research center will discuss polling. and we will talk with catherine bradshaw to look at a new jersey law to allow students to give police anonymous tips about bullying. "washington journal" is live every morning at 7 ams -- 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. ♪ host: good morning. the u.s. house leads a pro forma session today, we will be covering that live at 2:00 this afternoon. in the newspapers, jim cliburn calling for compromises in committee. a separate op-ed from mr. mcconnell, saying that we need

free trade agreements with colombia, south america, panama. "usa today," saying that the company behind restaurants like talk of l n k of say hit -- kfc has been allowing -- lobbying for more states to allow food stamps in their restaurants. one report saying that they're looking to cut costs in some states. how would you cut costs at the postal service to keep it solvent? here is how you can weigh in this morning. for republicans, 202-624-1115. for republicans, 202-737-0001. for independents, 202-624-0760. we have set aside a special line for those of you who are current and retired postal workers.

202-737-5579. you can also send us an e-mail at journal@c-span.org and reach out to ouessant twitter, twitter.com/c-spanwj -- reach out -- reach out on twitter, twitter.com/c-spanwj. the postal service could lose up to $10 billion and have less than one week's worth of money in the bank at the end of the fiscal year, according to the postmaster general. the writer of this story for " the washington post," joins us on the phone right now. caller: they have billions of dollars in labor and health care costs that must be paid every year that this year will probably total north of $7

billion. they are trying to get congress to change those rules so that they do not have to pay as much in advance. they are also looking to put an end to a bit of language in the appropriations bill that requires them to deliver mail six days per week. dropping down to five days would save them $7 billion annually. it turns out that most americans are supportive of this. many do not see why they need to get mail delivered on saturday right now. it is simply that congress has not acted on it. there are other proposals that they have put forward, but then there are lawmakers who wonder why you would cut back on service during this time.

host: when it comes to the history of congress helping the postal service in this kind of situation, how willing has congress been in the past? caller: they have been asking for this for least three years. congress has not budged. every year around this time you see the postmaster general on the bill saying that this is what we need you to help us do. we are looking at closing post offices, we can only go so far. we need you, congress, since the post office is in the constitution, to give us the ability to sell things besides postage. the ability to not have to pay as much for advanced retirement.

congress, four or -- for all sorts of reasons, health care reform, an election year, has simply ignored it. this year, amidst all of the other talk, they are banking on the possibility that now that they are paying back as much as they can, the problem is that all of them are essentially starting to give back to the postal service some control over this period of the other is in the house, leaving things, demonstrating the potential gridlock that lies ahead. house and senate leaders can

rarely agree on house legislation moving forward. >> there is a picture this morning of cliff duffy and tervor orlando. what has been their reaction? caller: they hang their hat on this very complex issue regarding future retiree health benefits. it is a bid wonky, appreciating these details, but essentially since 2006 congress said they had to start prepaying retiree health benefits. the argument by the postal service is that paying one-fifth of that would leave them in much better shape. and that they would not be experiencing these types of losses. the issue, and what the unions have proposed, is that back in

the 1970's and 1980's, when the old civil service worker retirement pension system was in use, the postal service over paid by billions of dollars. some have suggested $5 billion. others have suggested much less. what the unions are hoping is that congress will say -- look, because you overpaid this fund without any members any more, why not take some of this that you paid too much into it and move it to pre-fund of these retirement benefits for the future? solving financial benefits overnight and allowing them to refocus and find new ways to sell things that americans would want to buy, new ways for americans to start using the postal service again.

but any discussion of cutbacks inevitably means cutting jobs. this organization employs more than 20,000 people. this postmaster general would like to take it down to an organization that employs 25,000 people in he is seeking permission from congress to break union contracts. this certainly would not help things considering the employment situation. it would definitely changed the face of the postal service forever. they have a very strong unions but in the last few years they have given recessions as the postal service has cut back on the cost of labor. host: ed o'keefe, that you for your time this morning.

caller: great to be with you. host: again, your thoughts on the postal service and how they can cut costs. for republicans, 202-624-1115. for republicans, 202-737-0001. for independents, 202-624-0760. and if you are a current or worker, we have a special number for you, 202-737- 2579. one twitter message that we got says that the u.s. ps needs to stop saturday services. tanya, go ahead. caller: i agree with saturday delivery. as well as with, possibly in rural areas, continuing deliveries, but in an urban areas where there are post

offices right there, maybe it would be more efficient to go and pick up your postal mail instead of having individuals continuously coming out over and over again for mail that is undeliverable, certified, etc.. people getting up and not continuously depending on them, perhaps we would have more of a better chance of keeping those jobs in the post office, where they are needed host: the next call comes from cleveland, ohio. paul? caller: according to the congressional budget office, civil service retirement is that $50 billion. sdrs retirement, which will have $5.5 billion in default, it

is a little bit outrageous. what would be the regular time at the person would spend wh post office? 30 years? seems outrageous. host: missing a payment on september 30 would not cause immediate disaster, according to this article. host: this message from twitter -- host: palm coast, florida. bill, republican line. how are you?

caller: fine. i worked for the navy for 20 years, 10 years for the postal service. i just recently retired in june. i can tell you that the premise of the postal service is to deliver mail to anyone who has a mailbox outside of their home. that is the way that it has always been. now that we are in this economic condition, upper management is looking for ways to cut costs. which makes sense. but the problems of the post office cannot be explained in this simple 30 minute program, or whatever it is. the postal service has been paying into our health benefits and retirement funds. the formula that they use, they

were putting so much in their because they put too much. this happened three times after three audits. when you hear upper management saying that we have lost money, we have not lost a dime since the 70's. all of the money that we take in is based on posted sales. when you hear that postal employees are making too much money, it is all done with postage. people in upper management, yes, they are worried because they are worried about their livelihood. but they are shutting down all of these small offices and everyone expects to be able to put a mailbox outside of their home and get the mail.

host: dave, independent line. caller: i like what the post office does. forever stamps are consistently 40% less per package. i do us see any reason to change. host: what would you do about the costs and expenses? caller: 20 cents more per stamp this does seem like too big of a burden. from what i have read, they are all 75 years in the future in terms of pension expenses. host: this twitter message -- host: dallas, tx. caller: good morning. how are you doing?

i am a long winded presence, so i will make it short and sweet. i get upset of c-span every morning when i hear people talking. seems as though the republicans are taking over. people understand what is going on. the post office is a private entity in terms of wages and medical. the congressman and the people have taken the money and spent it all. now that what the postal service to take up the slack. my point is, we as a people in this world need to get together and stop complaining about what color this is, what color that is, and come together. host: some other stories in the

paper. this is from "usa today." host: long beach, california.

we have set aside a line this morning for retired and current postal workers. go ahead. caller: the prior caller says that the post office is itself sustained. i am a prior worker at the post office. currently, i am not working for the post office, but i am a consumer. and what i have noticed is that in today's world, there is a totally different work ethic. when i worked there we were some -- we were supposed to do a good day's work. the postal workers today do not pay attention to what they are doing. currently i get a lot of mail delivered to me that is not mine, leaving me to assume that someone else is getting mine. i am polite enough to make sure that the person gets their male that is delivered incorrectly,

but people are not always that polite to me. i have waited in a very long time. while the workers are busy talking to each other. they are blatant in their lack of accountability. you had a prior call with ed mentioned that maybe we should use postboxes. i think that i might vote for that. i never thought that i would, as i am now senior citizen, but there is a lot of sloppiness and, to tell you the truth, i cannot figure out in any position, anywhere, how any company or entity can continue to pay someone 90%, 100% of their salary, when they quit working. when they quit working, someone else has to be hired. host: facebook is another place

where you can let yourself be heard. sandie richards is doing that this morning, saying -- host: pontiac, ill.. caller: good morning. i have a hypothetical to illustrate a point. let's say that i am running a government department or business and i need $1 million in cost savings. if i have a $10 million payroll and 100 people working for me add $100,000 per year, i can

fire 10 of those people and get a $1 million cost savings, but then i have to pay 40% unemployment. really i have to fire 14 to 16 people to get the same amount of cost savings. if what i instead do is decrees all of those peoples paid by 10%, i still have the same work force, still am providing the same service. and everybody is sharing the sacrifice. do you get what i am saying? host: do you think that those kinds of fox will be received from the powers that be? caller: the problem is political and involves the unions. they do not want to see payroll decreases. they do not want to share the

sacrifice, is what i am saying. but the answer is a lot better if everyone shares the sacrifice to achieve cost savings rather than throwing people on the street. host: how would you rate the postal service? caller: i do not know that i am qualified to do that. i guess it is ok. and putting food on their table, the service would still be provided. you still have all of your staff. host: a couple of other stories. michael fletcher, talking about rhode island. the headline says that the state might take an ax to its pension.

host: oakland, california. nick, independent line. caller: i remember some years ago, must have been about 10 years ago, the post office was going to go into the business of packing mail and handling it, like you just bring the thing in and they will packet for you, like a ups store and they will charge you for that service. ups and fedex lobbyists stopped them from doing that. saying that the post office was not supposed to make money. that is one thing that would be great. it would be wonderful if you could go to the post office and they had that package for you already.

it seems to me that i heard that third class mail is being subsidized by more than what they make from the advertisers. they could raise the rates on a third class mail. host: august 11 of this year, the postmaster general was on this program talking about that situation. one of the things that he talked about was what the u.s. ps plans to do when it comes to its financial situation. >> working hard every year to prepay retirement benefits, that is 15% of our expenses. i told you we have taken a lot of golf on this. we need to move from six day delivery to five day delivery.

we would then be more profitable again. host: joanne says this in an e- mail -- host: a couple of international stories from the associated press. a convoy of libyan soldiers has lost a town -- left a town and are headed for a -- a capital. and reportedly they arrived late on monday. front page of "usa today." this from the pentagon, showing in may through july --

host: pittsburgh, pennsylvania. current or retired them of caller: i am a widow of an official for the postal service -- retired? caller: i am a widow of an official for the postal service. he put 30 years into paying for a retirement fund. he died in 2000 at the age of 50. i want to know how that will affect me. so far i do not have a cost of living raise. i do not get anything from social security. he died one week short from getting the money they put into social security. where does that leave me?

i think that congress should certainly give the postal service a chance. there were so many times they tried to make a better, and they always said no. host: do you get information firsthand about these kinds of situations? missing payments and the post office future? caller: no. host: buoy, md., janet, democrat line. caller: can you hear me? host: yes. caller: my father retired honorably from the post office. i remember him often saying that they kept changing his route. they would always less than it before a pay raise was due, so that he would get a pay raise on

a lesser amount, then increase it right afterwards. i do not know if all of the postal service is like this, but it would have been nice if they were the ones offering e-mail addresses, a service provider. that is my comment. host: this story from "the baltimore sun," --

host: vulgate, new jersey. steve, independent line. caller: as far as the problems of the post office, i think that they could do more by lowering some of the prices. for example, they used to have something called delivery confirmation. you could put it on any regular letter and get delivery confirmation. what they have done instead is they require you to send it certified, up words of $4 to $6. i think it is the cost of a stamp was lowered, more people would send letters. when i have to pay bills, i usually pay two months at a time so that i can save the cost of a postage stamp. if the cost was lowered, i would mail more.

by lowering your cost, they would increase the amount of business coming in. host: with people paying bills online, has that affected this? caller: of course, it has certainly hurt them. they said years ago, when e- mails was coming out, they wanted to get in on that. but having a lower price point in different price points allowing more people to use their service, right now what they are proposing to reduce services, to take away saturday delivery, that will drive more people away from using the post office altogether. host: a hearing today before the homeland security commission, a

panel talking about the postal service's fiscal condition. and you can see that on c- span.org today. there will also be information as to when we will broadcast it. stay tuned for that. tom, democratic line. go ahead. caller: the post office is a fantastic organization. they do their job very well. but i would probably pass a law saying no home delivery to any republican. that would make them happy, the government would not be spending any money. looking at inflation compared to some of the gas prices, they have all of these trucks that they put on the street every day. that would help. i would cut out saturday delivery. again, the republicans would be

happy is tech for that. they would all be screaming and yelling, but they would be happy as heck. host: when it comes to shortfalls, $388 billion according to this from "usa today -- from "financial times."

host: carmel, new york. jim? caller: one of the things that i think could be taken into account for cutting costs, besides the retiree issue going around, is changing the work rules. i have seen recent proposals where they have proposed to basically deliver the mail one day later, in essence delivering yesterday's mail today. this would allow the postal service some more management flexibility. under the current operating procedures, they have led the male driver delivery times instead of going through a cut off time and making sure that the carrier is on a specific schedule. this would eliminate a lot of overtime and make sure that a

specific time of delivery was every day. the other thing that i would change is the work rules. you have archaic work rules as to who work, generating a lot of disagreement between mail handlers and the clerk's. that needs to be changed so that there is one entity working in those plants. it has come under too much union control in that area as far as the jurisdiction issue goes. cases go back to the 1970's on this. there is a clause after six years of service, and it would be a boondoggle to put it into

effect because of the protections. you would have to guarantee that people working in new york, chicago, or california -- that process needs to be streamlined. when you do not have the protections for the people on the six years of service. the final problem is that they spend over $1 billion per year on injury, cases. other positions the need to be looked into to try to get those costs under control, these are all things that can add up to significant savings, in addition to changing how the retirees are funded. host: we have about 10 minutes left on this topic. papers looking at this story, "the washington post," they have a look at the latino vote in the 2012 elections.

host: were just there, massachusetts. jerry, democratic line.

caller: about the mail. we do not need male six days per week. monday, wednesday, friday. host: why only three days per week? caller: we do not needed every day. host: why? caller: because it is ridiculous. no one needs male six days per week. -- no one needs to get the mail six days per week. host: republican line. caller: these are government employees. just like the rest in the country. the constitution says, item number eight, i think, in the constitution, out with the government required to do things, one of those is to have a postal department. the other is to build a postal roads. it is the only department that i

know of in the government that actually makes money. besides tax revenue. so, i do now know why we do not just three the postal department the way that we treat any other department in the government. instead of isolating it by saying that you have to live within your income, the rest of the military does not live within its income and it does not have any income. the commerce department does not have any income, but the postal department has income. why not treat that like the rest of it and distribute it throughout the rest of the area? up host:. romney has an op-ed talking about his plan to turn around

the u.s. economy. just to give you the bullet points, first he says that president obama has threatened to raise taxes on individuals and businesses. he said he would push hard in the opposite direction. he said that he would pare back regulation, including obama- care, and regulatory increases being pushed down to zero. going to the next column -- host: he will make a speech on his jobs initiative and specifically his jobs plan today at 3:30. you can see that live on c-span, c-span.org, c-span radio, check it out on the front page. mitt romney talks about his proposal for jobs.

steve, independent line. caller: all the to do with the mail system is get lots of junk mail. basically, you have e-mail and facebook now. what is the use? you are getting this junk mail. it should be terminated completely. that is my opinion as far as the postal service. host: from "the wall street journal," this morning.

host: wheaten, illinois. caller: good morning. god bless america. i want to leave my memory to those who lost their lives at the pentagon and the world trade center. but i want to get to this postal thing. bottom line, this is what is going on in america today. we dropped prices on shipping and moving these, the post office will definitely benefit. more than that, like the woman from california said, if you have been in a post office

lately, they do it -- they just do not care. they act like you are doing them a favor by coming to them. these people just do not care. they are union employees. they have their jobs, they have their benefits, and they just do not care. if they start losing their jobs, it will get their attention. more than that, we need to stop bashing all of the millionaires in this country. a millionaire pays my salary. not the guy down the street. these big businesses pay our salaries and actually employed the people of this country. if we keep going around and destroying these billionaires and millionaires, we are going to destroy our jobs. host: there are already 64 comments on our facebook page. you can add your comments there

as well. raymond levy the fourth is one participant saying -- host: birmingham, alabama. caller: i am a vietnam war veteran and a single mother. the post office in tennessee, they have been having problems for a long time. they have yet to pay my correct salary. on and off through 1997, when i

came back to work i could have had my surgery in 1988 and been back to work. with five problems i could have had a quality of life for me and my children. to this day they refuse to pay workers' compensation. the department of labor refuses to even recognize the regulations. three times, like congressman and senator refused to help. the post office is attempting to save money in cases like mine. they have been doing this for a long time. seems like there is nothing they will do. they tell me -- there's nothing you can do. you cannot sue us, we of the federal government. host: "the financial times," they have an interview with the chairman of a libyan oil company.

the story says -- host: there is a larger interview there. iowa, mary, democratic line. caller: i just wanted to say to the woman who says that postal workers do nothing, she must be using a different post office that i do. we have good service. courtesy is the norm.

they will do anything for you. i believe that this is another scheme to privatize the post office, like they like to privatize everything. i want a post office. they can take the money from one of those other things. i love the post office. we need to be there. we talk there. we are doing fine here. thank you. host: one more call from boston, massachusetts. mary, are you a current worker or a retiree? caller: acorn worker. hello. host: go ahead, talk to me. do not listen to the tv. caller: very good. i wanted to mention that the

postal workers that we see, there are many more behind-the- scenes that we do not see, and they are sweating behind the scenes to make sure that the male is given out in great courtesy to them. taking extra effort to make sure that they are receiving their product with currency and consideration. to say that we do not and that we need to be fired, or people may need to lose their jobs, is inconsiderate. i am sitting here as a single woman, owning my own home, watching and worrying, only 14 years in this business, wondering what will happen to my home, my mortgage, my car payment. worrying about what will happen when the government and upper management does things that i do not approve of. when i see things that could be done to make our business

better, yes, if you want to blame the unions and say all kinds of things about government workers and stuff, granted, there are bad apples in every barrel. but that does not mean that the majority of workers are craftworkers. -- crap workers. i am so tired of listening to all the bashing put on political, government, union workers. there are a majority that really do care. i think the woman who said that she enjoys us. -- thank you to the woman who said that she enjoys us. to the people that care. host: pete -- host: we will have to leave it there. we have taken 26 calls on this topic. you may still want to make your opinion known. i invite you to go to our facebook page, where we can

continue this conversation. congress is back to work this week. that is this morning at 10:00. then the senate at 2:00. we will take a look at what they will be dealing with. fred barbash and for republicans, 202-624-1115. will the art -- fred barbash and daniel friedman will be our guest for that discussion. ♪

host: -- >> track the latest contributions on the c-span campaign 2012 web site. it helps you to navigate the web site -- with the latest polling data and links to c-span partners in the early caucus states. >> this weekend, the 10-year anniversary of 9/11 on the c- span network. here is our live schedule. saturday, c-span, 12:30, the flight 93 national memorial dedication service. sunday morning, in a clock 30, a memorial ceremony from the world

trade center site. on c-span 2 at 9:00, vice president biden from the pentagon. c-span 3 at 9:30, honoring those that lost their lives on flight 93. 9/11 remembered, on the c-span networks. >> every weekend is american history television on c-span 3. 48 hours of people and events telling the american story. watch oral histories. our history bookshelf features some of the best known history writers. revisit some of the best known battles and events during the anniversary of the civil war. go behind the scenes at museums and historic sites. the presidency looks at the policies and legacies of past american presidents. our complete schedules online.

sign up to have it e-mail to you. >> "washington journal" continues. host: as promised, a conversation about as they head back to work this week. fred is with "cq weekly." also joining us, daniel friedman of "the national journal." let's start with you. how would you lay out the relationship between congress and president obama? guest: congress is looking for the democrats to help them out a little bit. he will be proposing a jobs plan. congress has made it that by the house will pass the economy on jobs. democrats are hoping that obama

will let least kind of give a boost to their strategy, which is essentially saying that republicans will agree to hear these proposals, or they will look like constructionists. guest: i think that that is correct. potentially, it could be quite ugly. what is happening here is quite -- is not governing, is campaigning. the president will be trying to flush out republicans, making proposals, using it for political advantage. vice versa on the other side. i feel like it will be a tense, confrontational, difficult period in which all kinds of melodrama is dominant. the potential for a dramatic moment will come at around thanksgiving. host: we have been following the town halls over the coat --

course of the summer. jobs have been the number one issue. with that in mind, you still expect this to be a the wrangling? guest: creating jobs takes federal money. there are all kinds of gimmicks designed to avoid an immediate outlay of funds. basically, you have this intrinsic tension and people locked into their position on no revenue for the republican side. what the president would call a comprehensive for a complete, balanced package. is very hard to do anything about jobs unless you want to spend money. you can work around the edges, assuming that you can get agreement, but the problem is that there is no sense from the other side that they want the other to have something to go to the polls with that they can

claim credit for. that is the inherent problem. host: democrats in congress, are they looking for a go big moment? guest: i am sure that they are. but there is relatively little they can do. politically they are likely to go as big as possible and put the onus on the republicans to do something. people on the outside and on the inside look at the bad economy, hoping to shake up the situation some well. they are hoping that this will somehow change the opinion of the others. reinforcing the existing preferences. representative maxine waters of california, calling for water jobs -- host: representative maxine waters of california, calling for cuts.

guest: i just do not think anything is going to fly. maybe small things, like the continuation of payroll tax deduction. but that is already in existence. that will not provide new stimulus to the economy. the president might get some republican support, but that is a long-term thing that will not create jobs now, in the next year, or even the next two years. things that they can agree on, there is a lot of concern in the business community and the markets, they will do nothing of consequence and will have a visible paralysis that shakes the confidence in the ability of the united states government to get its basic governance and taking care of.

host: here is how you can contribute. for republicans, 202-624-1115. for republicans, 202-737-0001. for independents, 202-624-0760. twitter.com/c-spanwj adn journal@c-span.org. talk about republicans and the strategy that they will employ this week. host: -- guest: eric cantor has this idea on a series of boatvos related to the national labor relations boom. that is not going to impact the senate. what it does, it gives them an opportunity to say that they have their own jobs plan. it gives them an alternative.

host: politically, republicans, as they look to 2012, what are they thinking as part of that strategy? guest: politically, it gives them a little bit of cover. it is understandable. is a straight, symbolic, legislative step. seeing the republican presidential candidates and the massachusetts governor's, most of them are focused on reducing regulation. host: when it comes to congress, jim cliburn has this op-ed calling for compromise within the commission itself. guest: they are already known as

this super-committee. there are 12 of them with equal numbers from each party that are supposed to arrive at a specified number. i think that day, as a group, are potentially capable of compromising. that is a pretty good group. even those with fixed positions. those that our veterans are even kind of reasonable. the question is, will the combination of leadership and rank-and-file free them to come to some kind of agreement? there is so much tension over so many issues, the possibility of them reaching an agreement, my sense is that it might happen out there if they are on their own, but they are not on their own. host: what should they look out for? guest: one notable who is not

there right now is paul ryan. he is a powerful force. he has identified with his proposal to cut medicare as a mud useful. the cochairs played important roles. jon kyl could play an important role. most of them, you do not see bomb throwers on here. you see people of very firm, fixed -- chris van pollan, the ranking democrat on the committee, he is a reasonable guy who could play a role close to the leadership. all of them have a tie to the leadership. they could get something done. host: mr. friedman, would you agree on their ability to get something done?

guest: they can. i am a bit less optimistic. they are in many ways instruments of leadership on these committees. it was made very clear that the leadership does not want to see any tax increases. they do not want loopholes. if the overall taxthat takes ope table. they do have some options but the grand deal that people had hoped for is probably not going to happen. they may do something smaller. host: our first caller is steve on the democratic line. from illinois. caller: i am 51 and a registered nurse for 17 years in intensive care. i really think that the congress and the president and everyone

is missing the ball with jobs. if we had single payer, universal health care, there is plenty of people live become -- who could become entrepreneurs and people could easily get hired because small business would not have to pay for health benefits. even though we might need that to pay for it, i think it is the silver bullet on jobs that people are missing the ball on. if obama does not come out swinging against commerce -- congress, many democrats will not vote for him at all. we're very disappointed. guest: he wants to get his base out and try don't appeal to independent voters. single payer is not something that he will probably propose. if you are a supporter of that, unfortunately. he is trying to walk the line

between coming up with proposals and he would try to do this on thursday to motivate people. host: is this a moment that could change the perception that of him being a week later? guest: i do not think there is ever a moment when you want to come off as a week later. he will try to be as decisive as the candy. but it does have an opportunity -- talking all years about paying attention to job. they will do much more of an effort this time so they can do that more effectively. host: new york, the republican line, david. caller: thank you for c-span. the democrats demagogue a lot about social security. but they are lowering the funding scheme for social security with their payroll tax cut. so where did they get off

demagoguing about social security? that is number one. number two, the three people that nancy pelosi put on that super committee, two are from districts where very little income taxes paid. the third, mr. van hollen, from a district which her super federal employees and contractors who have a vested interest in keeping federal expenditure is high. this is the kind of stuff that we get from democratic party, and there disgusting. guest: i understand where the caller is coming from. the payroll tax has been something that has been supported over time, a reduction by the parties, not exclusively democratic. the social security has been demagogued as long as i have

been around this town by both parties. i have been around a long time. i do not think anyone has an exclusive -- right now it seemed to be more with the democrats against the republicans trying to do something to it. but these are long-term issues. they have been around almost longer than i have. the positions are gradually shifting, not the monopoly of any one party. guest: let me add to that. if you're concerned that districts -- democrats who represent is such -- districts to pay less income tax, you'd be right. that is how congress operates. people are going to represent their constituents. i think that we would be unrealistic if we thought it was wrong for members of congress to go out and do something that was in the interest of the people who elected them.

host: on the fall legislative session, it starts with the president's speech on jobs tomorrow. house speaker boehner will get his job speech on said to the 15th. the deficit reduction committee meets on september 8 and also on september 13. house republicans to -- vote to repeal regulations. spending levels for fiscal year 2012 have to be set by october 21. disaster funding for hurricane irene and replenishing that is on the agenda as well as free trade deals that the president is sending to congress and the reauthorization of the faa. senator minority leader mcconnell talked about trade and the need to spur job creation. where are we in the process? guest: first, pedro, you mentioned a long list there. i would be surprised if they get all that done.

mcconnell and senate majority leader harry reid have an agreement that they will move forward on the trade bill. the problem is that the administration has yet to submit them. they want the trade adjustment program extended. harry reid is not agreed in a way that satisfied the white house that they will be able to pass that in the house. i think that is the holdup right now on the house side. it doesn't like it will be worked out, maybe not this month, but in the fall. host: any possibility that the list will get done? guest: you will find another partisan divide and they are all connected in the nexis, free trade being an example. it is an expenditure that goes to people that might been hurt by the trade deal in a particular -- particular area. they considered a democratic

dispensing of goodies on a political basis. each issue has something that anchors the other side or portions the wrong button on the other side. there was a day when those things that i learned out in the greater interest of trade or whatever. that is what is not happening now. those sticking points either get pushed aside for another time, where they get ironed out in some way that both sides could report to their constituents that they had one or save face. that is what is not happening, the normal political processes have broken down for that is why the public has the low opinion of congress. they see that. people are very observant of what has happened with the process. host: what is likely to get done and what not get done? guest: barring a breakthrough on the deficit, i did it -- i do

not see much getting done. it is dividing parties and whole industries. everyone thinks it is so important for the competitiveness, the president will talk about that. but that has been stuck all over some relatively small matters. as a matter of policy, and the republicans have decided they are not going to agree to anything, they cannot have this president being able to walk into the campaign mode with a list of accomplishments. and likewise, the president who has already sacrificed so much support of his own constituency and base by compromising, i think he cannot make a lot more compromises than he already has. like last week on the epa regulation, he basically, from the environmental point of view, caved.

that is a huge blow to his constituency level and to his base. no child left behind, this has been sitting there since 2007, and it has gotten so bad that the secretary of education actually waved at a lot in order to go forward. there is some severe paralysis there. we have seen the hopes of compromise dashed on the rocks of campaign partisanship. host: margie on the democrats' line. caller: clinton used the unions and illinois and then announced thousands of state workers. our great mayor does nothing but a cut. obama has been such a

disappointment, i will not watch him talk. he did not keep the space program while the talks about how we need jobs in technology and science. it is the cognitive dissonance. now the post office today. i tell you, the millions of people that watched that space shuttle for the last time and realize that it was the end of america's confidence. and not one democrat was down there in leadership. nobody. and now the post office, which made our country great, -- i am 61 and unemployed. there are so many people my age that are absolutely being thrown away. we know history. ok, you are throwing away this entire generation. we just want everything?

no, we have been fired and we will not be rehired. obama as a woeful lack of leadership. i will not vote for the first time. i cannot believe that that is the choice i had, someone lacking in my face while they talk about jobs, while laying everybody off. stop laying them off. that is the first thing. host: mr. friedman. guest: you get a snapshot of the mood of the country and they are really angry at congress and the president. unfortunately, you have a disagreement over a what the solution is. that is the fundamental problem. democrats run the senate. they have ever constituents to voted for them than the house republicans. everyone is upset. there is yet to be any consensus

on where to go. that is the basic problem right now. host: from the "wall street journal." guest: it does not seem to be helping anyone right now. it is too early to say how competitive the advantage of it will be. guest: i think your caller's statement was very moving. they have been fired. she was 61 years old and i am not too far for her age. you have one generation that says the baby boomers are they

guilty party, we're living off the fat of the land in passing on this debt. and yet look at how this woman feels. there is a lot of alienation people -- a lot of alienation. some of it may not be grounded in reality. things have been worse. but the al look that people have now about the future and their own situation -- the outlook that people have about the future and their own situation 61 is not old. it is young. look at how she feels and looks at how so many people feel. i think this is a very small no. . she also sounds like she was an obama supporter and no longer is. right there you have your own survey that says a lot about this country. host: boston, massachusetts, you are next.

mary on the independent line. caller: i do not want to bash either party. i just want them to do what is right for the country. it seems like no matter what, they are not looking at the country. they are looking at their parties. they need to stop that. guest: the so that of the people who are calling here is right on. i have listened to the show for years, and usually you do not have this kind of an agreement on the situation. listen to the unanimity in the sense and the extent to which people have this feeling of despair about the parties. congress should be worried. host: let me throw in one more comment from twitter. guest: care about the executive branch growing? yes, we should care about it. it is our country.

standard and poors had the temerity that they were expressing in market terms what people are feeling. people cannot count on this government to get the job done. and that -- you have crossed the line at that point made. this is not just one bill or another bill. this speaks to the basic confidence which the founding fathers worked so hard to establish. remember, all we have is a piece of paper, this constitution. people talk about this document as marek less. it was the people they were the of miracles. you start to lose that spirit, then you have really lost something that is very difficult to recover over time. host: new jersey from the republican line. caller: the president said yesterday's i am not scared of tough times. i m plenty scared for all my brothers and sisters in this great country.

i wish the president would change gears and talk about how how precious life is. life is precious. he should say it is murder to kill a human being. and a pre born child is a human being. under current law, they have no protection from murder. i think our president should say i am going to protect innocent people. i am going to protect all our brothers and sisters. call this a civilized country? we put on our currency "in got our trust." if we had not killed 50 million babies, we would have social security. host: well social issues get pushed to the side? guest: economic issues are at the forefront of the election run-up.

it does not mean that social issues will not. voter turnout is basic to both parties. for republicans, social issues will remain a weighted they get their voters to the polls. host: he mentioned the president's speech. here is a little of that. >> we have roads and bridges across this country that need rebuild. we have private companies to do the building. we have more than 1 million unemployed construction workers ready to get dirty right now. there is work to be done and there are workers ready to do it. labor is on board, businesses some board, we just need congress to get on board. host: daniel friedman, getting on board with what sounds similar to his previous proposals. guest: i cannot think the republicans have changed their mind yet. some of what he is doing,

including verbally haranguing congress and republicans, is coming up with initiatives that do not require congressional approval. he is asked federal agencies to expedite some infrastructure projects. but congress remains relevant. obama will try to bypass some of this if possible or put pressure on republicans in congress to either make them look like obstructionists or get on board. host: florida, good morning. caller: i was a restaurant worker at the world trade center. yes, hi. i was a restaurant worker the world trade center. i have a lot of illnesses from there. a lot of the people down there were government employees. we had 3000 people.

there were firemen and police and down here in florida where i live, if there are what you call the right to work state. i know a guy who works for walmart. he drives 30 miles each way. they let him work four hours and send him home, they have the right justice and the guy home. the republican party, i think they are a bunch of -- i don't know. they are not for the american people, they are for the rich people. nafta really ruined all the jobs for this country. they can hire a time and 50 cents an hour to make things. they want to do it to us to. -- too. guest: it is an aggrieved people that we're getting. everyone has grievances and a

lot of anger out there. host: house that going to change? guest: it is the economy. it is tribal. i used to call at the northern ireland conflict. and as i strap -- and as i got into it, it there were years of a crusted grievance. washington is starting to become that way. when things are done, or is ever come republicans obstruct a judgeship and they say, tenure as ago, they did it, too. that is the justification for an awful lot of things. it is -- once you are in this tribal motive, it is highly emotional. it is a group-oriented as opposed to issue-oriented.

people perceived insults and hostility. they start to take sides in feel they have to join one side or the other. once you are into that, there is no compromise. maybe they ought to call george mitchell in here as a mediator as they did in northern ireland. that may be what needs to happen, some form of mediation with -- between our zero political parties. host: we are talking about the return of congress with daniel friedman and fred barbash. we're in the middle of a discussion about austerity, not only congress but the whole of the nation. how does one affect the other? guest: fortunately the spending level has been said, in telling

$7 billion in cuts. that agreement is helpful for october 1 to get a deal on a continuing resolution for the rest of the year. how be optimistic that they can get that done without a gigantic fight that they had over the last continuing resolution because of that top level spending being set. but disaster looms and other bills. hurricane arena and other disasters, the office of management and budget had asked for separate money for hiring, $1.5 billion in disaster aid. it becoming a bit of a political football with eric cantor wanting that funding to be offset. democrats see that as an opportunity to to exploit politically.

host: what is the timeline to produce something? guest: one problem is that the chambers are divided. when they are not in town, maybe the commission's and committee members will continue to meet wall one of their respective chambers are out of session. otherwise they will have to work quickly when they are in town. host: what does history tell us about the result of these kind of meetings? guest: going back through history, they can achieve something. they get in them from modern of the congress as whole -- an imprimateur of the congress as a whole. if it comes off like that that commission did, with a lot of

division, then it is more of the same. but they are in a position to provide a good deal of moral and political leadership, if they could break loose of what i have called these tribal issues. they could present to the public that we have been able to agree. we are republicans and democrats and veterans. we have something now. what about the rest of you? maybe that is a fantasy in my mind, but there is a potential that we of show historic plea for social security, they have been able to make some gains by establishing the special committees. some were within congress and were outside of congress. they're not wholly without merit. it moves into a different level and hope you can achieve something. host: paul is on our independent line from four to join the beach, va.

-- from virginia beach, va. caller: talking about the congress and the president working together now that they are back. i understand that a lot of the impatience that people feel in this country over d.c., and a large part of that in my opinion is the misinformation and how right wrong information that a lot of people have. a clear example of this is a woman just call then a few calls ago, very passionate about the space shuttle program being canceled. how serious you was about not seeing that happen again. she was blatantly wrong and that it was obama that issues this. this decree was signed in 2005

by george bush. as a matter of fact, he made a lot of degrading comments about nasa at the time. all three of you gentlemen just sat there and let this go out without letting her know what actually happened and who was relieved responsible for that. the reason i bring this up, i think a lot of misinformation and out here is not being challenged. when someone is wrong and something, could you please let these people know that they are misinformed and get them straight on this? a lot of the information that goes on, it feeds into a lot of discontent that a lot of american citizens feel today. please, gentlemen, when people call -- host: thank you, caller. president obama speaks thursday to a joint session of congress. you can watch that live on c-

span. go to c-span.org for more affirmation. next is a gym on the republican line. caller: i am a moderate republican, which the tea party would call a flaming liberal my first point is the idea that the congress is dysfunctional. i would contend that it is the republican party that is dysfunctional. if the media would get specific, president obama has bent over backwards to work it compromise. the republicans refuse to do it. we were in the last throes of the debt ceiling crisis, and on that matter, i think the president obama means well. he is highly intelligence but he is not a good leader. he needed to go to bat for all kinds of issues that he told it on so many.

on the debt ceiling issue, he had three years of mcconnell who tried to knicks everything that he tried to pass. he still thinks mcconnell has the mind to compromise. what he should have done is invoked the 14th amendment protected be fought in the courts, but he could say, which have done this debt ceiling thing for years and years and i am not one to play this game. i am trying to make the point the republicans are way out of whack. if the media we get specific rather than saying that congress is dysfunctional, talk about who is being dysfunctional. host: there is a poll from the "washington post" and abc talking about the president. 53% disapproving.

guest: that is a lot of disapproval. going to the last caller, he makes the point that mitch mcconnell is not interested in cooperating with obama on anything. that obama should have invoked the 14th amendment. he will cooperate with obama and i do not think the white house is under any illusions about what, was trying to do. the debt ceiling would be an example where they cut a deal. mcconnell was instrumental in the deal that they made. guest: i want to go back to the previous caller talking about the basic public ignorance and the extent to which we in the media do or do not corrected. i wrote an article some weeks ago looking at the polling on

the public understanding of these issues. basically they do not. for example, large chunks of the public believe something like foreign aid represents up to 20% of the united states budget. it may be 0.1%. public broadcasting may represent 5%, when it is not even statistically a significant amount. as long as people believe that, if you think most of the money goes to something like public broadcasting, that is an easy one, eliminated. but this general feeling -- this allows the politicians to define everything in their own way. what the causes of the problems are without being critiqued by the public. we in the media have a special obligation to do our best to set the record straight. host: all of twitter.

columbus, ohio, you are next. go ahead. caller: i agree with congress being dysfunctional. i am wondering -- i am a very big fan of president lincoln. he may roll over in his grave when i suggest this. i think the new border of united states should be a by-40 and west texas and -- let texas and all those southern states seceded. one of the reasons that congress is so dysfunctional, it is too large. it is far representing the people but huge corporate and wealthy, and some people feel

that the constitution was originally meant for the wealthy, for the landowners. host: mr. friedman. guest: congress is representing its people inadequately and poorly, but we should expect that voters have elected them. if they're not doing anything because people disagree with them, it is not just that they have a bunch of people who want the same thing and are not executing. the voters all want something done but they do not agree. yes, if we get rid of the -- half the country, and then we could get rid of one of the biggest problems, divided government. host: greta on the republican line. caller: i want to go back to the

free-trade agreement. is something they my party has pressed for years. to some extent, we have had success. but as i look at it, the only people i can see who will benefit from this have been other countries. they have a low interest cost and they ship their jobs to these countries. the people of lost of the american workers who lost all of our jobs. why don't we fix the terrorists and bring about the trade tariffs, bring the jobs back to america -- why don't we fix the tariffs, bring the jobs back to america. get this country back on track. quit worrying so much about to rest of the world and corporate america. guest: this is a longstanding grievance and debate over the impact of free trade. but this country is

extraordinarily prosperous. in the past, if you look at the overall picture in the past 20 years or 30 years as opposed to the past three years, you see a very different picture of very important things. all kinds of people being challenged and occupations that did not exist years ago, or otherwise they might have been in a lesser paying job. take the whole i.t. industry, jobs that did not exist when i was a boy, no one imagining that they would exist. here's an opportunity to move into a well-paid, white-collar job. i do not see this globalization problem as being destructive over time, quite frankly. in the short term sense, it you could see it that way when unemployment is very high.

but in the long term, we've had a prosperous 50 years. host: cynthia price says this. atlanta, georgia, democrats line. go ahead. caller: having a problem with united states, its leadership, and insanity. you keep rehashing the same people in the congress. as long as you continue that, you will have new -- you will not have a new fresh ideas. that is the number one problem with education -- as long as you consent -- continue the same education system, you will have a problem with education, being ninth in math and science. you have a big problem with terrorism in the united states. -- classism in the united

states. guest: i never even heard of classism before. i do not know what he means. the president wants to renew no clout -- no child left behind. that is looking difficult right now. i think the discussed with the education secretary to move forward. that is not overall in the education system that goes back 300 years. host: baltimore, maryland, jerry on the republican line. caller: for the deeply divided political system, we can look at the redistricting program. we're going to continue to get the extreme and no one will ever be wrong. [unintelligible]

that would generate more market representatives to more accurately represent the people in their states. it would be more reason to work with other people across the aisle. host: let me step back from redistricting and talk about 2012 in terms of the senate and where it might be after the election in november. guest: i'm going to go out on a limb. i think people are so angry that everything could change. you could have a senate that goes republican and the house that goes back into the house of the democrats. you could have substantial shifts in the senate. i think that this is a year -- i would not even begin to make a prediction as to how things will look the day after the election in 2012 because of this level of angkor, the number of people who feel alienated from both parties. the beginning of rumblings of not a third party, but a "noment, you've heard about

labels," involving a lot of business leaders. i think there is something that is terribly important. i don't feel good about going to districts and tell you which feel safe and which is leaning. it will not tell you who will stay home because who is mad. all of that, all three branches of government, if the house, the senate, and the white house, are subject to changing hands and it would not surprise me if they did. under these volatile circumstances. host: about 10 more minutes with our guests. arkansas on our democrats line. caller: people need to understand that congress was controlled by republicans for

six or eight years. then they changed it and put it over to the democrats. congress didn't pass anything under the republicans. the democrats passed bills that benefited the poor in the middle class. also mitch mcconnell, they're not going to do anything that benefits the middle class and the poor. all they are interested in it is power to take obama out. they will talk about what the congress will do but they will not do anything they will benefit jobs. all they want to do is remove obama. guest: mitch mcconnell said that to my own publication. his biggest priority is to defeat president obama. he is gone and that quote from back at him a lot of times since then. he is unusually honest in discussing his political copulations, perhaps been more honest than others thinking

about the electoral landscape in 2012. host: next up is baltimore, maryland. caller: i keep hearing people describe the government or congress as dysfunctional and irrational. when i go shopping, i look on the door and they said a drug test their employees and these of the people stalking our shelves. and i have friends the work for the government and they are all drug tested also. i am wondering why it is that the people that are acting this way and have so much of our destiny in our hands are not being required to a voluntary drug-testing themselves. maybe we have an elephant in the room that would explain the reason that congress behaves. they are only human. this is a societal problem.

why not require congress to be drug tested? and that is all. host: one of the thoughts on twitter. i think he means as a whole. guest: there is that view, that they may dislike congress intensely but they like their individual representative. i am not sure that that will last. i think you saw that in the 2010 election. i think we are in a period of elections or that notion of liking your own member, especially now that the year marks are gone, some of the things that make the people like to remember, i think we are in the unpredictable, all time, or that paradigm has changed. host: our republican line.

caller: i want to throw this out there. i've been thinking about this for quite some time, actually. up here in michigan, we truly have lost a full decade. we went through eight years of a democratic governor they came in with all kinds of hopes, kind of like this president. he was going to change things in turn things around, and she came in with a 69% favorable rating. she left with 16%. you just look at detroit. people keep bringing that up and they're absolutely right. it had 50 years of single-party rule and is just terrible. if you want to take a snapshot of what this president is about

to do, just take a look at what michigan is at. that's about all i have to say. host: correlation? guest: the second caller is suggested that the whole country is becoming michigan. they are really struggling just economic trends that are arguably better. certainly michigan, and obama's hands in many ways are tied. the biggest determinant will be an economy over which he has very little control. host: from your, and john on hard democrats line. caller: the woman, the 61-year- old lady, who said she thinks this would be the first time that she would not go out and vote.

i think that is exactly the wrong thing to do. obama has been trying to do things and has been stopped by the republican congress. in order for us to be able to get him to do things, we need to get more like-minded people like kim and willing to push his agenda through. not voting is the wrong thing to do. i think the guy made a good point when he said that -- i am using you three as an example -- when people say things they are wrong, you should correct them and let them know where they are wrong at and what the facts are. someone mentioned mr. mcconnell blocking the debt ceiling. then he said mcconnell was

instrumental in making a deal and extending the debt ceiling. but mitch mcconnell did that when all the damage was already done. by him saying that, mitch mcconnell was instrumental in getting the bill passed, mr. mcconnell was instrumental was instrumental after all the damage was done. host: we will leave it there. guest: mcconnell said he was trying to a void that scenario since after the election. i am remember him giving some speaker -- some speeches. and boehner, frankly, he said, let's not make these mistakes. they get using that term to acute adult conversation." one of the remarkable stories in

the house is that boehner and the leadership lost control of the situation to the tea party faction. people talk about the power of late small group like tea party, it comes from polarization. if the moderates could agree on something, 80 people in the house would be a basically meaningless number. as long as you have this polarization, if you open the door to small groups from one side or the other, having much more power than they would if the two major parties could get their act together and work together when necessary to avoid a crisis situation. host: let's talk about one thing that was not mentioned as congress comes back. guest: the patent reform bill that the senate will probably pass this week. i think it is a bigger deal than

a lot of the legislation because it will pass. we talk about a lot of legislation at the debating point or a talking point. it would change the patent system, very heavily lobbied. that is probably an interesting issue that has been ignored. host: mr. brabash? guest: the federal administration -- the federal aviation administration funding, that passed to happen by september 30. guest: center. guest: and the highway, there needs to be an authorization so that construction can continue to be funded. people are watching that closely to see if those things do happen amidst all the rest of the helter-skelter. if they do not, that is

problematic. every american will feel the effect of that. host: fred barbash and daniel friedman, thank you very much. in our last segment at 9:15 a.m., we will talk about bullying in new jersey, that state's efforts as well as others. up next is the result of polling and what it does. we have scott keeter from pew talking about their results and what it means to you the voter. we will have this after the update from c-span radio. >> here are some of the headlines. republican presidential hopeful mitt romney today will call for lowering the corporate tax rate and eliminating capital gains taxes for middle-class americans. that is part of his plan to boost the economy and create jobs. in a speech this afternoon in north las vegas, the former governor will lay out specific

proposals aimed at fixing the nation's 9.1% unemployment rate. he will be live at 3:30 p.m. on c-span radio in c-span television. robert zoellick says the u.s. economy will likely live along with slow growth and high unemployment but avoided a recession. he says that the europe that crisis is a far more eminent challenge. california's same-sex marriage ban faces its next legal challenge when courts overseeing an appeals process that overturn proposition 8. they're prepared to oversee -- here a hear an hour of oral debate. leon panetta is marking the upcoming anniversary of the september 11 terrorist attack today, with trips to ground zero

in new york and shakes though, pa. where united 93 crash. many people have their limits when giving up some freedom to fight terrorism. appalled by the associated press -- a poll by the associated press said that many say they are ok with surveillance cameras and public, but not snooping in a personal e-mail. some of the latest headlines from c-span radio. >> watch more video of the candidates, see what political reporters are saying, and track the latest campaign contributions with c-span's website for campaign 2012. easy to use, it helps you navigate the political landscape with twitter feeds and facebook updates from the campaigns. candidate bios and the latest polling data, plus links to c- span media partners in the early primary and caucus states, all at -- c-span.org/campaign2012.

>> this weekend, the 10th anniversary of 9/11 on the c- span network. new york city, shanks fell, and the pentagon. our live schedule. saturday on c-span at 12:30 p.m. eastern, but like 93 dedication ceremony. sunday morning, a memorial ceremony from the world trade center site with president obama and former president bush appeared on c-span2, vice- president biden from the pentagon. on c-span3, honoring those who lost their lives on united flight 93. 9/11 remembered, this weekend on the c-span networks. >> in 1844, henry clay ran for president of united states and lost, but the change political history is one of the 14th remembered in c-span's "the

contenders." friday at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us, scott keeter from the pure research center. he is this survey research director. here is the talk about the polls when people conduct them. what they looking for? guest: we're looking to hear what the public has their own -- on their mind and their experiences. the kind of polls that we read about in the newspapers, first and foremost, are asking opinion questions. what do people want? how they rate the president's performance in office? what did they think of the republican alternative? they also want to know how people are experiencing a daily life. house their financial situation changing, getting better or worse? what are the problems they think

are facing the country? all wide range of material that bears on important questions of the day. host: you have a whole country with opinions. guest: how can a small sample of 1500 people, the typical size of the public opinion poll, represent the general public? will we tell people is that we get everybody in the country who lives in a household that has some kind of cell phone service, or landline, an equal chance of being included in our poll and that is the basis for being able to take a small sample and generalize it to the broader public. the notion of random sampling is very commonly used. it is used by accountants looking for fraud, it is used in the medical profession. if you do not believe in rampant sampling, the next time you go

to the doctor and he wants to take a sample of your blood, say you do not trust samples. take all of my blood. you do not have to do that. a small sample will do. that is the basic principle that ensures that what we'd do even with 1500 people can predict the general public. host: most of our viewers remember what happened in new hampshire with the polling and the end result. guest: it was one of the most visible polling of years that we've seen in decades. there are a couple that stick in people's minds. if you are around in 1948, the polling indicated that dewey would defeat truman in that election. that did not happen and that led to a lot of rethinking of the methods that pollsters used. and a primary failure occurred,

it occasioned a similar reassessment of polling methods. it turns out based on a lot of evidence collected after that that it was a fluke. this was a consequence of the unusual circumstances of that primary coming on the heels of the iowa caucuses. it never happened again in the primaries. some polls to not do as well as others, but none of the primaries and certainly not the general law election produced a big failure. in fact, one of the things that makes us most confident that our method of electing a small random sample of people to represent a large population is valid is the fact that polling has a very good track record of forecasting how elections will come out. in 2008, many polling organizations came within a point or two of obama's victory for the same was true in 2004. the 2000 election was too close to call.

the polling was accurate then, too. we pass our final exams pretty regularly. host: scott keeter is our guest from pew research. the telephone numbers are on the screen. journal@c-span.org is our e- mail. caller: i like to ask the value of the iowa straw poll. and i have a comment after you respond. guest: it is not a poll like polling organizations conduct. it was of people they gather at a location. it is treated as if it is telling us something about the

candidate's appeal and their ability to mobilize their followers and so forth. but it does not bear any resemblance to the kind of polling that we try to do, which gives everybody in the country or in a particular state or wherever we happen to be polling, an equal chance of being included, whether they are motivated and interested in that particular contest or not. that is one of the major differences. host: and your followup? caller: i am a republican that used to work for ronald reagan in policy development and research. i am extremely frustrated with the file a straw poll. i do not know if you noticed in the paper, but ed rollins resigned and there is a big shake-up in the bachmann campaign. just so the public knows about this, what happened is that ed rollins brought in all of

strawee's people for that poll, front loaded everyone he could get into ames to raise a lot of money, and got the vote swung over to michele bachmann. guest: an interesting point. it is a contrast with the kind of polls that most news organizations do and other people, including the campaigns that themselves. there's not that opportunity to bus people into the polls. if we are reaching out and calling people at their homes or where they are with their cellphones and interviewing them, the fact that one of the candidates is more effective at doing that kind immobilizing is not relevant. it certainly is relevant politically, but we should take that as well -- pick that up as well. you point out an interesting contrast to the regular public opinion polls and the iowa straw

poll. host: from twitter. guest: a very good question. students of democracy have puzzled over it long before polling was actually invented. one of the debates of the founding fathers was whether or not the public really was capable of self government. so we do not have a direct democracy. we went up with the republic. it is supposed to be refined and enlarge through the medium of the congress. but even that begs the question, how the members of congress or the legislatures are going to be able to discern what the will of the people is, to refine and enlarge it. that is using madison's language group we think public opinion polls are one way to do that,

recognizing that a lot of people the recall may not have the intimate detail of policies, but nonetheless, may have a good sense of what the right or the wrong direction for policy actually is. host: "the wall street journal" released a poll today. how many calls have to happen to get the 1000 people? guest: we may take between 15,020 thousand phone numbers to begin with. a lot of those may not be in service. -- we may take between 15,020 to beginphone canumbers with. you also get a lot of people who simply never answered or refuse to take part in the survey. we're talking altogether about many thousands of calls, possibly tens of thousands of calls in order to reach the 1000

people to be interviewed. host: from a viewer on twitter they ask this question as well, this person is james parker, he says how to contact people? -- he says how do you contact people? guest: we pick phone numbers better from the underlying databases from the telephone company. not that we have your name or address. we might be able to do that if your number is listed. if you have a cell phone, you are not listed in any kind of directory. when we dial it, we have no idea who will be on the other end of the line. we might reach your household, but not reach you. we tried to select the household in a way that does not tell people who are often at home and willing to answer. >host: can you get the same

number several times? guest: it is certainly possible. you think about the size of the population, and you have a baby a few billion public opinion polls being conducted every year, but it to a small chance of falling into any one sample, much less a couple of times. host: myrtle from texas on the democrats' line. caller: many times polls are used to structure the opinion of the people. if you ask questions a certain way, you could cause people to see things in a different way. and why are they used in such a way? i have seen that happen over and over again. guest: result is absolutely right. one of the toughest parts is writing good, biased, their questions.

-- myrtle is absolutely right. it is a very difficult thing to do. it is the fundamental aspect of human interaction. we know how difficult it is to use the right words, that we do not buy as the interpersonal relationships with some assumptions we have, that may not even be conscious to us. all of that thinking has to go into writing good poll questions. there are very concrete examples that one can point to. one of the most famous is the question asking people if they favored increasing welfare. if you get a much higher percentage of the public that they favor assistance to the poor than to welfare. welfare has a very negative tone to a lot of people. the question is how do we make

sure the polls are not biased? that involves a lot of judgment on the part of multiple people for our situation. we sit around the table with a number of different people, some of you have social background and some journalists and some that have some experience in the political world and look at the questions and think about them and how will the sound to someone who thinks very different of the way i do? we work, and then we test the questions on a small sample of people and listen to their reaction. if we hear anything that makes us think the question is not a fair one, we try to modify it. two-door larger point, the question of whether polling has been used or can be used to structure public opinion or to chase public opinion, i do not think there's any question about it, it is certainly. there are a lot of people doing

polls. a lot of people have the dog in the fight. they may went to structured the survey in a way that either makes it look like public opinion is of their baby -- favor. that is the way to fight back against that, look at the questions that were asked and ask yourself is that a reasonable way to ask the question? is there a point of you in here in the question? if there is, maybe you should not trust the polls. >host: some of the questions they ask in the pole today is asking whether you think the country is going in the right track or do you approve the way the president obama is handling it? then they asked about different categories. from those questions, how would you wait those of what would you say about the way they are crafted? guest: those are very standard

kind of questions. many of the right track or wrong track questions have been around for decades. they are generally understood to be fairly balanced. they have been asked in previous administrations. in that sense we have context in comparison. those are among the use his kinds of questions to write about. the hard ones to write about our policy issues that are on topics that may be fresh or new. one of the most difficult tasks we have of a policy issue in the past couple of years was how to pull on the subject of a carbon tax or the cap and trade legislation. we found very small numbers of people had any understanding of that issue. it was very difficult to try to characterize public opinion on that issue, because the words we will put into question could very much shape the way people would react, because there were

working from such little information. -- they were working from such little information . host: a question from twitter -- guest: we poll, americans at large, 18 and older. we think public opinion is relevant, even if it is someone who is not registered voters are likely voter. we're talking about election polling, we may want to focus of registered voters. as we get closer to election day, on likely voters. those of the people we think will show up and make a difference in the election. as we know, there are differences between registered voters in the general public. registered voters include a number of people who may not yet the citizens. it includes a lot of people that are only recently adults and have not gotten engaged in politics particularly.

the larger group of all americans includes less-educated people. those individuals may have views and opinions and values that are very different from those of registered voters. in general, and this is not always the case, but we find registered voter samples are somewhat conservative and more republican leading than samples of the general public. likely voters samples even more so. the specifics of how that matters may be dependent on the particular political circumstances. in 2010 for example the likely voter universe was a very conservative one, and we saw the results of that of the election of 2010. in 2008 the registered voter in likely voter universe was somewhat more liberal. the question somewhat depends on how things are going in the politics of the day. host: napa, idaho.

printed on the line. calle -- brandon on the line. theer: hosi questioned chicken lee goes to the massive bailout. half of the wealth in the united states is owned by the top 10 percent of wealth in the united states. how do people regard that with the upcoming election and so many people out of work? guest: that is in that area -- another area that is hard to pull long in some respects. the bank bailout, part, it was a subject on which we polled -- tarp, it was a subject on which we polled. it was unpopular with the public, and it has remained so.

the stimulus program, which was enacted in 2008 and 2009 was also something that we polled about. he did have a more ritz reaction. -- it had a more mixed reaction. in general people did say it did not have the impact it would hope it would have. you will get pulling to suggest that people do not like the fact that there is such large disparity in this country, and at the same time you do not find high percentage of the public will we distributed through highly progressive taxation that is not to say when you asked taxes on the wealthy

to deal with the deficit, more taxes on the wealthy expire, you do in those instances get a majority of the public favoring. the public draws the line at a more aggressive free distribution of wealth. it remains a difficult topic to get a clear picture on. host: philadelphia, pa., michael of the republican line. caller: my question is about internal polling. we have polls every day, and then i hear something that white house has their own internal polls or congress have their own internal polls. they suggest that these are possibly more precise and give different results than regular polls we hear about on tv. guest: i did not know. i do not think i have ever seen any of them, so i cannot say that they do or do not give more

precise results. i am not sure that would be the case. presidential historians have looked going back to the kennedy era and before and found that polling has been an integral part of the white house under both the administration's. the fact is most politicians find it prudent to keep expressions of public opinion, and being able to poll of questions, especially when they're considering the rollout of policies or change in positions or similar kind of strategic decisions that they might be making seems very routine. that is not to say it is a good thing that politicians are pulling so much or falling public opinion in that way, -- following public opinion in that

way, but the question is how do you use that information you are receiving? to use it to be in tune with public opinion? to use it for manipulative purposes? the question comes down to how you make use of the information about the public? the fact that leaders will want to know what the public thinks does not strike me as a bad thing. it is a good thing, i think. >> is it transparent as far as practices? guest: this is an issue that is very much being debated in the polling industry. the american association for public opinion research bearded lawyer research professionals. we have decided over the years that tried to be the polling police is not the best way to deal with potential problems in polls, but more consistent with

the way the whole communication environment has shifted in the past decade or so with the rise of the internet and the ability of people to get information 24/7 from their own computers is to encourage polling organizations to be more transparent talk about methods to ensure the release the full questionnaire that is released in the polling so that the reader of the consumer of the polling information can look at the questions and context in which the questions were placed and understand the psychology that the poll set up for the responded. also to see whether the poll included cell phones. if they do not, 30 percent of the american public did not have a chance in being included. pole policing is something that we're putting a lot of stock in.

-- poll policing is something that we're getting a lot of stock in. host: chris from new haven, connecticut. democrats line. caller: i have done a lot of polls myself. i ran into do see a couple of weeks ago. our mayor is running for reelection. after ascertaining that i did not want to vote for him, ask me which candidates of my likely vote for and then focused on the candidates that i wanted to vote for and that's about it of much -- a bunch of different policies that i might disagree with that he claimed the other candidates supported. i think it is called a push pole. i think people around election time have to really be worried about that kind of thing. guest: it is hard to know whether you experience the

oppression pole or not. for listeners who have not heard about this, there is a type of campaigning and to the guys doing public opinion polling that is often labeled the post poll, but it is not a poll at all. they are calling you in order to put a lot of negative and misleading information into your head about the candidates. the problem with trying to figure out whether something is a push pole or not is that legitimate campaign polling that is being conducted on behalf of the particular can get it can sometimes sound like it. for example, if i am running in an election and the person you like is someone that i think is a formidable opponent for me, i may want to find out which is the following argument and it -- and negative information about kidded it would be thee mu

mocandidate would be most formidable and getting you to switch your vote? on the other hand, if i am trying to swine the sky with lots of information, i am not worried about you. i called up thousands and thousands of voters coming up to make a difference. the key is whether it is the message desk testing type or the real push pole. sometimes it is very hard to know. host: independent line is next. joseph from kentucky. caller: i would like to know with the major parties which methodses anand they use, and when they use those, which approached as the other side take? guest: in terms of pulling, both

sides use similar measures. a lot of the polling you see today there is a team of democratic and republican- oriented pollsters to do their work. that tells me that the approach as for trying to gauge public opinion by both sides tends to be similar. part of it is because over the years we have figured out the best ways to try to do this most effectively. if you're talking about campaign techniques, that is a different story. there certainly maybe differences, but unfortunately that is outside the scope of what i am an expert on and talk about. host: what do polls not tell us? guest: they have a harder time

giving us a sense of the emotion that is behind public opinion. a lot of pollsters when they're trying to understand, especially a new topic area, how people really feel about something in an emotional sense, the kind of emotion that can compel people to act or conduct an issue to their boats, it may be more useful to go out and speak with a number of people in debt. hold of focus group for you get a chance to talk to people and see their body language to see how they engage in the conversation. do they sit back and leaned forward into the conversation? you could make a lot of mistakes going on the basis of focus groups, and sometimes they do not do a good job of bringing across the motion. host: the survey research research center.w

a state approach to how schools handle bullying. our guest is catherine bradshaw from john hopkins university. we will take up that subject after this update from c-span radio. >> if the financial problems of the postal service come to capitol hill today. the postmaster general patrick donato is among those scheduled to appear before the homeland security and governmental affairs committee. the postal service is facing a second straight year of losses of $8 billion or more and has been considering cutbacks and layoffs. david tree is officially traded his stars for a business suit today. -- david patreus. after 37 years in the army the newly retired general will be watched to see if he will pursue policies opposed by white house officials who disagreed with him during the afghanistan war. rain from tropical storm league

is spreading northeast after leading widespread flooding in the south. meanwhile, out in the atlantic, hurricane katia is moving away from the united states. it is a category 3 storm. julian assange is blasting britain's guardian newspaper calling negligence this was his first public comments since wikileaks disclose the entire archive of united states cables. he told a trade fair our audience that a journal that published the past four to the encrypted files in his book. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> watch more video of the candidates, and track the latest campaign contributions was c- span website for campaign 2012.

easy to use, it helps you navigate the political landscape. can a bit bios and the latest polling data, plus links to c- span media partners in the early primary and caucus states. -- candidate bios. >> this weekend, the 10-year anniversary of 9/11 on the c- span that works with live coverage of each of the memorial sites. new york city, the pentagon. saturday on c-span, the plight 93 national memorial dedication ceremony from pennsylvania. sunday morning at 8:30, a memorial center marini from the world trade center site with president obama and former president bush. on2 c-span at 9:00, vice president biden from the pentagon. -- on cspan2 at 9:00, vice

president biden from the pentagon. in 1844 henry clay ran for president of the united states and lost, but he changed political history. he is one of the 14 men featured in the new series "the contenders." live from ashton, henry clay's kentucky home. >> "washington journal" continues. host: the final segment takes a look of bullying in schools. our guest is catherine bradshaw. welcome. we brought you in because one thing we heard about in new jersey when it comes to their approach to believe in school. can you tell us what happened? guest: they have passed one of the toughest anti-bowling balls. clearly they are setting the mark to having a clear policy

and outlining as that of prevention activities that schools can implement to prevent bullying. host: who is involved in that? guest: the state department of education outline their policy in relation with community stakeholders. then they develop policies for the individual education agencies to outline in greater detail that would be implemented at the ground level. host: talk a little bit about the reaction from the school systems themselves, because from what i've read, there was quite a reaction. guest: right. clearly this will be a big change for schools. they're now required to implement prevention programs and policies to prevent bullying. there will be a district coordinator for bullying prevention activities within the state. there are a variety at activities there require them to report back on a regular basis.

they will be greeted in a public venue in will be posted on the internet. that is really increasing the level of accountability that is required under the jurisdiction of the stage. host: does the state offer money and assistance to make that happen? guest: typically no. these are unfunded mandates. host: for the state you mentioned, is that places where they put the rules in place but they offered nothing in assistance from the state or money from the state? guest: that is typically the case. maryland has an unfunded mandate where there is a stricter requirements to implement an anti-bullying mandate. while the state provides assistance, there is no resources directly allocated to them. >host: is there a federal policy? guest: the u.s. department of

education outlines key components that they recommend. they are outlined in core elements they would like to see and the different model policies that are aligned. there was a recent dear colleagues letter that was issued to remind schools in states around the difference between harassment and bullying and the potential overlap of those. that is an important issue as well. host: talk about the level of interest from the white house on this topic. guest: president obama held a white house summit earlier this year. she and michelle obama both spoke about the impact of bullying. -- he and michelle obama both spoke about the impact of bullying. president obama spoke about a personal story he had. there were parents whose children have committed suicide

around bullying-related incidents. host: we will take calls in just a minute. if you like to ask her about questions regarding bullying coming here is how you do so -- as you call, here is the president of the united states. >> as adults we all remember what it was like to see kids picked on and the hallways or the school year. i have to say with the name i had i was not immune. but because of something that happens a lot, is something that has always been around, sometimes we turn a blind eye to the problem and say kids will be skids. sometimes we overlook the damage it can cause. consider these statistics. one-third of middle school or

high school students have reported being bullied during the school year. almost 3 million students have said they were pushed, shoved, tripped, and even spit on. it is also more likely to affect kids that are seen as different. whether it is the color of their skin, close the where, disability they may have or sexual orientation. bullying has been shown to lean to absences or poor performance in the classroom, and that alone should give as bought since no child should be free to go to school in this country. host: your thoughts? guest: one thing that was critical about the white house summit was being able to highlight some of the problems. the president speaking about the prevalence and the impact of bullying. there has been quite a large body of research that you the verge of the past 50 to 20 years documenting the significance of the problem. it is not something you go through and it over, but it can

have very profound affect in the short-term and long-term. that was well highlighted by the white house event. host: of you were on twitter ask specifically does history showed that bullying has worsened? -- a viewer on twitter asks specifically does history show bubbling has worsened? guest: there are couple of different data points and sometimes they have different results. some show in increase of bullying come up but most data shows the front line has increased a little bit. one area that does seem to be increasing is around the use of electronics for bullying. while that covers a lot of the media and can have very significant impact, it is one of the least common forms of bullying that you would experience, but can have a very devastating impact because it is so widespread.

caller: good morning. i have two questions. has there been studies between private schools and public schools as far as the amount of bullying that has been reported? the second part of the question, if there is no disciplinary action that can be taking place in do not have the support of a private school -- government school verses a private school, what is the differences? i know firsthand, and i will not get into specifics, but if you do not have the support of the parents or the school system itself from a there is not a lot that can be done. thank you for your time, and have a great day. guest: thank you for calling. you raise an interesting question about public schools and private schools. we see relatively similar rates within those settings. sometimes you get smaller class

sizes, which suggests a little bit of a buffer in terms of reducing the rates of bullying because he could have increased adult supervision within that context. rather than broad differences between the different school types, i think it is more a product of having greater supervision by the adults in a smaller classroom setting. as you also alluded to, parent involvement is sometimes greater in a private school setting. host: the numbers are on your screen. florida. laurie on the democrat line. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. first-time calller. my original question was what is the exact definition of bullying, and how is this happening in our government in congress and in senate with the climate of our government at this time? guest: in terms of the definition of bullying of the original definition was outlined

by a researcher. he highlighted three critical features of bullying, one that it is behavior that is intentional, intending to do harm. that is repeated. right now the u.s. government is revisiting the definition because there has been some disagreement about that. i am participating on a panel that is set up by the center for disease control and the department of education to revisit the definition and make sure it is keeping us with contemporary issues. so there are a variety of areas that we need to pursue in greater detail as it relates to the definition of bullying. that has a significant impact on measurement. we do not have a lot of good data sets to be able to understand the long-term course of bullying and how prevalent it has been. many of the datasets we have had switched the measurement

strategy overtime. host: you talk about cyber bullying. what is that? guest: that is bullying that ochers through electronic devices. it could be over the phone. nowadays it is typically over the internet. it could have been through a text message or posting on a block or social networking site. blog or sociala networking site. where do we draw the line between telling a joke about someone verses actually doing harm that is intentional? that is a fine line and really important for us to delineate what is this having fun verses actual bullying? that often is a challenge for schools to be able to figure out different types of behaviors that kids will evasion on line. host: when it comes to

different states involved in legislation, can they reach did when a student goes home and put something on the students facebook page? guest: typically it has to happen within the school environment. there were a couple of cases recently were the judge threw them out, saying it did not create a disruption with the school environment and overturned previous policies that the school had made. a lot of things that went to happen on campus will have a significant impact in the kids' activities and life at school. it is very easy to think of a situation where a child might post something on a school that -- on a social networking side and might cause a disruption at school. host: this question has been asked. how do you know it does not affect development in some strange way? guest: that is interesting.

some people report that it helped me be who i am today. there are some instances of that i imagine, but that is not always the case, especially when your kids that experience chronic forms of bullying over time. it is relatively rare for people to reflect back on those instances and say it did not mean that much to them. in fact, when i do trainings and presentations i typically have people of all ages that can fight very specific details about a bullying incidents they were involved in. it is amazing the amount of detail they wrong -- there remember about it. -- that they remember about it. those that have very profound affect on them. host: and on the democrat line. go ahead. -- anna on the democrats line. caller: how could we set an example to our children when the

senate and congress believe themselves along in their own ways? that is not an example for our children to set. i do not think they set an example for our young people. starts in the home. guest: there is quite a bit of research of some of the factors you brought up, which we referred to as the social learning theory. children learn from other people. in the home is one of the places where children can watch their parents in gauge in bullying or other forms of aggressive behavior. the concern we learned through the media, watching television shows that what -- might model behavior. certainly if they're watching what is happening in politics they could see it happening there as well. what we want to do is have

parents talk to kids about these issues and help them understand what kind of behavior is appropriate and what kinds are inappropriate for them to engage in. host: mike of the independent line from safety harbor, florida. caller: think you, c-span. this is my first official call as an independent. on the topic, ms. bradshaw, please do not take this the wrong way, but i think your endeavors are greatly misplaced if you will. i think bullying has been around since the dawn of man. essentially your slowly creeping in on the first amendment rights. obviously there are other laws that exist. you cannot fight someone pierre did you cannot punish someone. you cannot libel or slander

someone appeared that there are ready law on the books that insure that these things did not take place. if a child is doing something, posting something on facebook or twitter, tough. the student can choose to ignore it or they can grow from it or learned from it. the one thing you cannot do is teach people that you have to watch what you say because someone else's feelings will get hurt. guest: you brought up the difference between bullying and harassment. that is very critically outlined in the dear colleagues letters. i want to highlight that we have a large body of research documenting negative impact that bullying has had. certainly the suicides that were highlighted in the media and were incredibly tragic for everyone, including the family's

most directly affected. we get pretty rigorous research studies that document the short- term and long-term impacts. those can impact our mental health, of behavior help come involvement in academics, ability to grab free from high school. there can be pretty profound of beck's. it is not a new problem. i will agree with you there. i think what has happened is now we have started to build the body of research and understand what impact it is having to be able to develop intervention and prevention programs to stop it. host: for states to have bullying policies in schools, generally what happens to the person found guilty of bullying? guest: there are a variety of different reporting mechanisms. for example, in maryland to states and schools are required to provide parents and students the opportunity to write down

and document an issue of bullying. that insures there is a paper trail and follow through as a result of that. bullying is not an easy case to understand. it is often complex and may take years to unfold and culminate into a fight that happens in the hallway for example. it takes a pair of amount of investigation on the part of the schools. there are a variety of different strategies that the schools can use. one popular one is zero tolerance. this can cut down on people reporting bullying, because they are predicted will get kicked out and not be any kind of intervention. so in some instances you really need to ensure the immediate safety of the victim. what we would recommend and what many states are moving toward

our intervention strategies that range from therapeutic intervention to address the core issues around the problem, might even include a restorative just this type of piece where the perpetrator makes up in some way for the wrongs that have been done. host: our schools set up to do that? -- are school set up to do that? guest: some schools are. typically requires training. we work with a variety of different curriculum programs that require the training on how to handle bullying situations and how to intervene and what to do when you have a situation of bullying of a victim. host: the topic is bullying in schools. melanie on the independent line. caller: i am calling to say there is an answer. the answer is that first of all

if the child is being pushed, knocked down, cost over, which my son experience, the first thing you have to do is do not wait, call the police, because it is a salt. -- because it is assault. if the parents are contacted through the police, it usually ends. the schools do nothing. they do absolutely nothing. they do not want to get involved. you know what they do? they suspend the victim and the aggressor. what the heck will that solve? if you're going to suspend the person who is being harassed. okay? that will solve nothing. the schools need to be educated. the teachers do not care. i do not care what you say, who are, they do not care.

my son was harassed for the full time he was in school, from the time he was into the garden way up. anyone who is to say most of the time they do not pick the kids that are strong, they pick on the kids that are weaker and the purpose of school is to help you to protect kids like that. the police are not taught that. host: what do you think about your state passing this will anti-bullying legislation? caller: i think it is a step in the right direction. until you could be poorly prosecuted by the law, it will not make any difference. host: this involves not only setting in place policies, increased the staff training, deadlines for reporting, and each school has to designate its head-bullying -- anti-bullying

for nader's. caller: it does not help. the only way it will stop is it parents get scared even of that my son is going to go to jail. guest: i think her worry is not that unusual. i hear similar reports from other parents. it sounds like her situation might have involved a child with disabilities. we know child with disabilities from 94% of reported bullying. there needs to be more work done to be able to help those kids cope with these situations and of all families of that. she uploaded to the role of police in the community. -- she referred to the role of police in the community. this will require community involvement and occasionally

police involvement. it is important to recognize where do we crossed the line between bullying and assault? we are hopeful the policy provides guidance around that. host: blend on the republican line. tulsa, okla., is next. -- glenda, the republican line. caller: will new policies be to address the school policy of the industry should so that teachers can have training and the legal system does not end up pulling the head ministration, teachers, a bus drivers, and holding them responsible for these out of character, out of -- well, you know when the children just go off? will there be new policies developed?

guest: several of the states, a vast majority have already developed policies, but i imagine they will continue to be redefined, especially with the guidance from the department of education, and that does include a recommendation around professional development for staff on how to handle this. you bring up an important issue about how a lot of this falls on the shoulders of teachers and other staff to implement the programs and policies. i recently worked on a project with the national education association, the country's largest teachers' union, and they're very concerned about this issue. we will provide guidance to their staff around this issue. we found a national study of members and found that a large portion had not received the training they need it, and they were seeking additional support in trading around this cover particularly around issues of cyber bullying and how to

handle bullying among children with disabilities and those that are gay, lesbian come and transgendered. there is a lot of burden on teachers. i come from a family of teachers, and i work very closely with teachers. we expect a lot of them. we expect them to teach children, a manager classroom, and now be able to the many police officers and implement these differ kinds of policies. there is a lot of pressure on teachers. 97 percent said they would intervene in a bullying situation if they saw it. most say they have effective strategies. bill is a bleak you say they have made bullying situations worse. when we ask students we get a very different picture. i do not think it is because teachers are turning a blind eye intentionally. i think in many cases there are

a lot of pressures on them and our little scared of what to do and not to do. host: st. louis, missouri, david of the independent line. caller: good morning. the situation at columbine high school prior to the shootings has been described to me as if you were not an athlete or someone who supported athletics, you were ostracized and bullied. while not absolving the responsibility for mass murder of the two young men who did that horrible deed, why haven't the jocks who bullied and of used them had their share of responsibility allotted to them, and why isn't anything being done about it? guest: you highlight a very important issue and the columbine high school situation. the first law passed regarded -- related to bullying was passed

by georgia in 1999, the same year as the columbine shooting. you highlight really challenging issues as it relates to culpability, and can we really go back inside bullying and the issue? i think that is a delicate issue, especially given the events that happened in the overall hurting in the community. i think it is very important for us to examine the role of social by minutes -- dynamics in these situations. quite often they're not social outcast. they have high status and are able to have control and power over other use by acting in bullying behavior is and aggressive. it makes a very complex situation and will require a lot of effort in involving used in the solution and not just as a disciplined approach. host: bob barr wrote about this. he concluded when he wrote about

anti-bullying situation saying it is legislation run amok again. is that a fair conclusion? guest: it is a very complex problem. there are a variety of social marketing campaigns that are being developed. i talk with out -- at councils that are getting ready to launch a national campaigns. there are ready ever purchase that happen coming out of the school building and policy level. we're trying to address this from a variety of different angles. it is going to be in a board next up to see how these policies are rolled out in the schools. i see variation, even in the state of maryland, to the state of which there implemented.

some states took this to heart, and then they have incidents that are reported on the web. in other states they held back and did not rule it out as much. i think the truth will be based on how these policies are implemented and the ability to which we're able to document the impact they're having on students. host: the policies deal with after fact, but do they deal with the peer pressure and try to persuade the students themselves in dealing with this? guest: that is one of the employment as rigid elements. it is recommended that states use anti-boeing prevention programs. there are rare variety of programs that have been implemented. some of which work well. -- there are a variety of programs that have them implemented.

prevention is certainly where i would put my money on this instead of a reactive approach. host: what in example of something that works well and one that does not work well? guest: 1 is the bullying prevention program and is a school wide approach to change the norms of toppling and retaliation within the school building that provides training to teachers and opportunities for students in the classroom to talk about the issue of bullying and really have their voice heard. it also includes youth, community, and family members. we have a paper that is just coming out documented the impact on both bullying, as well as victimization. host: next call, pittsburgh, pennsylvania. dave of the democrat line. caller: i have a two-part question.

i want to know what if anything is out there to protect a child from retaliation? my second question deals with what you do if a bully is a teacher or coached? i will hang up and listen to your comment. guest: i think you hit the nail on the head in getting children to report is the fear of retaliation. i know of some of the urban settings where i work in baltimore, there's nothing worse than being a snitch. that is what i hear from the kids. when the model policy say we want kids to report on each other and there is a culture in the community about not reporting on other events like that, you are really tried to overcome not just the kids perception, but a broader cultural norms. that is a real challenge. we need to have a variety of different ways kids can approach of these things, many of which are anonymous. we do web-based surveying

rhythmic a report about bullying in different locations. the adults can use the data to increase supervision or intervene in those different locations without necessarily even knowing the name, but they can know where it is happening and you is generally involved and be able to increase supervision of those hot spots. with regard to adults bullying students, it becomes a question of is it really bullying? we think bullying between youth same age, but whene you have an adult being aggressive towards a child, i would be more concerned in the area of getting into the area of abuse. sadly, i have been in a number of schools across the country where i have heard adults yelling at students of thing inappropriate things to them. that is certainly a disciplinary action that requires a different

approach. typically it is something that is brought to the ad as traders attention. five often in those situations it is a staff member that is that there and of the rope. perhaps they're feeling profound and do not have an effective strategies for handling the stress they are experiencing. i am not accusing their behavior, are recommending they get out of the field or get additional support, maybe mental health support to understand why your -- why they're acting that way towards a student. host: from kokomo, indiana. bob on the republican line. caller: i am 41-years-old, and my mom was surprised to find out a couple of months ago that i pretty much at all levels in school. she asked why she never knew about it. i said i threw down.

i took it back to them and did not allow it. i am just trying to figure out where we went wrong. why did this become such a big issue? the calller from new jersey, i do not know what is going on, she must be sending her sson to school wearing a dress or something. when did this become such an issue? why do we have three different call-in lines. republicans, democrats, and independence? guest: in terms of what we want to recommend that kids do? i think you bring up the issue that many kids do recommend to their kids to fight back or bully back or hit back. sadly, that is not effective strategy. it can increase the risk of harm or both parties when the victim of grasses back in that way.

we get into trouble as well it can get suspended -- they can get into trouble as well or get injured. we do not recommend that kids fight back in that way. we need to teach the difference between aggressive and assertive this so that kids that are in a position that they can be assertive and can come up with other strategies to avoid bullying or if gates other friends as a coping strategy or avoiding it. -- or engage other friends as a coping strategy for avoiding it. some may not be very good of asserting themselves or coming up with the coping strategy. it is the important that we increase supervision in a situation where we know bullying might be occurring to be able to reach out to students. host: 3 minutes until the house of representatives that are scheduled to come in. apache junction, ariz.. democrats line. caller: i am 63-years-old.

i suffered abuse in high school. a group of girls -- i do not want to say jealousy. i to this day supper dramatics in trouble when i do not know if they will be around every corner. do not come up behind me and say tboo. i always get real nervous. i have a prescription. i think there should be a trial of their peers. when kids get to a certain age they do not listen to adults. there should be a credit that should be added. you cannot graduate. it should be in the eighth grade before you are ever enter high school. it should be of the curriculum. there should be classed as held, and it should be led by students, not teachers. i put it squarely on the

shoulders of hollywood. these video games. my son is 30 and has been playing since he was very young. lived with me for a while, and i thought i lived in a war zone. host: apologies for cutting you off. we are running short on time. guest: 1 think for to get lehigh did was the role of you did this. we will not solve this problem with adult-directive policies totally. there has been mixed impact in the research. what we do not want to do is saddled this solely on the year and have only youth-facilitated programs for adults the back and expect you to resolve it. finding constructive roles that participate in. spreading the message that bullying will not be tolerated and injured bei