commission talks about the revenue, which offices may closes and when closures are expected. and later, west huddleston explains how drug courts are used at the state and local level to keep eligible drug offenders out of prison. "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: is the lead story in all major newspapers this morning. the "atlantic journal- constitution," s&p says deal falls short of what is needed. the sec, the tribune, as a the shots you -- closes u.s. u.s. credit rating. it could lead to higher bahrain

calls. in the hartford current, losing its aaa recall credit rating. following a tumultuous week on wall street. good morning and welcome to the "washington journal." we're going to be talking about standard and poors, its downgrading of u.s. credit from aaa to aa plus, what that means to you and how you want to comment on it. do you think is responsible for it. let me get your calls. if you have a call this the last 30 days, put down the phone, pick up the keyboard and send us a message electronically. you can reach us by e-mail. if you are and twitter, you can follow us.

in the "washington post's" this story, 117,000 positions added in july. downgradesd poor's credit rating. a reporter is jonas, neil perlin. -- neil irwin. the announcement came out officially that they had downgraded the u.s. credit rating from aaa to aa-plus, how did we get to that point? guest: they are not really making a judgment about the u.s. financial capability to pay our debt but our political capability to pay our debts. there not as confident as they were few weeks ago that the u.s.

government and its political system has the will and ability to reach the decisions to guarantee that u.s. treasury bonds are the safest investment on earth. a remarkable transition period during the debt ceiling debate they sensed that they were going and distortion, but it is stunning. host: you say that it could increase washington's cost to borrow money as well as ripple effects around the globe. what has been the reaction to this downgrading of the credit rating? guest: hard to know until markets opened up on monday morning. and outside rating agency is saying that u.s. securities are no longer as safe, the safest investments on earth. it is hard to say how that will ripple through the financial

system. one thing that we learned during the fall of 2008, lehman brothers, it is hard to know in advance how one financial crisis can spread elsewhere in the world. i think everyone will be crossing their fingers starting sunday evening our time when the asian markets open, and then when the european markets opened, to see whether this is a ripple effects that are nasty. it may also increase borrowing costs. we would have more of that deficit problem. host: you mentioned earlier in this interview that this downgrading of the credit rating was not necessarily a comment on the u.s. ability to pay its debt but on the politics behind the paying of the debt. who controls a standard and

poor's? whether politics? guest: they're not political. they do research and analysis on business trends. if you are a large company and you want to go to the debt market and buy bonds or issue bonds, they will come in, look at your books, analyze them, and put out a report saying that you are aa or single way or aaa, whatever your credit rating might be, and with sovereign debt, government debt, they do the same kind of analysis. they look at the u.s. government or the canadian or british governments, whatever it may be, and analyze the financial position and the ability and willingness to pay. is not terribly political but what they are is in the case of

government debt, it is not that they have a lot of affirmation that everyone else does not have a, because they are just one group of researchers. it is not like they have great insight into what is going on with u.s. government that no one else in the world has. host: two major credit rating agencies, moody's and fitch. with those two agencies, but that u.s. still has a aaa rating. what a difference -- what are the differences? guest: that come to different conclusions. this is a very interesting activity because no one knows what the level of risk is. it is all about guess work and conclusions based on what we see now. what is driving svp's decision is that we have the republican

party, the freshmen in the house, that has been making threats about not raising the debt ceiling and maybe default would not be a big deal. that kind of talk is driving those decisions, and moody's is not affected by that tall. they say the u.s. government has paid for its own debt and it will continue to do so in the future. host: what is being talked about both ends of pennsylvania avenue? not much talk on capitol hill because they are out of the august recess, and the president is in camp david for the weekend, but as we get closer to monday and further into the month of august, " will the congress and president do to turn this around and help the u.s. get a aaa rating back? guest: this is not something that can be reached overnight. they reached this based on fundamental factors going on in this country. it is not some larger debt

ceiling deal will necessarily change it. and moreover we had a deal reached one week ago, and the idea that they're going to reopen in reconsider that is unlikely to me. the question now is, can we prove them wrong? can we prove the s&p analyst wronged by reaching a series of awful well designed decisions over the next years? if we did it, then they will be wrong and people who bought our debt will be right. host: we have been talking with neil irwin of the "washington post." he has the lead story. it is what we're going to be talking about for the first 45 minutes of the program, standard and poors downgraded the u.s. credit rating. thank you for being on the

"washington journal." standard imports downgrades the u.s. credit rating from aaa to aa-plus per your thoughts about that move for the first call comes on the republican line. from new jersey, jeff, you are on the "washington journal." what did you think about the downgrade when you heard about it? caller: i think is appropriate and long overdue. it should happen months ago. the person you just had on had good points about how they and evaluate a company versus a government. when companies do something to bring revenue in, the government, they have taxpayers. they have a tax base. that tax base is diminishing paired with a 51% of the people that do not pay any taxes. so we need to redistribute the burden of running the government on everyone equally. we need to bring them back into

the fold as productive taxpayers and i keep raising the burden on the upper class. i don't care of it is a than $5 for $10. everyone to get into the game and pay something. host: you think everyone should be paying more taxes not just what is suggested by some in political circles that the upper income, the upper 1% or upper 2% should have their taxes increases. you say everyone. caller: not an increase. let's have the other 51 percent and have them pay something. host: john online for democrats. caller: the previous caller illustrates what is wrong with this country. we have all section of people who are totally blind to the fact that the super rich have increased their share of the

economy to the point where the rest of the 51% who do not pay taxes did not have jobs and they have no income. the republican party is clearly to blame for this whole mess in washington grid they are the ones that does their heels and and they're the ones who have put this into the political game of jeopardy here. and they scream about the deficit. i cannot believe the hypocrisy of the republican party. they move further and further to the right and change the national conversation from jobs to which they want to do is hurt the poor and feed the rich. host: michael r. line for independencts. caller: congress is out on vacation. standard and poor's and moody's,

they put the aaa on all those john mortgages that we bought and sold to everybody, and now everyone is going downhill. i agree with both and guys that just called. the problem is, both parties are responsible, republicans and democrats. when are we going to wake up and do something about it? host: when you say we need to do something about it, what do we need to do? caller: actually shut this government down and do audits on everybody, especially the department of defense. host: mike in plymouth, ohio, we will leave it there. in the "new york daily news" this morning --

back to the fund. boston, massachusetts. caller: the road to the decision last i was a very long one. it started in the mid 1960's with the great society. from that point on, 70 different times the debt ceiling was raised. all we did is create a mindset in america at that this government owes me, the government will take care of me. i say to all you democrats that are blaming the republicans and all you republicans blaming obama, do not do that. it started with a great society. we have done this to ourselves. welcome to the beginning of the end of a great society. host: arlington, va., on our line for independents caller: i am afraid it is both

parties fall. they had a surplus, at 10-year tax still, the republicans were excited about it. it was reaffirmed in 2003 when we came to 2010. both of them jumped at it and they could've latigo and the tax hikes will come off. and this was followed by the debt commission. instead of the president's submitting that commission to congress, he just let it go. then they came out and said we want a long-term solution but they had just trashed the tax increases there were supposed to come into effect in 2011. so i can see why this group, there's not a lot of credibility in this stuff going on in washington. i think a good step toward creating credibility would be for the president to submit the

simpson-bowles commission and say, here it is, congress, here is what they were dead, take -- why don't you approve the steps? i think this would go a long way to re-establishing credibility, rather than make statements and longterm agreements which everyone suspects would be followed or two would not be followed through. host: sense and-bolts, the plan being put forward by the gang of six, it had as its framework, the sense and-ball commission, and it did not get too far. caller: it set of follow the format of submitting a commission report to congress rather than saying, rather than letting the gang of six work it out. it should have been submitted. you know now that a lot of people think the current set up for this new group to get

together, working out agreements and if it does not work then they will have these cuts, there is a lot suspicion, i suspect, and certain financial circles that that is all hot air, that it is never going happen. host: we're going to move on to sterling, va., carry on online for republicans. caller: some policies that i believe is downgrading, because they have confidence in policies, some of which are enshrined in our constitution, such as the hyde amendment, where we cannot pay for abortions. and yet to have a child, that is going to cost $50,000 a year, because we have to supply their medicaid, their education, their fetal alcohol syndrome children,

we have to deal with them. and if they are crack babies, some of which are white, too, i might add. host: what does this have to do with standard and poor's downgrading the credit rating to aa-plus? caller: looking at our policies, that is their logic. we need to have some logical policies in this country. my constitutional rights are being violated by being forced to have to pay my taxes to support the incompetence of parenting or whatever you want to call that problem. host: we're going to live there. the "baltimore sun" has their lead story, u.s. credit rating cut first time ever.

back to the phones. oklahoma on a line for democrats. you are on the "washington journal." caller: yes, sir. you are asking questions about

where people are putting the blame. the blame goes directly on the republican party and their stated mission of the only thing that they're worried about is on seating president barack obama. this credit crisis that we just recently went through, that is clearly being dictated to them from people like grover norquist, whoever is and what every it does. they're more worried about their pledge to him than they are this. as long as you have a conflict for thet, it's possible -- it is impossible for the republican party to manage their rahm business. when they are not even able to

manage their own business, how are they going to manage the business of united states government, especially when they are in the majority in congress right now, not in the house senate but in the house? host: we will move on to joe in long beach on all line for independents. caller: that caller from massachusetts to call for to talk about the great society, he nailed it. there is one other thing that distort his third sending our jobs overseas. maybe c-span can help in this, but we still get the name of every politician that decided it was a good job to send american jobs overseas. if we take these people down to guantanamo and we waterboard them until they get our jobs back. host: we're going to leave it there. on july 27, the house financial services subcommittee held a hearing. one of the witnesses was the

president of standard and poor's. he was testifying on the company's criteria and for ratings sovereigns and what it would take for the u.s. to retain its aaa rating. here is the exchange where he explained what a aa rating means. >> it means that it is a low probability, of very low probability for the fall. that is all that means pretty veejays the rating, it means that the risk levels have gone up. does not mean that it will default. if we believe that, we would change it to of the fall. talking about s&p downgrading the u.s. credit rating from aaa to aa plus. our next call comes from san antonio tx on our line for republicans. john, you are on the washington, -- you're on the w j p k b a lot of johns on this morning.

-- you are on the "washington journal." we have a lot of john's on the program this morning. caller: when you run a business, hit you cannot pay the people more than what you bring in. you don't have to borrow money said that they can get paid. no one is talking about reducing the pay and salaries of government employees to make it, that is why they want the debt ceiling to be increases that the federal employees can be paid. in the private sector, we pay their wages. why should they get more demanding -- more money? it's like a dog with fleas produce you do not get rid of the fleece of that dog, that will fit on to something. there are only talking about that portion of the credit rating. as part of that also.

i know that someone running the company said that we need to tax the rich more. i disagree with him and anybody else that wants tax. i think we need to cut the size and cost of government, not next year, immediately. host: we are moving on to alex on a line for independents. caller: thank you for taking my call. here's how i see it. we are living in the tail wags the dog. what do i care what wall street says, aaa, aa-plus, doesn't matter. i think we have to go to the core issue here. with me, the core issue is wall street has plenty of money to give to all of these elected officials on the national level to get their particular issues,

laws that are slanted toward them. i think we need to take -- bring it back to public financing of political elections. even though i am going to vote for obama because i feel he is the only breakwater i've got, even though i am not crazy against him, i guess the right ring republican in the steep party -- the right between republicans and the tea party ers, and we used to check off of box and our tax form, toward the election. do we still do that anymore? i am not sure. host: we had a tweaked from monte.

pittsburgh, pa., on our line for republicans. caller: i like to talk about social security. host: i would like for you to talk about the stand and imports downgrade of the dead. caller: this will have something to do with that long hundred allied to see the fica change. go back to foab, a defined benefit plan, as social security was originally meant to be. as a person 90 years old, i often wonder what it's going to happen if i would die and my beneficiary would throw my body into the ocean, along with my payments continue to go on? this is a particular issue with me. i sometimes things we ought to have a civilian accounting firm command and take a look at social security and find out how many checks are going overseas

to dead people, and the same thing in the united states. host: houses when a string of our situation with standard and poors and get our credit rating back up to aaa? caller: social security is one of the things causing a lot of problems. i think we need to stop fooling around with it. in my case, when i retired at age 62, i had a specified sum of money, supplemented. host: i guess we lost him. tommy in national -- nashville, tennessee. caller: it seems like the only, but a person we have up there is mr. timothy geithner, and what he'd done, is he inform me and allow me to look at the 14th amendment and our republican friends up there in washington have held the nation hostage and

they think they are going to do it again and again and again. they have done to the president, if they look at the 14th amendment, they are obligated to raise the debt and pay off what we owed to the pensioners, the veterans, and just look at the 14th amendment. it was written for southern senators and congressmen to tell them they got to pay the debt. and they do not have to pay the confederate dead. host: tom become a we have a tweaked -- tommy, we have a tweet. what you think about what's juan has a? caller: that is exactly right. and this is the constitution we're talking about it. it says we are obligated. if this congress people want to default, they have proven

themselves incompetents and on fit to serve and in violation of the constitution, sir. host: in the of " new york times" article, the right that the obama administration reacted with indignation, noting that the company had made a significant mathematical mistake in a document --

hudson, florida, on our line for independents. caller: people have been blaming the republicans and everything grid that is ridiculous. this is just another notch in obama's belt. you wanted to fundamentally change america and he has. the first president that has ever taken over private industry, the first president that has demanded mandates from buying things come obamacare, and he is sued the state in the united states. first of all, obama said he wants to fundamentally change the country and he is. someone stated something about our treasury. he does not know anything about that. the reason this was downgraded was because we did not cut our spending and appeared the people are uneducated. that is just totally wrong.

obama is just getting what he wants. host: we're going to move on to tennessee and francis on our line for republicans. caller: the national debt is not been paid dawson's and jackson in the 1830's. what is been ignored that during president bush's administration, the budget deficit was never more than $500 billion a year. under obama we have had no budget. congress and he had not sent a budget. we've had three consecutive budget deficits of over $1 trillion. and if we do not start cutting, there is no end in sight. that number will keep climbing. host: in the "new york post," this morning.

this is more what the president had to say yesterday. >> the unemployment rate went down, not out. but while this marks the 17th month in a row of job growth in the private sector, nearly 2.5 million new jobs in all, we have to create more jobs than that each month to make go for the more than 8 million jobs that the recession claimed. we need to create a self sustaining cycle where people are spending and companies are hiring and our economy is growing. that will no doubt take some time.

host: back to the phones and our discussion of the downgrading from aaa to aa-plus. our next call comes from cars so, tennessee. -- clarksville, tennessee. go ahead. caller: my comment was that what brought us here is the government's solution, appropriate money and help the problem disappears before the government does. to think what would be accomplished if every government agency, every budget was a conflict -- cut &, and that money was applied toward projects and employing people to go into work and doing the necessary things, that would become wage earners, providers for their families, consumers, and it would to a world of good

for the economy and the unemployment and all the other many hills that plague us. host: clyde, are you talking about something similar to the wpa program that president roosevelt put together? caller: no, no. if you're not spending that money, don't let the government handle anything. i do not know of any time the government has taken over anything and made it profitable and worthwhile. host: we will lose their grip of "financial tens" has is one of its editorials this morning, if obama is challenged.

mr. obama still has affordable will assets. he is an impressive man and voters like him. that is the editorial from the "financial times." on online for democrats, another john. caller: if anyone has followed this for the past three years, as they know the big three rating agencies made a terrible error of one of the toxic cbo's overseas during the housing bubble. they were forced to curtail as long as they could until, let's

say, when the rating agencies finally level of. now you have a new rating agency in china that has downgraded us from a + to a. the big three were forced to downgrade as a, because china is our fiercest competitor. that in turn will probably take us from $192 billion to zero $1.2 trillion. it was something that was coming. thank you. host: houston, texas, on our line for independents. jay, are you with me? we're going to leave him there. the lead editorial on the "new york times."

back to our discussion regarding the downgrading of u.s. credit rating from aaa to aa-plus. our next call comes from louisville, kentucky, bonnie on all line for democrats. caller: if anyone had watched cnn last night, if you would have seen the spokesman for s&p talking about this. it started with the bush tax cuts, tenures ago this began. the tax cuts should have been stopped.

the gridlock in washington not getting anything done, the republicans threatening to default -- that is like going to the bank and arguing in front of the bank that you're not going to pay your bills. that is what this is all about. and anybody -- this is ridiculous. we are never coin to get in infrastructure bank or a jobs program to this congress until they are gone. host: what is your solution to this problem? caller: we need a jobs bill and we needed coming through congress and is not going to happen. they are not moving on anything. every bill is stalled. they will not take it up. and we just keep sitting here, losing jobs -- the republican governors are eliminating every government job in every state. host: we're going to let you take a look at the map that shows the other countries are

around the globe that have a aaa ratings. this comes from moody's and standard and poor's. they include australia, austria, canada, denmark, finland, france, germany, the isle of man, luxembourg, the netherlands, new zealand, norway, singapore, sweden, switzerland, the united kingdom, and up until yesterday, the usa. next up is texas, bill online for independents. host: the question originally was who is responsible. anyone who did not stand up and take action measures to reverse that is responsible. during the recent debate, that all was how to save social security and medicare. the problem is that they are set

up as a ponzi schemes. they require ever-increasing populations, in ever-increasing productivity from the next generation. mathematically we know that is impossible, because otherwise, the population would have to reach in affinity or productivity would have to reach infinity. until we are willing to wind down these and get rid of this great burden, it is inevitable that our debt level will continue to decline. host: we're going to move on to georgia, carol on our line for democrats. caller: give me a minute. let me tell you this. the thing is that, i will not say the democrats, ok. everyone is blaming the president. but when he got out campaigning

in november and made people to come out and vote, nobody came out and voted on the democrats' side. now we want to blame him because the republicans have taken away the right, our bargaining rights, they are trying to take away our right tax abortions, to take away every right that we have. but they want to keep the tax cuts. does it make sense that you will find -- you only have black poor people, you've got white people to come out protesting about medicare. host: what does this have to do with the downgrading of the u.s. credit rating? caller: when we did not go and vote, they voted all these republicans in, they can call them tea party are whatever, but we put them there, and that is what they said they were going to do.

host: we will leave it there. as we continue our conversation, you can call us, you can send us an e-mail, you can send this twitter, or join in the conversation on facebook. that address is on the screen. you will be able to have one more platform where you can find out information about what is on our different c-span networks, c-span radio, and online. you can also be involved in conversations with other viewers and listeners of c-span. texas, center on our line for independents. caller: last night on anderson cooper, there was a higher up spokesperson from standard and poor's, and he said that it was not just because of the debt, but because of the process of the congress, mainly the

republicans, who held it up and did not pass it clean, and there was not any revenue and net. -- in yet. he did not come out and say the republicans were fall, but everything he said pointed to the republicans. and specifically the tea party. i just wanted to say that. host: sandra, in texas. on," christopher smith is our guest pretty talks about the famine in somalia, tensions between sudan and southern sudan. what we're going to show you right now is a part of his interview, and he talks about what he thinks you wind peacekeeping troops and the african union could do to get

food to areas of somalia, hard hit by famine. >> are you saying that the u.n. peacekeeping troops and the african union forces should be marching into the south? >> i think that they should be robustly try to negotiate the tranquillity that has been used over and over again. they were used in the run of when many people were risk of dying there. in this to be something that is pushed strongly right now and as far as i know, we may be there but it is not being pushed away that it ought to be. babies and children will die. those who are living by their feet will become refugees either in the country are in kenya. some of them are dying on the way.

many are so close to death in emergency camps, the younger or the elderly, that they die soon after entering the camps. host: you can see the entire interview with representative christopher smith tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m., and again at 6:00 p.m. on c-span. it is also available on-line c- span.org. our last call for this segment comes from texas on our line for republicans. if i can don't know explain this where obama can expertise understand it. the downgrading hasted to like a person with a credit card use spend more money than you bring in or you can pay off. they say, your credit rating is not that good for you cannot pay it off. so you do not have the money to pay at all. who spends the money? we know who has been president but he cannot be blamed for anything because he is just as

stupid democrat. only a republican president can be blamed because he is a man and a real american. we know that all the democrats are just leeches on america and all of us have to pay for them every day, especially the rich people, if paying for the losers that we hear that someone needs to pay for me every day of my life because democrats are too stupid to do anything right, including half the state pay for the abortions. the problem with the democrat is that their mothers and fathers, just like obama's, if you do not want them, you want to pack your bags and get out. host: we want to thank all of our callers who participated in the previous segment. coming up in 45 minutes, a discussion on the future of the u.s. postal service. back after this break, but that the unemployment numbers out yesterday and what they mean for the economy.

you're watching the "washington journal cave -- the "washington journal." ♪ >> the house of representatives has been off eight weeks already this year including this week. if you get eight weeks of vacation? i did not. >> on our nightly tcu -- tv show, alyona minkovski takes a more irreverent view on washington and the u.s.. >> we're willing to step outside the box and try something different, to figure out how to make tv news exciting and entertaining and informative again, rather than like i said, the cards that it had dwindled down to. >> she will talk about her network in her show on c-span sunday night.

>> good things come into is. there is c-span coverage of the house, and live coverage of the senate on c-span2. you can see them when everyone at the c-span video library. c-span2 as non-fiction books on book tv. >> c-span3, explore history tv. >> caller twitter. >> join us on facebook. >> it is washington your way on c-span. >> created by cable and provided as a public service. >> 8, 9, 10. >> 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, up three, to come 1. >> these are the stakes.

to make a world in which all of god's children can live or to go into the dark. we must either love each other or we must die. >> both for president johnson on november 3. >> this weekend we look at the history of political campaign ads with a rubber mann. the former homicide detective on the day jack ruby killed a man under his protection, lee harvey oswald. a former speech waters for president nixon had reveal how his messages were crafted in created. american history tv on c-span3. c-span.org/history. >> every weekend, american history tv highlights a 105th anniversary of the civil war. this week one of the most important documents in our nation's history, the emancipation proclamation.

abraham lincoln and the proclamation's constitutionality. the civil war every weekend on american history tv on c-span3. >> "washington journal" continues. host: daniel indiviglio is our guest. he is an associate editor with the "atlantic." he is talking about the unemployment numbers which came out yesterday and other aspects of the economy. let's start out with the announcement that standard and poor's has dropped the u.s. credit rating from aaa to aa- plus per your thoughts on that? guest: they warned us. the other rating agencies do not agree. it is a bold move but is it the right move? it is a matter of opinion. what it comes down to is a political risk is cheaper the numbers do not matter much in this case. no one disagrees that the u.s. is on an unsustainable path. something has to give. you have to cut entitlements or

raise taxes per s&p worries that the political realities in washington are not going to allow that in the next decade. host: when you say the numbers do not matter? guest: there was an issue that the treasury said that the numbers are correct. s&p made a calculation mistake, but it did not matter. it was not an issue of $2 trillion here or there. it is the political climate of washington being so poisonous that the u.s. is not safe anymore. host: what is s&p seeing in the political climate here in washington that is not being seen or factored in by moody's and fitch, who still have our credit rating has dropped off -- aaa? guest: s&p worries that we will get to the point where washington will fail. they came close recently but a last-minute they said it would compromise and raise the debt ceiling and cut some spending.

s&p worries that in the future, the partisans of our part that they will not be of limited time and we will have a catastrophe. host: any indication that moody's and fitch may follow suit and drop their ratings as well? guest: not that i considered the market does not agree particularly with the s&p. treasury yields are at record lows. host: we have year to talk about the jobs numbers. they came out yesterday. this headline in the "baltimore sun" represents what we see in the papers today. 117,000 jobs were added in july, greater than forecast, but less than needed to bolster the economy. guest: economists thought that the number would come around 85,000. that is not as good as we saw. but for just population growth,

it needs to be somewhere of 125,000-one under 50,000 jobs per month per give we're not hitting that baseline level. in this case, the number,. it was because people left the work force, probably discouraged, for whatever reason, the work force should hearten size. -- shrunken size. host: the private sector added 154,000 jobs and the unemployment rate was at 9.1%. from what you have seen, what does this indicate that the private sector was able to add 154,000 jobs? guest: the private sector has been doing better than the government sector over the past year separate the government

continues to bleed jobs on the state and local level. you see there the state austerity measures, they are tightening their belts. they do not have enough money. the decline in tax receipts that they have seen since the recession, they have to cuts and jobs are being lost. we do not see that in the private sector because the economy is still growing. as long as you see that happening, and jobs will be added gradually. the demand is not large enough to warrant them to hire a lot of people right now. host: if the private sector is continually a new jobs and jobs are going away in government segments, when they tend to make certain elements of the political arena happy to see that there are more jobs being added in the private sector? could the president get more support from the republicans because we we added more jobs to

the private sector? guest: i do not think anyone would dislike that. the critics would say that it is not enough. people on his side of the i would say, that is great that we have one under 50,000 private sector jobs, but what is wrong with government jobs? why is the government laying off people? they would want to see the federal government help states to prevent those job losses. host: we also want to show crop growth by industry sectors. professional and business services were up 34,000 jobs last month during in the health- care industry, up 31,000 jobs. the retail trade added 26,000 jobs. manufacturing added 24,000 jobs. laser and hospitality, 17,000. those numbers supplied by the

labor department. we will continue our discussion regarding private jobs aboard and the overall economy with daniel indiviglio, associate editor at the "atlantic." if you want to join in the conversation, give us a call. you can also send us messages by e-mail and twitter per our first call comes from bloomington, ill. on our line for republicans. you are on the "washington journal." caller: according to paul krugman, something like only 58% of the u.s. population is actually working and actually has jobs. it seems to me that we need to have revenue in been need more jobs. i do not make a lot of money, but i would not paying taxes

especially if it was imported goods from low-wage countries. that is the only way that we're going to get this unemployment number down. host: when you say you do not make much money, what is your overall income? caller: around $25,000 a year. host: you would be willing to pay more in taxes? caller: yes. we have sent all of our jobs overseas and now only 50% of the u.s. population, working age population, is actually working. i am not in favor of redistributing money from the other 42% of the population that is working. but we need to have jobs and now like to have some of those jobs come back that it gone over to asia and india. host: he would be willing to pay more taxes. guest: what he is speaking to

specifically is the idea that the jobs have gone overseas, manufacturing gobs, -- jobs, and people make this point a lot about global trade. is complicated. those workers were for less money. if you study international trade theory, this sort of relationship between u.s. and china, if it benefits both nations because the u.s. this those goods and services for cheaper than we could produce them, giving our wages. are consumers benefit from those low prices. the problem is those jobs and what eventually happens is training for americans, throughout the generations, to have this order jobs that would not be transferred overseas. that is not a quick thing to solve. over the next couple of

decades, hopefully they will come through. host: in the "wall street journal," china hamstrung and rescue role this time. so it does not seem in 2008, china was able to help us out a little bit, by going with the run stimulus plan, but from what it sounds like here in the "wall street journal, cause what they are not in a position to do that again. guest: it does not seem like many people are.

japan, there is federal served is in trouble this week as well. globally these nations are having troubles of the room. there is not a lot of stimulus coming down the pike for any country. host: ron on our line for independents. caller: it is not a political thing. i think it is a corporate thing. the ability to pay taxes come up with all these people out of work, the large corporations can now look any further than the next quarter. -- can not look any further than the next quarter. if they -- that person is not going to buy american products. if you keep seeing -- sending jobs overseas, these can get made cheaply over there, but it does not make good financial sense to keep doing that.

they are cutting their own throat. they are putting people out of work. is a catch-22. guest: one thing you mentioned at the beginning, another issue that could help solve why so many jobs going overseas could be corporate tax rates. the u.s. is towards the top in business tax rates, making it harder to compete with businesses overseas and one of the reasons why u.s. corporations will move jobs to other nations where they can have factories or whatever. that is sometimes to avoid tax liabilities. host: next up is a louisville, ky. caller: how are you doing? i believe the united states -- some people do not want no jobs here. i called in a couple of months

ago before the debt crisis got really bad, and i said that debt did not matter because there were no jobs. no one said anything about when the president said that it did not matter. now people see what is happening. ain't no jobs, ain't no money, people losing their homes, losing their business. in kentucky, there were jobs everywhere. i was 18 or 19 years old, everywhere but. now in louisville, no jobs. host: what kind of jobs are you talking about? caller: we used to have a lot of factory jobs. you can leave one job on a

friday, and monday, get up and get hired on another job. host: daniel indiviglio, is this going to be a situation where the u.s. is going to be able to manufacture its way out of the crisis? guest: you know, i think manufacturing will help even chile. they were one of the sectors hit hardest during the recession. the problem is a lot of the jobs are going overseas. the issue is finding our niche in manufacturing. those tend to be higher technology manufacturing jobs, so they sometimes require more training than other jobs so

there is not always an easy transition from people who have been laid off from one manufacturing job to one that is more sustainable. host: next up is louisiana, charles is on our line for republicans. go-ahead. caller: i am a first-time caller. the only person to cut social security benefits was obama, rideid, and pelosi. first time in history. they are running an advertisement down here on television if you are on food stands, you can get a cell phone. if there are 45 million people on food stamps, who is paying for all of this? this was nancy pelosi's pet project.

who is paying for this madness? think of all of the money we are saving from nancy pelosi -- all of the hundreds of millions of dollars floated around on 8. guest: a couple of things there. on the food stamp issue, i am not familiar with. the entitlement spending is something that is a problem. the u.s. is spending so much on entitlements and that will increase more as the population ages and social security dries. that is something that needs to be addressed by congress. that is one of the big issues. host: in the new york post this morning, they have "rough ride" as one of their headlines.

are these three men just holding onto this roller-coaster that they cannot necessarily control or is there something they can do to try to smooth out this ride? guest: i think what they can do at this point is limited. we saw a huge stimulus package in 2009 and several programs. unemployment is still at 9%. i think it is limited. at this point, all they can do is try to make the environment as conducive as possible by either a lower the taxes that businesses have or limit regulations. most of these measures are not creating enough jobs so that they have a significant impact bank that is a problem.

with the federal reserve, you saw them do this quantitative easing last november. the u.s. grew less than 1%. it did not get us to a grade growth rate. what we are seeing right now is it might be a waiting game. consumers have to start feeling better about things. host: this time last weekend we were being told that they could not come to a deal on raising the debt ceiling, the markets were going to be fluctuating up and down, and our credit rating would be dropped. they came to an agreement on the debt ceiling, the markets went up and down violently, and we lost our credit rating. guest: the market's reaction i think did not have a lot to do with the debt ceiling debate. what upset them was a lot of bad economic reports. if you look at the month of

june, across the board sub par economic reports. this month, we thought of that or we still think that personal income was stagnant. we saw consumer expenditures actually declined if you do not adjust for inflation. a lot of bad things and narrow upset the market. earlier this month, the manufacturing sector had its worst month in quite some time. that is what really upset the markets. yeah, the downgrade issue now has reared its head. we are going to see how the market reacts. earlier this week, i heard rumors that people were expecting something bad. some people on wall street were already worried this was happening and that was part of

the reason i heard that the dow jones dropped over 500 points on thursday. host: daniel indiviglio is an associate editor of "the atlantic." he is also a blogger. he is here with us for about another 25 minutes. ashtabula, ohio, on our line for democrats. caller: yes, hi. one thing -- excuse me--that the one to address was concerning the historical numbers that were spoke of earlier on. the historical numbers concerning the new norma -- i felt it would be so impossible for them to have that because not everyone fills out these stimulus sheets that come door-

to-door. in order for us, i feel, to make this a common work for us just as the republicans and democrats came together when it came down to letting the foreigners work, no one had anything to say because everybody benefited -- let's do that and come together on this because then maybe life will be better for all of us. the stimulus package that the president offered -- you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make them drink. everybody did not want to work apparently, so you cannot blame the president. guest: it is interesting, the stimulus package. one of the problems is it did not have enough direct jobs measures and shovel-ready jobs

measures. other sources of of spending that were less affected. host: next up is maryland on a line for republicans. bonnie, you are on the "washington journal." caller: -- laid off the citizens. he passed the dream act so illlegals would have state tuition. what about retraining some of the american citizens rather than bringing them over, paying for their green cards and transportation, the homes and all -- this is where we are going wrong. it just does not seem fair that our citizens are going without jobs.

host: we will leave it there. guest: yeah, i am not familiar with the issues that she was speaking about, but there are americans out of work that could have easy training and stepped into the job openings. i think when it comes to immigration, there are some high-tech jobs that require a lot of training and certain entrepreneurial situations where it makes a lot of sense to get citizens to come and work here. are there americans out of work that we can train pretty easily? host: jeffersontown ship, new jersey, go ahead. caller: good morning. i do not know why anybody puts a lot of thought into what these rating agencies say because they were the same ones that rated mortgage securities aaa when

they were worthless. that job figure that came out yesterday -- what were those jobs? part-time jobs? minimum wage jobs? people cannot live on that. thank you, c-span3. i want to thank c-span because i watched the hearings that were held on social security. it is find. the only think they have to do is raise of the raid by 1% or take the cap off. when you see any representative, including the president, they got a $2,135 raised by lowering that 2% of the social security. mind you, a u.s. congressmen can retire at the age of 50 if he has been there for 20 years. guest: that is what a lot of

people are saying. what do these rating agencies know? it is a pretty valid point. then a huge mistakes mortgage securities and they have lost a lot of credibility. i think at this point we have become pretty wary about rating agencies. in fact, what you might see it is if moody's holds a line, investors still think it is the safest in the world, you may see a negative aspect towards s and p. on social security, it is obviously a problem in the future the way it is growing. host: c-span covered the joint economic hearing yesterday where the vice chairman argued

that friday's jobs numbers are nothing to celebrate given the long-term unemployment and under employment. this is more of what he had to say. >> clearly, today's increase in the number of jobs provided relief to the market because it exceeded such a very low expectations. it is certainly nothing to celebrate today. in the -- and the unemployment rate fell because the 193,000 decline in the labor force. the number of employed people in the household fell by 38,000. of a broader measure remains over 16%. what troubles me is we have the fewest number of people participating in the workforce in a quarter of this century. guest: all the pit these issues are valid.

-- all of these issues are valid. it might indicate that we are not headed for a double dip because firms are still hiring at a modest pace, but is not good enough. there are a lot of people who are out of work and are not being included as part of the unemployed population. it is defined as a very technical way. there is like 14 million americans who fit that definition but another 4 million or 5 million americans who are also out of work, want a job, but are not considered unemployed. that is a huge problem. it is something that needs to change. host: in the washington times, this headline on the front page --

host: are we headed towards a double-dip recession? guest: right now, we are at a crucial turning point. i think the economy could teeter either way.

but i think that a lot of the effects for what went wrong in may and june and in july, we saw that big earthquake in japan that upset the global markets, unrest in the middle east and that cut into oil prices, and then we saw inflation rise with energy. of those have subsided, and that is one of the reasons why we are seeing better results. i want to talk one moment about that month of june spending #. in a sense, that is not true. the way you look at the numbers -- spending declines actually began back in the month of may. in april, we saw spending declines. in june, spending was approximately flat when adjusted for inflation. consumers are buying which is

better than we saw in prior months. that is why i think you saw july higher bank clearly, firms must have sought more demand in june to higher in july. the time to worry would have been april or may. host: earlier this month, in "time" magazine, they put out this chart. they talk about the rate of spending growth from 2003 until 2007. 14%. they show since 2007, consumers are spending more on all items like higher education, bicycles, cell phone services. spending on that is up 31%. lotteries are up 16%.

we are spending less on pet services, closing repair and alteration, postal and delivery services, new autos. do you see -- what do you see in this red area that there c ould be an increase in spending to help us avoid another recession? guest: first, it sort of makes sense that spending was higher than. that was during the housing bubble when americans were using their house as atm's. credit was going crazy. spending was rising incredibly fast. we are not going to see that again. that is something we should not expect for decades.

what we should be seeing is spending rise. what sorts of things should be purchased more? if you look really deep into the spending numbers, you are seeing spending rise on the upper and of people who make more money. they are spending a lot more these days than in 2007 or 2008, but middle and lower class earners are not spending as much. that is probably with some of the products you were mentioning. may be wealthy people are buying more expensive watches, so these are the sorts of things that makes sense. we need to see the middle class rebound more. host: back to the phones. our conversation with daniel indiviglio, associate editor of "the atlantic," talking to us

about friday's jobs report and the overall economy. the next call comes from panama city, fla.. caller: hi. what i am looking at is its seems to me that the larger businesses are the ones that are moving to china because they want more people. they are not -- they are the ones that we would be taxing extra revenue, right? we should be spending more money on our businesses because they would be the ones doing the hiring if they had to work. we need to get more stimulus to them and forget about the big businesses because they are going to leave anyway. everything they bring over is the junk. i keep trying to look for things that are made in our country, but it is very difficult to find anything. guest: i think the point about

small businesses is an important one. as far as small businesses and making them more competitive, the tax rate there matters a lot. big businesses tend to find ways to minimize their tax burdens more so than small businesses. they find all of these loopholes. small businesses do not so they probably have to pay whatever taxes they are supposed to pay. that gives them a competitive disadvantage. that is something that should be looked at. to that end, also, one way to compete globally is for us to export more things. you do not need to be a big business to export. of that tax disparity where, let's say, we make something and sweden makes something but sweden has a lower tax rate.

that is the problem with this global imbalance of taxes. host: we have a tweet from games in southeast louisiana woh writes -- right?we'll see, it is a big question of who will get blamed for this fiasco. no one wants to be the sitting president when the u.s. gets a downgrade, so we will have to see how it shakes out for the president at this point. republicans had their sticking point and would not allow any tax increases. the deal that we got was smaller. so, the entitlement issue is a big one. democrats are holding tight on

that one. host: next up is marked on a line for republicans from michigan. caller: thank you very much. the problem that we have as far as the deficit and our dysfunctional government, it lies within the federal supreme court. the taxation act was supposed to offer the a public non- burdensome tax. the concept is a seven-year tax cycle so everyone will have a chance to not pay federal taxes for one year. there is to one year where we will not have to cover the deficit spend. of the postal system -- what happens when we offer free energy for the world?

dispensing energy into atv to. the post office would a ride around in their electric cars, spend their $3 or $4 to recharge their batteries, alleviate some of the problems that the post office has. you can go to this system. once it is paid for, you can shop there for free. guest: right. you know, in terms of electric cars, the government is investing in the electric cars. there is a huge tax break for buying an electric car, but the technology is just so expensive still. the chevy volt is a really cool concept. it has this plug-in battery. the problem though is those batteries are so expensive now. the car sells for over $40,000,

so it is not something that the average american can buy right now. in time, hopefully we will see that comedown. host: next up, texas, mike is on a line for independents. caller: good morning. all of the problems in this country would be easy to solve if we just made a criminal laws for these a thieves to steal everything out of this country. we look at these big corporations as sacred cows. they were built on the backs of our grandfathers are right here in the united states. the first and they do is go overseas. they do not pay any kind of tariff to bring their products back into this country. what we need to do is instill tariffs to solve the problem

when they have to compete with us. what they want us to do is get down to where we can exist on 40 cents an hour as they do in china. it is never going to happen. the people will revolt before we get to that situation. guest: that way to disparity is the key to the problem. let's say you have china making t-shirts and the u.s. making t- shirts. in order for the economies to balance out to produce them profitably, wages would have to decrease in the u.s. and would have to increase in china. we will probably never see that happen because china is just so much lower than we are. that is why what we need to be aimed at our products so that way those jobs will stay here.

host: we want to let our viewers and listeners know that we have a special series airing all next week on the "washington journal." we will be looking at jobs in america. we begin monday looking at the labor department, work-force training programs by ending tuesday, a technical education and the work force. wednesday, a private public partnerships. thursday, and assessment of federal jobs programs. friday, a look at women in the work force. that is all next week monday through friday at 9:15 eastern time. our last call for daniel

indiviglio. caller: of that figure is closer to 18% -- that figure is closer to 18% when you count those who have totally given up and those who are under employed. so i have a two-point question for you, sir. is the 9.1% figure that i am looking at right now on the screen that c-span is using -- is that flashed out there to fool the american people into thinking that the unemployment problem is much lower? question number two, don't we have the capability with the excellent polling systems that we have to precisely determine how many are there out there that have given up and how many outs there precisely are under- employed to put a little food on

the table? guest: on the first point, i would say 9.1% is a measure. there are lots of ways you can measure certain things. the bureau of labor statistics that creates these numbers have a very specific definition of the unemployed. let's say you got laid off and you have not looked for work for a month or two. you are not considered unemployed because you are not actively looking. people can disagree about that. in the technical definition, they are not. the number you were looking at was the 16.1% in july, the broadest measure of unemployment including people who work part time. that number is much higher. is the 9.1% in an attempt to

mislead people? that is one point of view that people might have. it might be something more simple like that is the definition that the government thinks makes sense. i like to look at the number that is slightly different. include part-time people. if you look at a different measure, including people who still want a job but are out of work, that number is like 20 million americans. that percentage is something like 12%. host: we have been talking about the jobs report and the overall economy with daniel indiviglio, associate editor of "the atlantic." if you want to read some of his articles, you can go to their website. thank you for being on the program. in 45 minutes, a discussion on drug courts.

after this break, a discussion of the united states postal service. you are watching the "washington journal." we will be right back. >> this weekend on c-span2, the life and times of an attorney for the damned. live, sunday at noon eastern, three hours of your calls and questions. ann coulter, her latest. look for the complete schedule at booktv.org. alerts. up for >> this month, more of the lbj tapes airing for the first time. today, hear conversations

between the president, secretary of state, and senate armed services committee chairman. >> i am trying as hard as i know how to get peace in vietnam as quickly as i can. for that reason, i am not running. >> listen to c-span radio and online at cspanradio.org. >> i am not for changing the system so we can feel good by having voter turnout which may approximate what they have in australia which is 97%. it does not mean very much in terms of the help of a democracy. some of the most vicious dictatorships in the world get close to 99% when they hold elections. >> voting is irresponsible act.

responsible act. >> monday and tuesday on c-span, ralph nader hosts a series of debates looking at controversial topics. monday, the pros and cons of mandatory voting. tuesday, professors from georgetown and the university of massachusetts on taxing stock trades, derivatives, and currencies. monday and tuesday at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> of the motion to concur the house amendment is agreed to. >> with the debt ceiling bill now signed into law, watch the debate and see what your elected officials said and how they voted. a comprehensive resource on

congress. there is videos of every session. when the members return, follow more of the appropriations process. at c-span.org/congress. >> "washington journal" continues. host: mark acton is vice chairman of the u.s. postal regulatory commission and is here to talk to us about the future of the u.s. postal service. before we get deep into the conversation, tell us what is the postal regulatory commission. guest: we are charged with oversight responsibilities for the united states postal service. we provide disclosure to operations and finances. we are not the united states postal service. they have their own operation. host: so you are not actually running the postal service.

sec.: ist is akin to the host: the postal service recently sent the regulatory commission and advisory asking for recommendations on closures and other recommendations. what kind of advice or recommendations were they looking for? guest: we have not issued any thing get. i should preface this discussion by letting you know there are some concerns and the scheduling and what not, but there is a provision that calls for the postal service to be able to come to the regulator and ask about our views on proposals such as these closures. host: they write the postal service has issued a plan for optimization to examine whether

to continue providing retail and other services and products at its approximately 3650 of the more than 32,000 post offices in its retail network. host: so it sounds like they are planning on closing down postal services and outlets, and they are trying to get guidance from you? guest: yes. even though there are 3700 facilities, not all of them will be closed. this is an assessment process that the postal service is proposing.

they are looking for insights from the commission about whether or not the criteria is suitable and whether or not the plan is a good or bad idea. they are looking at questions like revenue thresholds' and access points. they want to be sure that in those areas with a close a post office, there is a good, suitable alternative access for people to be able to go to to get the products that they want. host: we want to let our viewers know that the budget for the third quarter of the u.s. postal service -- these are the numbers from october 1, 2010, until june 30, 200011. the total revenue was $49.9 billion bank total expens. we get these numbers from the

u.s. postal regulatory commission. what kind of input would the commission have on operations of the postal service that would get these numbers more in line? guest: the commission has three important roles. one is compliant. we ensure the postal service is operating in a fashion that conforms to the code. we offer some disclosure opportunities so that the postal service can share information in a timely fashion. and transparency is important. we also offer advisory views on important matters that the postal service is proposing to make changes in with respect to access or pricing and frequency of delivery and those types of questions. we help facilitate the postal service and their efforts to help improve the bottom line.

host: we are talking to mark acton, vice chairman of the u.s. postal regulatory commission. they announced last month that the u.s. postal service is considering closing more than 3000 retail offices. mr. acton is here to talk to us about that and how the postal service decides which offices to close and when the closures are expected. if you would like to get involved in the conversation, the numbers are -- you can also send us an e-mail. or if you are on twitter, you can follow us. how many people are there on the commission and how often do you all change the lineup?

guest: there are five presidentially appointed commissioners. we have six-year terms and they are on a staggered arrangement. we presently have four. there are two republicans and two democrats at this point. no more than three of us are from the same party. host: the letter was submitted on july 27 from the u.s. postal service asking for an advisory opinion on changes. along with the regulatory commission look at those changes -- how long will the regulatory commission look at those changes and issue back something? guest: in terms of the review process, in about three months. we are hopeful to have a report to congress and the president and the postal service some time near thanksgiving. host: right before christmas.

guest: there is a real need for speed because this is an important question for america. the postal service does not have the same place in society as the way it used to. it is still a very important part of america's fabric particularly in rural america. " the first call comes from pennsylvania. jerome is on a line for democrats. caller: i have a comment for mr. mark acton. i wrote to my congressman. my suggestion to my congressman was that they set up an account number for the national debt to andreated a s a charity

they would accept only a postal money order as payment in that account #. i wonder what you would think of that suggestion. although i don't know you can do anything about it, it would definitely help the postal service and the national debt with that sort of a program. guest: it is that novel thought that the commission is trying to encourage. to anything that will help improve the bottom line of the postal service is something that the commission wholeheartedly supports. host: next up is ohio, rick is on a line for republicans. caller: yes, sir, i am a usps employee. i enjoy my job. it is a wonderful place to work.

don't ment is i understand why some of these smaller post offices are not forced to close to save revenue for the post office. i have been told these are political issues. bought for the survival of the postal system, -- but for the survival of the postal system, somebody has to bite the bullet. do you believe that we will go to a five-day delivery schedule? thank you very much. guest: there are a couple of answers to your question. the commissioner recently issued and advisory to eliminate saturday delivery. we had 200 pages of thought to say about it. they save nearly 3 billion annually.

there were some service impact incentives about slowing down the delivery of your mail. of the more troubling aspect of this proposal to reduce the frequency of delivery is that in areas where they must depend on the mail, they will be hurt by having mail service eliminated on saturday or any other day of the week. there are considerations in terms of saturday a dropping and not having the need of a six-day basis. i do not think we are at that point where this proposal is a free of problems that we can address before we are able to reduce the delivery of the mail. host: pennsylvania, you are on the "washington journal." caller: i am a recently retired postal worker, 23.5 years,

retired from disability. my question to mr. mark acton is that part of the problem with the postal service is that they have managers and supervisors who cost the postal service millions and millions of dollars in payouts and unnecessary money because managers and supervisors do not want to follow the rules, laws, and regulations. regular union's help, postal workers receive large payouts. host: give me an example of this activity that you are talking about. caller: i will give you an example. my daughter is a postal worker. she is under a supervisor that -- she got injured on the job.

she comes into work asking for a limited duty position. this supervisor says you either come to work and work the job that you are assigned or go home. they have temporary workers working in positions that my daughter could have worked, but they refuse to put a casual temporary worker into another position so she can work. so now my daughter is out of work and now she has a claim against the postal service. and she will win. guest: first of all, i would like to thank the caller for her years of service. the postal service has a lot of challenges.

the question that she raises is not strictly a regulatory concern. might depth of knowledge to that is not as good as it can be. there have been recent negotiations that have been brokered in terms of work force are arrangements that allow managers to send more of the staff where the work is. there are rules that prevent this strict segmentation of work force that you were talking about. host: kirk is on our line for republicans. caller: i am wondering how the ebay boom that started many years ago has affected sales or the post office. i myself can say i spend a thousand times on postage than i did before the day was in use. i am just one person.

i would have thought that the post office is doing good. that kind of surprised me because i am sure that i am not alone of these people who use it a lot more because of this big internet shipping back and forth. i want to mention of the postal workers in my area, the place that i used in pennsylvania, are absolutely remarkable. of the people are very helpful, extremely knowledgeable, and particularly mike and jenn y up there are great to deal with. guest: i echo your views about the postal service personnel. it is interesting that you mentioned ebay. delivery services and packaged products are one of the few bright spots in terms of the

postal service. so it is not the package services that her causing problems in terms of revenue shortfall. it is more of the general declined due to the electronic diversions. also, the national economy is not good which means mail volumes have declined. ebay is a great interactive use of the postal service. host: how much competition is being presented by folks like fedex and ups? what kind of effect does that have on the decision that the commission makes on recommendations? guest: it has a true effect because basically the postal service is separated into its monopoly products and competitive products. they are not allowed to subsidize.

having said that, the postal service is very competitive with the private sector providers primarily in terms of price. we are the only one of those three their reach out to every household of america six days out of 7. host: walker the monopolized aspects of the postal service versus the competitive aspect? guest: if you send a greeting card, that is a monopoly pursued. then there is standard delivery which your catalogs and what not. host: mark acton is vice chairman of the u.s. postal regulatory commission, nominated by president george w. bush on nov. 2005 and was confirmed by the senate in 2006.

indianapolis, indiana, john is on airline for independent -- our line for independents. caller: they need to relax their work rules. they are terrible. they need to close some of these outlying post office is. they sit in their six hours a day doing nothing. they need to look at their transportation system. they've run trucks empty day in and day out. i have been involved with the postal service for 20 years. he would not believe the money that they spend on those -- you would not believe the money that they spend on those three items that and mentioned. guest: the caller obviously has a familiarity with the challenges that the postal service is facing. they are important issues for

the commission to deal with. host: back to the phones, maryland on a line for republicans. ray, you are on the "washington journal." caller: one of the reasons that the postal service is experiencing financial problems is because they keep raising prices of stamps and postal services. now, another thing -- the man that was on a few minutes ago, he mentioned "shovel-ready." as long as people keep dying and they are using shovels to bury the people, the president will do well. guest: i can speak to the question about stamps bank the postal service operates under a price program. it limits the ability to raise

the price of stamps beyond inflation. they cannot pierce that cap. while there are a lot of concerns about the price of stamps, it is true that the affordability of the united states postal service is better than many overseas. host: does the u.s. postal service have to go through the regulatory commission in order to raise the price of stamps? guest: under the reform act of 2006, the congress wanted to empower the postal service with greater flexibility to allow them to set rates. so they have that new capability. date set the prices and the rates, and then they send it for a review where we ensure that there are not these cross subsidies that we were talking about earlier.

but our review, a look back review is a more of a hands-off approach. host: next up is a kansas city, missouri. caller: hi. if the postal service wants to save money, i would suggest that they start cutting management. they have one manager for every five to seven employees. they also need to stop hiring psychotics as managers. thank you. guest: i think there have been some important movement in terms of the postal service executive leadership team deciding that some of the pursuits that they are going to have to in force include looking at their management level staff and understanding whether or not there needs to be cutting going on. i think there have been significant changes.

the they may be making further adjustments. i know that the board of governors at the postal service are very active. host: you addressed a caller that talked about cutting back services from six days a week to five days a week. last week, -- actually, last month, there was an article that talked about the postmaster general saying that within 15 years, we might be down to delivery three times a week. his forecast is based on a projected $8.3 billion loss this year. on september 30, he told "usa today" editorial board of that, "i will not be able to pay my

bills." guest: one question has to do with the projection that is many years away. i read the reports that the postmaster general had to say about the change in delivery down to three days a week. he is speaking to the trend that we are all familiar with. the postal service will always occupy an important part of what needs to be done so that every part of america has access to affordable postal service. that is important. the other question is more in terms of the immediate fiscal constraints. host: covering retiree benefit. guest: there are proposals in congress that are supported by the findings that will provide some answers, some short-term adjustments, that will allow the

congress and the president to make the longer-term adjustments in terms of the business model that is called for. host: back to the phones. ray is calling from norfolk, va.. ray? let's move onto indian. -- indiana. caller: i have a question regarding political payback. host: barbara, turn down your television. caller: i have a question concerning political payback. this is an example. my home town in michigan had a postmaster who died.

the woman next in line who had been there some 30 years was passed over for my brother in law who had never work. this was soon after the war. he had never work in a post office ever. he received the job. i always thought it did not seem fair. apparently, they thought it was because he belonged to the democrat party rather than the republicans. host: we will leave it there. guest: i am not familiar with all of the specifics of the situation there, barbara, but i know the postal service has in place a very robust performance evaluation system that they used to assess their employees to provide insight on who should occupy posts. i would expect that that would

be an important consideration in what you are talking about. host: how much influence does the u.s. postal regulatory commission have on hiring and manpower, meaning certain manpower numbers for the postal service? guest:we have a number of import provisions. managing the postal service in particular is up to the management team and it is up to the board. host: massachusetts on our line for democrats. donald, you are on "washington journal." caller: i am retired letter carrier. i had 33 years as a letter

carrier. in my observation, even after 21 years, the same stuff is going on. only psychotics work in management. that is a requirement. host: when you say "psychotic," what do you mean? is your boss overtaxing you? caller: i retired. the postal service has never changed. i started in 1957, and what goes on today went on in 1957. host: give me an example of what you consider to be psychotic behavior. caller: usually guys going to management are people who do not want to work or get their hands dirty, or sweat. they are perfectly content to just drop off of the top of the

system. host: we will leave it there. guest: the description donald talked about is not uncommon in terms of the stresses that occur between the general work force and the management workforce. you have to keep in mind that this is a massive group of individuals, nearly 600,000, the work for the postal service, the second-largest employer, second only to walmart. there are a lot of moving parts in a management operation. the source of stress can seem inevitable. host: if an employee in the postal service has a problem and does not feel like it will be redressed within the system, can he take his concerns to the regulatory commission? guest: there is not an avenue for that type of involvement for a regulator to be active in terms of management concerns. host: houston, texas, on our

line for independents. caller: could morning. my question is had you ever gone to a post office and just good in line for 15 minutes, 30 minutes, every time you go? it is the most frustrating, irritating thing possible. i just hate to go. your service is just terrible. guest: this is a question of concern to the commission and it is an interest that we might term at the postal regulatory commission. you were talking about the way time in line. the postal service has a program called mystery shopper which is a management tool they employed try to keep track of how long individuals are having to wait to get retail service. some outlets are better than others, and in some cases it is

proper management and sometimes it is available work force. the commission tries to gather this information and make it available were needed to the service can do a better job of targeting. host: more numbers provided to us by the u.s. postal regulatory commission, budget numbers for fiscal years 2011. total revenue was $67.70 billion. total expenses were $74.10 billion for a net loss of $6.40 billion. the total expense includes $5.50 billion for payment into the retiree health benefits fund. huntington, west virginia, on our line for democrats. you are on "washington journal." caller: hello. how do you do? sir, 33 and working on a 34 years carrying mail in rural

west virginia. the people depend on me every day and they are watching them awaiting them and looking to see that i am on time looking for their mail, including on the sixth day. what i want to ask you about is that is it not true that the postal service was required to fund the head of time to the civil service retirement system billions of dollars to cover the retirement of people in the future that are no longer even alive and we have tried to retrieve that money to ease our budgetary concerns and congress has refused to do so. they want to hold on to that money and use it just like they have done social security, for their own benefit. host: before mark acton answers your question, as a person has been carrying mail for 33 years,

what do you see as something that can be done on the front lines in huntington, west virginia, and other places that would save u.s. postal service money and extend the service going for six days rather than having it cut back? caller: i am not really a manager, but two or three things. one thing talking about the window service, we put people in the larger offices where there is always business to accommodate people at the times that would be early in the morning, evening after work, and at lunchtime when they are off of work. also, i think that the rural post offices, rather than closing them, they could be serviced by rural carriers even

doing such things such as filling stamp orders that could be done through post office boxes and keep these open for the benefit of the people so they will not have to travel 20 or 30 miles until the next town that is large enough. why think that would be helpful. if you did not want to do that, you could use postmasters to go did two or three separate offices for a certain time during the day and and stagger them. most of these offices being closed are in these rural areas where they are sometimes close to each other. host: pat from huntington, west virginia. guest: you provided a host of good answers. i want to reiterate what you said which is that post offices in rural communities are a very important part of those communities. it is not the same in rural and

remote parts of america as it is in this city where there are better options more readily available. the commission is on record with that viewpoint in a previous of miserly opinion and we will be looking at that in the latest opinion request. in terms of the unfunded workforce expenses, with respect to the retiree benefit fund and sellers -- civil service retirement fund, it is a popular view and one view supported by expert findings of the commission. we hired an actuarial accountant certified to give us advice on new methodologies on how those expenses could be met in a responsible fashion but still provides the top of copper -- the type of coverage congress insists on, but it improves the bottom line. the postal service suffers under a unique payment schedule that is unheard of in the public or private sector.

the reason why it is on heard of is because it is a recipe for fiscal insolvency. they're trying to looked at different plans to relieve us on that front. host: sandy, you are on "washington journal." caller: thank you so much. i am here to speak up for the u.s. ps. i lived in new mexico, and you should live with the postal service like they have to realize that we have the best postal service anywhere on the planet. the money that my mother tried to send me was regularly rifled out of the envelopes. ithopst says that is the way is and you do not try to send money there because they will rifle the money out of the enveloping of the open your mail and read it just to see and take it back together. it was just horrible.

and it is people who complain of standing salon in line at the post office, i have made it a point of checking my watch to see what time i get in line to post a package, by stance, or something. there was a lady behind me one day his said, "have you seen anything like this?" i said it, "you came in right behind me and we have been here three minutes. have you really checked to see how long it is?" it may not be fun standing in a line, but these people are working steady trying to serve us. i tell you, i'd wish people would realize what a great thing we have here and stop tearing everything down. host: mark acton, go ahead. guest: i would echo your viewpoints. the postal system is the premier system in the world, delivering

160 billion pieces of mail last year, up 40% of the mail delivered worldwide. there is no other postal service that compares to the scale and scope of the united states postal service. people have individual stories about unpleasant experiences they have had a at a given retail product, but we work hard to improve that. they monitor where they do things well and where they are not doing things as well and work hard to make improvements. host: of of twitter -- guest: privatization is a constant issue in terms of this debate about what to do to repair the postal service. there are overseas posts that

have the experimented with privatization and it has worked well, and in other cases it has not been a good outcome, like in japan. you have to be careful talking about privatization particularly in the american context. the u.s. is a very unique nation with a very, very geographic landscape. an important part of what the service has to do is provide uniform access at affordable prices which is not easy for a privatized provider to offer. they may, for instance, may be eager to deliver my mail in washington, but may not be so inclined to deliver mail out in the far reaches of montana and at an affordable price which is a real problem when it comes to providing universal service. host: in texas, rose, on our line for independents.

caller: i am a retiree from the postal service. everyone that is so concerned about their small post offices being closed should realize that they should have liberal carrier that will deliver their mail -- a rural carrier. they can buy stamps from the carrier. they can mail a package from this carrier. they should not be losing any service. guest: the caller raises a good point. when i talk about my concerns and the commission is concerned about alternative access and the need for the presence of the postal service, i am not pre- judging what the commission makes important, but i'm trying to indicate where our focus may be in developing this report. it is true that its proposal is not done -- developing in an

earnest effort to develop alternative access points for those people whose post offices may be close which includes the rural carriers or a village post office which will incorporate the offerings in a way that may be more customer friendly. people can buy groceries and also do their postal business. the caller is very astute in saying this because the post office's closing does not mean you will not have access to postal products. it is the commission's job to see how that can be accommodated. host: for more information on the u.s. postal regulatory commission, prc.gov is there website. an e-mail from arlington, virginia.

guest: i do not know the number at hand, but it is a considerable sum. but it is a fact of the matter that the postal service benefit schedule is different than the rest of the workforce. there are provisions in pending legislation to make changes to that. it is the one of the tools available to congress if they -- it is one of the tools available. host: our last call for mark acton of the u.s. postal regulatory commission is from arlington, texas. caller: good morning. how are you doing? standing in line, my post office is the biggest problem is they are doing passports at the same time that they're trying to get us stamps and mail are packages. if there are just one or two

clerks, one of them is tied up doing passports and the other is trying to take care of the line and it makes it tough. they need to figure out another way to do pass border have a dedicated person for about and not have it interfere with the stands and other products. host: mark acton? guest: the postal service works in cooperation with other federal agencies to try and offer assorted services to help make people for the consumer and people who need things like passports to get them. there is no question that a passport can be more complex transaction than buying a book of stamps and it takes more time. perhaps the postal service could commit more resources to ensuring that passport production is something that can be done at a faster schedules. host: our guest has been mark acton, vice chairman of the u.s. postal regulatory commission. thank you for being on

"washington journal." up next, an alternative to drug court instead of prison. today is saturday, august 6th, and we'll be right back. >> the house of representatives has been off eight weeks already this year including this week. have you had eight weeks of vacation this year so far? i have not. >> rt network host tries to take a more reverent view. >> we want to try to something different, try to make tv news exciting, entertaining, and informative and again, rather than, i am sorry, but the garbage that it will dwindle down to be. "she will talk about her networking and show sunday night on c-span's "q&a."

>> it may not surprise you that we think good things come in twos. >> you can watch live events on c-span.org. >> or the c-span video library. >> explore american history tv. >> join us of facebook. >> washington your right on c- span. >> created by cabling provided as a public service. quite 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 -- life off. -- lift off. these are the stakes. to make a world in which all of

god's children can live. we must either love each other or we must die. >> vote for president johnson on november 3rd. >> this weekend, the history of political campaign ads with lsu professor robert mann. on the day jack ruby killed the man in his protection, lee harvey oswald. american history tv on c-span3. but the complete schedule on c- span.org/history. >> i am not for changing the system just so we can feel good by having voter turnout which may ultimately approximate what they have in australia, which is about 97%. voter turnout does not mean much in terms of the health of democracy in.

some of the most vicious dictatorships in the world get 95%-99% when they hold elections. >> voting is a responsible act. i should not be coerced to make a decision which is life and off for many people if i'm not concerned. >> monday and tuesday, ralph nader and the center for the study of responsive law looks at controversial topics. monday, the pro and con of mandatory voting with the competitive enterprise institute's fred smith. tuesday, professors from georgetown and the university of massachusetts on taxing stock trades, commodities, and derivatives. monday and tuesday at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> "washington journal" continues. host: west huddleston is the ceo

of national association of drug court professionals and we are talking about drug court as an alternative to prison. first explain what is a drug court back? guest: it is a special pocket door calendar in the system set up to help drug-addicted criminally involved prison-bound offenders get the help that they need to get their life back on track to return to the community as a productive citizen. it is headed up by specially trained judges who understand addiction and mental health issues and the judges surrounded by a team of criminal justice professionals such as prosecutors, a defense attorney, probation officers, and even treatment providers. they work as a team, unlike a traditional court that is adversarial. they want to help that individual get clean and sober. what is special about drug court

is the offender has to come before the court on a very regular basis. in the first three or four months, they come every week and are held accountable by the judge to what they have done that week in treatment, whether they have tested positive or negative for drug use, and whether they are upholding their obligations to the court, their community, and to their families. during these status hearings, the judge it rewards good behavior and punishes bad behavior. frankly coming is a remarkable innovation in the courts that is saving lives. host: we want to show our audience some of the criteria provided to us by the department of justice for drug courts. it involves early, continuous, and intense treatment. canid its are held accountable to obligations. it requires regular and random

drug testing, frequent court appearances, and offers appropriate incentives and sanctions. why does this have a certain list of options that a regular judge could provide to say that this person has been convicted of possession, distribution, or whenever, but rather than send them to jail, we put them on probation and send them to treatment. why is a need to be a whole different mechanism? guest: that is a great question. it is a question that was answered almost 22 years ago in miami dade county florida where the first judge referred people to treatment, return them to probation, and left it up to the offender and probation to non we offend.

-- not re-offend. it takes the immediate power, if you will, to respond swiftly and with certainty to behavior. probation officers do not have that authority. only the judge does. really, and individual freedom is in the hands of a judge, so the power of the judge is very powerful in regards to treatment. the drug court provides a structure that probation and treat malone cannot answer. host: we are talking with wes huddleston with national association of drug court professionals. for the next 35 minutes we will talk about drug courts as alternative to prison. if you want to get involved in the conversation, here are the numbers.

we have a special line for people who have experience with drug courts, either as a prosecutor, defense counsel, as someone who has been through the system and has benefited from that as a judge. if you have any experience, the parents or family member of someone who has been through a drug court. give us a call and share your experience. 202-737-2579. if you have experience with drug courts, your number is 202-737- 2579. earlier last month, there was a hearing in front of the house judiciary subcommittee on crime and terrorism. during that time, a member of the heritage foundation gave his opinion on drug cords and some potential federal budget

authorizations for the drug court discretionary grant program and we want to show you what he had to say and get your response. he said, " thoughts? guest: that evaluation, and seven others, have already been done. in fact, there have been a seven meta analysis that have been performed. each and every one of them has demonstrated that a drug court significantly reduced substance abuse, cut crime in half, and saved taxpayers an absolute fortune.

i was at that hearing. and there was really a lack of understanding on what the scientific literature says. drug courts have been researched more than any other criminal justice initiative in history. in fact, drug courts have more science behind them than many medications. host: our first call from bosier, louisiana. from our line of those who have experience with drug courts. tell us your experience and then your question or comment for mr. huddleston. caller: i was taken into custody for growing me some marijuana. i ended up and drug court as a probationary thing. it does not help, you know, as

far as me stopping my thing. i think it is a money tactic. i do not want to say that they do not care, but there is no way stabbing a man from doing what he wants to do, you know? -- stopping a man. host: your experience with drug court did not stop you from being a re-offender? caller: i hope what i did learn in taking me away from my family, i do not know. i do not know how to put it. host: we will leave it there, james. mr. huddleston? guest: your experience is very unlike with the vast majority of the almost 120,000 offenders go through each and every year in the almost 2700 drug courts in

operation in this country. 75% of our graduates will never see another pair of handcuffs and the vast majority of drug dependent people get clean and sober and go on till the very productive lives. i appreciate the notion that we cannot force people into a drug- free lifestyle or recovery and it reminds me that you cannot lead a horse to water. -- you cannot lead a horse to water, but you cannot make them drink. you can make the horse thursday, which is what the drug court to do. we really give people enough treatment so that it actually takes hold in their soul and people began to see the benefits over time that sobriety is better than drug dependence.

host: next up from salt lake city, utah, on our line for democrats. go ahead. caller: i would like to know why someone would want to go to drug court rather than taking a jail sentence. i do not see anything that helps them out. why would they do this? i know several people who have gone through drug court and they go right back to drugs. i do not believe this is a good program. i think we are wasting money. host: have you met anyone that when the alternative route, went to prison, serve their time? what happened to them? caller: they had a lighter sentence. this is almost like "1984." this is abusive. why would anyone want to go to drug court instead of going to jail when it is actually about

the same or worse. host: west huddleston? guest: drug court is voluntary and that is the bottom line. literally, hundreds of thousands of offenders choose drug court over jail or worse, state prison, for a number of reasons. two reasons in particular are that the offender typically gets to avoid a felony conviction. but that is very important and appealing to someone who does not have a felony already on their record. drug courts offer an offender the exchange for coming in to drug court and getting into treatment and becoming drug free the option of not having a felony on their record. that is huge. the other important part here is that drug courts are really for

very seriously addicted, prison- bound individuals, people who have already been to prison, already been to jail, already been to treatment, in probation, and have not succeeded. these are very desperate people to select drug court, and as a result, in those cases, do not end up in prison for years away from their families. host: where does the funding for drug courts come from? guest: primarily, the funding comes from state budgets. state coffers to day support drug courts for about $243 million from the united states in all 50 states and u.s. territories. the federal government has increased their support for drug courts over the last five years from about $20 million to where it stands today, a little over $80 million.

there is good support on both sides of the aisle, and in both the house and the senate, and that the state level among legislators for drug courts. there is a huge support for these programs. host: on our line for republicans out of houston, texas, you are on with west huddleston. caller: rod, you are looking good today. my question is to this big government rhino. let me give you the words of a troop two-party-- true tea party patriot. the government needs to stay within the confines of the constitution. it was designed to of the government keep off of the people's backs. you have no business telling anyone what they can or cannot put in their bodies.

but is not your business. it is not my business. it is no one's business to tell somebody what they can and cannot do. guest: drug courts operate within the law. the law, as it stands today, is that methamphetamines, crack cocaine, heroin, and other very dangerous drugs are illegal. they cause a great deal of harm to families, cause a great deal of harm to our economy. drug courts seek to get people off of those drugs and back to a productive life. host: our next call from georgia, on our line for those with a connection to drug courts. go ahead. caller: i would just like to say a few things. i recently went through a dui and went through an evaluation. there is a drug court here in this city i live in. the judge told me where to go

get my evaluation and it comes down that the judge's wife runs the evaluation facility and there is a stream of connections where the money goes back in one little funnel. i think the program probably helps, but, for me, you have to have a desire to want to change your life and get clean. no matter what you do to somebody, it will not affect them unless they truly have the desire. host: was this your first experience with the judicial system? caller: i had a d y back in college in 1978. i said, "if you really want to help me, it just pay for all of this. it is a burden financially. i've been clean for about seven months, and i intend to stay sober. i go to counselee once a week -- counseling once a week and a.a.

meetings. host: how often do you check in with the court? caller: every two weeks ago back to probation with random drug screenings and a random counseling sessions. i have 26 weeks of counseling with three hours per night. guest: it is unclear if he is in dwi court or a drug court. you bring up a good point which is personal responsibility. drug courts and dwi course, about 500 of those around the country, really do stress personal responsibility. you, as a repeat offender, have the opportunity to get your life back on track and utilize treatment services available to you through these treatment courts and prove to the prosecutor, your possible

victim, your family, that you're serious about your recovery. drug courts and dwi courts are here to help people. it is good to hear that message from you. host: you talk about a repeat offenders. if you are a person coming in and you have already been convicted of a violent crime associated with drugs, and could you still be considered for drug court? or have you cross that bridge already? guest: it is very unlikely that you would be eligible for drug court without a previous or current violent offense. just in terms of sentencing guidelines in this country, typically, you're going to end up incarcerated with a violent history or violent offense. however, there are a number of drug courts that use state dollars and do take offenders

that have previous violent offenses, domestic violence, assault, it typically charges that may be driven by an addiction to alcohol or other drugs. host: maria from roswell, georgia, good morning. caller: the morning. hello? -- good morning. my son was picked up for having a "roach." he ended up going to court for the first offense. he ended up going to court and getting the drug court assignment. it cost is about $900 in court fees and fines, the probation officers charges. all the charges associated with his being in drug court had to be borne by hamper, or in this

case -- him, or me. the $900 for court, he had to go to drug treatment. it was very difficult to find enough drug treatment center is to go after work or on the weekend. host: if you had a choice between him going to drug court or serving hard time, which would you choose? caller: i think it is better for them to go to drug court and serve their sentence while they are free to have a job, can pay for the fines instead of going to jail and letting the taxpayer pay. guest: i agree. drum corps it saves taxpayers an absolute fortune. saves. corpurt it is anything between $25,000-

$43,000 per year to house an inmate. drug court is between $5,000- $7,000. the individual can work, pay taxes, and the outcome is far better for drug court participants and graduates than those coming out of prison. i will give you a few statistics to back up that statement. drug courts, on average, save roughly $2.21 for every $1 invested which is a savings to the criminal justice system. those are avoided costs. as a drag -- as a graduate of drug court, not getting arrested again, not costing the police of this money to have to continue to deal with me, and i am not costing the court system more money. that is a 221% return on tax

dollars by putting in drum corps. then when you had community incentives, such as reduction in the emergency room episodes, less dependence on foster care, the savings for the drug courts jump up to every $27 for every $1 invested. it is a good investment. about your comment, drug court is really for the drug addicted, drug dependent, prison-bound offender. door first-time marijuana smoker is not appropriate for drug court, frankly. the cost savings is for putting those who need drug court in drum corps. host: -- drug court. host: it sounds like her son had to pick up a lot of the costs associated, court costs, rehab costs, officer costs.

is that the case for most drug courts? guest: most do require the offender, or the participant, to invest. it is not a free ride. $80 a month for one year of treatment, supervision, drug testing is pretty reasonable, frankly. yes, there is some investment on the part of the offender. host: does that lend itself to pricing certain members of the society out of being able to afford drug court? guest: a great question. any court that charges the client has a sliding scale. we are dealing with some very, very down and out, difficult people. many of whom are unemployed. no one in my working in drug

courts for 15 years has ever been turned away because they could not pay. host: our next call for west huddleston from palm springs, calif., with an experience with a drum corps -- drug court. caller: thank you for having me on. i was totally intimidated because they sent me a deal -- a bill for $2,500. if i did not pay that on time, they were going to deducted out of my paycheck. then when i got through the program, i had to pay $30 every visit and then they told me i had to go back in to pay final payment. and then they told me that i was finished and i would be able to deny that it never happened, that i ever got arrested.

when i got pulled over, i told them and i denied it. they knew exactly what i had done and pulled me out of my car, had me on the curb. it was intimidating from the beginning and they used it. i just think they are using that to put the lock on them, i guess. guest: if that was a drug court, that is not consistent with a drug court practices. drug courts are incredibly and ellen -- incredibly benevolent. they give a great deal of service and time the people who the traditional criminal-justice system says are really worthy of throwing away. we are talking about judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys who are doing drug court beyond their normal judicial and

professional duties. drug court are not paid any more to have drug court multiple times per week. they still have trials, preliminary hearings, sentencing calendars. doing drug court up and beyond those duties. that is difficult to hear. at the same time, we know that not all drug courts work and not all are operating within the best practices that we have learned over the last 22 years. i am sorry for your experience and i do hope that it helps you. host: off of twitter -- guest: it is a waste of tax money, and i cannot imagine that

was as a result of being in drug court. that is the thing that drug court tries to avoid. look. we have 2.3 million adults locked up in this country. we lock up more people than any other country on the planet. one in every 100 adult americans are incarcerated and drug court to put in place of the past 23 years as an alternative to our over reliance on incarceration for drug use and drug dependent. host: west huddleston is the ceo of national association of drug court professionals. previously, he co-designed an early mentor court in oklahoma. burlington, n.c., on our line for democrats. go ahead. you need to turn down your

television and it will make this process a lot smoother. caller: i think the lord for mr. huddleston. can you hear me? host: i can still hear your television. caller: i have it all the way down now. i think the world for drug court. i hope that the drug court will come to north carolina because of the simple fact that you're going to have some people that will do right, and some people that will do wrong, but this is needed for the people who really have their heart to do this right and a non-violent offenders. i have a nephew in prison right now who has never been a violent offender, raised in the church, but fell between the cracks. he was sentenced to 20 years in prison for selling crack cocaine. this was a snitch thing, this last time.

i thank the lord for drug court and i hope and pray they can come here because now he has a baby that is not even three months old. that is 20 years of his life he will not be able to raise his child. i think of drug court would have been here, that would have saved his life and been able to rehabilitate them. we do not need to put everybody in the prison. that is not the right thing to do. if we can rehabilitate them, show them the right way, give them some training, sometimes this is a condition. i have worked with people in the mental health field, and sometimes it is a condition and there can be done -- something done other than going to prison. i hope and pray for you, sir. this is needed. for the families like mine going through this trying to take care of these children left behind, he is not even 30 years old and has his whole life ahead of him. his life should not be taken away from him for something like

this where he could have been rehabilitated. host: was he also using? was he addicted to crack as well as being convicted of distributing? caller: he was not addicted it. no, he was not. host: was he using? caller: no. host: we'll leave it there. guest: he would not be eligible for drug court in this case. we did not take drug dealers who are not drug addicted. these are treatment courts for people who really do need treatment and need intensive treatment that is judicially supervised. the real heroes of drug court are not me, but the judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, court coordinators, probation officers, law-enforcement, and treatment providers the work day in and day out to truly give

people back their lives. i will agree with you that there are not enough drug courts in the united states. the department of justice recently showed that there are 1.2 million americans who were legally eligible for drug court this morning and drug courts are only serving about 120,000 of those individuals. we are really only reaching about 10% of americans in need of treatment that are caught up in the criminal-justice system. we do need more alternatives to lighten the burden of the over reliance on prisons. host: tell us about the precipitation -- participation of the drug-addicted persons? host: -- guest: it is a

fascinating story that came about in buffalo, new york. and he was formally a drug court and mental health judge and he saw an influx of men and women who had put their lives on the line for this country, veterans who were getting caught up in the criminal justice system and were really not doing very well in drug court or mental health court. they were really trained not to admit they have a problem. they were not comfortable in that environment. this judge thought they would create a separate calendar for veterans. he used to the camaraderie that so many men and women in uniform really thrive under and brought all of the veterans who were caught up in the criminal

justice system in buffalo into one court room and something really magical happened. two things happened. these veterans started to open up, talking with one another, and really started helping one another. the other thing that happened was that the va came into the courtroom and started working hands on with the veteran court calendar. the va is sitting there in the courtroom getting these veterans the benefits they have earned, getting them the treatment services through the va that have burned -- earned, and , as a team, restoring their honor. there are 80 of these veteran courts around the country and they are springing up all over the case -- place. 1 in every 6 veterans coming back from a current conflict are suffering from a substance abuse

disorder and one in five suffering from mental health disorder like post-traumatic stress. bettering courts are really coming to the aid of veterans in communities all across the country. host: eight minutes left with the west huddleston. on our line for republicans, you are on "washington journal." caller: offenders need to be responsible for their actions. i agree that if you want to change that you need to prove it. getting health sometimes means you need the paper that treatment. with an offender preferred to spend time in prison or have a chance at a better life and become a productive member of society? thank you for these drug courts. guest: that is our aim, to give addicted individuals the opportunity as close to that moment of arrest as possible

when they are motivated to change their lives, to provide treatment and give them the services that they need right then and there. it is really working and i appreciate your support. host: dan, from kansas city missouri, you are on "washington journal." caller: i wanted to make a comment regarding the discouraging remarks from the heritage foundation. i am a clinical psychologist, and i just wanted to make a comment that the research is part of a larger body of research that is regarding therapeutic jurisprudence, the idea that law and public policy affect people psychologically. there has been numerous, many,

many studies, not just on drug courts, but on mental health courts and they show that these things work. you are doing good help, and thank you. guest: there is a body of literature out there. therapeutic jurisprudence and other problem solving courts, and there are 1900 other problem solving courts that use this model. what we just learned in a new nij study, is that with a multi- site study looking at 23 drug courts showing that individuals did better in drug court because they felt that the judge understood them and that the

judge invested in them, cared for them. it is not rocket science. when we care for individuals, when we treat individuals as people, and we care about these issues, even from a judge's perspective, it matters. host: a caller from alabama who has some experience with drug courts. go ahead. caller: thank you for having me on. as a recovering addict, i would like to thank the drug court. it is one of the best things that has happened in the judicial system that i know of. i have been a recovering addict, it has given me the opportunity to carry on normal life. they take a felony off of your record after one year and it is an extremely good thing for young people who have run into a problem in their lives. they are able to overcome this

because the felony will follow you the rest of your life when you fill out any job application. i would just like to say thank you for the drug court. host: thank you for your call. i want to bring you to attend -- this tweet to your attention. how many times do you get to go through drug court before they say this is not working and they send them for hard time? guest: to the question of of twitter, there are three ways to get in illegally. one is a pre-plea condition which is a diversionary program. it is the promise that we do not make you feel guilty -- plea guilty, but we will except you, see how you do, than if you do,

then, yes, the charges dismissed and the record is a sponge. it is a phenomenal -- the record is expunged. the next is post-plea, but pre- judication. if the individual succeeds drug court, then the plea is withdrawn and the charges dismissed. the record could be expunged, depending on the state. the thirsd way is post- plea, post-judication. there is a guilty plea and is sentenced to probation and as a condition there put in drug court. the reason there are three legal avenues is because it really depends on what the individual

was charged with and what their history, their criminal history, is. how many times does the drug court give the individual a bite at the apple, so to speak, before the are kicked out? many. this is a model that is really designed to be difficult to be kicked out of. we understand that addiction is a very, very difficult condition to overcome and it takes a long time to get into stable recovery and to kick an attic dow for acting like an addict is kind of contrary to drug court. as long as the individual is trying, as long as the individual is showing up, going to treatment, trying to change, we will keep working with them, even if they slip. that does not mean there are no consequences, they will be, but they are