health care analyst marcia gold on medicare advantage. host: the libyan capital of tripoli remains shrouded under confusion with gaddafi on the run. these are scenes libya from early this morning courtesy of "al jazeera." military advisers are working covertly inside of the country. gadhafi's a son and turned up early this morning in tripoli. we will get your take on what is next for the u.s. role in libya

in the next few minutes. phone numbers are on your screen. we wanted to give you the latest from the country. a reporter is joining us from inside of tripoli. who controls the capital right now? guest: we have no idea who controls the capital at the moment. after the appearance of the fighters, the situation has evolved considerably. it seems like different parts of the city are under the control of different militias or not under anybody's control. the situation is very confused now. we have reports of intense firefights in different parts of the city. there are many forces roaming the city. we are trying to understand the situation that is changing by

the hour. host: is it just the city of tripoli that is in question or other parts of the area as well? guest: there is still fighting going on in other parts of the country. the map of control has not changed appreciably. the forces of muammar gaddafi are still in control of cities considered his stronghold. in the south and center of the country. the rebels are still in control of large parts of the east and western mountains. the city is where i am right now, 50 miles outside of tripoli. it seems to be the disputed battleground at the moment. host: we are learning there is a hotel and side of tripoli were a

lot of the foreign journalists have been staying. that has been surrounded by gaddafi supporters. were you at that hotel? how did you get to where you are? what is it like reporting there. guest: the journalists staying at that hotel where those covering tripoli for a long time. they had been given permission by the gaddafi government and proper visas. they were inside a tripoli before the rebels entered the city. myself and other journalists, who are staying here and outside of tripoli, have been following the rebel advances. when i went to tripoli the other day, that was my first visit there. the places we have not been able to go get are places that seem

to be more strongly under the control of the government loyalists. that includes the fortified compound of gaddafi, and area that is surrounded to be -- that is said to be surrounded by his troops. no one knows where he is. host: that was my next question. where is gaddafi and what are you hearing? it sounds like speculation is that he is at the compound. guest: there is speculation he is at the compound or in algeria or gone to one of these towns that are friendly to him. no one has a solid information about his whereabouts. we know that his son has made a

visit to foreign journalists earlier this morning. he was seen on the streets of tripoli yesterday in a very confusing episode. we had understood that saif al- islam had been arrested by the rebel authorities, the national transitional council. he and his brother mohammad were in custody. now we are told that he may have escaped, but it is very unclear what happened. many wonder if he was ever arrested at all. his brother is also said to be free. host: what are you hearing about the transitional council that has been set up and where they are right now? what is happening with them and what is next? guest: a member of the ben ghazi

based transitional council, arrived here last night. we were not able to speak to him. he was meeting with local military commanders. this is a another confusing aspect of this whole transitional phase. the second in the command of the rebel transitional executive committee in had actually been fired from his job a few weeks ago that was after the assassination of a military leader. he seems to be here representing the government in some capacity. i was unable to get an answer as to the question as to what position he holds. he was a senior rebel leader. about the senior transitional council.

it is hard to understand how they will make their way to tripoli at this point. host: i know you are on the run. what's next? guest: we are trying to get an answer as to who has control over what part of the city. we are trying to understand how the fighting is and what of the situation on the ground looks like. host: thanks for joining us. what is next for the u.s. role in libya? for a country in transition, -- it says this.

that is the washington journal and here is the washington post.

that is where we turn to all of you this morning. what is your take on all of this? what will be the role of the u.s. going forward during this transition. we have a line set aside for libyans living inside of the united states. let us hear from rick first, a republican in las vegas. caller: this is american and an american-cuban that is happy to see people getting their freedom. it is a long way from over. by accident, 20 some years ago, fell into a book written by gaddafi. the key point is that gaddafi

came to power at the same time that the cia and the kgb were both running coup attempts on him. he snuck in between them and played both sides in the middle. this is an open source book from retired cia sources that i found. uslim brotherhoodrhood association has attempted at least 40 attempts on his life. a who are the rebel forces?

i think the media is handling it a lot better than the tahrir square fighters and -- this is beautiful. host: what does that mean for the u.s. role going forward? caller: the u.s. role going forward is to sit back and keep a low profile, not come out and say anything like yesterday, your role is over. he is the desert a mystic. -- desert mystic. over 100 cruise missiles at 1 million a pop. we still do not know where this guy is.

he is delusional. he is wacky. the u.s. role was started, because a year ago, remember the from the united nations? if you go back and watch it, gaddafi has done some pretty wacky stuff. host: i will leave it there and show our viewers about what you said about the cost. 89 million for the pentagon's budget for daily military operation. that is only through june 30. too much to 22 million in ammunition, parts, sold to the allies. sorties our aircraft and

refueling aircraft that was sold. that information coming from the pentagon yesterday. sarah, a democrat from chicago. caller: i agree that -- i totally agree with what everyone has been singing. i think we are going about this all wrong. -- has been saying. i think we are going about this all wrong. we needed to go in as less of a force and held them do it themselves, instead of us turning into what was iraq and having to pull everyone out. i know it is harder than that and things are a lot worse than what i am singing. we need to go in -- seeing.

we need to go in more as a helpful force. host: you want a peacekeeping mission on the ground? caller: that is a good thing, but we need to do it in little steps. not send all the troops there in one time and then have to pull the out if the country is in total chaos. i think that is what has happened in iraq. host: how old are you? caller: 17. host: why have you been following this so closely? caller: i love politics. if i am going to go into politics i need to know what is happening in our world today. from presidentr obama yesterday when he made a statement from martha's vineyard

about the transition and the conflict in libya. >> as we move forward from this pivotal phase, the opposition said continue to take important steps about a transition that is peaceful, inclusive, and adjust. he leadership of the ntc has made clear that the rights of all libyans must be respected. recons -- peace will not come from violence but reconciliation. in the effort, the united states will be a friend and partner. host: libya in transition. the next role of the u.s. is our question in view this morning. -- here is a tweed. -- tweet.

if you want to send us a twins, here is the address. -- tweet, here is the address. you can also make a comment on facebook. caller: i was a rescue worker at the world trade center. i saw what people were doing. i believe gaddafi is held up with all of his nerve gas and all types of gases. we have to help those people. i would love to see how happy they are to get rid of that idiot. he has some kind of plan. they will kill thousands of people at one time. i was in the service. i know all about this. i was down in florida during the cuban missile crisis.

they used tear gases and other gases. he is laid back, waiting for those guys to come in there. i would cover all the supplies with water. they would have to surrender. host: here is a facebook, who says we have no business involving ourselves in the first place. if you want to post your comment on facebook, go to our website there. we can continue the conversation there. more from the "wall street journal" this morning. air power on the verge of toppling colonel gaddafi. there is talk about winding down a nato mission. u.n. officials over the summer stepped up for the planning of the fall of colonel gaddafi.

also the peace quotes, i do not see much of a role for u.s. military in pose conflict libya." the campaign effective but not a model going forward. the campaign will not be seen as a template for further intervention in the middle east. the the big campaign had u.n.

backing. we'll hear from shaun next, and independent from tennessee. caller: your question is what is in store for us now? more of the same. i see the president's comment and the young girl that called in. what a lot of people do not understand is what war is. my father was killed in okinawa in the army. war is killing women and children and people lane in hospital beds. that is what is more in store and what is more to come.

that is what war is. people do not understand what it is. host: democrat from baltimore, what do you think? caller: you have to understand the difference between war and liberation. we went through the same thing in our history. these people are trying to secure their freedom. i heard one thing about the decisions that our made -- our president has made, and making the situation less than confrontational. the republicans have tried to make it seem that he has moved fast enough. there have been no american lives lost. a strategic plan has been amazing. this is not just about freedom, but a tyrant that has killed americans. to see the conversation moved so far past the decisions of our

commander in chief and what he has done to give families to the peace.s ps host: fred, a republican in fairfax, what do you have to say? caller: we should learn from history not to let the big be like iran and from a modern dictator. if they want to be democracy, they must not tolerate -- they need to know more than that. democracy means role as people. you have to be able to tolerate as much more you can tolerate of people.

[unintelligible] in the united states, we have 200 different countries, 64 different languages. the united states is different, because it can tolerate. if they want it, they have to watch history and have more toleration. host: here is an e-mail from a viewer. if you want to send us an e- mail, send it to journal@cspan.org. the german foreign minister according to "ap" this morning is calling for a quick un resolution to unlock frozen

libyan assets. i want to show you what to the german foreign minister along with a south african foreign minister had to say regarding the situation in libya yesterday. >> the legal, diplomatic, political, and financial support. we will soon be able to release the frozen assets that belong to the libyan people. >> the dictators time is over. he should now go of his own accord to prevent further bloodshed. >> we do not know the whereabouts of colonel gaddafi. we assume he is still in libya. >> foreign perspective for you this morning about the situation in libya. here is the "financial times" about what will happen next. much will be said in the coming days. french president has invited head of the transitional council to discuss the next

eight on wednesday. it says hillary clinton had a conference call in york. the agenda included financial support for the national transitional council and the libyan people. that is what is next for the dish in the coming days. we are getting your take on that. here is a piece by daniel, a guest on the "washington journal."

here are some of the problem is likely to occur. he says many libyans have suffered under the gaddafi regime.

that is the opinion piece this morning from the "washington post." we go to an independent. caller: as far as our role, we have no role in this. we have problems of our own, pertaining to our economy. why are we were rain about a country that is thousands of miles away. many of these coups -- all they do is blow back.

it makes no sense. you have to recognize that and there are millions that still support these gaddafi regimes, even though he is not. nobody actually knows who the rebels are and what their agenda is. host: we will talk about that a little bit more with steve coming in about 15 minutes. who are the rebel forces and who is in that opposition government? the "washington times" on the oil situation in the country. the u.s. not likely to benefit from the drop in oil prices. the "financial times" story. here is that a headline on oil. l.i., n.y., republican. caller: i am so tired of

listening to the u.s. going out all over the world helping other countries. it is a lovely, but we are spending so much money in ways. what many in the u.s. have no jobs. we have so many problems and such high debt and risk spending all of this money outside of the country. i hope we are helping these people with their money not ours. we cannot help all of these people. that is why we are in such a big troubles. it is nice to hate -- help these people, but they hate as anyway. host: here is another view. . -- viewpoint. we cut to a democrat in philadelphia. caller: i believe our role should decrease as far as

involvement and increase more so towards these spectators. where we are just observing. we are monitoring the level of terrorism -- key points like that period. imposing our government, they will not accept it. i think we have enough issues right now that we need to focus on. the enemy is becoming too big in my opinion. [unintelligible] host: let me get your take on the "washington post" this morning. look at since the benefits if

libya moves towards democracy. the momentum will help in tunisia and egypt. host: i say what needs to happen is that we still need to

decrease in our roles. but what is happening is there is a true interest in monopolizing this entire world. everything going to become republican or democrat? we see how it is working out in our own country. host: the "baltimore sun." forces shot down three people. the u.n. says the death toll from the crack down on protests and had reached 2200. here is the "washington post" reinvigorating the arab spring movement. it boosted other popular uprisings in the region. many have seen their momentum stalled since the early days of the era of spring.

thousands of anti-government demonstrations were cracked down. -- demonstrators defied a crackdown and were . and here is the business section of the "new york times" this morning. here is a piece in the money section of "usa today. " who is to pay for prescription drugs? we started a series this week looking at medicare and the different aspects of it. during our last hour of the "question journal" we will look at it today and the cost of prescription drug programs, which will be the topic of wednesday's program.

today, medicare advantage, is coming up later on today. program a community's -- and the community's program. it would look at 300,000 deportation cases and to give those in charge the authority to decide who can stay in the country. we will have a roundtable discussion on that coming up here on the "washington journal." and talking about politics for 2012 and the battle for the senate beginning to take shape. one person will run for an open seat in connecticut in 2012. and the two people, announced that they will not run. it came days after elizabeth warren said she is forming an

exploratory committee to face of senator scott brown. next, a republican and in pennsylvania. what is your take for the next role of u.s. in libya? caller: our role should be turned over to britain and france and the other european countries and the enforcers of the no-fly zone. republicans in congress did not authorize this military action. there is stuff going on. there are reports from advisers on the ground. they need to proceed with impeachment proceedings on president obama. that is why the act of 1973 was

produced for. the american people did not want this war. this involvement has gotten deeper and deeper and is escalating. we have more unrest and the destabilizations. host: here is "usa today." they write to this. -- they write this. what is your reaction? caller: we had no business going

in there. we violated pakistan. this free fire zone with the drones -- i have been emailing in addition contact with senator kasey about it. -- and in contact with senator kasey about it. some have been protesting this from the start, but our mainstream media has not picked up on it. [unintelligible] this guy gets a free pass on 1600 pennsylvania avenue on everything he does. it is time for the american people and the people of congress stand up to this guy. we are paying for it.

we are borrowing the money from these countries. it is leading to escalation and escalation. this fight in libya is far from over. host: we covered a lot of different hearings and testimonies from different people as well as the senator's views on the situation in libya. c-to our web site anon span.org. let's see what gop candidates had to say about the situation is in libya. rick perry says it is cause for celebration. mitt romney says that the first

act of the new government should arrest and extradite the lockerbie bomb so justice can finally be done. michelle bauman said i hope that our intervention there is about to end -- michele bachmann said i hope that our intervention there is about to end. next, and general freer -- jennifer, in riverview, california. caller: i am a first-time caller. i always watched the show. obama is claiming he wants to

get everybody out of iraq and afghanistan. now we are over there in libya. we have all of these budget cuts over here. every time you look at the news, there are cuts for our schools and our kids. we do not have the money to send 850 million over there to unite a country. they are not interested in uniting. they have something we want. we cannot get it willingly, so we are going to take it. why are we always the one point two over countries and taking it over? don't we 0 china however much money? why are they the ones going over and helping all of these other countries? it does not make any sense to me. it is always the u.s. i agree with some of your previous callers. it is always the u.s. going over. it is the same thing that happened over in panama.

i am panamanian. it is the same thing. host: we showed earlier u.s. involvement in operation libya. about 820 million in the elite military operations through june 30. 22 million in ammunition parts sold to the allies. 12.5 million in meals and etc. given to the allies. then aircraft flown. bombs, missiles, predator strikes. this is from the "washington times" today. this figure when you look at overall nato operations, about 19,877 sorties flown over libya.

you can compare and contrast nato at large involvement with what u.s. military operations have been. north carolina, republican. caller: first-time caller. not 1 ounce of u.s. blood or treasury should be spent in libya. i understand the fact that this is part of the nato operation. we also have to be mindful that these are the same people that -- when the plane returned. we cannot get so far into wanting to establish this new democracy. [unintelligible]

i did 22 years in the military. we will always be needed in those types of countries. host: this is what one person rights. -- writes. caller: i completely agree. our president gets a bad rep. i did not necessarily vote for president obama. he said early on this country would have to make sacrifices, because there are certain things that our previous president had brought us to. we had afghanistan and iraq.

i served in both of those countries. you are exactly right. president obama was smart. we had an initial involvement. i know we are still in giving sorties, but we did not lose american lives. anything that we do, humanitarian aid, money will have to be put into this country. we did the same thing with haiti, and the same thing after this a numbing -- tsunami in singapore and those areas. to know not bebe naive that things will cost money. in about 10 years, i believe it will be china and that everybody will be looking to call shots if we do not get our act together here. host: next step for nato and

libya could be stepping aside according to one report. on sunday, nato planes launched attacks on several sites in tripoli. a question posed by "usa today" this morning. if you want to continue the conversation, go to our facebook page. we will continue the conversation here with all of you, with your phone calls, tweets, and emails. we will speak with the washington editor at large from the "atlantic." we will be right back. ♪ ♪ [chimes]

>> notice the color of the bourbon. the amber color that you see is all coming from the tar from inside of the barrel. -- this char from inside of the peril. this is where the bourbon get all of its color and a lot of its flavor from inside of the barrel. >> this weekend, we highlight frankfort, ky on book tv and american history tv. but for the history and literary life of the kentucky state capital. on book tv on c-span2.

and brown on the life of the kentucky cavalry soldier, porter. american history tv on c- span3, a distillery that was in operation, we one of a few that was still in operation. book tv and american history tv and frankfort, kentucky, this weekend on c-span2 and 3. for politics and public affairs, nonfiction books, and american history, it is the c-span network. it is available on television, radio, on line, and social media sites. search, watch, and to share all of our programs anytime with c- span the video library. we are on the road without receipts in digital bus and local content of vehicles, bringing our resources to local communities and showing events from around the country. it is washington your way, the

c-span network, created by cable, for a ride as a cable service. watch more video of the candidates. see with political reporters are saying and track the latest campaign contributions with c- span is website for campaign 2012. easy to use, it helps you navigate the political landscape with twitter feet, facebook updates from the campaign, candidate bios, and latest polling data, plus leak -- plans to cease in media partners in the early caucus states. all at c-span.org/campaign2012. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with our guest, steve. we were speaking about this "usa today" article. some could be stepping aside in

the coming days. what happens to the nato effort? guest: there is not a next step, because they are still trying to resolve the issue of the incumbent leadership, which is muammar gaddafi. there has been an unbelievable fiasco about the reports of his son been taken into custody and now released. it has created a lot of doubt in the first steps of the national transition council. i think there will be ongoing scrimmages of gaddafi loyalists. the big step is for nato, and france, britain, and the united states to offer assistance as needed but give the transitional council an opportunity to organize itself and take into account the people of the revolution. we have just seen in the last few days a new contingent out of the mountains come down.

everyone is saying the big change is what nato did. what really is the big change is a lot more libyan villages became part of the action. they have not been part of the political equation thus far. host: they may not have respect for this national transitional council. guest: there have been reports on both sides saying there is a loose reporting relationship with the command out of those mountains and with certain tribes. i do not think it has been negotiated yet. the action is going to be the question of -- some of your earlier comment years were saying water, structure, basic functions of cities and villages. they have created a template where you have government

council and various people appointed and responsible for these basic civil functions. it is replicated in town after town and village after village. i think that will be the fundamental first order. i think nato needs to realize there is an undercurrent of anti-western feeling inside of libya. it does not mean they are not think over what has happened. one of the techniques of gaddafi was to constantly blames the west in colonial powers, people trying to undermine the libyan state. it is important to put in arab face on what happens next. there is an opportunity for that. when you look at the press across france, britain, and the united states, it is somewhat self indulgent about what we will do next, as opposed to what do the libyans might want to have and what would make the softest footprint that will not

alienate and frustrate a lot of libyan citizens. host: tell us about of the head of this new transitional council? guest: you have many of these individuals, who were former officials of the gaddafi government. some are humanitarian activists. you also have various kinds of islamic leaders as well. it is a grab bag. at new sit down with those handling the international policy portfolio, they are very impressive. they have a great vision. we do not know if they have the vision into the muscle. we underestimate the need for muscle in libya.

my friend talks about their humanitarian credentials. i do hope they have -- on their side. there will be a competition for power in libya in the next steps. host: the head of the ntc had a press conference with the turkish prime minister. why is turkey important? guest: it is a country after the model with religious parties in a large as sectarian environment, where there is respect for minority participants in the government that many people look as the best hope for the model as to what libya should aspire to politically. the turkish foreign minister has impeccable timing to swoop in at this great moment. he beat the french, british, americans for doing so. they gave him a $100 million allied grant and are releasing

funds to the ntc. turkey has emerged as one of these fascinating strategic players in the world today, where you see many other stakeholders in the system chomping at the bit to play a bigger role. whether it is syria, libya, turkey has been a vital player on the national stage. i think it is a very positive thing not only for turkey but also for us. they are trying to send a message of inclusiveness, rule law and we are here to support you, not just the former colonial powers but partners around the world. host: germany is calling on them to unfreeze the assets. guest: i understand germany was

isolated within the european matrix. now it is rushing ahead to show that it wants to be a country of concern and a supporter. host: we will take your phone calls with steve clemens about what will happen next with libya. c -- clemons about what will happen next with libya. we are taking your phone calls, emails, and tweets. guest: it is messy. it is shocking. many had hoped that the gaddafi family would see the writing on the role -- wall and take off to malta or somewhere. the problem with the international criminal court the

places in which one can move to, perhaps russia or china, where you can seek refuge, are really diminishing. it shows the power of the criminal court. i do not know what will happen with muammar gaddafi. he is unpredictable, a dictator, who grew -- it is important as a strategist to look at the full measure of things. we were in the process with libya for some time of trying to normalize relations and the real reason of that was that libya was on a nuclear weapons a track. we offered a set of carrots to get libya to forgo and suspend its nuclear research work. it is a good example of trying to use statecraft to make the world a safer. i think it is highly unlikely

given what we have seen -- the downside of what we have seen is it will be hard for any other dictator in the future who decides to get on the nuclear weapons track to become their security protection from what we have seen. i know it is politically incorrect at this moment, there are downsides for one to consider. in north korea, when we took action, i think he said, he did not want to give up his weapons. this gives them another reason. host: 1 paper reports to the upside of this. here is what they say. look at the benefits.

young libyans may not join terrorist groups to act out their frustration and anger. guest: it is important not to be a contrarian. libya will not set the tone for most of the region. it is too small a player. it is a relatively rich country that has serious political problems. egypt is in a completely different league. one of the causes we have done in the big the strategy of obama's and not necessarily own and the outcome and did not allow a slippery slope where we embrace the libyan conflict as our conflict, which was rather smart. in the end, -- i lost my train of thought. i do think that with what has

happened in libya, it must be a libyan-directed outcome. we have to be careful about not overplaying our hand. host: what is the iran factor in all of this? guest: in terms of a regional competitor? host: with gaddafi gun and iran? guest: -- gaddafi gone and iran? guest: each of these countries, there is a battleground for the property between them. i do not think it is the primary driver of instability or insurgency in libya. we need to work -- worry about the islamic fighting group. it is a terrorist islamic extremist group.

host: are they part of the billion? guest: -- the billion? -- the rebellion? they had hoped all the participants would respect democratic norms and practices as the next government came in. one of the things that unifies this and went gaddafi was capturing and detaining these islamic fighters, they were departing to fight the british and americans. he would capture them at the border. he would sometimes kill them but other times detain them. they are suspicious of western

motives. host: we asked our viewers what is next in this transition of libya. some are calling on the administration to be part of a peacekeeping mission which would include boots on the ground. guest: i think boots on the ground would be a disaster. we need to be careful about not undoing what barack obama did very skillfully, which was to keep a western, allowing other leaders -- one of the interesting things to think about is when barack obama came into office and we were faced with a global financial crisis, they manage a transition from the g7 to the g-20, and that allowed other countries to be a

part of that. we have done the same thing with national security issues. the u.s. was always in the lead. they brought in other stakeholders. some just behind them who are not overly part but are key stakeholders. you have a kind of g-20-i zation. we have never seen this before. it would be a tragedy if we went to the next step of injecting forces into that mix, particularly ones from europe. it would reinforce this islamic protectionism and you run the risk of having people like jibril and jalil and others as

being huggers of the west and being anti-libya. we do not want to give them the ammunition to undermine the legitimacy people who wore democracy builders in libya. host: there is gunfire around a tripoli hotel. we will go to a republican in florida, ann. caller: good morning. how're you? let me turn my tv down. i like to ask you, our congress is on vacation right now. when they return, how do you think politically this will go over with the congress that will be returning here in the u.s.? i have a comment. what do you think in regards to

unfreezing the funds that have been commented on? how will the u.s. used those funds that will be unfrozen to help in the libya situation? do we have access to those funds? i hope there's a chance to share the list of the funds with you. guest: when congress returns, this is a town that will not miss an opportunity to have a fight about anything. i hope it is not partisan. their world -- there were some that were resisting. it will help tilt the odds in libya. we help the population to escape what might have been a slaughter in been gauzy -- in been gauzy

-- bengazzi. this is painful to hear. our collective expenses are about 1.1 $4 billion. in the scheme of things is a drop in the blood -- in the bucket that is small. wonka $1 billion in libya is not to be too facetious a deal. i think the cost is not an issue. on the question of funds, the funds of the libyan government's funds. the u.s. will not be able to use those funds at its own direction. it will unfreeze those funds and they will do so. the timing has not been set. they are waiting for a resolution of the gaddafi situation. there will be available to the

national transition council. host: we have a tweet. guest: that is an important point. there are few places we have seen the fall of a government like muammar gaddafi's in our history and seeing a vibrant democracy take hold. the cynicism is based by the tweeter. we have to give it a try. structurally what i fear it may from ais we're moving highly static, controlled regime to a future that will be highly fluid. you are likely to see many shifts in changes in what comes next. one hopes you take steps

towards democratic inclusion. it can slip into scenarios of competitive power -- competitive players to refuse to work together in a democratic context. i hope that the best practices and the council from the rest of the world and historical memory would lead us into a smoother transition. by sure the skepticism of the -- but i share the skepticism of the twiteeter. this is exactly the point. three of the top libyan islamic fighting group members, their sentences were commuted. we were there that day. in that process, you would meet individuals. it was interesting to talk with

them. they did not have anything against the united states or the west, just the united states or the west doing something in these countries. that makes me worried about the rush after gaddafi of western- breaded enterprises rushing in. unless -- it will look to many that we're trying to take advantage and to exploit the situation and it will trigger the same kind of feeling that iststo many jihad this \ / fighinting. caller: i have two questions. the world war powers act. where does president obama get

his authority to be in libya? only congress shall declare war. you mentioned something about $1 billion that it cost us. it doesn't matter what it costs us. in my opinion, it doesn't matter what it costs. it is an unconstitutional war and we have libyans fighting us in a iraq. we're sticking our noses where it do not belong. what is next? more broken promises. more breaking the constitution. america needs to wake up and vote ron paul. guest: thank you. one of the interesting things about government is it is messy. our system is a system of checks and balances.

this intervention in libya, the white house's argument is that they did go through notification procedures with the congress. many members of congress disagreed quite strongly. they went back and forth. you had nonbinding resolutions expressing disdain for what the white house did. this gave the factor permission to the white house to do it. it remains an unresolved question. i think there is some struggle between the legislative branch and the -- votes happened. congress had an opportunity to defund this war. i recognize it is controversial. i think that is a fair read.

host: nato is holding a press conference right now. this is by videoconference from naples. for more information, go to our web site, c-span.org. caller: hi. i want to take a not popular position. i'm against where we have been in libya. in terms of the united states at first been in charge of the bombing campaign. we let nato takeover. i don't think we should do that because that is not in our national interest. what is next -- bahrain? what about yemen?

guest: a big difference between bahrain and yemen and syria -- many people think we just decided or nicolas sarkozy of france decided to intervene in libya. it wasn't that easy. if there was no vote to take action, there would've been no u.n. sanctions and no actions by any of the western powers. it is nearly impossible to imagine a scenario where the arab league would take that kind of action against them. gaddafi has managed to make a lot of enemies. i guess that the caller raised an interesting issue about the u.s. role and nato in leadership. there have not been nato missions in the past in which the united states was not in the lead. some of us work mocking the

president -- some of us were mocking the president. that we would continue to provide unique capabilities which meant intelligence and systems integration and maybe some drones falling out of the skies. nato is u.s. leadership. i was in direct -- zurich. many were angry against the united states. they said there cannot be a nato mission without the u.s. in the lead. i hear what the caller is saying. it is important that we did something we have never done before. we have helped trigger an action that we did not own all of the outcomes were the cards were not

all stacked to deliver the outcome. we invited the stake holders to take the real lead and to be part of that coalition. not that the united states was calling all the shots on and to make it work. i'm still struggling with what this may mean. it is an important model that we have not seen before. it is interesting and we can give the president some credit. if president bush had done this, i would have given him some credit. one of my concerns early on about intervening in libya was that it is not a place of vital u.s. national interest. there are regional dynamics. i believe the band width to

make libya stable would steal from things like egypt. egypt is getting under attended right now. obama kept our costs extremely low and created an opportunity for libya. i hope the transition is able to availability to make this the full story. host: who makes up these rebel forces? guest: you have different islamic factions and you have an interesting generational issue. libya has a lot of youth and a lot of people. what has happened and the aspirations of young people having a sense from what they see on their digital phones and

smart phones and their computers is that there is a bigger world available to them. they did not have the same degree of fear that their parents and grandparents may have had from that regime. i'm excited about young people and how they -- the have to balance that against less liberal forces that exist and are powerful. different tribes. one of the interesting things about muammar gaddafi is that he was a brilliant balancer of tribal interests inside of libya. the next government will have to do that, too. caller: the people have spoken and they want democracy, religion, and change. we need to help them by providing food and water and humanitarian aid and medical

assistance. host: how does that work? guest: if they ask for those things, then i agree with the caller. the need experts in its utility provision and that kind of build out. we think of these countries going through this as being poor and developing. libya is not poor. iraq has oil. libya has oil, too. they will have the economic wherewithal to import this expertise. we need to let them do it on their own terms. there is a gap, a lot fighting. we heard reports of the mines.

the united states and europe will provide everything requested that libya needs, but then get libya off of that and have them be in control and have them paying for their own future. host: we have this tweet. guest: an interesting question. i would not say capitalism has failed as much as they have had some pickups -- hiccups. we don't talk about this in the united states. the united states showing military limits. this undermined america's leadership and ability to counsel other governments on how to organize their economies. many are looking to china as a model. if you can get big investments

develops but yet you can maintain -- that worries me. that is something we need to take seriously in our own country. not running away from a market capitalist model of inclusive democracy. the united states after the battles that the one in washington, make it look like -- we used to be king of the hill and the rest of the world says why is america kicking down its own heill? host: dan in detroit on the independent line. caller: hi. in the great empire did not stay great when the halleys campaigns going on. support our troops. bring them home.

-- any great empire did not stay great when there were campaigns going on. stop the drugs going into the country. when was the last time we won a great war? host: we have a tweet. guest: right. both callers raised an important point. there is distress inside the united states. president obama issued his national strategy report. that is available online to read. maybe half of that report is u.s.ed to getting to the economy back on track. there is this tension that the apple corps at home is running inside. i do not think we get the

benefit of choosing one verses the other. using the resources you have at hand and trying to shape the system in ways that are good for america's interest. i just returned from kabul. when you look at this engagement, the longest war in our history, you have to ask the question, is that war helping america becoming a trap of american power? that is an unresolved issue and not necessarily helping to defer america's ability to project power and influence. host: we have reaction from the press conference. they will continue libya operations and will bomb gaddafi's forces if they keep fighting. guest: they have identified the

bombing of libya and forces. one brigade was rushing from one area of green square and i think this falls under the u.n. mandate to protect civilians. i think there will be that level of intervention. not much they can do when it enters an urban area. i'm watching for for what happens to muammar gaddafi. i believe he is in the country. we would know because there would be quick defections. what muammar gaddafi is doing and the kind of various scenarios about what happens to him and his sons. we see these young kids with guns. they are wild and excited and angry and frustrated and they are then king -- venting.

we did not see a bloodbath in benghazi. tripoli.sover what countries might take gaddafi? guest: i don't not want to speculate. there are a number of african countries that are on the list. any one of the countries that might have to agree to bring him in. italy was trying to broker that deal. there were trying to negotiate an outcome. he would not do that. it puts anyone of those host countries under pressure about evading the international criminal court. i do not know of a mechanism to undo that. that didn't give gaddafi and easy it back door. host: steve clemons, thank you

for talking to our viewers. we will continue our series about looking at medicare. up next, a discussion on the deportation of illegal immigrants. here's a news update from c-span radio. >> more on libya from john mccain. in remarks today, he says he's not sure how long muammar gaddafi might hold out against rebels, but that the u.s. should turn their attention to national ricans -- national reconciliation in libya and making sure there are no revenge killings. in britain, the bbc is reporting the former editor of "the news of the world" did receive

payments from the newspaper while working under david cameron. a reporter and a private investigator were jailed for hacking into the voice mails of royal staff. joe biden is praising the resolve of the japanese people as they recover from the earthquake and tsunami. about 20,000 people were left dead or missing. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> dr. martin luther king was not a president of the united states. at no time in his life to be hold public office. he was not a hero of foreign wars. he never had much money. while he lived, he was reviled at least as much as he was

celebrated. by his own account, he was a man frequently wracked with doubt. a man not without flaws. a man who once question why he had been chosen for so arduous a task, the task of leading a people to freedom. the task of healing festering wounds of a nation's original sins. >> the groundbreaking of the martin for king jr. groundbreaking of the moral. the memorial will be dedicated in washington, d.c., this sunny, live on c-span. we will have coverage of other events this week on the c-span networks. every weekend, american history tv on c-span3.

48 hours of people and events. watch or a history is the drink -- watch oral histories. visit college classrooms across the country. go behind the scenes on american artifacts. get our complete schedule at c- span.org. >> "washington journal" continues. markede're back with krikorian -- mark krikorian and sarahi uribe. did i did ok with your name?

we are talking about the deportation of illegal immigrants. what is the program? guest: a program that seeks to insure over the next few years that when a person is arrested and fingerprinted, when they are brought into the police station and their fingerprints are taking comfort their fingerprints are checked against the fbi and against the immigration databases to find out if the person has been ordered deported or there is some other kind of outstanding immigration warrant against them. dew point is to do what americans think is already done -- the point is to do what americans are rethink its are redone. are you wanted in another state?

and check whether there are immigration violations. a lot of people are deported. secure communities is one way of finding people to be deported. they usually did not report the numbers separately. secure communities has not rolled out to the entire country. the program was started during the bush administration. the time what is to have it in place everywhere by the end of 2013. it is likely to result in a large number of people identified as illegal immigrants. hit on secure gets pai communities. not everybody is picked up because they have not ask for enough detention capacity to hold everybody.

they will have to decide who they are going to pick up. a lot of people who are identified as being an illegal immigrant are in fact given a walk. they are not in fact picked up by the immigration service. the number of people deported overall over the past couple of years has been under for under thousand a year -- under for a hundred thousand a year -- under 400,000 a year. guest: american communities are less willing to call the police. criminals are the ones who benefit from this program. you cannot solve a problem if people do not: the police to report the crime. cities and states know this is

common sense. you cannot work with a community if they are not willing to talk with you. host: that is one of the points that is brought up. guest: one of the talking points but it does not make any sense. i can see how you can make that argument with regard to checking the immigration status when someone is stopped for an illegal left turn. there is no empirical evidence that this claim is true. affect onchilling cooperating with the police in a domestic violence case or something like that. if it were true in those kinds of more casual encounters with the police, how can you argue that someone who has been arrested and taken to the police

station, had his fingerprints taken, that that action is going to dissuade members of the public who are not criminals from working with the police. secure communities is one of those threshold issues. if you are opposed to identifying immigration law violators among criminals, you're not serious about immigration enforcement. you're opposed to the very idea of enforcing immigration law. it is almost kind of a minimum standard that at least people who are arrested by the police should have their immigration status check. it mystifies me how anyone can be against this unless they are against the concept of departing anyone. guest: 3 governors -- the governor of massachusetts, new york, and illinois, as well as

other localities have opposed this program because it hurts public safety. we have the top experts saying this undermines their ability to prevent and solve crimes. we have seen the stories of domestic violence survivors who called police and wind up being deported. the program was touted as targeting serious criminals. it has created a deportation dragnet. traffic offenses at a time of scarcity. it doesn't make sense. host: this is put out by i.c.e. the green is those that are activated. all little over 5000

jurisdictions that are activated. you mentioned the governors who do not want to be part of the program. what is the status of those who would like to get out of the program? guest: when the government rolled out this program, they said it was voluntary. the district of columbia asked to opt out as follows other cities, such as san francisco. there is critical resistance from the cities and states. the government wants to force this program on every jurisdiction. this is about government. you do not signed contracts and decide they are meaningless. that is the point where we're at. this may be a question about the state's rights and whether the government can have this unfunded mandate. the way states can opt

out of the program is to not submit fingerprints to the fbi at all. that is a voluntary thing. every state has a clearing house where the local jurisdictions send the fingerprints and from there they go to the national criminal information center. states can say that we are not going to participate. that means there police don't have any access to any federal databases. that is irresponsible. confusion came with regard to the ability of being voluntary. the obama administration was ambivalent about the program and was sending mixed messages. this is a problem the political appointees to the obama administration created rather than one that is inherent in the program.

you get no fingerprints from anybody. if that is ok with you, then that is irresponsible. host: this is an addition of "the new york times." guest: those statistics are in a false or alarming. we filed a lawsuit about six years ago. we have received 17,000 internal documents. we found out that the majority of the people deported through the program are non-criminals or they were convicted of a misdemeanor. what is a criminal alien? this is a term that is not

defined. we have the presumption of innocence in this country. this program flies in the face of that. host: the news on thursday that canceledation was -- guest: this is a step in the right direction for the president. it is good he understands that indiscriminate enforcement has had catastrophic -- there have been false and now spends. they had three announcements in the past and we have not seen results. we are innate wait and see moment with this policy.

-- we are in a wait and see a moment. host host: residents with police records who came here illegally -- your reaction to this decision. guest: it is a lawless act. every executive -- president, governor -- has to have some will room -- some wiggle room. there'll be some exceptional

cases where you'll want to make an exception. the problem is this policy is that the administration is turning that wiggle room into the law. congress has rejected something called the dream act. this is amnesty for people who came there at a young age and met other requirements. the administration is implementing the dream act and spitting in the face of congress. host: do you think there will be lawsuits on this? guest: that is a good question. i have no idea. the problem is that even those people who supported the dream act should be deeply disturbed by this. there is going to be an administration at some point in

the future of that they do not like on immigration. it established a president or congress can reject a policy measure or proposed law -- is .top was a president'cedent the people who would benefit from this new policy would not be deported. it is not as though the government would look the other way and if you're not there, they will not look for you. people will in fact be amnestied. this is administrative and a state and in a constitutional sense is outrageous. host: deportation policy is our topic this morning. we'll take your e-mails, phone calls, and your tweets.

host: we go to john, a democratic caller from ohio. caller: yes. hello? host: you are on the air. caller: i think the lot is totally ridiculous. we're bringing back -- i think the law is ridiculous. we have 10 million illegals in this country. they are violating the law. we are rewarding them for violating the law. we give them schooling, housing. we give them medicaid. we give them food stamps. we are rewarding them to commit the law. you go out and get a traffic violation, you have to face the law. when are we going to make these

people face the law regardless? thank you for your time. guest: the caller is right. the system is broken. there are about 12 million people in this country that are undocumented. we're not going to deport all of them. that would be immoral. we to figure out what is most important to us. host: john, a republican, in new hampshire. caller: for a student getting run over by an illegal immigrant who had a prior conviction of assault and battery on a police officer. i'm sick of these liberals. are one vietnam thavets

the street. give the american people some help. host: dennis is an independent in michigan. caller: we are not a country that is not compassionate. we're not a country that is immoral. it is important to take care of americans that are in this country first. there are probably people suffering in louisiana from katrina and other people in appalachia or in the ghettos of detroit and boston and washington, d.c., that have legal citizens that are suffering that are not getting the care that they need. let's take care of the americans in america. your point.t p

guest: we have a government to look after the best interest of american citizens. illegal immigrants have not just violated the immigration law. across theem stocnuck border. once they are here, illegal immigrants are committing perjury if they got a job and sign the forms when you show your social security and driver's license. if i commit perjury, i go to jail. illegal immigrants do not. they create a whole history with a so security number with potential problems. if i do that, i go to jail. illegal immigrants do that and they did not go to jail. in certain areas of the law,

illegal immigrants are in a privileged position. they are better off than american citizens because we give them a pass to commit a whole slew of crimes without holding them accountable. host: you represent day laborers. what are you involved in this? guest: people like to think of all criminals that commit crimes on a daily basis. undocumented immigrants are nannies. they pick our vegetables. some are heroes. we are a part of this society. people are married to us. it makes no sense to continue to deny people that kind of political and social equality.

day laborers look for work across the country. there were thousands of day laborers the were recruited to go build after hurricane katrina. it was the day laborers that rebuilt that city. they have a right to remain in a place they now call home. host: democratic caller from texas. caller: miss uribe, i understand what you're saying. those jobs that these people are working on, years ago, kids at of high-school or trying to make extra money over the summer -- i came from california and i'm also a teacher. i will tell you that these kids are reading at a second and

third grade level in the sixth, seventh, and eighth grade. there are things they bring across -- microbes. we have had an uptick in a whopping cough and other diseases. when you say "undocumented," you're trying to soften the word "illegal." guest: sorry to hear that people are reading and a second-grade level. the underlying tone of the caller -- of what the caller was saying was a little bit disturbing, that immigrants carry disease. the way that immigrants were described in the 1950's, it is

upsetting and people are ready to talk about a real solution. people want to figure out a way to move of forward. host: ed, a republican from georgia. caller: i feel president obama feels more about the illegal mexicans that he does about the people of the united states. he is going around the laws. he is not following the constitution. this man is dangerous. host: we have a tweet from bill. we go to clay in arkansas. caller: thank you. i have to agree with mr. krikorian about the comment he

made about the perjury and fraud we americans must face. as far as the lady who called from texas, there has been a substantial uptick in the last decade for of tuberculosis. i would like to ask miss uribe, who is espousing the talking points, what is the criminal penalty for illegally going to mexico? it is quite severe. congress should quit giving their powers away to the executives. the constitution says the united states government is to protect our borders. we have 20 million unemployed americans, 12 million aliens, and we have a bunch of troops that we should bring home and they should have jobs. host: a democrat from

philadelphia, jen. caller: i think this issue is important. it is one of the things that has not been mentioned and needs to be recognized. many people come there without documentation and they work and they send some of the money home, but they are also supporting our domestic economy. it can only be remedied by some kind of immigration reform that allows legal authorization for people who work here. host: let me take the point. guest: the argument in favor of high levels of low-skilled immigration is pretty weak and anytime. and a time when we have over 9% unemployment, there is no justification for it.

we have seen instance after instance were illegal immigrants have been removed from jobs whether because of a raid. they have done these audits of people's personal files. a restaurant chain had its personnel files audited. they had to let go a lot of people. the next day, there is all line of legal immigrants and american citizens applying for those jobs. there is no excuse for not acting aggressively to remove illegal workers from the work force when we are in this kind of economy. guest: why is the onus on the government? under the law, they have to except the phony documents that the legal documents present. if they say, do you have

something else? this green card looks kind of fishy. they can be fined by the justice department. there are corporate employers knowingly hiring illegal employees. we need legislation to have all employers when they hire somebody verify that social security number and name and date of birth through a system called e-verify. host: jeffrey is a republican in washington. caller: that was a good comment. i think there is a tier system in america. i was born in california and have been on the bottom of the my entire life.

i watched employers hire people. they were not worried about documentation. they were worried about making a larger profit. that's what we do with children of our middleclass. we send them to walmart. those jobs were taken during the good times. those are not the jobs that will bring you wealth and stability and a college education. those jobs were being taken by people that did want them. the children of our country don't want those jobs. they want the better jobs and the better future. we would rather have that job than none. but they were taken. guest: there is frustration with the unemployment crisis. that is very real and we cannot dismiss that.

people are unemployed and that is hurting peoples' household. the day laborer and the street corner -- it was wall street that brought us into this crisis. immigrants are being used as scapegoats and fingers are pointed at immigrants for causing this recession, which is not the case. in terms of improving wages and labor standards, giving people amnesty and work authorization is the way to elevate and create a level playing field. we have unscrupulous employers that are willing to pay less than the minimum wage to drive down wages in this country. host: betony read you a tweet here. -- let me read you a tweet. guest: not really.

there are some people in a gray area. the great areas are created by immigration lawyers. there was a blog on someone from the previous amnesty in 1986 who lied on this amnesty application. the whole thing was a tissue of lies. a lawsuit in supposedly this gray area and has constantly been put off and filed another lawsuit. he has been in limbo. almost all the immigrants that are in a gray area created that limbo as a way -- they are holding on with their fingernails to stay in the united states and to prevent the law from being enforced.

guest: my mother received her citizenship. it has been 20 years since we last had an amnesty. we have millions of people in this country that have not seen an amnesty. there is not a pathway to citizenship in this country as we have that right now. is about time we modernize our loss. -- it is about time we modernized our laws. this is nothing new for reuniting families. host: we have an e-mail. guest: that is right. we are not all mexicans. 50% are from mexico and the other 50% are from different

parts of the world. this announcement by the administration is not amnesty. people's cases are being closed but they are not being dismissed. they are not going to drop the deportation numbers. there are still at an all-time high. i mentioned operation wetback. we deported 800,000 people. today, we of deported over 1 million people. we're seeing a historic levels of deportation right now. that is creating a serious crisis for the hardship that these communities are facing and public safety. 60% are from mexico. they have to adopt a mexican accent to not be discriminated

against by mexicans. the immigration problem is fundamentally a problem of mexico. the basic point does not matter where any of the illegal immigrants are from. the reason we have this problem is because we are on willing to enforce the law. we do not have amnesties for the heck of it. the 1986 amnesty was to be the one analyst example of a it. e will tie up the loose anends by giving amnesty. we're going to enforce the law. the illegal immigrants of the amnesty up front. the promises of enforcement were abandoned. fool me once, shame on you.

fool me twice, shame on me. host: here is an e-mail from don. guest: there are employers out there that loved the cheap labor. they want to export -- exploit workers. the threat of deportation is used to drive down wages. there used to be used in jobs -- there used to be union jobs. people have second-class citizenship in the united states. give them papers. give people and the state. host: michael in santa barbara.

caller: good morning. i am concerned about the immigration problem. most americans feel the illegals come into this country. what they really want to do is just send their money back home. americans are left out in the cold trying to figure out how they are going to survive. what my question is, since the government has failed the people, do we have a right to form a militia to get the illegals out of this country? host: mark krikorian? guest: we can for slaughter normal methods. we do not need machine guns, land mines, or citizen militias.

we need normal law enforcement. even though there are legal changes that, i think, are necessary, even the existing law provides adequate tools. host: is their common ground between the two of you? guest: i think we agree that the system is broken. guest: as much as i think the implementation of the dream act is a lawless extra- constitutional measure, there is an idea in the dream act that kids who grow up here known no other language and they are psychologically americans. i think there is a case to be made for those kids under certain circumstances with other enforcement guarantees. the problem is that discussion has never taken place.

supporters of the dream act of attempted to use it as a poster child in the vehicle for amnesty saying here a little johnny brought here of three months old, valedictorian, wants to go west point and lives to kill terrorists. therefore, all 11 million illegal aliens need citizenship. if we start looking out it -- if we stopped looking at it as a gimmick and a look at those who have been brought here and the young age -- host: soaring number less than 300,000? guest: that is the number in proceedings. some of them will get the amnesty and some will not. there are some not that could benefit. guest: this is not amnesty. their cases are being

administratively closed-end it does not mean that they now have amnesty for political equality. amnesty is not happening anytime soon. i think everyone knows that. there is no appetite for it in congress. the president can and the so- called secure communities program and he can stop the collusion between local police and immigration and customs enforcement. matter where people stand on the issue of immigration, which we know, can be very controversial, very emotional, at the end the day police are here to protect and serve our communities. if several immigration violations are getting in the way about, it does not make sense to make them do the government's job. host: you mentioned your mother got amnesty under the 1986 law? where was she from? guest: mexico. she crossed the border as a

domestic worker. she put all of my sisters through college and we went to some of the best colleges in the world. now we are here today. host: do you have your citizenship? guest: i was born in los angeles, so i have my citizenship. we would drive around los angeles and if she ran a red light or had a traffic offense and i think about losing my mother because of that, it really strikes from and it really makes it real how on just these immigration laws are and how they just do not make sense. host: republican from knoxville, tenn. caller: this issue is about politics. democrats cannot alexian's without illegal immigrants. we had tight restrictions in 1956 and they lost. when we passed the law,, and

some people have said this, it keeps right people and the country, which i think is an exaggeration. the lady on the left does not care about immigrants. she is a political hack. all three of those governors are democrats. democrats love immigration because it gets them votes. politics is about winning. that is all it is about to. they do not care, okay? unemployed people vote 20 to one democratic. roosevelt won three elections with high lanham hyman. they love unemployment. the problem in this country is on the left side of the street and it is the liberal democrats. guest: voters are definitely turning into the debate and many of the more frustrated, including myself, about the president's broken promises.

the president has supported more people than any other in u.s. history. for latinos, this is a slap in the face for a president who would like to see himself as a champion of immigration reform. and fidelity no vote is angry about this and we hope -- and the latino vote is angry about this. host: a recent piece from "the washington post." coppermark krikorian -- mark krikorian? caller: -- guest: hispanics vote

two to one democratic regardless. this is the way it has always been with a few notable exceptions. the caller had a point though. it is not that illegal immigrants boat a lot. we need to make sure the people voting are eligible to vote, but even nationalized citizens do not vote in huge numbers. the benefit of emigration to those promoting a bigger government, higher taxes, a bigger state, is that it makes things, economic and social conditions, worse than then enabled los promoting bigger government to say that they need their solutions. 33% of all people who lack health insurance are immigrants or children of immigrants. that makes the argument over government involvement in health

insurance making it the more salient. immigration increases the gap between the rich and the poor. it increases the number of the poor. it increases the clientele for government programs, the welfare state, generally speaking. that is the benefit. immigration makes social problems worse enabling those who want a bigger government, to say, "look at how bad these problems are. we have the solutions." host: next is an independent in arlington, va. caller: there is the green card lottery. there is the j-1 visa and h-1 visa. you are either here legally or you are not. i commend president for getting rid of 1 million. that is remarkable. that is the reason health care

costs are up, you know? you are sitting there. i am a social conservative and i am a religious conservative, as well. i do have sympathy, but i do not think this about illegal immigrants. you break the law. you go back to your country. host: reborn in the united states? caller: yes. my dad was in the service so i grew up in england. there are some laypeople who were trying to get to the u.s. illegally and that is the way to do it. employers as well, both republicans and democrats, they are all using us as pawns. they like using illegal immigrants as slave labor. host: ms. uribe? guest: there is no way we are

going to deport the 12 million people and documented in the united states. what would be disastrous for the economy, immoral, and it is not happening. well, what every going to do with the people that are already here? if we do not deport them all, one of going to do? the idea that everyone who crosses the border as a criminal and somehow that eclipses every other contribution they have made to this society is, i think of very dangerous. it is then easy to take the right away from people who are dehumanized. my mother crossed the border. she was undocumented. but that did not make her into a criminal. maybe that was an illegal act, but when someone runs a red light, all of a sudden your child is not an illegal. guest: the important point is that we are not going to deport all of the illegal immigrants.

we are not going to round up 11 million people and drive them to the desert on tuesday like a scene out of "the 10 commandments" movie. that is not the alternative to amnesty. the alternative is gradually reducing the illegal population through attrition and enforcement. the reason we do not have 12 million immigrants is partly because of the economy and better enforcement. we had a peak of 12.5 illegal immigrants in 2007 before the recession. it started declining and it is now down to something less than 11 million. part of that is because of deportation. part of that is because of better enforcement, making a harder to get in, and part of it is because a lot of them took the hint. it may be the party is over and they should leave. we have seen this in arizona and georgia. people are packing up and

saying, "apparently they do not want me, so i will go home." that is the key. host: sarahi uribe and mark krikorian. we have a few minutes left here with both of you. we will try to take a few more phone calls. a republican from baltimore. go ahead. caller: appreciating that the system is broke, instead of record rewording that behavior, which is what amnesty is, why not invest money and time in giving these people a one or two year temporary station and place them at the back of the line? host: ms. uribe? guest: we are more rewarding people. they said they were and clogging the immigration courts and making room for people they believed were a higher priority

and that the deportation of 400,000 per year would not drop. it is inaccurate to say that people are being rewarded. i want to go back to the point about arizona and attrition through enforcement. one of the first lines of s.b. 1070, the bell stopped by the department justice, said it was a bill about attrition through enforcement. if we want to create an arizona- ification, we are in trouble. it collapsed because of some of their very hateful legislation, and it has shown to be one of the worst in this country's and it gained international attention at the time. even hillary clinton said that it became an international incident and countries were

rightly criticizing the u.s. for a policy that would create an apartheid. host: democrat in indiana. last caller. caller: i wanted to speak to the lady. only her. i wanted to ask if -- there are rules in the bible that do talk about being your brother's keeper, caring, and emphasize the. that is what jesus came to earth for. -- caring and empathy. we need to represent jesus if we are christians. host: of which are run out of time. i want to thank both of our

guests for being here, sharing our viewpoint, and talking with our viewers. coming up, continuing our discussion about medicare. today, medicare advantage. first, a news update. >> 9:14 a.m. the s&p said in a statement that the agency's president is going to resign by the end of the year. his departure comes weeks after the s&p downgraded the u.s. credit rating to aa +. one analyst tells bloomberg news that, "it looks like he is being helped out the door." politico reports the republican national committee wants to fund -- get out the vote. they hope that nominee bob turner can pull out and not said -- pull out an upset. he is ahead by just 6 points.

chris shays plans to file paperwork to run for the u.s. senate. he said he decided to run after the connecticut independent senator joe lieberman enhanced you would not seek reelection in do those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> dr. martin luther king was not a president of the united states. at no time in his life did he hold public office. he was not a hero of foreign wars. he never had much money. while he lived, he was reviled at least as much as he was celebrated. by his own accounts, he was a man frequently wracked with doubts, a man not without flaws , a man who, like moses before him, more than once questioned

why he had been chosen for so arduous task. the task of leading a people to freedom. the task of healing the festering wounds of the nation's original sen. >> watch the entire event, the groundbreaking of the martin luther king, jr., morial at d.c.'s ban library. five years later, the memorial will dedicated this sunday live on c-span. during the week, coverage of other events surrounding the indication on the c-span networks. -- surrounding the dedication. [bell tolls]

>> notice the color of the bourbon, that pretty amber color. that is all coming from the inside of the barrel. this is where the bourbon gets its color and a lot of its flavor. currently, they have discovered over 200 chemical flavors just in the oak from this merrill. -- barrel. >> this weekend, frankfort, kentucky, on a "booktv" and american history tv. on c-span2, vice kumbaya lance, and urban renewal. on "the crawfish bottom." and also the life of john porter. corn american mystery tv on c- span3, a visit to the buffalo

trace distillery, one of only four in operation during prohibition, for medicinal purposes of course. stop by the old state capital. booktv and american history tv in frankfort, kentucky, this weekend on c-span2 and 3. host: before we get started on our discussion about medicare advantage, part of our series this week, i want to give you an update on the situation in libya. a piece says the situation in tripoli is still very serious and dangerous. the residents of tripoli have been fleeing and that it off the's compound has been breached. compaq has been breached. we are looking at medicare every day this week.

tomorrow, we will look at medicare part d and thursday, we will look at the fiscal health of medicare and proposals to bring down the costs. today, a look at medicare advantage and privately run insurance plans. let's begin with what is medicare advantage and how does it differ from traditional medicare? guest: medicare advantages in a way of getting medicare benefits, but instead of the government paying advisers to a private plan. when you do that, you are guaranteed the same benefits that medicare covers, but if there is any savings they have as a result of care management of how they are paid, they can go back in extra benefits. typically, beneficiaries have gotten additional benefits or less cost sharing by joining in

medicare advantage plan. there are a narrower range for so providers because they usually have a provider network. host: how does that work? guest: once per year, you look at the choices and you can join a private plan. when your new to medicare, you can join the and if your circumstances plan come -- change, you can join. there are different plans different to most ppo's. the beneficiary looks at it every fall, usually between october 15th-december 7th and they will look at the types of plans. you were committed for one year, although there is a little bit of an opportunity in january to disenroll and go back to fee- for-service. you get all of your benefits plus or supplemental, so you do

not have to take a gap policy. if you're going to get the drug benefits, part d, you can get that through the plan, and there are a few exceptions. host: of does it cost more docks guest: -- does it cost more? guest: it depends. there are a small number of medicare advantage plans that could offset some of those premiums. the plans can charge extra for the benefits package. a lot of them, these days, have a $0 premium, but that varies and it depends. you could be paying extra for that plan, but it combines gap coverage and part d. host: medicare advantage is a private hmo-ppo plan to pay for hospitalization, doctor visits,

and prescription drugs. some plans offer dental and vision as well. it is funded through general revenues and premiums paid by those enrolled. it was established in 1997. guest: the predecessor does go back. there was always an attempt to have an option, if there were in the private sector, so even in the beginning there were work around to allow plans like kaiser to get in. in the 1980's there was an hmo program. in 1997, the managed care expanded to include other types of plans. and has continued over time, but it has not had as large a role as it does now. host: you mention the kaiser. what are some of the others? guest: kaiser, he managed -- humana, united, blue cross, blue

shield, aetna. there are a lot of big local plans that could be important in different markets. host: 48 million medicare beneficiaries. that makes up about 36 million traditional, and then in medicare advantage there are 12 million. by the big difference? guest: people voluntarily choose what they want. historically, people who have had the employer-based coverage or who are also eligible for medicaid have been less likely to be in medicare vantage because there is a disadvantage to being there because their employer is already paying them and it gets complicated to do so. probably about 33% of beneficiaries, or more than that now, maybe 40% now, who do not have those types of coverage at least get their part d coverage

through medicare advantage. people have less choice in providers and medicare has been popular. people like to stay in the traditional program, but increasingly people find there may be an advantage for them financially so they join the medicare advantage plan. host: here is a map of the country according to the kaiser foundation. the darker states colored have the most people enrolled in medicare advantage by state in 2011. when we talk about costs, $116 billion in 2010 was the cost for medicare advantage. 22% of medicare spending and 9% higher than traditional medicare. why is the cost more? what was the objective in the beginning? guest: it changed over the

beginning. there were supposed to spend 95% of what it cost people to give medicare coverage for the fee- for-service people in the same county. over time, it has changed. people were concerned about rural counties and access to private plans. there were concerned about urban counties where payments were lower. a variety of different things happened. then, in 1990 -- then in 2003, the medicare modernization act, the government said that at a minimum it would be 100% of fee- for-service and that the rate of inflation had increased. for a variety of reasons, that were both intentional and unintentional, the price went up to about 114% of fee-for- service. now under the new act there are trying to bring that back down

slowly on a phased basis of it is closer to 100%. it is likely to vary depending on one count to you live in -- on what county you live in. if you are in the lowest payment county, you can go down to 115% of fee-for-service thomas of the government is trying to shrink that 109% because the original concept was that it should save money or not cost any more. host: off of twitter -- guest: there is a big debate about how they efficient they are. they are paid more than traditional managed care. certain plants, largely the hmo oxime -- plans, the hmo's, they

are on average more efficient than medicare but the other plans cost more than medicare and there is a lot of variation across the country. host: before we go to the con calls, i want to show two different perspectives. we begin with senator lamar alexander and his viewpoint. >> 25% of all americans that are on medicare have chosen medicare advantage because it provides the option for increased dental care, vision care, hearing coverage, reduced hospital deductibles, and benefits. this is helpful to low-income and minority americans. it is helpful to people in rural areas. host: that was senator lamar alexander. i want to give the democratic perspective who says it is inefficient and costs more. let's see what he has to say. >> you have got to squeeze the

inefficiencies out of this medicare advantage program were the original idea of a medicare hmo's it would be that they would be lower than fee-for- service and it was going to cost medicare on a 95% of it fee-for- service. that is not what happened in the prescription drug bill. it got reversed. host: marsha gold? guest: there is a big debate between the parties about the value of private plans and how much we should pay for them. i think both parties probably think there is a reason to have an option for a private plan because it exists otherwise and gives beneficiaries traces. the question is how much to pay for them and how much value they add.

republicans tend to think that competition and choice is good so there are not as bothered by paying more for them because they think it will get people there. the democrats are not convinced they are any better or maybe not even as good as traditional medicare and they do not want to pay more. one of the issues of extra benefits is it because medicare has limitations which is why people buy the gap coverage. should we fix the entire medicare program to get better benefits there? agreed -- or do you have to join a private plan to get better benefits? host: democrat from north bergen, new jersey. good morning. thank you for reading. go ahead. caller: i have regular medicare and aarp. they sent a letter to my

bank, and i pay $100 in medicare, then i pay part d, then i have a copay of $7 for my medication. after the pharmacies it's $7 a month. host: what's your question? caller: what is the best plan? i don't know. they talk about how much they are paying and if i put 2 adn 2 together besides what i pay medicare, i pay $400 per month extra. guest: that is the dilemma. your situation is not at all

unusual. the kaiser family foundation has some numbers about how much people paper medical care. you can look at a private plans to see if that would save you any money. there is a website the federal government has, medicare.gov, and a 1-800 number you can call. one of the problems congress is facing is that they do not have a lot of money but medicare beneficiaries do not have money. how do we deal with the dilemma? host: medicare.gov is the website. we go next to a republican in new york. jerry? caller: thank you very much. i have some familiarity because i have gone through four levels of appeal on the coverage of

continuous glucose monitoring for diabetes. the coverage is denied because medicare says it is precautionary. to me, that does not make any sense. i have two questions. how do regulations come about? i understand there is the medicare regulation. my second question is that the medicare subsidy they provide to the insurance companies, my understanding is that runs $13,000 per year per member. if that is the case, it seems like the incentive would be to minimize the payment to maximize the profits. host: here is one tweet. guest: on the last question, and insurance companies under medicare, which are regulated,

and have pretty much the same profit level or not any more than they get in the commercial lines of business. for the most part, savings go back to the beneficiaries in the extra benefits. every year, medicare reviews the bids for those plans and tries to make sure that there are there. in terms of the specific questions that you have come you may want to look in the end "medicare and you" handbook which lays out the appeal rights. they are fairly extensive, but i also know that i have heard many complaints from people who find them still confusing and get frustrated when something in their doctor thinks they want, they cannot get. i cannot answer your specific questions, but i can appreciate why it may get frustrating. host: there are over 120 pages

in this pamphlet. guest: there are people you can call the help you when you do not want to read all that stuff. you can call the 1-800 number for medicare and each state has an office on aging you can go in and talk to people. there are an advocacy groups like the medicare rights center and other places to help people understand their particular situation. host: the answer to this next week may be in this handbook. guest: that is a hard one to answer because there are specifics. generally, you are required to cover all of the medicare benefits, whether you are in the advantage plan or another plan. it should be identical between the two. cost sharing is a load to bear.

there have been concerns in the past that some plants have had high cost sharing for certain things that are high cost like things that may have to do with chemotherapy. cms, the center for medicare and medicaid services, has clamped down on those and now there is more protection. generally, you should be able to get things, but like anything else, everyone's situation is different and it is important to consider the specific health plan you are in and talk to your doctors and other providers to see what plan is likely to be best for your situation. there is an open enrollment. coming up in the fall, that is a good opportunity to. host: we're talking about medicare advantage in our guest is marsha gold from the mathematics of. what is a mathematical policy research?

guest: we are a nonpartisan group that does research on public policy issues. host: frank become republican, from ohio. caller: if medicare's their privately run plan, why is it when i go to the veterans administration that they do not pay anything towards any benefits i have or for any care? they charge my medicare instead of v.a. and i am 100% disabled from world war ii. years ago, they took over everything. now they charge everything, medicare, to my v.a. guest: when there are a lot of these programs and people may be on several of them, there is often a question of which program pays first and which is the right way to do this in the things have changed over time.

your situation is an example of the government and congress deciding that certain expenses copers to medicare and then the va will pick up the difference to stretch the dollars out of the va. the website and in the handbook they explain that in more detail, but that is why that happens. host: spring town, taxes, democratic caller. -- springtown, texas. caller: i tried medicare advantage, and if you have any chronic illnesses, you're really suggesting yourself -- subjecting yourself. it was atrocious. it did not want to file on it. to me, i could not wait to get

back to traditional medicare and i found it has worked out better for me to save my independence to go to whatever specialist i think, like to go to rather than somebody on a list. host: why did you initially decide to do medicare advantage? caller: i felt for the propaganda. we're going to give you dental, vision, there is a health club membership, blah, blah, blah. you try to use it, and it is nothing. host: you're going where? caller: to the doctors and hospitals who are the low bidders to get on the list.

host: what did your doctors say about medicare advantage? caller: of course, they like it pretty well. not all of them like it. it just kind of depends. i found that it was very, very inconvenient. i was being forced into hospitals and doctors that i heard a terrible things about. host: you had an hmo and not a ppo? caller: i do not know what you call it. i do not even remember the name of it now. i had to use a list, only these hospitals, only these doctors, and so on. the doctor, for instance, that i saw for my heart had a terrible

reputation, but i guess he was just the low bidder. guest: i think what you point out is probably a good example of the importance of being really educated as a consumer. there are a lot of plans and your experience is one. other people have had other experiences. some like them, some not. some plans are better than others. unfortunately, i think the level of sophistication you need it to look at some of these things is quite extensive. you really need to understand which providers are in there, what the benefits are, and make good choices for yourself. that is pretty demanding. i can appreciate that being difficult. i am sorry you had experience. the government tries to post what their experiences are, but that is an important reason why

some people have argued to make sure that the traditional medicare programs stay there and people have choices not today private plan if they do not want to. host: medicare vantage is the topic this morning and part of our series this week looking at all aspects of medicare. thursday, we will look at the cost of medicare and how to bring them down which is the subject in a piece this morning in "the new york times." "cut medicare, help patients."

they go on mentioned procedures where there are areas where this new super committee should look up and those are topics they can bring up on thursday. next in colorado, an independent college. go ahead. caller: i just want to propose a solution to medicare and social security. i call it word, an acronym for "work, retire, and die." have 10 years of political benefits plus a living allowance, like social security. but pays for anything, mayo clinic and a stanford medical center, you want it, you got it.

then i near 75th birthday, you lose all government benefits. i do not think we can afford to keep everyone alive until their 100. it is a noble goal, but it will bankrupt us. host: marsha gold? guest: that is a question of philosophy more than a fact. there are quite a few people who would disagree with you. there are lots of ways one can solve health care costs and a lot of them debate as to the best way to do that. host: panama city, florida. doug? you are on the air. caller:. you for taking my call. there was a woman being so negative about the advantage plan. i have been on medicare advantage from the beginning. i investigated and checked it out. it is a fantastic program.

in five years, i have probably saved maybe $12,000 that i would have had to pay into medigap. my little brother is paying si $200-$300 more. i have had open heart surgery. no one could have more heart problems that i have come and i have fantastic care. it is a great program. there are some major problems when you are 65 and you should always go to medicare advantage. host: when you're looking at traditional medicare verses medicare advantage, what about your situation made you think it was better for you? caller: over the course of one

year, something major happened to me, the most i would have to take out my pocket would be $2,500. if i had medicare and it did not have the gap coverage, i could not afford it, if i had a major operation, like i did come up a heart attack, it would have cost me $40,000 approximately. with this, it cost me $2,500. gold?marsha guest: a lot of people only look at the premiums. i think that is a mistake. it is important to look at the benefits. there is a lot of savings or getting in your case which has been the biggest attraction to it for some people. it may turn out they would be better off with medigap. the premium is higher, but have more financial protection. there is another issue which is

that the government is probably better at figuring out ways to pay providers lower amounts, but the private plans may have more flexibility to innovate and do interesting things with care management. this is more a reality in some places than others, but the hope is that they can really coordinate care better and do things better. they're trying to do that now in the traditional medicare program, but the article you mentioned earlier in "the new york times," it was talking about how to get smarter, not just cut costs, but delivering care that people need, keep them healthy, and focus on things that matter the most. that is still a dilemma on and one that a lot of policy makers, i think, denounced up to the plate enough. it is very easy to say that the bad guys are doing this or that

we will have death panels, but there is some very difficult issues ahead. host: another debate ahead is the prescription drug portion, part d, which is our topic tomorrow. in "usa today." surveys show 13%-17% have added a bit special category and are more than likely to adopt them given that specialty drugs are in development. it goes on to say -- that will be the topic tomorrow around 9:15 a.m. eastern. an independent in lafayette,

louisiana. caller: i am a physician. many of my patients are of medicare age. the big problem is the the administration of the plan is too costly in my opinion. they should limit the amount of the cost that goes into the administration and allow the funding to triple -- trickle down. we have a lot of patients that are not very well- into really . in my office, i am unable to really help them get into a better plan. host: why is it they're getting into clans that do not fit them? why you think that is? caller: marketers. they promised them all kinds of things.

host: here is the medicare advantage cost breakdown. you mentioned the administrative costs are too much. 83% to medical expenses,% to administrative costs, and 7% profits -- 10% to administrative. guest: you can debate how much should go to administrative costs. there is a requirement that will go into place to require a 85% of the expenses to go back to medicare benefits or care management. they are trying to work on those. they have been trying to work on some of the abuses in marketing where they occur. i sympathize as a position -- as a physician in try to do right by our patients. it is a difficult situation to be in and most doctors do not have the time to do with.

the government has set up counseling programs that mentioned earlier where beneficiaries can get help, but there is only a little bit of money for them and there are an awful lot of choices. generally people rely on their neighbors or adult children. one thing the government is trying to face is how much choice to you give people marks you want to give them some choices, but you want to make it simple enough that it is manageable for people, especially people who may not have that much help literacy or be able to manage -- health literacy. it is difficult even for me to understand the choices. host: joe is wondering why people cannot opt out of medicare. guest: one of the things that i

am not sure how people realize is how on even medicare expenditures are. usually most people make about the same. a very small percentage of people account for large percentage of the health care costs because they are more sicken have chronic conditions. intent thousand dollars may be a boondoggle to someone, but for someone else -- $10,000 may be a boondoggle for some. it would be an income transfer and it would defeat the purpose of medicare, to give everyone some access, and really protect you if you get sick and have a lot of medical expenses. host: another tweet. republican in phoenix, arizona. go ahead. caller: the morning.

you go to the doctor and they hand you a sheet for the diagnostic tests and you go to a blood test place india three tauruses. whether you will pay, not pay, take the test, so i call medicare to find out what tests they cover and they would not tell me. is there a database somewhere where you can look up and determine whether or not certain tests are covered? guest: most of them are covered. if you look at the cut medicare and you" handbook it lists and were you can call for more information. in some of the private plans, there may be some approvals the need to do before hand, and but in traditional medicare, most things are covered, but you can check and see what is excluded. it depends if it is medically necessary and there are some rules to decide that. host: democratic caller from

georgetown, texas. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am very opposed to medicare advantage. i agree with the man that called earlier. there is incentives being given to the insurance companies, between $11,000 and $13,000 per year. most of the people that get on our low income because of all the marketing. they do not understand it. and they are not receiving very good medical care on it. another thing is that they offer them incentives to not pay their monthly premium. that is why a lot of them got on because they do not take the premium out of their social security so they can get their entire social security check. talking to the more educated people that i know on it, they are very against it and they switch back. the other people are just unaware that they are not receiving the medical care.

i hear the administrative costs of these private companies is about 30%. host: marsha gold? guest: the administrative costs are higher than medicare, but people debate how much higher. i do not believe it is 30%. maybe in medigap. it is a tough question. the research being done, and it is not as extensive as we would like to comment generally shows things to be a bit of a wash. sometimes the private hands -- the private plans look better. it depends how the measures are done. the real truth is that there is a lot of the variability across the plans. there is a lot of variability in provider quality. you really have to do your homework. the government has been trying to impose quality standards and

improvement rates. you should make your opinions known to legislators because some of this is a value judgment as to what we should provide. people are trying to provide them permission and there have been mixed experiences. host: off of twitter. guest: biggest expanded under the health reform bill. there has been some expansion in coverage of preventive care thinking it will save money. i am not sure the cbo that scored these things and gives it that much credit for savings because it is a long-term issue, but it is something that policy has been moving towards. the of the debate is people who are disabled and qualify for

social security. there are some people who argue that they now have to wait two years to get on medicare and it may be a good idea to cover them sooner so that medicare will not have to pick up all of the expenses that they may not have gotten from care. there is the hope, i think, that the reform bill as it goes into effect will mean that more people are coming on to medicare having been covered before in their earlier years and therefore will not have a lot of expenses. there is often a gap between it stopped working earlier and get on medicare. host: last call, a republican, from greenville, n.c. caller: i have the advantage plan with humana, a ppo. i researched it to make sure that all of my physicians took it because i am in the hospital every six months. for an angiogram, i pay $50

copaiba verses when i would have to pay with medicare which would be 20%. my last angiogram is $54,000. my advantage plan works very well. i also have that vision and dental. i have used my vision, and i enjoy my advantage plan. my doctor appointments are $15 and my neurosurgeon is also in raleigh, n.c., have to drive 90 miles. host: how did you hear about medicare advantage? but sold you? caller: looking through what medicare offered and then what he man offered. i save a lot of money. i get all of my drugs for free except for a few that i still have to pay for, but mostly all of my drugs are free and i am on nine of them. it works well for me. i am hearing is going away when

obama's plan comes through. guest: it is not going away. there is nothing that changes medicare as it stands now. the coverage expansion with the health reform act is for people who do not have coverage now, not for people on medicare. host: last week. [laughter] guest: all i can say is that there have been complaints periodically by the advertising that goes on for medicare advantage plans. some of them do have a lot of truths. the government has really tried to regulate it. i think the sense that things are better now. it is not everyone, but certain plans. it is a lesson for health reform and other things that even if you hari