carolina of the budget committee, new jersey democratic representative donald's payne will take your questions about union organizing and "the national journal" chief correspondent michael hirsh joins us to talk about unemployment. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] host: good morning and welcome to "washington journal." wednesday, november 30. in the headlines, "the washington times" leads with the senate testing be the threat in holding terrorist suspects. "the washington post" leads with iranians attacked british embassy. "the new york times," their lead story, lines long for free meals at u.s. schools. "usa today" leads with troops with p -- straining resources.

we will talk about the euro debt crisis. a lot of talk in the papers regarding that. we will talk about that in the next 45 minutes. if you want to call -- we are going to start off by taking a look at an article in "the washington post," i pulled it off line.

howard schneider writes --

we are going to continue our discussion on that but before we take your calls, we want to show you what the president had to say yesterday earlier this week after meeting with eu leaders to talk about the european debt crisis. >> communicated to them that the united states stands ready to do our part of to help them resolve this issue. this is a huge -- on the economy. if europe is contracting or having difficulties, it is much more difficult for us to create good jobs at all because we send so many of our products and services to europe >> such an important trading partner. we have a stake to see it work in a constructive way to try to solve this issue in the near future. host: to what extent should the

u.s. get involved in the euro debt crisis? our first call comes from atlanta, georgia. derica on our line for democrats. you are on "washington journal." caller: hello? i wanted to remind the public that the media is trying to -- about socialism did behalf -- they have to betray this as a hero or a european problem, it is a greece problem. greece, a lot of investments by wall street. wall street called greece to get in trouble and now they are trying to say the whole european zone is in trouble. they need like a couple law hundred billion dollars. it is not as big as the media is trying to portray. they are trying to -- the people about socialism.

if this is propaganda. host: what extent should the u.s. get involved in this? caller: we don't need to be involved at all. this is a small issue. this is a very small issue. of the media is trying to cause fear. host: more from "the washington post" article.

back to the phones. annapolis, maryland, on our line for republicans. caller: hello, good morning. i think that the united states doesn't have any other choice except getting involved and i think what they will do is print money to solve it, whether or not it is here or in europe. both the u.s. and european

community, they are both drowning in debt. and one of the disturbing things to me is that most people in europe, if you go and ask, are not interested in staying in the eurozone. the public sentiment is actually against it and yet the politicians forcefully keep it together. and one of the big criticisms i have is it is slowly starting to eliminate democracy because you have a centralized government in brussels that makes more and more decisions and of the will of the people is basically ignored because the people are not the ones who vote the brussels government in office, they are appointed, and that they are not basically held accountable because even if the people wanted to vote them out of office, they can't, because they are appointed. they cannot be challenged.

host: where are you from? caller: originally from europe, but i am an american citizen. i am german and i don't like what i see in europe. there was the article in "the wall street journal" about the whole thing, how anti-democratic the european community is and how they are really starting to eliminate the democracy because people cannot -- even the thing in greece, the referendum, it was put up to let the people of the country vote and they basically eliminated that. it to me it is a troubling sign because you have a centralized government in the hands of a few, and it is getting worse and worse and worse. and you can go to every single country -- people don't like being in the eurozone anymore. host: serra in annapolis, originally from germany and now living in annapolis, maryland. this piece in "the new york times."

pensacola, florida, on our line for independents. caller: good morning. host: to what extent should the book -- u.s. involved? caller: i must admit, i am a bit puzzled because the president,

of course, is listening to his divisors from wall street and the international banking circles. but, you know, to hear him say that we are so tied up in it that it is creating a crisis here really perplexes name. because, i must tell you, i am 67 years of age, i have been retired a few years. i have seen my money whittled away by inflation and all and i can remember back in 1965 in southeast iowa meeting a young fellow in pittsburg telling me they were closing the steel mills then, 1965. that is quite a long time ago. and our country is in trouble because we do not manufacture anything anymore. and the president is saying how we are tied and linkedin to selling stock to europe? i am a bit perplexed. if we are not manufacturing, how

are we selling to europe? host: we got this tweet from ashley who writes ba -- our next call comes from rhode island on our line for democrats. michael, you are on "washington journal." caller: i just want to say that i believe that i think we should help people out. but before we do that, we have to go line by line with all of the programs we have and all of the foreign aid that we give and see if it is worth it. we have to whittle down some of the money we are sending out to some of these other countries and other programs that our domestic and foreign. it may get more affordable to help people out. that is all i got to say. host: that is michael in a rhode island on our line for

democrats. if we are going to take a break from our discussion regarding to what extent the u.s. should get involved in the euro debt crisis to talk to stefano, a correspondent with reuters, currently in the united kingdom, and he will talk to us about the strike in the u.k. and what is happening now and how many workers are striking and how it may impact the public and private sector. welcome to the "washington journal." guest: thank you for having me. host: you have a headline from yesterday -- britain faces massive strike over pension reform. explain what is going on over there and why are the teachers, hospital staff, and other folks taking part in this mass strike? guest: i am action on a picket line right now in birmingham. i am not sure if you can hear the whistles behind me. but certainly there are 30 unions, a big number for

britain, who have all come out today. the numbers -- the unions are saying there could be a turnout of as many as 2 million. we cannot gauge its at the moment. but certainly, public-sector workers are angry. that is certainly palpable. teachers, probation officers, police support staff, cleaners, paramedics, some nurses, who have come out in defense of their pension. so, that is where we are at the moment. the general secretary of the trade union council, an umbrella organization that represents all of these unions, on the sidelines of this thicket, and he says that the strike is going fantastically well. impossible to gauge. the government has not actively said what they think yet, but we will get reaction from them later today. host: you write that it could

hit services such as health, refuse, and tax collection, and could bring chaos to ports and airports and border control walks out. have you started to see a concerted effort to try and fix the situation? how are people in the u.k. dealing with these lack of services or the approaching lack of services. guest: certainly what has happened with the board of personnel, they come under a civil service union, and it looks like in fact the airports -- heathrow has not been affected. it has not happened, but the government has made contingency plans to bring embassy said in to deal with potential destruction. -- bringing embassy staff in.

schools are closed, routine hospital operations being canceled -- we know that. and there is a certain amount of disruption going on across the country. by the evening, we should be able to know in terms of numbers how it is affected -- affecting day-to-day living. what is clear is there is anger. we will see what actually materializes by the end of the day in terms of support. host: you also wrote earlier this week about 30 trade unions will join the strike on wednesday. wanted to find out if there is going to be any sort of discussion between the government and these trade unions on how to fix this situation and deal with the pensions and get everybody back to work. guest: absolutely, negotiations have been going on since the start of the year. nine months to negotiate this pension situation dared the government says we can't afford

to keep paying these the -- they are not affordable, we have a euro crisis, we have all of these austerity measures to deal with, and the deficit was running at 11% of national output. and this is something that we've got to control -- that pensions, and in terms of paying out on pensions. discussions and negotiations have been going on in the background but at the end of the day, in the last months -- they have made up their minds and it is certainly -- simply not going to happen. we have a self-imposed deadline by the end of december by the government to actually come around the table and say we are going to have to accept this. they can say if you don't negotiate we are going to possibly have the prospect of more industrial action on this

scale. i have to say, it is a very big thing in britain. 30 unions, almost 2 million people. getting back toward the 1979 general strike, the famous winter of discontent that swept margaret thatcher to power, and she took on the unions and won and it changed british politics forever. host: you mention prime minister margaret thatcher being swept into power. the politicians in power now, are they concerned of this strike could threaten their jobs and could bring in another change, told a change in the power structure? guest: i did not think it is as quite as bad as that at the moment. they are certainly worth about it because they are fighting on many fronts. the eurozone crisis is an enormous thing to deal with. the government having to set out plans to actually -- more money,

which they did not want to do, because of the crisis. they are not at the moment really desperately worried about the spiraling out of control. it is only a one-day strike, we have to say that. but things could change. we just don't know. but at the moment, the government is making contingency plans. of course, what will we really important in all of this is public opinion, where that goes, whether they support more strike action or not. host: we are talking with stefano, a reuters correspondent. give us a sense where you are on the picket line? guest: we have about 40 to 50 public-service workers -- from

respect --lso auxiliary staff. a lot of cars going as beeping their horns. i do not know if there are going to regional differences, whether some parts of briton experiencing higher unemployment will actually backed strike action because they are not happy with government policy. but certainly there appears to be support. host: my final question for you, the british prime minister is fielding questions from the house of commons even as we speak, but has been the reaction from parliament and how is the premise the working to alleviate the situation? guest: i am at the picket line and will go to a trade union rally shortly, but i know the

main ministers involved in the negotiations and the prime minister says it is highly irresponsible for trade unions to call this strike -- for members to go out on strike while negotiations are going on. so, they are not happy with this stoppage. of course they are not. but they're having to bite the bullet and put up with it. host: our guests talking to us from the united kingdom is a correspondent with reuters and has been reporting on a strike. thank you very much for being on the "washington journal" this journal -- this morning. that's our discussion on to what extent the u.s. -- back to our discussion on to what extent the u.s. should get involved in the european debt crisis. massachusetts, for independents. caller: the u.s. is already deeply involved. a few weeks ago at the g-20 meeting president obama rushed over there to the meeting and the reports demanded that the

great president and the elected a town in president replaced by bankers from goldman sachs, one of the top donors, so they were replaced -- the president of greece and the president of italy did work for goldman sachs and that the united states and assistance they did become president. host: republican line, don from tennessee. caller: good morning, rob. first, i have a comment about yesterday's program. libby cllowed a caller -- allowed a caller -- are you still there? yesterday she allowed a caller to say something about mrs. gingrich that i thought was too much and there was no cutting off, know what politics,

nothing. i resent it very much. about europe, anytime you allow trade unions to run the countries you will run into this problem. thank you for taking my call. host: we've got another tweet, this one from robert, who writes -- and if you are on twitter and you want to follow was, you can go to c-spanwj. in "the wall street journal," this headline --

also, covering the story this morning in zero -- is "the washington post." they have the headlined --

our next call comes on line for independents. new jersey. caller: an idian word. my comment is, why are we bailing them out? how many know that germany, italy, france, hold more gold than the united states of america? we are bailing countries out that are richer than us. we are on a currency that is worthless and when people really find out, we are in trouble. one thing i want to say about the european union that most

people don't know -- the people of europe did not vote for the european union. it was shoved down their throats through treaties. host: you say the u.s. should not be involved with helping them at all but the president and others will tell you that the european economy is very closely tied to our economy. if we don't help them out in the long run we are hurting ourselves. caller: that is baloney. i am in my 60 process. let me tell you something -- america has been bailing out the rest of the world since the second world war. when they wanted to close at some bases about 30 years ago in germany, the germanies went berserk because they are living off of our bases and certain towns. enough. we are bankrupt. host: we will move to bhave from sacramento, california. welcome to the program. caller: goldman sachs, they own . % of the ueuro

they are not going to lead and go bankrupt. it america will bail them out anyway because goldman sachs, they are all in the united states government. they have been in the government since 2000. all you see is goldman sachs over years and years nobody is ever going to get them out because they give people the most money for their candidates. they will never get goldman sachs out. that is what -- host: kansas city, missouri. denton is our next caller on the line for democrats pretty caller: to make it sweet and pretty, i think we are witnessing global fascism. i think we are seeing the burgeoning pains and the side effects of the same and it is the global economy, global marketing and slave labor. i believe you are witnessing all of this, together at once and i do not see how you are going to fix it unless you reinstitute

the sarin see of these countries. that is about all i have to say -- reinstitute the sovereignty of these countries. writes --iewer righ back to the phones. torrence on our line for independents calling from arkansas -- terrance, sorry. caller: i do not believe we should get involved financially with the euro at all. we should let it crash because

it is inevitable in my opinion, with our infinite growth paradigm and limited resources, that we are just eventually going to have to stagnate. that is what i have to say. host: what do you mean by the growth paradigm? caller: constantly we base all our projections on higher population, more energy consumption more efficiently, and just spreading. whereas, there is a limited amount of resources that we will eventually outgrow and we will not be able to do it anymore. host: in the "financial times" the headline this morning --

columbia, maryland, on our line for republicans. caller: good morning. in terms of the european union, i think it is time the u.s. cut the european union free. because we have to take care of our own of problems. we have seen the problems going on in greece right now. they've got problems with their unions just like we have problems with our unions. the unions have gotten their benefits voting in and now they refuse to cut back. why is it that unions that get

guaranteed benefits at the expense of the tax payers, while the private worker is suffering in this economy? we need a shared sacrifice from everybody, and it has to include unions. our government has to start saying, okay, it is time for our public employee unions to share the sacrifice, which they did not have to do the first two years of the obama administration. host: i got an e-mail from new jersey. sue says -- your thoughts? caller: i agree. the greek prime minister went to the european union, got an agreement, and immediately the people in greece say, no.

it is the public employee unions who are refusing to cut back and to share and a sacrifice that everybody else is having to make. host: in "the washington times" this morning -- fort bragg, north carolina, on our line for independents.

you are on "washington journal." caller: my name the comment about the european central banks and how it ties to the federal reserve, is our founders warned us about allowing bankers to print our currency. it openly and that with less freedom, liberty, and the loss of wealth of citizens because the central banks cannot balance the budget. they simply increase the amount of money. and the citizens of these nations lose their purchasing power, they lose their wells. it is a hidden tax. it is a horrible tragedy that this country fought many wars -- yet we as a people cannot understand how important it is in our history, that we can't allow bankers to print money and call it value. it is dangerous.

i protest this at every moment. it is not covered in tv or the mainstream media and it is a conspiracy -- i hate to use the word that is exactly what it is. these central banks are simply evil and profit from war. that is all i have to say. host: let me get your response to this tweet we got from matthew -- caller: i am a capitalist. i believe it is ok for people to make money and be successful. what an executive makes it is determined by the free-market and if a consumer does not want to buy their products, they need to quit purchasing that company's product or services. that is out a free market works. this is not a social state where everybody deserves everything at birth. you don't deserve to have a house or bank card given to you

-- you did not deserve anything. you need to go out and work and earn it. host: we will leave you there and move on to jay and atlanta, georgia, on our line for independents. caller: i think we need to stay out of the eurozone whenever we had our crisis in 2008, europe could have helped us but they did not. bear fell, lehman brothers fell, fay and freddie we bailed out and aig we build and now -- and the europeans had tremendous exposure to aig. host: we will leave it there. thank you for the call. we will go to an item we got from politico.com. ginger white says she and herman cain attended the tyson-hol yfield fight.

also, regarding herman cain, in this morning's "baltimore sun" -

back to the phones. dallas, texas, on our line for republicans. linda, you are on "washington journal." linda? >> , yes, hello. host: to what extent to the u.s. get involved in the euro debt crisis? caller: i was wondering -- my understanding is they always offered for america to get into bed, ties to it, no other president did. i heard when obama became president it is one of the first things that he did. i heard someone on tv state this. when he did it, this would be the downfall of america. i heard this person on tv say this two times and it is like nobody picked up on it. and i have been watching it and lo and behold, three years later, they are falling but we

are going to fall, too. i would just wanted clarification on was obama the only president on that. and could i make another quick comment on cain the real quick? if a woman was having an affair for 13 years with herman cain, if you would look at this, which you really have an affair to a man she professed to love, if she had to have feelings for him being with all these years, and then come back and bite him on public tv like what she did, i think not. host: linda and dallas, texas. the headline in "the washington post" this morning.

also writing about the president's trip to pennsylvania, in "the new york times." the story is about brian -- or it talks about brian herrity who teaches history and he says he supported hillary rodham clinton in a democratic primary in 2008 over barack obama --

next up, little rock, arkansas, on our line for democrats. mandy, you are on "washington journal." i am sorry -- leon from hollywood, florida. caller: the man and a couple of times ago was talking about how that capitalism and occupy wall street and all that, and i see that as a bad thing. in the 99% against the 1%, everybody being equal and doing away with the currency. there is no way i can see that could ever work.

just this morning, the euro debt crisis, all of them forming one currency or one of the -- or monetary system and i have always believed in america being america. but at this point now, with the collapse of the global economy, if we did not join hands together all of the free nations, i believe that the economy will crash. i never thought it would come to this but it has come to this. what do we do? host: we will leave it there with leon from hollywood, florida. the lead this morning in "the washington post."

spearheaded by hundreds of members of a volunteer militia which pledges fealty to the supreme leader but solicited a contrite statement from mahmoud ahmadinejad's foreign ministry which called the assault on the british sites unacceptable. talking about the attacks yesterday in iran on the british embassy and a separate diplomatic residence. back to the phones.

little rock, arkansas. on our line for democrats. mandyg o ahead, mandy. caller: i am proud of the greek people because they stood up and they are not taking that austerity measure from the bankers. the bankers and just want the free money because they are not going to help the people. host: what do you think the u.s.'s involvement of to be? caller: i just think it is the same thing that happened over here. we gave bankers a bailout and you see what they have done. host: the lead editorial in this morning's "wall street journal" as the headline "blame it on berlin."

back to the phones. excelsior springs on our line

for democrats. daniel, go ahead. caller: i don't believe we should get involved in a european crisis because i believe that wall street helped create it and they want another bailout. they sold these toxic subprime loans to these countries that were just taurus economies and now they are in trouble and now they want us to get involved so we can bail them out -- so we can bail them out again. host: what do you say to those who say the european economy is connected to hours and we need to help them out in order to protect ourselves in the long run? caller: that is why i feel like we are interconnected. if they sold loans to these tourist countries and i believe they should have to deal with the problems themselves and we should just take care of our own. host: in "the washington times"

this will lead story -- this lead story -- and since, ohio. on our line for democrats. caller: i think everybody should

turn over to fox news, they seem to have all of the answers to everything. another thing, i think they left out the senator weiner, woody did. they ought to bring in bill o'reilly back on because there is a lot going on. host: what does this have to do with -- caller: i do not think we need to get involved with anything overseas. we kept them for centuries and we are sitting here right now with no food on the table for the poor. s, ohio.ttie in athen bigscotty writes -- >> online is an kingdale, florida. -- next on the line is and then

-- annandale. caller: i do not understand why it is so hard for somebody else to be considered for the same help. host: from cbsnews.com under the headline --

louisiana, ed on our line for independents. caller: thank you rick take my call. i think what is going on is corporate restructuring. i think once everybody understands the united states is actually a corporation rather than a country -- and if you look into clint richardson's work he did a documentary called "america, the corporation." once you understand that this is all a corporate restructuring situation where actually all of the corporations of the world are restructuring to gain more access to world currency power, i think everybody is going to understand what is going on. thank you for taking my call. host: the lead item in "the new

york times" this morning.

we want to thank everybody who participated in this segment talking about possible u.s. involvement in the euro debt crisis. we want to let our viewers and listeners know that coming up, a discussion on spending battles in congress with representative mick mulvaney of south carolina, coming up right after this break. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> within 90 days of my

inauguration, every american soldier and every american prisoner will be out of the jungle and out of the cells and back home in america where they belong. >> george mcgovern possible lead at the 1972 democratic convention came nearly a decade after being one of the first senators to speak out publicly against the vietnam war. the senator from south dakota suffered a landslide defeat that year to president nixon but his ground-breaking campaign changed american politics and the democratic party. george mcgovern is featured this week on c-span's "the contenders." from among government center of leadership in south dakota -- from the mcgovern center for leadership in south curb -- south dakota. >> i look at why the country does well and does not, it is fundamentally a values thing. it is not natural resources. these are two crucial values. do you believe the future can be different from the president and you believe you can control your

future? these are not universal. some places they have it, some places we don't. in the u.s. we have an exaggerated sense of how much control we have but it is good for us. >> questions or offer and "the new york times" op-ed columnist david brooks. he will take your e-mail, tweets, on various topics. his latest book "the social animal." live this sunday at noon eastern on book tv on c-span2. "washington journal" continues. host: representative mick mulvaney is a republican from south carolina, member of the budget committee and he is here to talk about the debate going on before congress adjourns later in december, and a payroll tax holiday and the unemployment benefits and the cr which is

expected to expire december 16. where are we on this situation with the continuing resolution, and is congress going to make the december 60 the deadline? guest: you hit the nail on the head. when we approved the last appropriations bill before we went home for thanksgiving, included in that bill was a bill that extended the funding for the government through to december 16. a short-term continuing resolution. we've got two weeks from tomorrow left on that. but i am confident that we will work something out between now and the end of december, or at least the middle of december. host: among other things we wanted to discuss was the payroll tax. we have this item from "roll call" by stephen dennis. senate democrats and white house setting up a certain to fail

vote -- guest: you have to love a senate that sets up a vote to fail for political purposes. if people want to know why our approval rating is as low as it is, there is evidence. it certainly -- especially for the senate that i did not think has passed much of anything this year. i think it is three years we are waiting on their budget. but it does not surprise me. this is going to be the issue going into the campaign. we have moved to a full-fledged class warfare, it seems, from president obama, so this will fall right in line. what will get lost unfortunately

in the debate is that the payroll tax funds and social security so what we have been doing since this payroll tax reduction is in place is borrowing from social security. i hope we do get a chance to debate the merits of that. what you read as not discussed the other parts of the bill, which is the extension of of and when the benefits. but i think the summary you just read hits the nail on the head as well as anything, which is of these votes regarding these tax increases, decreases, these extensions, are designed more for politics at this point than policy. host: you said at a town hall meeting in october that you did not support the extension of the payroll taxes because they do not work. tell us a little bit more. guest: keep in mind, one of the things we talked about for the very big -- from the very beginning is whether the stimulus worked -- the payroll tax reduction was part of the stimulus plan. i've got 15% unemployment in my district.

this is such a small, mis- target. what is the trade-off? the trade of is we have been under-funding social security. we have been taking the social security trust fund, which originally was going to expire in 2037, i think, the most recent date, and every day we go with a lower payroll tax level the date moves closer to the present. there is going to be a great effort, i think, from some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to make it looks like a tax cut versus a tax increase debate, really the underlying substantive debate is are we willing to do what is necessary to save social security. host: if congress lets of the tax expire, doesn't it go against the republican anti- raising taxes effort? guest: keep in mind, the republican position on taxes deals with the growth. that is how we look at taxes. we look at them generally

speaking as a limit on growth. we had a long discussion in south carolina about taxing cigarettes. people wanted to raise the taxes on cigarettes so we would have fewer people smoking. there are folks on this town who want to raise taxes on carbon emissions of people use less coal and gasoline. people understand when they are talking about cigarettes and carbon that if you raise a tax on something, you get less of it. the republican condition -- position of lies the rationale to productivity, well, and income. if you want less of it, tax and more. the payroll tax, again, a minor sidelight dealing mostly with the proper funding of social security, has nothing to do to reform the tax code to read -- produce the growth we need. host: talking to representative mulvaney, republican from south carolina. if you want to get involved in the conversation, give us a call --

you can always send e-mails and tweets. dave on our line for republicans. from wisconsin. caller: i am john -- always concerned when people talk about social security, the fact it is full of iou's. somebody was on the show signed with the system works, the american government pays social security. we had a big trust fund in the 1970's that had a surplus and then they took money out of the trust fund and then they created the social security tax, and then they got their hands caught in the cookie jar so they said something about a lock box, how they would put the money that came into social security in a lock box and secure it.

my question or my concern is, it does not seem like the federal government with 535 of the greatest minds in the world, can get anything done. basically, the social security system is broke, the post office is brought, and not all of a sudden here comes all the europeans. we funded the imf, nato, we fund at the united nations. here they are, and they want some more money from us. bottom line is, i think we ought to take care of our own problems first. host: go ahead, sir. guest: you raise a lot of issues. first, social security. a lot of folks, including myself before i came here, did not understand exactly where the money was and how it was funded. over the course of the last decade, more money came in every single week and every single month ban went out in benefits. by design. so, this surplus was built up. the surplus was technically invested -- although only

invested in one thing, these private bonds, which is essentially private t-bills and treasury notes, similar to what you hear talk about on the financial channels, except they are private, not publicly traded. then destinies government bonds, but you are lending that entity money. that is what has happened with the surplus from the trust fund. if the social security trust fund which was invested in those private notes sitting in a safe someplace in west virginia. there is roughly $2.6 trillion of these iou's buildup. the truth of the matter is that the money was invested and we spent did every single day. we do use the social security surplus to run the government and we give the social security trust fund back these iou's.

i'll leave it to others to say that these have value or not, i think that they do. but the bottom line is that the surplus will be expanded roughly by the year 2037. just this past summer, we had more money coming out every single month than was coming in. we're very close to a balance. over the course of the never several years, it will move more in favor of money going out. that is why that trust fund goes down and down until 2037, when it is $0. if we do nothing between now and 2037, then the benefits on that first day would be across the accord -- across the board cuts, and we expected to be 20%. it is automatic by law. that is the background on the social security. the lock box has never existed. it was discussed in the president shall election many years ago.

seeink you're starting to that sentiment percolate up troops congress. we are frustrated with some of the things that our federal reserve has been doing in relation to what is happening overseas. the more we peel back the onion on how much we have exposed and let the people of their raises red flags with us. our involvement overseas is becoming concerning to us, if not for the merits for what is happening but the lack of transparency. if you do not exact -- ask the exact right question of the exact right person, you do not get an answer. that is not a way to run a government. generally speaking, your sentiment about taking care of our own with a priority over getting involved with united nations, i think that is entering the debate here in washington. host: jim in misery on our line for democrats.

caller: his relative to the stimulus, for the c-span viewers, cbo just produced a report here, several days ago, and that indicated the stimulus did in fact work. republican mantra that it did not is false. it increased employment and gdp. so go to cbo and check for yourself on this data. secondly, on the payroll tax program, it is to be paid for by surtaxes of in cups over $1 million. that fax 345,000 taxpayers, or roughly 0.2% of taxpayers.

on the one-tenth of 1%, or one in 1000 would pay the surtax. how many people with id benefit? him roughly 113 million tax filing units. the republicans are trying to protect that 1% again and they're going to raise the taxes on 113 million people simply to protect their top one percent b the. i want to know how the republicans can justify his if we're supposed to be a country, that promotes the common good, how does that promote the common good? guest: thank you very much. the stimulus in the payroll tax, let's deal with the stimulus first. i have seen various reports and i do not know if i have seen the cbo report that you have mentioned. it became not in the last couple of days, i have not -- if it

came out in the last couple of days, i have not seen it. we have been above 8% unemployment for 30 quarters. we interviewed an official an admitted that not a single time have we created enough jobs on a monthly basis to bring our employment levels back down to where they were before the stimulus. the stimulus supposedly created or saved 3 million jobs. that number is not nearly as large as we were told that it would be if we approve the stimulus. and how do you measure a save the job? we could have that discussion all day but the truth of the matter is that your children and grandchildren are on the hook for several thousands of jobs of additional money in debt because of the stimulus plan. we spent almost $800 billion and unemployment in my district is at 15%, unemployment nationwide

is 9%. i do not see how you can look it up attacks on the ground and realistically make the argument that the stimulus plan worked. it is the most expansive economic plan that any culture has ever paid for. if we do not look at the end result and say it did not fail, stimulus did not work in a 21st century economy, then i do not know if we will learn anything. the size of that stimulus is twice the amount and modern dollars of the cost of doing every single inch of interstate highway system in the state. if you feel like you individually got as much benefit out of the stimulus or twice as much benefit, because that is what you got, and my guess is not. to your second point, what you laid out is what we will hear in the upcoming election. what you laid out is class warfare. take from this group of people and give to this group of

people based solely on how successful this group has been and how difficult times are for this group. that is not the common good. where is the common good in that? that is taxing someone else in order to saw somebody else's problems. it is easy to raise taxes on somebody else. where is the democratic mantra about stairs sacrifice and in all of this together? the reason we are in this bind economically is that no one asked us to share the sacrifice of the wars overseas. and in the next moment, you have folks on the democrat side of the house saying to tax the rich and solve the problems. you cannot tax the rich enough to solve our problems. you can take the marginal tax rates to 100%, to take every penny for people who made more than $250,000 a year, and you would not balance this budget. you could expropriate the wealth of every millionaire in this country and you could not pay

off the national debt. we have to look at the wholesale reform of our tax system and look at how we spend. we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. but i appreciate the call. host: harry reid and the democrats talked route -- talked about the payroll tax yesterday. here is what he had to say and then we will get a response. >> republicans know that raising taxes on middle-class is the wrong thing to do. in the past, they have always supported this. just last congress, senator kyl said not what he said on sunday but this. you can do something to stimulate job creation and certainly something like a reducing the payroll tax would accomplish that senator mcconnell said, quote, the payroll tax cut would put a lot of money back into the hands of businesses and individuals. so the reason of the republican

change of heart obviously a simple -- as senator mcconnell has said, his most important goal is to defeat president obama. it is clear the republicans will stop at nothing to achieve that goal even if that means hitting the middle class with a $1,000 tax increase. host: representative mall they need. -- mulvaney. guest: we do believe that it is bad to raise taxes on the middle-class. we talk about the marginal tax rate on the generation and well and in the come in this country. we want that have people have more wealth and more money. we want to encourage that type of growth. the payroll tax is a specific tax, not a general tax. i do this a lot. i talked to a lot of retired folks in my district and they are very adamant that they have paid for their social security benefits.

they are absolutely right in that they have appeared they paid out of the payroll tax. it is a specific flow of funds and it funds social security. not that we should be raising or lowering that tax but the real question is do we want to continue it to increase the money we take away from social security in order to funds these initiatives? we want to say that if you want social security to stay healthy, you have to pay into it. that means employers and employees. if we want to keep stealing from social security in a different way, that is all we're doing, we are taking away from social security to do things over here. if we continue to do that, then we have to fix the system sooner rather than later. you simply cannot go to the well -- there is no free lunch in this town, and stealing from social security is no exception. host: many in your district are

in the military. had its debut the specific cuts to the military that will be a result of the super committee's inaction? you have a lot of military presence in your state, such a shot air force base. guest: there is a major military presence. it is something that i know the whole delegation takes very seriously. yes, it does bother me. not in a general sense. i am one of the republicans who believes that there are cost savings to be had in the department of defense. i offered an amendment to freeze defense spending at 2011 levels. it was part of a simpson-bowles commission recommendations. i am not saying that defense spending is 100% of the table. that said, the automatic sequesters represent 10% of the

budget of the defense department. that is a significant onetime head. it would not allow a lot of time to prepare for. there are inefficiencies and economies of scale that we could see, for example, shot air force base in my district, but the sequesters are not the best way to accomplish that. i do hope that we can find other savings in order to ameliorate those reductions to the defense department. i am not one of the people that things that we should wave a magic wand and get rid of these cuts. we have to find the savings. it would be one of the things that we deal with between now and they ended the year. host: we're talking about ended the year spending battles with mick mulvaney. gary from indiana, you are on the "washington journal." caller: i heard the congressman make a statement about taking from one group to give to the other grid. he did not see that as being

right. you all have been doing that for years. you did that when you cause the market to fail and you called the -- caused the 401(k)'s to fail. it took it from the poor folk and gave it to the banks. that was a transfer of wealth. as far as social security is concerned, an agreement was made between government officials, not government, and the people. we're going to take this amount of money from you and we will do this for you when you retire. that was the agreement. right now you cannot of all that agreement because you have taken the money. -- you cannot hold that agreement because you have taken the money. i call that that. when you take it for whatever use you want to use it and not the purpose for which they gave it to you, you have stolen the money. secondly, when our politicians

and cooperations -- everyone is included but you all. whatl profit in bed at it, has happened is that the american people are sacrificing and you are doing nothing but sitting back with these laws and rules not benefit in the people whatsoever. host: from gary, indiana. guest: thank you and let me deal with each of these points in term. that transfer of wealth, you're absolutely right. if anything that we learn from that, there should be looked lessons to learn from the stimulus or the bailout. it was the largest wealth transfer in our nation's history. a lot of republicans agree with you that was necessary as argued by some and the truth of the

matter is that we took a lot of money from taxpayers and gave it the folks on wall street. i think that crony capitalism is something that has now come under scrutiny, especially among republicans. there is a large group looking at the occupy wall street's movements and saying, maybe it -- there is a common ground there. get some real reform in the way that some individuals and corporations look at government as a way to get money. that has to change. i am here to tell you that you're not alone in that among people on my side of the out. social security was an agreement. you expressed it exactly right. we agreed to take this amount of money from you over the course of your working life and he viewed this amount of money in your retirement. and now we're changing the deal, we are taking less money out. how can you still provide

payments on the back in? we have set up a system that is decide to fail in the long run. we need to fix that with these payroll taxes that are coming up this month. by the way, if you are in the system right now, the money is there. it is not cash, it is not gold, it is not sitting there but there are these government notes that are available and can be turned into cash to pay the benefits. the issue is in the 2030's when we come to retire as to whether the system will still be in place. lastly, if you talk about us not taking cuts. one of the most ironic things i have been here is about how we cut spending and cut spending, but we have not. the federal government is bigger this year in terms of total spending than it was last year. one of the only cuts actually taking place, the house's proposed many cuts, the budget that we proposed back in march was a cyst knick offense -- a

significant first that, but the only spending cut that kicked in for real was ours. we cut our own budgets to run our office by 5% last year, and we will cut by 6% this year. they are the only really real cuts that are happening. we of lowered the amount of money that we spend in our offices. he makes some good points. do some research and you will find out of a lot of republicans are sharing the same frustrations that you have expressed. host: our next call comes from john on a line from republicans, calling from san antonio, texas. caller: i hope that everyone is doing ok. give me a few minutes if you don't mind. host: not a few minutes. we do not have that much time. caller: the representatives answers, no one has really talked about government sacrifice.

you cannot continue to pay government employees more money than we the taxpayers can afford to pay. any business where they pay more money out to the employees, and we are the employers, by the way, we played more money to the employees than the company takes in. that company will go bankrupt or go seek some kind of protection of they get rid of all the problems they created. in the same thing with you guys in congress. you have janitors making $69,000 in the public sector where it janitors to pay their wages in the private sector make maybe $20,000. maybe it thinks -- maybe you think you are worth that but you're not. cut the department of education. don't cut it over 10 years, cut

it over one day. cut the department of energy, cut it today. anything else, you need drastic cuts in you do not need them over 10 years. host: john, we will leave it there. guest: i actually believe in answering the questions that folks chance. thank you for talking about government sacrifice. even though these things have not become a law this year, the house is done of a good job of shedding light on the problems and offering real solutions. the republican study commission budget would have balanced the budget in eight years. are cut, cap, and balanced plan would have had real cuts this year, hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts. the spending cap as a percentage of the gdp, and a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. if you go to our website, you'll

see many proposals that members of the republican caucus and conference have offered, including my own to shrink the size of the federal government through attrition. getting it down by 10% through attrition. we are trying to offer real ideas on how to cut. we know what you're saying. the number is not 10%, we would have to cut the federal government 40% across the board to balance it tomorrow. it is a real problem. i will suggest to you that we have not accomplished anything this year because of the things they rob a mentioned when we started date, the democrats in the senate sitting on every one of our bills, all of our budgets, they have increased all of our jobs bills, the democrats in the senate have sat on them. but to take this as a minor victory this year, we are no longer talking about health

care. no longer talking seriously about another stimulus plan. we're talking about spending. how to fix it, however relates to our economic malaise, how difficult it is to grow an economy when you have a $15 trillion debt. the language in washington has changed. the first step is to admit that you have a problem. if i wanted to look at the silver lining for my first year in congress, we at least have washington into a myth that it has a spending problem. host: mick mulvaney represents that district in south carolina. -- the theater district in south carolina. joseph ramirez wants to know -- to expand on that, tell us why if you did or did not, and how that has played into the debate as you see it on capitol hill regarding spending cuts or

spending increases. guest: i get this question occasionally and people sometimes ask me about this place to grover norquist. he works for americans for tax reform. they send you a piece of paper and they say would you pledged not to grover norquist but with you pledged to the citizens of your district that you will not raise taxes without some offset. essentially committing to not grow the overall size of the government. i was happy to sign because it reflects my beliefs. it was not to grover norquist or to any group in washington. go read the document. i hereby pledge to the residents of that if district of south carolina such and such. to me, it reflects my principles. hi a sign a very view pledges, maybe two or 3 cents i have been in politics.

but that one more than any other succinctly lays out my principles of outgrowing the overall size of government. -- of growing the over size of government. we have the discussion above making tax is more fair. the jobs through growth plan that the republican study committee offered a couple of weeks ago dramatically reduce corporate subsidies for things like ethanol and green energy and big oil. i do not consider that to be a tax increase. i consider that to be fixing an unfair tax system. we should base taxes on consumption and how much people make. not how much they spend their money. you might buy a prius and i might buy a humvee, but at the end of the day, the pledges to the people back home and it will

be up to them to determine whether not i kept my word on this and many other issues and not a lobbyist down on k street. host: you mentioned the unemployment rate in south carolina. talk to us about that high unemployment rate and how the people who are unemployed right now will be affected if the unemployment benefits extension is not extended. guest: the unemployment rate in my district is reported at 15%. it could be really 12% or relate 20%, but talk about it in terms of 15%. on the one hand, it is easy to sit there and say these folks are out of work and they need help and get their benefits run out, they are in a big package. i have to measure that to what i see on the ground. i tell this one story, it is symptomatic of many stories that i have heard, but i was talking to a firm looking to hire

people in cherokee county. they could not get people to come work. i asked them, is that a lack of skill sets? are we not preparing people for this particular job? it was in heavy manufacturing. no, they have to train these people. these are people that they laid out -- laid off in 2008. they said that they were growing back in which you like your old job back? they had eight months of benefits left. i had to balance those things off for whom the benefit is the necessary safety net versus the impact that subsidizing unemployment has on employment. if you pay people to be unemployed, you will get more of it. you have to do that balancing act between the proper role of the safety net and where you cross the line and start creating a culture where people would rather stay home. in this circumstance, the guy

trying to hire the folks had done the research and the people were making $12 an hour to stay at home and $16 an hour plus benefits to go to work. many would stay home rather than get that marginal $4 an hour. it is a hard decision to analyze, a difficult decision to explain, but the truth of the matter is, as long as we subsidized unemployment, we will get more of it. host: to leap from the nebraska, you are on the "washington journal" with mick mulvaney. caller: i do not believe you on how the people would not work. i live in nebraska and i make $7.25 an hour. i lost my job making $13.32, and that they called me today, i would surely go to have my

insurance and everything. i have another question. jobs, right?r but i have not seen you do many jobs and you have been there except for you doing this "in god we trust" and all the little things that does not matter to me. i need a job that pays for my bills. i hardly make it with $7.25. i do not know where you guys think that we're getting our money from. but we need help. we need jobs. give us some jobs so that we can say that you are worth paying for. guest: thank you very much. the unemployment issue is a balancing act that we have to perform. you are the solution. you are the way that we fix this thing. the folks who want to work, who would work for the sake of working because they do not want to take the benefit, those of

the people for whom the safety net is properly designed. you're not one of the ones abusing the system. my job in congress is to make sure that the taxpayer dollars are spent properly and the people like you using the safety net because they needed and is appropriate versus those of using the system. that is a balancing act that i go through. your story -- i met at teacher who was coming off of unemployment to go back to work as a teacher. she was going to make less money teaching than she was collecting there were various benefits as a single mother of two children who was laid off. she was taking a pay cut to do this, and now she has to pay for her child care. those of the people who were going to help fix the country. dedication to work is how we solve this together. keep in mind we have a system that encourages a small minority of people to take advantage of the system.

it is my job to weed that part of the system out the works the overall culture. your larger point about jobs, i know what you're saying. in god we trust, that cannot put anybody back to work. but do not overlook the fact that we have introduced over 20 jobs bill. we did not do a major large jobs bill like the president did. but we have offered over 20 jobs bills in the house that have gone to the senate and your friends in the senate, you called on the democrats' line, have killed every one of these bills. nebraska would have been a major beneficiary of the keystone pipeline. it would put many back to work in your state. but the president and the democrats are fighting that every single turn. they get put out any decisions on the routing of that until after the election. they could be available today in your state. we are fighting for them.

do their research, go to the republican website and find out what we have done on jobs. we have tried every single step of the way. listen, democrats want to put people back to work and republicans want to. if you cannot agree on that, you cannot agree on anything. we disagree on how to do it. we want you to go back to work and be able to do it for more than $7.25 an hour. we just do it a different way from the democrats. i appreciate the call but we are fighting in our own way, and i wish that it was different. all we can do in the house is passed what we think are good bills and let you decide whether and not you want to go our way and use the private sector to put people back to work or use the democratic way and use the government to put people back to work. host: you endorsed rick perry. why did you endorse the texas

governor? guest: i had a candid conversation with him and he said, look, i need the best ideas that i can possibly get. i need the best people on my team that i can possibly get. i am putting together an economic team. would you help me on things like tax policy and entitlement policy? he named some of the other people helping him including steve forbes and other people who have not come out publicly just yet. that is an attitude that you never get from a presidential candidate. that is an attitude you get from a real leader, from a real chief executive, from someone that knows that he or she cannot do the job by themselves, that recognizes delegation is how you run a business. this is the most complex and complicated business in the world, the american government. no one person can run it. the simple self awareness that

this would be a team effort to fix the country spoke volumes to me. i was extraordinarily impressed with that. i thought he was a very insightful guy. is he a great debater? absolutely not and he is paying the price for that. before the teleprompter is were around, the president thought there were 57 states. but he has offered real ideas and has a real track record. i hope he can do better, but all in all, i am comfortable with any of our republican candidates. through this campaign primary process, whoever the republicans offer will be better for us at the end than here she was going into the process. president obama proved that with his tough primary with hillary clinton and i think you see the same thing out of the republican primary. this process is designed to produce the best possible candidate that we can offer.

i am confident we will do that. host: thank you very much for being on the program. coming up in 45 minutes, we will talk with michael hirsh of the national journal. he is there a national correspondent and he will talk about the unemployed and on wanted. coming up, a discussion on labor unions and the election with donald payne. first the news update with c- span radio. >> central banks around the world say they are taking "coordinated action to ease strains on the financial system." the european central bank, the u.s. federal reserve, the bank of england, and the central banks of canada, japan, and switzerland are all taking part. ecb said that it is making it cheaper to get u.s. dollar liquidity starting next monday. they're taking steps to make

sure banks can get ready money in any currency at market conditions warrant. stocks surged following the news. dow futures in wall street are up over 240 points. meanwhile, occupy wall street protesters in some cities are being removed from parks. in los angeles, 1400 police officers hit a part earlier today to clear out the protestors. more than 200 people were arrested in the overnight raid. police moved in after the protesters refused to leave yesterday. in philadelphia, about 50 protesters were arrested when police arrived and took down their tents. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> let me be very clear. i will neither be a lobbyist or a historian. i promise you one vote. there is no way i would be a lobbyist.

i will miss this job and i will have twinges of regret when the new congress is signed up, but i will tell you this, and you will laugh, but one of the advantages to me of not running for office is i do not even have to pretend to be tried at nice to people i do not like. [laughter] some of you may think i have not been good at it but i had been trying. and the notion of being a lobbyist and tried it be nice to people i do not like would be ridiculous. no, i will not in any way be a lobbyist. i do not intend to practice law although i might show a pro bono for gay-rights case. i want to do some combination of teaching and lecturing. >> after 16 terms in the house of representatives, cornyn frank will step down at the end of next year. watch his retirement announcement as well as 1000 other appearances on the c-span networks online as the spine --

that the c-span video library. it is washington your way. >> the newly designed c- span.org website has 11 choice is making it easier for you to watch today's event. it is easier to get our schedule with you features like a three- network layout so that you can scroll through the programs scheduled on the c-span network. even received a schedule e-mail when your program is scheduled to air. you can access our most popular programs in series. a handy channel finder to quickly find where to watch our three c-span network on cable or satellite systems across the country at the of c-span.org new. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are joined now by congressman donald payne to discuss a new rule on union elections being voted on by the

national labor relations board. you have been involved in this effort as a member of a subcommittee. this is a controversial rule. first explain what the role is. guest: it is not in the nlrb. it is in the u.s. congress. it will be bought up on the floor. that is the work force democracy and enforcement act. we call it the election prevention act. it says that there has to be a minimum of at least 35 days before an election can be called at a site. that is the minimum time. currently there is no specific amount of time of 35 days. " it will do, of course, is

simply to delay the elections of that unit. what it will do is give the employer and advantage by making different allegations to the nlrb. once again, those cases would have to be heard and therefore you will have an extended period of time we're actually the businesses can weed out those who they think are union leaders in the first place. host: one of the reason is that the republicans brought this up is because of our role broad up by the national labor relations board. a shortening of the time between filing of a union and an actual election. guest: yes, that is correct. the board is down to its minimum

numbers at the current time. it needs to have a certain number of members, i think there are five members and 93 to function. -- and there are -- it needs three to function. the legislation was actually brought up at a labor committee that we had a hearing. it was voted unanimously by the democrats to oppose it to a person. so this is the legislation coming up on the floor. and that is to use certain what the nlrb is attempting to do today. -- to usurp what the nlrb is attempting to do today. host: why is this role for the nlrb needed? is there a delay between the time of union elections -- the filing for an election and the

actual election? guest: what is happened repeatedly, the employer has the upper hand. they have control over where materials are posted. the republicans say, while the nlrb can tell you the reasons that you can vote. that is true. they do not say very much about the benefits of the company. believe me, i have not been to a site where the company has not made clear why you should not be in the union. in one very large case and i will not name the company, but i visited there myself and there was an anti-labor material in companies area that could only be opened by key by the company. they had anti-labor material

locked and that could not be disrupted or destroyed. it was illegal because the company is not supposed to have worksite places that they control in order to prevent the union. if they allow the union to put their material in the same place, that would be one thing. but it was strictly anti-union material. host: we're talking with new jersey democratic congressman donald payne and if you want to join in on the conversation on the labor unions and the new rules coming up on the house floor and the national labor board relations -- and the nlrb, give us a call. if you are outside the u.s., you can call as well. congressman, then there has been a lot of criticism on this

rule from the nlrb that this is to create a quick election for unions. that gives the union members a lot of time to talk to employees about forming a union, but then springs the election on the employers. this criticism came up in the "wall street journal." this is the union version of speed dating and no wonder. union membership is down to some 7% of the private work force and falling. labor's responses to read the role so that companies have little time and fewer resources to educate workers about the risks posed by unions. when unions could not get a card checks law through even the democratic congressman, they turned to the nlrb to do their dirty work. guest: there has been union bashing since -- ever since the last 15 or 20 years.

in states like ohio, we recently saw governor kasich push legislation through the legislature which of course was rescinded by over a two-one vote in ohio. we saw what happened in wisconsin with governor walker, now facing a recall. they are in the process of getting their requisite number of signatures needed to have a recall vote. i think that unions have been treated unfairly. first of all, because of jobs stagnation and because of his worldwide competition, but on player has a very strong hand. that is why you see virtually no strike even though the number of to decrease.ntinue the businesses have made tremendous advantages.

that is why i am shocked that they are panicking on the move to simply try to have speedy elections. the other it part that you did not mention is that there is a way that the employer can categorize workers. they can take workers and gerrymander like they used to do in congress, until their loss preventing gerrymandering. they can say, we have a new category and you are not in this category and it is a category you know nothing about. this is one of the concerns that we have seen as businesses have attempted to muddy the brackets or worker said. host: is that included in the legislation on the house? here is an article about that.

is that that gerrymandering process? guest: exactly. what they would do is have unions competing in the same workplace, being more confusing, pitting people against each other. it should be a common cause. there are a number of manipulations included in this new legislation. and that is what the nlrb is trying to head off. host: lewis is a democrat from indiana. your question for the common interest in -- for the congressman? caller: there are all kinds of business associations. they support republicans. they give money to the chamber of commerce and they lobby. i think the chamber of commerce spends more money on elections than any group. i want to know how, if a

business can do that, it is all right, but it individuals want to join a union to get a better deal, they are labeled as being anti-american our socialist? guest: you're absolutely right. the new supreme court ruling indicated that businesses can on limited that do not have to give the names of the donors. there'll be a tremendous advantage for pro-republican candidates in the house and the senate races. it is unbelievable that the supreme court ruled that way. before, a company could not used company funds for political campaigns. it had to come out of the individual pockets. and they did well enough then, believe me. now you can actually take operating expenses and use it for political campaigns.

it is a sad day. host: north carolina, randy is a republican. caller: good morning. i would like to get the congressman's opinion on why it is fair in the northern states or union states to keep a qualified person from being employed if he does not want to be a part of the union. i know in right to work states like north carolina, and you can decide not to join the union and you can still work for a company that is unionized. in the northern states, if you're not willing to be a part of the union, you cannot get a job with the union company. that does not seem american to me. and i will take the answer offline. guest: i am not so sure that that is true. when a person goes for employment, they would be aware

of what the company has to offer for the window the salaries and the categories. -- they would know the salaries in the categories. whether it is a union shop or not. when a person applies for a job, they take on all the obligations and responsibilities that that particular company provides. if that happens to be a union operation, then the member is to all benefit -- and let me tell you one other thing. many people who are not unionized benefit from unions. i just introduced a resolution that commands organized labor, because what happens is that where there are not unionized workers, the companies that are competing against a unionized company tend to give basically the same benefits.

that the union workers get. and so it unions -- it is where all ships are listed by -- lifted by the rising tide. host: some concerns on the vote that will happen at to 30 p.m. of the nlrb about the way that the vote has been called. the detect chairman -- the democratic-appointed chairman has called his vote and as noted that he needs to college before the end of the year because the national labor relations board might lose its other democratic member. or is going to, he is a recess appointment. the one lone republican on the board has threatened to step down on how this election has been called. this is a letter that bryan hayes, the republican member of the board, wrote in his criticism of how this vote has come up. this is the november 18 letter

to the work force committee. i criticize the majority use of a rulemaking process that is opaque, and exclusionary, and at the surry. in contravention of the experiment -- of the spirit of the administrative procedure act, the government and sunshine that, and president obama's memorandum on transparency in open government. that criticism apparently made no impression on my colleagues who have continued this process and the same manner and without my participated. they make an unequivocal clear that they intend to publish a final rule before the expiration of a member backer's appointment without regard to port traditional role. is this heavy handed? guest: if the vote is not taken today, the nlrb will almost be ineffective. i do not look get it as being a

political vote. i see it as a vote that will be needed for the board to continue to move afford. there have been all kinds of refusals. we had more judges positions open because of republicans in the senate not confirming the persons for the position. we have more vacancies because of the senate, one person can object. they do not have to say who they are. they just put a hold on it. we have seen this stagnation of government where in order to get anything passed, it you need 60 votes plus in order to pass anything in the senate. that is not going to happen. it is not going happen now or next year or in the future. the senate is digging itself into a very deep hole where they, because of the way that they're used to be major bills that the so-called cloture would be called, and the filibuster

would be brought in. the national civil rights bill, things of that nature. today in the senate, you simply need 60 votes just to pass anything. that is really what is the paralysis in this nation. i encourage the nlrb to move forward so that it can continue to operate, because it will be defunct if it does not get the rule passed before the end of the year. host: we have a picture of bryan hayes here. he is threatening to resign before this vote today to deny the national labor relations board its quorum. a colleague question his motives, whether he had already talked to businesses about a job after this. guest: no question that if he resigns before the vote is taken, accusing the nlrb of being political, nothing could be more political than that. his resignation would prevent

the board from moving forward if he resigns before the meeting today. no question that he is working on behalf of the republican party and people who favor bashing unions and keeping unions' limited. it is only 7% now as we mentioned. i listen to your show and i even heard one of the previous members of congress this morning said that unemployment is bad because it keeps people from wanting to have a job. the congressional black caucus has five job fares throughout the country this summer. the first when i went to was in cleveland. people lined up outside the university, cleveland state, at 4:00 in the morning. we had 20,000 people standing in line all day that the lab and application for a job. i do not know where this notion comes a people do not want to work, that people would prefer

unemployment that to have a job. it is ludicrous. oft: we're with donald payne new jersey. from wisconsin, good morning. caller: thank you for c-span. a great program. congressman, you have it exactly right. this is lunacy why you would say unemployment is there when people can get a free ticket. it is absolutely insane. being from wisconsin, and seeing what has happened since ronald reagan fired the air traffic controllers. this is an outrageous attack on workers and workers rights. this is what is about. it is not about whether workers should decide whether or not they want to join a union. making wisconsin are right to work state, that is not what this is about. this is about destroying unions

and unionism, period. nothing could be more clear than that. host: the support the recall efforts? had he signed the opposition critic the petition? -- have you signed the petition? caller: absolutely, absolutely. the u.s. congress, while not an organized union, they negotiate their own the benefits and pensions, and i might add that as a u.s. congressman, if you are convicted and sent to jail of the felony, you can still collect your pension law you sit in jail. and that is a lavish pensions that they have negotiated for themselves. yes, the congress is made up republicans and democrats and independents but this is what they do. why do they want to deny that to

us working people in america? guest: i could not agree with you more. these are benefits and privileges that we have as members of congress. they started way back in 1789 when the first congress got together in philadelphia. the first committee formed was the committee on ways and means to deal with pay in travel and taxation so that we could run the government. i could not agree with you more. why would we want to deny people the same rights that we have? why would we say that it is wrong for a person to sit there and have a negotiation with their employer? i could not agree with you more. i think the overreaching of governor walker out there and wisconsin, and governor casey, i served in congress with governor ckasich, and he was talking

that stuff here in congress. they thought that they could eliminate in the ronald reagan style, firing air traffic controllers because they wanted to negotiate -- forget that. that was one of the first times that our country defied the labor laws by firing people and hiring non-union folks. i commend the people of wisconsin. i hope they are successful as people have been in ohio. and one last thing. we have heard the numbers of 70% of union membership in the country. i think you will see a resurgence, a rebirth of unionism. i think that the principles are now being clearly seen. i think that our country is having a race to the bottom. we see that wealth is concentrated in the hands of so few americans. you see the disparity between people living in poverty and those who are benefiting, it is

just unbelievable in this country. we cannot continue to have a country where as lincoln said, you cannot be half free and have slept. -- half slave. have cannot be wealthy and the other half impoverished. host: from oak ridge, tennessee. guest: well, i am one -- there may be certain areas that prisoners could be used if it is something that is just a state

function. making a license plates are things of that nature. but we have to be very careful. in the people's republic of china, many people are arrested because they are prisoners of conscience. they are put into work camps. those work camps have people who make garments, all kinds of equipment, and those products according to wto and programs of that nature, they're not supposed to use prison workers for commercial use, but everyone knows it. many of the products that come over, and we have had hearings on it in our subcommittee dealing with human rights, and so you have to be very careful when you start to say, let's have prison labor produce products. then you could see companies simply going to prisons because

the wages are like they are in mexico, $1 a day or so forth. host: you're on the phone with donald payne of new jersey. caller: i am from my right to work state. how'd you think the thing work is been slow down to produce planes in south carolina cannot movepany t its business to another state because the national labor board gets involved and tries to force the union on them y in the on -- what in the future with a do that?

guest: what the nlrb said was that boeing had planned to an expansion in washington state, where the primary manufacturing is done. there have been some labor disputes in the state of washington. boeing decided because there were having impasses with their labor unions in washington to simply scrap -- the increase was going to be in the state of washington. with the debate and discussion with the union, boeing decided to move to south carolina. you're not supposed to use a punitive action against a labor organization for its fighting the benefit of the workers.

nlrb decided that the move from the state of washington was directly responsive to what was happening in the state of washington, and therefore decided to go to south carolina. i heard a previous speaker say the next thing boeing will not go to south carolina. if boeing wanted to leave the young states of america, there would have left and not considered south carolina -- wanted to leave the united states of america. people around the world want u.s. products. even in china. people know that the u.s. product is something that is guaranteed, it will function, you have redress if the dozenit.

't. it will be difficult to compete with these wages that these other countries have. you would be surprised how many people around the world would prefer to have an american-made product if it is something that is essential. i did not think we to lose sight. we have to draw sellers doubt to be comparable to mexico in order to keep a company. that is ridiculous. those other countries, their wages are going to go oup. people are leaving mexico to go to china. there's labor unrest in china biggest people are refusing to continually work for these low wages. host: some criticism over twitter. this is joe.

carol on the democratic line from indiana. caller: i want to make a point. why do we have unions? because the company's went so far as to do terrible things to their employees. we have children working today. we know the history. i am a mother and grandmother. my children, i put through college even though their father died. my youngest child went to work for a company in fort wayne, indiana. she was on the dean's list. they wanted her to cook their books. anybody with a general

knowledge or common sense knows if you go a along with them who have the power, if anything happens, you are going to be blamed. she refused to do with it. they told there, all right, you're out. "we will keep you on as long as you can train the next college graduate." she trained him and he said, they want me to cook the books. host: do you think a union would have helped her? caller: companies have so much power. it makes me sick to pay as much as we do for a college education. these kids produce maximum grades and then they go to work for a company that would screw anybody.

host: that was carol from indiana. guest: this did not happen in our country because there was nothing else to do. we have to go back to the condition that workers, john lewis with the mineworkers, the fires in chicago where children and women perished. labor unions came about to give the worker some kind of protection. people forget that. we have seen mines explode. i went down any mine in west virginia about a year ago. i wanted to see how was it to go down in the belly of this earth and see the conditions these miners have to go through. many of the mines -- i don't

think they were unionized. people need to feel and those who are in control of the industry sometimes feel they have all of the power. absolute power corrupts. that is what made this country great. you had a counter balance of not having all the power in one hand. host: howard on the independent line. caller: thank you for c-span. you guys to a pretty good job. i was covering it when i was a journalist in college. i have six comments -- two comments. i wonder when we lost our notion that -- ask not what your

country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. it is kind of change to ask what your country can take somebody else from somebody else to give to you. the second point, a lot of these young people make a lot of money. i will not say they are the top 1% but they are in the top brackets. why not see some of these unions cut work hours down to 32 hours a week and equalize their time with the time that other nations put in. now you can hire 1/5 more people and put them into the workforce. guest: we are going to rethink how we have full employment. ofve gone through periods

depression in this country, fdr and those programs in the 1930's. we have had recessions up until the present time. one issue is how we will be able to provide jobs for people all around the world. even if you take the arab spring, what has happened in egypt and tunisia and places like that. the bottom line is people are saying they want a job. now they want jobs. we have 9% unemployment rate and we need to find jobs. i think it will be sort of a thinking or rethinking of how this planet can provide adequate

jobs for its people. one thing that is wrong is that wealth is concentrated in too people. that is a disaster for nation. the numbers are unbelievable when we look at the 1% that controls the wealth of this country and the household incomes of african-americans is 1/20 that of non-african- americans. host: georgia on the democratic line from california -- georgie. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i appreciate the congressman mentioning reagan. he was president of sag. then he busted the air

controllers. you have people that are going to school to work in the film industry, but they are not making the money because all of these places are not union. they're working 15 and 16 hours a day but they are not getting the benefits that older you and people are getting because they are not joining the union. host: what you mean are you a part of? caller: international alliance of stage and screen employees. of course i do not work anymore. i grew up and my family helped to organize the union. i grew up in a union family.

the strongest unions we have today are the longshoremen. the: let's go to college on republican line from new jersey -- colleen. caller: hello? good morning. i have two questions. a caller mentioned that a representative who is either sitting in prison or charged with felonies still collects a full-blown pension, and the sapper and had no problem with that. that means a person in new jersey working at mcdonald's is paying for that representative to sit back and collect a pension and you found nothing wrong with that. i'm sure you're fully aware of what new jersey taxpayers pay. we pay an average of $850 to

$1,000 per month all because of corzine. do you think that is a sustainable? great.colleen, we admire your county. essex and union, we have seen a lot of growth. you must have misunderstood me. i hope the other listeners -- i did not say i was comfortable with that. i said everybody should have the same right that we have. people should have the right to negotiate their salary and their wages. it is deplorable a person can get a penchant who served in congress and has been convicted of a crime. there are a number of businesses, most of them allow

that to happen. i think they should all be cut off, regardless if you work for the government or industry. i agree with you. it should be changed. you talk about property rights. the jersey is a very unique. you blame corzine for property taxes. we have about 620 municipalities in new jersey. you can go from one part of the state to another in two hours, each with its own mayor and police chief, superintendent of school. you have more school districts and municipalities. if managers it was to start to deal with its property-tax

problems, they need to look at regional government. in bergen county, you must have 50 or more towns in your county. many of whom make $80,000, $90,000. there are things that can be done. but nobody wants to give up home rule. we have to take a strong look at how our government operates if we're ever going to do a real hit on the high proper taxes of the state. host: george from michigan. caller: good morning. there's a huge disconnect and people to like to pay attention to what is really going on. the problem with the union, the

public-sector unions are paid for by the taxpayer. when we want this and we want better, it comes out of my bottom line. that is a comment. the unions are one of the strongest, the fiercest lobbyist groups out there. the politics of the unions go hand in hand now. a lot of people look at the democratic party as being owned by the unions. host: do support the recall effort? do not.ler: no, i the problem is one scott walker and was going on in ohio and what was going on with scott.

people come in and decide they will do something. the unit turns around and said, we do not like what you did. we will start the recall effort. those union dues are turned around and used against the people who are paying for them. host: list of the congress but a givee to respond -- let's the congressmen a chance to respond. guest: you would do the same thing. you're asked to contribute to the political action committees. that is part of your employment. we'll give a contribution to the pac. unions are no different. there's only 6% of union membership today.

supporters of the union are overwhelmed by the process of the private sector. for you to say that the tail is wagging the dog -- unions are struggling and they are being out with that. some to make a high salary. -- some do make a high salary. they are competing with lawyers that are getting paid five times more. to be able to go to policy papers, you have to have competent people, and in many instances they cost a bit. host: we will be watching the vote on the house floor. first, a news update from c-span

radio. >> the labor department reports that u.s. workers increased their productivity over the summer by the most in a year and a half. the gain was smaller than initially thought, just over 2%, slower than the 3 per one% estimate by the government. an update on the are rated demonstrators actions yesterday. britain's foreign office said insuring the safety of our staff and their families is our immediate priorities. britain is withdrawing all diplomats from iran. the foreign minister says britain has also ordered all our rating diplomats to leave the united kingdom. the attack on the british embassy could not have taken place without some degree of iranian regime consent. david cameron said he will consider taking some very tough actions.

norway has closed its embassy in tehran because of security concerns. the decision came after a security concerns and in context with the attack on the british embassy. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> every american soldier and prisoner will be out of the jungle and out of their cells and back home in america where they belong. cameeorge mcgovern's pledge after he spoke out publicly against the vietnam war. he suffered a landslide defeat that year to president nixon. his campaign changed american politics. george mcgovern is featured this week on c-span's "the

contenders," live friday at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> "washington journal" continues. host: everyone state we promote a recent magazine article. this week we're joined by michael hirsh. we'll do the phone lines of a bit different. if you're looking for a job, give us a call on 202-737-0001. if you stopped looking, 202-737- 0002. 202-628-ther callers, 0205. thank you for joining us. i want to start with the title of your piece, "the left- behinds." guest: that was the invention of

my editor at "national journal." i thought it fit the concept that we were trying to get across. the current long-term unemployment problem and a lot of the problems that we're seeing that are represented in the high unemployment numbers are not just an outcome of the most recent recession that began with the financial crisis, but are part of a long-term trend that we have seen over the last 30 years. we even started it in the article -- we even chart it. the number of unemployed as represented in the total unemployment has graduate ratcheted up. it is now 43.3% of the total

unemployment. that is people who have been out of work six months or more. host: we have a chart we can look at. these are the long-term unemployed. guest: the left-behinds is a way to capture the concept. it is important to look at this as a regional phenomena as well as the individual one. because they are hard hit in some particular way and because employers are avoiding hiring people who have been out of months or more. people do not want those people because there is perhaps is

skills atrophy. host: let's give some examples. you talk about stockton, california and a town in pennsylvania and the waste they became left-behind communities. guest: we went back to the old steel communities and looked at how they feared during this period. pittsburgh, reinvented itself as it health care and high-tech center. they got a lot of positive press for that. other communities grew up around the vibrant steel communities. they never fully recovered. you have all of long-term unemployed who never quite found their footing. i thought it was interesting to

compare that to the recent communities that have cropped up. you have a lot of people who are cast into unemployment because of the collapse of the housing industry. the housing industry was very big of their. re. that all collapsed after 2008 and you have a new subsection that is now long-term unemployed and will have problems finding employment. host: we have a chart. you're talking not stalking, california -- you're talking about stockton, california. host: the government added about 80,000 jobs. guest: it is gradually going

down, but slower than people thought that it would. this is now known as the jobless recovery. it is not quite that. we have seen a huge disparity in the hiring going on. a huge majority has been highly skilled, highly educated workers. those so-called low-skilled or middle skilled workers have been increasingly left behind. that is part of the same phenomenon. host: you discuss how these care about. "made possible by the free markets and information technology."

guest: we of adhering happy talk about globalization and free trade and the ability of our economy to adapt to new technologies and these huge phenomenon. some 3 million people that were part of the soviet bloc were in franchise and became part of it work force. a lot of these changes occurred. economists were not prepared -- not try to avert those policies or standing and taking an opposite view on globalization and free trade and saying we're

not going to do that. what they really underestimated were the hazards of globalization. how much of an impact it would have increased in this huge disparity of income. host: we're speaking with michael hirsh. served as a senior editor of four"newsweek -- senior editor newsweek."news. news o caller: i was downsized. i have not had a full-time job yet. i have had some part-time jobs and have tried to survive on that. i was overqualified or brought great experience to a job but i didn't have what they were looking for.

the government is supposed to retrain people. but they take the money and does not give any but the real training. i have been looking for real jobs since 2001. i was homeless for a while. what help me out with some friends. i have had a difficult time. i am on unemployment now. i'm facing homelessness again. i'm 38 years old. guest: james fits directly in to a lot of the phenomena we are talking about here. it is a sad situation. what james was referring to it was what i was talking about earlier. we have not prepared the social

buffers. the amount of money that's spent on job retraining in this country is by far the smallest of many of the major industrial economies. it amounts to about $50 million a year -- $15 million. the types of programs the government has set up over the past 30 years have been woefully inadequate in terms of coordinating with industry, community colleges, technical schools, industry, the secondary schools in terms of getting people trained up for the jobs that are out there. there's a sense we have done a poor job of helping people like ames who have been laid off

and getting them placed in equal or better jobs. during that time, you have someone like him who goes from job to job and becomes seen as sort of damage to goods, which is a term that unemployment counselors in pittsburgh used. host: we have joanie on twitter who bring up that point. this frustration that is out there. guest: james said he was 58. the older you get, 40's, 50's, 60's, it does get a little bit harder, i think. these are people -- this phenomenon goes back 30 years -- they have suffered from

government and industries inadequate efforts to get them retrained and to figure out what to do about the left behinds. david in florida. caller: good morning. i have a quick question. what do you think obama is going to do to help jobs and the economy, especially in florida? the job situation is scarce. i have been out of a job since bush became in office. i have been looking. even mcdonald's is not hiring. the think obama is going to put something in place so we have job security, or is that really is not his intention? guest: i think the president's

intention has been to get job training programs up and running for some time. what is happening in washington is basically total stalemate on almost every issue. this is becoming closer publicized as we closer to the election. last summer obama denounced a big job training, a job stimulus package that was stymied in congress. the current approach is to get it passed piece by piece. there is a debate over expanding the current unemployment insurance that is now set to expire. it is a huge fight. barack obama going into his re- election campaign has a huge interest in reducing the 9% unemployment rate and the much

higher long-term unemployment rate. that is what you're seeing here in washington, is still made. -- stalemate. host: the obama administration has been criticized for the green jobs training program. there were hoping to spend stimulus money to train workers. they spent $163 million and placed people in short-term jobs. guest: this has been consumed in the scandal over solyndra, a couple of a got support from the government and promptly went bankrupt and so the republicans and opponents of this program have held it out as an example of how the government cannot pick winners.

the question is more about the criticism the administration has gone about supporting green technologies. this dates back to the original stimulus in 2009 which included a lot of money for a green technologies and new technology. it has not worked out that well. it is a question of perhaps designing these programs more intelligently rather than picking certain companies and the tax structure. the political stalemate in washington has made almost impossible. host: we have about 25 minutes left with michael hirsh from "national journal." we go to joseph. caller: i am an ex manager from ihop.

my unemployment is about to run out. these people expected to survive on unemployment. what do they want us to do when it runs out? from what i hear in the neighborhood, people are going to go out. what did they want us to do once the unemployment runs out? right now i'm living with a friend. what is it that they want us to do? host: which the government be doing for joseph -- what should the government be doing for joseph? guest: a lot more money in these budgets in these times when there is not a lot of money to go around.

the debate is about further cutting the budget. there are certain programs that do need a lot more money. job training is one of them. there is a political debate about the unemployment insurance and whether it encourages people to stay on unemployment. the evidence is that people are using this to sustain themselves and barely that. and people do want jobs that are not getting them. maybe because they don't have the skills or they are deemed unworthy but companies that have job openings are looking -- companies are becoming picky in this environment analysts all the leverage our with the buyers. that is a sad phenomenon. what he is talking about is part of the article's thesis.

we have to step back and say to ourselves, what have we been doing to our economy? what kind of society is it in which, as some government sho figures show, the top one% has more than quadrupled their income in the last decade or so -- or last few decades. the lower 18% -- 20% have increase their income by 80%. real wages have gone down. the current debate in washington is simply not grappling with these fundamental issues. we're of having huge fights over the super committee, which fell

to come to agreement even on a small sliver of the debt problem. host: a comment on labor unions. diana from livingston, new jersey. caller: i think the fact of these job training programs are not matching us up with the skills the employers desire. i just finished a program to the department of health and human services. nobody is hiring us. nobody is giving us apprenticeships or internships. i will even work for free. they do not want eanyone. i am on job blogs.

everybody is complaining about the same thing. just google "skills gap." i say, where's the on-the-job training? they should invest in their own businesses and train people on the job and give us that experience. i think that they are sitting back and there is no demand, so they are sitting back and waiting until they are being too picky. guest: she makes a great point. in another article that i wrote, i focused on some of these companies. one was siemens, the company has a big presence in the u.s. down

in north carolina. out of frustration, not being able to fill some 3000 job openings. not just engineers but welders and technicians. they set up an apprentice program with the company got together with the local community college and set up a program where kids in high school would be learning on the job part-time after school and then would probably be hired by siemens for jobs that they were trained for. it sounds simple but that is a rarity. you don't get the kind of partnership that some other countries like germany have done better than the u.s. has. the need has become acute. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call.

it is interstate you mentioned the 1970's. i work with some committee organizing. the entire rust belt. took a hit. struggled for years. i was able to take care of my family and worked three jobs, had my own business. i worked full-time position to give my health-care insurance. i worked part-time as a teacher and i also have business as a multimedia developer. i worked until i was injured. i was able to get just before this down current. and now i feel thrown away. i have these skills doing

multimedia development. if i walked in a door with a cane and a limp at my age, they did not look to me anymore. they love my resume. just getting a part-time work -- i don't even get a response. i feel thrown away. i went on social security disability two years ago. i give up recently because of a walk in the door with a cane and a limp and they do not look to me anymore. guest: thank you. a very moving story. part of this phenomenon is still the classic economics issue of

collapse in demand and hangover from the recession, which technically ended in 2009, but has still persisted in terms of its effects on the job losses. you don't have a lot of demand or as much the man from employers as you did. you will see the unemployment rate will go down. the question is whether it will get back to where was, 5% or less when the economy was booming. you have skilled people like this gentleman feeling that they are no longer employable in this environment. companies have only tried to improve productivity and sometimes to their detriment. a lot of american companies are discovering their enduring innovation because the work forces have become so tight.

so many people are being asked to do so many things that you don't have time to come up with new ideas. host: on the training issue, gordon writes -- guest: that is another important point, one i have made in some of my articles in the past. everybody wants to go to college, liberal arts college, and yet it has become expensive. people are disparate that they are spending a lot of their working life to paying off their college loans and wondering often what that college education got them. there are kids be used to be where back when in the early part of the 20's century, there

were more readily go to vocational schools and learn a skill or a set of skills that would suit them for some particular industry. that became frowned upon. some critics have said we should beat funding more vo-tech school. the government has not done a good job of building up the vocational schools and matching up with the needs of industries. host: we're talking with michael hirsh, author of "the left- behinds." this is in the november 19 addition of "national journal." robert is looking for work from

fort worth, texas. caller: good morning. i am under employed. i worked two jobs, a part-time job and a full-time job. i am a certified teacher in texas. i am a former newspaper reporter, a free-lance writer, technical writer, technical editor, and my certification is in industrial arts and media. it is impossible to find a job to reflect on what the priest gentleman said. i feel like i'm thrown away. host: what has been the toughest part of the process for you? caller: good to repeat that -- could you repeat that? host: you feel like you have

been thrown away. caller: i think it comes from when people see my resume and they see my experience and they go down and a look at the years, the chronological listing of the jobs and they think, this guy has been around for a while. i've tried to get back into technical editing. i go to these meetings and they say, the only way you'll get back into the field since you've been out for so long, which confuses me because the english language has not changed very much in i don't know how long. but the what software experience -- but they want software experience.

this is an interesting thing. age discrimination is against the law. . new line -- i got two phone calls looking for technical writers. they send me an e-mail but they want to know might date of birth. i said, you're asking for my date of birth. that is against the law. i never hear from those people again. caller: good morning. i have a question. earlier today you let a congressman from south carolina who basically spoke about how unemployment is becoming like the welfare, sort of suggesting that americans are lazy and are manipulating the system.

the coming up set. -- that got me upset. can you speak to the data to explain what is happening about the unemployed to like in terms of employment opportunities and debunk the arguments that they're using this as a welfare type of support system? guest: to a certain extent i can. you're right, there is an unfair bias against those who are collecting unemployment. these long, outdated stereotypes of people who simply want to exist off of that or identifying unemployment recipients with welfare. it is not correct.

this phenomenon, 43.3% of the workforce that is now considered long-term unemployed, it is not something that just came out of this recession. it has been growing over a period of three decades or more and is part of his larger structural forces and the inability of our government, the inadequacy of the government's response to that. many of these people are called up in this long-term historical phenomenon. they should not be blamed because they are collecting unemployment. the previous caller found himself getting turned away at the door. this is not their fault. host: susan from san diego writes in to share her story.

host: let's go to jerry from minnesota. he has stopped looking. go ahead. caller: i would like to know where this gentleman and his government basically, where they are looking. i walk out my door and i see hispanics that i know are not legal, working around me. a walk in my bank and i see some mullions -- somalians. workers have been replaced by foreigners. host: of these illegal immigrants, do you believe --

are these illegal immigrants? caller: they are employed. guest: illegal immigration is a problem. there has been a long-term perception that good american jobs are being taken by immigrants. in many cases, you are seeing them in the lowest paying jobs. you're seeing them working at retail stores or in restaurants or whenever. these are not necessarily jobs that a lot of american workers want to work. they are used to something better. i don't think the illegal immigration problem is the biggest part of the problem we are talking about. host: we are talking about the loss of the middle class as well. host: 20 is still looking in

tennessee -- tony. caller: i have been unemployed for two years. fivest job i was the forfiv years. i have multiple friends in the same situation. they were getting replaced. this reduces the quality of work. i am in it right to work state. companies can reduce their payrolls. this is their way of getting rid of employees to cut the cost. i am in commercial maintenance. guest: anything having to do with building or construction or maintenance of new buildings related to the collapse of the construction industry in the

aftermath of the subprime mortgage disaster has been among the hardest-hit sectors. this may just be a cyclical collapse. but the set as phenomenon you will see is a number of people who did attaint a certain level of security in income in the housing industry or related industries are going to be joining numbers of the long-term unemployed. work,nger you're out of the more leery employers get of you, the more they suspect that you may not have the right work ethic or your skills may have disappeared. you may not have kept up with the latest technology. you become part of this category of the left-behinds or the thrown-aways, people feel like

they are discarded by the economy. host: we have a comment on twitter. host: us go to sharon in north carolina but let's go to sharon. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i watch "washington journal" every morning. i've been out of work since 2008. i look for a job like it was a jobs. i went on some interviews. i would go six months without even a bite on anything. i am an older worker. i did nothing to was a problem because my skills were so high

because i always kept that up. i still i hope. unemployment sustained me all that time. in 2009, i went on a job interview base said-- i talked to somebody on the phone, a telephone interview. they said, do you have a bachelor's degree to duke and accounts receivable job? "a bachelor's degree"? i said, why do i need to have one of those? they said it is and employers market and they want people to do this type of job with a bachelor's degree. i said, what? so i kept looking and went on a job interview and took everything off might resume that

showed my age. i just turned 60 in june. ididn't telamon graduated -- did not tell them when i graduated. the shock on the woman's face. they saw that i was older. i was discriminated against. i'm a singer back in school and will be getting my bachelor's degree in business management. it sure keeps me agile and accused by brain flowing accuse me frand ickes be from going ofe earth. i have to rent out three rooms out of my house. host: michael in san diego.

caller: good morning. give me your opinion on a situation about robotics. we'll know that workers need to take bathroom breaks and lunch breaks. why pay a human being to do a job when you could have a robot do a job 24 hours a day. now the company is making their profits. have a good day. guest: look, robotics, new technology, it is all part of these changes occurring in the workforce. a lot of it is inevitable. you want america to have a high- tech economy. the question becomes finding the right kind of