about jobs, the economy and the president's speech before the joint session of congress. later, a look at the program. joint the national law as our guest. >> well george bush and his pred sesor created jobs faster than you did, governor. >> that's not correct. >> that was the scene last night at the reagan presidential library. the presidential debate co-sponsored by msnbc and politico. the first time governor from

texas was a part of the line up. we'll show you clips of the debate and ask you what you thought. many think it is now the race between two governor or sitting governors. that would be rick perry and rick romney. let us know what you think about it. a lot of ways to get involved as we look at the gop candidate debate with governor perry's debut. >> the so-called congressional super committee. set to make a speech. seeing if the fed was more involved in the economy. more in a few minutes with governor perry's debut.

let's start with looking at some of the front page headlines about the debate. much of the news reporting have it as a two-man race. the washington times say it's romney versus perry. a chance to go head to head. in the "new york times" also, they debate over party direction is their headline in the story. in the wall street journal, they clash. perry and romney clash from the opening bell. they challenged each other

>> the other story today in the morning hour before the president's address on jobs tonight is the first meeting of the congressional super committee or the super congress.

the debt reduction special committee. the editor of roll call daily briefing is on the line with us to set the stage. good morning. remind people of the framework in which this super committee is expected to operate. >> sure. the so-called super committee, the formal name is much longer. the joint by partisan deficit reduction committee was part of the last minute comprimise that avoided the trough in august they came up with a trillion in

deficit reduction. their deadline is the day before thanksgiving to propose this. congress's deadline is two days before christmas. if none of that happens and if this joint committee's effort comes to naught, one year from now they would be more than they could buildup. >> from the house republicans from texas first elected in 2002 after a long run as an aid

believe it or not, the committee is being watched so intently that even the committee is being read as important tea leaves. the committee picked the republican staffer. he is a tech expert. the reading there is that means the republicans are willing to at least consider tax ideas. for the deputy tax director, they went with a democrat. the leading deficit hawk. a woman who knows entitlements.

that was viewed as the democrats being able to talk about the tough restrictions that they have long resisted. we'll have a live coverage of today's first session on c-span 3. you can see the information there begins at 10:30 a.m. eastern. there's been another debate about whether this committee should be able to operate fully in public. >> there's not that much to be transparent about. the selection of the staffers. this committee's jurisdiction, their ultimate goal is $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction. their charge has been written with extraordinary breath. there's almost no limit to what they can sweep into their

proposal. it doesn't have to even address their budget. they could for example. some think that they might take on the task of restructuring the postal service finance. postal service needs some help. it's losing $10 billion a year. there would be nothing to stop the joint committee if they wanted to from taking that to its wing and whatever it proposes. the breath is enormous, the amount of lobbying is enormous. they had an extraordinarily informative meeting about the number of aids to these 12 lawmakers. leaving the charge to influence this committee. it faces as big a challenge as any committee.

while at the same time sending off the lobbyist. the more transparent they are. since it's so enormous, e in town has a piece of it. the high wall would be the best approach. >> we will see at 10:30 eastern what the interplay of the members of the committee as it gets under way and see how it all begins in the effort of the time frame. >> look for the republican chairman to shake hands at the start of the meeting will be the first time they have ever met. that's a sign of how partisan leaders are becoming based on the fact that they have never met. >> the editor of cq roll call daily briefing. >> one of the proposals by the

chairman of the house caucus will focus the super committee on jobs. jobs was a great deal of the focus on last night as debate. the gop candidates. we'd like to hear from you. let's begin with the democrats point of view. this is robert from north carolina. you are on the air. caller: yes. i'm an old combat veteran. i have 24 years in the united states army combat, korea, vietnam. i have two purple hearts. the one thing, mr. perry, i don't like his deal with the ponzi scheme about social security. i got two purple hearts. the day i was done march 4, 195, when that ponzi scheme was put

together by president roosevelt. i seen too many people die for that ponzi scheme. i got that 100% disabled right now from doe fending that ponzi scheme. i don't like anything about it. host: governor perry's use of the term ponzi scheme has been getting a lot of attention. writing today. >> it wasn't that he attacked the social security as a ponzi scheme is perhaps the dumbest thing ever said. let's listen in to that clip and hear exactly what the governor had to say. >> in the book, you call social security the best example of the program that vie letly tosses aside any respect for the

state's rights. we understand your position it has funding problems now. explain your view that social security was wrong right from the begin. the republican candidates are talking about ways to transition this program. it is eamon centerous lie. it's a ponzi scheme to tell our kid that's are 25, 30 years old today you are paying into a program that will be there. anybody that is the status quo, social security today is involved with a huge lie to our kids. it's not right. >> governor perry talking about social security. in los angeles on the air. >> good morning. caller: i think he did a really good job describing the international experience. i'm still concerned about his

choices about gay marriage. second place romney. third perry. i have no clue why ron paul was there. i can understand his rhetoric. i was confused why he was there. i was concerned about the comments they made about ben bernanke. i want to tell mitch and others to keep up the good job. they are doing a fantastic job. keep it up. host: here's a photograph in the los angeles times of former first lady nancy reagan. she sat in the crowd. a lot of shots of her clearly enjoying the discussion. let's take our next call from georgia. occur tuesday is on the independent line. caller: good morning. as i watched the debate last

night, there was a five-letter word that kept coming into my head. party, party, party. it's never what the people need. do we really need another governor from texas to run again? i don't think so. i really enjoyed one of the candidates that made a lot of sense to me was john huntsman. he talks about how he created jobs and how things were done in utah. it was the majority of the country being sent rift. we need to find a candidate that will work on their own and do what's best for the country and not what is best for the party. >> since two callers have mentioned the governor, we have a clip of him talking about his international experience. we'll take a call and listen to

it. next is gibbstown, new jersey on the republican line. caller: i called this with co-workers. santorum was like a police. perry with poor track record on public education and all his minimum wage jobs. the guy who stood out to all of us was john huntsman. he sounded the most presidential. he made the most sense. his track record with creating jobs in utah and his service to china. china will have to be dealt with sooner or later. i think jon huntsman. i don't know why he's polling so

poorly. he made the most sense to everybody. host: let me ask you a question. if your group of interested friends liked the governor, what would your advice be to him? caller: the tea party is pushing perry. romney is on his second go around. huntsman, i don't know what his campaign finance look like. he needs to get his message out there and push it harder. he's certainly willing to engage the others on stage as you saw last night. i think if people give the goi a chance, he'll come up with the polls. host: thanks. let's listen to jon huntsman he is sxshlly with his experience in china. >> what will fix the china relationship is fixing our core

here at home. our core is weak and broken. we have no leverage. i have to say, mitt, now is not the time in a recession to enter the trade war. ronald reagan flew this plane while i was in china. host: to texas. what did you think of your governor? caller: i was ashamed of him and ron paul. they sound like idiots. all they care about is their own political agendas and what they care about. please listen to what they say. it's time to dump republican, democratic labels and work as one. here in texas.

look what our great governor has done to our school system. i don't know where all these jobs are. i do know that all of our school teachers are suffering. they have to deal with more than half time the size of their classes and he's in favor of education. ron paul is just so off the wall, i don't see how he could be elected. thank you for your time. i hope the people get out and vote. please. no matter who you are. get out and vote. thank you. >> danny from texas. host: david on the republican line from michigan. go ahead. caller: good morning. my first reaction is that obama needs to step down as president because he's failed so miserably and taking the nation into such a wrong direction. he often asks arab leaders that

have done the same thing to step down. we should just appoint one of these republicans or tea party people like michelle bachmann or mitt romney or rick perry. to the other callers on the ponzi scheme and social security. i looked up ponzi scheme on wiki and it defines a ponzi scheme as a program like social security. it's part of the modern definition. everybody in the republican party and tea party they have a pretty well unified front talking about cutting taxes and getting rid of obama care which will save our medical across the united states and up lift our nation. the cutting of taxes, here's

what happened to me. i was working as an engineer for a major corporation in the united states. the company had to pay so much taxes out that they just folded up and laid off 50,000 people in the united states and went to china. they gave us all letters and said whenever your united states government, the company i worked for was a foreign company that made tvs in the united states. they went to china and said whenever your taxes are reduced below 20%, we'll return. my research shows there's probably 10,000 to 20,000 other company that's say the same thing f. that were to happen, unemployment would change if taxes were simply cut. the company i am talking about

was $100 billion a year company. they have to pay $50 billion a year in taxes. they simply went to china where they paid zero. host: thank you for your call from michigan. let's listen to governor romney and rick perry sparing about jobs. >> governor romney left the private sector. he did a great job of creating jobs around the world. when he moved that experience to government, he had one of the lowest job creation rates in the country. his public sector record did not match his private sector record. we created more jobs in the last four months in texas than he has in the last four years. >> i disagree with that. texas is a great state. no state tax. they have a lot of oil and gas

in the ground. governor perry doesn't believe he created those things. it would be like al gore saying he invented the internet. host: back to your calls. independent. you are on the air. caller: last night's debate was a joke. this was all planned to stimulate an increased hope for rick perry. i watched chris matthews the last few weeks. it's disgusting what the political arena of broadcasters are doing. the questions just weren't right. the only one that spoke well to me was huntsman. i wish there could be more information on him. >> thank you for your call. to raleigh, north carolina.

talking about the gop candidate debate. brian william one of the questioners. next call on the democrat klein from north carolina. caller: good morning. the guy before is a complete idiot. he's talking about taxes. it doesn't work. we need to fix the whole system. it's a shame some people want to go this far. it's a big joke. the best guy on the stage -- and i'm a democrat -- that was huntsman. he's the only common thinker on the stage. let them go ahead and pick who they want to. they have no chance in the general election with this kind of nonsense. the bottom line is you have to look at the public as a whole. it may be less rich but it's more poor. you have to look at the complete

picture of the thing. jon huntsman made the most sense but it is say same that they won't even consider him. perry and romney, it's just not going to work. i'll tell you right now. they don't get it together, i'll be smiling. huntsman is the best guy. i'm a democrat telling them that. that's all i want to say. taxes is not the answer. you ever broke anything and it grows? you plant something and it grows. thank you. host: thank you. let's check in with our facebook community and look at some of the comments there.

host: back to telephone calls. next up is one from long island. republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i watched the debate with pretty much of an open mind. i didn't have -- my mind wasn't set on any particular candidate. i was hoping perry would do well. i don't think he did. everyone on the panel other than santorum came across very well. in my mind, i think mitt romney won the debate.

he came across as presidential, knowledgeable, cool and collected. same as hillary clinton yet, who do you want answering the phone at 2:30 in the morning? i think he'll do well for the country. i want to make a comment about callers that call in saying each party is looking out for their own ideology. i think each party feels their own ideology is what's good for the country. i want a republican who thinks republican ideas will get this country out of the mess that obama has brought it to. host: thank you. next caller is james from kansas on the independent line.

caller: i hear a lot of people talking about huntsman in terms of that they don't give him enough time or this and that. it seems to me that you have to make your own chances. you saw perry and romney next to reagan right up there in the picture. . what i'm saying is the majority of perry and romney -- romney doesn't even belong up there. he's for gun control. he's a rhino. he's not a conservative. i'm at a loss where all this tea party movement went because i'm not seeing it now. host: thanks. next up is jim from florida on the republican line. you are on. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: great. thanksgiving. caller: i was really a fan of

newt gingrich. he showed a lot of class and stood his ground. seemed like i waited for more than a half hour to hear from newt. he kind of stood up for himself and the country and said listen, what we have to do is get the white house back. he really seems to know the problem to protect the country. i said this before. without or country. all these other points are going to be moot. he brought up the nuclear issue. i would trust the country in the hands of newt gingrich. >> within the first half hour, you will recall his criticism of

the method raters. they are trying to divid the candidates. my question for you is your reaction to that. part of the whole process is to distinguish among the candidates. do you think he made a fair point? >> i thought the method raters were looking for a fight. msmbc doesn't really favor republicans or conservatives. i thought it was strange that they would be method rating the debate. i was really happy with his response. in the last two debates, i would actually entrust him with the country. i'd be honest with you. host: thank you for your call. next is a viewer from new

hampshire. ron on the democrat line. caller: thank you. i feel it's a shame that president obama's job package tonight is basically going to be dead on arrival in the congress like everything else. in the past, our presidents were -- it didn't matter whether they were republican or democrat, they were after a hearty debate, they were allowed to do something to either become a hero or zero. president obama hasn't been afforded that courtesy. the republicans and the tea party kind of burned their bridges with me with the debt debate saying they didn't need to bring the country to default and get us downgraded. it's just a shame that president

obama hasn't been given the chance to do what he was elected to do. everything he says or does is just dead on arrival once it reaches congress. that's a shame. it sgnt doesn't matter who becomes president next. if nothing happens, we are in for another four years of nothing. that's a shame. host: thank you for your call. . .

they just want power and they want the money they get from people like industries that have supported them all the way down the line. host: thank you. the new republic, a voice on the progressive side of the aisle as this analysis this morning.

host: houston, good morning, a democrat. you are on the air. caller: good morning. i wanted to comment on the republican candidates. buddy roemer, of all of them, he needs to be heard by the american public. he is the only one that makes sense. most of the candidates up there are millionaires. they will tell us we will try to make lemonade. mitt romney is a millionaire. he cannot understand the people at the bottom end.

he will increase the rich and put taxes on corporations -- they need to do away with bafta and allow jobs to come back to america. if so, we could grow jobs here. we need to protect america. host: thanks for your call. linda on twitter rig -- the next call is from union, missouri. good morning to gregg, republican. you are on the air. caller: hi, susan. the thing that we have going now, there are not going to be jobs for the american people as long as obama is president. that's the way it is. businesses don't trust him for regulations. his tax policies as well. these people calling in today said about the rich and this and that.

that is what america is. if you want to grow to be rich, you grow to be rich. thanks. host: banks. now to facebook. julie writes to us on facebook -- now kristin writes --

and doot writes -- next, spokane, washington, on the telephone line. john is an independent. go ahead, please. caller: good morning. i would like to say that the the republicans believe government by business and for business. mitt romney said he would not raise taxes on corporations and millionaires and will continue to let them skate by. texas governor created minimum wage jobs and not living wage jobs. i'm getting tired of people always coming down on obama when they know is some of the republican governments that created this mess. if you want this to continue, reelect republicans who continue

this mess. thank you. host: and by e-mail, roger rights for north carolina -- gand this from a viewer in seattle, washington. next, ohio. good morning to maryland, a democrat. caller: i'm so glad to be on this morning. i have a story to tell that is in the media here from a couple months ago. this is going right back to last night. there was a gentleman here and

they did an interview for him. he rallied at the state park. they wanted to know what he was sort. he said "i don't carry guns, we are good people, the only thing we are for is to make sure the lights stay white -- the whites stay white." the whole thing last night was to keep obama from being president again. newt gingrich told his story, we are all for the same pink. that is why they are not passing the transportation bill. and this other guy fthat i first spoke of was from the ku klux klan, a white supremacist. they're all for the same meetithing.

host: thanks, maryland, from ohio. don larsen of connecticut's its share of the democratic caucus in the house of representatives. -- john larson. there's a story in the new york times this morning about c- span's new history project. tomorrow night at 8:00 p.m. eastern time and for the next 45 days we will be on location from the historic sites connected with eight men who ran for office over the course of history and lost, but wertheir policies had an effect on american history. brian writes about the series this way --

thomas dewey is one of the people profiled. william jennings bryan and his famous campaign. alongside that, george mcgovern. charles evans hughes. and henry clay. henry clay will be our first subject. that's tomorrow night from his estate in lexington, kentucky, called ashland, a 90-minute live program talking about his history and his legacy and contributions he made to american society, sometimes for good and sometimes for ill as we go through the series. join us for that. sent francisco, john is up next as we talk about last night's debate. republican, you are on. good morning. caller: good morning. speaking of losers, last night i

was watching the debate, nothing but losers. let's talk about rick perry. rick perry cut education spending. then he turns to cutting federal funding for firefighters. and now look at texas is burning up. let me go to newt gingrich. it seems last night that he was sucking uup to rick perry, probably in looking to unseat the vice president's position. speaking of losers, all losers. go obama, 2012. host: bank. and now this from twitter -- just a couple of minutes of your analysis of last night's debate. now, from eugene, a democrat.

my apologies. i hit the button too quickly. mike, from beaumont, texas. caller: i wanted to make a comment. briefly on the social security, about that's going to be killed in the future or whatever, us baby boomers separate all our money into social security and the government can get it out for wherever they wanted to use it for. they need to pay the interest that we had our money in there for so that we can use our social security when we get to the age of retirement. also with medicare, talking about scorching that. we paid into the medicare system more than repaid on social security every payday. now they are telling us we have to pay for full coverage, to understand dollars out of our social security money, still

paying into medicare so we can have 80% coverage. i think that's wrong and the nation needs to address that and ask the government how did you get our money and why was it not paid back? host: thanks for your comment. thomas is a democrat in wilson, north carolina. go-ahead. caller: yes, i was wondering, i was watching the debate last night. how are you, by away? host: fine, thanks. caller: i was wondering whether the american people have taken the time to observe the candidates for president. rick perry is all for the same thing. perry is supposed to have had the worst job creation there is.

i was wondering what they have done for the american people in the last 18 months. i think obama has not been given a fair opportunity to display his talents as far as getting the economy straight. i would just like for the american people to really take an opportunity to watch the individuals that we are trying to decide to elect for president. so give that a close look and please go out and vote for the candidate not just because it is your party, but because it is the right person for the job. host: banks, thomas. c-span also covered a classic part of these debates these days where analysts and party

operatives, out and tried to bend the results. look at our last clip. ed rollins has been around through a number of campaign cycles and has been a senior adviser to michelle bachmann's campaign. >> i would say michelle bachmann clearly had a great night. newt gingrich is always smart. i think rick perry did not exceed anyone's expectations. there's a curiosity about him. no major errors. i think mitt romney had a better night. host: that wa as a veteran observer. now on the line from washington. caller: i wish people would not

be calling in to blame racism on the tea party's opposition towards obama. it's not about racism, it's about his politics. a substantial portion of the population lacks the intellectual capacity and to understand what ron paul says. he has very keen insight as to how to solve our nation's problems. we are in a lot of trouble. people don't want to listen to it. most of the candidates probably just want to maintain the status quo and that's why they're getting the coverage that ron paul is not getting. host: thank you. john larsen of connecticut will be joining us later and then joe

barton. we will talk jobs, the economy, and help care. the final segment this morning, how unemployment insurance works with the nation's unemployment at 9.1% still. we will take a quick break and we will be right back. >> the day after the 9/11 terror attacks. this weekend on american history tv on c-span3, senate floor speeches from september 12 from three senators. american artifacts from pessimists on in american history museum, recovered the objects from new york, the

pentagon, and oklahoma. and this weekend, northwestern university professor howard on societal changes in the first half of the 19th century led to the birth of the women's rights movement. get the complete schedule on c- span.org or get this schedule e- mail directly to you. >> "book tv features 9/11 ogs this weekend. saturday, four them. on sunday several others. co also this weekend, a pulitzer prize-winning washington post reporter suggests that the total government efforts to protect america after september 11 are secretive and dangerous and need to be exposed. see she is interviewed by douglas -- , former undersecretary of defense. and dick cheney talks about his experiences during 9/11 and the lessons he has learned since

then. and look for the former vice- president, interviews by bob woodward. find our complete schedule online. >> want more video of the candidates, 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 on thecacacacacaais, candidate biographies, and the latest polling data, and links to c-span media partners in the early primary and caucus states. all aspet c-span.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: the press district of connecticut, part of the democrats' leadership team, tears the democratic caucus. thanks for being here this morning, john.

guest: thank you. host: representative larson has introduced legislation that would require the super -- guest: the main premise is quite simple and very germane. we know from day cbo score that if we reduce unemployment to solve the 7%, that we can reduce the deficit by more than 25%. and so, it seems very common sense and straight forward to me that what we want to do as part of

the start of the committee to reduce the debt by $1.50 trillion, if we can get a quarter of that down by putting people back to work, the primary goal of the american public, why not? any economist that you have talked to said they have to have an approach that will deal with the huge unemployment question. this is a path forward. the national journal came out in august with 11 ways to put people back to work without increasing the deficit. there's no shortage of plans. certainly the president will lay out on this evening. democrats have laid out under what we call our kids in america agenda. that's focused primarily on infrastructure improvements and putting people back to work in the aftermath of these horrific storms that we have experienced in the northeast and the devastation that its cost,

having a community recovering co -- core. putting people back to work especially young people that are out of jobs and can help in the rebuilding and dealing with some of these communities whose very character has been changed. in vermont and new york and parts of connecticut, by the storm. so that is the goal. it is rather straightforward. i am pleased with the bipartisan support that i believe it can garner. >host: the stock little about the president's speech. do you think it makes good sense for the president to ask for a joint session of congress to lay out a jobs plan? guest: i do. i think anytime that you have an issue as pressing as the unemployment crisis that we are facing in this country, it is incumbent upon the president to address the people and at the same time addressed the body that will have to implement any

of his ideas. so without congressional support, it's going to be very difficult for the president to get through any of his proposals. i don't know what they are all going to be, but we have a strong indication that he feels very strongly about extending the tax cuts that people have received. otherwise they will experience tax hikes in this economy probably cannot be sustained. and also an infrastructure program that will focus on not only the roads and bridges, but rebuilding schools, and thereby help us on two fronts. making sure we are putting people back to work but also making sure that we are keeping our schools competitive in this global economy. host: let me ask your thoughts on the extension of the payroll tax deduction? % is the roll back, i believe. -- 2%.

it did not have the desired effect of people spending more money to stimulate the economy. guest: most people did not realize they got it. that is the common concern you hear from a number of members. i believe it did have a stimulative effect. i think without it, it would be felt immediately by those who recognize all of a sudden their taxes just went up. a long-term concern for me. we want to make sure that in a system of social security, that we continue to pay into that system to make it solvent and secure well into the future as it is now. host: on the issue of whether congress can work together, last night's eric cantor sent out a series of tweets. here's one.

callerwhat's your reaction? guest: a very positive statement. good people can disagree, but we need to move this nation for. i think eric cantor and myself and others when they went home heard very clearly from the public, stop the bickering in both houses and get the job done. job number one, put america back to work. that is what i think my proposal that i talked about before and when i say my proposal, i believe the committee will adopt something. it does not have to be my proposal, but if what we need and what this committee provides, and it will be the focus of this fall session, is a time frame. this committee has that. it is a very short timeframe. we only have 40 legislative days and the committee on has 100

days in which to complete their task. all committees must submit to the super committee by october 14 their plans and ideas. it would be great to see every committee submitting a plan for deficit reduction and job creation and economic growth, knowing that the two are linked. and then having till november 23 to present plans to congress. if congress will continue in a bipartisan manner, then there would be triggered an automatic deal where the cuts going to affect across-the-board and the jobs plan would be voted on up or down. either way, the american people would be served. if we work together, not only would it be good in our country, but we would once again establish ourselves as the preeminent parliamentary body around the globe and demonstrate that in a democracy that is free and open, people can disagree, but we can govern.

i think that is what is at stake here. host: there's a map that looks at state-by-state unemployment. let's focus on your home state. conn. tell us what the situation is there. guest: the situation is starting to improve under the governor who just went through very difficult session. in my own district, to see levels of unemployment in our urban areas rise to 20% is unacceptable. and so, that is why we think it is so important to come up with a program of work that will put people back to work. it's better that people are working as opposed to collecting an unemployment check. i would much rather make sure that the government money is going towards people getting significant and meaningful training and have them be involved in this case, as we suggested earlier, in the recovery and aftermath of

storms and the ongoing conservation that had been neglected for so many years, and so much work out there for people to do. , host: osman, let's get some of your questions and comments. we begin with jeff from sarasota, florida. you are on. caller: good morning. i have a couple comments. i hope you'll bear with me. my first comment, i think the job training idea has a good idea. only problem is if you are talking about trying to have the job training impact that the restoration restoration of coastal areas, i don't see how the time line would meet up with that. second, the infrastructure projects has to be there to actually be done. the timetable has to work itself out to the end where the process is ready to be worked out and all the permitting is done.

if you just throw money at states again, personally, when i vote and governor in my state and house members, i expect them to balance our budget and deal with pension and things of this nature. i don't think you guys need to throw more money at the states to help them deal with these things. last, i agree that my party, the republican party, needs to work with you guys on jobs. we are in a bad climate right now. the one thing that does not help us, while a lot of your fellow party members are out there spending are medicare and medicaid and social security and saying the programs are solvent and if we just raise taxes on people, everything will be fine. that's not true. these problems statistically don't work out if you do the math. i don't see how we can work together when you guys are literally putting these ads out where you are lying to people about these programs and their solvency.

guest: thank you.

guest: we heard from our members last evening. that needsot of work to be done. we do not need to create a bureaucracy. i think as recline -- ezra klein from "the washington post" has it about right. it simply was not enough. so rather than taking it to it's full extent and letting the antibiotic go on its course, we gave too little antibiotic in the case of infrastructure.

the states and municipalities wanted the aid at the time and they needed that. many states took money that was intended for a shovel-ready projects and used it to balance their budgets. 1/3 of that money went to tax cuts, which most people do not recognize that they receive. there is still room for an infrastructure program and there is growing concern in congress as people go home and his people lived through some of these storms and seeing what the aftermath has done in the northeast between the earthquake and the subsequent hurricane irene, structural damage underscores what has been years of benign neglect. i think there is an opportunity for the parties to work

together. you would like to see it happen in this committee in a regular order. the american public is demanding that congress get back to work. i am glad to hear what eric cantor had to say. we have to work together. there can be disagreement on how we get this ball, but there is no doubt that republican members want to see people go back to work and the unemployment rate lowered so that people can go back to work. if that also lowers the national debt, is not a program we can all work on? if we have the same time constraints and it is sent up or down vote in the house of representatives, there is an opportunity for the public to see results. we have about 40 legislative days left and a deadline of

december 23 to produce a bill or the trigger goes into effect and there are automatic cuts across the board. if the committee follows the line, there will be in upper down vote on job creation, as well. host: here is one of the recent comments. it is about a jobs plan that actually works. it is by ezra klein. "insights into a deficit reduction should be applied." that is ezra klein. charles is a democrat. you're on. caller: you have a picture of william jennings bryant.

he once said the first duty of government was to make sure that rings were put in the noses of every hawk. that needs to be done with c- span. we have a structural problem in our economy. a right-wing economists -- they agreed that roosevelt initiative programs. there was something i heard in my college class. there were all new deal economists then. someone had to do something to give the country hope. we have a lack of leadership. some demagogue will come along, capture america, and we will be in worse shape. host: we have a comment from "

the new york daily news" about the obama speech tonight. "it is now or never." "he must find a way to reverse what one democrat turned to a growing crisis of confidence." guest: let me say that the president -- have the is the head that wears the crown. the buck stops usually on pennsylvania avenue. he is leading in uncharted waters, it is inheriting a difficult set of circumstances -- wars on two fronts. $10 trillion in debt, keeping the

nation secure as we approached the 10th anniversary of 9/11. thee trying to get back on road to recovery. he is not received a lot of cooperation from the other side. and he continues hearing frustration from the democratic side of the aisle. he does believe that we all need to work together. he has been stubborn about that. those who think that that's a sign of weakness, i think are greatly underestimating this president and his ability. i expect thursday evening that we are going to hear his plan and ask for congress to step up to the plate and do the job or pullback and face their

constituents, explained to them why they're not willing to put america back to work. that is what is needed. the president to lay out his plan and congress to vote on it. host: we're talking with the chairman of the house democratic caucus. chris, you are on. caller: i keep hearing in the media that the republicans want to get rid of the regulations that they say prevent job growth. could you tell us what some of those regulations are? thank you. guest: let me put this in context. it's not that regulations should not be reviewed. but to gut the regulations, to me, do not seem to be job

creators in and of themselves. i think it is important to look at all government agencies and to make sure they are operating in as frugal a manner as they can. i was meeting in my district and a couple of senior people said, give the rank and file federal employee an opportunity to talk about where we think the inefficiencies are, what we get get out of this system, and we will find those kinds of cuts. do not demean the work of people without us having the opportunity to demonstrate the importance of function. we saw our state agencies pulling together to save lives and get involved in rescue missions. there's a tendency to forget that.

with regard to specific cuts and regulation, everything should be on the table. there should be an opportunity for the american people to take a look at this. i hope that the discussion will be on going with the super select committee. all jobs agenda issues and deficit reduction issues including suggestions from our own federal employees, would be out there and ready for the committee to dissect. host: more on the president. a town hall meeting. this is a recent story. "the past few weeks have been about trying to instill new hope. the difficulty democrats will

face, that even the president's most ardent supporters feel let down." guest: dispirited by the lack of jobs. any time that happens, barack obama's biggest opponent is not the current people participating in the republican primary. it continues to be this economy. that is where people are dispirited. people still believe in this man. 91-year-oldg to ma lady who said she voted to hillary clinton. she thought she was the better candidate. "but i have watched this president and i have watched what he has in dort and a watch what people are trying to do. and i think it is wrong.

i am voting for president barack obama." people say, "his intentions are right, but why is he fighting?" he is trying to bring both sides on board. the perception is people expect him to be more engaged in the fight. if you watched, seeing him to an overflow of 17,000 people, we know he has the ability to connect and fight. he has a responsibility to govern. i think he has tried to create that balance to the best of his ability, often reminding us he is not just president. he is the president of the united states.

that is how he has conducted himself. host: next phone call is from florida. you're on the air. caller: good morning. allow me to get a couple of points. you mentioned that i lot of people may not see this tax cuts that he is looking to -- when you begin to divide that by the number of people and you look at it per person, the dollar value, you will perhaps may be looking at $36 a month per person. it equates out to perhaps maybe less than even filling a tank of gas. he spoke about the infrastructure and spending in the economy. you do block grants all the time you send it to the states. the state governors spend money

on other things. that's because you're not specify what this money is to be used for. number three, you need to stop -- the people are sick and tired of playing this game where you play on emotions. you just told a story about the old lady. that does not put one penny in your pocket. this president knew when he came into office what the problems were. now he is talking about laying out a plan tomorrow, three years later. that is when people questioned his leadership. there was a debate, he and john mccain. don't act like this just became an issue yesterday. guest: he had a plan.

we have an automobile industry that is up and running thanks to president obama, and without one republican vote. he put forth a stimulus plan that everybody derided and without one republican vote. you may suggest there is $6 a month isn't much. for some people, that is an awful lot. if they can get a tank of gas a month, they will take it. it is not going to be much to a billionaire. that is why we think -- many of us think the tax code needs to be changed and overhauled. obama came in with a specific plan. we did not take the full dose of

antibiotic that we needed. there should have been at a deeper infrastructure program. there should have been greater investment in the roads and airports and schools. the call for an infrastructure banked, a proposal that was put forward in the house and john kerry in the senate. that has bipartisan support. we're going to need cooperation from both sides. this president has been bullish upon and system. john boehner boasted after the negotiations on the debt ceiling that he got 90% of what he wanted. it is time for us to get away from who got what and when. the most important thing is to put the country back to work. what i heard is that the fervor around having this country come

together in the spirit that we did after september 11 and recognize what is being ravaged and attacked here is the american economy. to change that, we have to look no further than ourselves. members of congress working together and getting the job done on behalf of the american people. host: i will show you a couple of tweets from progresses. -- from progressives. here's a similar one. host: let me add one more credit, al gore -- let me add one more critic. let's take this one example.

did he make the right decision? guest: i have great respect for vice-president gore and everything he has done in the environment community. everybody is entitled to their opinions. unless you're sitting in that seat unless you're going through what the president is going through, i think the president has handled things in a measured fashion, not always to my liking. i would come down on the same side of al gore on the environment. i was a proponent of a carbon tax. he pulled away from that. he did not think it was doable. president is dealing with a senate that can block anything with a cloture bill and a majority-controlled republican house. he cannot just move matters.

he has to get legislation through by what is doable. some would argue -- if you know you cannot get anything through, let's fight for what you really believe in. i think the president would love to do that. he has the responsibility to do everything possible to get people back to work. i think this election is pretty clear and will be spelled out based on what people believe and where they stand on this economy and where they stand on putting people back to work, where they stand on the environment versus health care for the american people. the president has made that clear. it will be a clear battle on the values people have about what is important to them. their economic value, getting a job and going back to work.

their environmental values. their pension and health-care advisers. that is what 2012 is going to be all about. shouldn't we all be working together to try to help people that are unemployed to get back to work? there's a simple way to get back to that. host: next up is a democrat, dion. caller: good morning. how are you going? host: great. caller: i got a lot of thoughts. i will see if i could get your answer on this question. congress -- there is a big fight on how to spend taxpayers' money. it is hard for me to say the what i want to say it. how we pay our government

contractors, the people who work for the government -- the contractors are the main thing. we have a fee for service policy. they do the work and then the charge the government what they want for the work that is already done. can you understand that? guest: i think what you're talking about is sometimes they go out and get a contract and then they are able to submit charges that accrue afterwards or overcharges. change orders that comment because they say the work has changed and they get more money than the original contract -- change orders that come in. that is a matter that is troubling and one that should be looked into. let out a bid. people -- lay out a bid.

then change orders exceed the bid. then it looks like that was not a fair deal. that's something that should be addressed. host: we have an e-mail from ray. guest: i agree with you, ray. there are a lot of programs that are out there. we need to change -- we need to train people for specific jobs. that will continue to exist as we continue to graduate kids out of high school. we celebrated the and the bane johnson 1965 ford with the creation of the jobs bill were they got the educational degree

and matched up with going into jobs within their respective communities are going on to get further training in areas that are needed. the health-care industry is one that comes to mind with the shortage of nurses and the shortages of personnel that we need to insist from surgery rooms to the emergency rooms. and so your point is well made in terms of do not create another agency to train people. we have enough agencies out there and there are committed to colleges that have to be to utilize. i believe they should be open on weekends -- there are community colleges that have to be utilized. we talk about infrastructure improvements. everybody in the community should the weather and utilize them in a way that they can get a skill and get the training that will assist them in the current job they are in or be able to grow and that job or

seek another job. education is so big that will have to be facilitated throughout a lifetime providing you're getting the kind of skill that will give the dignity that only comes with work. that is the most important thing. the ability to look across the table at their spouse and children and let them know that through their work and effort, that they are able to provide for them and that they are going to be able to get an education and better their lives. they will have the security of knowing that if something happens to them health was, they will be cared for. let's start with retraining them -- we have machinist in our state, united technologies,

pratt and whitney, command aircraft. we have an aging population of machinists and we have the need to bring on new people who understand this. i saw billboards standing out looking for people to come to work there. the question becomes making sure that you are lining up the people with the right s kills. i mentioned nursing and medical care. we look at health care and the preventive side of health care. there are a number of areas that we can focus on and match them up. but the deskilled labor force that we need. and everybody needs to go to college to get a liberal arts

education. they can be trained in the economy in this country and the global economic that impacts us as well. host: this is rick, an independent from cape cod. caller: the democratic party continues to pander to the unions. my property taxes went up. more union members were hired. han;g on. with the prevailing ways, it cost too much money for the infrastructure program. why is it necessary for your party to pander to the unions? guest: i do not consider it

pandering to the unions as well. people should be able to have a benefit. they should have the dignity that i was talking about before. more often than not, you can ask anyone, a labor that has a skill that someone has brought in from out of state that doesn't have benefits, that doesn't contribute to a committee, that gets a job that a guy who was in paying the taxes in the community, that sends his kids to school doesn't get. it becomes a race to the bottom to see who can get the lowest wage. labor has been under siege across this country. they have taken rather a heavy hit.

if you go back and look at what they have provided, it has provided a strong and vibrant middle class because they fought for health care and pensions and make sure that wages were at a rate where people could survive. if you look at the disparity that exists today between the.9 of 1 % and look at the middle class or everything has remained stagnant in the middle class while prices continue to expand, i think people should be taking a second look at labor and their values and what they call for in assisting and helping the american middle class be able to survive, especially in eight recessionary period of time where is the middle class that is getting squeezed. no one in the 1% of this country has suffered at all or

lost income or lost jobs. they gained. it's the people in the middle class, and labor has been consistent in sticking up for those people. the committee will take it up and i am hopeful that bipartisan agreement -- i am confident the democrats on the committee believe in this. in talking to rick in ohio and fred in michigan, i think they understand the necessity to link job creation with deficit reduction. i think there's a great opportunity for this country for this committee to succeed. i think the members want to see this committee succeed. and to reduce deficit.

if you can both reduce the deficit and put america back to work, it seems like a common- sense proposal that people can embrace. host: john larson from connecticut, thank you for being here. we'll have another member of congress, congressman joe barton from texas. a member of the energy and commerce committee. we will talk with him about of the same issues. >> here are some headlines. the united states need to take action to shore up confidence in the economy. that's the word from the organization for economic cooperation and development. it also predicts the u.s. economy will grow by only 1.4% this year. that's down from a forecast of 2.6% only three months ago.

robert gates believes the $400 billion in cuts the pentagon will face should be manageable. anything beyond that would pose a threat to national security. he spoke at the university of north texas near dallas last night. there commemorate the 10th anniversary of 9/11. he was named the next chancellor of the college of william and mary in virginia. michael bloomberg is defending the police department surveillance of the ethnic neighborhoods since the september 11 attacks. he said the department did not unfairly target any group. the new york police department used undercover officers to monitor daily life and scrutinize more than 250 mosques and muslim student

groups. calling for fast changes in the air transport industry of russia. reducing the number of airlines. this is after a crash that killed 43 people on wednesday. experts are blaming the age of the aircraft and a cost-cutting mentality. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> 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 c-span's new weekly series "the contenders." this week, live from ashland, henry clay's kentucky home, friday at 8:00 eastern. >> book tv features 9/11 authors

this weekend. also this weekend, reporter suggest the federal government efforts to protect america after she temper 11 are secretive and dangerous and need to be exposed. also, a personal and political memoir. dick cheney talks about the lessons he has learned since 9/11. final complete coverage online booktv.org. >> 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. >> "washington journal" continues. host: at the table is congressman joe barton of texas, a republican. this seems to be a day with a big story is jobs. the fed chairman is making a speech about the economy. the super committee is getting underway. the aftermath of last night's debate. i will star with a discussion among two donors about which state has a better record on job creation. let's listen in. >> governor romney left the private sector and did a great job of creating jobs. when he moved that experience to government, he had one of the

lowest job creation rates in the country. he had a good private sector record. his public sector record did not match that. we created more jobs in the last three months in taxes than he created in four years. >> texas is a great state. come tax. zero intere texas has oil in the ground. he did not create that. it would be like al gore saying he created the internet. guest: we still like to work in texas. we do have a lot of natural resources. we don't have a state income tax and we are proud of that. we're located in the trade corridor between mexico -- half

the nafta trade goes to texas. they still wonder what you'll do to more in taxes instead of complaining what you did not do yesterday. it is the spirit of the people that helps create jobs. gov. perry has that spirit and he is make sure we kept fostering that entrepreneurial attitude. host: what from texas can be applied to the nation as a whole? guest: a balanced budget. we have very good regulations for clean air and clean water. we work with industry to make sure that we implement those regulations in the most cost effective fashion. it is not a dirty word in taxes to encourage people to go out and work hard and make a profit. host: we have a tweet.

guest: the minimum wage in texas is the same as the minimum wage of the country. i don't know that has any great appeal in our state. host: some of the republican candidates have suggested the minimum wage is an impediment for people hiring. the think it keeps small businesses from hiring -- do you think it keeps small businesses from hiring? guest: especially first-time workers, teenagers. i think that it might be a good idea to suspend or lower teenage, first-time workers to see if that would help create jobs. host: talking about oil and gas exploration and homes. the head of the national

petroleum institute argues oil and gas exploration domestically is seen as creating 1 million jobs in seven years. let me show this article about the special election in new york. natural gas can generate $54,000 immediately. host: you have seen huge debates over fracking in this country. would you give us your perspective? guest: that is injecting sand and water under pressure to spread the shelf formations to release the oil and gas. there is nothing magical or mysterious about it. in my district, we have probably drilled 5000 wells with

hydraulic fracturing. will probably drop 100,000 wells in my state and no problems at all. we have the ability to increase our oil and gas production in the united states by using this technology and creating those jobs. i am glad that it is part of the debate in the race of new york. new york state and pennsylvania and ohio have the same type of shale formations up there that we have in texas and louisiana. if they will develop them, it will be tens of thousands of jobs and billions and billions of dollars and lower energy costs for that region. i am glad it is part of the energy debate. i support it and think it is safe. it would create more american jobs. host: i am getting a number of

people who are circling back and are frustrated about your policy about the oil spill. guest: i was trying to convey that every company in the united states that does business should be treated to due process. i do not believe the obama administration to treatedb bp with due process. i said at the time that bp should pay for the cleanup and they should pay for the cost of lost economic output to the people of the gulf coast. the fund that was set up was not authorized by congress. the administrator has done a good job of trying to direct those funds to the people that were economically disadvantaged. so my point was america is a country ofla law and process.

we should treat individuals with due process and we should treat companies with due process. i was not saying bp was not liable and that there were not the cause of the accident. they were. host: what you think of the restoration of the coastline? guest: i think the joint moratorium did tremendous damage to the economy. on paper, they have rescinded the moratorium. the have only issued a handful of permits. i think that the secretary of the interior and the president should really work to make sure that you can get a permit in a reasonable amount of time. you should monitor the drilling. we should resume drilling and

get the economic activity going. host: we have johnny, a democrat in jackson, tennessee. your honor for congressman barton -- you are on for a congressman barton. caller: i think a lot of americans are sad because we really believe that this country is in a crisis mode. 30 years in the manufacturing and human-resources, hiring and firing. several closings. i do not think anyone is being honest about just how serious this country is with its problems, particularly we -- everything is a heated up and nobody realizes how critical it is. adjusting to information

technology. trying to manage a world with rising energy consumption and rising climate and having a deficit that is so out of hand. every time i think about it, i want to throw up. we do not think to have leadership by either party that is willing, to say, "yes, we're in crisis mode." you take the leader that you have who is intelligent and is capable, and all the people and all the parties come together to try to solve these problems and we will take each other out. host: are you feeling a sense of the party is one to work together towards a solution? guest: that is a good question.

i want to comment on the caller. i sure that -- i share that. i don't think we're at a crisis. it cannot be business as usual. it is difficult for people to focus on the issue. we tend to stand back and figure out the best sound bite. if you're going to solve a problem, you have to agree on what the problem is. the republicans think the problem is too much spending. to much government regulation. that's my position. my friends on the democratic side think we need more government and some out big business or big companies are responsible. the spending is not an issue. we have to come together and

what the problem is. it was the decide that, i think we can come up with some solutions. the committee, they have an almost impossible task. everything that has been solved in the past 20 years, this committee is supposed to solve and the next two months. there are people of good faith on both sides. to ask 12 men and women to do and a couple of months to be able to do all we have not been able to do in decades is a tall order. i think they will try. they have given instructions to work in good faith. i'm going to be surprised if there is a positive outcome of that select committee. i hope there is and hope they go beyond the mandate. we to save eight trillion

dollars to $10 trillion. host: the world economic forum had the united states in the number-one position. yes bit they announced the new rankings and the united states has slipped to the fifth position. the weakness is in the u.s. economy, debt, and ethics. we have a twitter-writer. guest: the assets is the american economy itself. and the american work ethic. host: singapore and switzerland.

guest: most of those economists are smaller than the state of texas in terms of output. the united states economy is as large as the next five economies combined. they may on paper have a slightly lower tax burden and slightly more open regulatory system. in terms of output, i was still take the united states over them any day. that does not mean we don't have issues. you can fault the obama administration. they have gone almost a jihad trying to close at regulations that are very counterproductive, whether they are in the workplace or environmental issues. i am not saying there may be some positive benefits to those

regulations. they make us less competitive. host: i brought in an article from "the baltimore sun" on that very topic. this is running nationwide. "they often blame the tepid economy -- that is not evident." "a lack of capital, insurance costs. their problem is a lack of customers." guest: i just spent a month in my district doing town halls and i did house calls on a number of businesses.

everywhere i went, people were talking about the fear up excessive regulations, especially in the energy sectors and the utility and power generating sectors. if they do not change the regulations, we will close 20% of the power plants in the state of texas in the next five or six months. that is a tremendous negative. do we need more capital? sure. the obama administration, their regulatory imposition on the private sector is very negative towards job creation and to try to go out and hire more people. host: dan is a republican from michigan. caller: good morning. i have three things i want to

ask you. how come the american congress cannot get along with the canadiens long enough to take a few pointers from them on how they strain their country out -- how they straighten their country out? they have a balanced budget. they are running in the black. they have jobs. they went to way goods and services tax. i do not understand how come it's so hard for you guys on both sides of the aisle to get along and try that. what is it going to hurt? nothing is helping now. guest: we have good relations with the canadieans. i have not been to canada recently.

it is a great country. one difference is that we are about 300 million people and they are about 20 million people. we are a lot larger and a lot more perverse. i do think we can emulate the canadians' oil and gas policies . i tip my hat to them. i'm not too familiar with the tax code in canada. you say there is a good and services tax. that's something the u.s. congress should take a look at. if we get the democrats and republicans to work together. host: here is an e-mail from kitty.

guest: jeez. i am not a big plan of the stimulus package. i didn't vote for it. there are some green jobs that have been created. i think kitty is right about that. the best job is a job that the private sector on jupiter decides to create because he or she needs that work, to foster economic development in their business. i think the environmental community that is -- i think they have exaggerated the number of jobs. i generally agree with the comment that kitty made.

hostooh. i know or galveston county is in texas -- i know where it is. cities and states, counties can have a system separate from social security if it is equal to it. texas has a teacher requirement system. the teachers and not covered by social security. they are covered by teachers retirement. in most cases, the retirement system does provide a higher pension than the sources security would. host: here is a call next, lafayette, louisiana.

argue: i'm not going to any particular point with you this morning. i find fault with everything you say pretty much. this country for over 200 years, we formed a more perfect union, we the people. we altogether combine rich and powerful forces who would enslave us. there has been a determined effort to take away as many of these protections that we have. the regulation did not just come out of nowhere. the came about because there were past abuses and they were addressed by these regulations. you're leaving us open to all of these abuses all over again. to blame you for your approach,

there's been two opposing forces. one representing welfare and one -- one representing wealth and one representing the common man. whate to ask you, to ends do you want to do this? is it slavery again? when will you stop? guest: i am not sure how to respond to that. i have never taken a position against unions. texas' is it right to work state. you don't have to be a member of a union to get a job. i have one of the best use in

the country in my district. there's a big assembly plant in arlington, texas. i have a positive working relationship with the management and the union at that plant. i would generally say that the republican position on regulation is that we do not want to eliminate it. we want to make sure any new regulations have more benefits than they have cost. we want to see if they are necessary. an example would be an attempt to regulate carbon dioxide. co-2 is benign. it is not a pollutant. it is usually expensive if you

try to regulate it. most republicans and a lot of democrats would say, let's do more research on that particular compound before we decide to go in and tried to restrict it and reduce it. host: this is from "usa today." county workers were offered a better retirement alternative to social security. our plan put together was a banking model rather than an investment model to limit the risks that workers' contributions were put into fixed-rate annuities. our results have been impressive.

so they opted out and created their own plan and galveston county. guest: government entities are able to have a separate plant as long as their equal or better. host: we have both learned something. thank you. next calller. caller: i wanted to tell you about the $300 billion president's plan, jobs plan that obama is trying to do. and i have a feeling that even if they did create these jobs, how do we know there will not be sent overseas? host: thank you very much. jesse has seen reports that the president's proposal might have a price tag of $300 billion, the

majority of which is a payroll tax extension. we have it on our screen right now. spending on infrastructure and aid to state and local government. guest: we do not know exactly what the president will propose, but it is similar to that, i think the house republican conference will be receptive and look at it, but we will want to know how we're went to pay for it. do we need to reduce spending or offset it? if we're to spend more money, we want to make sure there is a true multiplier effect. most of the stimulus funds the president has spent the past several years have not resulted in any long-term, lasting benefit, so this time around let's put it into roads and infrastructure and water projects. i think the payroll tax

reduction for maintenance of the existing reduction makes some sense, but we need to see if there is not an offset to that. overall i think the house republicans will be receptive. we're not going to automatically affirm its, but we will look at it respectfully. we all want to create more jobs, and the best way to do that this will work spending and taxes and create spending and a private place so people can create jobs in the private sector. host: will you be in the chamber tonight? guest: i am probably going to be. i think it is a little bit of a political stage for the president, and i am supposed to be in texas during an event for a local radio talk-show host, martin davis, but i think my duties will require me to stay up here in washington. host: next call is from

tennessee. bryan, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning, ma'am. mr. burton, i was wondering if you have seen the documentary called "gas land"? seen experts of it -- excerpts of it. they are putting water and all sorts of chemicals and people are being poisoned. guest: with all due respect, people are not being poisoned. 99% of the fluid in hydraulic fracturing are water. there are some chemicals, primarily to provide lubrication as it goes into the formation, but most of the more flamboyant aspects of the film are casing

head gas and circuits gas, not natural gas that this escape a because of hydraulic fracturing. it is a high-impact film, but in terms of it being absolutely accurate in what its statements are, i would say there is substantial disagreement about that. host: jim heim says -- guest: well, 3 million barrels per day is nothing to sneeze at when we are using 20 million. approximately 20 million barrels per day. if we can increase industrial production an additional 3 million and a fashion that is cost-effective, i would say it is worth doing. i would say that is understating the case that we could probably

go substantially higher than that. host: a follow-up from the same person on twitter. what happens to the freshwater process?eath frackinthe frackig guest: it depends on the individual location. some wells keep it on site and reject it or reprocess it. other localities they are allowed to put it into the rivers locally. it depends. if they are allowed, in most cases it has to be processed before it is put into the local water systems. that is a good question. host: a couple of minutes left. next question comes from sheep york, louisiana. -- shreveport, louisiana. we are burning up in louisiana

like you all in texas. it is bad. the worst i've ever seen it. listen, ford motor company going to india to build a new plan because of obama. because of obama and what he is doing to america. number two, louisiana has more oil to go get. obama will not let them go get it. number three, please check on this, your office. bill o'reilly did a report how the legal aliens are using these income tax credits and get millions and millions back. it was on the right the factor of last night. factor lastreilly

night. anytime c-span has a debate, remember this everyone in america. 99 out of 100 calls, we want them people out of our country better here illegally. we want them out of our country the ones that here illegally. america is on your side, the republican side on this. guest: thank you. glad to have a friend in louisiana. i hope texas a&m gets in the southeast conference it will be playing lsu athletically and will run into you at some of the sporting event. host: are the fires and were near your district? guest: i have not had the large e fires like bastrop, but i have had my staff and the

district working with local officials. in fact, one of my staff assistance is in those areas today. on the jobs going to india and the illegal aliens, we should insist that people come to this country legally. if they're here illegally, we need to take steps to get them back to their home countries, set up some sort of a system in terms of paying a fine and going back before they could legally into the country i am very supportive of what he is talking about there. the best way to keep jobs in america is to make sure the american economy stays competitive so you do not have to put these plants overseas. host: another energy question. this is lee rodger who asks --

refinery in the united states is a problem. we have expanded some of our existing refineries, but i think we may have finally built one new refinery in the past 20 years. the short answer on how you will get american corporations to build new refineries in the united states, you have to change the permiting system and the regulatory system will you keep ratcheting down these 40 missions, beyond a health benefit requiring -- help benefit. it makes it difficult to invest billions of dollars because you have to spend so much of the money on remission reduction that you make the refinery

almost non-competitive before it is even built. host: long island is next. keep is an independent there. good morning. -- keith. caller: good morning. i wanted to make a comment on when you said global warming is just a theory of the study that was mentioned regarding regulations being a problem for small business. it is true co2 being a problem -- it goes to the theory that not all theories are equal. large part of the community believes it is a factor. i think that needs to be addressed. about the other issue, not to call you out in particular, but i am tired of republicans in general dismissing studies with

anecdotal evidence. a study was mentioned where small businesses were polled and said this is the reason, not regulation, and you dismiss that i sang that is not what i heard in texas. i have a problem with that. if you want to say i will look into that and cite problems with the study or the sample size was not good, that is a legitimate issue, but i think when republicans lost over things like that, it does give them a bad name as the m d science party, and that scares me. guest: i am not currently a registered professional engineer, but i have been in the past. i am all for science and real study. what i have a problem with is pseudoscience. global warming, i probably participated in more hearings on global warming than almost any other congressman or senator and shared a large number of them.

there are a large number of scientists who think man-made co2 does cause global warming, but there are also a large group of scientists to either say it does not or if there is no declared of evidence that states it is a fact. i have no problem doing continuing research on global warming, but i do not want to bet the u.s. economy on an unproven theory, is it is a fact that if you have to significantly reduce co2 you will cost tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of jobs and severely impact of in a negative way, the u.s. economy. i do not think too many members of the house and senate or even the president of the united states for that matter is ready to do that. host: last call for you is from

sheffield, alabama. charlotte on the phone for you. caller: i am just commenting on statement you made earlier when you said texas has a lot where they have to balance the budget yearly. well, something just released by the state itself set that texas will have a 27,000,000,002-year budget shortfall. is that true? or is this something that someone made up? it does not even make sense that you said you have to have it. otherwise your broken your own law. -- you have broken your own fault. guest: if texas is not a law, it has a constitution. it is the constitution of the state of texas, so we have lost to implement that. we have a comptroller -- the

texas legislature meets once every two years. at the start of the legislative session, which just ended, the comptroller issues are reports that states what the revenue and expenses of the state record to be. -- state are going to be. i think that is the report you are referring to. it states it it was business as usual and did not change the walls, texas would have a deficit of $27 billion, or something similar to that. the legislature met and worked with the lieutenant governor and came up with a balanced budget. they cut spending, not across the board, but they cut spending and reported on a budget that will be balanced for the next two years. host: that is it for our time. you've talked about the herculean task that the super committee has been given.

what are your thoughts? will it work? guest: i will give them a plus for effort and willingness, but expectations often times exceeds reality, and the chances of them reporting a bill that passes the house and senate and its 1.2 trillion, one in three maybe. there is some chance, but it is not a probability. my guess is this sequestered that is how out of defense and social programs, the social program cuts scared the democrats. the super committee will provide some sort of our report. we will not agree with that. we will not want this to quaestor in. -- sequestration.

they will put an alternative package together that will pass it. my best guess is there will be an alternative crafted by the leadership of the house and senate and president, that it built of the recommendation of the select committee. host: about 2.5 months from now we will see how predicted you are. the first organized meeting is televise today. you will see it live beginning at 10:30 on c-span3. that is the first organized meeting of the super committee. thank you. we always appreciate your coming here and taking our calls. thank you. one more segment let to go. you hear so much debate about unemployment insurance and whether or not it should be extended. we often hear from the 90 that have reached the

limits. we will hear the basics of unemployment insurance from our next guest. we will be right back up for c- span radio update. >> at the headlines, the number of people seeking unemployment benefits was up slightly last week. evidence that the job market is not improving say analysts. the labor department says weekly applications for unemployment benefits rose 2000 to a seasonally-adjusted 414,000. the report suggests that companies are not significantly increasing layoffs, despite weak economic growth, but also signalling little higher -- is taking place. harry reid will ask the senate to quickly approve a $6 billion emergency spending bill to replenish be met, that federal emergency management agency relief fund. it would then have to be voted on in the house where the majority leader has insisted any federal funding to deal with the

recent spate of natural disasters be offset with cuts elsewhere in the federal budget parroted republican presidential candidate john huntsman will host his first town hall in new hampshire next week as he continues to pour his energies into the first in the nation primary state. the former governor and ambassador will take questions on september 13, a day after participating in a debate sponsored by cnn and the tea party expressed in florida. while chris christie is not running for president, he is stepping up his political activity on the national stage. the new jersey republican governor has been tapped by his peers to serve as vice chairman of the republican governor association. he will become one of the top two figures under chairman in virginia gov. bob macdonald. some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> in 1844 henry clay ran for president of united states and

lost, but he changed political history. he is one of the 14 men featured in c-span is new weekly -- weekly series "the contenders." friday at 8:00 eastern. >> what were video of the candidates. see what political reporters are saying and track the latest campaign contributions was to spend website for campaign 2012. easy-to-use, it helps you navigate the political landscape with twitter feeds and facebook updates and the latest polling to c-spanluslink links media partners. host: let me introduce you to our final guest this morning, george wentworth. he is joining us from c-span studios in new york city. he is with the national of what

a lot project. he spent most of his career and the labor policy, 25 years of service with the connecticut department of labour. during that time was the director of program policy, oversaw the development of legal policy activities of labor in connecticut, and was the chief director of connecticut's of a flood insurance regulations. that is what your point to learn about today, how unblemished insurance works. thank you for being with us. -- how unemployment insurance works. will you tell the audience about the national employment law project, please. guest: the national and what a lot project is a national -- profit research organization where -- here in new york city. we basically advocate for policies that help low-income and unemployed workers, unemployment insurance and enforcement of wage laws, reapply this strategy's and

those measures. host: your organization must be happy that the focus is on jobs this week. guest: absolutely. it is a focus that has been needed for some time. host: there has been a great deal of discussion about unemployment insurance and extension of it. we thought we would go through the mechanics with you about how of a flood insurance works. i will start with the facts. wisconsin was the state that originated the idea of unemployment insurance in 1932. tell us about today's of insured -- and of life insurance program. is it at a row of state partnership? how does it all work? guest: i think it is great you mentioned wisconsin, because it is hard to believe today, but in the throes of the great depression there was no unemployment insurance available wereonally, and the state's

very reluctant to institute programs for a lot of the same reasons you hear now about other kinds of programs. states felt they would be at a competitive disadvantage. it was really fdr and frances perkins, the first secretary of labor, who put forward the idea of a federal/state system, which was basically in order to induce the states to put programs together, there is a federal tax imposed on employers nationally, and then basically if your state instituted an unemployment insurance program that met various federal standards, then most of that tax would be relieved. there would be a credit against 90% of that tax. that was all part of the social security act in 1935. by 1937 every state in the country had an unemployment insurance program it was very much of federal-state compact.

the upper government set of broad standards, but the states have tremendous flexibility in terms of exactly what the eligibility criteria are. -- the federal government set up broad standards. the states can establish benefit rates and for me less and eligibility criteria and qualifications, tax rates. while the federal government set the broad framework, there are certain things the states are expected to do in terms of providing due process to workers and so on, delivering benefits in a fairly efficient and timely manner. states do have tremendous flexibility in what their boss says and to is eligible and who is not. host: in essence there are really 50 state unemployment programs. guest: right. i think it is actually 52 with pc and the virgin islands. -- with d.c. and the virgin

islands. every employer u.s. workers that are covered under that of a plan of insurance programs. the federal taxes, which have been $56 per employee up until this year when it went down to $42 per employee. that goes to pay for the administration of the system and make sure some states have some form of unemployment, and the federal taxes go to pay for the federal extensions with those are necessary. the state unemployment taxes, which are held in separate state of public trust funds actually go to pay out the benefits. all states have to maintain a trust fund and try to calibrate their taxes in order to pay

benefits. right now we are in a tough situation in the aftermath of the great recession with unemployment basically in the 9% range for well over two years. we have 28 states who state unemployment trust funds have become insolvent, and all of those states are borrowing from the federal government in order to pay of a ploy that benefits right now. host: what is the state of the federal coffers supplying the money? is that operating at a surplus or deficit? guest: the original borrowing was something from the federal unemployment account, which was set up under those losses security act, but that ran dry awhile back. that account is borrowing from general revenue. in addition, federal extensions right now are budget item that

comes into the deficit discussion. host: i want to invite viewers to join in this discussion. a number of you have had experience with the unemployment system. if you would like to tell us about your own experience, we would like to hear about it. our goal is to learn about the process and how it works. the goal is to you off the unemployment insurance and back into the work force, so we will talk about a state effort in georgia that has tried to put people back to work. what size businesses are required to participate in the unemployment insurance process? guest: basically any business that has at least one covered employee and is engaged in employee/employer relationship is required to pay and employment taxes. host: of us to our self- employed -- so unless you are self-employed. guest: right.

unless you are a partner or corporate principle, you might not be required to pay, but generally if you have an employee, you should be subject to a state unemployment insurance law. host: what is the rate of taxation? guest: the rates vary tremendously with of the states. average per employe cost is somewhere in the $350 per of four range, but state taxes are basically required to do something called the experience rating principle, which basically means if you are an employer who has had a lot of layoff activity, your tax rate will be higher. if you are a deploy your we never has any turnover and never has anyone leave your employee and start filing for benefits, then you will have a minimum tax rate. in most states if you are paying

the minimum tax rate, you are probably paid $100 per employee or less. in some states it is in the single-digit. if you are of a full year with a lot of lay off, you will probably pay north of the $300 figure. host: what is the employee distribution -- contribution? guest: the system does not require an employee contribution. there are just a couple of states that a ploy the employee contribution. new jersey is one of those states. it is a subject that comes up from time to time, but basically this is an employer payroll tax that is required, both by the irs and state unemployment taxes. host: just a few more questions from me on the system, and then we will get to calls. what are the eligibility rules

in general, and what is the time frame for which people could collect benefits? guest: generally the eligibility rules relate to having had recent wages or recent work history. i would break it out into three major components. first, are you monetarily eligible? that typically means sometime in the last 18 months have you had wages? most bates will look for -- will set a threshold for a certain amount of wages that you will have earned in this one-year period called the base period. it will also look to make sure your wages were spread out during a couple of quarters read that time. there's monetary eligibility. benefit rates vary tremendously between states. the maximum in a state like mississippi is like $235 per week. the maximum in the states like

massachusetts is more like 625. beyond monetary eligibility, the other question is what is the reason you were separated? basically of a plan of insurance is partial wage replacement for those that are art -- better involuntary unemployment. the reason for your separation has to be non-disqualifying. the vast majority of people who file for of a point of benefits, and there is 7.5 million of them right now of this country are unemployed for what i would call economic reasons. there were laid off for lack of work. the company closed. there was a real organization. basically there is no question about the separation making them eligible for benefits. organization.re- once you become eligible, you need to qualify on a week to week basis. that means in just about

everything you need to be able to work, available for work, making some form of work search and not refusing offers of suitable employed it. those are pretty much the three basic criteria. a lot of variation between the states as to how bay establish individual application of those roles. general framework is pretty similar from state to state. host: from an article headlined, u.s. jobless base benefits squeeze. we have learned that about 7.3 million u.s. workers that are now collecting some form of unemployment insurance benefits, with average weekly benefit of just under $300 per week. in december 2007, just to point a for collecting.

-- just 2.8 were collected. as rising of what has forced more people to rely on the benefit, increasing the state and federal government want to limit the payouts. how does the 151.9 billion compared to before the recession? guest: i think in 2007 payouts were somewhere in that 35 million range -- i am sorry, billion range. in 2008 they went up over 40. in 2009 it was really the toughest year historically it terms of unemployment insurance. it went up to 120 billion. if you look out over three

years from 2008 to 2010, there was about $320 billion in unemployment insurance benefits paid under the state and federal programs. an important thing to know about that is in 2008 was when congress first created the existing federal extensions. up until the middle of 2008 it was just eight programs, which are basically, at least until this year, have all been about 26 weeks. this year we've seen some states start to cut basic state program down to less than 26 weeks. the federal extensions, and there is to of them, the emergency compensation program, which offers up to 53 weeks of benefits, depending on how high the of a climate rate is in your state, and another program known as extended benefits, which existed on paper before this

recession, provides up to another 20 weeks. the range it really depends on the level of unemployed in your state. -- the range really depends on the level of unemployment in your state. if you are in a state that has been persistently over 8.5%. any of the benefits that are paid after the basic 26-week state entitlement are federally- funded, and that of those are charged back to employers. host: a lot of details of the table. that was our goal. we hope you will have personal experience from your own state to add to our understanding or questions about how the process works for our guest, george wentworth. let's begin with texas. johnny a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. my question is on the extension

side of the benefit, it is not paid for by the employer or the recipient. i am a college graduate. i want to know why college graduates, when they get out of college and cannot find a job, so technically they are classified as unemployed. how come the federal government does that help them with this country is supposed to be equal across the board? that is my question. i want to know why we cannot get help and have to live just like everybody else? guest: i think the calller raises a good point. the unemployment insurance is just that, an insurance program, and it is based on an individual's work history and wages earned over a period of time. it was designed basically to replace some portion of wages after arson loses a job and has built up enough -- of wages

after a person loses a job and has built up establishment. a lot of college graduates that are coming out of school that do not have a well-established work history may not qualify. on the other hand, that many do do have wage histories well they have been in college, and they might well have some of entitlement to benefits. it is important to underscore that this is an insurance program, and so it is not based on need like the welfare program. host: already this year six states have instituted unprecedented cuts to the programs tied to reduce the length of payout from the standard 26 weeks. michigan, missouri, south carolina have cut it to 20. florida has enacted a sliding scale that could be as low as 12 weeks. next call for our guest of it new york city. jack is a democrat there. caller: many years ago i was let

go from a job where i was in the human resources department of a company, and the human-resources guy tried to evoke the name of insubordination where in this particular case it was absolutely not. i remember it ever tried to basically i think get around the possibility of paying me of a planet. i said to the assistant, do not go there, and i did my business with the head of human- resources. fortunately it was not a problem for me at that time. i do not like the business of blaming the victim when someone gets laid off from a job and there is a lot of public sentiment that is negative about people who collect unemployment. it is a very low cost to some of these employers, and you often hear them complain about the cost of of a flood

insurance. the republicans seem to be against these type of things. -- and often you hear them complain about the cost of of a point insurance. -- unemployment insurance. also, i think only in the united states could the wealthy of the country get the middle class and poor to cheer for taxes on the wealthy. think you for c-span. -- thank you. guest: i would like to address something the calller pointed out, which is that the vast majority of claims are basically uncontested, but basically it

benefits are intended for those that are involuntarily unemployed, then those states will have a disqualification that says you are not eligible for benefits if you are disqualified for willful misconduct or the term is, that. an instance like the calller refers to were the of lawyer alleges insubordination, and those cases almost every state will require it is the employer's burden to establish that the worker engaged in some form of misconduct. both states have protections against -- most states have protections against inaccurate reasons the person is being let go. obviously the intent is to ensure that if someone is being let go for a reason that is really more economic that economic benefits are paid. the costs are relatively small employer's the of lawye

other full array of tax obligations. in general i think the experience rating principle that i described earlier is that if you are an employer that has allowed to turn over, then you will probably have a higher tax rates. that is an issue. that is why we have seen employer tax rates are trending up words. -- upwards. with consumer demand down, a lot of employers have had a lot of layoffs come and that is naturally increasing the cost of benefits. you referenced the states that are cutting their maximum programs now. i think what we're seeing now is really a backlash to the cost of this, and sort of blaming the

victim but one of the callers mentioned earlier. we of states with $40 billion in outstanding loans to the federal government. basically a lot of the state trust funds ran dry. some of it was because of increased claims activity, but a lot of it was because the state have not kept their programs adequately but did during the good years. basically states should be keeping their revenues up during the good years so they can pay them out in the bad years when unemployment is high. we have 28 states with loans. those states are starting to see some additional cost on employers mostly. interest on the borrowing, and they will start seeing penalty in terms of increased federal unemployment taxes if their state trust fund is still in college. -- insolvent. host: we have an example of the

line, the state of georgia. mark butler is the commissioner of georgia. why don't we start with your status report on a point in the state of georgia. guest: we saw a little bit of a dip earlier this year. we got% for a few months. during the summer months we have seen that rate rise again. record to be a little bit over 10% probably for the previous month. -- record to be a little bit over 10% for the previous month. -- we are going to be a little bit over 10 percent for the previous month. host: can you give us a status report of georgia's of live at trust fund? are you solve it? guest: no, we are not. we have had to borrow over 700 million from the federal government in order to pay out benefits. right now we are currently not

our wing and the additional money for the rest of the year. we do have a daunting task try to have been up collections come in to be able to pay out benefits, and also to be able to make the fund solvent again. host: what are the industries hardest hit? guest: georgia was one of the fastest-growing state of the united states with the recession hit. one of the industries with the highest rate of growth was construction. we were one of the largest building stages we a bid it in the state's history. would the recession hit, we were hit with a lot of inventory. but construction in japan -- industry was absolutely decimated. host: we invited you on not just to learn about your state, but to also learn about our program that is being frequently cited of the national scene about putting people back to work. it is a program called georgia

works. would you give us the basics, please. guest: it was a program started back in 2003. just to get the basics of it, but it is a program that allows people that are on unemployment a chance to go into a work place, get some training, on- the-job training, while they are on of one of it. there is a small stipend they can get for participating in the program. it lasts about a week. the hope is through the program, and this is geared towards people better and jobs, generally lower-skilled jobs that may be. in an area of the job market where that area has lost jobs that may or may not return, and they're looking for opportunity to receive on-the-job training, new skills sets that they could use come and give them the opportunity to get on-the-job training with an unclear, and that of lawyer may like this individual of they want to keep them on, or they could take what

they have learned and transfer those skills to another job. host: what is the success rate? guest: that is something we're still trying to determine. when i took office back in january, we of it going through the numbers and the data we have available, and a rap number is 24% of the people of the program actually got jobs with the employer to were working with. -- the rough number is 24% of the people in the program actually got jobs with the employer they were working with. over 5000 people have found of live at through the program, which i know are not tremendous numbers, but the one thing we're trying to do is take the current program, the one we inherited, and may give credence to it, and also be able to track the numbers better so we can improve it even more in the future. host: a bit of an irony, ga. work is coming to the national

attention. you are asking lots of questions about how effectively the money is being spent. guest: no doubt about it. we're constantly about waiting programs. we want to strive to make sure we're spending taxpayer money as objectively as possible. on-the-job training is definitely something that the whole nation will have to lean on, especially due to the circumstances of this recession. we have a lot of individuals out there that are hard-working individuals that have skills sets that quite frankly are no longer dated, and we really have to look towards treating programs to take these individuals that have skills that may no longer be needed and help train them with new skills sets for some of the new jobs that will be coming our way in america. host: last question. you said you have ideas about how to reformat the director works program to make it more effective. -- the georgia works program to

make a more effective. guest: the main thing has to be oversight. we have to make sure individuals are in actual truth trading opportunities to where they can actually learn skills that they could either use of this job or transfer to somewhere else. that is the biggest improvement. the program grew at such a rate that the oversight was basically nonexistent. we have found instances where people were not being trained correctly or were not true trading opportunities. we have to make sure we have the proper oversight, and that is probably the biggest improvement you have to make of the program is you have to have the proper oversight, you have to be able to approve the of lawyers that are in there and work with both sides to make sure there is an actual opportunity that will work for them. host: you will have real suggestions if they like the idea of the more or less

apprenticeship program, more accountability and find a way to diminish the cost of oversight? i guess you want to see the 24% of its success rate go up. guest: there is no doubt about that. we would love to talk to them. all they have to do is call. we could tell of the good and bad. host: think you for talking to our audience this morning, commissioner butler. -- thank you. good luck to you. george wentworth, our guest from new york city learning about the unemployment insurance. we will go right back to telephone calls. inis is a called fromro ron minnesota. an independent. go ahead, please. caller: my question is ever so slightly off topic, but maybe i can get an answer. it pertains to the first calller. we have billions of college and

high-school graduates that are in full year -- employable. is there any statistic pertaining to the amount of percentage of invaluable personnel or people in america that are unemployed? the official of a flat rate is 9.1 percent said. it is about 14 million americans that are currently out of work. there is also the underemployment work, which is those people working part-time jobs, but really want to be working full-time jobs. then there are those that are on that have been looking for work for long time without success. that number is somewhere in the 25 million range. that is a huge number, and i think really the thing about this recession that is so

different is the level of long- term unemployment. we have got something like 6 million of their kids to have been out of work six months or longer, which is the benchmark for long-term of appointment. that is 45 percent of all the unemployed that have been looking for six months or longer, and close to one-third of all americans have been out for a year. it really is clear that the government needs to do more to encourage employers to start hiring unemployed americans. this level has been pretty much the same for the past couple of years. we have lost about 8 million jobs in the recession, and we have less than 2 million of them back, and the population has grown. it will take years and years to get back to a level close to where we work, which believe it or not in 2007 there was a national of the planned rate of

less than 5%. >> related to that, to reach the hall in tennessee rates that i feel for every one person getting benefits, but there are about 150 that are not. how does this factor into the publicized of of live at numbers? guest: basically the and a flood insurance numbers are not part of what the labor of statistic reports when it calculates the actual of a platter rate. there is a little west of 40 million unemployed. there is about 7.4 million that are getting some form of benefit, but that is largely because there is a federal program in place. if you were looking at a fixed date of would benefit from it is less than 30% of all the unemployed who qualify for the programs. would you have of federal extension and place like we do

now, a really pops up the numbers. 30 percent signed are getting some form of benefit. that is a lot of people that are either not qualified originally or have exhausted their entitlement to state and federal benefit. host: we're learning about how the state and federal and applied insurance works. the next call is from johnstown, pennsylvania. dave, good morning. caller: my question is trust funds. i remember several of its stations ago there was a surplus of what times were good. 190 billion surplus where they took the money and put it into the general fund. i wonder how many other states do that, but they did over the day when times are good and took money from of a flood insurance fund to use it in the general fund. guest: that is a good point your

calller makes. most states are not moving get over to the general fund. what a lot of states did back in the middle of the last decade when unemployment was relatively low were was to basically lower tax rates and provide tax rates for of four years and clearly they should have been anticipating that in fact be of a point rate would go up and that trust funds would be to be more robust in order to meet the demand. that is why you have a situation today where you have 28 states better basically insolvent, borrowing from the federal permits of and unfortunately we're still not seeing the political will to fix the tax system while of lawyers are paying penalties, the basic underlying financing needs to be fixed in the state's like

pennsylvania and others. instead what we're seeing is a trend to cut the benefit of workers. in 2011 we saw roughly one-third of the insolvent states make cuts. six of them cut the maximum available weeks, but which has bid 26 weeks for at least 50 years. in states like michigan and missouri and florida and south carolina have a they all they've really severe cuts. these are all states with pretty high of one of it. they will be cutting the basic program. it is generally not good for the economy. host: as we look at the states with the highest of live it, the battle is 12.9 percent signed, the highest in the nation. -- with the highest of of live loyment, nevada is 12.9%,

the highest in the nation. the darkest brown is 12% or higher. the blue color, but the dark blue is 4%. this state right here is the north dakota at 3.3% of the lowest in the nation. the next telephone call is from atlanta, michael, a republican. good morning. caller: i would like to thank george for going on the air of such a controversial topic. currently employed a rate of 9.1% -- unemployment rate at 9 .1%. if you accumulate totals between 2008 and 2011 if he would be surprised to see members at 29.7%. that is the total of those

drawing of a plan of its and those 99er's that have expired. it is a basic statement in question. thank you. guest: i think the calller may be referring to the larger rate that includes not just an unemployed, underemployed and those that have stopped looking for work. i think the number was around 25 billion right now, and i think that never has been higher at different points of the last year-and-a-half. host: detailed question for you. to public sector jobs pay at a flood insurance and what happens to avoid public sector workers? can they collect? guest: yes, but they can't. prior to 1970 there were not covered, but congress acted to ensure that they were in the

1970's, and one thing that is a difference for public-sector workers is the government does not pay our regular of of of it tax. the use what is called a reimbursing method, which means if you pay $100 in unemployment benefits to a former laid off state worker, the state government will in fact pay the $100 dollar for dollar. it is a direct reverse invested. yes, state, county workers are all covered of the state of of of insurance programs. host: a couple more minutes left. mike, a democrat. caller: good morning. i want to say a few more words about the georgia works program because help me find of love it. it allows people to collect of apply the benefits -- une mployment benefits for eight

weeks at no cost to the employer. host: have you take a part of the program? caller: yes, i have. host: did you find a job in the end? caller: yes, i did. they give you $240 per month to help cover child care and transportation. the big thing is the employer does not have to pay is because the benefit serves as your salary. so it is a eight-week program. after my second day the employer was so happy with my work he hired me on the spot in the second day. host: you are a great success. were you changing careers? caller: yes, i was. i had some experience on forklifts, and that is what i went into, and he liked my experience of a forklift and my work a