the economy. the procomposited block between at and t mobil wireless business >> and later washington journal is next >> sarah palin today. you can see her speech at noon on c-span. listen on c-span radio and follow along on c-span.org. u.s. consumer bankruptcies dropped 11% in august, that from a year ago. boston red sox a part of a new series of stamps.

in the wall street journal today, looking at the number of adults working. the headline says there is a low share of adults working in the united states. we want to talk about your status of work. 202-624-111 for those employed. 202-624-1115, the line for those who are currently unemployed. and a special line for those who are defined as under employed, meaning you are employed part-time or notfully using your skills in your current job. 202-624-0760. reach out at c-span.org to send an email or at twitter at c-span

wj off twitter.com. here is a picture from the wall street journal showing those in miami looking for construction jobs and taking application. below that, the headline. low share of adults working. employment to population ratio stood at 58.2% in august. a hair above the 28-year low it fell to in july. down 62% in december. and below the all-time high of 64.7. the rate now at 9.1% counts only those jobless and looking for works

>> we divided the lines differently than normal. for those of you employed, call 202-624-111. for those currently unemployed.

202-624-1115. and for those under employed, those working part-time or at a job not utilizing your skills you've been trained or educated for. 202-624-0760. journal at c-span.org and go to twitter as well. caller: good morning. when they talk about the national rate of unemployment, it's pretty immaterial if you live somewhere where the unemployment rate is 12%, which is typical state wide, we may have unemployment rate that's under the national average. but we have pockets of very high

unemployment. i happen to live in one of them. our rate here is over 10%. when they do come out with a jobs program, they should target areas and population in areas being harder hit. host: what's the situation there in orange? caller: it's typical of every place. our small businesses have gone under. our main street has empty store fronts that used to be small businesses that helped our local economy that aren't there any more. host: as for as the jobs speech, what do you want to hear from the president? caller: i want to hear that he plans to advocate to extend unemployment benefits. when there are no places to apply for a job in your local communities, it is hard to get a job. i think we continue to see a lot

of our jobs going overseas. i'd like to see him put incentives to those creating jobs here and take away those who are losing jobs to foreign countries. that's just logical. host: that's orange, massachusetts. three lines for your choosing. choose the best one that suits you. the headline from the "washington post" shows many headlines regarding this figure. unemployment changes at 9. 1%. we'll go deeper into the unemployment picture. >> nick on our line for under employed. what do you mean by under employed? caller: thank you. i used to work in 1995 for a

division of general motors under the argonaut realty division. i knew in 1995 that gm would spiral down hill. i looked for another job after serving my two weeks' notice. in that time span of about nine months, i couldn't find anything while still in the 1995, 1996 time period equal to what i was currently working for general motors. so i decided to start up a small business and do landscaping. that progressed into carpet cleaning. since 2001, everything has eroded and been completely demolished. in my area, homes range from $300,000 to $400,000 to $1.3

million. resent, we saw a $1 million home on 20 acres sell for $325,000 on a short sale. if the nuclear family is the fiber of economy, then jobs is the fiber of the economic system of any society. host: do you have a political opinion? caller: i don't think it's nasa sending jobs overseas. i believe everything has down sized during the cease of the cold war during the reagan administration. once government stops spending those big dollars for star wars

and the highways and manufacturing and so forth. that was the artificial insemination for our economy that was actually causing it to multiply and grow. that's my theory. i didn't write a paper on this. in looking at it, i think it's more than a global market. i think the whole agenda has changed. host: we'll leave it there. this message from twitter now. trouble it is hard for people to pull up roots and move to where the jobs are. if you want to give us your perspective. a line for employed, unemployed and under employed. pick the one that represents

you. on the line for those employed from iowa. you are next. julie, good morning. caller: i'm getting ready to go to work shortly here. host: what do you do? caller: i work for the postal service. host: what's it like these days? caller: lines are out the door. i need help. i've been working for the post office for 23 years. they can collect the money but people are walking out the door. i need a worker beside me. i'm being overworked. today, i'm going in on my holiday. i'm asked to go beyond my regular duties and do more. i'm 53 years old. can i retire in about three more years here. i see myself working longer and not being able to retire because of what's going to happen with

social security and i don't fully understand my retirement. i am overworked. i'm making lots of money. i don't need to make all this money. someone else needs to make money. i know other people need jobs. host: how do you respond when you hear stories we've heard about possible closures of some branches of post offices while reducing service and delivery days during the week? caller: it's happened here in iowa. several have closed in my surrounding community. people are coming in and lining up and i'm the only person at the window to help them. then we are being told too much. i would rather go to work and work. i don't want to worry about what's happening in washington.

i want to go to work and serve the public. host: austin, texas on the line for those employed. john go ahead. caller: good morning. i am living on a disability, social security but i am still employed by the state of texas. all i'd say is we have got to continue to hang on and keep on hanging on. there is so little out there. that's the spirit of the

president of the united states to hang on. host: what do you think about what the president has to say about the job situation? caller: he is the president. i see road projects in the works. new roads, new highways. fixing hot holes on the local level. host: is that what you want to hear from the speech next week? caller: i don't really know what to expect from the speech next week. i am a little worried about the republican response. and i'm thinking, you know, a house divided can't stand. i'd like to see more -- a little

bit more coming together between the parties. a litt a little bit more un i unification. host: highlighting a couple other stories. washington journal has some headlines about the branch of the federal government suing large banks over what they did to mortgages.

>> a follow up to the story this morning. a chapter h extension. the host: huntsville, texas unemployed line. caller: after the last caller called in and making comments to the prose and how he should be able to -- people in congress should come together, i don't think that's possible in this kind of climate when you are dealing with fundamental differences. you are not going to be able to

get the people to agree when one side of the aisle is making conversation about let's throw more money at the problem. let's do this in order to get more people employed. those same people are not working towards trying to get the people educated. on the other side of the aisle, they are saying let's cut back while we have a balanced budget. all this is tied to job creation. the oitia that home sales, i forget what it says. home sales bring in so much revenue for so many different areas, not just the home sale, furniture and realtor. my main reason for calling, so i am in a situation where i worked

for a municipality. i work there had a number of years. through those times, my wife and i have a small business on the side. now i'm going for my mba. my wife is in the same circumstances. she's been working and working. with our side job. we have found out because we have a side job and was fired from her full-time job, she is unable to get benefits from the federal government. here we are working 80 hours a week and going through my mba through distance learning and three children. she is working two-full time jobs. it actually producing for years full time plus each one of us. now we need help and we can't

get it because we have a job. host: the final r financial times talks about the federal benefit. voting on december 31. analysts predict the fight to maintain the 99-week maximum. host: off twitter, another story making the papers this morning,

the decision by president obama yesterday about the ozone later. the headline is, in a dramatic reversal, president obama on friday skrubed a clean-air regulation. in the boston globe this morning, looking at the presidential politics. the tea party headline is fragmented but still a force. no matter the mood aboard the tea party express the organizers of the rally are excited about their co-sponsorship in the debate this month. they have drawn considerable media to the cross country trip touring new england. scheduled to go out with the tea

party in new hampshire. sarah palin to address issues today in iowa. watch that on c-span starting at noon today. you can listen on sxan radio and listen along at c-span.org and watch there as well. bellvi bellview, pennsylvania. unemployed line. go ahead. caller: i am a vietnam vet. i spent two years in vietnam. capitalists was long behind us. now they have jumped in bed with the communists. that is frightening. they are violating the

constitution of the united states and all the laws of cower country over there. for the sake of the profit of destroying the working people of the united states. the communist is a totalian government. i was taught in school that absolute power corrupts absolutely. i've seen an article where people were building parts for apple computer. they worked a 12 hour shift. they went home, took a shower and got something to eat and went to bed. host: you identify yourself as out of work.

how long have you been out of work? caller: since 2010? host: are you still searching for a job? caller: yes. host: where are you looking? caller: basically construction. housing or building construction. host: are you collecting unemployment? caller: no. my unemployment has run out. it's disheartening to see the unemployed. they don't care about anything but their profits. host: is there anything legislatures can do about it? caller: make all the companies obey all the laws and the constitution of these countries that go in. host: virginia on the line

employed. caller: i am employed. very happily employed. last month, my wife lost her job. host: what did she do? caller: she's a phlebotomist. she worked 15 years in the same lab. she was let go because she is 57 years old. i understand a company called booze and company. host: booze helm. caller: they are encouraging employers to let go of long-term employees to hire cheaper ones. that is unthinkable.

if you have worked for 15 years for a company and they let you go to save two or three bucks an hour. host: you've been following the conversation about this? caller: yes. capital has the absolute power now and it is absolutely corrupt. they care nothing. host: account president do something about the job situation? caller: yes. i wish he would. we voted for him. host: what do you mean by that? caller: he seems to be buckling under all the time. we wish he would stand up for us working folks. we voted for him. we've made donations.

host: on twitter, minimum wage is not a livable wage. middletown new jersey. under employed. go ahead. caller: good morning, i was trained as a construction electrician currently working at a maintenance electricity at half the rate of pay. they have my trade and other trades working for approximately five years without a raise. also, as far as the job creation. when you talk about jobs, you mentioned they need to be more specific and talk about living wage jobs. if they are serious about

creating jobs, it has to start with manufacturing. host: and do what about that? caller: my idea is to say any company that wants to sell a product here should have one manufacturing company here. that would be a great start and put construction people back to work building. even if factories only had 50 employees making things. they would be supported by a smaller percentage, maybe shipping, accounting, bookkeeping, whatever you want to call it. that's a lot of people when you talk about one factory for all these companies. host: this is from the new york daily news.

host: from san francisco, california. catalina. caller: my perspective is -- i'm curious. i challenge the american people to buy locally made. don't try to save two cents to buy something made in china. you complain about having jobs. you yourself are trying to cut

costs by buying stuff made overseas. don't explain about your job being sent overseas. host: how easy or hard is it to keep to that? caller: it's completely easy. if you look at the cost benefit. if i'm going to drive to a super store out an hour a way to buy a bunch of stuff that i'm going to save $10 and i'm going to spend how much in gas to get there and how much is my time? that is not going to save me anything. if i would buy locally save me time and gas and i spend the same amount if you look at it dollar by dollar. >> have you talked to your legislature about the job situation? caller: absolutely.

host: who is that by the way? caller: in san francisco. it is jerry brown. host: what does he have to say? caller: i think san francisco is a different story. they are supporting buying local. it's a local movement. i think they are different. it has to be on a national level. the trade association that basically represents micro enter prize in the united states just came out with a study that says if one in three small businesses in the united states hired on one more person, the u.s. would be at full employment. if people are trying to say no jobs is such a problem -- i agree. how about you buy your coffee from joe coffee shop instead of

star bucks one day. buy it from the guy who lives in your community and runs a coffee shop. let your dollar lead locally. host: in the "washington post." talking about congress and their role to play. reciting jobs. . .

basically, i have a college degree but for the last six years i'm making 50% less than i usually make even though my company is making a profit, i've not had a raise in three years. what i want to hear from the president is not only working job creation but working on the housing problem because home owners -- and i'm a homeowner -- they are the ones who buy the refrigerators, the cars, and all the thing that is go with it. yeah know, you buy your land scaping, your furniture, which creates jobs for other people. i have a home, to have a fixed rate loan but it is under water by probably about 70,000. i have been spending all my

energy on lawyers for the past two years trying to get a loan modification. if they give mea loan modification it would reduce my payment down to -- i'm paying like 2200 and it would reduce my payment down about $1,000. that means i have 1200 to spend on the economy which provides jobs. therefore, i've got 1200 more to spend. they have -- they always appoint a czar over any other program that they do. there should be somebody that the banks can set up so you can physically go in and talk to someone. host: tell us why it's been taking two years to get the modification. caller: they keep promising. i have fife boxes of papers. all you do, this is my second

modification attempt. one was through a private company. they sent the papers through the bank. the bank said we're going to do it ourselves. let's start all over. and you're constantly sending papers back and forth. you're talking to a different person every time. they misplace the paupers then they find them, then they want other papers. and every couple months you've got to send all your bank statements and things again. and they tell you they're backed up. well, i think most of the american public is so frustrated and caught up in trying to get their loans remodified that they can't do anything else. host: one more question. the government has set up the prom. have you tried to get into that? caller: yeah. that's the first one i tried. and when they submitted that program to b of a, b of a says,

oh, first they said they didn't have it. then they found it. then they said oh, well, let's start all over. it's like they just dumped the other plan that was submitted to them and decided, well, to them and decided, well, we're going to try this. well, you talk to a different person every time. and every couple of months when they haven't done anything because they say they're backed up, they don't have enough people to help you then your constantly. i'm sending like 50 pages of fasms every time i send it in. >> thank you for the perspective on your story. i want to get some other callers in on the conversation. she was from las vegas, nevada. joe the american hero as he identifies himself on twitter this morning saying you can't have both. you can't refuse to work unless you're paid more and then at the same time complain about unemployment. from the atlanta journal constitution, georgia employer

unclear about the program e-verify. on our line for employment. frank, kansas. you're on the line. go right ahead. caller: yeah. i just don't understand, we don't have congressmen and everybody say that they don't know the price of milk and eggs

per day. zveragets host: and what does that mean for the unemployment picture? caller: i am employed but -- host: you've got to stop listening to the tv and talk to me. caller: i just wish they knew what the price of milk is per day and the price of eggs per day and the price of gasoline per day. if they had to buy that, what would it mean to them? host: st. louis, missouri, unnext on our unemployed line. caller: good morning. i'm unemployed, i've been unemployed since january of 2008. my unemployment benefits expired in april of 2010. and i am volume tirg. that's what i've been doing for the last two years for an organization, a nonprofit organization that was formed by -- host: what did you do for work?

caller: i worked for -- i'm a professional. i did business development for a scrap metal company. host: go ahead. caller: so it is very difficult out here, especially difficult for me because age is a factor. i turned 59. last month but i'm a very young 59ish -- 50ish. and it's very difficult out here. and my biggest concern is for not only myself but also for the young people who have families. and as the gentleman before me said, the cost of food is just skyrocketting. but relative to what the president can do. i really don't know at this point what our president can do. yes, he definitely needs to come out with a large jobs bill. hopefully it will focus on a massive public works initiative. i like the idea of the infrastructure bank. our infrastructure in this

country is literally croding. and our streets. local governments are really struggling. but the president is also looking at cutting programs -- i work in community and economic development and programs that are so essential to revitalizing communities, especially in our urban areas. those programs are under threat. this congress is, in my view, the congress -- this congress, this obstructionist congress is holding our entire country, the economy, they're just holding us hostage. i don't know what the president can do. he doesn't control the purse strings. host: when you say congress --, do you mean congress as a whole? caller: i mean the majority in congress. even though they're the minority they were

obstructionists. host: manhattan, new york. she woulden, underemployed. good morning. caller: how you doing. i live in manhattan, new york, and we've got the highest rent in the country and -- host: how much do you pay? caller: i pay 1200 for a single room. but that's a little -- if you've got a family you're paying around 2,000, 3,000, and up. things like that. but i want to say, i go up in the orphannage and i was trying to get a student loan for computer technician. i became a computer technician got the a-plus and everything just to find out that the field was saturated and that people more experienced than me they were hiring them instead of me because i was a rookie you know. and that's one problem. but another problem is outsourcing. they outsource all these jobs

to other countries and they pay you to do that. they should pay you to bring countries in here. and they're letting all the smart students go to other countries and become big over there with their technology. they're going to come out with better things than us. host: on twitter. you may not get the "wall street journal" at home but you may want to look at this story on line. it talks about, should you blow the whistle on your neighbor? adding the i.r.s. is offering big rewards but there are catches.

new york. can't tell if you're underemployed or unemployed. caller: i am underemployed. host: go ahead. guest: caller: i was on wall street making a six-figure salary. and the only job i could get --

i'm here. host: you've got to stop listening to the television and just talk to me on the phone. caller: thank you very much. i am underemployed. i was on wall street making a six-figure salary. i am no longer there. i am lucky to have a job at 40,000. host: what do you do? caller: i'm working for one of the large banks that you are constantly beating up on the news. it's unfortunate. but things have changed for us out there. the dodd frank bill in new york state, we are now paying a mortgage tax on home equity lines of insurance. there are people who still need that line of that equity line just to pay their bills. even if they don't use it they're paying the mortgage tax. the president is just not doing enough to work with businesses. we constantly hear on the news shows and on the money shows how companies have the money,

they are not putting it back into the businesses, they are not hiring people. if somebody in the -- and i am not going to blame congress. i am going to blame our leader. he is the leader of our country. he should be doing something. we are not -- he is our leader. you cannot look to congress, you cannot look to in fighting. you have to lead. and that's not what this country has. and we are not going to get out of this. host: so the banks that you say that the folks beat up on, what's their perspective especially from the perspective of washington, d.c. and policy made here? caller: things are getting much more conservative. they are not lending money. small businesses can't get loans. you see it all the time. i mean, if the money is not in the business -- if it's not in the economy to be circulated, how can it continue to be spread amongst everybody else? everybody's holden on. the companies are hold holding on. the people are holding on to

the money. it's not out there and it's not circulating. and you can see it on a regular basis. we see it all the time. people have run to bank of new york melon and they're charging more money to keep their cash as a custed toal bank because some people are taking that bank and flooding the banks and holding iten on to it. it is not circulating. we are going to continue to spiral down. people are not buying goods. they can't because kches aren't hiring you. there's no job. touns, people can't pay their taxes. why? because people don't have jobs. hence, teachers can't work. it's just circumstancecal. it keeps going around and around. and unless people are working it's really going to keep on its way. i enjoy listening to all of you on television all the time. but you have jobs. host: we'll leave it there. i want to tell you about our nake program.

the governor of ohio, the republican governor will be our guest. you may remember him from dealings with the protest that took place over collective bargaining issues. he was our guest talking to two reporters. one of the topics was what the president could do about debt. >> what the president could do, and i too think he needs to think about they've tried everything, maybe they need to look at some of the things he talks about reagan. maybe he should thing about what reagan did. two, put some sort of a moratorium on all these regulations, provide some certainty. see what he can do to work out some kind of an agreement on this deficit that can be real. and he's got to send a seg nal that in no way -- maybe he doesn't want to cust taxes but if you start talking about raising taxes and dividends and capital gains which is risk taking and investment and taxing people at higher marginal rates you freeze the

economy. the proof is in the pudding. so they need to think about all of this and i think we're getting to the point where they're running out of time in terms of this current administration. host: our guest on news makers tomorrow. on c-span. one more call on this topic. iowa. victor on our employed line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i'm actually self-employed in the construction industry out here in aims. but i hate to be the harpg or bad news for those that are unemployed in the manufacturing sector. listen, i think if you're 45 years or older you're permanently unemployed. we bring 120 million people in this country each and every year, give visas. we've got 49% of the green we've got 49% of the green cards all going to mexico. you've got something like 1.2 million new graduates out of

college each year. then you've got the high school folks coming out of college. those folks will not be a i believe to compete. host: and so -- caller: if you can't compete and there's no manufacturing going to come back into this country because there's no new subset of widgets that are going to be made here, there's not that next big internet that's coming around the corner. it just isn't going to happen. and if it does it's going to end up being over in europe or one of those third world countries that we're currently establishing these companies in. host: is there any political remedy? caller: well, there is a political remedy. one of your previousers a couple callers said it's a leadership issue. that starts at home. the united states constitution is the one that gave us the right to speak our voice and to point our representatives and congressmen in the right

direction. if you don't open your voice they can't lead. host: that's the last call we'll take on this topic. the story we were using low share of adults working. sara palin we told you one more time speaking at noon today. she is part of a larger event of the tea party america rally. that coverage starts at noon. governor palin will be part of that addressing the audience. you can also catch it on c-span radio as well as c-span.org. we continue on talking about the economy specifically the jobs numbers that came out to get some perspective from it. rosenberg from the fiscal times will join us from new york for that discussion. we'll be right back.

host: our guest joining us from new york, the senior editor. mr. rosenberg, the headlines when it comes to the release of the job numbers yesterday, the "washington post" calls it flat job figures. if you go to the "wall street journal" it says job growth grinds to a halt. if you go to the "new york times," it says zero job growth, latest bleak sign for the u.s. economy. in light of the headlines, what's the future when it comes to jobs? guest: right now it doesn't look very good. that's one of the issues that we're going to be hearing a lot about in the next couple of weeks. but for right now we're treading water and that's a big problem. we've seen over the last three months zero growth in august but over the last three months we've only had 35,000 jobs a month creet, nowhere near the level we need to keep up with the growth in the labor force

let alone grow and create new jobs and improve the economy going forward. host: any estimates that the jobs could grow over the next few months? guest: well, right now the white house itself isn't looking for -- isn't expecting that high of a job growth going forward. they put out a report from the office of management and budget this week projecting that unemployment is going to stay at 9% through next year. and it's going to be a long time, 2017, before it comes down to the 5% range. so we have got a ways to go in trying to overcome this jobs, this gap that we have in jobs. host: and those estimates, do other economists or people who follow these things such as yourself agree? caller: well, the white house, the office of management and budget was probably a little late in reducing some of these forecasts. commisses across the board have

been trying to -- have been lowering their projections, forecasts both for gdp and employment picture for a little while now, particularly as the growth that they expected to happen in the second half of this year so far has not been happening. host: what's the explanation of why we didn't see any job growth? guest: well, twhrs a range of factors affecting that and it's sort of depends on who you ask. but right now, the main issue is that businesses say they aren't seing the demand they need in order to be able to start hiring. now, republicans particularly house republicans for example will say that there's a lot of uncertainty and the overhang, clouds hanging over the economic conditions right now caused by regulation and taxes and things like that are a factor. businesses, some businesses are worried about credit being able

to expand by getting lines of credit. but the main factor right now that a lot of businesses are reporting is just they're not seing the demand that they need. host: demand as far as their services are concerned? caller: exactly. right. the demands among consumers for their services. people -- consumers have been spending but it's not at the levels that businesses need to be able to expand, to hire more people, and to aggressively grow in a way that would be really boost the economy. host: so what signs to businesses have to see in order to change that perspective? guest: well, consumer spending is a huge key. consumers cuent account for 70% of our economy. 70% of our economic growth. and so they're really important. and so we'll need to be able to see demand pick up for a whole range of products and services range of products and services before companies say they'll really be comfortable in going

out and hiring. hiring jobs is what's called the lagging indicator meaning that it's not going to -- that companies aren't starting to hire and for that matter not laying off people necessarily until they see conditions in place that will require them to do that. host: off of twitter,. how does that track with numbers you follow? guest: that's pretty close. economistless say that you need 130 to 150,000 jobs created a month to keep up with population growth and growth in the labor force. and so we've got a ways to go before we can get there. and we lost 8.8 million jobs in the downturn and we've only add add back a fraction of that so far. so we need to really -- numbers like the one we had come out yesterday of zero change just

rrned helpful at all. host: is that a psychological blow along the financial fronts? guest: it certainly could be. consumer confidence took a hit in this past month we saw that it reached low levels that it's been in a couple of years. consumer spending has stayed pretty good but the confidence took a blow and consumers are definitely worried. a gallup poll that was out showed that about 30% of people said they were worried about laufs coming. that's near it's all-time high. so is some concern that jitry consumers are going to pull back and that would really hurt the economy also. but for now, consumer spending has stayed strong and that's one of the things that's giving us the little glimmers of hope that we've seen so far. host: our guest from the fiscal times will join us and talk to us about the economy, the job creation, and what's going on

in that front. the numbers are on the bottom of your screen. asking the question of our guests, what kind of economic activity can contribute to absorb the unemployed and also what is being done besides pumping money into the economy? guest: well, in terms of what's being done besides pumping money in, we're going to hear a lot about that in the next starting this thursday when president obama speaks to a joint session of congress. he's going to outline a number of plans. now some of those do involve pumping money into the economy but not in monetary but more of a fiscal stimulus by creating new policies that will, the

president hopes and will create new jobs and lead to improved economic conditions overall. those could be national infrastructure bank, for example, continuation of the pay roll tax cuts. the infrastructure bank by the way would look to improve schools, rebuild roads, things like that. and that's one of the keys that apparently the president is going to be talking about. host: is there a clash then between having those type of proposals at the same time we're having discussions here on capitol hill about austerity and especially as we have a debt commission who will be meeting over the next couple of weeks to start talks on where to cut money? guest: there certainly is. that's one of the key fights that we're going to be seeing in the next month or two and toward the end of the year through the end of the year. there's certainly an issue of we've got debt and zifts issues

that we need to deal with. and the president is going to have to toe a fine line between stimulating the economy near term and dealing with the debt and deficit issues longer term. republicans right now would just say forget about increasing spending and the government, the best thing the government could do is just get out of the way and let business take over and let business really try to grow. host: our guest, from new york, and our first call from georgia, democrat's line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call and thank you for c-span. i wanted to make a remark to the gentleman, and i'm hearing this so many times that the big businesses aren't hiring because there is no demand. well, this to me is i hate to use the word as nine but how can you have a demand if people

don't have jobs or income to spend? it's just stupid. i don't understand where people are getting this concept. to me it is an excuse for not hiring. it has nothing to do with demand. if you hire people have money in their pocket the demand is there. so they need to stop this nonsense. and all this stuff about the president creating jobs. presidents don't create jobs. businesses create jobs. everybody's putting this burden on the head of the president. and not saying anything to the big corporation or sitting back holding money because of their greed and wanting to get cheaper wages so that they can have more money to pay their c.e.o.s. i mean, this country is going to hell in a hand basket. host: mr. rosenberg guest: well vilea is right that corporations are sitting on a corporations are sitting on a lot of cash right now. the corporate profits are very strong. and there's a question of what it really will take for

businesses to start hiring and work down some of that cash. but at the same time they do say that they need to see more demand. right now, the pressure isn't on them in terms of the business effects really certainly is politically but not in terms of the business effects necessarily to hire and grow. and that's one of the key issues. still. now, businesses, you know, you can say that -- and i think some people will make this case, that they need to be hiring and try to hire as much as they can and certainly have their jobs here instead of overseas to jump start that demand. but c.e.o.'s do have a responsibility to their share holders and companies to make sure that they're leading the company responsibly and trying to maximize their profits also. so it's a tough scenario. i think that businesses once they see some demand or they

have some sense, some confidence that the economy will be -- will not be entering a double dip recession for example will be staying strong they will respond to those demands that they see and start hiring. host: when we talked about the stimulus plrks rosenberg, there's a story that came this week about that solar panel company i think it's sold ra that received a loan guarantee from the federal government and thrmp stories that it closed its doors. what does that story mean for future discussions about assisting certain type of job markets with federal government money? guest: it certainly presents a challenge politically for president obama and his team. the stimulus is a huge point of contention at this point. the congressional budget office nonpartisan congressional budget office has said that the stimulus did help to maybe added as many as 2.9 million jobs recently.

things would have been worse if it weren't for the stimulus. but that's certainly a case that's being disputed particularly by republicans who feel like it was about $800 billion that was spent very unwisely. and the examples like the solar power company just add to that case, that the money could have been spent better. host: virginia you are next for our guest. caller: government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is a force like fire. it makes a dangerous servant and a fearful master. george bush, barack obama, these businesses are hiding. they're keeping their head low they're keeping their head low and riding out the storm and they're not going to come out until this president goes to martha's vineyard or whatever the heck, if he would just stay thrup and go on dancing with

the stars, then the economy would come roaring back. but he keeps meddling with something. the only two things that he hass worked on is the chicago climate exchange and the united states government and they're both broke. learn, people. learn. host: any response? guest: well, i think the dancing with the stars producers might make note of that. but for right now, the president is certainly working on trying to fix the economy. like i said before, there's a lot of people out there who agree with the callinger that government should just get out of the way. lower taxes. you know, maybe through tax reform, deregulation, businesses would just be able to do what they do and grow and create jobs. host: we had a caller previous who worked on wall street and talked about policy made in washington that's directly affecting the banking industry in new york. what's the response generally these days about these

policies? you mentioned dodd frank but other's as well. guest: well banks certainly have a difficult situation. they're facing a difficult situation. it's not necessarily the same it was in 2008 but they're certainly facing both in terms of liquidity, debt loads and the regulatory picture. they're in a challenging place. now, the thing is that the challenges are not going away any time soon. we saw this week the federal housing finance agency brought suit against a number of big banks for essentially fraud in misrepresenting the quality of mortgage-backed securities that they were selling and there's a lot for the banks still to work through both in terms of those kinds of issues, regulatory issues that they're going to have to adjust to and in terms of, for example, the

foreclosure and mortgage crisis that's still overhanging the banks and the economy overall. host: republican line. rob from sacramento. caller: i'm going to chime in with what he just commented. the federal government gave over $800 billion to the banks. and they're not loaning the money out on the streets. they're not loaning the money to new construction. all they're doing is putting the money back in treasury bonds and getting the safe interest rate and backing into those banks. some kind of restriction has got to lighten up from the federal reserve so they can start loaning money to the businesses, to the people on the streets. let's do the math. if you don't get the money out on the streets and where the businesses are at, you are not going to start stimulating this economy and it doesn't do much good to get the fire hose out after the house has burned down. it's been three years. it was in obama plrks, it was

an obama congress and senate. the democrats had the whole thing for three years and now he's trying to catch up. host: mr. rosenberg, the federal reserve planning to meet on september 20th and the 21st. and what does that mean in light of current news about the economy? guest: well, the unemployment numbers jobs numbers that came out yesterday senl only add to the pressure on ben bernanke, the federal reserve, to see if there's something they can do. the federal reserve chairman the federal reserve chairman has said and insisted that there are still tools that he there are still tools that he can use to try to improve the economy. now, whether that's third round of quantitative easing essentially buying more bonds and injecting money into the system that way, or if it's something that's being called operation twist just changing the ma turts on the bonds that the federal reserve owns and trying to lower long-term

interest rates and do things that way, there are still maybe a number of options and the thing is at this point there's also some conflict within the federal reserve we saw the statement that came out on august 9th, i believe, we had three fed bankers who dissented from that statement and didn't want to be as specific in terms of the time frame for low interest rates that the federal reserve set. so there's some dispute about what policies are going to be going forward. and that's why the federal reserve is going to meet for two days to try to hammer these things out and sort through what it can do and figure out if there's monetary policy that would really help at this point. host: and the speech last week mr. bernanke didn't indicate that another round of bond buying was on the table. guest: no. he didn't promise action, although he said he's prepared to act. and given the unemployment numbers now, i think the expectations are that we're going to see some form of

action. the question is what exactly the fed is going to do. host: connecticut, on our democrat's line. you're on with our guest from the fiscal times. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a three solutions. i want to know if the, if you would agree. the first one is raising the minimum wage $10,000 for commodities like gas food and electric. the second one is taking a strong stance against the work organizations against slave labor by making a living wage in third world country and if they don't comply refuse their products in the united states. and the third is putting the glass spiegel act back in place so that banks cannot gamble with depositors money. guest: well, look, foreign

trade is one of the issues that we're going to be hearing about. there are going to be a number of trade agreements that president obama is going to send to congress hoping to improve trade relations with various countries. and right now it's true that we need to -- the manufacturing sector has been hiring, has been building this past yesterday's report showed this past month it lost 3,000 jobs but before it had been adding and there are areas like that that we need to improve on and try to improve trade relation soss that we get the economy growing again. host: maryland thanks for holding on. mark, independent line. caller: basically there's three things that the u.s. government needs to do to get our economy back on track. and they seem to be advocating passing on all three. the first thing they need to do is to allow people who are current on their mortgages to refinance regardless of how

much equity they have in their home because the banks are still relying on those people still relying on those people to pay their mortgages. two, they need to place tariffs on any companies that are taking their jobs overseas and do not have the jobs that they're putting here in the united states. and finally, what they need to do is bye pass the banks. they need a direct stimulus into the sba, the small business krks and have the sba make direct loans to potential entrepreneurs. that's part of what's happening now. they're not allowing that so the money is not stimulating the economy. the middle class has all of their money tied up in housing, credit card debt, car debt. so unless the government stimulates the economy, businesses has refused, there's no money. guest: i should just add there could be a connection between your first point and your third point there.

the mortgage issues that so many home owners in this country face right now, and we've got one in four home owners under water meaning they owe more on the home than the home itself is worth, that could be affecting some entrepreneurs and small businesses also, because a lot of small businesses when they're looking for financing and just individuals out there looking to build a business, will be taking loans on their home and using that to finance the business. and if they're under water then that means that that sort of financing is much more difficult to get and they're not going to be able to grow the business. host: the president expressed interest on lining some regulations about seven or so proposals. do any of those affect i guess the private industry and what and could help improve business climate or make it easier for business to operate? business to operate? guest: well certainly that's one of the reasons the

president is interested in doing it and that's one of the reasons that eric cantor put out this week a list of ten regulations theapt to roll back with house republicans to remove the burden from businesses. the president yesterday agreed to shelve regulations, new rules regarding ozone, smog, and that was one of the issues that had been brought up as potentially detrimental to business at this point with costs that could run well into the billions. now, on the other side of that environmentalists have been saying that those regulations, that regulation, for example, and other environmental regulations in general are needed to protect people improve their health and that if you let that deregulation happen, or shelve new rules as the case may be, then the costs are going to be showing up

eventually as people get sick, have to go to hospitals and things like that. there's a fine balance and the important thing at this point is to have, to try to have a good sense of the entire economic effect of any of these regulations before decision making is made. host: an e-mail says guest: well we've seen as i mecksed consumer confidence took a big hit and we've seen a steady drum beat of bad economic numbers and weak data. so there's no question that confidence overall sentiment is a little bit more less confident more jitry than it had been. the debt ceiling certainly was a factor i think in that we had a lot of people, a number of

people not just the ratings -- credit ratings agencies like s credit ratings agencies like s and p but a number of other people saying that if president obama and congress had been able to come together on a deal in a timely fashion and hadn't pushed it to essentially the 11th hour, before coming up with a deal that ultimately disappointed a lot of people, then the economy confidence at least would be in much better shape. host: the president formed a jobs commission. do they have any input on what the president will propose next week? guest: well, you know, it sounds like the president in response to some of the numbers that have been coming out has been maybe tweaking the exact shape of his proposals and there's a big question about exactly what he's going to be talking about when he speaks to the congress thursday night. is he going to go big so to speak and put together a package that he really believes

in that he thinks will do considerable amount to help the economy and create jobs? or is he going to try to moderate that package and his proposals a little bit to try to work with house republicans, for example, and come wup a plan that will actually pass? and so there's a lot of politics involved there and it sounds from what i understand it sounds like the president's proposals are still -- were still being formed and may have changed a little bit over recent weeks. host: 9.1 unemployment rate for august. and for nonfarm pay roll employment that remained unchanged. what does that mean as far as because there was no net creation of jobs. but does that mean that jobs didn't happen? guest: well, no. it just means that there were no jobs added overall. within the economy, the economy

is very dynamic. there's always jobs being created and destroyed month to month. but it just means that there were no jobs added overall so the totals stayed the same. and what it means is we've got 14 million people who are unemployed, 6 million of those people have been out of work for six months or longer. and we've got another 8.8 million people who would like to be working full time but can only find part-time work. so there's about in all actually more than 25 million people who aren't working or aren't finding the kind of jobs that they want. host: our guest, the senior editor for the fiscal times. and for those who don't know, what is the fiscal times, sir? guest: it's a website independent editorial site covering all things fiscal. business and economy. and looking at both politics, policy, business economy. but also looking at the way those policies and business

programs affect consumers, too. really covers the intersection of all those areas. host: from maryland we hear from bonnie on our republican line. caller: good morning. i don't blame the president for job loss. i blame our local politicians. our governor went to asia, our governor went to asia, hired a bunch of teachers, paid their expenses to relocate to baltimore, all the while they laid our teachers off. now he's going to india. he bragged. we have five companies in baltimore and we have 50 companies in india. he's traveling with businessmen at the taxpayers expense. to me, it would make more sense to hire local rather than go to other companies and pay them to come to our country and take our jobs. to me, this is our politician's fault. it's the locals.

it's not the president's responsibility. it's the state responsibility to keep our jobs in our state. guest: now, i have to say i don't know about the conditions and the situation in maryland that you're talking about. but there's no question that state and local governments have been shrinking. they've lost about 550,000 jobs in all over the last couple of years. and so that's one area. states are dealing with their own debt issues and having to cut back and that's certainly an issue. state and local job losses, government job losses have been a drag on overall jobs numbers. no question. host: fiscal times.com is the website if you want to find out more about our guests and the -- how many people work for the fiscal times? guest: that's a good question.

i'm not sure. we've got a bureau in d.c., we've got an office we're head quart here in new york city. in all it's probably about 20 with another staff of a whole bunch of contributors that probably names that you're familiar with out there. host: michigan, curtis on our democrats line. caller: ok, i'm from michigan. i am a disabled veteran. i got shot up in vietnam. and i'm struggling with the housing market, too. and i'm water. i'm on the water and when they gave me this loan, bank of america took 80% and put 20 with gmac. charge me 11.5% and bank of america is charging me 6.7%. and i'm having problem problems. can't get refinanced. and until president obama or whoever does something about the housing, that's going to be a problem.

people cannot afford their notes. and they won't give us a modification or help. i've [inaudible] now he said he's got to help me but i've got to give him $1,000. and i'm scared it's a fraud. i can't afford to give him the down payment. he said he can help me but i've got to give him $1,000. now why? guest: now, i don't know who it is that you're talking to. i should say it sounds like something you should look into before you spend your money. but you're certainly right that loan modification programs are a big topic of conversation because the mortgage issue still a big overhang over the economy. there's a lot of people out there in situations much like yourself trying to figure out how to get out from under water

so to speak on their homes whether through refinancing or other programs that might be available and we're going to be hearing a lot more about that over the next few weeks. host: jefferson still, missouri. independent line. caller: politician here a few years back said we were going to hear a giant sucking sound when you pass nafta, sucking 7 million jobs out of this country. and giving the tax break to do it i think a lot of american people are going to let you know what they're hearing come november, 2012. host: is there a connection as you see it following the fiscal side of it when it comes to people's voting habits on the political side? guest: well certainly i think people are going to vote their wallets this election. it seems like it's going to be

another case of it's the economy stupid as we heard back in the 90's. and that's why tease numbers are certainly a concern for president obama and his administration right now. we've seen the republicans taking the leing president sh contenders taking a hard line criticizing the president for his stewardship of the economy. host: medford, oregon. steve, republican line. caller: good morning, sir. i heard an comics professor history say that unemployment during the greap great depression fluctwut. and if we measure unemployment the way we did in 1934 we would be at those levels now. please comment, and i'll list b on the air. guest: right now the overall unemployment rate if you

include unemployment and underemployment is 16.2%. there are more than 25 million people out there who can't find the jobs they want even including those people who are working part time because they can't find a full time job. and that number, that portion of the employment picture, those people who are working part time because they can't find full time work actually jumped by 400,000 last month according to the numbers that came out yesterday. so it's a really big number overall and when you say 9.1% or 16.2%, it's still sort of hard and vague to get a good understanding of what that means. and i'll throw out one other big number and it's more than 25 million people and it might be hard to really comprehend what that means too but it's a big number.

there's a lot of people out there who can't find the work they're looking for. host: the papers mentioned the fact that verizon workers are on strike. how does that factor in? guest: it factored in just because they were on strike at the same time that the government was taking its survey. so those 45,000 workers who would have been counted as being employed actually showed, fell out of the number. now, so you had the information sector for example verizon telecom company included in that had showed loss of 48,000 jobs. but 45,000 of that was actually these people who were on strike an are back at work. so the numbers overall would have been slightly better than they were. but still, you know, even if you add those people back in to zero that we ultimately had,

it's still nowhere near the number that we need to have to really see robust growth and reduce the unemployment rate long term. host: dallas, texas. on with our guest. democrat's line. good morning. caller: gork. -- good morning. in relation to the job situation we hear people say business has got to create the jobs and businesses aren't interested in creating jobs. they're interested in laying people off, sending jobs overseas, using technology. washington can't create jobs now because now that the republicans control that the house they're not going to give any money to president obama for jobs package. they're not going to give zero. but on the other hand we've got the federal reserve. now they've done qe 1, 2, 3. and all they did the first time they bought 800 billion worth of treasury bills and then 600 billion. instead of using this money to buy treasury bills, why doesn't

the federal reserve set up an infrastructure bank and make the 600 available for infrastructure projects at 0% interest like they're doing to corporations? and they're doing to banks. why not make it available for infrastructure banks to help america build projects that benefit our country? thank you. guest: well, i believe the president is going to be talking about an infrastructure bank on thursday night. but in general, there certainly are people like the caller who say that the economic stimulus that we had as far as it went might have helped, might not have helped. but it really could have been much bigger. there's a lot of people on left particularly who argue that the money that was spent was, there's a big debate about whether it was too much, too

little. but a lot of people agree with the caller that it could have been more money put out there to stimulate the economy. host: so then the president has to make an argument that go big as you put it that he could get a return on the investment? guest: certainly. the idea and i think that's the key for the jobs plans that he is going to be putting out. we want, you know, a lot of these programs have already been out there. they've been discussed. and some have worked better than others. the idea is that we want to be able to say that there really is a return on any new spending that we're going to be doing. and return not just in terms of the government not losing money or things like that but return in terms of creating jobs, boosting the economy, getting the economy back on the right track. and so whether it's payroll tax cuts or infrastructure bank or

other programs, job training programs, for example, certain energy efficiency programs that might be out there, there are a lot of programs that people are going to be looking forward to see whether they actually have a return and are a return on the money that is being spent on them. host: when you say some have worked better than others can you give one example from the previous spending that we saw that did work? guest: well, i'll talk about maybe a number of them. the payroll tax cuts for example, it's interesting the government says that that on average put about $1,000, gave $1,000 back per household. and the idea is that that money then was spent and further you know increasing consumer spending consumer demand for products and services. now, on the other hand, some economist that is i've talked to suggested that that payroll

tax cut might have been more effective if it had been put on the employer side of the ledger and so if you made it effectively made it less costly for employers to hire new workers and apparently that's one of the proposals that the president has at least considered and we'll find out thursday if that's in his plan. host: mary asked the question, can the federal reserve fund the infrastructure bank? guest: well, i'm not sure how that's going to be funded. we'll see how it's set up. the federal reserve certainly has a large balance sheet at this point. and it's been adding, we've seen with qe 1, 2, and other purchases that it's made but i think we'll see this week various proposals for how this infrastructure bank should be funded. .

there was pent-up demand coming after the second world war. people who were not able to buy cars, suddenly wanted to go out and buy cars. all of these other products as well. the recovery that we had seen, with production increases, they were able to continue well into the 50s and go from there. in a tricky spot. a lot of comparisons this time around after this great recession. it was to those years, the late '20s and after. the question is, whether the stimulus of thing -- whether the

stimulus will actually work. what makes this much more difficult is we also have been -- we have much higher overall national debt at this point, which makes that stimulative spending much more difficult. we do not want to end up like some of the country and in europe with the debt crises. it is a matter of finding the right balance, short-term spending with long-term fiscal responsibility, and figuring out a way to grow the economy. near term at least. host: you talked about auto sales. there was a story in the washington journal yesterday about chrysler, gm, and ford. guest: the car companies have been doing pretty well. the interest is a big reason the consumer spending was up.

zero point eight%. gm in particular has seen strong interest. people are interested in buying smaller, more fuel-efficient cars at this point. that has been something of a success story for gm. it has been traditionally known for making those a smaller, more fuel-efficient cars. host: what about the wheel to and honda? -- toyota and honda? guest: toyota was obviously affected by the earthquake in japan. we should see new models rolled out. sales and a special offers to customers should be coming back. customers should be coming back. for now, and a son, general

motors, they have been seeing strong sales. -- host: time for one more call. caller: i do -- we need to relate to jobs with tax breaks. we need an incentive to create jobs that are planted cash-rich. -- that are plenty cash-rich. the middle class has been battered. we have 7% of the people here that need to generate the economy. we cannot, because we do not have the money. as far as banks are concerned, the credit type is a significant. when people start losing their houses, which would then cause down's for the economy and

losing the taxation base. guest: i think all of these points you mentioned, we will points you mentioned, we will hear about them this week . in terms of companies and hiring, still a big question about what will convince them to hire or spend some of the money that is sitting on their books right now. they will do that once they see the prospects for growth pick up. once they see the money is not one be hurting their profitability in spending that money will increase their profitability, that is when we will see jobs pick up. host: we saw the bond rating lowered. what has the effect been as you see it?

guest: it has not been a disaster in terms of interest rate and costs. we have seen treasuries drop to really an all time low rate. interest rates have not gone up. interest rates have not gone up. consumers overall , -- investors overall, sorey, have not followed the s&p lead. they are still looking to buy u.s. bonds in treasurys. u.s. bonds in treasurys. i think the effect has been seen mostly in terms of our confidence -- business confidence in washington politicians to come to an agreement, put together policies that will be able to grow the economy. if the s&p downgrade has had an

effect, it seems to me that it has been mostly put in psychological terms. psychological terms. host: he is the fiscal times senior editor. thank you so much for your time, mr. rosenberg. later on we will learn about the nation's war policies. that will be at our 9:15 segment. up next, the justice the permit followed suit against the merger with at&t and t-mobile. we will be right back. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> machiavelli has become an additive. many people in town would love to have themselves to describe

as machiavelli. they may -- not too many people would call themselves machiavelli. >> his name is synonymous with cynical scheming and the selfish pursuit of power. sunday night, the author miles ubger argues that his personally may have been a result of the things and people around him. that is on q&a on sunday. >> good things come in twos. live coverage on the senate on c-span2. >> or you can see them whenever you want on the c-span video library. >> c-span2 every weekend, book tv. listen to us on your iphone. follow us on tour.

it is washington your way, created by c-span. >> provided by your local cable provider. >> wash more video of your candidates, with political reporters are saying, and track political contributions with the c-span website, campaign 2012. easy to use, it helps you navigate a political landscape. twitter feeds, candidate bios. >> this holiday weekend on american history tv on c-span3, on american artifacts, the name conjures elegance and grandeur. ectures and history, and professor talks about the integration of baseball with african-americans.

and uncovering the september 11, from president bush's florida trip to the pentagon. before our schedule is in your in box, click the c-span alert button. "washington journal" continues. host: this week, the department of justice weighed in on the suit with the merger between at&t and t-mobile. let's hear from the acting attorney general. >> we know this industry well. inside and out. hear the i just division conducted an exhaustive investigation. we conducted dozens of interviews with competitors. we reviewed millions of the at&t and t-mobile documents. the conclusion is clear. anyway you look at this transaction, it is anticompetitive. we seek to ensure that our

nation enjoys the competitive wireless industry. host: here to talk about the department of justice and what surrounds it is a new york times and reporters are writing a story on this, what is the backdrop of this decision? guest: the department of justice has been striving to show it is tough on anti-trust. they look at it from a number of perspectives. it really and eliminates significant competition, takes the number of competitors down from four to three nationally. it will harm innovation, customer service, and they cannot let it go through. at&t and t-mobile say the opposite, of course. they say, not only does it allow them to expand the reach of wireless broadband around the country, but it will provide better service and allow them to

give customers more choices. host: was this an unusual act by the department of justice? guest: not historically, but they have been under fire for not cracking down on mergers, most recently comcast and nbc universal. in number of consumer advocacy groups thought that very strongly. the detest -- the justice department said we will put conditions on the way you offer service and the products to offer and they have a high degree of oversight. now they are singing, we can do some of the same things. the justices said, no, the deal is just too bad to deal with. host: after the announcement it made, does that mean the deal is off? guest: it is never over.

at&t is pursuing two tracks. it will fight it in court. they have asked for an expedited hearing. they want to go to trial and think they will [inaudible] at the same time, they said they are going to go in and negotiate with the justice and see if there are conditions that can be agreed to, to allow the bill to go through. they previously have said, in local markets, where there would not be in a competition, we are willing to give up something. host: the headline to your story ooing." word "will guest: they have to convince the justice department that we are willing to work with you.

at&t never believed that justice would stay -- stand in the way of this deal. they came across as somewhat arrogant. according to people in the room, they never thought this was a real concern. it did not quite cozy up to regulators and say, let's see where we can work together. host: the president of at&t said he expected the deal to go through on television. guest: to be asked about the deal on television, the justice apartment filed a lawsuit in hour later. host: one person's book about the decision made by the department of justice. hear what he has to say and expand on it, if you would. >> at&t and t-mobile curly compete head-to-head in 97 of the nation's largest 100 cellular market areas. they also complete -- compete

nationwide to attract businesses and government customers. with a merger to proceed, there would only be three providers with 97% of the market. competition among the remaining competition among the remaining competitors, including price, quality, and innovation, would be diminished. host: he talks about markets. can you expand on that? guest: if you are in st. louis, milwaukee, or phoenix, you have a number of different cell phone companies to choose from. in most cases, you have six or seven companies to choose from. the justice department says people do not buy cell phones that way. certainly, companies do not. somewhat national reach. they do not have roaming charges.

at&t and verizon and sprint and t-mobile offered nationwide plans. they would take these four competitors down to three. the justice said that t-mobile is a maverick. they have been very aggressive with pricing plans, making low price their signature model. host: the washington post had a description of the pricing plans and companies involved. they said maybe t-mobile or the company looking to own t-mobile would unload it said that it would ultimately be sold to someone else? guest: the german telecommunications company said we cannot afford to invest both in the united states and europe. we want to focus on career. we want to get out of the united states business. someone who would be willing to buy that company and operate it

and there is good business there, t-mobile, until the time of the merger, was a dynamic competitor than that. the justice said you cannot do it in a way that would take quadra competitors down to three. host: our segment until 9:15 is the department of justice and they're concerned with the merger between at&t and t- mobile. here are the numbers for you to call in. if you want to send us an e- sail, journal@c pan.org. if you want to send us an e-

guest: it affects the majority of wireless subscribers. it is an issue that affects everyone now. at&t says it is not a national market but a local market. when you look at those other companies, they are a distant fifth starting with my trapezius and going down to other companies. they do not have the reach. they cannot offer the pricing plans. they cannot offer the handsets that people want. it really is a different market in a lot of ways. host: what about consolidation in this market? guest: a consolidating market is one that offers consumers a lot of benefits. if you are a phone maker, apple, you want to go to the company that can reach the most of customers rather than having to associate -- negotiate

agreements with them. host: jack, ask your question or make your comment. caller: i would compare to what they are considering now. it is my experience that i as a serious subscriber for a long time -- they added a royalty fee. my antenna ability went down. can you comment on that? guest: that is a merger that a lot of people have pointed to as a relevant one for the justice of parliament to consider. it allowed it to go through. they caught a lot of flak from consumer advocates. it was a market where there were two competitors down to one. what you see a lot of times when you go from two to one, there

you go from two to one, there has to be some consolidation and it seems inevitably that it results in prices going up and choices being limited. choices being limited. host: cleveland, ohio, independent line. caller: there are things that a government has a right to pick and choose what they want to do in the private sector. if we want to eliminate competition and the consumer would then be heard. on the reverse side, they could have opened up health care to the private sector, and allow themselves to spread among the many states. instead, they want to dictate how to run it, what to do. it seems like they are controlling what they want to control and not leaving it open to private competition.

guest: that is a valid point. there is a lot at play. the federal communications commission also has a somewhat different criteria that they look at the deals with. the fcc has to see if it is within public interest to transfer of the licenses for wireless airways from one company to another. they look at competition. they get a service and a lot of other fast -- facets. they have the ability to pick and choose what industries and the deals they focus on. they have deals since the beginning of the obama administration where they had filed an antitrust and then it

went on to settle the case to allow the merger to go through with some conditions. it is not out of the question that they would do that here. it is the main way that the justice has to make sure it in their view consumers are being protected. host: have they showed -- has the sec showed their hand when it comes to this deal? guest: they said we have some of the same concerns about competition. they also are looking at a number of other factors. spectrumthat t-mobile's words with at&t in overlapping in certain cities, whether they use the same technology and therefore they can share our things they have to consider. a difficult problem if -- that the sec has to solve if the justice the permit is less concerned with. concerned with. host: t-mobile is set about $50.

when looking at these things, the ability to lower -- offer lower prices, how would consolidation happen? guest: pricing for consumers is what the justice to permit has said it is looking at here. that is the primary concern. hong they say no phone company really offers different prices to different markets. we have to consider this as a nationwide market. in previous deals, the justice to permit said, this is a local market. as for at&t come we are depending and making all of its arguments on, they have kind have edged away from that recently. this will be up to the judge to say, what is a consistent argument made, and what are you

singing in this case? singing in this case? -- saying in this case? host: has the judge had experience in this before? [inaudible] [inaudible] guest: she is a no-nonsense person. she has dealt with a number of cases. she was a judge in the citigroup case. she is one, who most people look at as someone that is not going to mess around and make a quick decision, which is really what companies in the markets throughout. host: to her previous decisions indicate whether she backs of justice on these kinds of cases? guest: not to a great extent. she has been on both sides of those arguments. i do not think has shown bias or

inclination one way or the other. host: democrats line. caller: i am a customer of t- mobile. i am very upset about the merger. i get so tired of companies trying to decide where my money goes. i should have a choice into the right to choose whatever company i want to go with. if you let at&t by t-mobile, you only have three large telecommunications available. i do not think that is right. i am glad the justice department stepped in, and i hope they step in on more companies that are getting rid of small companies so that a big corporations rule. i am just sick of it. i really am. i am glad the justice department has gotten involved. thank you. guest: t-mobile customers are the ones most affected here.

we have to look at how they have been affected. a lot of people have gone to t- mobile, because they do not want to be an at&t customer or a verizon customer. this is something similar that you saw in new york city a couple of decades ago with banks. banks. if he got mad at chase manhattan, and you decided to go to main facts jurors andover, you could do that, but you would end up right in the same place. t-mobile customers are suffering the worst through this, because the company has is essentially, while it has not halted investment, it has put a lot of decisions on hold. the longer it drags on, the less they are going to do. what the justice has tried to do is bring it to a head, get a decision, so either the company will be sold to at&t or it can

operate independently continue to make the investments and update the key technology it needs to provide the customers with the best service. philadelphia, independent line. caller: i'm interested on his perspective of this. under the department of justice, market quantification guidelines, it is off the charts. i am just wondering what at&t thought when they went into this, in terms of the ending -- the department of justice. where this would go in terms of other mergers, where you go from four to 3, where the market shares are incredibly consolidated. what do you think at&t saw was the best out coming year, going

into something safe and it in a controversial tax credit what at&t wanted in this case was the spectrum on by t-mobile par. [inaudible] how good your wireless province services depends on where the electromagnetic spectrum you have licenses are. t-mobile has very attractive places on the pants. in various cities. at&t want those to be able to expand the market. it is the secret that at&t cell phone services have problems, drop calls, particularly in urban areas, which would allow us to put up more cell towers and improve its service in those places. that is a way to address one of the biggest price isms against

the country. host: one person made those arguments when he was before legislators. thus see what he has to say, and you can comment on it. >> you have drop calls, block calls -- it is a very basic concept. in any industry, grady -- greater capacity is a factor of innovation. .

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] guest: most of the people that look at this c.e.o. are concerned about broadband, because that's where the future is. the companies that offer a wire to your house, that's really going to be going away in the not too distant future. >> is that l.c.e.?

>> well, l.c.e. is what's marketed as 4-g services. it is the fourth generation of wireless services. it allows simply more stuff to be pushed through the line. in this case, more data, because people use their smartphones to download politics to use maps, to do all sorts of various things. they can't do that without traditional spectrums. the government has been use moving to -- the government has been moving to get more spectrum. they said the only way they will be able to get more spectrum to offer customers better service is to buy it. host: next up, democrats line from madison, wisconsin. caller: i just wanted to say that i am in favor of the at&t and mobile merger, because i believe that competition costs

more, and i would just as soon have a monday on reply when -- monopoly when it comes to things like utilities. they are paying a lot more people to try to get more business and that sort of thing. i think it gives t-mobile support. that's my opinion. host: thank you. what do you think of that? guest: that is certainly a valid opinion. it is an interesting one, and one many people will dispute. at&t when it had a monday only -- monopoly on local telephone service you were often paying $3 a minute to call someone across the state line.

it is hard to argue that the service was better or the cost to the customer was better under that. with utilities you don't want six telephone poles and six different electrical wires coming into your house so you can choose which electric provider. in that case it makes sense for a government to operate and register a monopoly. consumers have certainly been better off with greater competition and less monopolistic practices. host: one e-mail asked about the competition and lobbying. guest: in the beginning we all looked at at&t's lobbying force and how can they lose?

at&t was one of the largest offenders when it comes to capitol hill and u.a.c. and giving competition. in the first half of the year, they spent more than they did a they spent more than they did a year ago. the first half of the phone, this deal was really underway. at&t delivers 1,500 cupcakes to the f.c.c. last year when they wanted to -- it is something they do every year to thank the f.c.c. for its work, but it is something that they have to imagine won't be forgotten when they come to the f.c.c. and say, we want to do this. >> we're talking about the department of justice weighing in and getting the merger of at&t and t-mobile.

francine, go ahead. caller: i'm calling because i think one of the thing the justice department hasn't taking into consideration is the homeland security. the situation is such that ever since at&t was deregulated and housed the baby bells, instead of at&t being able to upgrade its long distance lines and allowing the baby bells to handle the phone distribution, the additional lines to the houses, and be able to, basically, distribute the numbers locally, so that at&t could upgrade its long distance which became a sprint optix venture capital, we kind of, i found -- i only lived within a 10-mile distance. i had to change my phone number because i decided to be at&t. verizon won't give you service

if you are not going to give you a verizon customer. then i have to wait to get a number. at&t had to give me a different number because the number they had wasn't consistent. there is an awful lot of portability numbers with problems. you can be within a five-mile radius moving from an apartment to a condo to a townhouse and have to change your number every time. i don't think when we deregulated in the 1980's that it was meant to do that. when at&t spun off the problem with comcast, when you have the at&t gentlemen speaking about 97%, the comcast man sat there with a grin on his face saying we really are urban centers. >> we leave it there because you put a lot out there for our guest to respond to. guest: the reason at&t is so interested in this deal is because it is also still in the local telephone business, as is

local telephone business, as is verizon. it still has wires coming into your house offering that local phone service. that business is going away. people are using their cell phones and not getting wire ms phone service in their homes anymore. that business is starting to lose money. they have to find a different way to go. now, those companies are very much into the wireless service. cable companies also run cables to their house, and they are to their house, and they are interested in companies like t-mobile as i -- a way to not only offer a different service but also to expand their offering of internet service. >> host:: maverick says we broke up the baby bells just to see them organized under a new technology umbrella. guest: that's true. they were reorganizing long before this deal. they were consolidating.

at a time at a time is really a -- at&t is really a grouping together of the former baby bells. long distance service is something you can buy from any number of providers that you can get free over the internet. some people don't even have some people don't even have wireless phones but simply use skipe. -- skype. one other point you can say here, the government itself regulates the airways. so they have a way of regulating these airways. sprint and the smaller two competitors have been asking the government to do is release a block of spectrum known as the d-block for very boring reasons. they want that to be put up to auction and let that valuable spectrum provide excellent service.

the 9-11 commission recommended that should be used for public safety. there was a long debate on how to do that. whether private enterprise or let the government build it out in public safety. it was decided in favor of public safety. that decision is going forward. there is very much a need for there is very much a need for that service. it is an example that the decisions the government has to make here about whether to favor private enterprise or provide something they think has more benefit to consumers. >> some of the folks on twitter recommended the prepaid service and the role it might play in this era of consolidation. >> you know, it is very easy to get phone service through prepaid programs, and it doesn't tie you down to one provider or another. that's one thing -- one of the biggest problems that t-monle

mobile has had is a very high rate of charge of customers. they offer customers, but for some reason customers come and go, and sometimes very rapidly like at&t and verizon. >> what does this mean for sprint as it looks at it? >> sprint has said there are no conditions under which this deal should be approved. you cannot allow this to go through. sprint is the number three competitor. so now, when there are four companies, it is the number one challenger to the big two, and it is beating someone. if you allow this to go through, it is number three, and it is not beating anybody. they very much don't want this spectrum that t-mobile has to go to at&t. now, there were a lot of talks before this deal was announced that sprint and t-mobile themselves were going to merge. they used it for technology. it was not quite efficient how

that merger would be, but that also would be a combination that would take you from four to three national competitors. so it is hard to believe that even if t-mobile were independent, even if another buyer would come in, that sprint would come in. >> i have a question for you. you said that t-mobile oneds it, and they want to get out of the market. what if they just shut the door and now you are down to three anyway? and all the people from t-mobile are out of jobs. guest: that's a good point. jobs is something that the justice department has looked here and said it is one of their considerations. georgia telecomm which owns t-mobile i doubt is going to shut its doors because it has a very valuable property, and to simply give away those licenses to spectrum would be throwing billions of dollars out the

window. someone wants to own that company, and someone is going to be willing to pay a lot of money. clearly at&t was willing to pay $39 billion. so it is not likely that it is just going to be shutting its doors. when you combine too big companies, you don't need too big marketing departments. that's one thing the justice department looked at and said, this is good -- going to cost a lot of jobs. this is going to be good for america. they have been behind this, in part because at&t is a union company. in part because t-mobile is not, and it hopes to organize those workers. >> sa vanna, -- savannah, georgia.

good morning. caller: i initially got marketed for at&t for a bundle package for home, phone, and business. what happened was the initial contract was excellent, but when the initial period was out, the cost went up almost three-fold. i got to them and tried to negotiate. basically they said, well, you've got 12 months to buy it out. even with paying the 12 months, and buying out the contract, i still would save money. then they said, we made a change, and now it is 36 months you have to buy out. and i haggled back and forth to get 24 months and i still saved money paying them for no services. so as far as i'm concerned, i don't think that they have the consumers' interest in heart at all. i just feel like, you know, once they get more power, they are

going to do these same sort of things and to a much greater degree. guest: you raise some good plingts. as a business customer, you are one of the most valuable customer tozz at&t or t-mobile or whatever phone company it is, and the commercial markets, the business market is one that the justice department looked at very hard and said, you know, very hard and said, you know, businesses don't buy phone service on a -- they only buy it on a national basis. even small businesses, people travel as part of business, and they want phone service they can youzhny where. this will affect business service because it takes down from four to three the number of companies that offer cell phone service, and that severely will limit, particularly for small business, which is all about trying to save money. it takes the low-cost competitor

out of the equation. >> host: chris jones on fwitter said he would rather see a sprint-t-mobile merger. any comments there? guest: the only problem there is it still takes four servers down to three. how you can merge those and where they will work functionally and where they won't is a big problem. it is just a possibility, and certainly one that was talked about and that the companies themselves were talking about. host: one more call. salisbury, michigan, on our democrats line. caller: just like the previous

-- you don't have too much place to go. it costs too much. guest: at&t has made the argument that the industry has consolidated over its industry, consolidated over its industry, and the price of cell phone service has consistently come down, so there is no reason to believe that if you continue to combine companies that costs won't continue to come down, and in part because of those combinations and those efficiencies, that's why costs have come down. have come down. there is oot aspect of that that you have to realize. that in any market, the more you

develop a market, the more the products can do. we used to have cell phones that are this big, and now we have cell fopes that are this big. the technology development that has allow those eefficiencies take place not through companies getting larger but through technology getting smaller. host: walk us through the next steps in the story. guest: at a time at&t has asked for an expedited hearing. it could come in the next week or two for the jump to rule that they can't block this. i would expect in the next month or two, if not by the end of the year accident that there would be a final decision. at&t, in the meantime, as we said, is going on a final track trying to negotiate something. they have an interesting incentive to try to negotiate a deal with justice.

if this deal breaks up, if at&t walks away, they have to pay a big break-up fee to t-mobile. $3 billion in cash, another $3 billion in giving them spectrum rights. rights. host: so they lose either way? guest: but they could win. because there is a place in the contract that if the justice department puts requirements on the merger, it costs them almost $7.8 million, then at&t can walk away. so it is in the interest of at&t to go to the justice department and say what are the conditions that we need? if it lays out conditions that are accepted, at&t can say sorry t-mobile, we can't go through with this, and we don't have to pay you. host: in our last segment, we will learn about clemmings across the united states.

we'll take up that discussion when we return. >> this weekend, a three thf day holiday weeke1 >> this weekend, a three thf day holiday weekend on book tv. from katrina's secrets, former new orleans mayor ray nagan's report on the storm after the storm. >> then politics on the first african-american president. >> then former editor and columnist ellis cose on race and media. find out about a book tv alert. >> watch more video of the candidates. see what political reporters are saying, and track the latest fim.

c-span's web site for campaign 2012. easy to use, it helps you navigate the political landscape wither updates. pafs links to ctrapan media partners in the early primary and caucus states. c-s at ctrapan.org/campaign 2 >> this holiday weekend on american history tv on ctrapan , on m. conjures elegance and grandeur. during world war ii the queen mary was commissioned as a troop ship. some -- >> and remmbering 9/11. sonya roth on covering september ione from president bush's florida trip. look for our schedule at

c-span.orthe ehistory. >> machiavelli has become a common word. >> his name is synonymous with ming. cal sch miles unger argues machiavelli's take my have been the result of the political situation around him. miles unger at 8:00. host: our next gest guest is from the national war college.

what -- joan john j:0nson-freese. what -- who is a war college student? guest: typical war college students are at senior level, war 5, war 6 which is a captain or colonel. who because of a mandate in 2006 they are required to attend professional military training. >> so it is required if a person achieves a rank, they will go to school? >> yes, it is called joint professional military education. there are two levels, and these service schools are the schools where they attend to fill that requirement. the war colleges are also the 3anting of institutions. we award a masters degree in

national security studies. >en so if a person is educated enough to gain the ranks of an officer within the various services, why do they have to go to schoo>> s what did they learn that did he didn't learn at officer's school? >> well, they basically looked around and said, we have to do many things with the military. one of them was to become more joint, to work together, to learn to work together, and to learn to work in an inner agency environment. further more it was recogni end that the military, the complex environment, needed to expand beyond its operational capabilities. our military officers arep>eery our military officers arep>eery very good at what they do. admiral devries said he recoly prizes what he was good he also recognized there were fields like international relations that he didn't, a tno. that much about. and the military officers attend the war colleges, to, in the words of one of the recent congressional reports, make sure they have intellectual agility

to deal with complex eto wironments. host: so topics would be? guest: military relations, firitical thinking isp>eery mwe stressed, and thn they also have joint military operations, ãto dearning more about their o fields. it is basically an opportunity - qin my department, for example, we teach regional studies. we have cultural an throw policy jift -- anthropologists. we talk about how religion to s into their new sitt. it is training them not only to be the best of the best within the military, but within all those tiers they will work with in senior leadershiar host: the college of naval warfair at newport, rhode island, there is the national war college in washington, d.c., something called the rsoint fore of staff in virginia.

talk more about that. uaest: army war college, naval war college, and air war college, those are all all higher levels of learninmmo the airports have access to technology, which is where the technical - qwhich is more a technical degree. there are speciality schools, and then there are the war colleges, which are the more, again, strategic thinkinrelamil schools. host: our guest joan il:0nsont greese. you can ask herme this topic until 10:00. host: if you say critical thinking and relations and how other cultures live, why are

they called war colleges? guest: well, the naval war college is overic 25 years old. when they were started it was a professional school to look at hov.do we operate? since then they have expanded and evolved as they certainly look ould. so i thi qw it is tradition. it is looking at war as a prompe. our soldiers are all professionals, but as they evolve in their careers, their fiareer cills and their educational needs expand as well. host: hov.many students attend the war college? guest: at naval war college we 3edet. per year. we're unir everyone together in one school. the army has two separate ptehools, the navy has two ptehools, the navy has two separate schools. we graduate about 600 students dn resident, and beyond that, everyone has to attend. so most of the soldiers,

sailors, airmen, as lend throug distance programs. there are extensive distance pro 3m. host: sto so if an officer has to as lend the war college, doe it have to be the war college, or can they get a similar edwe aation at any university? guest: going to princeton will not fulfill that reqhasrement. there are many officers. general petraeus and others have as lended doctorate institution. those are wonderful opportunities. number one, those institutions fiannot take care of all of the military officers. all military officers must fit the qualification. second they provide an dto walt. there are big differences. there are similarities, but there are similarities, but there are also differences between a prince upon ton

program and a war college program. and our pro 3ams at the war colleges are very much geared specifically tan oard security practitioners. we don't fit into the international relations theory and things that those kinds of schools somethines too often deevoe into. we gear our courses to the security practitioner. host: are the instrwe ators military? guest: we have different types of instrwe ators. we have active duty instructors. we have civilian academics, and then we have a significant number of military retirees. very different from se kel civilian academimore,interests tuges. one of the issues wes ande deal with nan o inside off.m.e. is w is the proper balance between acedemic retirees and where look ould active duty be prioritized?

han o do we lean forward tan oa education and a training model that sometimes creeps into the pvillia. systm. pvillia. systm. host: michael on the democrats caller: i don't see this as an either/or thing. people are paying into social security and medicare and all that for years and years. they deserve that.

at the same time we have to have a smart military, not a military that squanders trillions trillions of dollars on, you know, these guys that are below the radar screen or are trading off not only military hardware for nothing, but scans with these army-navy stores. host: caller, question concerning the war colleges? caller: yes, where are we going with all of this? we definitely need a military, but we don't need a military that threatens our way of life. guest: i would like to point out what the caller picked up, and that is that we need a smarter military. we have to make sure when they come to us, they are proven leaders in their operational field. when we have these officers come to the war colleges, our job is

to educate them for dealing with the kind of complex issues that the caller brought up. i think that is something we certainly would not have been familiar with in our technical jobs. soy think the complex issues of the future really solidify the mission of the war colleges to take on exactly the kind of complex questions that the caller brought up. host: garrett on our republican line is from orlando, florida. caller: i was just wondering how the war department works into this eindication. i'll take my answer off the air. guest: the services cad misare undergraduate educations. they omp batch lower's degrees. -- they offer bachelor's

degrees, usual -- a lot of engineering degrees. when officers are in the beginning of their career, often lieutenant colonel, their careers aren't very tactical and very operational. these service cad misprepare them very well for that, as well as the training that they receive during their careers. but it is also important to recognize that as officers become more senior, the type of skills, the types of problems that they deal with will change. and the war colleges are the educational institutions that move away from training and into education to fulfill that need. host: mike, independentents line. >> i served in the submarine service, and the captain was

probably the most intelligent person i ever had in my life. i used to drive by and notice he was reeding an strol strolling -- astrology book. he was actually listening to some rock 'n' roll thing on his tape recorder, and he said he was trying to figure out the common man. he was also known to be probably one of the best tacticians during the 1970's, and i wondered if you might know his wondered if you might know his name, alfred s. mclaren. i'll take your answer off the air. guest: i'm sorry, no i don't. host: it goes to the question of intellectual opportunity. guest: at the naval war college we have three departments, joint military operations. it is just as it sounds.

it is operational. it is basically looking at the kind of things that the officers are familiar with and how to approve their knowledge in those areas, strategy and policy, which looks at military history, and how the lessons of military history in terms of strategy, fighting wars, strategic operations. how those lessons learned from those. and my department, which looks at basically regional studies and cultural -- we look at strategies, policy, and leadership. how these call come together for how these call come together for decision makings in the kind of strategic environments that the area is not always familiar with. how washington works. how the international community works. the thing that these officers will really push them forward. one of the interesting thingeds, we stress a lot, not just critical thinking, but writing a paper. if you are on a submarine, you probably don't burn -- bring a

lot of papers. general petraeus and others have come out as recently as the speech at the national war college saying our leaders are fearless, but when it comes to writing an article or writing a blog, they are reticent. we need to get them over that. that is one of the things that we try to do as an educational interests tution. -- institution. host: are war colleges different from a regular academic college? guest: if you look at those schools, which we consider sister schools, sites at johns hopkins, the students that enter those programs go through a rigorous admissions process, and then they are taught by a tenured fact ulet who are there specifically to challenge them. to really say, you're wrong.

general petraeus said when he was at princeton, he got a d on his paper and it was a wake-up call for him. he was a number one student at he was a number one student at -- there is no admissions process, per say. they all have to come. that can impact attitude, quite frankly. many of the services putting emphasis on operation. a former comendante of the army war college said he was fearful that the personnel system didn't allow the best and the brightest to come to the war colleges. our students, there is no admissions process this is one of the debate colleges. there have been articles written saying, we are not tough enough on the students. there is too much caring about whether the students like what they are doing and attend yensans being made -- and then

attempting to make sure it is done in a way they are comfortable. comfortable. but debate is a healthy thing. it helps you move forward. >> so are they graded? can they flunk out? >> they are graded. the success rate is very high. near 100%. it is our chedge job to clencleng them, but get them through. that's more than a little tension. that's a fine line between making sure they like it and are comfortable, and challenging them. and personally, and this is only my opinion. by the way, everything i've said today is my opinion only and not that of the defense department or the department of the navy or anyone, certainly not the naval war colleges. in my opinion, i think we could be more challenging. i think we ought to push the students more. host: we have a budget of $7 billion for the war colleges for 2010. do -- are the war colleges funded by taxpayer dollars?

guest: yes, they are. i would be cautious of budget numbers. the naval war college, our budget, our facility is more than the facility that graduates a research division. it is hard to break down numbers in terms of what goes where. i would be dubious of those. host: sun prairie, wisconsin. caller: a college of war? caller: a college of war? how -- it seems so orwellian. how about a college of peace? or a peace college? how about the budget going there? i just heard $7 million be -- being their budget. here in michigan people are taking huge cuts to help bl the

budget. how about getting rid of some of these colleges? how about the military taking a cut? guest: i don't see how you can argue for less education for the military, certainly not in the environment that we are in. i think the value that you get for these tax dollars is beyond dispute. can there be an economic austerity? can there be cuts made? serm. i think there can be. i think there are ways to do that. one of the issues that has been brought to the forefront of civilian academic interests tutions and military is a huge increase in the number of administrators. there are a large number of administrative positions which have been created, which have come up in both sides of academics and p.m.e.'s. in there was a book reviewed in the washington journal very ante

recently, the fall of the fact ulet, which talks about assistant deans, associate deans. and these cost money. they could go to faculty lines. i think that's an area that could be looked at closely. in terms of val awe -- value of dollar, the caller made a comment about the college of peace. what we do in large part is how do we build stability in countries? how do you keep the peace? it is inheroin in the military to talk about and consider what do you do if you go to war. but just as much, if not more attention, is spent toward keeping the peace. host: this is a personal comment. she says "my husband who

received outstanding center officer, teaches, sees patients, was told if war college wasn't done, he would not be able to return." guest: some services put more emphasis on operations than promotions. i don't doubt that comment one bit. the air force, the irony, they are very interested in getting their students education. host: how long does it take for them to get a degree. guest: our officers finish their program in 10 months. it is extraordinary that they get this program completed in 10 months. now, there has been discussions at times to quit the program, -- to cut the program. if we can do it in 10, why not four? this is the difference between education and training.

education requires time to think. to not just read a book and take a test, but read, think. and we have seminars. our seminars are small, 12 or 13 students, where students can talk to each other and learn from each oofment learn how the army differs from the air force, different views. the zugs are fascinating. -- the discussions are fascinating. talking about how they differ in their views. their views. you are talking about iraq, someone in your seminar that went in your bag -- baghdad initially, the discussion level goes way up. host: would the students hear from a pacifist? guest: it is a job of the faculty to put that in. but quite honestly, there isn't a lot of diversity. but that's the job of the fact but that's the job of the fact ulet to throw those views out

and really put those challenges out there. host: our guest is joan johnson-freese from the war college. caller: myself, i am a proud graduate of the army war college. i just had a couple comments about that what this education did for me. first of all, it really expanded my thinking. up to the war college level, as your guest has already told us, because of the focus of that operation, and it is kind of an inward focus where when you get to the strategic level, the emphasis is much more con sessous -- consensus and coalition building, and the sort of commune cation skills that

are required to do those sorts of things. that's a significant paradigm shift for most people, and it was for me. i learned about the interagency process. and the old top-down style of leadership is not something that works well when you are working with the interagency or with other services or with people who are in other countries. i felt that really expanded my horizon there. and speaking to what your other caller said about a college of peace, if we had those skills and we're able to communicate or we're able to reach across the lines and we're able to shift our thinking from an inward focus to an outward focus, we would be much more likely to communicate better and avoid war. >> i couldn't agree more. we have international students at the war colleges who are in

our seminars. one of the officers i worked with years ago made the comment. if there's conflict, if you can pick up a phone instead of picking up a gun, you have come a long way. host: camebridge, massachusetts. on our independent line. caller: my question is about international relevantsy and the war colleges. one of the callers asked about why are we teaching war when we should be teaching peace. i think in today's age there can be a hard point that there is be a hard point that there is the international war coalition to work with allies, developing

nages, and that sort of thing globalized in society that builds a peace, hope stable global society and community around us. so if -- i would be curious to see if you can speak more about what that type of mission could be, also the types of students you see from around the world at the war college. >> we have the best and the brightest that come with us from around the world and sit with us and interact with our students. one of the things that occurred about seven years ago when the naval war college really -- we very carefully bifurcated our curriculum into an immediate and senior course, our immediate course is in the department i am in, national security, their focus is very strongly on regional studies. our officers get more of an exposure to the regional studies to the international relations

issues. in the faculty, we also have a very strong and very powerful program where we go and work with professional military educational institutions. they want our curriculum. it was an interesting example. in ethiopia, i was with a team from national security affairs where we were hoping to develop their curriculum and the building they were in was being built by the chinese. we were building the curriculum.

guest: at the war college we keep the students in newport, but we have a more concentrated regional studies program, but it varies by school. host: good morning. caller: good morning. maybe some of our politicians could use some of this kind of training. my question is having the politicians, particularly those involved in military decisions most notably, the commander-in-chief. have you ever provided any of this kind of training to them? i think it would be useful in some of the decisions that they have to make.

guest: we have people from the defense department. we are always trying to expand that inner agency inclusion. we have many speakers who are part of the decision-making process. we have practitioners. speaking from experience, one of my colleagues was a personal aide to senator john hines. we bring this in, but have we had decision makers as part of the course? we have had congressional staff as part of the distance course in washington, but not directly. in the way that i think you mean it. many of our students go on to be decision makers. that's exactly how we poise our curriculum. these are future leaders. they are operational leaders. when they come to it, they are -- they are strategic leaders in their future careers. i guess i would change my answer

a little bit and say yes we have along their career path. >> if a person is an active military on the field, and they get assigned to the work hall, are they lifted from their field of service to go to college and then go back? >> absolutely. we may have a student or faculty member. again, we have active duty on the faculty, who the week before was on a ship, flying a plane, and that is a strength and something that's a little bit of an issue for the academicics, because we have officers who come right from the on rages into a classroom, and we have to work with them in terms of just -- they haven't written a paper in a very long time. and so just bringing them into the educational, they are very the educational, they are very comfortable with training. they are less comfortable with education. that's one of the things that we really constantly have tension with, bringing them over to the educational field. >> students are from faculty in

iraq and afghanistan? >> one of my colleagues is >> one of my colleagues is currently in afghanistan. he was a faculty member. he was a navy reservist. he is currently in afghanistan, and he will be back in a month and within the classroom. host: plainfield, illinois, george, elena dementieva line. caller: it appears as though we have great education for our military. but if you look at the way we're fighting the war in afghanistan, it is exactly like the war we fought for independence, except in this case, we're marching down the officer of the road getting killed, and in the revolutionary war, it was the british. i'm interested in your answer. guest: i think my answer is one of the reasons for the war college is to move us beyond that kind of posture. it is to get our officers to a point where they are very future

looking, very strategic thinkers who recognize this and push forward. forward. that's the whole point. you have made my case, i think, for me. host: what's the average age of the students at the war college? guest: one of the issues -- and again, we have issues we are working on -- average age is mid to early 40's. would which -- would we lie like to get them younger? yes, but in the services, the concentration is on operations. because we don't have an admissions process, and sometimes the services are reluctant to send their best and brightest because they want them in operations. it has been the case that we get students as they are retiring. host: that's what one person --

one twitter comment is that we are preparing people for retirement. guest: we would like to see a change, but that is beyond the reach of the war clenl. that goes to the personnel systems of the services. host: how did you get involved in the war colleges? guest: my doctoral degree is in international relations, but i work on space security. so i have been at the air war college. when you work on security issues, you tend to gravitate to those issues where you keep security issues. while i keep a foot in academia through adjunct teaching, and i'm not the space board academy, i really want to work on sciences, and the war college is the place to do them. host: our next caller from our

independent line. caller: i understand the war colleges are very important. i really like the idea of having our military be more educated. but what about all the civilians but what about all the civilians that need to be educated? it is getting much, much harder for people like me to get out of high school and say i need to do something for the united states and not just the military. it is harder for us to get in the college as well. then you have people in the military getting into college like that. what about people like me? i was wondering, are we getting pushed to the wayside because of the importance of people already in the military? guest: i don't think it is an either or question. i think you are right, we need more education in general.

i certainly don't think that there should be priority put on one rather than the other. a function of what we are talking about now are people in the military and making their the military and making their way through the career ranks. we want them to have the best education possible, to fight the kind of wars that one of the earlier callers talked about in dealing with a complex environment. host: our guest is joan johnson-freese from the war college. caller: i would like you to comment on looking at war as profession as what you said earlier in the program. it is scary for me to hear war as a profession. are you looking at the causes of

war and how to have war no more? looking at war as a profession is a scary proposition. and i will take my answer off the air. thank you. guest: that's a fair question and a good question. military officers are in a profession. we want them to be professional. again, going back to engagement programs, one of the things we work with, with countries around the world is to professionalize their military. so military service is say profession. that means it has the norms and cultures. academicics is a profession with norms and culture rs -- cultures. the kinds of issues we deal with within the war colleges are exactly the kind of issues you were talking about. how to prevent war. in the course i am teaching now, with the students i worked with yesterday, we were talking about countries in latin america and how to stablize these young

democracies. a democracy democracy is a stable form of government. it is not just how did the commanders -- how did the military officers who are in military officers who are in these commands, how do they best keep the peace, how do they foster economic development? how do we make our global environment one that is secure for the uts us -- united states and those countries. so we are dealing with exactly the kind of issues you are dealing with. >> one more question from birmingham, alabama, you are on our independent line. caller: i think my question is really starting to be answered, because what i was going to say about my question is with the previous caller who suggested previous caller who suggested these colleges, because i think that the question was in what respect are these at the war colleges? and it occurred to them in international relations, and rather defensive or more of a cooperative perspective,

teaching perhaps off other countries strategies. how can we work together to make the peace? you how can we make the war colleges peace colleges? guest: i think you are right. guest: i think you are right. at the war colleges we have an obligation to deal with the officers and make sure they are the best and the brightest in their operational fields. we do just that. again with the department share, we hire anthropologists, people who specialize in religion because these are issues that our officers have to deal with on a regular basis. the more they know, the more that we can seek cooperation and not have to fight those battles.