clearly there is an element of choice. when we get to that term environment, we do not use it in a literal term. what we mean is the surroundings around all of us, but physical surroundings, the social surroundings, economic surroundings, and so forth. understand where we are when it comes to obesity. there is 70% of americans either clinically obese or overweight. when you look at the people in the normal weight categories, a large portion of those are getting weighed at the same rate is overweight people, it would just take them all out to get to the overweight rage. and others in the normal weight category are doing the same things as the over weight categories, relatively and healthy, not moving that much, but they are resistant to weight gain by genetics or otherwise. virtually everyone in america are doing the same things. we're eating relatively un help

making particularly great decisions, myself included. so to blame the individual when all was, almost, are doing >> a lot of this is mindless eating. certainly among children, you are not blaming the child for what they got served in their school lunch or the amount of physical activity they are getting. a large part of that is the environment they are put into by their parents who are stressed in other ways. it is very difficult to steer around things especially if you have tv, kids are bombarded by

advertisements, there is a lot of peer pressure and all of us who have kids have gone shopping and gone down the candy understand this. --coke understand this and many people understand this. i think the market is very important. we know the decision part of the brain is not fully matured until after 20. trying to steer kids one way or another is more manipulation than emphasizing choice. >> again with the consensus- building. >> i would not over-glamorize this and say this is the key element to solving the problem. i think there are lots of elements that can be done, reducing the amount of calories,

reducing the amount of sweetness so weak reed-calibrate our suite prepare taste buds. a lot of increase in sugar, salt, and we are used to more in our food than we once were. i personally grew up with no added salt. different behavior. >> i will disagree a little bit. every person who has struggled with their weight, everyone will say it is my fault and i take responsibility for it they are not saying it's the government's fault. at the same time, we should at least talk about substances which are addictive. they are engineered to be addictive. there was a recent study that

rated sugar over cocaine. there is a strong pressure inside companies that they want to show the bottom line. they are making products which are hard to stop beating. -- to stop eating. i think we need to take that into account and we need to take the marketing into account. i think we're dealing with the prediction in this country and when you have sent in like that, you need to think of the influences that are affecting that addiction and one of them is environmental, how many times are you seeing ads for jack daniel's or other things and we need to talk in terms of the environment of the architecture of choices. one of the things that sometimes gets left out of the equation is our best friend, our customers, our retailers. how can we change the structure of the grocery environment said that can these are not in the

checkout aisles, that fruit and vegetables are in the checkout aisles, maybe some things are more difficult to get to? that might require regulation. i think we should be open to it. >> as a shopper, that is happening with some retailers. >> it is annoying when there is no candy at the register. >> i want to pick up on a comment about personal choices. anyone from the industry says this is all on the parents is not an intelligent or accurate statement. for those of us who are working parents, there is a lot on the plate and if you can get yourself to work and back and the kids to soccer and use a "rehearsal and everything and

it's friday night and everybody got ready to go, you just serve something to eat and call it a good week. it is exhausting the way we have to manage all these responsibilities. to say to mom's or dad's that it is all i knew, i don't think is realistic. what do you do that helps them? we, as an industry coming here for moms all the time that they would like help. everybody i know service minis if you serve soft drinks. the 10-year-old soccer team needs something to rehydrate at the end of the game. we have sports drinks with substantially less calories. there are things that industry can do to address the help that parents are looking for. the calorie label is just a piece of information but if you have no context, it is meaningless. the broader food industry under

my colleague industries have launched an education campaign. if we resist what we hear from people on the panel when it says it is all us. we also think that is not a very intelligent perspective that if industry is wiped off the face of the earth we will no longer have an obesity problem. that is not very sophisticated thought. we like to think about it as an industry as what is the problem we are trying to solve and what can we do that is meaningful? we can partner with president clinton and the american heart association and change the with calories and reduce the calories in schools by 88%. that is something we can do. we can put a label on every single bottle and package and people can look at that label with bigger information that comes from their md who is

giving the mons council and to get information -- and gives the moms council. we are looking at what can we do and that is why we partner with the first lady and president clinton's foundation because it is a bigger initiative. >> i think all of us have agreed it is a bigger initiative. a portion control and there is a problem if you have 0 calories and it is very sweet that you are training the taste buds to sweet and they will have 0 calories but because they need sweet, they will have to go other places and everything else they each have to have a lot of sugar added whether it is a male -- whether it is oatmeal or

something else. what are you doing about portion control and what are you doing about lowering the sweetness so people are not so addicted or trained to the sweet taste? >> i have to question your assumption that it is only beverages. >> i did not say it is only beverages. >> we have lots of different beverages with different calibrations of sweetness. personally, as someone who likes a diet soda once a day every afternoon, that takes care of my desire for a sweet and i don't want anything else. >> kids are trained staff from the. >> when i was a kid, they aren't pop was not sweet enough for me. -- the orange pop was not enough for me. eight outs minis are out there. sports drinks now have 0

calories or 10 calories. there is a lot of offerings out there. >> your position is that these things should be more tightly regulated? why, what is the case against regulation? >> i have heard that we want to be responsible citizens and part of being responsible citizens is let's give them a shot. the first question is on things they can do, are they doing it? i commend you, putting on the calorie count. i think from labeling is a step forward. it is not nirvana but it is a step forward. i think you guys did a good job not trying to confuse everyone. portion control i think is

really important. let's give them a voluntary chance to reduce the portion and the average portion of salt. we have gone up to 20 ounces being the norm instead of getting down to 10 or 8 an ounce as the norm. you guys have that data as to all the bottles you sell and show me how much 8 an ounce stuff you are selling them not just to play devil's advocate -- >> in a competitive market, you're asking a great deal of companies to put themselves at a disadvantage in the market. >> you are absolutely right. >> one might argue that regulation needs to step in. why are you hesitating to take that position? >> i think there are several companies that tried in the 1990's to step out and be more healthy. they clobbered. that has made everyone has a

tent about being the first out there. i think we hear this from companies is that we would rather have it be voluntary and giving them a chance to fight. if they don't step up and do the right thing, i think the alternative should be considered about regulating it. but give them a chance. i don't have any principle that it is right or wrong one way or another. let's be realistic. regulation will take two-three years. that is that much time they could do it voluntarily. by putting the ingredients on the front, they can do something altogether. i would also like to see portion control. >> in the beverage market place, the arms race right now is to come up with more products with

lower calories. that is where the cola wars are taking us now. the average calories have gone down but not because we are brilliant but because we listen to our consumers and that is what they want. the one beverages with less calories, they came up with minis because moms said they want them. >> the total number of calories you sell has actually gone upper, correctly if i'm wrong. the individual ones might go down but the total calories sold by the beverage industry has gone up. you're selling more calories and people are consuming more calories and it is hard to go down and obesity. the total calories are increasing their mother has to be a tipping point. >> there has to be a tipping point. where we are selling products

but selling lower calories. >> and i correct that you have sold more calories overtime? >> all i can tell you is the sale of powerful calorie soft drinks has declined over the last decade while zero calories have gone up. >> maybe the market will ticket-. take it-. negated. ive. when you look at the increase in obesity which is striking in the u.s. which is relatively recent and a dramatic change, what do

the scholars attributed to? is it mainly reduced exercise? the huge change in the u.s. and other countries and in britain is that children now get driven everywhere. they never walk. they may as well not have the use of their legs. [laughter] i wonder if that is not a large factor. >> to have perfect scientific evidence on one side or the other is extremely difficult. there is pretty good agreement among educated people in this field that is both sides of the coin. you mentioned the term 'exercise pierre.' in addition to exercise is the general physical activity of every day. as part of our society, by default, we are all doing less

because jobs have gone towards sitting in front computers most of the day it is hard to catch up with that. it is the same thing on the food side. by default, we are heading down this path. we make many help the decisions along the way but because so many of the defaults are skewed in the opera direction, we end up going slowly and some people go faster in the wrong direction in terms of weight. >> i don't know whether this has been covered in the first panel but this is a two-decade phenomenon. it began in the late 1980's. prior to that, we had about 5% among children obese and it is -- it has nearly quadrupled over the last two decades. it suggests it is all environment. the next and is to look at

consumption patterns. households now be 30% of their calories outside the house. in the house, 50% of dinners are either ordered in or take away. they are prepared meals. there has been a big shift to more prepared meals. that, i think, is a place we have to look at. at least among children, 11% of calories and daily basis are sugar-sweetened beverages. that is a large amount. on the positive side, the huge amount of attention that this has generated over the last two years because of the first lady and all initiative i think has made everyone aware. i think that is a huge positive. we also have to look at the times in this country where we reverse this kind of things. smoking is a paradigm case. we know we can make a huge difference.

we went from 50% of the adult population smoking to under 20%. >> the cigarette companies did not make the changes voluntarily they needed to make. i think the other thing is that when we talk about addiction and breaking some of these very deep patterns of behavior is what is the normal? culturally, i think we send mixed messages. 20 years before, it was about health, now we have anorexia, eating disorders, the beauty images are making women feel they are faster than they are. >> if you look at the polls, women think they are thinner than they are. not just women, men and women.

some of the obese think they are overweight, too. what is our comfort level with the stigma? in addition to compassion, the entire environment, we kind of talk about love and your courage and your body the way it is. -- loving your curves and loving your body the way it is. >> i want to keep an eye on the time. i wanted to invite you to ask questions or perhaps make a comment. police say who you are -- please, say to you are and keep your question or comment. . >> the biggest challenges in this country is used obesity and school reform are absent of the

voices of young people in the solution. are you working with young people to engineer the solution? >> we are. we are in schools and have been in schools for 40 years. we have our materials and lesson plans an gqames and music and books for kids. we have also had a salad bar initiative as well as a garden initiative with the schools. i had an interesting conversation last night with a woman who works on nutrition education programs in schools and she said you need to make sure you are not just coming in and changing the menu. you need to involve the kids. that was a tipping point for me and i think that will be something that we will work harder on in the future. you need to be prepared to make

some hard choices. they talked about not having french fries in the school to -- cafeteria. we took all suites and it is great. -- we took out all this week and is great. people love it. people say they have a problem and ask how we can help them. wal-mart invited me out to go to fayette del. ville. my heart is breaking and i look at their cafeteria and their best-selling item was pork rinds. they said we can't take this stuff out. they said they will extend the

healthy choices. if you're not willing to take the bad stuff out, people will reach for that stuff. >> the point you make is good is that peer pressure is a very important element among kids. we have to be more creative about using it to get kids to be more active, eat better, not consume the large portions. there are many other things to do but getting them to police themselves is obviously going to be very important. >> we have to be careful not to stigmatize kids who are overweight as a result of these behaviors that are shaped by the environment they lived in. >> yes. i wanted to get another response from you guys on this issue of how much stigma is enough? if you think of the smoking case

as the successful public health intervention, you have to be struck by how brutal the cultural assault on smoking was. i have seen people fight in bars all over someone smoking in a disputed zone. before it was made illegal altogether, where was the smoking section? people were coming to blows. smokers in public, it was beyond a statement. i have never smoked but when i watched this culture develop, i wondered if this mob loathing of smokers was consistent in liberal society. the stigma can be taken too far, canada not? >> absolutely, there's another piece where the vast majority of americans are either overweight or obese or gaining weight.

the vast majority of americans are either overweight or gaining weight in a society that so values and overvalues thinness. i don't know anybody that wants to be overweight or wants to be obese. people that live in a society that encourages this, to stigmatize them based on this is really the wrong direction and more preterm might be slowly changing social and cultural norms which i thank will happen and happened around tobacco. tobacco is an excellent analogy for obesity. the difference is we stigmatized smokers and i think it would be very inappropriate to continue to stigmatize overweight people. >> it is the behavior, eating

the huge portions. stigmatize buffets. that is a different thing. >> if you see a fat person tucking into a big mac, you should get over how they work with them. >> maybe not, maybe when they ask how they look, you can say you are concerned about you seem to have gained a lot of weight. i would never want to say that. by looking the other way, i don't know if we are doing anyone a service. >> i would not use those words. >> good afternoon. i am from dupont. what about the role of functional foods that are health-promoting and in disease

prevention. do you have thoughts on that? >> we are looking at that right now. we are the largest fruit and vegetable provider in the world and our chairman is very passionate about keeping our brands and our products as pure as possible this is a huge market opportunity. there are ingredients in fruits and vegetables that could be beneficial. we are looking at it. >> i have not heard the term functional food. >> maybe you can give a better definition but it is foods that have specific ingredients that are targeted toward health like

a probiotic. >> it covers both ends. >> for the obesity issue, is the question of consumption. there are other health benefits or health problems related to foods. these issues overlap. if you are focused on the obesity issue, it is about calories in. you can have vitamins and a-0 mega3's and all that stuff but if you have 1,200 calories you still have 1,200 calories. i would separate those two issues. the amount of fruits and vegetables that americans consume is an issue.

americans are well aware of overweight being tied to heart disease and diabetes but the month -- they are much less well aware of overweight being tied to cancer and less than that. that is actually a wake-up call to many americans. >> we will take another question or comments. >> i am with the national anti hunger organization. we teach families with low income how to cook healthy and affordable meals. i think i am the first person who said cooking. people are not cooking at home anymore. it is a considerable challenge. i would be curious to hear your thoughts around getting more cooking at home and using the schools as a venue. home ec went away.

from the families that we service, the ones to tell us that they don't believe help the food can be affordable and they don't believe help the food can taste good. until we deal with those two things, we will not solve this problem is what i would offer. >> the demise of home ec does not help the problem. we are focused on cooking and this is our best-selling item, our kids cope of bre cookbook. making sure that the recipes are simple and they are healthy and weak reengineer them so they have a little fat and -- have as little fat and salt as possible and when kids are cooking and gardening, they are much more likely to have that relationship with fruits and vegetables over the years. >> the point you make about

healthy eating a-in both ways, people perceiving it to be more expensive and not to taste good, that is a huge problem. companies that advertise their stuff as healthy, that goes south. that is a real cultural change. >> that is an education. >> that is a huge issue. >> absolutely. >> i am with the grocery manufacturers association. i thought it would be worth mentioning that we represent the manufacturers of food and beverage and consumer-products and our companies employing 1.7 million americans or 40% of all manufacturing jobs. we are in 30,000 communities and we export to more than 200 countries. when we talk about food, we forget about all the people who are employed making food and the role they play in our community.

as we are thinking about that, i think it is important -- and we think about regulating food or taxing food and enlisting my children to police their friends and talk about people who enjoy a pork rind from time to time -- [laughter] what are the things we all agree on that can help move the ball for? one issue is access and the other is affordability. manufacturers of food have changed the recipe is of more than 20,000 of their products to reduce fat, sodium, sugar, and salt. when you walk through the supermarket, you see it everywhere. the thing that you may mess because not everyone is as old as we are is that in the 1970's,

there might have been 7000 products an average gross restore and now there are 40,000. if there is a grocery store near you, it has never been easier to build a healthy diet if you choose to and you have the knowledge and information. ao many people don't have grocery store need them and that is an issue we can work together to address. the other is affordability. people talked about the cost of fruits and vegetables and the usda did a fascinating study that shows you can get enough fruits and vegetables in your diet to meet the recommendations of the dietary guidelines at a cost of about $70 per month which does not sound like a whole lot to you but it sounds like a heck of a lot if you are one of the 44 million americans on food stamps and getting by on $133 per month. that is half their money gone. one of the pieces we should look at as we have done in

massachusetts and elsewhere, how do you provide an incentive to folks who cannot afford to make these choices to meet the goal we all want them to meet which is to cover half their plight with fruits and vegetables. -- have their plight with fruits and vegetables. -- have their -- half their plate with fruits and vegetables. some kids don't have access to the ballfield that my kids to we could work to change that theme on affordability, what are you suggesting? >> there is an interesting pilot in western massachusetts that provides an additional benefit to recipients who purchase for its and vegetables for the state of massachusetts has a program that is doing a similar initiative where if you buy certain kinds of fruits and vegetables, you get more money, you get a coupon to purchase

more. the fundamental question is what is more likely to get you to cover half your plate with fruits and vegetables. , a coupon for more? >> that seems like a false choice to made. me. why can we have both? the second question is, i think price incentives are really important but the other question is, it is one portion of an element. >> which is more likely to get the desired outcome? >> one of the things i learned in medical school is usually you try everything altogether. >> i would also say -- i will

take this softball -- we can sit here in this rarefied environment and talk about what we would do if we were kings and queens but the reality is that any policy as to get promulgated through a broader process. things that are notable that have gotten done have everybody in the tent like food legislation and the last congress, the healthy hundred under for kids act. different senators passed a provision related what is sold in vending machines in schools. we work together and when we can find those commonality point, we can get their further faster. >> as i said, one of the reasons to try voluntary is to let you

guys step up to the plate and it takes a long time to get regulation through even if you wanted to do it. that is absolutely right. on your $60-$70, that may never be a lot of money -- it is also a helluva lot of work. people don't have the time to do that kind of work. you have to make the health care option, the lower calorie option, the easy option and one of our problems is that if you are hunting for the supermarket among 40,000 bags, it is very hard to do that especially when you are a busy american varia. >> i will take another question. >> i am the end a tour of" flavor" magazine.

-- i am the editor of "flavor" magazine. is there an argument against changing profs set -- products other than profit motive? >> there are those that would say that it will help solve obesity. if you wipe out all beverages of sugar would you still have an obesity problem? the answer is probably yes. i would argue it will not solve the problem that those in the segment of the public health committee will sell.

the other reality is there are economic analyses done that you have to get the tax on the product as high as 40% before you even reduce calories per day by 12 which is roughly 1 pound per year. that is another argument for why this will not work. it will not fly because it is a discriminatory tax policy. anybody on the wayans -- on the ways and means committee when this was floated on the debate on health care said that as a bad tax policy. if it reduced consumption, you have not -- now tied revenue source to something that will not exist over time. >> i don't think anyone of these things will solve all problems. i don't think a tax on sugar sweetened beverages is meant to wipe out the entire industry.

it is one incentive. if you are thinking about advocating sin taxes on these foods, you need to take into account larger political climate in the country and the appetite for taxes. while there are shifting coalitions that might be open to it, maybe we should have that in our arsenal. even though they might like to see that higher tax, if it is going to be wasted by the politicians in washington, they will have less of an appetite for it. we need to be careful. we need to craft these proposals in such a way that maybe they are going back into communities. >> if i'm not mistaken, there are some localities that have tried this.

it is something that needs to be studied very carefully. our usual experience, if you focus on kids, is that the price elasticity is different than adults. small price changes does change their behavior a substantial amount i don't know what the data is. i think it is one of those things -- i don't think the chance of a national soda tax is zero. i think there are some localities which have done it and i think it has been very intensive. >> there are two states that have long had excise tax suggested -- west virginia and

arkansas. they have some of the highest obesity rates in the country. the study were this has been in place, it has not had the desired effect. if the goal is to address obesity, i don't think it has been proven to make a difference. >> i don't think there is any question that increasing the price of certain foods will decrease the consumption of those goods. what is the sweet spot and more importantly, how do we conclude from what ever studies that we study? even if we raise the price, a decrease consumption of the sodas or cereals ultimately will not solve the obesity epidemic and is still needs to be a piece of the puzzle. >> i'm a tax analyst. [laughter] i am american citizen and i care.

to what extent the government subsidies for commodity crops influence prices? for example, i don't know but if you eliminated the subsidy for corn, would make mcdonald's hamburgers more expensive? would make french fries more expensive? all the things that could be done without increasing taxes. what role does government policy under the top layer play in what we are seeing? >> moving upstream has to be a part of this. we don't know. control do a randomized on farm bill changes. hopefully, we can look at this over the next few years as we come to the next iteration of the farm bill. we will have to base some of our

policy interventions there on less than perfect data. that is the way it is. >> i think it is a piece of the puzzle. we put these policies into place for very specific reasons and times have changed and is a part of the solution to be subsidizing those commodities that we are eating too much of. ? some of these programs, one of was reading about was the dairy management that will spend $140 million per year and going out and trying to figure out how to get americans to eat more cheese. it is already the biggest source of saturated fat in the american diet. i don't know if that is a good use of our government resources. the result might be a 10-cheese pizza.

>> we would agree that subsidies should be looked at for a variety of reasons not the least of which is reducing our national deficit. the subsidies to create an artificially high price ingredient and that inflates the price. that is an argument that all should be examined. >> this will be our last question or comment. >> i'm from the center for science and the public interest. >> perhaps you could comment on one thing. give us your best shot. >> let me chalk -- limit talk about sugar in soft drinks. the corn subsidies have virtually no effect on food prices. corn ethanol subsidies does have

some significant a factor in on the tax issue, i think it is a matter that one of the tools in the tool chest is that has an effect on alcohol and tobacco. states raise about $1 billion per year now from mostly sales taxes, small taxes on soft drinks and other foods. there are two potential benefits from attacks. even a small tax, 2 cents per can, can raise a lot of money. if that were earmarked for health purposes, health education, by pat's, basketball courts, that could be extremely beneficial in the fight against obesity. it takes a larger tax per can to begin to have some perceptible effect on purchases and maybe obesity. again, if you took some fraction of that revenue and plowed into

salad bars, cooking class a is,bike paths, that could have a major impact. some organizations will fight this to them and mail. -- to and nail. -- tooth and nail. the soft drink industry says this is the most important way that it can be used to influence soft drink sales and i will fight it every inch of the way. >> do you want to come back? we have already discussed the tax issue. >> it is not sound tax policy. you will raise money and that money will lots of rich -- will do lots of good things. it can be put to good use.

if you talk to a tax writer and they will say it is a bad policy because this is a sound revenue source but not an equitable revenue source. it will get rejected by the tax writers and it will not sell obesity and 70% of the american public think this is a bad idea. thank you for giving us credit but 70% ofg the spothis the public biggses is a bad idea. moms think of this as a tree but i don't and that is how you will solve obesity. >> let me give you the last word. >> i will dodge. don't bother to [laughter]

. i wish you had told me this before. >> i will put it to you. if you are making policy in this area and politics were not an issue, i am guessing that you would have a modest tax on sugar. is sugar the main plank? -- is sure the main thing. ? >> the process of highly concentrated in sugar and fat and salt in the same food products which is not normal in nature is a big part of this. that needs to be something we look at. we talk about in terms of food

addiction. early in the research on this we talked about this but it is an issue. it is not just sugar but that is a piece of the puzzle and we need to keep working on this. >> it is about energy density, large concentrations in very small amounts that are not otherwise filling. is a big source of the problem. >> it is also contributing to the weird phenomenon of people who are over-fed and under maris. nourished. increasing fruits and vegetables is important because you can get the signals by getting the nutrients you need. there's a different feeling you get from being well marriage

instead of just being well-fed. >> we will break from launch. we will leading fruits and vegetables, thank you very much. [laughter] [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> this year's studentcam competition asked students to consider washington, d.c. 3 lens. this is the grand prize winning video. >> we cannot continue down this road.

>> the senate is an institution built on. compromise >> the nature of a democracy rests on the art of compromise. >> this is exactly what our founding fathers did, they compromised. ♪ >> we need a wake-up call. [beep] >> september 19, 2010, our family departed on a trip to washington, d.c. i hope to learn more about our nation and the capital and the current state of our nation. washington, d.c. is the center of one of the largest metropolitan areas in the country, house and all three branches of government. it is home to 174 foreign embassies as well as many of the nation's monuments and the city has a strong local economy.

it took more to get washington, d.c. to get where it is. i interviewed a doctor. = from george washington university. i want more information on the history of the capital city. >> can you imagine that the united states congress met in the capitol building of a state? >> this change in june, 1783. >> a crowd of revolutionary war soldiers who had not been paid gather to protest outside the building. >> the soldier's demonstration was and that the state. >> the only way they could get their pay is to go to the state government that congress create a special committee to deal with the mutiny started by alexander hamilton. >> he was a wartime hero. >> he believed that if the state of pennsylvania [inaudible]

>> he said you have to call an emergency session of congress and get them into the pennsylvania state house before the soldiers get their we will lose all kinds of jurisdiction and power. >> the market to session was called and the congressman entered the building. they could use the situation to their advantage. >> they could argue that the demonstration was against congress and the federal government's dignity had been consulted. >> they agreed that a pennsylvania did not call off the state militia, congress would lead philadelphia. that was a big threat. >> john dickinson said he will not call up the pennsylvania militia. do you think a man of pennsylvania will take up arms against the very army that was

independence? >> congress was forced to adjourn and reconvert on -- reconvene in new jersey. >> congress needed to find a new permanent capital. >> it took many years to decide where to put this capital them somewhat in the york and others want it in philadelphia. >> it was a sectional dispute. the number 1 in the capital in the north and the south wanted the capitol and the south. >> finally, jefferson brokered a deal that allowed the government to be placed on the banks of the potomac. >> this compromise had more advantages than met the eye. >> a committee was created to see how large the federal city should be and how much jurisdiction, brittany -- congress needed over it. >> the committee consisted of people who want to empower the federal government. >> alexander hamilton did not want in -- what happened in philadelphia to ever happen again. >> there is a need for a federal

district under federal control. >> at the constitutional convention, a section pass that gave congress the exclusive jurisdiction over the capital city. congress would soon exploit these powers. that became a heated issue representative tom davis spoke about what happens next. >> the political party could not come to agreement, a imagine that? >> federalists wanted strong control of the city will anti- federalists wanted limited control. >> with jefferson and republicans preparing to take control the presidency and congress, a crisis spurred the federal lists into action. >congress passed a stripped-down version of the bill -- >> it said that the citizens of washington, d.c. would not be citizens of maryland or virginia leaving them without representation.

>> they decided the only way to secure the government was to deny representation to some of their fellow citizens. >> this suggestion have unintended consequences to come up with the best solution and fully examine the issue. >> today we live in the exact same position to the federal government of the united states as the american colonists lived in london and great britain. can we have taxation without representation? >> despite these issues, washington, d.c. has become a symbol of the strength of the federal government. the national archives preserves important documents including the declaration of independence, the bill of rights, and the u.s. constitution. the constitution itself was not. without many conflicts of its own. may 29, 1787, william randolph introduced the virginia plan to

the constitution. the late senator robert byrd spoke about the plan. >> under the virginia plan, both houses of congress would be apportioned by a population. an arrangement that would favor the larger states. >> the smaller states felt threatened. william paterson countered with the new jersey plan. >> the delegates rejected the new jersey plant them about the small states had enough boats to keep the virginia plan from succeeding. >> the convention split 5-5. the delegates appointed a special committee. to solve the dispute. >> the compromise determined how the legislative bans -- branches run today. >> a compromise in apportioned the house by population and gave the senate a quality. >> this would be known as the great compromise. >> the great compromise is one of the more. momentous events in our country's history. >> this helped create the government of checks and balances that we have today.

we have a political climate today like the founding fathers would many opposing viewpoints. we can agree -- >> is imperative that we work together to find a compromise. >> people need to compromise. >> compromise. >> legislation is the art of compromise. >> compromise is not always the best solution. imagine what may have happened of abraham lincoln compromised the south? we must find a proper balance between compromising and standing firm and how much to compromise. we passed legislation without delay examining the issue of taxation without representation in washington, d.c. we created on forcing compromises. perhaps it's time for another great compromise. >> go to studentcam.org to

watch all the winning videos. >> today on c-span, "washington journal" is next with your phone calls. at noon eastern, live coverage of major general richard mills on the war in afghanistan and then a live simulcast of the iowa public radio programs, " the exchange," with a look at the 2012 presidential campaign. then ben bernanke will take questions from reporters when he announces that policy on interest rates. on c-span 2, the prime minister questions is getting underway. we have live coverage from the british house of commons in london. later on c-span 3, more from the british house of commons as their defense committee looks into military operations in libya. that is live at 9:30 eastern.