tv Washington Journal CSPAN December 12, 2011 7:00am-10:00am EST
7:00 am
pension plans for american airlines due to its bankruptcy. later, "education week" staff writer talked-about the education department's title i program. "washington journal" is next. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] host: welcome to "washington journal" this monday, december 12. the prime minister of iraq visits the white house today. president obama and vice president biden will host a meeting with him in the oval office. they will also go in front of the press and then the leaders will attend a wreath laying ceremony at arlington national cemetery. as the u.s. pulls its troops out of iraq before the end of the year. our question for you this morning, is what should the u.s.-iraq relationship be in
7:01 am
7:02 am
also on the prime minister's agenda this week, he will be going to the chamber of commerce. this is tomorrow. he will be in washington, d.c., addressing that group. here is a press release from them. he will help launch a new chapter in bilateral relations of the two countries. and he will highlight the growing commercial ties between the united states -- and calls on the u.s. business communities to seize investment and trade of trinity's available to them in iraq. looking at some of the political implications of what is happening, there are stories in the news about that, covering
7:03 am
what it means for president obama and also what it means for the economy of the u.s. this is a story from "bloomberg business week." this story came from when the super committee was still at work but it is still relevant because it asks the question about what happened with the money. cheryl, new jersey. robert on the republican minority caller: good morning. i just have two quick comments. it seems to me that with the war in iraq or even extending a little bit to afghanistan, that there are situations in place where the president and others have said by a certain time,
7:04 am
2014 or 2012, we will pull out. and then there is supposedly all of this paid a non-military personnel that will stay. we will take out 100,000 people but leave another 100,000 contractors, which might cost more money. that is my concern. i think if we pull lot of these places, we should really pull out. if i could just make one other quick comment with regard to something that has been said quite a bit on c-span lately? there was a big talk from republicans about the redistribution of wealth. there should not be a redistribution of wealth. interesting, coming from me, a democrat. but when you think about these europeans, if i might be honest, who went in and stole everything, the jewels from africa, that was redistribution of wealth. when the ripped off the incas and the mine and and stole all of the gold and ripped off of
7:05 am
the native peoples and bought a manhattan with a candy bar and trinkets, that is a redistribution. i think it is dishonest finally to have all the wealth hidden with yourself and now be against the redistribution when the europeans ripped off the world from england to africa and now all of the sudden people are concerned are redistribution of wealth. i think the whole story is dishonest. host: here is a comment on twitter that echoes what roberts said -- let's hear from milan from new york, new york. democrat line. caller: i would like to say that i think iraq should be a full- blown nation and not groveling -- and i on? and should not be groveling to the united states but we will
7:06 am
have a well entrenched listening post for the rest of the middle east so i guess they will have to deal with us as much as our money goes there. our footprint is forever there, but it would be nice to have a presence in the middle east, but one of equal adulthood rather than a junior nation and a senior nation type of situation. colonial power laying on a smaller country. that is my comment. host: you can go to c-span.org to find more about the prime minister al-maliki's visit to the united states. the president and vice president will -- will meet with him in an expanded bilateral meeting and then the present need some at the oval office closed to the press. and then a joint press conference. and the presidents, vice president, and prime nestor
7:07 am
nouri al-maliki will go to a wreath laying ceremony at arlington national ceremony. you can find out more on our website, c-span.org. john, a republican from nashville, tennessee. what should the relationship be? caller: i believe the iraqi and the u.s. relationship should be more informative to the american public so they know the history as far as how the united states supported iran obverses -- iraq versus iran when they were fighting against one another, as well as the concentered -- continued process to rebuild infrastructure, schools, roads, and create education, jobs, so the iraqi people can sustain an economy and a way of life that is productive for everybody. host: charles from north carolina. joe on our democrats' line.
7:08 am
caller: i want to comment on iraq. president obama had cleaned up the mess and that george bush and cheney and rumsfeld had started over there, and now it is time to get out. but one other point, iran. we sanctioned them too much and they have not paid attention. it is time america and the nato forces go over there and do something about it. they have gotten one of our airplanes now. and we need to do something. they are going to bomb the jewish people if we don't be careful. those are my comments. host: looking at "the wall street journal" the headline is --
7:09 am
7:10 am
the oil companies in this world have a lot of power. and i really don't think they should have that power. and i think the oil companies are pumping more oil out of the gulf of mexico than they are telling the people about. i think it is a real shame. that blown out oil well should have woken up a lot of people, up to 50,000 barrels a day. over 40,000 wells in the gulf of mexico. do the math -- that is a lot of oil. i just want to wish you guys a happy holidays. host: let me ask you -- are you still with us? what do you think about the phase now? you talk about the past relationship of what he thinks about going for? how should i give the u.s. presence be there for -- or the
7:11 am
oil bank companies? caller: it is something that was worked out anyway. there is nothing we can do about it. the oil companies have to much power in this world, and that is the truth. they decided to end the war in iraq and it ended. host: from twitter -- arlington, virginia, david joins us on the democrats' line. caller: on the conclusion of the iraq war, my view is that iraq should go to the united nations or the la hague and get resolution where the country who invaded them would pay for everything, plus should be
7:12 am
sanctioned. from a historical view, that is what should be done. host: sean, independent line. caller: if we are going to leave iraq we need to totally leave iraq. we also have all the other bases in the surviving crunch -- surrounding countries. after desert storm, we said we were leaving. we set up no-fly zones over iraq. if we are leaving, we totally need to shut down the other bases. host: let us go to clinton, maryland, and hear what robert bass to say. calling us on the republican line. caller: i think it is all -- on the part of the administration. he claims to be pulling 8000 troops out but we are leaving 20,000 people there and a billion dollar embassy.
7:13 am
we exercise hegemony control over their region for knows how long and we will continue to be there for hundreds of years. i hope the democrats are aware that this president has created more wars than george bush did and they are being taken for fools. host: let us look at a story from the npr web site looking at the political implications of the timing of the pullout.
7:14 am
birmingham, alabama on our democrats' line. welcome, eric. caller: thank you. what i would like to say is it as best we come out of iraq. we do not have the money. and the reason why really these wars are started is to support the industrial complex. if the people of the united states just let the people of egypt -- they are not behind these words. there are very few people who profit off of these wars. what i have to say about the tax issue of these wars, which was not paid for, the first time in history, we need to raise taxes to pay for these wars so my grandkids and kids to not have to pay for them. we started them. we need to pay for them. that is all you hear the republicans talk about is they did not want to pay the deficit which is running up. they ran it up so they need to
7:15 am
pay for it. they the military men fighting the wars more money. they deserve a more than a contractors. if you take the contractors out -- will we are doing is providing security for china to go over there to profit. thank you. host: a comment on facebook -- on twitter, arnold ways and -- weighs in -- caleb, independent line from missouri. caller: i find it funny that we talk about all of the atrocities that were committed by saddam hussein but we deal with china every day.
7:16 am
all the abortions and all the stuff. it is about the oil out there right now. and the oil companies should pay the contractors over there protecting the oil lines and the shipments to the sea so they can bring it however, distributed however. but it does not have anything to do with our military. and i believe our tax dollars are going to protect the oil companies and the distribution of the product. host: let us hear what a viewer pass to say on email -- oliver from mclean, virginia. republican. good morning. caller: i just came from iraq. i had a long-term visit. i was on the ground talking to
7:17 am
iraqis and every -- almost every city are around baghdad. host: what were you doing there? caller: i went there for a business visit. and i can tell you iraq is thriving and the americans should be proud of what our men and women did in iraq. basically they changed the nation -- the whole setting and the tone of the iraqis now is about business, about democracy. they don't talk about wars anymore. they did not talk about the state of israel. this is great step toward democracy. that is one thing. the other thing is -- when we talk about iraq, we cannot say that the united states should have influence because other countries have influence there. we have influence from surrounding countries, their own interest. as americans, the people where we spent treasure and blood over there, we have the of the presence but not in the
7:18 am
military. because military presence -- but we have to have a present, either civilian presence, business presence. i call upon american countries to go over there and get their business there. we cannot leave the country for the chinese or the europeans. america spend a lot of treasure and blood over there and we should have a priority. the last thing is, what president george w. bush did, basically an earthquake in the middle east. now we see, because of iraq, we see democracy is thriving in every other country. we have to give credit to president george bush. the state of israel is more secure than ever. and this is a great achievement in the right direction. thank you. host: let's look at some other stories in the news, what is happening on capitol hill --
7:19 am
7:20 am
congress this week. good morning, erik wasson. thank you for talking with us today. what is the biggest battle that faces members of congress before they leave for the holidays? guest: i think the payroll tax extension is the highest profile. it looks like the spending on the bus, the trillion dollar package, is on a much better course toward resolution. the worst sticking point, about labor, health, interior, environment provisions, lots of these provisions called riders on the bill, that were sticking point. but there is a fail-safe that you could just extends funding at just the current lover -- levels and those bills under a continuing resolution. i think the chances of a government shutdown are very minimal. on the other hand, the payroll tax extension remains unresolved. looking to get out of town at the end of the week. eric cantor, majority leader,
7:21 am
put out a notice saying it could go on further into the weekend or next week. so, i think the payroll tax extension is the big item of the week. host: is the fact that there is some agreement being reached, cr which expires saturday night, the fact that members of congress cannot sing to be headed for a big showdown, is it a sign of compromise or the unwillingness? what does it mean? guest: it seems to be a sign of all this debt dealing holding up and that is a decision leadership made at the time just to stick with it. that a deal set and overall top one spending number of -- with a little extra for disaster aid. it looks like the bill will come in at $1.05 trillion, a compromise having been reached on disaster aid. a decision to stick to that and not reopen and tried together a lower number, i think smooth
7:22 am
passage largely set the tone for appropriators to work out a deal. it is almost on the bus -- om nibus, nine bills and one, it is something the gop does not preferred to do but they will try to get the individual bills next year when the have more time to work on it. this year's appropriation process did not to started until late because the 2011 spending process was still going on until april when a government shutdown was narrowly averted. host: as members of congress consider going home for the holidays, how the aid -- do they deal with the lower approval rating and do they see an opportunity before they lead to improve it? guest: i think there is an increasing amount of wary about anti-incumbency feeling. it is now at the highest on record. that will hurt everybody.
7:23 am
sticking to the debt ceiling delaware to show the people thatd peopleeal, -- deal, to show something is being done, i think there was another crisis done everyone would certainly suffer and the mutually assured destruction crisis is pushing the white house and to them together. at the same thing for the payroll extension, they want to get the deal ultimately so they will probably see something. host: tell us more about what might be still on the table with this payroll tax reduction effort. where is there room to negotiate? guest: it is interesting, the massive gop bill is going to the rules committee tonight, and likely a vote tomorrow or wednesday. that bill is a big package that includes not only the payroll tax extension, as you mentioned, but an extension of insurance --
7:24 am
and reducing the number of weeks people can take on unemployment insurance benefits, and restricting eligibility, allow states to drug tests. also contains a fixed, a provision in medicare law where doctors would receive a massive cut if it is not packaged in the beginning of the year. and it includes a host of items to pay for these, including things like national flood insurance. one thing i brought into today's edition of "the hill" in extending the flood insurance program, the expected $4.9 billion of savings. there is a little dispute about the accounting on that. but i do know they are waiting into a big fight within the insurance industry between state farm and other insurers about how fema manages these former
7:25 am
state farm insurance policies. by putting a must-pass legislation of their with a lot of provisions -- out there, there are a lot of things on the table. the bill looks set to pass probably by a close margin from the gop caucus, but it is pretty much dead in the senate as harry reid, the senate majority leader, has said, so it will be a negotiation between that bill and that alternative which is a more generous payroll tax break paid for with a surtax on millionaires, which is anathema to the gop. i would think it is a combination of these bills that will be the final product. host: erik wasson, staff writer for "the hill." let us look at a common, to us from twitter.
7:26 am
our question is about the u.s.- iraq relationship, what should be in a postwar era. primus and nouri al-maliki appears in washington this week visiting with the president and vice president -- prime minister nouri al-maliki. and it will be laying a wreath at arlington national cemetery today -- they will be laying a wreath at arlington national cemetery. a viewer weighs in on e-mail -- lafayette, louisiana. mary on the independent line. caller: good morning to you, c- span viewers. way back on the guy who talked about iran and how we should go
7:27 am
over there and take care of the country as we ran over there because of what they don't want to do. i would like to pose a question vote -- to all human beings. what makes you think that you have the right to either prevent or bang for another human being to do things he don't want to do. if he is not trying to kill you at the moment, if he is not trying to steal from you at the moment, what makes you think you have a right to harm him? as long as you did not put your hands on me, i have nothing to do with you. i would like america, if they are really christians, to get god in their lives and really find out who gave you to -- the right to force another human being to do what you don't want to do. host: darrow, democrats' line. welcome.
7:28 am
caller: one of the many lives we were told of the beginning is the iraq war would cost no more than $40 billion to $60 billion. that is what we were told by paul wolfowitz. so far it has cost almost $800 billion, and still counting. we went over there because they had weapons of mass destruction, which was a lie. the only nation in the middle east that's as weapons of mass destruction is israel. illegal weapons of mass destruction. i can't understand the american people. we all knew this was a lie and they call in here and act like everything is fine now. we destroyed that country and murdered over a million people. i don't know how they can set up here and act like it was nothing and why george bush is not in jail, i can't understand it today. you have a great day. host: de "the washington post" talking about the nation going
7:29 am
7:30 am
the line, turkey will attack the kurds in the north, and not only that, with the ba'athist party, they will start fighting with the other people and it will turn into a civil war. a year from now after we pull out we might have to go back in there. i predict the iranians will be real happy and everything to make as much trouble as they can. you know, it is hard to say what will happen to the future, but it doesn't look good. host: here are some numbers reported by "the wall street journal."
7:31 am
this cover story called "after iraq" -- book raton, florida. windy, republican caller -- wendy. caller: the thing that occurs to me -- where is the oil? we go to other countries and we free them and give our lives, and we went to afghanistan, same thing -- talking crazy over there, saying we are out to get there. but if we are going to go free a country, they have no gratitude. why did they pay us back in oil? thank you. host: texas. james, independent line. caare you with us? caller: hello?
7:32 am
yes -- yeah, i want to talk about the relationship between iraq and america. host: what do you think? caller: i do not think we suggest -- i think we should get our troops back and not look back and more. we took the bad guy out and now it is up to them. i think american troops should be minding their own business and coming back and spending the money we spent over here. host: let's go to our next caller -- missouri on our democrats' line. caller: the gods are dead but in their name humanity is sold in maine, the tinsel priest sit- down with proffer is at the fees, blessed the -- garland around the butchers' sword and poor freely now as then the sacramento blood of man.
7:33 am
7:34 am
spending, this story from "the washington post." some stories in politics, this coming to us from "the baltimore sun," looking at how things are playing out in the republican race for the presidential nomination. romney and a race not suited for him. the candidate shows unease going on the offensive. "the washington post" says republicans are scrambling to curb new gingrich's lead. romney discounts latest polls. "the washington post" has a profile of rick perry. here is that this -- big picture of him.
7:35 am
our question for you this morning is about u.s.-iraq relationship and what you think it should be going forward. let's hear from jen, republican line from massachusetts. -- jim. caller: my question is, how are we going to win -- take on obama when we have problems with our people like newt gingrich, out to chase every female he can find. you look like one of the comrades -- why can we get to a democrat to talk to? why do we always have republicans? host: leadscope to michigan. jesse. what do you think about the
7:36 am
u.s.-iraq relationship? caller: it was based on a lie. they had no business there in the first place. i can't believe we have people here -- "washington journ talking about iraq, but not taking care of our own people here. every country in sticking our nose in the business -- you know what? america and israel the most threat to peace in the world. iran has no -- and other countries. iran does not have military and other countries. we need to get out of the imperialism we have and take care of our own a business.
7:37 am
as far as i'm concerned, he is doing the same thing george bush is doing. all you so-called obama lubbers, this man is not doing anything to bring peace to the world -- all you so-called obama lovers. host: let's hear from president obama himself talking about how he is doing as president. he was a guest on "60 minutes" last night. here is what he has to say about reaching across the aisle. >> i think when i came into office in 2008, faugh -- it was my firm belief at such an important moment in our country, there is no reason why democrats and republicans could not put some of the old ideological baggage aside and focus on common sense, what works, practical solutions to the top problems we were facing. and that think the republicans made a different calculation, which is -- was screwed up the
7:38 am
economy, obama seems popular. our best bet is to stand on the sidelines and at some point just blame him. so, we have not gotten the kind of engagement from them i would have liked. host: president obama on "60 minutes" last night talking about how he is reaching out to republicans. let's look at some of the headlines on politico today. one headline -- and there is also a profile of barack obama's 2012 campaign manager and looking at what his role is. and here is a story about republicans -- "gop takes a packaging path."
7:39 am
in a counterpoint to president obama, let us hear what senator lindsey graham had to say on "meet the press" on nbc. >> i think the issue is he has a failed presidency, and he did not talk about the things he has done to make america a stronger, better place, in a bar partisan fashion. ronald reagan sat down with tip o'neill, bill clinton sat down with newt gingrich to balance the budget and end welfare as we know what. this all speeches about pitting one group of americans against the other and his policies are the biggest threat to hard- working americans. if you are a union guy, this pipeline would be good news to you because it would create 20,000 jobs, and it almost
7:40 am
caused a facility in south carolina that would cost 10,000 hard-working south carolinian their jobs -- the environmental policies of this administration makes it very hard to create a job. host: our question is on the u.s.-iraq relationship and what should become aware be think it should go from here? minnesota, jack on our independent line. good morning. caller: you are looking great. it is what it is, it is what we plan for when we invaded. we have a great vassal state now in the midst of two-thirds of the words the world's oil when we only have 2% of the oil itself. halliburton has great contracts to develop the oil fields. at the oil companies, exxonmobil, has a great contract, allowing the ceo to
7:41 am
bank $76 million. the same thing with ray hunt of hunt oil, now a for billionaire, and now the the military industrial complex can sell lots of weapons to our new "allied." best of all, we have a great ramp for invading iran so we can grab another 10% of the world oil in the wake of p. goyal. mission accomplished. host: here is a comment from twitter b -- jim is on the democrats' line from daytona beach, florida. good morning. caller: yes. when we went over to iraq in the first place, it was democracy. it was not what they wanted.
7:42 am
they wanted to have control of their -- their own country. now that we are severing our ties basically with iraq, iran is going to run the show as soon as we are out of there. i don't see really what we accomplished, if anything at all. they talk about oil. the only part of the oil we will actually get is what iran tell them we can have. we can see this is not going to turn out the way we think it is going to turn out. host: a comment on facebook -- other common from twitter -- -- comments from twitter -- angeles, jim, independent line.
7:43 am
caller: thank you other ticket michael. we went into iraq for the neo con israel agenda. we are not getting any oil from iraq. we did not talk about it in the news but it is discussed in the "transparent kabal" book, i did an interview with him about that and you will not see any other interview on american media but you can go to -- host: what did you learn? caller: the bottom line is the same neal conservatives and the rest of the pro-israel lobby are pushing obama in an election year to go to war with iran. how many more americans will have to die for israel in the middle east? we already had 5000 americans die in iraq. or troops are not coming home. they will be reece situated into kuwait to keep an eye on iran for israel. we are already broke. general petraeus said these
7:44 am
neal conservatives falling over themselves about how much we have to support israel. general petraeus told me -- u.s. support for israel and the middle east is a threat to u.s. troops and theater. it is incredible. the e-mail exchange as i had with general petraeus last year conveyed how much influence the neal conservative -- max boot, and he is pushing for military intervention in pakistan as well. host: stephen, a democrat writes -- johnny is in houston, texas. democrats' line. joanie, excuse me. caller: i did not finish -- i
7:45 am
heard someone else talking. host: you are on the air right now. caller: my comment is they already want him and onetime president. i think he has been treated the worst president i have ever seen -- i have been around since dwight d. eisenhower. and things just came out -- hello? i am just calling to give my comment. thank you for answering the phone. i know this time is greater than ever -- the one that has his back wakes us all up each morning. thank you for listening to me and all of you have a pleasant day. host: here is an e-mail --
7:46 am
on twitter, chris says -- finally, a story from "and it times" related to iraq -- you can read that act "the new york times" online or in print. the press and is, what to do with the last detainee. you can find out more about prime minister nouri al-maliki's visit on our website, c- span.org. we will have coverage today of his visit to the white house and his trip to arlington national secretary. up next, how pro-life issues are
7:47 am
playing out in campaign 2012. we will be right back. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> there is much more to the newly designed c-span.org, 11 video choices, making it easier to watch today's events live and recorded. our online schedule and the three-network layout so you can swiftly -- quickly scrolled through the programs and receive an e-mail alert when your program is scheduled to act. more access to our popular programs like "washington journal," "campaign 2012," and "american history tv." see where our sees the networks are available on satellite and
7:48 am
cable systems across the country. and click on c-span products for dvd's and books, mugs and more. all on the new c-span.org. >> which part of the u.s. constitution is important to you? our question for this year's studentcam competition, open to middle and high school students. make a video documentary 5-8 minutes long and tell us the part of the constitution that is important to you, and why. include one -- more than one point of view and video -- c- span video were big programming. the grand prize is $5,000. for all the details, go to studentcam.org. >> the fcc is a new deal era agency, a lot of promises in the way of destruction that art and era ago. i think we do need it, but i do think at some point, five commissioners, this many of his party, this many of that party,
7:49 am
organized, administrative procedure act -- in the internet age it may become too cumbersome. >> former fcc chairman and former -- now head of the national cable association michael powell talked about issues affecting the telecommunications industry, tonight at 8:00 on "the communicators" on c-span is read. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we have the president and ceo of americans united for life action. i wanted to talk to about the 2012 race and the republican nomination and how the candidates are ranking in their opinions regarding pro-life issues? you had an opportunity to meet with nick kingery last week. it was a relatively intimate meeting -- you had an opportunity to meet with newt gingrich last week. guest: it was a very good meeting.
7:50 am
there have been a whole series of meetings with candidates, and he specifically asked to be next in line. we met with quite a few of them to really just have a chance to ask some direct questions about specific questions. it went all across the waterfront. and it was very candid, frank. people expressing concerns and getting to ask direct questions. host: what types of questions was the former speaker asked on pro-life issues? guest: he was asked to kind of talk about clarifying and going into details about various policy things. i asked him specifically about his comments a couple of weeks ago about life beginning at implantation, which was kind of a reversal of a consistent theme of is that life begins at conception, which is the scientific position to take. a clear definition about life beginning there. he basically explain to me -- we
7:51 am
had a long conversation about it -- that he had misspoken, that he was thinking about experimentation on embryos, and that it did not reflect his true position. i think it was a confusing statement on his part for pro lifers, and i thing we just have to wait and see if he manages to maintain a consistent stand on the position. host: charmaine yoest is our guest, americans united for life action. here are the numbers to call -- speaker gingrich has changed positions on some issues related to abortion issues. topics related to that that are often of interest to your organization -- here is a story we pulled off of the web, from
7:52 am
the "de maureen register -- "des moine register" -- the question whether they realize gingrich has an past spoken in favor of federal funding for an embryonic stem cell research and abortion in certain cases. guest: i think that is a question he certainly needs to address. when i talked to him, he was very clear that he was opposed to embryonic stem cell research and that he wanted to take a look at in vitro fertilization and hall -- how the beginnings of life, and how it influences public policy. i think it is very healthy that people are digging into the specifics of the issue, although our organization does not take a stand during primaries when we
7:53 am
have multiple candidates who are pro-life, because i think it's it's really important for people in this election in particular that this president, running for reelection, is the most pro- abortion president that we have seen in our history. so, while we are really grateful people are paying attention to the specifics of public policy, we also want to call attention to their real dramatic contrast in a president who, for example, one of the issues that we are hearing about on the campaign trail that we think needs more attention is the issue of combat -- supreme court justices. it is next president almost certainly will have multiple opportunities to shape the courts by putting in new appointments. and we have seen this president put in the two very, very proactively pro-abortion candidates on the supreme court. i myself testified against the both justices kagan and
7:54 am
sotomayor. that is a concern of ours. we are encouraged by the fact that the candidate in the republican side have taken stands on that. host: besides the new gingrich, what candidates also best represent your group? guest: there is a dramatic divide between -- we already know the candidate is going to be on the democratic side and he has been aggressively pro- abortion, so on the republican side, we are still in this process of seeing how these candidates differentiate themselves. that is a healthy back and forth between them as they work to do that. host: is the bottom line where they are now or this change over time matter? if you see a change in some of the candidates stance that they have now that perhaps they did not have in the past -- thinking mitt romney, even nuking bridge in some ways -- do you trust a candidate -- thinking it romney
7:55 am
and and newt gingrich in some ways. guest: i love the chance we have a chance to talk about it on c- span, because in sound bites you do not have enough time to stake out a clear position on it. sometimes people get too focused on a change being necessarily bad. from my perspective, if you're a candidate who is changing and looking at their position in a very intelligent way, and thinking through the issue, it is always on to lead them, if they are being honest, to a more pro-life position there and i welcome change, as long as it is in the direction of becoming more pro-life and being willing to defend life and law. host: doris on our democrats' line from chicago. caller: good morning. i would probably call this young lady's organization the organization against women's rights. this group portrays women as
7:56 am
being too stupid and ignorant to have control of their own bodies. this movement has been conducting this war on women ever since the 1980's and it is rooted in violence and intimidation and oppression of women. i was reading a book by "frank schaffer," and his father founded the movement and they said behemoths -- the one to impose christian evangelical law. guest: thank you for your call, doors. i am always -- obviously i am a woman, a woman who spent 10 years at the university of virginia working on a phd. i am always slightly and use the people accusing me of being anti-woman and being -- at hamas
7:57 am
attack of calling our position stupid. i think it would be more helpful for everyone if we focus on making specific arguments about public policy instead of making accusations. i have invested my entire life in public policy on this issue. so, i cannot think is helpful to call our position anti-woman, particularly when you are not looking at the fact that i believe that there is a real targeting of women before birth all across the world. if you look at the international movement, particularly in china and india, you see girl babies being the ones targeted by abortion. i think it is a nonsensical argument to say that the pro- life position is anti-woman. host: republican in beverly hills, michigan. caller: good morning. first of all, thank you for c- span. you are a godsend. i have had the opportunity to
7:58 am
observe an ultrasound -- a number of ultrasound of women who were pregnant, either just early pregnancy or even beyond. the other day i observed one of a baby, eight weeks after conception, and we were actually able to see the heart -- here a hard day -- here a heartbeat. there are so many people who are pro abortion was say this is not a human being. certainly this is a human being, a human life. it is not a snail like or a dog like or a tree life, it is human life. and i am concerned very much that our president supported partial birth abortion as well. it is unbelievable that anyone would support the horrific way of killing a human being. host: tell us about the candidates who are running for
7:59 am
president on the republican field, do any of them aligned with your values? caller: i think probably newt gingrich aligns certainly with my values, as well as direct santorum and michele bachmann -- rick santorum, and i think romney does. i think he changed his position. as your guest just said, sometimes people are further educated and learn that truly this is human life. i am very concerned also about the choice of supreme court justices that your speaker just a grant -- addressed. these people do not represent the majority of people who are pro-life. guest: judy, thank you for calling and i am glad you bring up this issue of sonograms because this has dramatically changed the landscape in terms of how the pro-life issue is being discussed. just this last week, americans united for life announced we
8:00 am
hired abby johnson, who used to be a director of the fourth largest revenue producing affiliate for planned parenthood in texas, and the critical moment where she became pro life was and watching a sonogram-guided abortion where she saw the baby as the procedus going forward we see such a dramatic impact from science and technology really eliminating the unborn human life and how much we can do to address human life even before it is born, babies who need to have surgery. joining our staff to look at planned parenthood and the abortion industry goes to a discussion we see on the campaign trail, which is the question of how much the federal government is funding abortion. we've been drawing attention to the fact over $360 million of
8:01 am
taxpayer dollars goes to planned parenthood, that is $1 million a day. this is another issue in addition to judges we believe is going to be an increasingly big issue on the campaign trail as the as the president to account for how much money is going to the abortion industry from federal tax dollars. host: our caller mentioned rick santorum but let's hear what he had to say yesterday talking about his state. >> there was a conservative revolution to try to get rid of him as speaker. that does not happen very often we have the speaker of the house at a time when republicans are on the ascendancy and the person who led them in large respect to that would have that kind of rebellion within the ranks among conservatives. i think that should tell you something. host: rick santorum talking about newt gingrich and looking at where he has come from since newt gingrich has been under
8:02 am
public scrutiny for decades now for his role in the house. rick santorum said he is the "true conservative" candidate. that he has been a stalwart of conservative values from religious issues in states to abortion. what do you think about his candidacy and why isn't he getting more momentum right now? guest: some of what i'm hearing from the ground and iowa is history of fantastic job and getting a lot of traction in iowa. i think the terrific job his during the campaign trail is a good example of how much dynamism others in his campaign and how much -- people have been laughing about the twists and turns that have taken place on the republican side of the campaign. i think that is very healthy and shows there is a really dynamic conversation going on and senator santorum is really driving the life issue on the campaign trail in a very good
8:03 am
way. host: independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am totally against abortion. i do believe a woman has a right over her own body, but we have over 7 billion people on this earth. most of them dying. we have sailing pollution. where are we going to put these people? how are we going to feed and clothe them? we have third-world countries, women popping out babies left and right. children are starving every day and we're worried and this spoiled country about abortion. let's get real. control birthrates, keep the population low, and work together. is that possible? guest: i share your concerns for the environment. i think it is important to be good stewards of our resources that we've been gifted with. but where we differ is i believe
8:04 am
human beings are one of those resources. it is a question of whether or not you see each individual human rights the -- life as unique and contributing to human progress or whether or not use the human beings somehow as a liability. i would encourage you to read carefully about it -- there's a lot of debt to back up the assertion that would make to you that protecting human life and events in the interest of human life is really overall economically -- it is an exciting generator of human progress. if elected the data closely, it backs that assertion up. host: our democratic line. good morning. guest: how are you? caller: i want to make several comments. they should not call it pro- life, but pro birth. once a woman is forced to have the child, if they do not have
8:05 am
the means to take care of it their solution is to give away for adoption or, too bad. they're cutting funding to help these children to have sufficient food to ,care, school, and everything else. to me, that is wrong. if you really care about pro- life, you'd be going, we need to put more money in, not less, to help these children out, you know? they say, well, the women should not have sex. that is ridiculous. that has not worked in 5000 years. another thing, when a woman has a miscarriage, according to the republicans, the child is a gift from god. if that a miscarriage, did god create an abortion? host: you have raised a lot of issues. let me zoom in on one near and dear to my heart, which is you raise the issue of adoption.
8:06 am
my own family, in my extended family, it has been deeply enriched by adoption. there are so many people waiting who are so anxious and willing to raise all the unwanted babies in our country. i did this important focus of the facts the really are not any unwanted children. adoption of such a vibrant opportunity. one of the other issues you raised about when women are in need during their pregnancy, one of the issues americans united for life focuses on is partnering with pregnancy care centers, which are very excited movement in this country to be a resource to women through care net and are the international, two groups we work with, that really do fantastic work in helping women when they're in need during their pregnancies. host: michigan, republican. guest: i feel i have important issues to add to this
8:07 am
conversation. in relation to the age demographics that abortion has traded in this country, we have a baby boomer generation that out numbers the xers and yers and the zers by great amount. simply because they aborted their children instead of having them. now they are faced with the fact of forcing a very small population to support their social security. it is impossible. actually, the abortion issue has but the liberals in iran. they are going to have to at the age of the retirement age to 70 or 75 in order to maintain social security as it is right now. guest: the question of whether not children are a driver of economic progress and an engine of productivity, i would argue that is the point you're making.
8:08 am
i think it is always important to nail that down. host: a question on twitter -- guest: we focus on life issues from bio ethics to abortion to end of life issues and do not really get into those issues. other groups covered better than we do. host: concerns about the alternatives to abortion, how to find other ways to cope with unwanted pregnancy or preventing pregnancy and things like that. guest: that is why we far this -- focus so heavily with our partners. host: co author of "mother in the middle," charmaine yoest, served as the senior advisor to the 2008 huckabee for president
8:09 am
campaign. she has a ph.d. from the university of virginia. let's look at a story from "american prospect scrimp a recent article about a moment of conception, how radical abortion movement matured. looking at the idea of personhood. tell us we organization stands on this idea. guest: there's been a lot of talk in the media about differences in the pro-life movement over personhood. i would start with underscoring the fact that nobody in the pro- life movement disagrees over personhood. this is a foundational concept that we want everyone to understand is that life begins at conception. once you have life, that life is to the rights of personshood. the question becomes, how you make that happen? one thing we have focused on is pushing for fetal homicide laws.
8:10 am
we think this is one of the most dramatic ways to help the american public understand it is very easy to grasp we have a homicide situation that you have to victims there. so we have seen this concept sweep the country. with 36 or 37 states that do prosecute feet a homicide laws. that is one way you can go about helping to lay the groundwork until later in to our laws this contradiction between treating the baby as a full person one is wanted, nurturing it through very rich prenatal care through a one to pregnancy, so in every instance outside of abortion, we do treat the unborn as a person. host: it was mentioned a moment ago, the differences in strategy for outlawing abortion, whether it is trying to get roe v. wade overturned or perhaps placing
8:11 am
something else in the constitution. then the idea of the personhood movement and the difference between outlines partial birth abortion in the eyes of some who led the movement, and adequate. it is like saying, well, other types of abortion are ok. i understand not been so many differences. but where do you stand on this? the have concerns or fears about the personhood of movement going too far and not leaving room for other options? guest: we all agree brophy wade is the target. fortunately, -- we all agree roe v. wade is the target. some scholars believe it needs to be overturned because it was so poorly decided. the question is, how do you get there? one of the things we have worked, because we work with pro-life legislators across the country during this last lead of session, 20 pieces of
8:12 am
legislation passed alone. we see each one of these victories in the state as accumulating momentum in the life movement but each and every victory is significant and moving us toward the ultimate goal of roe v. wade. that is our strategy. we think it is important to focus on the issues, for example, i have friends who disagree with me on the abortion issue. it is very difficult to find people who disagree on parental notification or the partial abortion. one of the reasons of the ban on that is that it really nailed down 89% of the american people who supported that and read it is the first time we have been able to see any kind of encouragement at all into the absolute right of abortion for any reason for all nine months of pregnancy the we currently have in the united states. we were supportive of the ban
8:13 am
on partial birth abortion and support of of other efforts like that that nailed down the agreement among the american people that abortion should be a very limited right, on the road to overturning roe v. wade, ultimately. >> hudson, new york, independent. caller: in morning. i'm calling because i'm a woman that impartially experienced an abortion. i was uninformed. i was forced against my will play someone who i thought was a friend. i became pregnant. -- i was forced against my will buy some i thought was my friend did i became pregnant but i only heard one side of the story of planned parenthood. they did not show with the development of an embryo to a fetus was or anything like that.
8:14 am
i suffered many, many years of feeling a great deal of pain as a result. i had complications and went to the hospital. they informed me if i had come to the hospital immediately, they could have prevented me from getting pregnant. i really feel that option still needs to be available to women. it is only fair. children to get raped could young adult women get raped. they are forced against their will. if they are informed, if there is an alternative to having a pregnancy occur, those options are much better than having the option of having to go through something so awful. they should have an ultrasound if they wind up in a position where it is beyond a week or two weeks, because that way they can least see what they are about to
8:15 am
do and can make an informed decision. host: let me ask you as an independent, does this issue change how you will vote for the president? does it play into a political decision? caller: yes. i believe unless women are more informed -- he hit everything about viagra on tv, but you do not hear about prevention of pregnancy or options for women. the day after pill i think is a very good thing. i interest in the conception part. until it is connected to the uterus, it does not become a pregnancy. guest: thank you for sharing your story. your underscoring a point that i was wanting to make earlier about the fact abortion is an anti-woman effort, so we really, really need to be focusing on
8:16 am
how much abortion harms women. i really hope you've had an opportunity to connect with other survivors of abortion like yourself through silent no more or richards -- rachel's vineyard. they could be helpful to you. host: comments on the fox news sunday by rick perry. >> when you look at the catholic charities that are not allowed have money because they have made a decision that they're not going to allow abortions in their facilities, so this administration is keeping money away from them on programs that help people who are sexually trafficked. again, if that is not a war on religion, i don't know what is. host: rick perry yesterday on fox news sunday. you mentioned you and your organization are not yet endorsing a candidate, but
8:17 am
listening to what they have to say. where does rick perry fall on your meter of how candidates weigh in? guest: as a governor, rick perry is someone we have worked with for many years. he has been a close ally. i am glad to ask that question. it underscores the fact there are several candidates running on the republican side who really have strong pro-life records. that is a really terrific option. while we're in this process of weeding through details and asking them specific points, the overarching message we're emphasizing is that we have really strong pro-life candidates to go up against this president who so aggressively has advanced the abortion agenda. host: how important is fate to your group? -- faith to your group? guest: we are a law firm. i think part of the question
8:18 am
becomes, faith is one element of character and whether or not someone is consistent to their word and operates the realm of politics with integrity. host: democrat line. caller: i want to share with you my story. in 1963, my husband and i had been married for just a year. are birth control failed. it was before roe v. wade. we have a friend, a social friend who was a veterinarian. by has been held my hand, i climbed on the dog table, and he perform the abortion. the only thing you and your group can ever succeed in doing is making abortion illegal. but you can never end abortion.
8:19 am
you can only make it unsafe. and the next concept i need to share with you is this -- the only reproductive decisions over which you have any right to decide are your very own. i have the right to make mine and you have the right to make yours. guest: thank you for sharing your story. i'm sorry to hear about the tragedy in your life. here is where you and i would disagree. the idea that somehow abortion can be made safe by making it legal. i think if you talk to the families of women who have been killed in abortion clinics, for example, holly patterson in california who was sent home to hemorrhage and parents did not know anything about this until
8:20 am
they were called to her deathbed in the emergency room -- in terms of personal stories, abortion is just a tragedy all the way around whether it is legal or illegal. that is my concern, that we don't focus enough on what a tragedy of abortion is for women. even in the context of having legal abortion, we still see women killed by this awful procedure. host: pennsylvania, republican. caller: up until four years ago, i did not have an opinion. three years ago, someone i know they need a book. the doctor was behind roe v. wade. what happened, the sonograms got better. he could see better. when you is looking inside and hearing, he could hear a baby crying, laughing. then he shot it was sailing. sometimes they have to shrink the head. i think they should show this on
8:21 am
tv around next august. i never really cared about it, but when i was reading this book, it broke my heart. they're killing babies. there is a god in heaven i am sure looking at this. this is sad. i think you should show a commercial on tv right around august showing an abortion, showing what happened, showing the baby laughing, crying, moving around red then they should the saline in it. >> caller: -- guest: thank you for your call. the doctor speaking of was a great example of how people come out of the abortion industry after seeing its reality. the movie you're talking about is called "the silent scream." it is available online. one of the reasons we are excited about bringing at the johnson in to work for american
8:22 am
unit for life, i believe she is the doctor of this generation. even as abortion becomes more sophisticated and more mainstream, you still see people coming out of planned parenthood. abby is not the only one. many workers are leaving planned parenthood after they see the reality of what abortion is in contrast to the spin. host: looking at the peace on to attack american prospect" -- "american prospect was curtis says, whose legal right, 1960 with anti-abortion the geordie's -- majority sprit record number of laws limiting access to abortion services have been proposed and passed this year. the states in light cream, where personhood amendments have been put on the ballot and the darker green say states that have passed fetal pain loss this year to prohibit abortion after 20
8:23 am
weeks. minnesota's law was beaten by the governor. it states that did both. which state is leading the charge in the line of thinking that you most like? guest: great questions. it is really exciting. you bring up an issue that does not get a lot of attention. so much attention was paid to the changeover into pro-life house of representatives and john boehner coming to power in washington, d.c., that people miss the tsunami of pro-life activity going on at the state level. going back to the 28 laws we saw pass that we worked on. we really expect this to continue going into 2012. our model legislation, we had 1600 requests just to look into and consider passage in this last legislative cycle. we expect this to go into the next session that starts in january, which, i think, is going to be a big part of what
8:24 am
you're going to see life in such an issue in this presidential campaign. because the attention being paid to the funding the plan. i mentioned, which in the past we have not seen as much traction, but now that we see, for example, not even mention the fact we now have investigation going in to planned parenthood on the house signed, which is a historic thing that happened, particularly, in the context right before a presidential election. host: a question on twitter -- guest: that is a really good question. the issue becomes whether or not you're looking at whether or not you have two patients. that is the dividing line, whether you go into recognizing the right to life of the unborn baby. once you have now that down, the doctor and patient can look and make a decision as you would in any medical situation as to what
8:25 am
options are available to you, what is the threat. there's a whole host of questions you have to ask when you're treating two patients. then it is entirely different at the question then abortion. host: what about candidates who say abortion to be allowed in cases of rape, incest, or the health and survival of the mother? guest: it depends on the context. if you're talking about what is their ethical framework, the have to request and then carefully about whether or not they understand when life begins. if you're talking about a specific piece of legislation that moves the ball, that actually its victories, that is an improvement in a position currently have, that is something we would support. it is the context question. host: independent line. caller: are you against procedures that create artificial embryos and keep them frozen and then maybe they
8:26 am
become destroyed it later? do you think abortion should be illegal and that women should actually go to jail for murder when they have an abortion committee because of incest, rape, dire poverty or desperation? and if a young girl was pregnant, she should be handcuffed to a gurney, for said in may to continue with the pregnancy the she cannot handle? guest: that is an interesting mental image to throw out there. several different questions are there that you have thrown out. the most important one, since we do not have time for all three, the most important issue i would make sure that our listeners know today is that no one in the pro-life movement now or ever has advocated for putting women in prison as a result of abortion. the abortion laws target the abortion doctor. that is where the real issue
8:27 am
becomes, with looking at turning abortion illegal. host: but do you think about embryos and what should be done with them of a family crete's embryos to be implanted? -- created embryos to be implanted? guest: it is important to look at this issue. we're in a position of the wild west as we vote at reproductive technologies and bioethics issues. -- as we look at reproductive technologies. in europe, they have regulations of the reproductive technologies that we have not even begun to consider here. i think it is a question need to be looking at more carefully, and not treating the embryo is something that is just holy disposable, which is what we do now. host: massachusetts, democrat line. caller: what this comes down to
8:28 am
is this lady and her group are trying to force their religious views on the country, trying to make laws, just like in afghanistan, to impose their religious views. other people do not have those police. and our government, they should be allowed to do what is right in terms of their family and their life. when i was in high school in 1969, my best friend became pregnant and abortion was completely illegal. she was terrified. she was killed in a cavalier motel in a botched abortion. it was a huge chain but the manager was involved. girls went there to get abortions with coat hangers. it was uncovered. if you make save, legal abortion illegal again, these kinds of operations will come back up. it is all about the money. there are unscrupulous people who will take advantage of
8:29 am
people like her who were in trouble. unfortunately, many people do not remember what it was like in those days. i would just like to say next result ski from 1969, we all remember her needlessly butchered death because of these religious fanatics like the guests you have on today that insist on imposing their views on the rest of the country. that is not what america should be. host: i appreciate your story but let's not make an attack against our guest. as you mentioned, you do not see your stance as a religious one. our caller had a very impassioned argument as another caller did earlier, white abortion should be legalized in his opinion, to least keep it safer. -- why abortion should be legalized in his opinion, to at least keep a safer. guest: google the doctor who is awaiting trial on many counts of
8:30 am
murder, who was an abortionist in philadelphia. they're calling it the house of horrors. the kind of description of abortion that our caller just made under illegal situation is still going on today with abortion being legal. it is really, really a tragedy when you see women who are faced with just been told the advocates of their health are actually the ones to profiting from the destruction of their health. >host: he was asking about plan b. the fda decision to put it on pharmacy shelves and in health and human services reversing course on that. guest: we were surprised and pleased to see kathleen sebelius coming out with a very common- sense solution or excuse become
8:31 am
a public policy that goes against the ideology of the abortion reality of making this drug available to everyone over the counter. it really is a problem that we see a plan be available over the counter. it is a heavy, heavy dose of drugs that a much lower doses require a doctor's examination and prescription. so just from common sense, even the idea that adult women are able to get this drug without a doctor's supervision really kind of goes to our earlier point of, where are the advocates of women's health? if you're concerned about women's health, why would you want a megadose of this chemical to be unsupervised by a doctor? it makes no sense if you're looking at a fully from the perspective of protecting women's health. i'm very glad to hear they're not going to allow over-the- counter for young women. however, having said that, there's a massive loophole by the fact is available for adults over the counter means adult
8:32 am
men can get the drug and give it to underage minor girls. the research is clear that the majority -- not the majority, but a very, very large percentage of young girls who become pregnant have adult fathers of their babies. it is very troubling underside of this issue, the issue of sexual abuse and plan p having it over the counter enables the cover-up of situations like that host:. charmaine yoest. thank you so much for being with us. coming up, the role of the federal government in protecting corporate pensions prefers, this news update from c-span radio. >> the federal reserve is considering a move towards more openness.
8:33 am
and meeting planned to mark, expected to focus on a plan to in part by the late update the public on how long it plans to keep short-term interest rates at record lows. the new communications strategy could be unveiled as soon as next month. analysts do not expect any announcements tomorrow. more on the downed u.s. drone in iran. an iranian lawmaker claims the experts have the ability to reverse engineer the drone and they are in the final stages of recovering data from the aircraft. he says the information will be used to file a lawsuit against the united states for, in his words, the invasion. after a significant drop of support for his party in the recent parliamentary vote, russian prime minister vladimir putin has a challenger. one of russia's richest men and the owner of the new jersey nets basketball teams as to run against prime minister putin and next march's presidential election.
8:34 am
speaking of earlier today, he said a decision to run for president was "the most important decision and his life." those are some of the latest headlines. >> which part of the u.s. constitution is important to you? that is our question this year in the student competition open to middle and high school students. make a video documentary five to eight minutes long and tells the part of the constitution and important to you and why. include more than one point of view and video of c-span programming. entries are due by january 20, 2012. $50,000 in total prizes. grand prize is $5,000. for details, go to studentcam.org. promises andlot of the way the fcc was created. i think we do need it, but i think at some point this party, that party organizing this week
8:35 am
,apa -- in the internet age, that may become increasingly too cumbersome. >> former fcc chairman, michael powell, talks about the issues affecting the telecommunications industry. tonight at 8:00 on "the communicators." ""washington journal" continues. , thank youa gotbaum for being here. describe the worked the pbgc does. guest: it is a backstop. when companies fail and cannot keep paying their pensions, we stepped in. it was modeled on the fdic. when a bank fails, they cover your deposits. pbgc was set up so when companies are bankrupt, cannot pay pensions, then we will step
8:36 am
in and we will pay pensions. host: the bankruptcy filing of american airlines could saddle is this the obscure federal agency that entrance company pensions, your agency, could saddle it with a $9 billion loss. the reason the financial pressures on the debt and government funds and the possibility it could mean a taxpayer bailout. talk about american airlines' bankruptcy filing and what is your role? what do you do? guest: when a company declares bankruptcy, if they have an underfunded pension plan -- an america does -- we stepped in. we say, if this plan is terminated, we will become a creditor. usually when that happens, we're the largest or one of the largest creditors. what we will do is step in to say, we are there to protect the pensioners and the pensions.
8:37 am
we will see what is necessary. when companies go into bankruptcy, they want to change things. they do not do it for fun, but because they think they need to make changes. american, when it went into bankruptcy, took great pains to say to their customers -- nothing is going to change for you. you will still get your frequent-flier miles, service, etc. they did not make the same promise to employees and certainly not to us. our job is to see in the changes they may, can they keep their pension plan? that is what we try to do. host: this story says, as american airlines waste dropping its plan, pbgc will push the company to keep it a bit recently, the agency is help persuade delta and the autoparts maker to hold on to pension plans them otherwise have dropped during reorganization. guest: yes.
8:38 am
when companies go into bankruptcy, many times they say, we have to change all of this. we cannot fulfil any of our promises. even our promises to our employees. this is a good example. this on a par business was born out of the auto parts dollars the of a purpose business -- we met with them and said, if you turn in your pension plan, all of the following things will happen -- your employees will get less than they deserve, less than promised because pbgc pays pension benefits, but not retiree health benefits. there is a limit on what we can pay. so some of the vestion employes would not get their full benefits, and so we said, we think you can successfully reorganize without killing your
8:39 am
employee's pension plan. that turned out to be correct. the same was true at northwest airlines, for example. that is what we're going to do. we're going to say, american, we understand you want to make changes and need to make changes. it is important business be successful and jobs be there, but cannot you do that without killing the employee's pension plan? host: let's look at the details. $9 billion is the number of projected pension loss for american airlines. everyone hundred 30,000 people will be affected, $18.5 billion in benefits. pbgc is responsible for $17 billion of total benefits. and in united, delta airlines, a us airways, and in pensions and bankruptcy costing $11 billion. guest: yes. the numbers get confusing. let me start with the biggest number you mentioned.
8:40 am
right now, american airlines has still obligations to its employes of around $18 billion. if we take over their plan, some of their benefits we cannot pay. congress has said, you cannot pay pensions above a certain amount. so we think if we take over their pension, american airlines employees and retirees will lose about $1 billion in benefits. that is one reason why we would like company to build to keep its plan. in addition, when the takeover a plan, we get the assets from that plant americans pension plan is dramatically underfunded by our rough numbers, that $18 billion of obligations is matched by about $8 billion in assets.
8:41 am
so there is a $10 billion shortfall. we think we would end up paying about $9 billion of that. the employees will lose about $1 billion of it. that is the reason why we are one to try very hard to enable american to reorganize without killing its employees' pension plan. host: let's go to the phones. ron joins us from nebraska on the independent line. good morning. caller: hello. i have a question. and sure your organization is great and helps out the workers, however, why isn't there a long protecting those workers? you said -- why not start with that instead of having your company, after the fact? why not make the law so that is much harder? guest: that is an important
8:42 am
question and you are correct. there should be a lot and there is. there is a law that requires one company's plans could underfunded, they need to make up the difference over a period of years. however, what has happened, american and other airlines have gone to congress and said, we're going through hard times, won't you give us a hall pass for making contributions to our pension plan? as a result, american, for example four years ago, the plan was underfunded by about $6 billion. today, we think it is underfunded by about $10 billion. part of that is the market went down. we all know that. pension plans have stocks and bonds in the. the other part is, american got congress to change the law to let them not make their contributions. the basic law is when companies make promises, they have to find them. host: john, a democrat won, ohio.
8:43 am
caller: good morning. thank you for having me. i want to ask, if i'm correct, the federal government is funding this, correct? guest: no, the program is paid for -- we do not use tax dollars at all. this program is paid for by insurance premiums that are paid -- it is, like auto insurance. you pay premiums for it when you get in trouble, the insurance pays for it. we do not use tax dollars. frankly, that is one thing we're trying to keep. congress, in addition to setting a loss about how much we can pay, also has said -- set our premiums and they are too low. for example, the exposure we have from american airlines is about $9 billion. over the last 37 years, that is
8:44 am
how long the agency has been around, americans paid premiums to pbgc. it totals about $260 million. congress has cut the premiums essentially too low. as a result, we're going have to make up the shortfall. we're trying to do so by raising our rates, not by using taxpayer dollars a host:. joshua gotbaum pbgc.gov. was appointed by president of them to the position in july of 2010. previously, he let and manage the organization of hawaiian airlines. when it emerged from chapter 11, the creditors were repaid in full. most of employes received raises, and the benefit pension plan remains in place. host: this is my first experience with airlines and airline bankruptcy.
8:45 am
-- this is not my first experience with airlines and airline bankruptcy. i had the sad experience of trying to help braniff airlines before they file for bankruptcy. when they filed bankruptcy, they never came out that time. hawaiian airlines was a happier story. fortunately, it turned out we could, through a combination of unpopular moves, we raised rates to the point where folks in hawaii were unhappy with the prices we were charging that we were able to bring hawaiian airlines at a bankruptcy without terminating a pension plan, without undertaking dramatic cuts in labor costs. by creditors were paid in full, which does not happen a whole heck of a lot. host: a tongue-in-cheek, from twitter -- is there a danger in that?
8:46 am
guest: people up and concerned about that for long time. the reason that does not happen nearly as much as you would think is because companies generally have to be -- declare bankruptcy. they have to go into the bankruptcy process and go under the thumb of a bankruptcy judge in order to get permission to terminate their pension plan. when they do so, by the way, other changes it made as well. for example, management stock options generally get wiped out. in the case of american airlines, the ceo resigned. we think the service we provide is provided when it is needed. we do not see a whole lot of people and a whole lot of companies filing for bankruptcy just to drop their pensions. host: michigan, independent.
8:47 am
caller: it just seems to me that, you know, it is not a question if these airlines going to bankruptcy, but when. they all do in the all run to the federal government to get bailed out. i think it is simply a technology that is just too expensive to maintain. i don't find flying to be any more convenient than taking a train or driving. with the tsa in the management of the airport, it is just an overwhelming, stressful situation. it makes the holiday season a lot less pleasant thank you. guest: as a person who can take the train and fault with airlines, i don't think there's anyone who doesn't recognize -- and involved with the airlines, i don't think there's anyone who recognize the
8:48 am
changes after 9/11. i also think most people on reflection would say that it is better that we have airline service, even if we have to go through metal detectors and searches and so on and so forth at least for me personally, it is a question of is the service worth it? i will tell you, there are millions of people who fly every day. or their lives changed by september 11? yes, they were. but i still think we are a heckuva lot better having airline service than not. by the way, that is why when a company like american airlines declares bankruptcy, our response is not to say, of which, no, let's shut them down but, how can we make sure they can restructure, that they can succeed, that the 80,000 people
8:49 am
who were working for american airlines can keep working for american airlines? and can we do it without killing the pension plan? that is what we're here to do. if i may, part of the reason what i think this matters is that there is a retirement crisis brewing in this country. people are living longer. 50 years ago, the average person of 14 years after retirement but today, the average person lives about 20 years after retirement. plenty people live 30 years after. our pensions 40% bigger than 50 years ago? social security 50% bigger? is medicare 4% bigger? -- 40% bigger? part of the reason why we will to preserve pensions as much as possible is because people are going to need them even more in the future than they have in the
8:50 am
past. host: a question on twitter -- guest: very good and important question, jim, wherever you are. social security was intended to be a floor. it was intended to protect people against the greatest forms of elderly poverty. a century ago, the people of america who are most likely to be poor or the elderly. today, thanks to social security, thanks to medicare and thanks to private pensions, the people in america who are least likely to be poured -- poor our senior citizens. but what is happening, pensions are eroding. as people switch from the traditional pension to a 401k, it turns out they do not put aside as much as they used to. sometimes they take it out
8:51 am
early, etc. my fair now, the reason why i think pensions matter, people are living longer. if you live longer, that means you need more for your retirement. my biggest fear is and getting to the age where people the less we talk about boomerang kids. kids get out of college, cannot find work or cannot afford their own place so the move back with their parents. i am worried about grandparents. what about people who five or 10 years after retirement run through their 401k and have to move back with their kids? host: susan, democratic caller, it taxes -- texas. caller: i want to know under whose administration was your department set up? host: and what is your other question? caller: the other question is,
8:52 am
american airlines -- well, it is not really a question but a statement. they pulled this before. there's always money in a separate account to pay off the ceo's and upper management. i want to know when this change, and not just the airlines but all corporations, when was this made possible for these companies to shut down the employees pension plan, but to separate money out and even take away from employees plans to set up for the ceo's in the upper management? how is this possible? guest: to answer your first aestion, in the 1960's, large auto company, studebaker, went bankrupt, went out of
8:53 am
business. they had a lot of employees. it turns out the promise to pension, but never set aside any money. this bothered congress. so beginning in the late 1960's, and finally in 1974, congress passed the employee retirement income security act. it said, it company, if you promise a pension you have to set up a separate fund. yet to put money into it. there has to be something there if you fail. as sam law created the pbgc. so we have been in business -- that same law greeted the pbgc, so we've been in business for 37 years. he asked the question, are there separate funds for senior management that are different from the employee funds? there are. those funds are treated differently for a couple of reasons. one, they do not get a tax deduction.
8:54 am
when companies actually set aside those funds they pay taxes on them. when they set aside a normal pension, they do not. in addition, generally, when those -- when a company goes into bankruptcy, those funds are at risk where as the pension fund is protected by us. is it true there are separate employee pension plans from the executive pension plans? yes, there are. it is the case that when a company goes bankrupt, usually, if one is killed, the other is killed. we protect one, but we do not protect the other. host: "washington post" points out the pension benefit guaranty corp. is already facing a $26 billion deficit. the largest in the 37-year history after being stuck by
8:55 am
company failures across the country during the recession. it points out on companies failed, the pbgc except the obligation to pay pensions to employees. in the past fiscal year, the agency has assumed responsibility for the pensions of 57,000 people. let's look at some of the numbers from "washington post." $81 billion in assets from obligated to pay out one at a $7 billion over time. the $26 billion deficit, the largest in your history. guest: yes. when pbgc was set up, congress set it up on the model of the fdic and said, let's not use taxpayer dollars for this but use or charge a premium, an insurance premium to pension plans. that is what we've done for 37 years. unfortunately, congress did not let the pbgc said the premiums.
8:56 am
they said the premiums. for the last 37 years, has set them too low. that is why american airlines when it declares bankruptcy has a potential liability to us of $9 billion. we look at the premiums they have paid over the last 37 years, it is $260 million. that puts us in a bind. what that means is, how are we going to pay that? are we going to go to congress and ask for a taxpayer bailout? no, we are not we said it congress, congress, we ought to be upset our premiums and they should be high enough to cover accidents, to cover the real cost of the insurance. hoping is that congress will not only raise premiums as they have done a dozen times in the past 37 years, but that they will recognize this is a job we
8:57 am
should be doing ourselves. what happens when congress sets the premium for the pbgc -- first of all, it is too low and not very fair. what happens now is a lot of companies will say, well, let me get this straight. american airlines declares bankruptcy, your deficit goes up, and my insurance premiums have to go up? unfortunately, the way congress has set up the premiums, that will happen. we would like to do it different. the way i think about it is, we all have to have auto insurance and pay premiums. the question is, if you heard the guy down the street had an accident so your rates had to go up, you of the little ticked. that is what is going on with our premiums. host: is says, if the agency is forced to take over the american airlines pension plan, it would represent the largest ever single claim on the pbgc fund. the largest previous clinton and the injustice in the pension plan for united airlines in 2005
8:58 am
-- previous claim on the pension plan for united airlines in 2005. caller: good morning. my question relates to this issue about why you are protecting union pensions, but ignoring executive pensions and why you're ignoring those of us who lost money in the stock market? i would also like to add that my entrance on my car is partly driven on where i live and where i drive. i will take my question though- your answer off line. the majority of the people whose pensions be protect are not union members. the majority are employees who are not members of the union. we protect pensions of any business in america that is set
8:59 am
up under the federal law as an erisa plan. they're plenty of companies that have no unions at all whose pensions for protect. the reason we do not protect executive pensions is because they are not covered by the protections that congress passed. so when a company gets into trouble and says, we want to take over your plan, we do not ask for the plan came from. we ask two questions. can the company for to keep the plan? if it cannot, we take it over. then we figure out what benefits people are owed and we paid -- and we pay them. host: a question from twitter --
9:00 am
to step into that position? guest: probably yes. it also do so for nonprofits. some nonprofits congress did not put under the law. church we have a lot of hospitals. there is one in new york city. they went bankrupt. we are picking up their pension. host: robert on the independent line. caller: i'm calling from minnesota. worked in the mindes. i suffered a claim, partial disability. i decided to retire early and
9:01 am
take my pension. i'm wondering if my company went under, would not be subject to the early retirement age cut? what the americans with disability act would be all over that. i'll take your comment offline. guest: that is a good question. the people of the pbgc have a good hot line. you can call them and ask the question. host: joshua gotbaum is director of the pension benefit guaranty corporation. that website is pbgc.gov. he was appointed to the
9:02 am
opposition last year. he was the first ceo of the september 11 fund. the cherry had over $500 million in assets -- the charity had over. he also spent time as an investor banker. looking at the future of the hole we talked about the whol that your company is facing. where do we go from here? basically if they pbgc becomes responsible for the funds of the american airlines, at some point there will be faced with the choice of meeting a taxpayer bailout or not meeting the pensions. guest: this gets to the basic
9:03 am
design of the pbgc. they said it should not involve taxpayer money. congress kept the authority for setting premiums on its own. made them too low. pbgc cannot offer a safe driver discount. companies that never will declare bankruptcy will pay the same rates as companies that will. we're trying to go to the congress and say premiums are too low and in order to do this fairly, to do this in a way that we do not treat everyone as if there were a pension criminal, let us offer a safe driver discount. ofht now there's not a lot
9:04 am
emotion from the congress, but we're hoping we will get a hearing. host: dave on the democrat's line from new jersey. caller: thank you. the american people have to be blessed that we have a check and balance after we put money in for 30 years. my question and a concern i do have is that -- pensions are a privileged not the right -- not a right. what is your take on that? is that true or not? guest: in this country, employer-provided pensions are not required by law. in this country, an employer can choose to offer a pension or
9:05 am
not. if they do, they have to follow our laws. the mandatory pension protection is social security. what we're trying to do is encourage as many employers as possible to offer pension plans of whatever kind, whether the traditional defined benefits or the 401(k) or some kind of hybrid. people are living longer, which means they need more money for retirement, not less. employers are not required to do this. we encourage people to talk about this. host: bill on the -- independent line. caller: i love your show.
9:06 am
it governede -- is by demand? if the demand is there for the airlines, why don't they change the price and raise the price? that is the one thing i do not understand. it is like anything else. a car next year will be the $2,000 instead of $45,000 -- $50,000 instead of $45,000. guest: the airline business is a complicated business. the industry is very competitive. we can go online and say, if i
9:07 am
want to go from washington to chicago, i have more than one choice. nine times out of 10, people will pick the lowest price. all airlines face the pressure to keep costs down. they have pressure to provide good service and the requirement to provide safe planes. they all face pressures to keep prices down. they are always trying to do all of those things -- watching their cost, improving the quality of their service, and required by the government to make sure the offer safe service. they cannot just do one or the other. host: looking at a story from the website boston.com, this is from earlier this month.
9:08 am
host: what happened, and where are you going from there? guest: when we takeover company's pension plan, we have to go with it and learn about the pension plan. in the case of united, there were four of them. we have to figure out how much money is in the pension plan. when united declared bankruptcy and pbgc took over the plan, the folks we scented frankly did a
9:09 am
bad job. it is a complicated job, but they did a bad job. when, thanks to congressman george miller, our inspector general looked at that and found, "hey, you guys did a better job." the first thing we did was to admit it. secondly, we hired a new team of accountants to go back in and redo the work. that is what we're doing now. if we have underpaid anybody, we're going to pay them back. we will admit it. we'll send them a check with interest and an apology. this was four years after the first problem.
9:10 am
i said, we cannot afford these mistakes. we now have auditors on each of the processing teams that handle pensions. we're training them better than we used to. i started a review of that whole part of my agency so that we do not make these mistakes in the future. we have zero tolerance for errors. if people think they are not getting the full benefit, they are not secure. when we find a mistake, we will fix it. that is my pledge to everybody. host: nicholas in palm beach, florida. caller: good morning. pilotsm a retired delta
9:11 am
that put in 39 years with the airline and lost my pension in 2005. basically what happened was the pilots' pension was short funded, which cost delta to file for bankruptcy and was granted by the court. now ism concerned about that delta has since purchased acquired northwest airlines, and one of the provisos of that agreement was that delta would pay the retired northwest pilots their pension. that is basically salts in the wound. with reorganization, the flight attendants got part of the
9:12 am
company. the ground personnel, part of the company. the pilots -- the actor pilots got part of the new company, and the mechanics got part of the new company. the retired pilots didn't get anything at all. we now have to pay are not health care benefits. can delta airlines be penalized for this salts in the wound operation? what is your thought on this? guest: it is lousy situation. for other people, pilots have for generations made a conscious choice, rather than taking all of their earnings up front, to defer earnings. pilots have more generous pensions than the average person. pilots used to be forced to
9:13 am
retire when they were 60 years old, not 65. they needed better benefits, etc. when a plan is terminated, the benefits that we can pay don't come close to thec benefits you could get as a delta pilot. that is why we pushed hard not to terminate a pension plans. the pbgc is there. the same congress that keeps our premiums to lowe says you can not pay more than a certain amount. your fellow pilots from delta are getting benefits from pbgc but they are not getting the benefits that they counted on. the tools that we have are limited. think of us as an insurance
9:14 am
company. when a company gets in trouble, we take over their plan and we pay the benefits. we take -- we get a piece of the company. we get shares of stock in delta air lines or a note from delta airlines but it is never 100 cents on the dollar. our tools in the situation are limited. once the company gets out of bankruptcy, we're just like anybody else. if a company like delta acquires another company, what they do is not something that the federal government will be able to handle -- at least the pbgc. you have pointed out the reason
9:15 am
why i think it is important that we push companies as hard as possible. northwest went into bankruptcy, too. we pushed north west not to terminate their pension plans, and they did not. that is why the american, we're going to push really hard. we want companies to survive and we want jobs to survive. we want companies to succeed without killing their employee'' pensions. host: william in pennsylvania on our independent line. good morning. hi, william. guest: deputy to sleep -- did i put you to sleep? host: i think we lost him. what is the timeline? guest: the thing about pensions
9:16 am
is everything happens over a point of years. our deficit -- pbgc has had a deficit for all but seven of its 37 years. we have said to the congress, premiums are too low, you have to raise them. this time we said we should let us set them in a way that is fair so that we do not kickoff people by forcing them to pay for other guys. that will be taking up i hope when the congress starts returning to business. there's no immediate crisis from our perspective. we have $80 billion in assets. we paid out last year at $6 billion a year. we have money for the foreseeable future. we think the right thing to do,
9:17 am
especially when you're talking about the long-term people's retirement security come is to finances nowc'ds so there is never a day of reckoning. we started talking to congress about this a year ago. host: joshua gotbaum, director of the pension benefit guaranty corporation. the website is pbgc.gov. coming up next, our weekly "your gment. sec >> as president obama and nouri al-maliki meet at the white house today, nato has said there was shut out their military training mission in iraq by the end of this month. the officials had said the talks on extending the mission were
9:18 am
stalled over a request for legal immunity for the foreign trainers. this and it plans to keep u.s. military presence in the country. nato has about one-third of advisers -- 130 advisers in iraq. moron an offer by mitt romney in a bet newt gingrich. congresswoman deborah washerman schulze says the bet was delayed is when the next governor demonstrated he is "really out of touch with the average american." "mr. romney does not understand what is going on in middle class america." medtronic is dismissing his offer of a $10,000 bet. -- mitt romney is dismissing his
9:19 am
offer. turning to the economy, concerns over the european debt crisis continue on wall street. the agreement on fixing the situation is replaced by worries it will not be enough. the deal allows for a central authority to oversee future -- david cameron makes a statement about why he refused to sign the treaty to the house of commons at 10:30 eastern time. you've been here live on c-span radio -- you can hear live on c- span radio. >> more features. a three-network layour. t.
9:20 am
you can receive an e-mail alert when your program is scheduled to air. more access to our more popular "washington journal washington journa." use our handy channel finder. click on c-span products for dvd is and books at the all new c- span.org. >> the fcc is a new deal-era agency. there are a lot of premises in the way it was constructed that are about an era long ago. i'm not one of those people who think we don't need it. i think we do need it. but i do think at some point, five commissioners -- organize in this way -- apa, administrative procedure -- in the internet age, that may become increasingly too cumbersome. >> former fcc chairman and current head of the national cable and telecommunications association michael powell talks about the issues affecting the cable and
9:21 am
telecommunications industry, tonight at 8:00 on "the communicators," on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: every monday at 9:15 is art features section, "your money." at the segment will look money the education department spends on low-income area schools. our guest is alyson klein of "education week." we wanted to ask about how school districts use the title i money to help low-income schools. guest: title i money is supposed to be focused on construction -- instruction. it can pay for coaches. it can be used for professional development, instructional activities.
9:22 am
host: what does that mean? you talk about this idea of what the money can be used for. guest: states and district will use this to determine which students are put into the title 1 formula. it is space-bar -- it is a complicated formula looking at the number of kids in poverty, population, pieces like that. it is supposed to be a plus, not replacing state and local dollars. host: we're talking at schools with a high percentage of students who come from low- income families. what challenges to the schools face -- what challenges do those schools face?
9:23 am
guest: it can be more expensive to educate. those parents not be able to afford preschool. title 1 closes the achievement gaps. host: the elementary and secondary education act requires the services provided in title 1 schools be least comparable to those provided in non title 1 school. guest: that is right. it is supposed to be a plus. host: above and beyond. alyson klein is a staff writer for "education week." here are the numbers to call --
9:24 am
host: you talk tell the funding is allocated -- you talked about how the funding is allocated. guest: it is a complicated form what the looks that population at how much the state spends and other factors. there have been tweaks to the formula. the act is up for renegotiation. host: looking of the american recovery and reinvestment act, the stimulus funds by the obama administration -- what is the money used for? guest: the money is spent the same way other money is spent -- instruction, making sure teachers can do their jobs and
9:25 am
to make sure they have the materials they need. to insure that -- they did not want to be facing a funding crisis. the title 1 money was a special thing. school districts were cautioned not to do extra hiring unless they felt those positions could be sustained after that money went away. so they have to think carefully about how they would spend those funds. host: have you heard from schools, superintendents that they treated the money that way, or is always a risk that wants to get money in, you start to rely on that and put things in place that if they do not have funding in the future can fall apart? guest: it was a challenge to try to ensure that the money was spent on investment.
9:26 am
we're hearing layoffs in districts across the country. that is not just because stimulus money is dissipating. state and local budgets are in rough shape right now. it is tough to say what we're seeing such a wave of layoffs. host: here is a reason start the came from writers -- here is a recent story that came from writreuters. the department found more than 40% of schools with low-income students spent less per pupil than other schools in the same district. guest: that pointed to a problem that advocates have been
9:27 am
talking about for a while. this money is supposed to be a plus. in some schools, it has not been. they say there is a loophole in the law. this is a complicated issue. school districts have to make sure they are given all schools the same amount of money before they are allowed to pass the federal titled 1 money. when it comes to salaries, school districts don't have to look at how much they're paying each of the teachers in the school. they have to make sure everyone in the district is on the same salary schedule. and schools that serve low- income kids will love for teachers that are less experience and will be on the lower end of the salary schedule, making about $40,000.
9:28 am
you may have 10 veteran teachers making $80,000. there on the same salary schedule, so everything is ok. advocates say that's not fair. host: let's go to the phones. caller: good morning. what i have observed -- we have a situation where the bureaucracy is overburdening the system. title 1 requires a huge expenditure for all logos to the classroom. my bet is that less than a third goes to the classroom. the emphasis with title 1 on" accountability" is to account for every teacher, every
9:29 am
expenditure on paper, but never to account for the quality instruction in the classroom or to be sure if the kids are there. a lot of title 1 students are taught once toons because they have a parent who through seminars has discovered that the there isssi money available -- that there is ssi money available. discipline has gone by the wayside. anything that works has been thrown out. host: you brought up a lot of issues. guest: the caller made some interesting points. republicans and democrats have talked about scaling back what people say is the bureaucracy and red tape. in the current version of the
9:30 am
act, they are striving -- some of the ideas include giving states and districts more flexibility over title 1 money. host: madison, tennessee -- we lost wallace. tom, an independent. caller: there are so many facts and figures about how much a teacher's salary should be and building schools. it is hard to understand what is going on. i think they need some kind of framework so the voter can understand what is happening. one side says they cut the budget $800 million. other people said it was on
9:31 am
education and students. everyone i talk with said there were probably too many teachers. i do not understand you do not say -- they said some might teachers and kids will fall behind. how can you judge this? guest: there are folks in congress pushing districts to be more transparent about how they are spending their money. you can find out online how much teachers are paid and sometimes on the web site of the local teachers' union. host: a comment on twitter. this is according to jody. maybe you can talk to us about
9:32 am
charter schools. guest: some charter schools do receive title 1 funding. it depends on the local rules. i think it is a misnomer that charter schools get more of federal grants and public schools. there is a federal program that is dedicated for charters. i would say the vast majority of government money flows to public schools. host: alyson klein is a staff writer for "education week." gloria in san diego. caller: good morning, ladies. i would like to say to that lady this morning addressing this issue of title 1 funds, there is a history with title 1 funds --
9:33 am
there was a move by barbara boxer, she started her grass- roots foray into government investigating what happened to talk to one funds in marin county. she found out what happened to talk to one funds. there were not reaching the students. they were being used by administrators. i would like to know how come this problem is still existing. you are an adorable girl and doing a great job. your investigating something that is older than you are. host: i want to say that alyson klein is a staff writer from "education week."
9:34 am
the caller brings up the interesting history and where this comes from. guest: the caller brings up a point that a lot of folks in congress continue to make. they want to see more transparency with title 1 and with state and local dollars. some members in congress think the reporting requirements are too onerous right now. there's always a tension as lawmakers consider that. host: good morning on the independent line. caller: thank you. good morning. i have two comments. the first half to do with uniform testing for teachers -- testing for the students and how they evaluate the teachers. i have a son who is a teacher.
9:35 am
these tunes when taking a test put forth -- the students when taking a test put forth a certain effort. the standardized tests, they do not put forth the full effort. my son says a test that would take a student 20 minutes, the average kid takes 20 minutes. when they do the standardized tests, sometimes they are done in five to 10 minutes and they are just done. they will board through that test because they know will not affect their personal grade. guest: that is something that lawmakers talk a lot about, whether standardized tests should be used to great teachers -- rate teachers. some states are trying them out right now.
9:36 am
-- itsn't look that passed the senate committee early this fall. there wasn't a requirement that states or districts used standardized test to judge their teachers. that is a hot area of debate right now. the cult hit on a controversial area -- the caller hit on a controversial issue. host: we're focusing on education funding for low-income schools. how much money goes in a proportional to other schools. we have some numbers -- the budget request for 2012. host: can you share with these rewards are in the school to run
9:37 am
grants? guest: a proposal to give extra money to talk to one schools that do a good job of closing the achievement gaps. helping low-income students catch up. it does not appear that congress will approve the three and a million-dollar -- $300 million. right out the program is up in the air. for the school turnaround money, the obama administration has been specific about how they want to see it states and district turn around the law was performing schools. they propose some pretty controversial ideas, including getting rid of the principal if the person has been on the job for less than three years. one option involves getting rid of passive teachers at the schools.
9:38 am
that debate continues to rage. host: power from california -- howard. caller: good morning. titlet quite sure what in want that you're talking about when it comes to special -- is it special schools that do will well with underprivileged children that are going to be reimbursed or continue to be sponsored by this program? is that the idea? guest: that was the administration's proposal, to give those skills that do a good job with low-income students more money. it is not likely to be part of the final budget. host: was there an idea to have
9:39 am
a reward system for those schools that are doing well? seeing or the successes are and what methods are working and hoping to learn from that or foster more programs. guest: that was the idea of the title rewards program. one criticism was there was a bunch of punishments for schools and it wasn't an incentive for doing well. the rewards program was part of the administration's push to include more carrots and not just sticks in a nutshell left behind -- no child left behind. this is an overarching theme for the obama administration when it comes to education. host: $13 billion went to tie one programs. -- title 1
9:40 am
program. at more details.ore detail guest: the echoes back to the problem about whether the money is being used at the local level-- that goes back to the problem. you don't have to look at how much each individual is getting paid. just that they are on the same salary schedule. you could have inexperienced teachers at a total one school core earning less but they would meet the requirements of the last lot as it is now. that is the problem that the report reported to.
9:41 am
host: some are using like to fill holes in the budget. guest: districts were supposed to look closely at school expenditures. host: we have david in indiana, welcome. caller: my question concerns the salary schedule that keeps getting mentioned. has to been any studies done that show how a teacher who pursues a master's or ph.d. is a better teacher when it comes to teaching middle school or high school students? guest: that is a great question and another controversial area. a lot of states and districts give teachers extra pay if they pursue a master's degree. in some cases that has shown to improve their instruction.
9:42 am
some say having a master's degree it does not make you a better teacher. this is an area of hot debate in education policy. host: mike from oregon, good morning. caller: hello? host: you are on the program with alyson klein. caller: my name is mike. i don't understand why the children out here are going four days a week. they're going to be added disadvantage. maybe i'm wrong -- they are going to be at a disadvantage. they will cut as a down to three days a week. what line is it child abuse, and
9:43 am
aren't they being cheated out of a future? guest: well, right now state and local budgets are under a lot of pressure. some districts have dealt with this by going to a four-day school week. they made the day longer but they don't have to pay transportation and energy costs for all five days of the week. that is highly controversial. folks are wondering how you can get the same quality of education in four days as opposed to five days. host: gary writes in on t witter. talk to us about this idea he is bringing up. guest: there are a number of economists and educators that
9:44 am
have looked to see in the highest spending districts, like and watches, d.c. -- washington, d.c. there is as perennial point that money does not make the difference and that there are other ways of improving student achievement or the money needs to be spent smarter. host: we're focusing on funding for schools and children in low- income areas. title 1 funding was passed back of the 1960's and distributes money to schools in districts with high percentage of students from low-income families. our guest is alyson klein and talking to us about this and also about the stimulus program. there was a requirement that
9:45 am
schools report back on how they are spending the funds. we have some stories that show that it was almost -- here's a story -- "starting to bear fruit." this idea of schools of having to report back. how toddle one schools are spending their money -- how title one schools. guest: you can take a look and see if title once schools are getting an extra plus and the money is not just going to fill holes. host: what is the reaction from people who read the report? guest: arne duncan had a big
9:46 am
press call. he wanted to make sure that reporters were paying attention to this issue. he believes the loophole is closed in the reauthorization of no child left behind. he wants lawmakers to include that language. there was a bill that was passed with bipartisan support that does include language to close the loophole. we'll see how that plays out in congress. caller: hi. thank you for taking my call. is there any possibility that this could -- that nothing could get past? what happened to those students in those schools if that happens? guest: that is a wonderful
9:47 am
point. congress has had problems passing just about anything lately. it's tough to say whether there will be able to pass a reauthorization of no child left behind. there are superintendents who say that it might add another layer of bureaucracy and red tape and that spending decisions are better made at the local level. host: felix in woodbridge, virginia. caller: thank you for taking this call. should title one spending be used instructional material for the children as well as for braille instructors who are underpaid throughout the united states?
9:48 am
host: that question was about-- guest: that question was about blind children? host: what this money can be spent on. guest: title 1 money is supposed to be spent on instructional materials. you can make an argument that the kind of technology -- there may be school districts who found a way to use title 1 money for that purpose. the individuals with disabilities act funding goes to special education. that money would be more likely to be used for purposes like hiring teachers for the blind, for instance. host: connie, a democratic caller. where are you calling from? caller: bowie. i think public schools under
9:49 am
obama has gotten better. my kids are all grown and we lived in d.c. it was so bad that lots of times kids did not have toilet tissue in their bathrooms. i bought toilet tissue and took it to the teacher for the class. they have had some of the most wonderful teachers. my three children went to school in d.c. two of them went to college. one of them became a fireman and did quite well. if the parents do not support what the teachers are trying to do, they fall behind. i had a job. i would have to come down and i made sure i it may time to help them.
9:50 am
now i'm doing that for my grandson. he is a straight-a student. give them a book and the right homework.e they have wonderful public school teachers. people want to put public school teachers down. if you misbehave, your parent is called to the school. very seldom they have problems with children misbehaving. if the parents reinforce -- i used to tell my kids that if they misbehave, i would spank them right in front of the classroom where they misbehaved and i never had a problem with them. parents have to reinforce no matter how much money you put in.
9:51 am
parents have to reinforce what the teachers teach. host: basket response from our guest -- let's get a response. guest: president obama has talked a lot about parents responsibility. things like reading to your children is something he mentions in speeches. it is great to hear the caller -- it would be great for the obama administration to hear that education has improved. i mentioned race to the top in bracing reform changes in education policies. he has put money into a turnaround the law was performing schools. i'm sure secretary duncan would be pleased to hear what the caller said. host: we have a comment on
9:52 am
twitter. looking at where the money comes from. guest: that is a point that is brought a lot when it comes to education funding. it can be done but schools are funded through property taxes and other local sources of funds. that was part of the thinking behind title one. that was a plus for some local areas. it was not supposed to replace state and local dollars within a district. go to kentucky in hear from pat, a republican caller. caller: the parents are concerned. they are troubled that their
9:53 am
children are not learning. what troubles me the most was that some of these kids were intelligent. you could tell. they excelled in music and art and maybe in something else. school focuses on scholastic and the going to college. children knew they were not going to take that venue. the paris were frustrated -- the parents were frustrated that the teachers took away with the children were going to school for. they were failing in math and reading. why year upon year we're a looking at-- not all kids are going to go to college. look at the kids that are still -- we need plumbers,
9:54 am
electricians. we have smart kids. host: what was your involvement? did you have kids in those schools? caller: i went to several different schools, the elementary, middle schools. the schools were title one. my child did not need anything special. just for the involvement and to make sure we're getting funding. there is -- it was frustrating to parents. everything was more college- bound and the children being shut out. host: let's get a response from our guest. guest: this is another hot topic of debate in education policy
9:55 am
-- whether all schools should be preparing all kids for post secondary education. the obama administration has been focusing for kids to get out of college and a career. maybe like a cosmetology license, for instance. host: tom from chicago. caller: good morning. i think people are missing a point here. we spent far more than other countries for our education system and we get far less for a it. i served in the military in germany. going to work, the kids were going to school. they were coming home after i came home, after a nine-hour day. all day.
9:56 am
they went half a day on saturday. they did not have the three months off during the summer. they went all year. they got to take weeks off for christmas and easter and all these holidays they could come underup. njure up. i have a great vocational system where the kids don't have to spend two years after high school to learn a trade. they have betrayed when they get out of school -- they have a trade. guest: this is another area where the obama administration has been looking at, getting extra funds to extend learning time over the summer or after school. it sounds like the caller would be supportive of that. host: future funding for no child left behind.
9:57 am
one of our callers to talk about gridlock in congress. where do we go? what is your expectation for the reauthorization of the act? will that be a priority for congress? guest: that is a great question and i think a lot of lawmakers do not know the answer to that. widespread gridlock in congress right now. the senate education committee to approve a comprehensive reauthorization bill. the house education committee has approved three smarter -- smaller bills, but none of the bills address teacher quality, which is referred to as it hot area of debate. they are still looking to see
9:58 am
how they can hold schools accountable. if there are similar, there may be a passed forward. if they are significantly different -- the rear authorization was supposed to happen back in 2007. it may be further delayed. host: frank, go ahead. caller: hello? they made a mistake. i have a short run made from china. it has the eagle on it and everything. if they teach the kids how to sew and make their own outfits and also they used to have body work in the school where the
9:59 am
kids could do it bodywork on cars. kids know more than eight years old and have a couple of cars in the yard. they ask me, "do you have a car which could work on -- we could work on"? host: we're just about out of time. he proposed an interesting idea. guest: there are still plenty of schools that offer up those kinds of courses. those activities are still going on in schools across the country. host: alyson klein is a staff writer "education week
185 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
CSPAN Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on