. the role of turkey really does bring between the europe and

the muslim world. guest: the leader of the turkey -- of turkey is the leader of the akh party. they want to be part of a democratic community and look out of the arab -- for the arab world. it is difficult for them to bridge. at the same time, they are criticized by the rebels in libya for blocking a tone to do more to help them get rid of bui coffee and put our lives in danger. host: bernie york. well, the republican line. -- from new york. caller: nato is supposedly there to defend the civilian population. i would like to know how you did

for the civilian population from the rebels? guest: against to the point of how you do that darks hearty protect the civilian population with the governments in libya is actively targeting them. continue to do so darks the only way to protect civilians is to remove the regime that is attacking them. the more they are attacked, the more they're driven into armed opposition. host: this goes back to yesterday's "the new york times" article. this is an impact of the craters said the by gaddafi forces. eight people killed standing in a bread line. guest: is absolutely appalling. i am sure that is not a leading story either. host: brian from miami. good morning. welcome to the conversation.

caller: yes. i'm 25 years old. host: are you with us? ok. we lost the call. this nato have cia types and defense contractors to do their dirty work? guest: as they do have that? they do not. the member states who are responsible for those things. nato is a strange animal, sovereign states to bring their own abilities to the table or are supposed to. there are a few things done in common. there is, for example,, and aircraft. there is also some architecture that belongs to nato. for the most part, it is the

member states the brink things to the table so defense contractors, intense operatives, that would be something that the u.s. or the u.k. would bring under national command as part of the contribution. host: alex in new york city. good morning. caller: good morning. this gentleman really is not telling the whole story. i want to make these quick points to. on what everyone to read " concessions of an economic pacman" -- hitman." when it comes to libya, we should not have been there. a it is like a page out of your playbook. we're going in to save the civilians and then the nato or american army, these are reasons you put together from these european countries, american countries, or the countries of backer, you do more harm to the

civilians that that are there. the third point that i wanted to make, there was a question. i'm kind of nervous, so excuse me. host: stay on the line and we will follow-up. guest: one point wanted to at responded to. thus far, i think the u.s., the u.k., france, and all the actions being taken after the nato operations have a very little impact on the civilian population in terms of hurting them, damaging them. there have been a couple of cases of civilian casualties, but nowhere near the wholesale destruction in iraq targeting going on from gaddafi's regime -- destruction in targeting. caller: you use corporations interchangeably like they are the u.s. population. you go in here because it is protecting us but because the corporations want to use these

resources. guest: in the case of libya, you cannot make that claim. the u.s. has had sanctions in libya for a long time. we were only just beginning to build up again after gaddafi decided to get rid of the weapons of mass destruction after the war in iraq. the economic interest is rather small. moreover, the kind of destruction and disruption going on in libya now is that for every business in libya. host: a lot of different points of a view. "nato is an elite group of nations interested in global domination." how do you respond? guest: they are in the nation's in that they have a set of shared values that are the same as ours, freedom, democracy, human rights. we want to live in a world that is secure. we want to see people around the world have opportunities both to the advance their own freedom but to the in a secure

environment. nato is a military and political alliance aimed at improving security and defense for all populations. host: last call from houston, texas, on the line with ambassador kurt volker. thank you for waiting. caller: you brought up the colonial last act of africa and north africa. -- the colonial aspect of africa. we are trying to reimpose, in essence, colonialism. these people have to figure out if that this was a tribal culture and we have to let them to figure it out. we do not need to be spending all this money in terms weapons and potential cost of, especially if we ever go in with ground forces, when we are still hurting at home. it is not necessarily i shall --

isolationism. we are an island fortress and we have problems on our border. people think that they do not exist. and most of our troops should come home. we are killing our next generation. guest: there are high costs to all of these things, financial, military, young people's lives, and also facing what we have at home. there is no question about that. again, these issues and challenges around the world really affect our country as well. we have a series of bad or difficult choices and we try to make the best ones that you can. in terms of our reimposing colonialism, there i would just have to disagree. this is the first time we are seeing the people of the country themselves standing up for fundamental rights. hopefully they will be able to finally -- six decades after world war ii -- be able to establish modern societies to

look out for their citizens much better than anything before. host: kurt volker, a veteran of the u.s. foreign services, former u.s. ambassador to nato now with the mccarty assoc. and a senior fellow at johns hopkins. dennis cauchon will be joining us in a moment to talk about jobs and the u.s. economy. congressman from california and chairman for the armed forces committee will be our guest on "newsmakers. the other sunday talk shows are also under way. we check in with the c-span radio studios. >> at noon, c-span reindeer replace the five network talk shows. topics today include the economy, raising the debt ceiling, the situation in libya, and presidential politics. noon become an nbc's "meet the

press." david gregory interviews and geithner. alan greenspan, senator lee and the former governor of michigan. at 1:00 p.m., abc's "this week." also timothy geithner and members of the tea party from north carolina, florida, and others. "fox and news sunday" is at 2:00 p.m. chris wallace welcome is republican senator tom coburn and chris van hollen. ray lahood talks airline safety. republican senator rand paul, new york democrat weiner and former cia and administrator and donald trump. at 4:00 p.m., "face the nation."

bob schieffer talks with paul ryan and senate budget committee member bob warner. these are brought to you as a public service by the networks and c-span. you can listen to them all on c- span radio, 90.1 in the d.c. area, xm 132, an iphone app, or c-spanradio.org. >> your questions for chapman university professor tibor machan. he will take your calls coming emails, and tweets sunday, may 1st, on booktv. >> to be a parent means that you are treating the people you cannot live without you to live without you. >> his son's college admission

process, the s.a.t.'s, and more. andrew ferguson was not prepared for "crazy u." >> that did not happen to me when i was thinking about college in the mid 1970's said this was dawning on me that this is a very much different process. >> find out if he catches up tonight on c-span's "q&a." you can download a podcast of "q&a" available online at c- span.org/podcast. host: we want to welcome dennis cauchon from "usa today." digger being with us on c-span. -- thank you for being with us. let me talk about this story available on the "usa today" web site.

guest: if you think about what economics is, if it is the number of people working and how productive they are. our economy has been very productive for the last 30 years in the computer era, but the number of people working with the aging baby boomers is starting to decline. that has profound economic duplications. host: with the share of the people with jobs dropping, what does that mean for people out of work still looking for employment? guest: the downturn in the job losses have hurried to these trends. even people of working age are having a hard time finding jobs. then you expand that to people who are old and leaving the labor force and it compounds the problem. host: here is a front page story on "the baltimore sun." the pieces by jamie hopkins and

points out that maryland has 200,000 unemployed residents looking for work. maryland players have 70,000 jobs open trying to fill. the unemployment rate would drop overnight if many of the jobless people have the skills needed to fill those of the positions. unfortunately, it is not working out nearly that really. can you elaborate on that point? guest: we are spending more time getting educated. one reason fewer people are working is we are spending lager in college getting educated. the economy is changing very fast in an international world. we are trying to adapt and short term we are not doing so well. perhaps a long term, we will do better. host: how does this very between men versus women? guest: quite a bit. men and women tend to hold a different jobs. women are professionals in health care and government. mentored -- men move toward the

private sector. the change in the economy has been devastating to men with the private sector. the percentage of adult men working is at the lowest rate since they have kept records since 1948. well over 80% of men had jobs and today is about 66%. this is a long-term trend that men have been leaving the labor force, but the economic downturn really gave a whack to men. some are calling this the "man-cession." more women have been coming into the labour force so that is helping. however, around 2000 this trend toward women entering the labour force plateaued. that is why we have a jobless recovery for the last decade. men have been leaving, women are

really coming in, and we are in a flux. host: the ripple can be seen in so many areas. this is "to the n.y. times" sunday magazine. the flint, mich., now has the highest murder per-capita rate. "flint is not a vehicle city anymore. the spark plug plant is gone. fisher body is gone. plant is now the murder capital. in a city with a population of just over 100,000, there were 66 document to the murders. the murder rate here is worse than a new work, new jersey, st. louis, and new orleans. it is even worse than baghdad, iraq." guest: i live in ohio and not washington so i really see the decline of industrial america. it is shocking to look at at only fled, michigan, but small

towns across of higher -- flint, michigan, but across ohio. these grand buildings are not there anymore. that is where the high school educated men used to work and earn a good living. that does that exist anymore where economic growth has been in washington, california, silicon valley. host: let me go back to the figure we have on the screen to eliminate what we are discussing. 45.4% of americans holding jobs. what was the peak and when? guest: in 2000 which happened to be the economic peak as well as the cultural peak when the baby boomers hit there maximum entry into the work force and when women were entering the workforce in the highest numbers. it was between 2000-2010 when the decline started. i was born in 1957, the peak

year of the baby bell, more and -- -- of the baby boom, the most babies post war. i am from a family of 5 and i have 2 kids. this dependency ratio, workers supporting people who are not working with a our kids, seniors, prisoners, college students, has started to change dramatically and will do so for the next 10 or 20 years. host: you wrote about this and the aging of 77 million boomers of born between 1946 and 1964. this is changing the relationship between workers and dependents. can you elaborate? guest: when i was a kid, as i like to say, most of the people not working were kids in the 1970's, itt's, and in 1990's most of the people not working

or children. for the first time in the last decade, 27 million adults have stopped work. with only 3 million new children. the baby boom has not even hit 65 get. that will happen this year. this foreshadows the nature of people not working which will be markedly different than it has always been in the past. it will be seniors with the very few kids. kids have been a deferred compensation program. you educate them and then they spend the next 40 years working. seniors have their productive years behind them so there is quite a different economic change. host: "poverty and unemployment are the root of crimes in the u.s." dennis cauchon writing that we have hit the lowest number of

americans working. from new york city, good morning. go ahead, please. caller: i have a comment that the economy is the topic and we are talking about the tea party and their big concern is jobs. we have these republican governors talking about this, yet they are getting rid of collective bargaining and imposing draconian measures. we have seen these protests in wisconsin of 100,000 people out there, farmers, firefighters, police, and i am just wondering why c-span would rather show and donald trump and you do not bother to bring your cameras to the protests. i was looking for this on television.

there were over 100,000 people there. why do you not sure that? host: i will get that is to respond and i will follow-up to your point. guest: i covered both the wisconsin and ohio labor unrest and i spent weeks working on this full time. there was a voluminous coverage, from my perspective. host: what we did was bring in the wisconsin legislature to give a sense of how the government of wisconsin, both democrats and republicans, dealing with the issue and it is all available on our web site if you are interested at c- span.org. it became a topic of a lot of discussion here on "washington journal." this past week we have uncovered the washington gov. testifying on capitol hill. we dealt with this from a public policy perspective about how this was playing out in

wisconsin and in washington, d.c. next call from the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am 75 years old. i can remember in the 1960 proxy when corporate america and our wonderful leaders started giving our jobs away. who are these people in the commerce department? you know, when i was a young man tried to buy a home i worked for the railroad during the day, a trucking company at night, and i ran a milk route saturday and sunday morning. i could pick up the newspaper and find a job anywhere. now the jobs are all in china. $300 billion trade imbalance with china and everyone is wondering why no one in this country has a job. what in the world? i go to vietnam -- i am sorry.

i go to wal-mart. it costs $17 and the shirt is made in vietnam. the walmart people are probably making $15 on that shirt and the people in vietnam have a job but no one here in this country has a freaking job. guest: wal-mart is one of the nation's largest employers. a free trade in any century, there are going to be winners and losers. ohio on net, michigan, have been a loser. wal-mart is an interesting case because you can argue it is one of the greatest anti-party programs because it has brought down the cost of goods to a larger group of people. there are winners and losers. that is the change.

host: from palm desert, california. good morning. caller: good morning. legislators on both sides of the aisle say that day in order to reduce unemployment and create jobs. i would like to consider three major effects of high employment. without making any value judgments or conclusions, one can say that these are very real and a major effects. first, there is the economic effect. a nation's real wealth is not in the money but the hands of our working people. in the goods and services those hands of produce. when people are out of work, they are not producing wealth. also, there is the effect on labor management relations.

high unemployment gives management-enhanced leverage over labor. there's always someone desperate enough to take that work on any terms so labor remains, certainly, under the thumb of management. host: we will stop you there and get a comment from our guest. guest: but those to work and the balance to support social programs and others. host: that read this one a summary. "the bad economy and the plateau are rick -- contributing to serious changes for financing the nation's program in this is

all part of the debate we saw in washington and will continue to see in the weeks ahead with the president outlined town hall meetings that will begin in a northern virginia that reno, nev., that in the san francisco than the house of representatives supporting the budget put forward by paul ryan. michael jordan s from toms river, new jersey. good morning. caller: they emphasize higher education and everyone going to college. not everyone is college material. there have to be people to do trade work, the lower end of the population. if everyone is a college graduate, eventually there will be no jobs for them at all.

they will beat a college graduate picking up 2x4's. host: also saying, "put them to work where?" that goes to your earlier a point. where are the jobs? guest: some people think we are geting over educated. if you travel around, people are getting practical educations. it is not that they are just learning english. it is a lot more applied with degrees like engineering. it is not just a public policy

perspective. the computer engineers, engineers who know specifically had a program for an ipad or a phone, these highly skilled jobs, it is just like the marketplace. historically, it catches up. if you think of maybe 5 or 10 years, it may be more successful. host: the lowest level of americans holding jobs with a 45.4 million americans holding a job down from 45.3 -- 49.3%. the breakdown is almost 67% of men compared to 55% of women. in ohio, welcome to the conversation.

caller: kassick in ohio, -- he -- $8 billion in debt so he decided he was goign to [inaudible] every cabinet member that a substantial raise. -- got a substantial raise. [unintelligible] each member of his cabinet came from out of state. guest: kassick, the conservative

republican. whether liberal or conservative, how you get the economy to grow. if you look at the rhine proposal and obama, there are ideas on different paths to head down, the numbers still do not match. do we go down this road or that road? the laboratory of democracy, as they called the 50 states, with a lot of conservatives and trying to make their economies grow. host: from cleveland, good morning. caller: are you for more free trade agreements? guest: i am a reporter so i do

not have a position. i just like to describe how they work for. what you probably know is you look at the exit polling, free trade is overwhelmingly unpopular in ohio. center -- senator sherrod brown is very populist. republicans nationwide are pro- free trade. the blue collar republican is anti free trade. it is complex. caller: you have 1 billion people in china who will take our jobs, 1 billion people in india. we have millions here needing jobs and now they are signing agreements with colombia and panama with the average monthly

wage of former dollars. how do we compete with that? will we all live in poverty? host: a lot of ohio of viewers calling in. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am 36 years old, african- american, and a republican. i did not like my government. he is all talking about how we need trade with india. look. jobs are hard in ohio. we have people lining up on tuesday to try to get a job at mcdonald's of all things. like i said, i am a young man, but richard nixon went over to china and said they would get our jobs in the future when he was president. kassick, i cannot stand it. just like the last guy said from pennsylvania.

everything is made from china, silverware, a bike. i bought bike that was built where? in pennsylvania. now it is built in taiwan. host: think you for the call. response? guest: most of the schwinn bike tour made right here in ohio. he was referring to an affluent shopping district in columbus. things are not made here any longer. if you work for boeing for caterpillar, which are exporting and heavily depend on exports, you will have a different view of free trade. it is complex. host: pennsylvania, democratic aligned -- line joining us with

dennis cauchon. caller: i watch the politics pretty close. the republicans ran on the jobs, jobs, jobs which are not being created but could be created if all they had to do would be to pass a bill stating that no company can import more goods than are made here. if you do not make it here, do not import it. it is going to put jobs here and they can still import but they cannot import more than they make here. host: thank you, michael. to pick up on imports, "wal- mart does not force anyone. the customer chooses." guest: hearing the arch of the calls, as an off point, when the wind blows 35 mph, we call it an

"obama wind" or a "ryan wind." politicians are spectators and participants. the baby boom is not an obama or a paul ryan thing. the growth of china is not an obama thing. we have to open our eyes and look at these broader phenomenon. this is not just a political perspective. host: from utica, new york. good morning. caller: i have a couple of comments. i am a world war ii vet. what i see happening is the high-tech -- you can get productivity without labor. you know where i am coming from. if this does not stop, we will be nowhere. there are billion years with a high productivity and without

labor. i see this in the newsletters. this is ridiculous. they are saying only 1% goes overseas of the budget? these guys better check again. 15% goes overseas when you look at 1000 airports, 1 million military men, i was over there, too. sir, will you please comment on what i am saying and tell us the truth? have a good palm sunday, everybody. guest: the other thing i am hearing is productivity is not a good thing, but if you think how many people used to work on farms, almost all of our society. bars became aware more productive and productivity did just not take away from jobs but it also allowed people to do different things. working and productivity and

there are different friends and everything's going along, but america has to be productive. if you are going to be a labor making $20-$30 per hour competing against chinese, you have to be extremely productive. that is why america is still competing, because we are amazingly productive if even in older industries. even the automobile industry is extraordinarily productive. gm and people perceive that nonproductive are way more than they ever were. host: dennis cauchon, as you put together this piece, did anything surprise you going to doing your research a? guest: one thing that surprised me is that you would think in a new economy that more people are working for themselves or self- employed. in fact, it has