>> this morning, robert borosage, co-director for the campaign for america's future, previews the vote in the senate next week on president obama is a jobs bill. then tom mcclusky talks about the values voter summit being held this weekend in washington. later, a bloomberg reporter lorraine woellert discusses the home modification program. "washington journal close code is next. -- "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: a look that the capital where the senate is set to vote on the president's jobs bill next week. but for now, unemployment is at 9.1%.

those are the numbers this morning, saturday, october 8, and we want to hear the story behind the numbers today. if you have lost a job in the last six months, give us a call at the first telephone number. if you have gained a job in the last six months, your number is the second number. if you have stopped looking for work altogether right now, the last number. you can also reach us electronically by e-mail. journal@c-span.org. you can also join us on twitter or facebook. this is how it is being reported in some of the major newspapers.

the jobs numbers that came out yesterday in the "washington post," it is their lead headline. jobs report offers a respite. the unemployment rate holding steady at nine want -- 9.1%. >> in the "new york times," also their lead story --

also, of one more item that we want to take a look at before we go to the phones. the front page of this morning's "wall street journal." this is a story from the "wall street journal." we will get back to that later in this segment. we want to talk about the story behind the unemployment numbers.

the first call comes from washington, d.c., on our line for those who have lost a job in the last six months. michael, you are on the "washington journal." >> actually, i gained a job in the last six months. host: go ahead. caller: i got laid off in 2008, when people were being laid off in droves. i got addicted, i was homeless, -- evicted, i was homeless, i had been making good money, midlevel management. then i had it cut in pay to minimum wage, and i lost everything but my car. i had to sleep in my car. my son graduated in 2008 and he still has not found a job.

and please let me have one more comment. this is really quick. i want the american people to realize something. our president came into a mess. if the bush tax cuts were really creating jobs and all that, why since 2001 when they got them, we are not flourishing with jobs? host: you said you had been without work without eight months and you gain the job? caller: no, i was out for nine months. but i did get word, i was one of those people that did not want handouts. a mother with grown children, no benefits, no nothing. they let me almost industry. host: do you see anything going on in washington --

guest: i was living in virginia when that happened and i could not afford the rent. host: do you see anything going on between the white house and congress to give you optimism that the folks that are out of work now will be able to find jobs within the next six months? guest: i think that americans are reasonable people and we are all christians. i am sick and tired of them going up against each other. we are a christian nation. but we all believe in one god. host: moving on to georgia, james, and you just found a job within the last six months? guest: yes, i found me a job. i found the imam and palm restaurant. grover norquist has two points to his program for republicans.

the promises which the republicans talk about, it will not cause jobs, but the simple fact is that that jobs, that tax breaks, the bush tax cuts, people do not have to work and provide jobs. they can sit on the extra money that they are making. they do not have to put it back into circulation. host: james, tell me -- guest: since they took jobs in january, the economy has been going. [unintelligible] at the state level and local level. host: we're going to move on to fort worth, texas, on all line for those who have stopped looking for work. thomas, why have you stopped looking? guest: because there is no work down here for a job close to 100

people looking for a job. there are no high-paying jobs left out here. host: what kind of work for you doing before you are unemployed? guest: i was in security, but i look for 18-20 months until my unemployment ran out. i am living on my pension and social security and now my cars broke down. i did not have transportation to go out and find a job. basically i hit the downtown fort worth area on foot to find a part-time job. because they're no jobs down here that, like i say, it shows

up in the paper, there are some many people applying for it, you do not get a callback. host: anything you see on the horizon coming from washington or from the state government in texas they give you reason to believe that you will be employed any time in the next six months? guest: no, not in the next six months. not unless this jobs bill is actually down to the local grassroots. host: chris in ohio, you have gotten a job in the last six months, is that correct? caller: had transferred position within the same company. host: explain how that works. caller: my employer is a government contractor.

i went from one contract to another inside the same company. host: how long were you unemployed? caller: i was not technically unemployed. i did not file for benefits. i went from one contract to another. host: so you really were not out of work. to attendwasn't able a job for nine to five. i had to learn some new skills in order to stay work. host: what kept you working for that period of time? caller: you have to ask the federal clients. host: we will leave it there and move on to akron, ohio for our next caller, who has lost a job in the last six months? no, akron, you have given up. johnnie?

caller: now why am speaking to someone. host: i am listening to you in america is listening to one. caller: it is not that i quit looking, but that i settled for the job that i have been doing, ok? host: but you are still employed. all right. we are going to leave it there. we will listen to part of the president's radio address for this weekend. he is urging senators to vote for his american jobs act next week. he challenges those who think of voting note to show him a better plan. >> and the senate there out there thinking against voting -- voting against this jobs bill should explain why you would vote against something that would improve the economic situation. if they have a better plan, they should prove it.

one of the same independent economists who look to our plan said that their ideas would not mean much for the economy in the near term. their plan does not measure of, the american people deserve to know what republicans in congress do not like about this jobs plan. the hair of friends say that one of the most important thing we can do is cut taxes. well, they should love this plan. the american jobs act would cut taxes for virtually every worker and small business in america. if you're a small businesses that hire new workers, raises wages, or higher is a veteran, you get an additional tax cut. host: we are talking about unemployment this morning. the numbers you see on the screen, 9.1% unemployment for the month of september, 103,000 new jobs added. if you lost a job in the last six months, give us a call for the first line.

if you have gained a job in the last six months, the second number. if you have stopped looking, the last number. you can also send us messages by e-mail, twitter, and facebook. our next call comes from port charlotte, florida on our line for those who've just lost a job in the last six months. caller: i had business and i lost that so i am still looking for work. there is absolutely none in florida. host: what kind of business did you have, jeff? caller: had jewelry store. but what i really called the talk about is that there is an opportunity for the united states to put a whole lot of people were, millions of people, and no one is looking at it. there is a new product on the market available to use now called and thorium nuclear power to replace uranium.

it is 90% safer. the united states has the third largest deposit of it. host: this will put people to work? caller absolutely, if you build new nuclear plants or replace the ones that we have now, you can do it relatively inexpensive way for the uranium plants. and you will not have the problems that they have in japan it's something should happen to go wrong. it is a product made by light bridge inc., and none of the media is talking about it. it is available for use now. this company was 25 years developing this product. host: we are move leaving it there and moving on to hans doh, alabama. allen is on online for those who have also found a job in the last six months. -- ellen? caller: i put ads in the paper

and started cleaning business. now my house is deteriorating. i have no insurance. the money is good. but it is hard, it is hard work. i do not mind doing it and i am blessed to have it. but what you do what's your house expires? host: how long were you out of work before you started your business? caller: actually i was not. i was a waitress and i was not making much money. i have always worked really hard in my life. host: you're cleaning business, is that a one-person operation? the u.s. employees? caller: right now what is me. i like to contract out. that's down the line because i have to get the money for the

people and so on. but right now, it is just me. so, yes. host: moving on to john in illinois, who has just found a job in the last six months. or just lost a job, sorry about that. caller: no, i just gained a job. i am from illinois and i just got a job at the ford motor company here at the south side of chicago after being off for better than two years. rob, i was offered two years and ford motor company gave us a chance. i would like to tell america to buy american. ford is hiring, america. get out there and buy a ford. host: we don't want this to turn into a commercial for ford, but tell us what you did before you had that two-year layoff.

caller: i was collecting unemployment compensation. oh, i was an electric maintenance for 30 years. it closed up and we lost 120 jobs. i was making toilet paper, the best product on earth, you would think. it closed down in a week's time. i would never buy that toilet paper in my life again. host: you had to go through a retraining program to get the job that you have now? caller: no, they are providing training in robotics and the ford motor company is doing that for the new hires. host: we will take a break from our discussion regarding unemployment to check in with the political director at wmur-

tv in new hampshire. he is talking about new poll numbers released last night. are you there? guest: yes, i am. host: tell us about the poll numbers that came out last night. guest: this is the establishment, the real poll of new hampshire done by the university of new hampshire, the most credible that we have got. we partner with the television station here. no real risk but -- surprise about who is in first place, a release sizable lead in this state. he has never been second place since we have done this poll. he got 37% support britain next place is a surprise, herman cain, who has 12%. herman cain has obviously been rising nationally in the poll. but in new hampshire, he is only

been here once, shaking hands, and that is how can it rises in the polls. so we're scratching our heads as to how he is in second place. but good for him. third is ron paul. ron paul with 9%, who has always had a strong contention here. -- contingent here. he has been second place in recent polls but is there. jon huntsman, rudy giuliani, who was getting some smoke signals in new hampshire that he was running for president even a couple of weeks ago, and it is more difficult for him to jump in now. the takeaways from this poll is, number one, romney is dominant. but we always knew that. and he dominates everywhere

among tea party republicans, to democrats who are voting in the republican primary, or independents. his hard to see where opponents will attack him. their real contest has been for second place and we will see herman cain in the spotlight has basically every presidential candidate will be in new hampshire this week, starting tomorrow, really. herman cain will have the spotlight. the other person to watch is rick perry, a guy who comes in with a lot of buzz and momentum , and our last poll was in july, he was at 4% then. he is at 4% now. and then michele bachmann, who had the opposite finding that herman cain did. herman cain went from 2% to 12%.

she went the opposite way. she went from 12% to 2%. she says that her focus is not on new hampshire. clearly there is one poll that you have to realize and taken, the fact that only 11% of folks in new hampshire say that they know who they are going to vote for. the converse means that 89% of the state of likely voters in the new hampshire republican primary are undecided. new hampshire always makes up their mind very late. the contest is wide open. that is encouraging news for mitt romney's competitors. host:, james pindell, you tell us that new hampshire voters make up their mind very late, but the new hampshire primary could come earlier than usual.

tell us the current situation of when they will try had the new hampshire primary and how that relates to the iowa caucus and the other primaries and caucuses that follow new hampshire. guest: the decision from the republican national convention of the four early states, all of the republican national committee said this, and florida decided to move up their primary to january 28. that got the calendar into a tizzy in the last couple of weeks. the republican national committee never punished florida so therefore every state will have to move. the situation is that you head -- you have january 28 with florida, then south carolina said that they would have the saturday before that on the 21st.

in nevada, they have caucuses and decided they would have them on the saturday before that, which is january 14. new hampshire is squeezed with our state law, and we have not stated -- set a date yet. host: indeed "wall street journal," but they said the date was possibly january 3 is you mentioned. the new hampshire primary is generally a week after the iowa caucus. guest: generally a today. host: so that would be january 11? guest: usually is on a monday night, but there is a state holiday. so new hampshire has two options here. one, a deal could be made that

it that bad a move as their primary back to -- nobody moves back to january 17, then new hampshire could go on january 10 and everyone is happy. if it does not move, then it may well go into december. host: you were talking earlier that herman cain had only been in new hampshire once. tell us about the frequency of visits by the other candidates and whether you see more visits coming up as the primary gets closer or if more visits may affect how people are ranked in terms of their popularity among republicans in new hampshire. guest: he has been here one since august. he was here a lot before that. but you cannot explain his recent rise in polls, given his

lack of visits. most candidates have spent -- i would argue that the seismic experience of the ames straw poll in august, that is certainly true for mitt romney has such a strong lead, spending a lot of time. jon huntsman, as you know, says he is all in in new hampshire. even moved his national campaign headquarters here. even lesser known candidates like much -- buddy roemer have moved to the state. gary johnson has also basically moved to the state, and you're finding a number of candidates spending a lot of time here. most of them, practically all of them are in the state of the next few days. host: james pindell of wmur-tv in manchester, new hampshire,

sarah palin said that she was not running, and chris christie. what was the overall reaction to those two candidates? guest: very few people wanted chris christie to run in new hampshire. he was basically a washington and a new york story. people are interested and like him, but it was not a lot of buzz. no organizing of a draft chris christie effort. sarah palin has never been popular in new hampshire. she would have skipped the state. we did include her in the poll because she was making her decision. she was at 3%, in between newt gingrich and rick santorum. host: james pindell has been on the phone from manchester, new hampshire. thank you for being on the

"washington journal" this morning. back to our discussion regarding unemployment. the numbers, unemployment for the month of september, 9.1%, 103,000 new jobs added in the month of september. this article on the front page of the "financial times" weekend edition, this is emblematic of the coverage it has been getting.

other details were also encouraging. so we have been talking with folks on the phone. we would like you to join the conversation. we're looking at folks who of lost jobs in the last six months, call us on our first line. if you have gained a job in the

last six months, the second line. if you have stopped looking altogether, the last number. we will go back to the phones, fort lauderdale, on our line for those who have stopped looking altogether. william, what is your story? caller: good morning. i stopped working after the attack boom in 2000. i was looking -- working for h- p, a contractor, and when i got there, there was me and another black eye and everyone else was caucasian. for i left, the whole place was filled with indians. they were importing them are getting them to come to america so that they could work it h-p. i saw the diminishment of black people being employed there and diminishment of americans being employed there. my concern was web when they

attacked boom busted and the jobs went away, mike and scott -- when the texas boom busted -- tech boom busted, and that job when away, they opened up a non- profit after i lost my operation. i opened up a non-profit to educate young people, young african-americans particularly, because of -- to gauge why are the most neglected that i saw. i've got them interested from grade school all the way up high school. we sent many people on to tech careers. now they are not out there. but i started working way back in the tech boom, because i saw that the jobs were going to foreigners. host: you have not been employed this whole time? caller: i have a nonprofit.

we started a nonprofit in order to train the vocational centers, in order to train young african americans and anybody else who was poor, basically. host: how much luck have the people coming out of your training program had in finding a job? caller i want to say up until this great recession or depression, whatever you want to call it, they were always finding work. now of course, and here is the thing i wanted to emphasize, i do not want to sound racist or anything. but my people were the first -- the last hired and always the first fired. even though they have this technical ability out there, there are no jobs. we train hundreds of young people and brought them in the technical fields with a vocational center.

but it is futile now. it is kind of hopeless now. i see the tech jobs, all the jobs going overseas. host: william, we will leave it there. thank you for the culprit we move on to chattanooga, tenn., matt, who gained a job in the last six months. caller: a lot of people have given up. that last caller had his own problems and he should take that up with his place of work, but a lot of people, they quit looking. you have to keep going at it and follow your job. host: where did you find your new job? caller: i was out of work for two weeks. the place i am working out right now, it was looking for people for the last two to three months. no one even came in. people get laid out and they

would give up. i do not know, -- host: we will leave it there. john than is the chairman of the republican policy committee -- thune is the chairman of the republican policy committee and gave the republican address this weekend. he says that president's plan is the same all ideas. >> it is so flawed that senate democrats have rejected it and are rewriting it. they want to improve the political standing. nothing but a rehash of the same failed ideas he already tried combined with a huge tax increase. this is a cynical political ploy designed not to create jobs for struggling americans, but to save the president's own job. in my state of south dakota, we have one of the lowest

unemployment rates in the country because our state as low taxes, fewer government regulations, and has a right to work state. the republican plan to get our economy moving again builds on these kind of ideas. we are calling for regulatory timeout, and affordable energy plan, broadbased tax reform including lower rates, and policies that provide certainty and stability that our economy desperately needs. host: we continue our discussion regarding unemployment with trichet in denver who just lost a job. -- trisha in denver who just lost a job. caller: it is patricia. it has been more than six months. i lost my job in may 2010, and i have been on the job hunt ever since then and have not been

able to locate a job. host: what kind of job are you looking for? why has it been so hard to look for -- to find one? caller: jobs a gone overseas to the philippines. i was working in the health-care field. even though i have a doctorate in criminal justice, it is hard to find a job in that field as well. host: to see anything coming from washington on the federal level or something in colorado that will help you find working get back to -- help you find work? caller: i hope so. i hope that president obama's plan, that he has in place, hopefully it will help us get a job or bring the jobs back from overseas. host: david on our line for those who have just found a job, calling from sarasota,

florida, go ahead. caller: thank you for c-span. i have lost a job and gained a job. i work for a day laborer company, not certain that you will work every day. you go and try. i had a good paying job three years ago in the construction industry. when the housing boom went, there when my job. host: what is the housing situation like right now in sarasota? caller: not too much construction and residential. there are a few projects and commercial. -- in commercial. we did a baseball stadium. host: in sarasota, you think the fact that people cannot afford the houses or are the prices too high, they cannot get loans to

buy the houses? what is holding up the housing recovery? caller: in my opinion i think there is a lot on the market. a lot of people cannot get loans. they are afraid to buy because of their job situation. but the point i wanted to make, it is related to finding a job. there are a lot of companies that will not hire people because they have things on their record, and they did not investigate if the person pleaded guilty because they had to, they could not afford a lawyer. host: is that your situation? caller: yes, it is. i was convicted for child abuse but i did not touch them, i just ran them. i had to plead guilty because i got tired of sitting in jail for

six months. the lawyers are all busy with their cases so i took a plea to get out of jail. host: was moved on to lincoln, rhode island. steven has stopped looking altogether. caller: all like to thank you for taking my phone call. how really enjoy and appreciate the what you guys doing for the united states. unfortunately, rhode island is at the bottom of the bucket. local politicians -- since the recession in 2008, i have been laid off five times. i have a four professional resumes. i have been in -- i actually have a full-time job making

$50,000 a week, working on the weekends as a musician, since then i had four companies close up and move out of state. i have been on documented 600 interviews. my issue is that i am 53 years old, i am blue-collar general laborer. host: why the think that a guy with your experiences having such a hard time finding work? caller: i have to be blunt, it is discrimination against my age. i always follow up, and i always see new faces. i know this for that because i have gone to these managers, i've gone from mcdonnell's up to

the big companies in the state of rhode island. i have a four professional resumes. there is not a mark on them. i have qualifications, my history, my education, and my experience host: stephen in lincoln, rhode island. we have but which to get tweet from alabama. -- we have the tweet from alabama. the saturday edition of the "atlanta journal-constitution" has on its front page -- washington, d.c., pat, you have

stopped looking altogether. caller: it is done necessarily stop looking. -- it is not necessarily "stopped looking." sometimes there is mediation and retaliation. if you find people going for something similar in you help them, in no, i look at it like this. when you have moms at home working for the children, taking care of them, and you have homeschooling, those individuals are working the same way that people are working on the outside. even if you cannot help yourself, you're always getting back in keeping your skills up as much as you can. -- giving back and keeping your skills of as much as you can. we are helping our country and helping others to work while we

wait for the court or the administrative processes in order to take cases on from a basis because we cannot pay. host: john in san francisco, california, thank you for waiting for you of lost jobs in the last six months. caller: i sure did. host: tell us your situation. caller: i was working with the media company, i will not say which one, but a local company that was owned locally, in local hands, and had union protection and everything was great. it got bought out by a corporate entity who is not a part of the country, and they very quickly found a way to sideline us old- timers who would risen in the ranks over couple of decades and were making a decent wage and are able to squeeze out our hours down and bring in kids

that were fresh out of college, paid them a third of what we were making. what they did to make a square with the union was squeeze our hours down almost nothing. what happened in the end was that i was on call, maybe getting five or 10 hours a week. host: do you see any relief coming your way from the white house or the congress or the folks there in california? caller: i do not know. i am not sure about that. there has to be some kind of -- there is a climate that the republicans have created where they tried to scapegoat the unions for some of the economic problems the country is going through right now. the unions and working groups and worker advocacy groups.

i think they have been affected because you stand up and say, hey, i put my time and that the company for years and years, decades, and where is my union protection? you bring that up and you're some kind of freeloader or something like that. host: we will leave it there. a programming note. on newsmaker, buck mckeon is our guest. he talks about how far he is willing to go with cuts in defense spending and a meeting with leon panetta to present specific ideas with cuts. his thinking about same-sex marriage in the military. let's take a look good part of the situation -- the conversation on how far he thinks the military can go in defense spending cuts. >> there are things that we can

cut and we're looking at that. the defense department, when we meet next week with secretary panetta, he will give us some specifics on what they are going to cut. and then we will have a chance to hold hearings and look at that. there is no question -- all of this yellow is going to be cut. that will come out of manpower, it will probably be reduced over 100,000. people they will no longer be wearing the uniform, helping defend the nation. and there will be programs cut. if the sequestration happens, if the super committee is not able to come up with their program, the charges that have given, which is a very tough job for these 12 individuals, if that does not happen then sequester asian taste in -- and the sequestration kicks in and a red will be cut. that is pretty graphic.

host: tune in to the program tomorrow, sunday at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on c-span. it is also available on-line at c-span.org. coming up in 45 minutes, a discussion on social conservatives and the republican party. up next, a look at the progressive agenda and campaign 2012. you are watching the "washington journal." today is saturday, october 8. we will be right back. ♪ >> during deliberations, the only people allowed in the supreme court conference room of the nine justices. who gets the door?

>> i was paying very close attention to the discussion and i failed to hear a knock on the door. billy brennan on my left and bill rehnquist on my right, they both got up and answer the door. it made me feel two be high. one of the most important jobs of the two new justices to remember that you are the doorman. -- john paul stevens sunday night on c-span. >> some people say that to succeed in this world we need to be more like india or china or brazil. i say we need to be more like us. >> on this final sunday of a british party conferences, david cameron sets the tone and goals for his party in the upcoming year. watch his keynote address from the conservative party conference sunday at 9:00 on c-

span. live wednesday, look for the return the prime minister's questions on c-span2. >> if you think that a bill of rights is what sets this apart, you're crazy. every banana republic in the world has a bill of rights. every president -- the bill of rights of the former evil empire, the u.s.s.r., was much better than ours. literally, it was much better. we guarantee freedom of speech and press, they demonstrated protests in anyone who is caught trying to suppress criticism of the government will be called to account. that is wonderful stuff. of course, just words on paper. >> antonin scalia and

stephen breyer testified about the role of justices on to the constitution. watch the rest of the discussion at the c-span video library, archives and searchable. it is washington your way. >> "washington journal" continues. host: robert borosage is the co- director of the campaign for america's future and is here to talk about the progress of agenda and campaign 2012. we want to talk about the senate vote on president obama's jobs bill which comes up next week. tell us what you have heard about the bill, what you are hearing from the folks on capitol hill, and whether or not it has a chance of passing. guest: he has been stumping for this, and as that at the job numbers, man, there is more reason for action. -- and as the tepid numbers come

in, there's more reason for action. there is no hope that he can get it through the house. the question is, will the republicans stand in the house pass pieces of that they give us some relief? that is still unclear. a good half of the bill is simply to keep things where they are, extending unemployment insurance, extending social security payroll tax cuts for employees, providing money to keep teachers on the job, but does that add to our employment. it simply keeps us at our unemployment. it is important to get this done an important to do the other parts of the bill which might help put people to work, and much more, but at this point, we're still in this partisan gridlock in washington. house leader eric cantor has indicated that the bill is dead on arrival.

not clear it all which pieces will go forward. host: there are tax increases in this bill and the rope public and majority leader is opposed to it and says that they are not going to vote for anything that has tax increases. guest: they still seem to be wedded to this place that they all signed, never to raise taxes on anyone for eternity. so the attempt to spend this money now and have tax increases in the bill that kick in later that will pay for it, they are not yet ready to swallow that. on the other hand, they seem to continually brag about the need to get our deficit nodown. how you do that is unclear. host: what is the political fallout for the president if he cannot get this bill passed? guest: it depends on what he does. he is arguing the case that

americans want action on jobs. this is a country with an economy that is in very bad shape, people suffering. be a 25 million americans in need of full-time workers if we of students graduating from college with no jobs, burdened by student debt. you see that element -- anger and outrage in occupy wall street. this is that the system is working for the very few, and not the rest. -- the sense that the system is working for the very few, and not the rest. i think the president is talking where the americans are. host: we are talking with robert borosage about the progressive agenda and campaign 2012. if you like to get involved, give us a call. the numbers are on the screen. you can also get in touch with

us electronically with e-mail, twitter, or join in the conversation on facebook. "weekly standard" had this story. your thought about that? guest: i do not think anyone bill will save any president's job. he runs into stiff winds, 9% unemployment, an economy that is stagnant, and that is a strong argument for his opponents. but the president has to and what the country deserves is an argument that poses a choice. how will we get out of this fix that we are again? to the extent that he can pose a choice where he talks about serious job action, letting those people who had benefited from the economy pay the price for reducing our deficit, and

giving tax breaks and putting people to work across the country, posing that choice with the republicans, which lowered tax rates on the top, roll back the regulations on the banks and the environment, and that is their jobs plan, i think he has a decent chance if he can make a choice to give americans a choice and have them in up with him. but there's no question that he will run into stiff winds. host: speaking of that, mitch mcconnell said on the senate floor on thursday that republicans are ready to work with democrats on areas of common ground. let's see what he had to say and get your reaction. >> as i've said repeatedly, republicans are ready to act right away with democrats on bipartisan job-creating legislation. on the free trade bills, for instance, on regulatory reform,

increasing american energy production, and tax reform, all of those things would help the economy and all could be strongly, strongly bipartisan. host: robert borosage, your reaction to what the senate minority leader had to say. guest: you have to put that into context. he said that the number one priority was to ensure that president obama would be a one- term president. that seems to be their driving build it it seems like they will cooperate when it will help that. they will block things when it seems that will do that. but that is how they make the president week. the danger is that republicans are ready to have this economy stagnated over the next year in order to achieve that goal. it certainly seems that way with the posturing around the deficit, the debt limit, and that for your four times they

are threatened to shut the government down over in significant differences. this is not a cooperative arrangement. on the policy stuff that he mentioned, the three trade deals will not create jobs in america. that will probably be net losers, which is what most independent analysis says. we've had trade deals over the last 20 years and there at the it has been company shifting good jobs abroad. we run up large trade deficit that we have to borrow from abroad. this is not been a successful course for us. these three trade deals are in that tradition. host: our first call for robert borosage comes from maryland. caller: obama keep saying that you made that it, build cars that the middle class can afford, and his so-called shell already jobs, they are union and

state workers. there are no jobs in it for the private sector. all he is doing is making us the welfare state, because all of the tax credits for this, tax credits, and you want to blame republicans for everything. i'm so tired of hearing it. when the democrats going to take responsibility for something? it is not all bush's fault. guest: i have not mention bush yet, but i will get there. the autoworkers' jobs are all private sector jobs. i think everyone would recognize that it was a success of the administration to take the risk to stand up, not with ford, but with general motors and chrysler, and reorganize those companies, give them guarantees to get back up on their feet. now they are turning a profit,

starting to repay the loans that they got from the government, and they are hiring across the country. rebuilding our industrial base, our ability to make things in america, i think that is crucial to our economy going forward if we build a strong economy and middle class. that was one measure going that way. i think the president, when he goes before the electorate, he has to deal with the fact that he has been for four years and he is 9% unemployment. no question that he inherited an economy in free fall, a banking system on the verge of collapse, and he had to do emergency measures to stave off the deep recession. but we expect him to fix the economy, not just to keep it from going to the bottom. so will -- he will have to tell americans about what he has done

and what he plans to do to get us out of this fix. the important thing is for people, everyone has to understand that this economy did not work well for most americans even before the financial collapse. in the 10 years of george bush, now that i have mentioned his name, the economy was growing but manufacturing was in a depression. we were shipping good jobs abroad. most household wages for the first time lost ground. the middle class was sinking eason is -- even as the economy was growing. the top 1% was capturing virtually all the rewards of growth. you cannot recover to that old economy. it was built on at debt bauble, and you do not want to go back there. we need to build a new foundation for this economy, one that works but the vast majority of americans, even as we recover from and figure our way

out of the whole we were in. it was not an easy task. a huge project as the nation and it would be nice to do it without that type of partisan division that we have faced over the last year. host: robert on our line for democrats, calling from florida this morning. caller: what i see is that the middle class has the power. they have no political power. they do not have millions of dollars to give the candidates. and the kennedy feels that they are beholden because you give me so many millions of dollars. there needs to be pac that advocates for poor and middle class issues and as leverage to at that some kind of change on the politicians. the people with the money are getting what they want.

guest: there is no question that you are right about there. we have given over whole areas of public policy to entrench corporate interest, big oil and king cole, the health insurance companies, drug companies, the multinationals on trade policy, our financial policies to wall street. it has created a set of policies where they have rigged the rules so there are very few benefits. they enforce that with very powerful lobbies and with very expensive campaign financing work. how we counter that? the only way is to counter the vast numbers of americans mobilized to counter is the vast number of dollars that if you can mobilize. i think we are headed into an election that may look like that. what you see in wisconsin when the governor tried to suppress

the right of workers to collectively bargain unorganized, you saw on the streets of occupy wall street, where the students are protesting an economy that does not work for the 99%, and what you will see over the next period is more and more people all along that our government has been taken over, really, by entrenched special interests. and we need to mobilize large numbers of people to take it back so that it works for the average american. host: give us more of your reaction to the occupy wall street movement. you were actually on your way to visit those people today but graciously decided to come and be on our program. is this the kind of organization that is going to push the white house and the left, leaning direction, or is it just something that is a

reaction to the tea party? what is your sense with this occupy wall street movement? >> if is a reaction to reality, with the banks that went back to paying themselves multi- billion dollar bonuses while the economy stagnated. .

the rest didn't matter much. so the wealthiest one percent of americans had as much income as the bottom 60%. so if you're selling things, if you're thinking about investment as an investment

portfolio, you know who you're targeting. you don't have to pay attention to rest. this is an economy that is not a democratically sustainable economy. and in our history when we get to these extreme concentrations of wealth and corruption, we've had popular movements that call the country back to account, the pop lists at the end of the 19th century, the hueie long and the parties and the unions in the 1930s. and i think the occupied wall street is the beginninging of that now striking a very popular cord anding we've got to create an economy that works for working people. >> in this morning's new york post a political cartoon shows some folks protesting on wall street. one says, i don't want to occupy wall street. i just want our money back. and another one says wrong protest, lady, tea party's down the street.

we continue our conversation with mary calling from florida this morning. >> good morning. i think this is the -- this is terry. one was the tax break that they're giving us on our social security taxes. to cover the warning label that says you're going to have to work an extra five or ten years before you can retire. because they're taking a program that's already under attack by the republicans who would like to do away with it and they're making it even weaker for the $15 that they're giving people is just going to evaporate and they're saying it's out of money now. one of the reapses the economy is faltering is because they don't have that slice of the $2 trillion that was paid by people who were working that they couldn't put into a lock box to save for us but the

republican is say that you can't tax the rich and you can't tax the death benefits. there's no estate tax. that's putting money into a lock box. >> terry in west palm beach. your reaction. >> there is great concern about advocates for social security about the effect of the payroll tax cut because it will accelerate the drawdown of the social security trust fund and while there is promises it will be replaced by the general fund everyone is very nervous about that transaction. on the other hand, everybody ought to be really clear about this. we are heading into a debate about who pays to clean up the mess that was caused by wall street's excesses and they blew up the economy. it's created a huge economic mess and now we have to, we're struggling to pay for it. and there is absolutely no reason why that bill should go

to on social security or medicare, the most vulnerable on medicaid, kids with slashes and cuts in education. this is a wealthy country. the people who had the party who benefited from the party, the people who have seen their incomes soar over the last decades and who caused the mess ought to be the people who get the bill and that's going to be a fight we have over the course of this election and over the course of the next few years. but everybody ought to be really clear. there ought to be no reason whatsoever that we ought to preserve and strengthen medicare. >> two weets tweets. the first one comes from done richie.

guest: i think both tweets show the kiped of people's unease with the tp the president and what he has done and not done i think once this election becomes a choice between obama and whom ever comes out of the mr. president primary that people will have a primary that people will have a very clear sense. the republicans have really rather astoundingly reasserted the policies that drove us off the cliff. they want to roll back health care reform they want to roll back energy reform all of which have been inadequate but at least the first steps they want to go back to that economy they oppose tax increases on the rich. romney and others have now decided that the key tax reform that needs to be made is to have more people who are not paying into the income tax pay

into the ip cox tax the bottom 40 frts or so who pay no income tax but pay payroll taxes et cetera. so they focus their tax reform on taxing the poor which makes no sense on this unequal society. so when people see a choice it will start to concentrate the mind. host: back to the phones. massachusetts, ed on our line for republicans. thanks for calling. guest: good morning, c-span. and my question for your guest, does the campaign for america's future support increasing the transparpsy and conducting a full daut of the federal reserve bank? and also does the campaign have a position on the wars in afghanistan and iraq and all the other places that we have military assets deployed? guest: on the federal reserve, we joined with bernie sanders

and with ron paul, with the right-left coalition to push the legislation in december that was, that required the first audit of the fed. and we thought, we did this around bernanke's renomination. we thought it was impossible to renominate bernanke as head of the fed without first looking at how he spent the trillions of dollars that went out to bolster the banks and to in the middle of the crisis and was done really on his hook with very little oversight. so we got the initial audit coming out of that and we are very much for transparency in the fed. we think the entire, it's a very powerful institution. we've got to learn more about that. and we've been calling on coming out of the wars for some time and using that money to rebuild america and make it strong from the inside out. we're spending billions of

dollars a week in afghanistan. the c.i.a. says that basically al qaeda is no longer in afghanistan. we're trying to rebuild a country that has resisted outside ok pires for its entire thousands of years. and we've been there ten years. it's long past due that we get our troops out. but there's a bigger problem that i think this country has to face. we have about 00 bases around the world. we police the world. we have a larger military bument now than we did when the soviet union was in existence and we were in the midst of the cold war. we have to find a way to share that with other powers so we can use our resources to rebuild a country in which the basic sin yous of our economy and society are weakening and in trouble from roads to suers to getting fast transit together to moving into the new renewable energies.

we have a huge investment agenda here that has to be met and we're going to have to tighten our belt in terms of policing the world and searching for monsters to detroy across the world. >> back to the phones. caller: thank you very much. i have two questions. one, what is it going to take for people in middle and lower economic classes to realize that supporting a corporate agenda is maybe not the right way and maybe not for their i want rests? and secondly, with the recent supreme court decision about corporate financing of elections and individuals, is there any way that we can remain a democracy instead of just turn to other systems?

guest: very good questions. on the corporations are people they have rights too so they get to spend what they want out of their treasuries, i think we have to go right after that. that's an unacceptable decision. it's a decision that simply opens the flood gates of corporate money trying to influence elections. we had a congressman in oregon who wanted to ensure that henl funds operators pay the same tax rates as middle class people instead of the lower 15% tax rate. one hedge fund operator dumped $3 million into his race. one operator. so we've got to expose this stuff. we've got to make up a corporations expose all their spending and we've got to overturn that decision. but at the end of the day money will always be in politics and the only thing that cournts is it people in motion. and mobilizing people.

host: in addition to being the codirector of the campaign for america's future, also is a contributing editor at the nation magazine and a regular blogger on huffington post. river side, california on our line for republicans. go ahead. guest: good morning. caller: good morning. i appreciate your honesty and candidsy. i feel the investor class and the bankers and all the shareholders and c.e.o.'s don't want anything to do with any labor taking place here in the united states any more shipping outsourcing every job to china. i don't see any of the industrial manufacturingr coming back here and that was our base for our economy can creates our economy. this new service sector and then rich and poor is just going nowhere. guest: two things about that. one is we have to have action

against america tilist nations like china that rig their currencies and use a range of industrial policies to capture technology and to make it -- to really encourage and force companies to invest abroad. you know, just recently as the chinese currency has started to go up a little bit and the wages of chinese workers have started to go up a little bit you've seen news articles of companies saying it may be better to hedge our bets and have a factory or two in the united states because if those trends continue the united states is going to get more and more competitive. we need as a nation a national manufacturing strategy that's very clear about insuring a level playing field in relationship to trading partners, particularly like china where most of our trade deficit our manufacturing trade deficit is with china and it's done because they're playing by a totally different set of rules and we've got to enforce it and we've got to lay claim

to areas we want to be the source of innovation and production and create the subsidies and the arrangements that ensure that we make things in america again. i think it's absolutely crucial if we're going to rebuild a middle class society. the other part that you mentioned, which is service jobs, service jobs that are not competitive with the global economy could not be shipped abroad, say hotel waitresses or the cleaners of hotels or the tourist trade jobs. those ought to be unionized and they ought to become middle class jobs with benefits and hours et cetera. in new york city which is a union city cleaning ladies make up to $50,000 a year they have full health care, they have a retirement plan because they have a union and because their job isn't -- can't be replace bid somebody in india. you have to clean the bed in manhattan. so we've got to be really

sophisticated about empowering workers to create a middle class in the new service economy even as we try to rebuild our manufacturing sector. host: we've got a tweet guest: i think manufacturing and new energy and cheap energy go together. but look, the reality that we faced as a country is every other country, industrialized country, and emerging country had a conscious ipped central policy. they picked industries they wanted to succeed, they subsidized them, they used tariffs and other forms of barriers to ensure they could capture the edge in them and we had a view of kind of market fundament list view that we would let a thousand flowers bloom and the best things would rise and wherever manufacturing

ended up that would be fine. the result is we invent the solar industry and the wind mill industry and the chinese capture the industry and now are making 90% of solar and wind mill in the world. and we simply have to have a much more comprehensive view in this world. and if we do and it includes energy prices, it includes a whole range of things, this country ought to be leading and driving the green industrial revolution which includes renewable energies and much more efficient appliances and much more efficient ways of transporting goods and services. that's the industry that's going to sweep the world inevitably given catastrophic climate change and we ought to be inventing the appliances and inventing the energy and making that a centerpiece of our next job's spur here in the united states. host: our discussion regarding the progressive agenda and

campaign 2012. we continue that with dayton, ohio. caller: good morning. i call in every month here and been watching your contender show and maybe listened to ed last week maybe thing maybe i'm a socialist because this country, i'm going to take your place in dayton, i'll be at the wall street protest here because i have seen a man bernie sanders telling me that one hedge fund manager made $4.6 billion. he made as much as a whole workforce of wal-mart. no man is worth that. i made 1085 in 1985, 47 years ago i made $10.85 and i see people get jobs for $8 an hour. i just wanted to rattle on here. i will be in ohio at the protest.

guest: i think that's the spirit. we have an economy now that serves the very few and it doesn't serve the many. and if we're going to save the american dream, the sense of a broad middle class where you can get a job to raise a family, send your kid to college, have retirement security and health care we have to turn this around and i do think the occupied wall street demonstrations around the country are putting that question to our politicians and to our society. and it's an incredibly important moral question they've posed. and if it keeps building and there's no reason to think it won't, it keeps building in this economy stays stagnant then i think by next fall every politician is going to have to figure out what side they're on and tell us why and the press is going to demand those answers and voters are going to be interested in who is standing with whom. host: next up, lee from oklahoma. welcome.

caller: thank you. i've got a question for you. you talk about how wonderful it is to start from the top and work your way down. with government. but what i want to see is your thought on welfare reform. you have to start at the bottom to help wean the folks off of the government by holding them accountable for holding their benefits. you talk about an industrial country. how many other countries allow welfare system? i lived in japan for 14 years in the u.s. military and i know in japan that you every year have to prove that you are allowed to have those benefits. there's no just automatic let's go out and get the benefits of

$500 or so a month by having three or four children. that's not the way the rest of the world works. guest: well we did welfare reform under clinton which limited the amount of time you can be on welfare, forced recipients to be either in training or constantly seeking jobs. and has dramatically reduced people who are on welfare or even eligible for it. the problem we have now is a different one. we have mass unemployment. we have 25 million people in america looking for work in need of full time work. and they don't lack a work ethic. they lack jobs. and our economy is misfiring because it is not generating enough jobs to put people to work and that's true whether you're a high school graduate or a college fwradwut.

you have kids coming out of these schools into the worst jobs market in the 1930s, going home and sitting on their couch and that leads to despair and damage that really last thrause lifetime. we have a huge stake in creating a process that puts people to work now. we don't have a problem of people wanting to hang out on the welfare dole and do nothing. we have people across the country who are desperate to find a job and simply can't find one. guest: the outcome of the economy? i think, look, i think policy makes a huge difference. and particularly in times when the economy is broken as it is now and it has to get readjusted, reframed, reformed,

the policies make a big difference and we're going to face a very big choice and i think republicans have said this, the president has been less clear. but they want to go back to a set of policies that believe the market will do it. it will trickle down, create jobs, roll back regulations on business and that's all we need. and there's the alternative path is that you've got to restructure our economy, you've got to invest in people and innovation. you've got to capture have an industrial policy that captures a lead in the industrial revolution. you've got to balance our trade, take on the nations that are playing by a different set of rules and make this country strong from the inside out and that includes progressive taxes on those who with their speculation have caused the

mess in order to have them help pay for cleaning up the mess that they caused. host: our next call comes from pittsburgh, pennsylvania. caller: here in pennsylvania, we recently elected senator too manyie -- toomie and he is off of the wall street crowd. he is one of the originators of the club for growth and the club for growth is in bed with china and india. and so people just are not educated as to what's really going on. guest: well, i think you're right about the club for growth. the club for growth is a classic market fundament list operation. they believe that we should operate with total trade corporate trade rules even if other countries have national strategies they don't want --

they oppose taxes of any kind. they want deregulation of finance again even though they've just driven us off the cliff and they're a well-funded group. but i think when we're in this kind of crisis people start paying attention and once they start paying attention they learn who is where, what their positions are and they start to break through the cover stories they start to see the implications of their policies. so i think we're headed into a series of elections and debates that will get more and more interesting as this country struggles to find its way out of this hole that we're in. host: i call your attention to a headline that is in the los angeles times.

guest: i thought in california they had basically totally legalized medicinal can bass or pot for medsle purposes and it is a hunal multimillion dollar industry there and the pot growers had a very smart initiative in the last election where they tried to put on the ballot an initiative that would that said tax us. legalize us and tax us. we are a multibillion dollar business. tax us. and the state in extreme needs for revenues, why not make this a atlanta industry? -- legitimate industry. i think that effort is going to go forward. i think the effort to suppress this when more and more people see its medsle value is probably not going to succeed. host: our last call comes from cleevel, ohio. millie on our line for democrats.

caller: good morning. thank you for this opportunity. i am so frightened. what i see this resegregation in north carolina, i'm so concerned about the voter suppressing that's targeting 5, maybe 10 million people in the next election. it appears to me as if this hypocracy thing we keep talking about is far more advabsed than we could imagine. i think they've been very covert for the past couple of decades and now i -- i feel like they're just going to blow up the middle class and low income people. when are we going to get a fair -- like you said, it's time for debate. if we get a republican president, we're not going to have a debate. host: we're going to have to leave it there. you get the last word.

guest: i think we are headed into that debate and you can see it on occupied wall street you can see it in the american dream movement, you can see it in the response in wisconsin to workers when they tried to suppress the right to vote people are starting to fight back they're starting to mobilize. we built brick by brick a broad middle class in this society. it is what made us exceptional. and we had to fight to get the doors open for opportunity for african americans, for women, for immigrants. but it was the real, the triumph of america. now that's under threat. i do not believe we're going to let it go without a fight. and so i do believe we are going to see citizens mobilizing to deached the american dream and the america that they knew. host: if you want to get more information regarding the campaign for america's future, you can go to their website, our future.org. thank you very much for being on the program.

iveragetsd a pleasure. host: coming up, a look at social conservatives and the republican party here. we'll be right back.

host: done is the senior vice president here in washington this weekend and tom is here to talk to us about the role of social conservatives in the presidential campaign. the republican party. and the group's legislative agenda. welcome to the program. let's start off at the top.

the role of social conservatives in the presidential campaign, particularly in the republican primary season. guest: well, on a lot of people's minds is of course the economy and that's true for conservetives and for everybody. however, the best economic programs is a strong family and some of the policies that we have seen over the last four years if not all the policies we think are furter eroding the family. that's why we think that the candidates need to talk credibly about these issues and that way they're also going to reach a lot of people who otherwise don't vote. host: do you think that because the economy has been dominating the headlines over the last year or two that family values, social values have sort of been pushed to the side and are not getting as much attention either from the democrats or the republicans? guest: well, unfortunately in our opinion it's getting way too much attention from the democrats and as i mentioned a lot of policies, the current

policy that the obama administration did allowing in our opinion violating the marriage act and allowing for same sex marriages to be performed at military chapels. and the.'s abortion policies we think they've been getting way too much attention. and while it's not making "new york times" headlines there are certain things that i mean minnesota, north carolina are both going to be voting on marriage amendments next year. the new york nine race, representative weaner's old seat that was one based on the marriage issue in new york state. so it might not be getting the headlines but those issues are still out there. host: for those not familiar with your organization tell us about the family research council and the values voters summit taking place. guest: the family research council is a cushion-based organization that tries to bring those values through legislation and also on the

federal level and also on a state level working and allying with a number of other organizations. with value voter summit we're partnering with a number of those organizations all in an effort to give a place for conservatives to get together, show them how to talk about the issues and also to get them inspired to be active on these issues and to start talking to their neighbors and the people sitting next to them. host: tom is the senior vice president of the family research council action part of the political arm of the family research council. if you want to get involved in the conversation regarding social conservatives give us a call. the numbers are on the bottom of your screen.

you can also get in touch with us by e-mail twitter and on facebook. governor romney is speaking later on today at the summit and there's been some stuff in the headlines and in papers this morning regarding some comments that were made about governor romney yesterday. prominent pastor, in the "new york times," prominent pastor calls romney's church a cult. the comments by pastor injected a potentially explosive issue in the presidential campaign, the belief held that mormons are not christians. how much of the back and forth or how much of a concern is this particularly among the frc if governor romney goes on to get the republican nomination? will members of the fmp rc be able to support him in the 2012 run for the white house?

guest: this is the sixth time that governor is going to be speaking. we did work with the governor during the marriage debate up in massachusetts. i think the comments yesterday were unfortunate certainly and we did not know the pastor was going to be making these comments. i think what the people are going to be looking for are values. i got to watch on c-span.org the president's comments at the human rights campaign dinner the last weekend or the weekend before where the.said this next election is about values and i couldn't agree more and that's what people are going to be looking at. i think mit romney's values are much closer to mine than barack obama's. host: so for you at least and for the members of the frc, it's not so much his religion, it's his values that you're concerned with and that the frc

would be able to support governor romney if he gets the nomination. guest: well one thing i mean this could certainly change in the elections that i've been involved at the presidential level family research council action which can endorse, i like us to talk about values. even after a nominee is announced. we're bipartisan. we're nonpartisan. and we work with both parties at the presidential level i think that we are more valuable talking about these values bringing them around. that's one reason i go to the summit, we're going to be doing national bus tour and the buses at the summit where you can see it and it's going to be talking about those values that the family research council stands up for. host: our first call for tom comes from pennsylvania. mara on our line for democrats. caller: we're in hatfield and what i would like to know is

since the family research council is based on supposedly conservative biblical values, where do they stand on issues such as food safety which is a huge problem in this country and since there's so much in the bible regarding this, why isn't it being addressed by them? it seems to be a very important human rights. guest: well there's quite a bit of issues i think that the family research council could get involved in based on the bible alone. except we tend to focus mostly on the life issues, the marriage issue as well as religious liberty issues which is certainly tying it all in. on food safety there isn't much we've done in that area except for we were against certain cloning techniques being used in the industry.

host: next up wisconsin on our line for republicans. james you're on the "washington journal" with tom. caller: i was just wondering, i'm sort of a socially moderate republican and i was wondering if you think some of the hard social lines will hurt the election campaign for whom ever the republican nominee is. host: hold on before you answer. james, give us an idea of what you mean by socially moderate. caller: well, i would say that i'm pro-life with the exceptions of rape and insent, and i don't think the government has really any need to be involved with marriage at all, whether it's with a man and a man or even if woman, woman, i don't really care about the marriages. i think a lot of younger republicans like myself feel the same way. host: james, how old are you?

caller: i'm 25. host: thanks for the call. guest: well, if you look at the people who do vote these issues they do care about them and james i agree with you that i don't think the government should be as involved as it's getting in the marriage issue. it's the government that is working to redefine it through the court system and curble through the obama administration. the benefits that are given to marriage were based on the fact that the best environment for a child and best for society is a family with a mother and a father and that's why you see a number of these benefits. now, except if you look at who vote, i mentioned the new york nine before and this is very liberal new york district. but what brought that district into the republican column after since 1923 is the fact that the democratic opponent voted for same sex marriage in new york state which upset a lot of his orthodox jewish base.

host: now, the last caller said that he was 25 years old and according to gallup poll numbers that were released in may of this year same sex marriage supported by age in his age group 18 to 34, 54% supported same sex marriage, 35 to 54, 50% supported it and those over 55 is only 33%. so as the voters as younger voters get older, what is this portend for the issue in years to come especially for the republican party and members of the frc? ifrpblt well, i think what you find part of it is that when younger voters get older they do tepid to be more conservative once they're out there more in the real world and it is something we're trying to address and we have programs at the research council. there's a lot of young kids at the summit this weekend and hoping to address those young

christians that are out there and young people that are out there on these issues and the dangers of them. they get it on the life issue. it's trying to explain how the marriage issue affects it as well. host: the next call for tom comes from bakersfield, california on our line for independents. frank you're on the "washington journal." kiveragetsd thank you. i wanted to ask you if you could please explain knut gingrich's values. i'm sort of offended that he won't come out and probably speak at your meeting. it's sort of similar here out here in the central valley with a gentleman named roy ashburn who was a gay and -- a gay republican assemblyman who was sponsoring some really hateful anti-gay legislation here in california. also, you also have a current senator from i think north or south carolinaa a senator he

freekts brothles in new orleans. there seems to be such incredible hypocracy. host: we'll lee it there. guest: well, unfortunately hypocracy is all throughout our society and when you're talking about values sometimes you're the one that can be the fartest. the best frc can do is pray for some of those individuals and hope that they do come around. i certainly understand the frustration. the senator you mentioned -- and there have been other senators on both sides of the aisle and members of congress when they fall i don't think it's for the public good. so one thing we do try to do is work with some of these senators and congressmen who are away from their wives, away from their families. we try to give them outlets as well and there are programs within congress too that hopefully can support each

other and give a brotherhood and a sisterhood that it's, it is very sad when ever this happens. and i just hope that people don't paint all politics as you seem to be doing in this manner. and all i can say is that us at frc we just try to pray for them. host: susan from fortworth, texas is on our line. caller: good morning. i am a christian. since i can remember i've been a christian even though a coworker a few years ago when bush was going to go into iraq, i protested against it at work. and i was told i wasn't a christian because i didn't believe in bush. but my point of calling is there is a very good reason for the separation of church and state. so a particular religion cannot impose their views on everyone

else. and what we're seeing now are these religious groups trying to impose their will on everyone else and it's very, very dangerous and it's getting worse daily. and i am a christian. but this scares me to death. host: tom. guest: well, right up the street we have the newsium that has the first amendment right on the side of it the building and very strong believer in the first amendment. the separation of church and state doesn't mean that you have to hide your beliefs. we as christians are just as much allowed to go and argue in the public square and debate in the public square. and that's all we're hoping to do. because if we don't, trust me, the other side is already trying to impose their values. all we're trying to do is get into the debate and have a fair debate on these values. host: next up, jonathan from oklahoma on our line for

republicans. caller: yes. first of all i would like to mention that i'm a republican on grounds of expediencey not principle. i'm a libertarian. i sort of have a followup for tom. it is of my opinion that the united states is a has a state or semi-state religion that being cristianty. the evidence for this is in god we trust is printed on the money. presidents are sworn into office with their hand on the bible. it's, if you're anything other than a christian, heterosexual, you have no chance of being elected. and it's a pretty big problem like the previous caller just pointed out christians go to the polls with religious beliefs in mind and they vote for politicians who appeal to

their religious ideals. and the politicians then in turn take their bible to work with them and legislate from it. and that imposes that religion on to intelligent atesiests like myself who want no part of it. and i would like his view on that. host: tom. guest: well, we are based -- we are a nation that was based on jude yo christian values. god we trust was just in the 1950s except overwhelmingly passed by congress and signed by the president but a number of things like swearing on the bible these are all things that are in the origins of our country. and as far as elected officials and all we are a representative government and we are going to the polls and going to elect people who we think is going to best represent them in congress. and that's why you're going to see a lot of christians up there and a lot of people who are upholding the same values

that their electorate has. host: jan harris sends us this tweet and writes, evangelical fundament listless line up to support the guy from niger head texas regarding texas governor rick perry. fess the candidate for the republican is this going to present a problem for the frc and might it give an advantage to president obama? guest: i have to be honest, i only -- i haven't followed that controversy as much. it does sound like though i thought that either the family doesn't own the land or they changed the name of it. it is unfortunate and i think comedy central the cober report had a good take on this that there are unfortunately a number of places even in my own state of new york that still use that word.

and it's not just in texas. so this problem is national. and even if there is no basis for that word and those names should be changed as quick as possible. host: he has said no more mosques should be built in america, that homosexuality gave the world adolph hitler and the holocaust. your thoughts on what he might have to say to the frc. guest: well part of me is hoping he doesn't repeat all those things because i'll be following him actually this morning. it's -- i know brian and i know sometimes he has a radio show and i know sometimes he says some of these things. i don't always agree with some of the conclusions that he draws. but i'm proud to be work

alongside the american family association. i'm sometimes on their radio show. host: wheng things like this come out what brian fisher says and the controversy surrounding governor perry, does it make it more difficult for the frc to go out and recruit supporters who will sign on to be part of the movement and to work in this kind of a political organization? guest: well, i think what we need to do in those situations is make it make a sil purse out of a pig's ear in that we can use these opportunities to share about the religion, differing religions, differing values that we have. i grew up in a small town in upstate new york and i thought there were only two religions growing up, irish roman catholic and italian roman

catholic and i was happy to be educated differently after that. so we should look at these -- i hope they happen less but we should look at these as educational opportunities. host: our next call comes from fort lauderdale, flay. martha on our line for democrats. caller: i had a comment in reference to many of the previous callers on voters. and i feel that as a young person who has graduated college, who has made the investment in my education and cannot find a job in my field, these issues are not important to me. economic issues are. i think that value voters should not impose their beliefs on how detrimental the republican party has been to our economic issues. i feel that do they have any agenda going forward to help the poor and middle class on their economic issues and not on their religious?

guest: one reason, one thing that attracted me to the family research council is we can look at things both from a christian perspective except we also have the data to back it up. and that's i used to be with the national tax union, a fiscally conservative organization, fam and we firmly do believe in the fiscal values that if you free up the market a little more that the government doesn't create jobs. and what the government usually does is impede job creation. so we think as a policies of through lowering the tax base -- reforming thed to completely, easing a little bit on the regulations that have just grown so much on the last four years. we think through those means you're going to be opening up more jobs out there. host: back to the phones. alexandria, virginia. reafl on our line for

independents. caller: good morning. i'm an independent but i vote republican. sometimes. however. whatever bothers me about the conservative social conservative g.o.p. is their racial outlook. they seem to be more racist in some of their views than just having conservative values. can a republican nominee win such as the man from texas holding on to these this kind of a value? guest: i'm not quite sure what the statement was. if -- i'm also an independent that usually does vote republican. because i mean, if you look at

whose -- i don't know if he was accusing the republican party of possibly being racist. i wasn't sure. host: i think he may be leaning in that direction. if you look at the coverage of the values voters summit that in the crowd you don't really see that african americans. are their values, are the values of the african american american community that much different from the values propose bid the frc or is it the message that the frc is sending out that sort of keeps african americans from joining the frc? guest: it is unfortunate about the crowd. i mean, at the family research council we have a church outreach program that works very much for the african american community, the hispanic community as well because -- and i used to travel with jack kemp who used to like to go to black churches and

talk about republican values and all because it's on those social issues that i believe there is common ground. california marriage amendment in 2008, the african american community voted overwhelmingly for barack obama while at the same time i think the numbers were 70% voted for the marriage amendment out there. so we do need to do more outreach to get them at the summit but that is not representative of the people we're trying to represent. host: you mentioned being on the campaign trail with jack kemp. you've also had experience on the campaign trail with senator demonto, the bush-quail ticket in 92, and george allen for governor in 1993. back to the phones. tallahassee, florida, donald on our line for democrats. caller: thank you. i would just like to add you used the word christian value a number of times.

does it bother you, sir, na k89% of so-called christians believe in the rapture when it's not in the bible and do you believe in the rapture? host: what does that have to do with politics? guest: well, he used the word values a number of times. this is to me a value that consent a person to hell because of false teachings. host: i think we're getting off the rails on there. we're going to move on to houston, texas. warren on our line for independents. go ahead, warren. . .

caller: china? it has been going on in for 30 years now. guest: the majority leader spoke yesterday, and he has started a program now being run by a number of the freshmen republicans. it tries to look for different ways that the federal government can cut spending and have legislation to vote on it.

one of those things that is a great combination for fiscal and social conservatives is to stop funding for the u.n. which gives a lot of money into china. everyone child and forced sterilization policy -- they have a one child and forced sterilization policy. one thing that we have been working on is that the obama administration has been using funds to lobby other countries. most recently, kenya, the philippines, to force a two child policy in that very catholic country using taxpayer funds. we're trying to expose that and hopefully sunlight will make them stop. host: atlanta, georgia. you are on "washington journal." caller: how in the world can you claim that you represent family

values when you have a party that is corrupted with criminals stopping the country from having any type of jobs or prosperity in this country because they won't work with this president? this is what causes the break up, when there is no financing. your house is being taking away from you -- taken away from you by criminals and these criminals have taken all the federal money out. host: who was the criminal? ma'am? mr. mcclusky? guest: popov i think, right now you see a very divided washington. -- well, i think we have a divded washington. washington should not be seen

as a job creator. there are philosophical differences about what can be done. the american jobs act, the so- called jobs bill, what is holding that up is senate majority leader reid and the democrats. the president is having problems with his own party. this standstill in washington, d.c., is bipartisan and i do not see it going away anytime soon. host: what of the issues that tops the frc agenda? can you get them through before 2012? guest: we have already had a

vote on the note taxpayer funding for abortion act. what will get the government completely out of funding abortion and abortion providers. we hope to see a new vote. there is a destruction of religious liberty in a number of states right now. there is a bill on the democrats' side that would destroy a religious liberty when it comes to adoption and of running catholic charities and other christian adoption agencies out of business. they would force them to accept homosexual adoptions but would force them not to give preference to married couples for adoptions. we would like to see legislation to protect those businesses that have been already forced of business in massachusetts and illinois. if we can get better the democratic senate, but this is one reason why we see the 2012 election so important. host: republican line calling

from rowlett, texas. caller: i am a registered republican and a vote that way most of the time. i also a christian. i have a big question in terms of christian values. i know some muslims that believe in one god and they have the same values i think that christians do. i think we need to except people like that the same way that we need to be accepting of other people. god created those people who want to get married, men with men. i married a woman, but if a man wants to marry a man, it is not my business but i think they should be able to have the same kind of tax rights. i have not read in the bible

that they should not be able to adopt children. i could go on and on. in other words, christians just start sticking their noses in the year thinking they are better than people are not being very christian and i question their values. host: tom mcclusky? guest: this is not by no means thinking we are better than anyone else. without the mormon church, we would not have seen a victory in the washington state, hawaii, alaska, california, and any of the 29 states where we have seen the electorate vote on marriage. they have voted for marriage to be between one man and one woman. on the international stage, we do work with a lot of the muslim countries even though we made on not share 100% of our values, but we like to look for it --

look for ways to work together. society -- the government did not create marriage. there are benefits that come through society with marriage being between one man and one woman. once you start taking away the values of such unions, it will hurt society like a frog in a boiling pot. we are only starting to see some of the damage being done because of these allowances. host: are there any members that our jewish or muslim? guest: i do not know about muslim. there are members of the frc that are jewish, and number who are more men. we were closely -- and number who are mormon. we work with several on capitol

hill. host: on the line for a democrat from miami, florida, go ahead. caller: there is so much i disagree with that mr. mcclusky is talking about, but i leave he has the right to express his opinions in what he is pursuing. every time you call him on anything he says it is " unfortunate." it is a really big problem when what they're trying to do is interject religion into politics. that is how you end up with theocracies. look at iran. that is not where america should be heading. it is almost like their version

of sharia law. host: tom mcclusky? guest: the only democracy i support is a dem-ocracy. you're absolutely right. it is being able to talk about our values and use the political process and legislative process to talk about those values where we are representing democracy. what we're trying to do is represent a constituency that believes the way that we do and work with legislators that believe the same way as well. host: "doma and don't ask, don't tell are anti-american which is why we are against views like yours." guest: the cannot explain completely in 140 characters why things are american. that term -- unamerican. that term gets thrown around.

doma was passed in 1996 with a large bipartisan majority signed by a democratic president. you can get more american than that. host: waukesha, minn., jack you are on "washington journal." waubesha.'s first place, i think you people are harassed -- astounding hypocrites. i have been married to the same wonderful, lovely wife for 51 years and it grieves me that people like you and people you represent, like newt gingrich married three times, the whole slimy bunch of hypocrites will be telling me about marriage. that is that the main issue i want to take issue with you. i was in vietnam for one year

and i saw what we did there. i steadied the war and afterward, tiger forces it actions, the massacre, and that was not about a respect for life and this iraqi venture in criminality is even worse. one johns hopkins study says there may be as many as 1 million iraqis, not zygotes, destroyed by us and we've spent 5 million of them into homeless exile. why are you not screaming from the rooftops about these criminal wars? guest: thank you for your service and congratulations on being married for so long. i mentioned are issues earlier. there are a number of people in the frc that did not agree with

president bush. we do not want to distract ourselves from the mission that we created 30 years ago. my church, the catholic church, also had problems with such conflicts that the u.s. has gotten involved in. to be against the war is based in christian values and it is not an issue that the family research council gets involved in. host: from here you will be going to the values voter summit. former governor romney will be speaking today. who else? guest: ron paul at 9:00 a.m. bill bennett will be on right after this. jim jordan later today. glenn beck. and i'll be heading up a

marriage panel was some great speakers. host: utah on our line for independents. caller: how are you this morning? there is a movement afoot to begin taxing churches because of their involvement in politics and the use of their facilities as well as their pulpits and personnel to advance their agendas. do you feel there is anything on that? if you do not, why should there not be? guest: i do think it is a very real threat. during the 2008 elections, the number of churches that were involved in political activity in support of barack obama, we spoke up saying they should be able to do that. we partner with the alliance defense fund to challenge these

laws because we believe they are unconstitutional. it is something that lyndon b. johnson put in when he was in the senate. pastors are citizens as well and should be able to instruct their congregations on the moral values that represent their faith. host: our last call for tom mcclusky from springfield, mass. caller: is the premise of your organization and based on manifest destiny? i want to know whether or not when he thinks you can take away health care for people who cannot afford it, does that represent the family values that he is advocating for? thank you. guest: i have not heard about manifest destiny since the james

polk administration. on health care, i can tell you right now that we oppose obamacare, not because we saw this as a great assault on the conscious right and the promotion of abortion, which it certainly turned in to be, but because we saw the damage it was going to do. the fact that some people can afford health care -- cannot afford health care is an issue, but the current law not only takes away health care from those who can afford it, but that is one of our top priorities will be to repeal it. host: tom mcclusky, the senior vice president of family research council action. thank you for being on the program today. we will take a short break. when we come back, a discussion on federal programs to help prevent a foreclosure. you are watching "washington journal" on saturday, october 8th.

>> during deliberations, the only people allowed in the supreme court room are the nine justices. who gets the door? >> i was paying a very close attention to the discussions and i failed to hear a knock on the door. brennan on my left and rehnquist on my right both got up to answer the door and made me feel like i was about two feet high. one of the most important jobs as the junior justice is to remember that you are a doorman. >> of retired justice john paul stevens on his new memoir, "by the chiefs" sunday night on c- span's "q&a." >> congress returns after columbus day for legislative work on tuesday on trade agreements and worker

assistance. the senate will deal with trade agreements and a revised jobs bill. watched live coverage on c-span and the senate on c-span2. to review what happened this week, use our comprehensive congressional chronicle. vote records, daily schedules, committee hearings, and more. the c-span networks, created by cable and provided as a public service. >> if you think that a bill of rights is what sets us apart, you're crazy. every banana republic in the world has a bill of rights. every president for life as a bill of rights. the bill of rights of the former evil empire, the u.s.s.r., was much better than ours. literally. it was much better. we guarantee freedom of the speech and press. they guaranteed the freedom of street demonstrations, protests,

and anyone who is caught trying to suppress criticism of the government be called into account. that is wonderful stuff. just words on paper. >> justices antonin scalia and steven briar well testify -- breyer will testify about the role of judges in the constitution. watching all on line in the video library. washington your way. host: lorraine woellert writes about housing policy for bloomberg and is here to talk to us about federal programs to prevent foreclosure. welcome to "washington journal." new numbers show it was originally touted to help 3-4 million has helped just under

690,000. the home affordable modification program started in 2009 and was posted give lenders financial assistance if they lowered mortgage payments. tell us about gamp -- hamp. guest: it is one of the half- dozen that the obama administration put in place. it was meant to give lenders an incentive to help people. the incentive is really small. in addition, the program has been bogged down by bureaucracy. it is very complicated. we have all heard stories about people's paperwork getting lost and starting the process over, missing deadlines. for the first year or so, there have been bureaucratic glitches keeping it from working. host: some hamp numbers from the

treasury department -- it starts out with a really huge number, between the 2.5-4 million people, but only 690,000 have gotten the permanent modification. guest: 690,000 have stuck with it because they can make their payments, basically. if you run into trouble once again wants your lawn has been modified, you have to drop out of the program. -- if you run into trouble once again, you have to drop your loan. if you have had a financial misfortune, that is not the program's fault, the economy's fault. host: speaking of the economy,

how much money has been invested in this program so far? guest: all told, i think hamp is about $50 million. i'm sorry. we have not spent tha, only a portion. you only spend the money when people get help. the check gets written to the bank once the person has been helped. that is when the banking gets their check. host: you wrote on september 2nd, almost three years into his term that obama has failed to halt the slide in home prices and the foreclosures. they fell by 5.2% in july from one year earlier, according to car logic and, a data provider in santa ana, and california, and last year brought a record

2.9 million foreclosure filings. is part of the problem that there are too many homes on the market? guest: yes. there are too many homes on the market, too many foreclosures, driving down prices. and this housing problem started, these interest payments were jacked up and they could not make the payment. now it is different and it is people who are unemployed and why they are not making their payments. host: talking about federal programs to prevent foreclosure with lorraine woellert of bloomberg. if you want to get involved in the conversation, give us a call. we would like to hear from people who have been involved in

the foreclosure process. they have been able to rescue your home or you lost to foreclosure, by all means get us -- give us a call. email, tweet, or facebook as well. on thursday, luis gutierrez expressed concerns to treasury secretary geithner over the amount of money spent under the home affordable modification program. we will show the exchange between those two gentlemen and then get your response. >> how much of the $50 billion was spent? >> a very small amount. >> $2 billion. >> we have committed it substantially more. >> how much has been is spent? >> the very little. >> you can write me a letter saying how much it has been.

it is still miserable amount of money. it is not very much. is terrible. host: lorraine woellert, what did you think when you saw that exchange between rep gutierrez and the treasury secretary? guest: we have seen it over and over. democrats and republicans have been on have been with this even from the very beginning. the treasury has made improvements, hud has made improvements, but have not gone far enough. it is questionable whether or not the program can even be fixed enough to make it work. host: why is that? guest: there are some hurdles to have to jump through the qualify, but banks have to cooperate to get the print to work. the incentives paid to the banks to get them to modify people's

lawns, lower the interest rate, whichever comes -- modify lowns, ans, it's pretty small. host: our first call comes from johnstown, pa. come on our line for democrats. anthony, turned down the volume on your television. caller: i just had a question. i'm a veteran and my parents are retired. they worked all their life. it is not so much that there is bureaucracy. sometimes you may say there is too much regulation, but when we get in trouble it is these officials that bayless out yet we go to them for these programs. it cannot be a double-edged sword, you know what i mean? the foreclosures, those types of

things, you have to go through that. it is not so much that i see these regulations, but these presidents will still run into the same thing. we set the standard, not government. we want the government when we want to get bailed out, but we do not go to them to set the policies. to the average american, like myself, my dad spent 20 years in the air force, they do not assess what the average person may need because you can do this, get this amount, and the banks, too. they prosper from that. we lose our homes, but they do not lose any money. guest: the banks and to lose money, but you make a more important point. we need to take our medicine.

but the foreclosures go to the system and let's get it over with and come out on the other side. some people say that these programs are just slowing down that process. host: organon airline for republicans. douglas, go ahead. -- oregon, on our line for republicans. s ller: i put the government's under citizen's arrest. host: we will leave it there. let's move on to new hampshire on airline for democrats. you are on "washington journal." caller: i had my home saved by the home mortgage modification program. it was a real pain in the butt because we had to do it twice. every time you called, the

mortgage holder, the bank, however, you got a different person. host: what was the biggest obstacle you had to overcome? caller: dealing with the banks, actually dealing with the mortgage lender. it seems as though the people had difficult indian accent so what was hard to understand. you would get someone different every time so you would have to go through this 20 different times with 20 different people to get anywhere. my situation changed and i lost more contracts in my small business. host: did any of those hurdles have to do with your income, credit rating, anything like that? caller: five years ago i had a

great credit rating of 850. then this happened and i lost contracts because of the economy and market meltdown. i had to climb bankruptcy and things just got really difficult for me. -- i had to claim bankruptcy. the banks were not helpful. they kind of pushed me into bankruptcy. host: ron from new hampshire. guest: congratulations on getting the modification. that's more than most have gotten. you are a good example of what is going on out there. people go in and try to fix things and run into financial troubles, want to make their own better, then they fall into deeper financial troubles because the economy is still sliding down.

you find yourself back in the hall. host: collins, mississippi. caller: how you doing? host: how are things in collins? caller: rough, but we are trying to move forward. ms. lady, i wanted to ask a question about the federal government and the programs. i have been hearing so much about foreclosures and innocent people losing their homes and being entrapped with the situation with the banks and things. there's a damage to people living in these apartments, federally assisted units. there is so much corruption going on with it that when you call the governemnment to expla,

it's not just the housing being bombarded, but the money that the government is spending for people to live in these apartments and then move forward to a programmer you can get a home, -- program where you can get a home. they tend to ignore you. i spoke with mr. lewis office in washington and i sent information to attorney general eric holder. is so difficult for them to speak to anyone on this level down here because of the politics and the way they are handling their business with people like us. host: this is more of a treasury problem. guest: they do give some loans and it is a small part of the

program. then there world the bell at mortgage program. host: springfield, mass., on our line for democrats. caller: i have one question for you and a question for your guest. why does c-span challenge people when they make these crazy statements and the you do not challenge them on where they got their information? everyone who calls in is so thankful for letting them speak, the problem is that c-span does not challenge these guests when

they make outrageous statements. host: what kind of outrageous statements? caller: blast against said the united nations family-planning gives a lot of money to china. that is outrageous. they do not. we do not give money to china for abortions. that is just crazy. i will move on to for foreclosures. volunteer with a nonprofit group and we have a hotline for foreclosures. it is true that the banks are "losing the paperwork." consequently these people are shut out. this happens a lot, okay? why does the bank lose their paper work and they cannot get their modifications? the banks are taking the money that they give them.

believe me. obama has not failed. he gave money to the banks in good faith that they would help people in foreclosure. i have news for you. they have no intention of doing it because there is no money in it. host: to address part of her point, does the bank increased their profit margin? what is the incentive for the banks to hold on to the money rather than putting out there in the marketplace to help foreclosures? guest: we are may be talking about two different things. we have the foreclosure programs we are talking about today and the tarp bailout were the banks got a giant check. that is the money have been sitting on. they have been spooked.

they want to maintain their capital cushion. they have new rules to maintain that cushion and some banks will tell you that the regulators, like the fdic, they complain, but the regulators do not want them to make mortgage loans because they are too risky right now. they are urging them to get these mortgages off their books. the loan modification programs, that is paid at the end of the day. once you have succeeded in keeping up your payments over a certain amount of time, the bank will get a small check, maybe $1,500, $3,000. i do not think of the bank profits. it is meant to cover basically their paperwork. host: there was more of a profit margin for the banks, you think that would be an incentive for

them to work with people to get more money out into the housing markets? guest: yes. the problem is there is still a complete lack of confidence in the housing market. there are some people getting into the business called high- touch servicers. you're starting to see an increase in that type of service. they believe there is profit to be made in that business. in addition, the banks have come up with their own programs in addition to hamp where they have sidestepped the bureaucracy to do their own loan modifications. that program has been pretty

successful and have done hundreds of loan modifications basically on their own terms. host: first of two calls from chicago, ill., first from our mind for republicans. -- our line for republicans. caller: i have a quick question. i read an article about how property taxes are increasing. the prices of homes are going down. in one instance, there is a person whose value has increased by over $100,000 and their taxes went up to 3000. will we see this everywhere? should this be a concern for states across the nation? guest: that is a really a local issue. your city cents its budget and

at the end of the day, they need $x million. they look at the property tax and sees that housing prices are falling and they will not get the revenue they do from their property taxes. even though the price on the value of the house has gone down, they may raise their rates. they are still paying more money, possibly, than you were before even though the value of your house has gone down, but these cities are squeezed. can they sustain it? it will affect cities and states across the country. host: our second call from chicago comes from our line for democrats. go ahead, mariyann. caller: i am working on the home

modification act. there are many, many hoops and i do get the feeling that if they can discourage you within the first phone call -- and it took me 45 minutes debating on the phone and to even get the number to talk to someone about the home modification at -- and then i was told the first thing i needed to do was get a copy of my tax return. to get a copy for free, it can take you six months and application deadline is only 30 days. i would encourage anyone working with the program to stay with it. do not give up. keep calling. keep checking. i cannot get this question answered. generally, all government programs that are applied for, food stamps, things of that

nature, have a government timeline or dead line of how long this will take. they have to tell you within 45 days of four down, yes or no. part of the problem with the modification that is the people on the telephone are telling people they do not have a deadline. it could take 60 days, 120 days, it could take up to one year before they can tell you whether or not they can even help you. host: where are you in the process? caller: i am calling every third day to make sure my application is there. host: you have been doing that for almost a month and a half? caller: sure.

host: do you know if you are goat -- doing a government mod or the bank mod? the government does not have a deadline. host: tell us the difference between the two. guest: the bank deadlines are pretty short and you have to come up with a lot of paperwork and it is a pain. they have their own deadlines, their own rules. there are massive hurdles that you have to clear and you do not necessarily have the deadline that the government sets. it can also work to your benefit because you're not facing this media deadline. host: in an email --

if a person is upside down, will it make it more difficult to get housing assistance? guest: yes. this is a big problem the government is dealing with. we have a program for people like her, but the banks do not want to cooperate. there are other glitches in the system to keep it from working. banks usually put mortgage instruments on your loan to ensure that they get paid even if you do not pay them. the mortgage insurers refuse to produce a peak in those loan modifications. -- refused to participate in those long modifications. the government is trying to figure out ways to help more people, but we will not see

massive help to lots of people. that one is messy. home affordable refinance program is what harp stands for, for people with little to no equity and under water. host: houston, texas. caller: hello? yes. this is a hard call for me to make because i lost my husband one week ago and we just got social security and i am stuck with a house and we had to borrow money on it to keep up with the cost of living. i do not know where to turn because it is too big for me and i am in a mess. i do not know who to call for advice. host: are you in danger of being foreclosed? caller: the to about six months to get it fixed up because of this 30 years old. i do not know whether you can

claim that or how you deal with it. i am stuck between a rock and hard place right now. host: our condolences. guest: call a realtor. the banks will sometimes agree if you want to sell the house to do what is called a short sale. they will take less than you owe on the house. it can take a long time, but it may be worth asking a realtor familiar with the process. host: another email. guest: we did have a program like this. it was called the emergency,

owner along program that recently expired and never got off the ground. it was designed to make the mortgage payments of people who were temporarily unemployed. very few people got their applications in in time because it took so long to set up the bureaucracy of doing it. there is some glimmer of hope on the horizon. states and localities are experimenting with exactly this. you may check with your state housing finance agency to see what they're doing in your state locality. there are some people who have observed that the $700 billion in tarp money that we shall allow -- shelled out would have covered all of the upside-down mortgages. that is an observation that some people make. host: lorraine woellert is the

housing policy reporter for bloomberg. that also includes treasury anti-foreclosure efforts, fannie mae, freddie mac, the federal housing administration, and the ongoing business to settle htthe robo-signing suits. rockport, ill., an airline for independent -- on our line for independent. you're on "washington journal." caller: i think you're mixed up. i'm in houston. host: we're definitely mixed up. tell us your problems and run your question by us. caller: i have a daughter. she and her husband went through

the loan modification program because one of them lost their job. the only thing that the bank did was a lower their interest which meant that their lormortge payment was reduced by less than $100. it took them four or five months and consequently they are about to lose their homes. the banks are not lending that money. i agree with one of the callers that the government never should have given the banks that authority because they are not helping the people. host: lorraine woellert. guest: i am sorry about your daughter. a lot of people are in the same boat. we are starting to see the banks

loosen up a tiny bit in some areas. houston, i am not sure how the market is there any particular, but i am very sorry about your daughters. host: we have a chart here that shows 50 metropolitan areas with the largest hamp activity, and the largest being los angeles, long beach, and santa ana. it turns out that it is 7.4% of the u.s. activity and it goes all the way down to sacramento and rosedale which has 1.7%. houston is not in there. these numbers are not much. it seems like an effort in

futility if you want to work with this program. guest: you are right. remember that we have six anti- foreclosure programs. hamp is the biggest. we spoke about the emergency refinancing program. they are each designed to help fix a specific problem. the lesson we need to take away from this is that our housing system is so complicated in the mortgage system so complicated that there is no one. fix to this. in addition to federal programs, there are state programs. they are each just a drop in the bucket. host: democrat mine calling from washington, d.c. caller: about this housing crisis problem, me and my wife are going through this right now. our mortgage lender is wells fargo.

we have tried to get on the program before the foreclosure. we foresaw the program and called wells fargo asking for help. they said the mortgage was not behind so they were not in a position to give us help. i lost my job and my wife was unemployed. they said to call back when we were three months behind. we would call back and then of course you have to be current to get any help. we went through the hamp program once or twice. my wife gets a temporary job with the census bureau. i am still out of work. they cannot help with the modification because it is not a full-time, permanent position. then we get unemployment and they say because i am not on

the mortgages so cannot use my income. we have an accordion-style boulder and now that it is all correspondence with the banks -- folder of correspondence. it is a vicious cycle. what we do? this has been told before. i watched a movie with my boy john wayne talking about wells fargo. there were talking about the mortgage crisis about people losing their homes and they were predators. they were taking their land back. they are doing the same thing here. host: we will leave it there. guest: the government and bank regulators have seen this problem and they have reached a settlement with the large servicers, including wells fargo. as we speak, they are starting the process of reaching out to

people like you who the system has failed. hopefully that will yield some results. host: there are 248,000 homes that are under government custody. how does that happen? does that make tax pair of the owners of these homes and what will be done with them? guest: yes, taxpayers, through the fha, and indirectly through fannie mae and freddie mac. we are the owners of those houses. until now, we have been selling them off one by one. the agencies are now trying to experiment about what to do next. they put out a call for ideas. what do we do with all these properties. they have 4000 responses so now they are going for them to see if there are any bright ideas.

lot of investors are interested. host: how about restructuring the loans so the people can stay in those homes? guest: it is too late for that because there have been foreclosed on and the government is already the owner of the property. host: springfield, ohio. caller: good morning to you. i am going crew modification process right now. i have a real quick question. did she say that the insurance that the banks by compensates them or incentivizes them to foreclose instead of working out a modification? is that correct? guest: the banks by an insurance on a certain part of your long that they will recover if your loan goes bad. caller: so they are incentivized to foreclose. i have a project and a quick question.

why would a bank for close on some one and sell the home from anywhere between 50%-80% less on the $1 when, in fact, if they adjusted the principal of the lawn the person could stay there? i have a quick project for you. i have a friend who had a home with an option on it from the gentleman who owned the property. he filed a bankruptcy, went into foreclosure, made him move out. the option was born $112,000. a fairly wealthy person came along and bought the house for $45,000 cash. i wonder how many people are getting richer in buying these homes for 50 cents on the $1 and then rent that for $1,000 per month. the richer are getting richer,

the poor are getting poorer. host: lorraine woellert of bloomberg. guest: they tend to be small investors. we have not seen really big banks step up to this opportunity, i suppose. in terms of your point about the principle right down, it is a mass. mortgage insurers is one important -- one problem, and any new loan is seen as " riskier" so they are reluctant to refinance some must every single i is dotted and t is crossed. host: i understand you're trying to refinance your home. how is that going? guest: it has been a real hassle and it will take a lot of time.

host: we have been talking with lorraine woellert of bloomberg who is the housing policy reporter. if you want to read more, you can go to their web site, bloomberg.com. we want to tell our viewers and listeners more about what they will be able to see and hear tomorrow morning on the sunday edition of "washington journal." tom davis, a former representative of virginia, and he will be here to discuss recent congressional and political developments including the 2012 presidential campaign. we also have wendy weiser from the brennan center of justice and we will talk about a recent study by the brown and center which looks at new voting laws put in place that could make it harder for americans to vote. we will finish off with roger simon of politico to compare and

contrast to the political campaigns of previous democratic presidents. that will be the program tomorrow. thank you very much for joining us today on "washington journal." we will see you again tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> sunday on c-span, "newsmakers," buck mckeon at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern.

and "road to the white house," michele bachmann will be in new hampshire. part of a three day campaign tour. >> c-span radio is another way to keep up with politics and public affairs, offering a mix of the most relevant he thins from the three c-span television networks and -- events from the three c-span television networks. listen to us at 90.1 fm and on ackberryne an d bl apps. now in our 15th year. >> israeli ambassador to the u.s., michael oren,