other foreign developments. then ralph benko discusses efforts in some states to make gold and silver coins the form of legal tender. then later, joshua bernstein from the seiu on why the dream act stalled. "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: on this saturday, scenes like this one playing out throughout the country. it is college graduation season. it is followed by job-hunting season. depending on what you read these days, college may not be worth what you pay for it. our question to start the "washington journal" this morning -- is college worth it?

what do you think? the telephone numbers are on the screen. we had a fourth line this morning just for college students. his college worth it? we have found a timely editorial cartoon in the "washington post" -- actually this is the "atlanta journal-constitution." you'd think he is handing out diplomas but it is actually lottery tickets. there is one interpretation of what is going on these days and the college area and the real world. this headline as well in the "wall street journal."

nicosia picture here from new students at the university of michigan, celebrating their commencement. but the recent that this year's college students have better prospects than their peers did a year ago, as long as they are looking in the private sector. employers plan to hire 90% more graduates this year than 2010 according to a survey -- a lot of detailed information here which will be brought out to you in the next 40 minutes. his college worth it? we have been following commencements throughout the country. we will air them on memorial weekend, saturday, sunday, and monday. we got this idea up from a poll

put out by the pew research center last week. they have talked to college presidents about the value and quality and mission of higher education. they talk to over 2000 people and their take away deals with cost and value. they're right that a majority of americans -- the right -- they write -- lots of different opinions out there on whether college it worth it. mike is our first call from baltimore on the democrats' line. good morning. you are on the air. caller: i do not really think

college is worth it these days. for the simple fact, let me give you the example. let's just say black people, they would teach you how to fish, but universities, it seems like they give you a book on how the fish and then give you some answers and say, you did not get a ride, it give me your money and that is said. this young generation, you can go on to youtube and watch videos and things like that. you need to new -- find a new way. but all of these test in these universities, they seem like they want money and they are not educating. and one more before you hang up on me. host: go-ahead. caller: we talk about the middle east thing, the truth of the matter, that 12,000 israels that

were dominicans and indians, there were 12 of us. with all of the 12 tribes, if we would go back to israel, it would stop the middle east peace in the jews could come over here. host: we want to move on to this topic at hand. plenty of time to talk about the middle is coming up at 7:45 a.m. today. josh rogin will be here from "foreign-policy." the question right now, is college worth it? if you want to share your situation with us, let us know. alistair life turned out based on your can -- your situation. another call from baltimore, steve, an independent. caller: i think we need a better balance. we have tens of thousands of people supplying us with needed skills in the non-college areas.

we need those people and we are not giving them the opportunity to get training. our schools are becoming like private education systems where we crank out many people who have no skills. and yet we are creating worker populations, people who come over here killing tens of thousands of very good jobs, and we are not training our own people to do that. we needed balance. host: a balance is the argument there from steve. is college worth it? caller: it is worth it. booker t. washington, one of the great black educators made sure that the people going to the black colleges were both educated and had a skill. every man came out and every woman came out with a skill.

i met teacher of autism. without college, i would not be where i am. without a college education, you are really nothing in our society. host: more of your calls coming up here. some more facts and statistics as pew research center released with its poll. is college more affordable? 22% of digital public says that it is more affordable. college presidents have a different and you. . -- have a different view. how which you rate the jobs of higher education? how're they doing in providing value for the money spent?

this is based on the pew research. if you're looking at income levels, a lot of talk about college costs, but once you are out of college, how much do you earn? the bureau of labor statistics have some details. if you have some college but no degree, your average earnings per week is about $712. if you are a college graduate, your average earnings are $1,038. over one year's time, it is a $17,000 difference per year, whether people went to college or not. as far as employment, a huge topic in the country, this statistic -- collagen education and 2010 unemployment. to% unemployment for highs college -- high-school graduates. for those who have graduated from college, the current unemployment rate is 5.4% nationally according to the

bureau of labor statistics. margaret, a democrat from jackson, mississippi, what do you think? caller: i think it is worth it. it depends on the field that you choose. you have to see what is available. then you get on a career path that you go in. most people make the mistake, they choose a major and they do not look at the job market. they do now real life -- really look at what is currently available. computer jobs, at teaching, up those skills are opening. you will always have a job and education because teaching as a skilled all always be there. as long as children are born, they are going to need teachers. a lot of people do not want to teach because of that discipline in the politics involved in it. i look at it like, if i can make a difference in a child's life,

that is why i chose to be an educator. and i know they say there is no money in it, but there are other rewards. you're the one that has to mold and shape everybody else and that is why we have our presidents, our doctors, and our lawyers because of teachers. host: this is a "wall street journal" article that speaks to this. some degrees are far more valuable than others.

detroit, michigan, henry, an independent. caller: i think it definitely is worth it. my mother was a school teacher. i never went to college, but we needed an extra two years of high school. those two years should be for training, jobs specifically, job training purposes. it should be extended from four years to six years. then the could be down to where everyone could afford it and we get to the place where we belong. we have thousands of foreign students now filling jobs in this country. it just does not make any sense. they come over here with these as an things. we need these jobs for americans.

we just do not have the proper job training. that should be adding two years to the high school curriculum. host: stephen from fort worth, texas on the line now. caller: college is definitely worth it from the perspective of what college does, it gets you a job with corporate america. but the masses of jobs out there are now with corporate america. therefore that creates the flip side of the coin of college not been worth it. when washington talks about tens of thousands of jobs being created, the problem with this is economy is that 8000 of those jobs are part-time jobs. what can be referred to as mcdonald's jobs. the majority these companies the majority these companies are hiring part-time people

because of the economy and their budgets and they do not have to pay benefits. host: stephen, what do you make of the whole issue of costs? we've heard about the college of college education, prohibited for a lot of people, or they end up with a lot of debt and that leaves a lot of people to think it is not worth it. can you talk to cost? caller: the cost is what it is. you have to make a business decision. if it is difficult if you do not have someone to advise you wanted. but the cost is extreme in relationship to the economy and so far at the time when you are 18 or 20 years old going into college. but the responsible person, when they come out college, can pay that -- kate -- can pay back that student loan. they are not taught in college,

they are not taught that. so paying back the student loan does not become a priority once someone goes to work with a college degree. host: moving on to i republican caller from orlando. is college worth it? caller: thank you for the great job c-span does it every day of the year. i am a republican but this has nothing to do with party politics. i work in an ad agency and at this time of the year, i get a lot of resumes and cover letters e-mail to me and for the mail. i am pretty much astounded at the lack of skill when it comes to our team in our college graduates. -- writing in our college graduates. i was taught all of my life that nothing reflects you better than the quality of your

writing. i think a lot of students and parents are being cheated. frankly, the lack of discipline and skills, those two things combined, there is not a lot of hope for people coming into the market and they cannot communicate well in a simple letter. and that is my comment. host: moving on to dublin, va., jean, a college student. caller: caller: when we talk about college costs, we are kind of missing what is going on here. whether it be largest private institutions or a public institution, they may be nonprofits but they are still businesses. you that people from the

president all the way down to have been an administrator who make a living from this university and whole towns that exist. you have the administration that wants to keep everything going wants to keep everything going so they can keep the cash flowing in. i have a friend of mine who is an admin in seattle and she was explaining to me that the university is now giving preference to out-of-state students and foreign students because they pay more money and that is how they will fill all of their budget. host: that is a common headline we are ready for it where you go to school now? caller: if you look of dublin, va., you know where i go. host: what is the tuition where you are going to school? caller: if you are and out of state student, it is $9,000 per semester. host: how are you paying for your education?

caller: at my age, i have a lot of experience so i am working in one of the research units as a researcher. that is helping me out. i can tell you right now, with research money being so difficult, sometimes i have had to pick up the bill myself. host: what is the connection between what you are studying and what you might be earning over your career? caller: i would say in the negative because my last job was a project manager with one of the major automobile companies in six figures and that will not happen ever again. it is a different world. host: more from pew and a poll they did. this analysis using census bureau data estimates that the typical adult with a bachelor's degree but no further education will earn about $1.42 million over a 40-year career compared

with $770,000 for a typical high-school graduates. it is a $650,000 difference which would narrow to about five order $50,000 according to the analysis. caller: good morning and thank you for cspan. i would say that college is definitely not worth it these days in the sense that it is not affordable. the metric that i use for that is i went to boston college in the early 1970's. the tuition cost my parents about 10% of their gross income. my daughter was accepted to boston college for this upcoming year. that would cost me about 1/3 of their income.

-- of our income. that is an interesting way to compare it. in my view, college tuition is the next bubble waiting to burst for there are many student loans that will go sour the way the housing market did. i believe government subsidies have got to get out of higher education because it is just driving the cost of. up. the kids to college is the ability to pay higher incomes and salaries for professors and other staff and the pass it on to the student's who attend school. host: auburn hills, mich., a democrat line -- is college worth it? caller: i recently graduated with a bachelor's in 2009, the masters in 2011, and my student loan is $130,000. host: what did you study?

caller: my undergraduate is business administration and my graduate is religious education. host: a six-figure bill you have to pay off, what kind of career are you headed for and what will you be earning? caller: i am headed for teaching community college which is what i want to do. is it worth it? it is definitely worth it but the salary i am looking at to start is about $50,000. bill loan payment is about $5,000 per month where it is it worth it? on a fulfillment level, yes, it is worth it. is it affordable? i don't think it is affordable for most americans even with the budget plans that are out now. once you take some of those budget plans, your interest is over $1 million over the course of the pay off.

i think we need to do something i think we need to do something to make it more affordable if the jobs are not there to accommodate you. host: that is a six-figure debt coming out of college for a student at nyu, good morning. tell us your situation. what are you studying? caller: criminal-justice. host: what you're are you in? caller: sophomore. host: what is your debt looking like and what are your prospects? caller: it is about what you do while you're in college. george go andt let's hear from john in braid and tin, fla. on the republican line. is college worth it in your view? caller: good morning.

i believe that college is very important. i did not graduate. i did not get my ba and i have been bypassed for jobs because i did not graduate. it is more about financial than anything else host: how old are you? caller: i am 50 now. host: what are your earnings -- would have your earnings been like last year's tax caller: imi stockbroker so it is ok. itcause you don't have a ba, really hurts you changing jobs and stuff like that. i tell my kids that going to college is more important. i have five kids. i tell them it is more important

about the kings to learn in life and not about earning money. you go there to learn about humanities and arts and other things and history and that is good for your personal life and your own kids that you have. i want to mention one thing but i don't mean to sound racist whatsoever because i am not, but i just beg that affirmative action has kept my kids from getting scholarships. i think that can be reconsidered. host: more information from queue. pew. we are taking your tweets and

reading them this morning. back to "the wall street journal"article -- san antonio, texas, independent,

you are on the air. caller: good morning. caller: good morning. i believe colleges worth it but from what i am hearing from your callers, it sounds like people

grow up after they are 25 or 28 and they don't think they can go back to college. i think people should rethink it. everybody could go back to college if they wanted. i think more people should do that instead of giving up on that and having a family. they could have it on the side and go to college. everyone can get an education like that. host: more from pew -- those are some details from pew. they say six in 10 college presidents agree that students and their families should pay for college expenses here are some statistics.

champaign, ill., you are on the air. caller: i would like to say that i would imagine that those who think that college is not worth that are the ones who did not go to college. the ones that think it is worth that are the ones who did. with the exception of the ones with the exception of the ones who are in huge debt host: are

you a student's right now? yes caller:. host: where you go and how much are you paying? caller: university of champagne and tuition is $8,000. host: how are you financing it text luckily caller:, i got most scholarships. only a few loans. host: your degree is and what subject and where are you headed after school? caller: computer science engineering and psychology. i plan to be a professor so i will probably continue school. host: anything else you want to add to the folks watching? caller: definitely, two things. first, everyone knows there is this kind of ratio between the

years of education you have and years of experience you that. depending on what field you are in, there is a ratio. of course, it is not really very clear whether it is worth it or not because you can make it up with experience. people would rather take experienced people for jobs. you have shown statistics that show you make more money with a degree. you can do the math to figure out whether that will cover your cost of college plus more. if that is your definition of the work that, yes, it is worth it. you can define being worked as is it good for the health of the people and i definitely think it advances society. i would rather a society that is educated and understands political theory when they are voting and and on educated society.

host: a little bit more about college education and the average weekly earnings -- grapevine, texas, is on the line, go ahead caller: this is my first time: i am nervous. i think colleges worth it. my mom went to college when she was raising me. it was not a high income area. everything is possible with very hard work and facing god. -- m faith in god. nothing can get better now. one of your callers said

that young people are -- tend to go on youtube and look up things. young people would not do that. i will leave it at that thank you for having me on. host: we appreciate you calling. here is a twitter of message -- we found this at studento mics.com -- here is another right up.

college is not for everyone,

that's true and due to the sluggish economy, there may be more graduates of than the current job market needs. west haven, conn., the line for democrats, is college worth it to? caller: colleges definitely worth it but it is decreasing in value. from what was when i went to school. how host: so? caller: i have a ph.d. from dartmouth and was fortunate to go to a number of gray schools and had great professors and a great liberal arts background as well as several more

technological degrees along the way. i was actually a professor for a number of years. i was not as worried about the salary i would make when i came out. i recognized that as a professor i would not make as much as i would in the corporate world. i believe in education. i was very pleased with how college and grad school had opened my eyes and my understanding of the world. as a professor, it soon became clear to me that it was a business and more and more, we were made to bring students along who really did not have the capability to be passed on and given a certain grade in the class. the quality of education has been decreasing because it is a business and we try to keep all the students in college for the

tuition and so i think businesses see that. i think the quality of a four- year degree does not mean as much in the job market because students are being passed along without the ability to read, write, and debate their thoughts. host: is there any particular message to the folks in washington on all of this? caller: i would like to see them -- i firmly believe in education and i firmly believe that everybody should try to go to college because i would not ever give it up in my own life. i would like to see us going back to a more stringent set of criteria for how we grade children. to get the skills they need to get a four-year degree, if someone has to take four or five

years at the associate level in community colleges to get themselves ready for the four- year degree," then a four-year degree would mean something one can add to the job market. then we would see it being worth it. it would have a quality stamp. it no longer desperate host: this is the front page of the " richmond times dispatch" -- >> that is one of the many headlines here and the paper is using various posts -- various photos to express what happened in the white house yesterday with a tense meeting.

some suggest the israeli prime minister admonish the u.s. president in from of the cameras and in front of the world. this is the front page of "the wall street journal "-- coming up in about 10 minutes, we will talk with josh rogen and talk about this story and the president's speech from thursday. in the meantime, chris is on the air from summit, new jersey, a college student. where are you right now where are you going to school? caller: i am going to school at rutgers in newark, new jersey. host: what is the price at rutgers? caller: i am paying $300 per credit reports host: house that the amount for one year? are you doing room and board? caller: luckily, i am living at home. one year is around $8,000.

i would like to point out an article written in " the new york times"the other day which said that the median starting salary for students graduate from four-year colleges in 2009- 2010 was $20,000 and that is down from $30,000 for those who enter the workforce in 2006 and 2008. that is a 10% decrease right there. we are looking at practically a 30% increase in inflation and the numbers and you were setting where you say that typically make more money with a college degree -- that was from decades ago. you are not really accounting for the inflation and the price of tuition. when my parents went to school, they had a 2% interest rate on their student loan at we are up to 8%. is it really worth it? it will be harder to make that money back the way the economic

metrics are set up today. but the point out one more thing about president obama. he just paid off his student loans a couple of years ago. had he not had a best-selling book or audio cd for presidency, it would be hard to tell when he would pay those student loans off. host: it is a busy weekend for us at cspan covering lots of live events. "the atlanta journal constitution" he writes about this one. we will have the event today

with herman cain of godfather's pizza announcing his candidacy in atlanta today and we will have live coverage on this network at noon eastern which is 9:00 pacific. listen at cspan radio and you can watch it on our cspan video leverage -- library. it is jon huntsman tomorrow. mr. huntsman is taking the bold

step that meeting with potential voters. he is having a series of meetings in his state and we will cover john hulsman tomorrow in franklin, new hampshire. that will be live at 4:30 p.m. eastern and 1:30 pacific. charleston, west virginia, republican, thanks for waiting -- is college worth it? caller: college is huge. ben franklin sunday up -- if you are going to waste money, wasted on education because her liberty and property can be taken away but her education cannot. parents are huge in this process for it if we get another politician involved in education, we will sink this education shepard. ship. we have an x governor who is on the board of the standardized

testing he. the problem in west virginia is that it is another education initiative and this one is to get more high school students to schoolap courses. we have one of the worst graduation rates and the country. in high school and we have one of the worst graduation rates from college using every standard measurement you can think of to get a kid up there and count him as a graduate after six years. my four kids, the buck stops with the parents. it does not start with politicians and a dozen and with them. -- and it doesn't end with them. if parents take charge of the education and use the public school system as a supplement,

the job will get done. host: thank you for your thoughts. we are down to our last couple of minutes. we have an update on dominique strauss-kahn, the former head of the imf. he went from power to the accused in five hours. there is a picture of him winning his supreme court built during but will remain under house arrest at a block of flats in new york. below, they have a small photo of where he will be staying. he has been released from jail and will be headed to a temporary safe house on friday after paying $1 million in bell and posting a $5 million bond. he will be under 24-hour armed guard to prevent him from fleeing. there's also a story this morning on what comes next.

the imf is seeking a new chief by june 30. the executive board said friday it intends to select a new managing director by the end of june. the head of the board said friday that the board would accept nominations until june 10 and then narrow the candidates for a list of three for final consideration. this is about "newsmakers" which runs every sunday at 10:00 a.m.. our guest this week will be dr. donald burr wicked, the head of the centers for medicare and the talk in the short piece about the administration's medicare and health care plan. >> you have talked about your view of long-term. your future is and doubt -- health reform is in the courts right now we don't know what will happen to that. how confident are you that these efforts and is a long-term plan

to have without there are not going to result in nothing? >> i am 100% confident it in success. i know this will work. "we have crisis in our country. we all share this. we are all in the same boat. is it time to come together. i really see that happening. there are wrinkles and debates and complaints but we are really on track now and i have confidence in this country that we will get to the right place. it may not happen in one year but it will have in my lifetime. >> if you could fix one thing without any exceptions from anyone else tomorrow, what would it be? >> tempo, i would go faster. my sense is of readiness. we know what to do in this

country and how to make care safe and chronic care excellent and the note prevention looks like and we now have to listen to a patient. we know so much and maybe it is my metabolism but i said let's host: that is dr. donald berwick. he is our guest tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern. the last couple calls on the question of whether colleges worth it. illinois, democrat, thank you for waiting. caller: no matter the cost, college education is worth it. college education is worth it. i am an older worker about lost my job and i applied for electrical instrumentation job, a maintenance job, and i had to take a chemical engineering test for that job. i would like to argue for the students out there listening -- work harder. i agree with thomas jefferson -- education is the key to everything. i left with a lady from human

resources. i had not taken a hard test in 20 years. that was the hardest hit ever take it and she chuckled with me and said everyone in the office our engineers. the two people who qualify for taking this test, both of us were turned down for a big job is in the paper again dober chemical in hammond, indiana. for the students, work harder, work harder, work harder. thank you for cspan and kerri andrea host: that was our last call for this segment. look for commencement speeches throughout moral day weekend saturday, sunday, monday, next weekend at 3:00 p.m. in the afternoon and again at 10:00 at night. there will be various speakers from politics and various fields whether they be the business world or entertainment. that is all next weekend. coming up in about 45 minutes, we'll talk with ralph benco

about americans in action. there is an approach in some parts of the country and a push by conservatives to return the country to what is known as the gold standard. we'll get your thoughts there. we'll get your thoughts there. the low bid on foreign policy coming up next and judge rogen will be our guest. we will hear from the president of united states and the israeli prime minister on the issue that has come up about the 1967 borders. >> while the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear -- a viable palestine, a secure israel. the united states believes that negotiations should result in two states with a permanent palestinian borders with israel, jordan, and egypt and permit israeli borders with palestine.

we believe the borders of israel and palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swat so that secure and recognized borders are established for both state. s. the palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves and reach their full potential in a sovereign and contiguous states. >> while israel is prepared to make generous compromise for peace, it cannot go back to the 1967 lines because these lines are indefensible panic and because they don't take into account certain changes that have taken place on the ground, demographic changes that have taken place over the last 44 years. before 1967, israel was all but 9 miles wide, half the width of

the washington beltway. these were not the boundaries of peace. there are the boundaries of repeated wars. the attack in israel was constant. we cannot go back to those indefensible luines and we will have to have a long-term military presence along the jordan. i discussed this with the president and we understand that israel has certain security requirements and will have to come into place in any deal we make. host: at the table now, josh rogen. this is one of the many headlines on the meeting at the white house yesterday. explain to us the importance of what was said and how it was

said at today. guest: 20 to star with why it was said. what we had was a unique situation with the prime minister of israel is getting on a plane to washington and he gets and he bit off from the obama administration saying we will change u.s. policy on the israeli-palestinian conflict. prime minister called hillary clinton and said please don't do this. this will not be good for me or for you. can i convince her not to do this and the secretary of state said it is out of her hands. by the time the prime minister gets to washington, has already issued a statement criticizing the new policy and the entire washington community has erupted in a debate over whether the policy was a good idea. when they are standing in front of the press after their 2.5 hour marathon meeting where they discussed this and other issues, there is no doubt that

they are totally on different pages. president obama and the promise for don't agree. they will not pretend to like the fact that they don't agree. it was a very awkward situation where you have the prime minister speaking to the president and the president speaking to the cameras. that is where we are. it is a relationship where there is a total break. we will have to see how that plays out over the next couple of days. gueshost: this is " the new york times" "the washington post"has photographs as well. there was about a 15-minute

meeting with reporters. here is a photograph in "the washington post." what happens next? part of our coverage over the next couple of days includes the president making a speech tomorrow which we will have live in front of a group called apac. who are they and what might the president say to them? guest: they are the lobby of jewish americans who work all over the country and especially in washington to raise money and support a policy that they believe is in israel's national security interest. they also believe it is in america's national interest. they believe they are one and the same. this is an annual conference in washington that starts tomorrow and thousands of their members will come and spread out all over capitol hill to make their case. this is why the prime minister is in town in the first place. in addition to present obama speaking to this group tomorrow which is the first time he has

chosen to speak to this group, will the prime minister netanyahu speak to this court monday and we will have the prime minister speak to a joint session of congress, both chambers, assembled together, on international television in a rare speech. we have a series of major speeches that are all following this very public and embarrassing rift in u.s.- israeli relationships. host: we're talking u.s. strategy in the middle east. speech thursday, there were a lot of broad themes out there regarding the part of the world. the telephone numbers are on the bottom of your screen if you want to talk to josh rogen. foreign policy is our topic and we will get to your calls in a moment. you mentioned congress and the reaction potentially here. a around the world, give us your

sense of what is going on. what are folks spending elsewhere in the world? guest: this amounts and on u.s. policy toward is to look in the context of a 45-minute speech that covered about 20 different countries which was calculated to frame america's approach or the government's approach to the changing wave of democratic revolutions that is sweeping the region. while the majority of the coverage is focused on israel, president obama made news on u.s. policy toward bahrain and u.s. policy toward syria, yemen and he announced a brand new aid package of -- for egypt and tunisia. for those who think that present obama is doing the right thing in adjusting policy in the middle east, they are supportive of the speech. there has been a lot of reaction

on both sides. the regional picture here is what obama was going for. host: we will try to make time for all of these different spots and blend in your calls. we want to touch on syria which is making a lot of front-page news today. what do you see happening in syria but most of the articles basically say that the president of syria is ignoring the u.s. what i do you think? guest: i agree with that. president of saab has been engaged in a brutal crackdown that has resulted in deaths of innocent people whose only crime was to take to the streets in protest for increased rights. u.s. policy has been to be critical of president asad.

the president announced this week were sanctions on president aasad, freezing his accounts in the u.s. and preventing his ability to travel to the u.s. how do you convince this ruler to stop killing people in the streets tonight killing does not seem to be abating. most people see a contradiction in u.s. policy when you look at libya where you have a ruler killing his own people and here comes nato and the international community. host: this is the president on syria from thursday. >> > >asad a choice, he can lead the transition or get out of the way. the syrian government must stop shouting demonstrators and allow peaceful protests. they must release political prisoners and stop on just arrests. it must allow it human rights monitors to have access to

cities like daraa start a serious dialogue to advance the democratic transition . otherwisedemocratic transitionasad continue to be challenged from within and continue to be isolated abroad reported ho. host: what leverage my u.s. have to create the kind of change that we want in this country? guest: there's a realization in the administration that the analysis does not have leverage against asad. should the united states act in concert with european countries and middle eastern countries and arab countries, that could work. there is no appetite for that and yet mr. reagan knows that. -- and the administration knows that. that. asad calculates that the will is not present in the international community to take the measures

to change his behavior. host: first call, riverside, calif., a democrat, good morning. caller: good morning, cspan. i want to ask your guest rigid the foreign-policy that president obama is trying to enforce or a dress with israel is the same policy that was agreed to an almost came to an agreement with the clinton administration when there were close to negotiating a settlement between the palestinians and israel. is it not that i don't know why everyone is in an uproar. they are acting like this is something new. guest: that is a great question.

it is totally correct that president obama is framing that peace should be based in 1967 borders with the beswaps and that has been mentioned and talked about and use by both president clinton and the george w. bush administration and before and after. that is totally true. in a sense, there is a lot of wonderment as to why people are so shocked. they don't see his son announcement as a significant policy change. the other side of the coin is that president obama advanced u.s. policy incrementally by that this is officials u.s. policy. before it was a goal of u.s. policy. some said that as a distinction. when need to remember that president obama wanted to move u.s. in policy. he wanted to do this intentionally.

the israelis believe he changed policy. we can debate whether that change is a big change or small tent but he changed it and did it without consulting the israelis and that is why we have a political problem. host: we have houston on the line, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. with everything that has occurred since the first part of the year in the middle east, to me, it is evidence -- it is evident that since the obama administration took office and appointed hillary clinton as secretary of state and the effort she has made in the middle east was a lot of visits over the past couple of years. we were really not hearing too much about any kind of policy

positions and so forth that were taking place. i think they got kicked back on their heels. all of a sudden, everything from tanzania and libya and yemen and syria and so forth -- i think it has kicked our state department back on its heels. they were not prepared for what is happening right now and they are trying to put a smokescreen over this. this is a move toward democracy. i think the brotherhood in egypt and hamas and any number of terrorist groups such as al- qaeda, those influences in the middle east that are bent on middle east that are bent on moving toward more of a religious state in yemen and

monarchies and so forth is to that end. host: we get the point. guest: thank you for your comments. i will turn that into question. the obama administration and hillary clinton have not had a policy and i have to disagree with that. the context is that for the past year or so, the state department has been involved in intensive diplomacy to push for the peace process led by george mitchell resigned last week that process was based on the theory that if we could work on the issue of settlement and get israel to agree to stop building settlements, we could move on to issues of border security and territory and the status of jerusalem and the right of return for palestinian refugees. that process failed and that process is over. it looks like we don't have a policy and that is what obama is trying to correct the tried hard

but they failed. as for the moslem brotherhood and hamas, these are issues that are connected to the peace process and u.s. policy in the region in the sense that the change in egypt which the obama administration eventually supported does open up the opportunity for groups like the muslim brotherhood to participate in the political process which is controversial and something that u.s. policy makers are watching closely. hamas is about to join into a unity government with the palestinian authority and this is a barrier to negotiations as far as the israelis are concerned because hamas is a terrorist group and i don't believe in the israeli right to exist. that is a pretty big problem. host: a caller brought up the state department. "the new york times"writes about dennis ross. they point out he is a defender

of israel but the basis of the article says they are not quite sure how he thinks about all of this. guest: dennis ross is the senior director for this region at the national security council which is the group of staffers that advises the president. he does not work in the state department. he worked at the white house. there is a tension between the white house and state department on most issues especially this issue. dennis ross is the person who is the lead interlocutor with the israeli government. perhaps that netanyahu government prefers to deal with him. they know him better and they trust him better. to call on a defender of israel is an accusation that would require more evidence. i would not be willing to go that far. his positions may be different than the state department in that he works for the

administration and george mitchell does not. if there was a bureaucratic battle, it h would it he won. >> ohio, welcome to the program. caller: good morning to both of you. i am curious -- in the historical context with the shia-sunni conflict and the pragmatism of the monarchies and ruling families in that region, how will a palestinian homeland of fact all of those issues? i am just curious about that. guest: that is a very complicated question that we could spend at least an hour on. the sunni-shia conflict is at the heart of most of the uproar in the middle east. this is important because the sunni rulers don't treat their

shia citizens very well and use iran would to say shia-majority country as a bogeyman, fomenting the unrest in their countries which might be true. it is difficult to separate the sunni/shia split. from the wave of democratic and popular revolutions going on. they are interconnected. what most arab rulers will say about the palestinian homeland is the only way to solve the greater problems between israel and the arab world is to solve the palestinian issue first which all sides agreed should be based on a two-state solution. it is clear this resolution -- resolutions are not connected.

there is a lot of blaming going on. on. it is not clear how much they are connected enough people believe they are connected that it is part of the debate. host: the prime minister of israel spoke about hamas and mahmoud abbas. >> israel cannot negotiate with a palestinian government that is backed by hamas. they are a terrorist organization committed to the destruction of israel. they have fired thousands of rivets on our cities and their children and have recently fired an anti-tank rocket at a yellow school bus killing a 16- year-old boy. hamas has attack you, mr. president, for ridding the world of bin laden. israel cannot be asked to negotiate with a government that is backed by the palestinian

version of al-qaeda. president abbas has a simple choice. he has to decide if he negotiates for keeps his pact with hamas or makes peace with israel. host: blog mahmoud abbas into this equation. guest: he was a great hope here. he was the moderate palestinian leader that was supposed to lead his people toward the path of peace and into the negotiations. he has his own domestic political problems. that prevented him from agreeing to many of the things that the israeli and u.s. government wanted him to agree to. that process is dead so he has decided to sell another political problem which is the fact that gaza is run by a democratically elected government that happens to include many people who believe that violence against israel is a great idea. his own democratic elected

officials in the west bank, he has joined them together. it is not clear what that means. this is a problem for israel. it is a problem for the united states because we get hundreds of millions of dollars to the palestinian authority and u.s. law bans the government from donating to a terrorist organization and hamas as a terrorist organization. host: we have emporia, kan. on the line, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. having been in the region three or four times in the last three years, one thing i am amazed by -- this american idea that we can fix these things, i get the sense that we are pushing wait around, trying for some desired

outcome and the issues are personal more than anything else. having been in israel, i understand what it is like to feel that your security. is really security. the young boy that was alluded to that was killed in the bus attack -- it's something like that happen in my neighborhood, that would affect the way i think about things. if i had terrorists a couple of towns away from me benton much destruction -- we don't seem to grasp that. we americans have the idea that we can really fix things for that we really are the power on the block and we can make things happen. i would like you to comment on that. guest: i think it is an excellent question. the idea that the u.s. plays an indefensible and important role in mediating the conflict between israel and the palestinians and arab neighbors is an idea shared by all three sets.

sets. america is the only honest broker and whether they are unbiased is another question. both parties are dependent on the united states to play a role of united states as the world's superpower is expected to lead on this and a host of other issues where it may or may not have the power of influence to affect the outcome. that essentially is the conundrum that president obama is grappling with in israel but across the middle east where everyone in egypt and libya is looking for the obama administration and the united states to play huge role and lead one way or another and make a decision. present obama and his staff looked around and says since we can't control events, let's not try to pretend we are controlling events. they are damned if they do and they are damned if they don't.

that is also what happened with president obama's remarks and israel. he felt he needed to do something but you really could not change the situation on the ground. he did something and get criticized. that is the same old story. host: live coverage of the president's speech to apac for tomorrow morning during the 10:00 hour and a couple of days after that, we will hear from eric cantor, the majority leader in the house monday night is fairly big. we will of coverage of the speeches to apac and the president speaks tuesday. caller: good morning. i have a few questions. i follow the israeli press for it is not true that there a

number of peoples for -- people from labor a moderate parties inside israel who were talking about the fact that what netanyahu needed to do in congress is to offer in 1967 borderline agreement along with land swaps? host: let me stop you there and get a response. guest: it is true that there is an opposition in israel that is very critical of the stance of netanyahu. it is true that group has lost popularity and the net and out of government -- and that netanyahu government was chosen in a democratic process and there are those who agree with his stance. yes, there is a very small blood loyal opposition in israel that is maintaining that israel should make concessions. that group agrees with president obama.

the netanyahu government agrees more with the republicans in congress. this is a fundamental problem and this is why we can i get agreements between the two governments. caller: is there greater clarity in how our government is responding to president obama statement, because it appears that we have decided as an electorate to go along with the likud interpretation of where israel and said. we're like a greater israel and the return of palestinians to arab nations. arab nations. guest: it is true that the likud party includes positions that denies palestinian

refugees are right of return into israel. that is something that president net not -- prime minister netanyahu said and he is not likely to move from a. president obama was trying to define a u.s. position. it came as a surprise to everyone, including me, including netanyahu, including congress, and so that clarity was lost. if he wants to communicate a clear policy, there's several things he can do to communicate that in the next few days. host: help us understand something coming later this year. there will be a human vote on palestinian statehood. why is it so important? guest: the palestinians have

decided that they could go ahead with their own unilateral agenda, which is recognition of a palestinian state, even though it does not exist. this is a hugely controversial -- and there is a strong indication if they decide to do this in september, it would pass overwhelmingly because the palestinian position as a lot more support in the un and the israeli position. the united states does not have an opportunity to veto that because it is in the general assembly. but we do have considerable influence. it would force everyone country to weigh in on whether to recognize a palestinian state. this is part of the chaos that the obama administration would love to avoid at all costs. they have told the palestinians

they do not think it is a good idea. they believe it should be negotiated and agreed upon with all the parties. if they are going to just declare a state, what does that do to the peace process? the palestinians believe that the status quo is not in their favor and they have to do something. host: queens, new york, an independent scholar. frank, good morning. caller: my question to mr. rogin, 80% of the american problems deals with the palestinian issue. the terrorist issue stems basically from the fact that america [unintelligible] has been one-sided.

[unintelligible] guest: i will assume that you are referring to foreign policy problems because they are not responsible for our education system. let's focus on foreign policy for a minute. the u.s. support of israel, a real and calculated set of policy decisions, has been in place for decades. place for decades. yet we have not had these severe problems in the region for that long. so there must be other causes. one of the rain -- one of the main reasons that al qaeda is fighting is because of our policies in terms of the occupation in iraq, in saudi arabia, afghanistan and pakistan. none of this is directly related to the palestinians. the wave of popular revolutions

in the middle east is not about israel and the palestinians. that is not to say that people do not connect them in their speeches and rhetoric. that is not to say that u.s. policy does not pay a price for the support of israel. there is a diplomatic price of pay. that is a calculated benefit and cost that have been made by several administrations. there are percentages of benefits they come into that. host: us look deeper into libya. one of the headlines from the "washington post." gaddafi has been forced into hiding. a little bit of what the president had to say in his speech on thursday about libya. >> in libya, we saw the prospect of imminent massacre. we had a mandate for action. we heard the libyan people call for help.

had we not acted along with our nato allies and regional coalition partners, thousands would have been killed. the match it would have been clear -- seapower -- keep power by killing as many people as it takes. now time is working against gaddifi. he does not have control over this country. the opposition has organized a credible and from counsel. and when gaddafi is forced from power, a transition to a democratic libya can proceed. host: what you see happening in libya? guest: so many things in that clip worth discussing. first, how we got into the war. eminem massacre? perhaps. i guess we will never know. mandate for action, the mandate where five out of the 10 members did not bode.

mandate is negotiable. thousands would of been killed? perhaps. the inevitability that it gaddafi will leave? it does not look like he will lead. it does not look like the international coalition is going to force him to leave. so how does this end? what is the objective? what are we doing there. how long is it. the last and how do we plan to get out? those are all really important questions and the president has yet to answer them. host: this coming week with the house coming back, both bodies of congress will be in session. the wartalking about our acts, something dead is a rather interesting creature. it is written into law but it is not the kind of things that gets acted on. guest: the war powers act of

1973 is law. but it is a lot that is never really been enforced in a real way. never challenged in the judicial system. the constitutionality is a matter of severe debate. until someone challenges said, it is the lot and it does require the president by law to seek congressional authorization for using u.s. military forces in a foreign country. and there's several limitations including that after 60 days, he is legally required to stop using force. 60 days was yesterday. he does not have congressional authorization and he is and not about to stop the use of force. there is no one in congress about to challenge him. he is involving u.s. military and just ignoring the war our act. we will see if any senators a plan to call him on it.

but what we need to discuss here is the great uneasiness in congress about what is going on in libya, in the sense that they were not consulted, and congressmen feel they do not have a clear idea of what the objectives are, how much it will cost and how long it will last. and there is no consensus on how to move out forward. different congressmen with different ideas, it is just basically a total mess in terms of what congress will do on the libyan war. but now that the 60-day threshold has passed, it will come to a head and it will have to do something. host: miscall from frisco, texas. john, a republican. caller: i want to talk about the israeli-palestinian conflict and president obama this comment about that yesterday with the joint conference with the prime minister. what we saw yesterday was three

stunning developments in the american farm policy establishment as outlined by president obama. first we saw that president obama has completely discarded assurances previously given to the state of israel that we would not in any way make or force pre-1967 borders on the israelis. that is number one. number two, what we saw was president obama is essentially advocating the destruction of israel. the israeli prime minister says that the borders on which the president offers is indefensible. it is essentially the destruction of israel. the third thing the president obama did was implicitly recognize what is essentially a terrorist state. it is no different than the afghan government under the former leadership of the taliban

and al qaeda. so in spite of efforts by this administration to portray their policy as merely a continuation of understood ideas, it is a radical departure and i think it is important to understand that the continued support of president obama in the jewish community in essentially supports the destruction of israel. guest: ok, thank you for your points. let me tackle them one by one. bodley i would say, the sentiment you are expressing is shared by several gop presidential candidates and many in congress. some but that definitely all of the jewish community organization leaders. some were decidedly split on the president's announcement. a lot of them criticized it. completely discarded assurances

made by previous presidents. he did change the policy. incrementally, i would not say radically. that is the prerogative of the president of the united states. assurances can be changed. likewise, an insurance made by ehud barak can be changed by benjamin netanyahu. them's the brakes. no one is proposing that we go with the 1967 borders it themselves. president obama has acknowledged that there have been changes on the ground they want me to be recognized. but what netanyahu as saying, why would she start negotiating from that position when only a couple of months ago we negotiated from this position. it is a really bad idea for israel to negotiate from a worst position. and president obama, could you stop against us?

destruction of israel is extreme and harsh. and implicitly recognizing a terrorist date, no different from al qaeda. he compared of moss to al qaeda. -- hamas to al qaeda. he is the same that we should recognize the unity government. he is saying the palestinian should come up with an answer on should come up with an answer on how we can recognize them. how they will not seek the destruction of israel. it is an open question but president obama is not citing at, he is as a demanding that explanation yet to come. host: a democrat from. here run, mich. -- point huron. caller: he clearly said that the

1967 borders with land swaps was a starting point. bibi netanyahu is israel's version of dick cheney. he is attempting to control our electoral process here in the united states. he wants president obama out of office, because there is a conservative bent in israel equivalent to the rupert murdoch bent here. caller: why did president obama. this time to address? it seems that israel is in a relatively peaceful time in their existence. why now with everything going on in the rest of the middle east? host: before we get a response, what do you speculate?

caller: i have no idea. it looks like it was piling on the things that he has on his plate as point. host: part of why you're here. guest: there are a couple of reasons. the administration has been struggling on dealing with the arab spring, the wave of revolutions sweeping the arab world. there was a lot pressure to articulate a policy and vision that wraps up their myriad approaches two countries into one coherent thought process. it is something they have been wanting to do for a long time. the israeli -- the palestinian part is interesting because the aipac conference comes every year. netanyahu comes every year and gives a big speech. there was a feeling that if he is going to make a big speech, we need to.

netanyahu is going to speak on monday in tuesday they wanted to get the first word in. since they are giving this huge speech, let's just wrapped this into one long 45-minute speech. has that backfired? there is a good argument that it has, considering the speech caused a rift in u.s.-israel relations that will be on the front pages dropped -- during netanyahu's visit. host: a piece about middle east change. here's a look. >> there is some need for some straight talk. even under the best circumstances, a democratic middle east will be a very different and more challenging place to navigate in the region we have been accustomed to. this is how one person described the difference. for years, the united states has

paid wholesale for its policy in the middle east. now you have to pay retail. host: senator mccain's comments from this week. guest: senator mccain is not a big friend of president obama's approach. he has a lot of people who agree with him. the bottom line -- there are some people who left the job of steering the ship of u.s. policy. and the latter group, it is the more easy group to be in. he is not articulated a way to solve the middle east peace process but that is not his job. he is taking a position as a critic and he is very good at it. host: nora, cleveland, a democrat. caller: thank you for answering my call. i want to say that intuitively, and i know that is funny today, for me to use my intuition, with

all of the arab spring going on, it makes israel more vulnerable. and that president obama could talk to leaders in to sit down and making one small step toward peace, i think it would distract the anger and rage that may be projected onto israel because of their democracy or for what other reasons they might have. also i wanted to ask mr. rogin, how does it affect the business where we have the right wing republicans opposing and united states presidents on international affairs, especially as ruthlessly as they are doing it? host: josh rogin guest:. is israel more vulnerable due to the arab spring was marked yes, they relied on these dictators

for their security. all those borders are now seeing violence. that is something that the united states and israel are lined up on. we should take steps to increase their security and make sure the unrest does not spread to israel. if president obama could get everyone into the room and make a small step, they would be an accomplishment. that is what president obama thanks. but there is no trust. there is no trust between u.s. and the israel, so that small step would be great but it looks like it will not happen. and as far right rain -- right- wing republicans opposing his farm policy, they will only heat up as we get into the 2012 presidential season. they were a lot of left-wing democrats are ruthlessly opposed

george w. bush's foreign-policy. host: we are just about out of time. atlantic beach, we can squeeze in here. caller: i was like, how could obama make that move could start the 1967 borders are so far have a question. he is setting himself up like jimmy carter. how could he say something so stupid? it is political suicide. i think obama and netanyahu are up for academy awards. this is great performances. this is a subterfuge. the palestinians had gone to the united nations and asked for stated. if they are granted statehood, they no longer can be locked up behind barbed wire. they no longer could be held -- denied food, water, and medicare. they would have to be treated by human beings. israel does not want them to be

granted statehood. they are proposing this phony deal, 1967 borders. what a lie, what all like, what a life. host: the final on on the broader middle east policy questions. guest: there is a lot theatergoing on all sides. everyone knows that president obama's announcement will not change the facts on the ground. it was politically risky for him to do. again, we need to think about this in the context of a region that is going through amazing changes, and an administration trying to craft individual approaches to each country and claimed that this is part of one strategy. in egypt and tunisia, we see a push for aid, showing the arab world that if you choose democracy, we will support you. in yemen, we're going to push for change and say we support

the president's stepping down, but then it is up to you. in syria, we do not support the president's stepping down but we would like to. then we will go to a country like jordan and say, you are fine. and bahrain, which is also killing people on the street, do not worry. we have got your back because you are a client state of saudi of arabia. these are a wide range of reactions to what are totally different situations. the secretary of state describes it as the goldilocks doctrine. not too hot, not too cold, it just right. but calculating what just right is and explaining in and implementing it is a gargantuan task for this administration. there clearly struggling with that. host: josh rogin, staff writer we will talk in 40 minutes with

joshua bernstein of the service employees international union. they will talk about immigration and the dream act which failed in congress. after this break, the topic will be a potential return to the gold standard. at least conservatives are pushing in that direction and parts of the country. we will be right back. some looks at politics to the eyes and hands of our cartoonist. here we go.

>> no one succeeds in live by themselves. you must be willing to lean on others, listen to others, and yes, love others. >> watch commencement speeches and search more than 800 past commitments speeches from presidents and other world leaders and more online at the peabody-award winning c-span video library. every event we have covered from 1987 through today. it is washington your way. >> history is, as you know, much more than politics and soldiers and social issues. it is also madison and science and art and music and theater and poetry and ideas. and we should not want things into categories. it is all part of the st. thing.

>> samuel morris, harriet beecher stowe, thomas edison, henry adams -- sunday night, part one of two weeks with david mccullough on americans to maybe "greater journey" to 19th century paris. >> "washington journal" continues. host: at the table, ralph benko , a senior economic adviser to a group called america principles in action. the topic is something we have not talked much about, the gold standard. specifically, a conservative push to return this country to a gold standard. before we get to your actual opinion, educate us on what the gold standard is and where has the country been on an issue. guest: when america had its original regulation, the founding ponders -- fathers

issued continental money which issued continental money which dropped to value le less. they strip that right out of the constitution. with the exception of a short period during the civil war, because war always destroy is the gold standard, we had that creating jobs and economic growth until 40 years ago when richard nixon finally took a softer gold standard, promising us some more jobs. host: why ever turn now? guest: the strongest reason is 20 million jobs. a strong dollar, which is what the gold standard does in a gentle an organic way, is one of the greatest methods of protecting jobs. under reagan, used a proxy for

the gold standard, he was able decreed 19.4 million jobs by lowering tax rates and strengthening the dollar. since then we have seen the dollar appreciating and how you and getting weaker. we have been losing jobs along with that. the one thing the president obama really needs the most, 20 million new jobs, exactly what the gold standard would bring to the united states. host: let's put the phone numbers at the bottom of the screen for our guests. the topic is what is being written now, a conservative push for the gold standard. mr. benko, it is not just people and groups, but states are active in certain areas. talk about what some of the states have been up to. states have been up to. guest: utah has just passed legislation recognizing gold and silver as legal tender. legislation introduced in about 13 states, and this is the end

of the state legislative cycle. we will see it coming back next year. we expect to see it in iowa, where there is a bill pending in the senate. we expect to see it in new hampshire and a number of other states. this is a distress call, saying, washington, you are not getting host: it so someone would walk into a store and buy something? it's paper or electronic. guest: under the gold standard, under the international gold standard, if you would not notice any difference whatsoever. when my father was a young man, he could get a $20 bill and it would give him a one an ounce gold coin. that money set gold certificate. when i was a young man, i could walk in with a silver certificate and it would give me a that silver dollar and returned. no one is walking around with gold coins under the gold standard. they are heavy and inconvenient.

but the legal right to convert your money into gold makes the money retain its value. paper money inevitably depreciates its value. nixon says specifically coming toward dollar will buy as much tomorrow as it does today. the not -- that $2,011 is worth 19 cents compared to the $1,971. 19 cents compared to the $1,971. the 2001 $1 is worth 19 cents compared to the 1971 $1. host: you mentioned the potential of millions of jobs. how would it make the broader economy stronger? guest: in addition to american

principles and action, i am also the editor of the london institute website for people they want to read more about that. api has a website that i also strongly represent -- recommend. it's better to say let's go forward it to the gold standard, forward it to the gold standard, because it is very bored- looking. the facts are indisputable. people who promised us the paper standard would be better, more jobs, more growth, more infrequent recession, but in these 40 years, we have seen slower growth, less job creation, more unemployment, or frequent recessions, and sharper and deeper recessions including the panics like we had in 2008, very consistent with a pure paper money standard. money is managed by civil

servants, the chairman of the federal reserve. their well-being people -- well meaning people. host: before we get the calls, a little bit of push back from someone who rode in slate. guest: i read that article. host: the government would have to decide what the price of gold is. it is a lot harder than it sounds. in theory, it would -- there is an ideal rate at which to pay currency against gold. which is to know what it is. it is the taurus lead volatile. it is doubled over the last two years. if the federal reserve were to simply fix the dollar to a price of gold on a given day, and demand for gold changed drastically, it would guest: wreak havoc he is right.

but the markets are very capable of getting this right. by announcing that we're going to restore convertibility at a date certain in the future, then the markets will arbitrage the price. price. they will figure out the natural clearing price and the government would pay get to that price. host: how many more states to use the acting on this? we talked about a couple. guest: a lot of votes of no confidence in washington, with qe1 and qe2. people feel that they are running the printing presses over time. american principles in action is actually developing a model legislation which it will offer to the exchange council for states to consider how best to go about implementing this

legislation. host: you can read more at the website. our guest is ralph benko, the senior economic adviser for that group. he is more than 20 years experience and campaign in government service and technology areas. a lot more that we can get to. orlando, florida it is our first call. david, a republican. caller: thank you for taking my call. i thought it was franklin roosevelt it took a softer gold standard. and nixon took a softer silver standard. -- took us off the silver standard. it says that congress should be responsible for coining money and determining the value thereof. how does this relate to the creation of the federal reserve? guest: first of all, we got off

the gold standard in stages. franklin delano roosevelt took a soft the domestic gold standard in 1932 and made it illegal for americans to own gold. but we were still on the international gold standard until lyndon johnson took a soffit in 1968, and legally nixon repudiated the cold standard in 1971. maybe more history than you wanted to know. there are compelling legal arguments that this is not constitutional. i am a constitutional lawyer, called by the treasury department to testify before the gold constitute -- cold commission about the history of monetary policy. a long and rich history, and it is crystal clear whether you read the debates when there were writing the constitution in 1787, look up the notes of

1787, look up the notes of debate, and you can read it for yourself or go to the gold standard website and search their. there is a blog entry about that. one of the founders said that the -- give the federal government power of issuing paper money, it would be as alarming as the mark of the beast in revelations. they were strongly against this power. george washington wrote against it, james madison wrote against it in federalist paper no. 44. the constitutional history is very wrong that the founding fathers intended no paper money. that is how we conducted our affairs very successfully for 150 years. host: david is on the line for ralph benko. caller: i beg to the gentleman

the would-i beg to differ with the gentleman that we conducted our affairs so well. there were crashes so often. this country got started on publicly managed paper money. during the revolutionary war, what that gentleman forgets to mention is that the briton -- the british were i tacking us with a massive counterfeiting operation. he forgets them mention the greenback which carried the union through the civil war. this father -- this country has never had a true publicly managed money system. guest: on the history of the experience of the revolutionary war, i read their own language. they were traumatized by. they detested paper money. in everything i have read, it is

said by the founders, none of them said, it would've worked great except the british had been counterfeiting so heavily. there was a wonderful article in 1863 in the civil war, and i forgot to mention -- i did mention that america win off the gold standard during the civil war. and i always said the war is the destroyer of the gold standard. that was an allusion to the greenback, which have their own interest in history. it's quite clear to me and the statistics around at continental is that the continental congress flooded the country and it dropped by a thousand to one. host: another point, the effect of the gold standard. we had many depressions. guest: i read this very

differently. paul krugman attacked the gold standard in his "york times" blog. the only attested to one panic, i think it was 1893. it's interesting to me that he had to reach back that far. there is a famous scholar going on to public service, ben bernanke, and writing about this very subject as to whether the gold standard was the cause of the great depression, in an article that he cove road in about 1993, he said that it was a to form a version of the gold standard which cause the great depression, which was exactly right. he also spoke as a governor before he came -- became the chairman, speaking about how well the gold standard at work. host: woodstock, va., is calling. calling. caller: my question to you, who

is opposed to implementing the gold standard in america? and if it is not too complicated, what is your vision of how this would be implemented? guest: two excellent question. congress is very recalcitrant about this. it's not too hard to understand why. and in referencing that to the previous caller, what the proponents of gold standard, the people's money, not money managed by a small group of people. you have the power to go in and get gold from a bank if you do not believe that the treasury is is doing the right amounts of paper money in it will depreciate and inflation will come. congress will have to be pushed into this kicking and screaming,

and so will wall street. this is like a credit card for congress. if congress is spending money like a drunken sailor. there are only three ways that congress gets his hands on our money. taxing, borrowing, and printing. and the printing press, a metaphor for the fed pause creation of book-entry dollars, is probably the worst, because it leads to the depreciation of the dollar which is working guys like me particularly hard. host: you mentioned the gold commission. you testified before, and one man, ron paul, who served on it. guest: and there were others. host: ron paul has run for president. he has made this a political

question. will we hear about this and the next guest: year-and-a-half we will, because we are collaborating with the idea what tea party in a bus tour to 17 different locations in iowa. we're training people to participate in the ames straw poll. it is bringing issues to the four and this is not just a conservative issue. people like michael kinsley, a very wise and humanitarian progressive, have written in the manic monthly -- the atlantic monthly very good things about the gold standard. i do not represent the ebenezer scrooges institute or the scrooge mcduck institute. we want to take the privileges away from washington and wall street and turn them over to the

people for good job creation. that is the major benefit. know how'll let to much -- i would like to know how much gold is this gentleman much gold is this gentleman holding in his own personal account, or how much called is the group holding in their investment accounts? it would be very telling to find out how much you are holding. since you are advocating the gold standard. gold standard. guest: can we get the cards up. there are my holdings, 100%. host: why is that important to the discussion? caller: he is advocating for a net return to the gold standard. off the top of my head, i was

wondering how much he was holding. i would assume that his investments would go up significantly if the entire u.s. economy would switchover. one more question before i go? you're also educating for individual states leaving behind the federal government. do you think it would be beneficial for the united states economy in its current state with our currency being devalued against the euro? guest: i am not an investor. i am a working guy. i do not have any gold investments at all. i hate to shock you, but if we go to the gold standard, gold will likely stabilize near its current price. if we do not, it is highly

likely that goal will go to the moon. if they were looking to stoke the price of gold, i would attack the dollar and praising the paper dollar and not moving toward gold convertibility. congress will have to be pushed into this. there are 3 or four major outside forces. this takes away congresses credit card. congress is like a drunk. no matter how much they swear to lay off of hooch, there's no better way than just locking the medicine cabinet. this is one way to move congress. encouraging the tea party to take this up and to bring it to the floor is another way of moving congress and also the presidential candidates.

other countries who are heartsick at watching the way america is abusing the dollar in a misguided effort to improve the trade balance or whatever are also eventually going to get off their fdr ride, even tim geithner says that the practical option. other countries will tumble to that. there will be pressure on congress to let us block the liquor cabinet from the people, from the states, and their allies. host: 50 minutes left with our guest. -- 15 minutes left with our guests. caller: to what extent would the benefits of a gold standard be frustrated by the practice of fractional reserve banking?

guest: that is a wonderful question, not at all. adam smith wrote about this. "wealth of nations." he addressed fractional reserve from the gold standard. this recommendation was that we create 20% gold reserve. it is like an insurance policy. insurance companies don't keep one of the present time reserves against it every house in the country burned down at the same time. if they keep sam reserves. we believe the federal government in combination with the people is better capable of assessing than we are. we are not saying exactly what the reserve should be. at the head of its credibility, the bank of england which was then the central monetary agent in the world and now the federal reserve is, only kept about 5% on reserves against currency.

on reserves against currency. until the federal reserve re- earns credibility, it will require something more like 30% or 40% but that is way above my pay grade. host: in addition to what we have been talking about, one viewer writes fri-- there's this idea is to pay the country's debt. guest: what a terrible idea. host: how much gold is there in fort knox? guest: the official gold reserves of the u.s. is about 8,000 tons for it is roughly four times as much as germany and they are number 2. host: how much money with that represent? guest: role hundred billion dollars.

-- several hundred billion dollars. dollars. mr. lehrman spoke about this. mr. lehrman spoke about this. he talked about how america might be a net buyer of gold for a while. that would not bring in a rich material amount of money to reduce the deficit. it would be non-recurring. my own personal assessment is it is not a good idea. host: madison, indiana, republican, good morning. caller: will it create a

tremendous devaluation of the dollars we have now? there are so many dollars in the money supply and only some of the gold. wood in it leads to a devaluation? guest: doing it right is really critical. after the civil war, the federal government went back to the gold standard in a way that upped the value of the dollar and caused a long recession it created a prairie populist movement. this is where william jennings bryant said you shall not press down this crown of thorns and crucified man kind across a cross of gold. and winston churchill made the biggest blunder of his political career by resuming the gold standard which had been factored in by world war i. it created a massive recession. it is why it is so important to assess -- for the market to assess what the gold value will be so we will neither have

deflationary or inflationary and it will stop eroding. host: this is an e-mail --. guest: this is the counter argument to gold and that is without gold, the government can't bail out wall street and cannot bail out the banks and cannot be allowed detroit. from my analysis of the historical and the empirical evidence, it is the instability of the paper dollar that causes the crisis in the first place.

the patient is not responding, let's give her more crack and it was cracked in the first place because the crisis. let's get off this cycle of volatility and for it's something that is gentle, organic, and stable. this is so we don't put ourselves in a situation where we have these crises and congress get involved in the bailout business which i think is bad business. host: another viewer wants to know about jobs. they should have written 20 million jobs. what specifically are these jobs what specifically are these jobs that will get created tax ? guest: you have heard of warned of that and there's a comparable figure in mexico who wrote a wonderful paper called "gold -

job generator and job protector." i am paraphrasing -- you can look this up on the web. it is compelling. free trade implies a gold standard. right now, we are buying all the toys in china. in return for which, we get all the toys and china is getting the toy factories and the factory jobs and the dollars. i am in favor of china achieving prosperity. but we don't want them to be achieving some kind of austerity prosperity were they are making all this money by not spending it. we are spending all this money and not making it. and not making it. under the gold standard, we can restore our industrial base so we have really good height- paying jobs, not just mcjobs but really good jobs and bring them to the fore.

it would inject -- restoring our industrial base is one thing the gold standard would do. the balance in trade with automatic rectify and we would no longer be a sport -- exporting our best jobs. host: will bar, maryland, go ahead. caller: and we have a 585 trillion dollar value in over- the-counter derivatives. deleverage on that is 1-40 so i would like to ask how in the world, when you are all anti- government, this amount of money -- our government -- our debt is a piddling amount

compared to this. how can the world would you tackle that by going back to the gold standard? >guest: i am a conservative but i am not anti-government. the tea party is not anti- government. the court the most authentic tea party group called tea party patriots. we have three doctrines as tea party patriots and one is fiscal restraint, meaning reduce the wasteful spending. number two is free market because the free market is the way of creating real jobs and number three is constitutional integrity. we are not anti-government. as for the derivatives, i main street guy. i recognize their is a lot of weird paper out there. i don't understand it and and i'm not sophisticated that way. i know that real companies

generating real jobs with real stock in value on the stock market is the core of our prosperity. there needs to be a respect the relationship between the federal government and the private economy. the federal government right now is number 1 running riot and allowing wall street to run riot. i am not a big fan of these derivatives traders. this is about bringing the american economy and its fundamental basis, our money, back into our heads and our control and cutting of the government's ability to manipulate. host: speak to us about your perspective of the gold standard on other countries. guest: there is a number of important developing countries that we have nicknamed the bric.

brazil, russia, india, etc. the use of the dollar as an international standard is an extraordinary privilege. using the dollar as a reserve currency allowed the u.s. to run deficits without tears. this is bad for our trading partners and that for other countries and it is that for the united states for it gold would be absolutely neutral. it is a supra national currency. it allows people to receive an honest day's pay for an honest day's work reported host: pontiac, ill., republican, go ahead. ahead. caller: good timing -- i was a

dream of a question about india and china and reserve currency and gold. as i understand it, india has been the primary buyer of gold for several years, at least until this year and now china is buying more gold. how many thousand tons of gold to india and china have -- to india and china have and i understand that china does not want the dollar to be the reserve currency. how close are they to making it so they can switch to a gold standard? guest: the gold standard has not been taken up by the g20. the day before yesterday, the former deputy governor of the reserve bank of india published an important article in the hindu business line. it indicated the world is moving

back toward the gold standard. there are wise thinkers internationally and another one is manuel hines who dollarized the salvadoran economy. as little as a year or two ago, the gold standard was considered kooky. it is rapidly becoming on a marble. -- un ignoreable. we are not sitting here waiting for high inflation. we don't perceive it that way. at least not right away. gold is just very useful to found a currency with an intimate act -- and international monetary system with. host: independent caller, good

morning. caller: what gives me pause about the gold standard is that most of the people espoused this go beyond this end to this government. they believe in the other minority and the masons running the country. the people following this scene really kooky to me. i believe in the gold standard but i am worried about the people espousing it. guest: they are a distinct minority. there are like people like american principles in action and the lehrman institute. go to 2012.org and the money projects website overseen by dr. judy shelton.

there are perfectly solid advocates who have looked at the data and said this stuff really works. the fact that there have been more marginal proponents of this is immaterial. there are people of great stature including dr. paul rain this issue to the fore. dr. paul is more of a purist and we are. we are for the classical gold standard. his background seems to be for the austrian 100% reserves. we encourage you to come and join that this course which has become respectable host: new york city, a democrat, go ahead caller: i read in history about the u.s. going bankrupt in 1934. that was after the federal reserve took over the american

people's money. any time before that, i cannot find anything in history about america being bankrupt. americans had enough money to work for a home, a car, and land and two pounds of working to pay for a two-bedroom apartment guest: it is very important that a central fact that here to some very well-known rules under the gold standard to prevent things like national bankruptcy. and prevent things like recessions or to minimize those. the gold standard is the start. there are rules by which the gold standard is adhered to and those rules are understood. part of the reform will need to be getting the federal reserve to be following the rules rather than making them up as the goal all along. host: our guest has been a

senior american adviser for american principles in action thank you for your time this morning. we have about 45 minutes left on the saturday edition of "washington journal." a discussion on tuition rates for illegal immigrants in time for your calls, be right back. ♪ ♪ >> this weekend, on c-span 3, from lectures and history, cleveland state prof. regina williams on the music of duke ellington on american artifacts, a look at the smithsonian to preserve the jefferson bible and live sunday from jackson, mississippi, the 50th anniversary celebration of the freedom ride. 15 men and women black and white boarded two buses for new orleans and their goal was to integrate southern bus stops. get the complete we can schedule

at c-span.org/history or press the cspan alert button to get our schedule e-mailed directly to you. the local content vehicles kicked off the city tour in tampa/st. pete with book-tv event on c-span 2 including interviews. plus, a look at the book industry with local booksellers and american history of dance on c-span 3 from a st. petersburg museum of history. the hidden history of angola, a settlement of 750 former slaves and seminal indians who fought two wars against the u.s. in the early 1800's. the city's tort picks up next weekend at watch it on c-span 2 and 3. >> follow the house and senate when you want. our comprehensive resource on congress, the congressional chronicle, makes it easy to find

information about your elected officials would daily schedules, a full list of members, each day's committee hearings, plus video of house and senate sessions and progress of bills and notes. congressional chronicle at c- span.org/congress. >> follow "washington journal" on twitter. you can also treat your questions to our guest and add your comments to the conversation. starter twitter account today at twitter.com/cspanwj. "washington journal" continues. host: we are here to talk about state tuition rates for illegal immigrants. back up to something called the dream act that did not succeed

in congress in the recent months. what would that legislation have done? guest: the dream act is for a generation of young people who are the victims of our broken immigration system. they are young people who were brought here who have grown up here and come to our schools. the dream that said is that if you stayed in school and stayed out of trouble if you came five years before the dramatic pas sed, once you graduate from high school, you get put on a pathway for being able to legalize yourself completely if you continue into college, at least two years of college or graduate from a community college or

else serve in the u.s. military and eventually, if you continue to have a clean record, you will be able to have u.s. status. host: the federal action has not moved forward and perhaps it will be brought up again at some point. move on to the states. what are states doing in this particular area? what are you advocating? guest: over the last 10 years or so, states where there are large number of immigrants have gradually tried to figure out what they can do. these kids to grow up in the u.s. and were brought by their parents and eventually it will become legal and become u.s. citizens and will live here the rest of their lives. most people believe that, it is just thinking conversive long time. the states have said that we want our kids to be educated so that when they get legalize, they will be able to get value from what we are providing.

the states said we will allow these kids to have the same tuition rate as their classmates. that is the in-state tuition rates and we won't force them to pay the out of state rate which two or three times higher. host: the concept of tuition equity proposals, you mentioned 12 states and this means of said access to in-state tuition for students who meet criteria regardless of their status. beyond maryland, it is currently proposed in 12 states. proposed in 12 states. we want to invite the viewers to phone in with their questions and comments. guest: in those states where

they have this institution, it is not for all undocumented immigrant kids. it is only for those who have attended high school in that state and graduated from high school in that state. if you are from out of state, you will not qualify for that tuition. host: other other criteria attached to this? guest: it depends on the state. sometimes you have to sign an affidavit. sometimes not every college qualifies. in maryland, it is only the community colleges that qualify initially. they can only go to the university of maryland after they graduate from community college. host: our guest mentioned maryland. if you are in state in maryland, the tuition is $8,416 in one year. out of state, it is $24,831. that is quite a difference.

guest: that is for the university of maryland. most of these kids don't go to the top tier schools. they will go to community colleges. there are differences of the amounts are lower for in-state tuition host: gainesville, texas, the republican line, go ahead. caller: good morning. this does not regard to extending state tuition for illegal immigrants but i don't fully understand why there is a different rate between out of state residents and residents of the state regarding the tuition rates. guest: i can explain basically

the concept of in-state tuition is that these are state- supported institutions. the idea is that the states want to spend their tax money on those who are residents of their state who will remain in the state. one of the reasons why we subsidize education in this country is not just for the students themselves but also for the benefit of the state and our future. we're all better off as more people are educated. they don't want to educate someone and spend their resources on someone from another state or that will go back to that other state. the one to focus on the ones that will stay in their state. that is the concept. host: tell us more about the arguments for and against immigrants paying in-state tuition. guest: those who are opposed to it are opposed because they see as a slippery slope. they don't want any kind of benefit to go to the children of

undocumented immigrants no matter how those young people have lived their lives. they see it and they see it as an average. why should somebody who was a child of an undocumented and art and get the benefit text then make a comparison between those kids and kids' from out of state. state. an undocumented immigrant as one that grew up in that state and went to school in that state. they want to get the same rate as their classmates. host: let's hear from pennsylvania, a democrat, good morning. caller: there are no guarantees that they will stay in that state, to begin with. guest: right, there is no guarantee.

the track record is pretty good. these kids can i go back to the country they might have been when they were infants. there would not be able to come back here. most of these kids to stay in the state. they are a little bit less mobile. caller: i don't agree with you. guest: we can disagree and that is why we are in this great country. host: this is from north carolina, the independent line, good morning. caller: i don't feel that illegal immigrants should get any benefits. if they are here illegally, they should be sent back where they came from. guest: that is a very common thought. one thing that has happened is that our immigration debate has gotten a little bit emotional

and we are not focus on really what is practical and doable. it is not realistic to deport all the 11 million undocumented immigrants and it is not beneficial for us to do that. we're talking to kids who have grown up here. they were brought here by their parents at a young age. you have to be -- it is important to be a little bit nuanced and think about what is better for america and what is right and good for these kids and not try to make blanket statements. regardless of whether they will cure a disease or win the nobel prize, we still don't want them to be here because they are illegal immigrants. host: we mentioned in 12 states active in this area. speak to us more about the growth of this idea. and different states acting and this trend. guest: they are red states and

blue states and have republican governors and democratic governors and republican legislators and democratic legislators. california and new york and texas have the most numbers of undocumented immigrants and they are voting and saying it is better for us in the long run. if these kids are educated than if they are not able to access than education. there is a huge difference in terms of what the outcome is for an education. you had an earlier segment where you talked about is it worth it for a young person to go to college. whether it is worth it for them or not, it is definitely worth it for us. the more people we educate in order to compete in the global economy, we need to educate as many of our kids as possible and

we can afford those who have worked in high school to graduate and who are ambitious and want to go to college, we can't afford not to encourage them and give them the tools they need to do that. host: here is more information on the immigration law center. guest: it is a controversial issue for some. most americans understand and agree that there are areas of disagreement and controversy in immigration but most americans understand we are better off to educate more of our young people. we should not make an arbitrary distinction of who we are educating and not. it is encouraging to me because we have heard a lot about entire

dutch immigrants sentiment growing our current congress is opposed to immigration reform than the previous one was. and the other hand, if you see in the states there has been a rebirth of this. almost every year, the bill would be passed like this to allow young people to have tuition equity. the last few years, it has not happened and this year, maryland did it, conn looks like it will probably do it, maybe oregon might do it. there are several states that are expecting. the ones that are trying to go the other way, it is much more symbolic. and the other states that are not those 12 states, young people are forced to pay the out of state right. to pass a law that says they have to continue doing that, that is symbolic and the status quo. host: we showed you the

statistics for tuition in maryland. at university of connecticut, here's a look at tuition costs for it if you are in state resident, is about $10,400 per year. out of state, just under $27,000. guest: 1 misconception is that the out of state rate [unintelligible] the in-state rate covers the cost of that individual student's. s. these bills don't cost states additional money because students are coming in and they are paying tuition at the lower rate but that rate is enough to cover their instruction. host: citrus heights, calif., republican caller, good morning. caller: good morning. caller: good morning. you might be surprised to find

that i actually support this idea. i think it is unfair for us to hold it against these kids that were brought here. they did not carry themselves across the border necessarily. i think they should have the same opportunity based upon merit to get these positions in school. the other side as perfectly legitimate problems with that. what do the unions have to do with illegal immigrants? what i see in california is they are trying to unionize farm workers. what is the end game? what is the end game? host: where is the interest in the issue come from from the seiu. guest: there are several but the

overriding one is that we represent to put 1 million people and maybe 1/4 of them are immigrants. we are trying to support our immigrant workers but also, the changes we support what we support overall, we are talking about the dream act and young people, we support comprehensive people, we support comprehensive immigration reform which includes border security and some kind of way for those who are here illegally to legalize their status. it includes fixing our immigration system. we believe the conference system is a drain on our economy. it is something holding us back and creating an uneven playing field for workers. we believe we want all workers to be legal workers so there is not unfair competition. as a labor movement, we strongly our support of a comprehensive immigration reform. the dream act and these type of

things are a part of that. some of these kids are the kids of our members. on the other side, in every state, we want the tax base to be larger. these kids will earn more money over their lifetime. college graduates earned about twice as much as a high-school dropout does. these bills to encourage a much bigger percentage of these kids to go to college and they reduced the dropout rate which reduces crime which reduces the costs associated with and increases the amount of taxes that these kids eventually will pay. it is a good deal for the taxpayers. in the end, our members are like everybody else and immigration is important for our future. it is important to have our

immigration right and right now, it is holding us back. looking at the future, they will be much worse off if we don't sell our immigration problem. host:seiu.org is the website and our guest is josh bernstein. he has a law degree from cal he has a law degree from cal berkeley and was a clerk to the ninth circuit court of appeals and spent 14 years at the national immigration law center and is currently with the seiu and our next call -- we have about 20 minutes left -- fairborn, new jersey, a democrat, thank you for waiting. caller: i oppose your point of view not so much because i don't support immigration. ina legal and a grim myself -- i

am a legal immigrant myself. to the moral concept of the violation of american law. not being able to pay in-state tuition is punishment, essentially. the children's problem is they have to speak to their parents. it is a punishment for them and their parents, morally. most of the time they're parents are part of a cash economy that don't pay taxes. you also said that in-state tuition covers tuition and does not cover more than the cost of educating the student. yet every year, in state colleges come to the legislature and ask for more money because

otherwise they will have to raise tuition essentially, you are asking for more money for taxpayers prepare accept the punishment. the u.s. people to pay $10,000 fine to become an american citizen or green card holder, there'll be hundreds of millions of people who would want to do that. obviously, we cannot do that. the punishment has to be real. not necessarily monetary but if you are here illegally, those people never become american citizens. they say they came here to work variant they came here in violation of american law. they should not be deported which is in human that they should be punished. the proper punishment is that they will not be able to influence the american political system. host: thanks for calling. guest: we talk about

comprehensive immigration reform. one of the things we want to get away from is the idea of who is at fault and focus more on how to solve the problem. there is a lot of blame to go around of our current situation you could buy as immigrants or their employers or american lawmakers -- there's a lot of punishment to go around. if we think about what will be better for us, we have a comprehensive solution. according to one study out of ucla, our economy would benefit in the numbers of $1.50 trillion. on the other hand, if we try to spend money to put in the resources to deport these immigrants which i don't think is realistic in the first place, that would cost us trillions of

dollars. we have to solve this problem. when you look at this particular kids who have grown up here, it is a bit of a different dynamic. many of you might have seen the sign at the border that says -- you see the parents running across the road and you have the kid being dragged along with them. those kids of the ones we're talking about. there were dragged here. especially if there were older, they had already set down roots. they did not necessarily want to come here but now they listen to hip-hop and you would not know that your high school kids best friend might be an undocumented immigrants. many valedictorians and really promising young people who have done nothing wrong and don't

deserve to be punished, all they've done is live the life there were given and done the best they could with it. the ones that are benefiting from this are the ones who stayed in school and did not drop out of school. they graduated and are ready and ambitious enough to go to college. host: here is the message from twittered -- guest: that is not accurate. it was surprising to me but it turns out that the in-state tuition, in most states, there is no fiscal costs. you look it with the state budgetary offices have said about what the cost of this is and basically it is negligible. in-state tuition covers the cost

of additional instruction. it does not cover all the educational costs but what we're talking about which is 2% of the incoming class, if all the undocumented immigrants were to go in, just a couple of more people coming into school, it does not really have an impact on anybody else. host: assuming they get the lower rate, how they pay for college? if they are undocumented, how does the financing work? can they get a loan? guest: you see about 1/3 of these kids are attending college. it is a struggle. in dormitories. they live with their parents and that my commute 1 hour. many of them cannot qualify for

drivers licenses so they will get on the bus at 5:00 in the morning to get to school. it is a struggle sometimes and it will have to drop out for a semester. they don't qualify for student loans are in the kind of financial aid. this kind of remarkable and a testimony to the human spirit that they persevere and some money of them do want to go to school and figure out a way. sometimes they have benefactors who will help them because they are promising. i wish i could introduce america to some of these kids. they are wonderful kids. it is a typical american story. when history is written years from now, i think we will look back on this and we will see that some of these kids went on and do great things for our country and others were teachers or nurses or they were doctors. we will be really happy we help

to these kids. host: providence, rhode island, independent line, good morning. caller: of like to give my comment. i read the paper from the pew hispanic center. they don't use 12 million illegal immigrants in united states. they refer to upwards of 30 million. i have actually read the various dream and its online. it is not quite so simple as you stated. the language is extremely vague. all people have to state is that there were brought here to this country before the age of 16. it covers people over 36 years old and they don't have to graduate college and they don't have to graduate high school.

they just have to get a g.e.d. the only have to attend one year of college for one year of the military. in many cases, they'd have to go to college at all. they can claim card chip. the dream act is written [unintelligible] [unintelligible] what irks me the most -- we have vast numbers of american citizens, untold millions, who have been displaced from their jobs. from nafta to china, our immigration system is not broken. our government is refusing to enforce laws. that is harmful. we see our visa programs being exploited and we have young people, american citizens, graduating from college or high school and they cannot get jobs. engineers, nurses, i know a young woman who graduated from a

nursing program at a state college and she cannot get a job at a public hospital. they are hiring visa nurses from the philippines. guest: the pew estimate is about 11 million. the number has gone down since our economy has gone down. the numbers fluctuate with the economy historically. ito really think that anybody says 30 million. it doesn't really matter the total number. the point is that the more there are, the more urgent to this is for us to solve the problem. as far as what the dream access, it is honestly not vague. the original author was orrin

hatch of utah. every law has its flaws and this one definitely does. there are things i would change about it. you don't have to state that you're under 16, you have to demonstrate it with evidence. most of these kids will have their high-school records. that is hard to fake. they don't have a high school record, that will invite suspicion. that have to have graduated from a u.s. school or have a g.e.d. of the have to have been here five years at least. we're not talking about people will come in the future. if you are young, you should have a school or medical records that will allow you to permit. host: on the federal level, is that anything like the dramatic comeback this year or next year? >> the dream act will be

reintroduced. it is tough in this congress. we see that the republican majority does not seem to be that interested in comprehensive solutions. they are big on the enforcement only approach. they are trying to deport them all. that is not a realistic solution. that is more symbolic. if we did that it would be extremely disruptive and bad for our economy. i agree that our economy is in tough times and there are many americans who are out of jobs. i just don't see that going after undocumented immigrants -- they are not to blame for that.

undocumented immigrants contribute to our economy. that is a controversial statement but it is absolutely true. if we deported all the undocumented immigrants, it would be harmful and fewer americans would have jobs. comprehensive solution to our immigration problem will give a boost to our economy and americans will be employed. if you care about american unemployment, you should support immigration reform. host: bloomington, illinois, republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. i recently watched a documentary on the news about the undocumented students in indiana with his graduate college. -- who just graduated college. they were up at the capitol

storming the doors. governor michel had just passed a new law on illegals. an undocumented workers. i saw news and arizona where some high-school students took over a meeting, a school board meeting, turned over chairs, yelled, sprint, were totally obnoxious. there is no humility and these people. they come in demanding some much. host: let's go onto victor on the line from democrats from new york city. caller: i want to address mainly the dream act. there is a lot block -- wrong with the immigration system in this country. we encourage illegal aliens and emigrants over many years. we need to fix it. the politicians are dancing

around it and won't fix it. we need to have it fixed. i think all these people who should beas mineors given proper legal status. it is not their fault there were brought here by their parents or relatives. some are grown and summer children and did you send them back to the country where they were born, they would be strangers in that country. host: looking ahead to 2012, immigration overall, as an issue, how much will it be talked about? guest: i think it is an issue that will not go away and still we start to go after it. every four years it will be talked about more.

i am hopeful that it is starting on american politicians that this is not the only way to be successful. i think there has been pandering to the anti-democrat side over the years. it seems like it is changing both because the growing latino- asian immigrant population is growing every year, about 40- 50,000 -- actually every month. in addition to that, i see there there was a few years ago we could have a more emotional discussion.

there was less understanding. the american people are starting to understand that immigration reform is good for us and not just for immigrants. i am hopeful the may be 2012 will be the turning point and by 2013 or so, we will be able to resolve this. host: this is from twitter -- guest: there is an exception to my -- that is a blanket statement and i don't think this is a blanket issue. we are a complex organization and some of our members are like that twitter person but most of that twitter person but most of them understand that it is better to solve the problem. host: california, you are of first amendment scholar. turn the sound down on your said that we will hear you much better.

hello? can you turn the sound down and you're set to caller: i did, good morning. i'm sorry i can't hear you. host: go ahead and speak. caller: one of my questions is -- when the kids come here, the public schools are forced to hire english language lerner's to teach these kids english. when they get here, they are not fluent in their native language. they don't know how to read and write in what ever language there were brought here from. i think that is the first problem of a lot of american parents is when the extracurricular activities in our schools are getting cut because we don't have the money but then we have to hire three full-time english-language teachers to teach these kids. then we have children that we

want to send to college and i'm i want to send my kids out of state. i'm not sure why an illegal immigrant would be able to h been chosen over a child that has lived here. i understand the cost that these people cost our country on a yearly basis in so many different areas. you think that to getting them will solve our problem. just because you're educated person, does not mean that they will go on to do great things. guest: that's true, but statistically, the more people we are able to educate, the better off we will be economically, socially, in every way. people that are educated, zero 0.1% of people have a bachelor's degree are incarcerated. that was in 1997.

the rate for high-school dropouts is 19 times higher. education is not really zero sum game. if we educate one set of people, we have to hold back and not at to get another set? our goal should be to educate everybody who is qualified and ambitious and want to go to college. college. host: next to last call, fla., go ahead. caller: i was a union member for 45 years. people like you put these illegals in the unions and took our american jobs and these people come over here illegal and bring kids with them. it is not our fault and they are not legal in this country. the should not have education and we should not pay for their high school and now you want them to pay for college. there is over 1 million of them

on disability and they should not be entitled to that. host: let's squeeze in one last call. democrat, york, pa., welcome to the program. caller: good morning. i am from southern california and i had to move because i did not speak spanish. 11 million is way underestimated. i would state that that is what is in california alone. we like to look at it as our borders being invaded. we don't feel that these people should be rewarded. our systems are going broke. the schools are going down because we have to pay for all the illegals that come over here. we have to pay for dental, food, they get taken care of better than we the workers do. my daughter graduate from the best school and never missed a day of high school.

she got the best rates and graduated from temple university. she cannot find a job. i am supporting her. this is what the caller before discussed. that is what our system is broken. i thank you for listening hope that something can be done for the american people that work hard. host: final thoughts? guest: our last two callers want to blame immigrants for a lot of other problems that we have and i agree that we have many problems that need to be solved in this country. you can just that say that immigration is the cause of all of that. if we solve our immigration system, if we make it better and make it work for americans and level the playing field, we have a legal work force and a more sane immigration system,