we will begin by taking a look at the governor's from sea to shining sea and talk about raiding your governor. the national governors' association annual winter meeting kicks off today here in washington, d.c. and we will have coverage of that for you. we will tell you more about that in the program and where you can find details on our website, c- span.org. for the first 45 minutes, we want to talk about how you would raise your governor. the numbers are on -- how you would rate your governor. the numbers are on your screen. the email address is -- if your honor twitter -- -- if

you are on twitter -- here is an item in this morning's "washington post" the politics and nation section talking about governors and what they are dealing with these days.

we want to talk to you for the first 45 minutes - rate your governor and tell us whether he is doing a good job in a bad job and whether you will be supporting another candidate if your governor is up for reelection. our first call comes from freeport, maine, on our line for republicans -- caller: good morning, our governor is paul lapage who was elected in 2010 paid -- 2010. he managed and his first year to cut the liability created by

promises to the pension plan. he cut from $4.1 billion to $2.4 billion with a pretty united legislature. the republicans and democrats got together to do that and also lower the tax rate. from 8.5% to 7.95%. i would say 70,000 people were taken off the tax rolls by raising the amount of money you had to make to pay taxes. it was a good first year for the governor and he is still working on trying to lower taxes more and cut state spending. host: the cooperation between the republicans and democrats in the legislature, is that a result of the governor's effort or something that happens on a frequent basis? caller: i have not followed

politics for that long. there have been times -- there's a big workmen's compensation issue in the 1990's where republicans and democrats worked together. there have been times but there has been a lot of republican frustration with the democrats who have been in power raising government spending and raising taxes and also putting in some regulations or allowing regulations that have, in hindsight, hurt business development. host: let's move onto airline for democrats in texas -- caller: rick perry is not good for texas at all. he does nothing for texas. he just wanted to use this as a stepping stone to the president cy. thank goodness that did not

happen. host: wisconsin, our line for independence -- caller: our governor is scott walker and he is in the middle of a recall. this has become a very partisan and hostile place to live. he has done cutting and overturned collective bargaining rights but he has had massive cuts to education, my concern is that we have a prison industrial complex in wisconsin. 22,000 andetween 24,000 of our citizens in prison and neighboring minnesota has about 9000. this is costing us a boatload of money to incarcerate all these people. he did not look at that line item which is the most expensive on our state budget. i think we've got an agenda politics all over the country but it is really hot style and partisan in wisconsin. i am no lover of democrats

either but this guy came in and it is like the republicans running roughshod over the state. i don't like that that much either. we will see what happens this spring. we will see if he will be recalled. thanks for taking my call. host: how you feel the recall ever is going now? caller: gathered well over 1 million signatures and they only need half of that. i think our state is split right down the middle. we have people on the left and right and nobody is looking to compromise and work together. i think it is a mirror of what is going on all over the country or in many places host: we've got a tweet ---

speaking of virginia governor bob mcdonnell, we will have him [video clip] "washington journal" [video clip] >> we will do some things that will save us money and that is the way we will reduce deficits and prioritize economic development, a private-sector job creation, and grow our way to a stronger virginia. for us it has worked. we cut the equivalent of about $6 billion to cut the deficit when i became governor and my

predecessor recommended a $2 billion tax increase i thought that was the wrong policy. we eliminated that tax increase. we cut spending in the neighborhood of $6 billion and invested in job creation and education and transportation but we cut other areas. host: we will have more with governor mcdonnell on "washington journal" mar morning at 8:30 and that will come to us from the national governors' association. also concerning governor mcdonnell and maryland governor o'malley, this is from a politico --

>> kentwood, louisiana, on our line for democrats -- caller: how are you? in this state of louisiana, the governor never did anything to help after katrina. because of all that, it was the mayor who did all the cleanup and what ever. the governor did not do anything, did not help. he could have been much better. everyone put in an effort by the

governor did not do anything even for the oil spill. the governor stepped aside and let the federal government to do something about it. everyone else pitched in. they did not do anything to shout about. they just made a big deal out of what this whole thing of what the katrina situation was. host: in this morning's "financial times" -- a related story.

back to the phones in our question about rating your governor, our line for republicans -- caller: good morning to cspan and the world. our governor john kasich -- i am a young african-american republican and here in columbus,

ohio, our governor has no backbone and no respect. he did the state of the union last month and he did not do it in the state as. he took it up to toledo. he does not stay in the governor's. . he goes around the state talking about jobs but we never see any jobless. we done made far in just very we need more american jobs, factory jobs. when the people voted for our governor, everybody knew what he was going to do. he worked for fox news. he bashed the president all the time. the speaker of the house is a republican and this man has no respect. he just runs around and tries to bully the other democrats and does not work with them. when it is time to vote again and get a new governor, in our

state, my state is a republican state but it swings both ways. host: you are talking about a republican governor and you are listed as a republican. in an article from "the washington post" -- you are listed on our screen as being a republican and john kasich is a republican governor, would you support him? it does not sound like you will support him if the runs for

reelection. who might be a better choice for governor of ohio? caller: i would love to see our mayor in columbus, michael colman run body has a lot of baggage. he is a democrat but he has baggage that people don't like. i would like to see somebody fresh, republican, independent, democratic because john kasich is not doing the job in columbus, ohio. he does not like coming to the state house. host: will move on to our line from democrats, atlanta, ga. -- caller: greetings and good morning to wall. all. our governor was a congressman in d.c. and he was chased from the congress because of ethics

problems, some money mismanagement and he came back, to run for governor. he got most of his votes from the rural counties outside atlanta when he won. he has taken us back to maybe 50 years during the days of the civil-rights movement. he has thrown up barriers to keep people from voting in the upcoming presidential election and future elections.

he also brings these new companies to georgia for them to put down roots and hire people. each company he has dealt with that is coming to georgia -- host: we will leave it there. here are a couple of e-mails -- if there recall laws in florida, he would be in the same boat as scott walker.

another email -- back to the fans -- suffolk, va., our line for independents --. caller: governor mcdonnell is doing pretty good on the fiscal issues. he was doing very good but in the last couple of weeks, he got into this ultrasounds thing and he really blew it. he has been talking about smaller government and less

intrusive government in our lives since he has been in office and is forced ultrasound issue that he originally supported is probably the most intrusive thing that you could do with government. i think he did a good job fiscally but he really blew it on the social issue. there have been protests here every day since this came out. host: more from the politico peace talking about the debate between governors o'malley and mcdonnell of virginia. he was edged about his national abitions, governor o'malley, democrat and chairman of the democratic governors' association, defended barack obama and the democratic party.

we will take a look at what governor o'malley said about republicans saying things that would get better if you both for them and then throw out all kinds of social issues. [video clip] >> i would dare to predict that in virginia they have seen what happens when you put republicans totally in charge, they have seen their legislature take a hard right turn and that is exactly the sort of over reach base of in wisconsin which has the 49th worst job creation rate and a sort of overreach they saw no high which has the 30 worst job creation rate and also what they have seen in florida which has the 45th worth -- worst job

creation rate. they say things will get better and you both for the republicans and they take a hard right turn. they all relationships, women's ights, unions, outl \awing all sorts of things when people just care about jobs and the economy. host: back to the phones and raiding your governor. our line for republicans -- caller: i have not seen that our governor has taken any interest in reforming welfare and i don't think any of the politicians know anything about the common man. i work two jobs and health care just to make a living because i support myself there is nothing for the single people out there. host: you are in tennessee, the tennessee governor is a republican and you say he is not looking out for folks like you, who is he looking out for?

caller: i have no idea but he is not looking out for us. host: our next call comes from our democratic line in arkansas -- caller: our governor is a good manager but he is in trouble with republicans who are trying to mess the budget up and cut taxes of the budget would be unbalanced. i think he is doing a good job but he will not be able to run again but he is doing a great job. we need to get rid of our republicans and keep strong fiscal balanced budgets. the pipeline should go, some of it should go to new england.

they should take some of the pipeline money and create a pipeline in new england and start retrofitting the homes there with natural gas and lower their heating bills. we have a mild winter and we can take that money and to england can use it and create a pipeline for them. you could give those people a decent, low fuel efficient home. thank you and have a great day. host: you say you're a governor is limited by term limits so he is out after the end of this term. do you see anybody on the horizon that you would support as a replacement? caller: i do not at this time. i hope we don't get a republican. that's all i can say. host: next up is west chester,

pa., on airline for independents. caller: i want to talk about governor tom corbett in pennsylvania. he promised massive budget cuts. the way he has done is entirely wrong. he has done solely on the back of educators who depend on state funding for education. host: all right, next up in picayune, mississippi on our line for republicans. caller: thanks for taking my call. our previous governor haley barbour was a great governor. i would like to make a comment on the lady who called previously from louisiana who talked about governor bobby jindal not doing anything for katrina. first of all, he was not the

governor when katrina came through. these people need to get their facts straight before they call in and-these people. i work in louisiana and picky and is on the state line. everyone i know in louisiana loves bobby jindal. he is a great governor. host: tell me more about the governor barber and his replacement phil bryant. what is their relationship between governor bryant and governor jindal? she is born. let's look in some other items in the news this morning as we continue our discussion regarding rating your governor. in this morning's "daily news" --

regarding the situation in syria, this item from "the financial times"--

back to the phones and our discussion involving rating your governor. seattle, washington, on airline for democrats -- caller: we love our governor in seattle. she does not have a racist bone in her body. she is doing a great job, thank you. host: when you say she is doing a great job, talk to me in terms of what you feel she is doing either for the economy or education. caller: she is doing it all. she is like a president. she is concerned of education and everywhere you go, you see them working on the road and she

makes sure the streets are good. host: next up, our line for independencesd, from rochester n.y.. caller: i think governor cuomo is doing a great job. if you will permit me to lead -- read this letter -- this pertains to legalized gambling. host: make it brief. caller: i could go on more. host: summarize how you feel about legalized gambling in new york. caller: it is my strong opinion that the race tracks in new york state are doing a terrible job. the casinos have taken over the race tracks. the worst thing that could

happen is to legalize gambling in new york state. thousands of people will be put out of work in the racing industry but the ruling affects around the track. host: you're talking about casino games when you talk about gambling? horseracing is already legal, correct? caller: let me make a point -- since the casinos have gone into these rates stress, 90% of them would call it "-- close-up tomorrow if not for the casinos carrying them very racing industry is a multi-billion dollar business that employs many people. if they close the casinos down, have these rest -- race tracks will go out of business. if you legalize gambling in new

york state, this will destroy the racing industry. host: we will leave it there. here is another tweet -- caller: yes. i do not like our governor. caller: why? host: -- why? caller: they have taken everything out of my check. i have a brain tumors. i cannot get any medical coverage in the state of texas. for two years, waiting for medicare to kick in, because i am disabled, i do without.

my brain keeps on swelling. i'm going to die before i get help. it was not as well when i was growing up. host: what kind of responsibility do you feel the current governor has for your situation? caller: medicaid is run by the state in the state of texas. adults are not recognized as being eligible for medicaid. they tell you to go to a charity. anything i have ever given i have given to a charity. the government took the money out of my check and promised some type of safety net. my husband died before he even got to touch social security. now, here i am and all i can do is pray that something will happen. host: we are going to move on to new jersey. edward on our line for

republicans. go ahead. is great to have a governor who does what he promises and despite all of the screams about three balancing the budget without raising taxes, he is doing it in new jersey. he proposed a tax cut. that is the way to go. not to cry and moan about government not having enough money and that is why we need to raise taxes. we need to cut spending, that is what we need in this country. big time. i have a second comment about the lady who called and she did not like bobby jintao. -- jindal. she said that he did not do anything about the oil spill -- she obviously forgot that mr. obama did not do anything about

it as well. he did lots of things to heighten the tragedy when he forced labor laws, which did not allow cleaning ships. host: this was on the front page of the atlanta durnell -- in atlanta journal constitution today. how long georgians can receive unemployment benefits would be cut by as much as half under a bill passed on friday by the senate. the vote came despite a warning by the general assembly's chief lawyer that it could be ruled illegal and not surprisingly, it antagonize some of the people most affected by the states high unemployment rate, those without jobs. it makes me irritated, is not angry, because it is obvious the republicans in the legislature are playing politics in order to gain votes in the upcoming election, said matt.

he has been collecting unemployment since september. he goes on to say, they should not be balancing the budget on the backs of the unemployed in georgia because i t happens that i am one of them. back to the funds. mariana r. lines for -- on our line for independence. caller: governor christie is a big disappointment. we are sitting in the aftermath of an oil spill. environmental issues have not been strong. he is good at -- he will not take on the chamber of commerce. he has not tackled immigration. he has not tackled a trade.

i wonder if funds were embezzled from other places. he speaks like a mafia person. he has been a disappointment. thank you. host: murieta in new jersey. this is one of the editorials in this morning's "wall street journal." "everyone hates superpac. s. they deplore seeker money in politics. the candidates to benefit feel compelled to wish for some alternative. stephen cole beer and john stewart recently set up a superpac to mock and denounce superpacs."

host: we are going to be talking about superpacs with dave levinthal. he will be taking your calls and e-mails and tweets. back to the phones in miami. you are on air. caller: my name is diana. it wrecks that is our governor. -- rick scott is our governor. it we need to train -- we need to train in orlando. host: why do you think the governor has control over whether or not you get the train? caller: he did have control over it and nobody got any jobs because the train did not come in.

a lot of people would have gotten the jobs. also, also, the government is kind of late because people on workmen's compensation have been on workmen's compensation for 25 or 30 years and they have worked in the county and different places like that. i am out there 25 years. a man who is out there 23 -- he just got paid. i am 59. i have worked in corrections. i feel like something should have been done. the last governor was not a good governor, mr. bush. now, this governor is passing us by, also. host: also, this morning, medicaid cuts doctors.

hospital finds washington state drive to trim emergency room visits. she writes -- host: back to the funds. detroit, michigan. go ahead. caller: -- this is brandon. i want to talk about the economy.

going to move on to david in charleston, south carolina. you are on the republican line. go ahead. david? caller: hi. i have no use for any governor who will not stand strongly behind the 10th amendment to the constitution. we're in the situation we are in -- all of your callers are saying the same thing. my governor is not doing something for me. the governors are -- they have gotten in bed with the several -- the federal government. the big get them to do what they want on the environmental and social policies. some governors set up behind the

10th amendment and told the federal government powers not granted to the federal government are prohibited by the constitution are reserved to me and by pitt -- my citizens. host: you bring up to his vacation. in this morning's "washington journal" their right -- they write. host: how would this work out for you and south carolina?

caller: it does not matter. it is not the federal government's job to worry about my roads. that is up to the state. host: do you feel like governor haley is doing enough? caller: no. i am disappointed. she should have stuck up before congress and tell them to leave the state itself along. we know that every state is being run out of washington. there is no liberty living in any state in this country that is run out of washington. host: ohio. democrats, go ahead. caller: high. -- hi. i wanted to duck about our governor. -- i wanted to talk about our governor. he restricted the rights of policemen. we have seen a backlash. i wanted to comment that there

is a really good sign of people not just choosing sides, and when it comes to things like basic rights for workers. host: okay. next up, patterson, new jersey. go ahead. caller: good morning. the reason i'm hauling -- i am calling is i have this guy -- one of the governor's got called from new jersey -- i am talking about my governor. the toll is going up. the property taxes going up.

my property taxes are a thousand dollars. -- even with the federal government giving a program to new jersey is supposed to help to his irritation, -- transportation, this will not do that. host: transportation is a big issue with a lot of our callers. a big issue that a lot of governors have to do with. this is another look from the chicago tribune.

host: next up. kentucky. audrey, you are on air. caller: i was thinking about our governor trying to pass this gambling bill. it is not going to help us any. the horse industry is here. it can stay because it looks like gasoline is going to be so high up that we are all going to

be riding horses anyway. i do not understand. they say the lottery is helping us. our schools are falling down. we have nothing. i pay taxes -- school taxes. i have not had any children in school in forever. they are raising cain about wanting to make another college here so the kids will stay here in this area. if there are no jobs, there are college-educated hit -- kids here, they are working at mcdonald's. host: we're going to leave it there. on the front page of the wednesday edition of "politico" --

that discussion coming up in just a few minutes. first, this call from idaho. caller: our town's name is french. host: tell us about your governor. caller: he is a republican. he takes a lot of the money from the schools and uses it for other things. i feel like our graduation rates are really low. i am also in our spirit at work in washington state. i live in idaho -- i am also a nurse and i work in washington state. i live in idaho.

our wages are really low because we are live in a right to work state. i feel bad for the lady who has the brain tumor. limited health care for republican states is a reality. i feel the governor in washington state does it really good job. host: we are going to leave it there. in about 45 minutes, we will have a discussion on the consumer financial protection bureau and overdraft fees. we are going to be -- coming up after the break, we are going to be spending time with the superpacs. we will have coverage of the national governors' association winter meeting that starts today here in washington d.c. at 10:00 a.m. live right after this program. you can see their opening news conference. at 11:00 a.m., they have a panel discussion on state economies.

this followed at 3:00 p.m. by a discussion on economic growth in the states. that is the nga's annual winter meeting. we will have coverage live on c- span. go to our website for more expert -- for more information, c-span.org. coming up, a discussion. this is "the washington journal." >> live today on american history tv -- "american history tv" 5 of veterans make their case for the person of the year. they and the day with an audience but. if viewers can join in with your calls and tweets. live saturday starting at 9:30 on cspan3.

>> the louisiana governor is going to reveal his position for revealing the budget today. a budget $900 million in the red. in shreveport, la it is 37 degrees. listening to the news and weather station. >> next week and, a "book tv" >> dollars the history and literary culture of shreveport, louisiana. -- next weekend, on both tv, we explore the history of literary culture of shreveport, louisiana. the red river campaign of 1864. a look at the 200,000 books of the john smith nobel collection house that the trees port -- house that the shreveport, louisiana library.

we look at the role on 9/11 in shreveport, louisiana. also, visit the founding fathers autographed collection at the louisiana state exhibit museum and from the pioneer harry tisch center, medical treatments and medical and dealings in shreveport, louisiana. >> this particular phone only brings for a serious question. keep it in a hand who has proven himself responsible. >> bush and dukakis on crime. dukakis battled the opposes the death penalty, he allowed first- degree murderers to have weekend passes from prison. one was willie horton. >> the accusations that was made against the veterans who served in vietnam was devastating your >> randomly civilians --

we can all point to a regis commercial or two or three or four. negative commercials are more likely to be correct and negative commercials are more likely to talk about issues. >> will 2012 be the most negative campaign cycle in history? a new foundation discussion looks at current and past political campaigns and their impact on american culture. watch this and past panels on political advertisements on line at the c-span video library. search, what, clip, share. it is what you want, when you want. "washington journal" continues. host: dave levinthal writes for "politico" -- super packs emerge as campaign gonzalez. dave levinthal welcome to the program. guest: good to be with you. host: explain the phrase

campaign godzilla is? guest: nobody expected them to exist. here they are, playing an incredibly upsize role. compared to what a lot of people thought they would be playing. you have to remember that back in 2008, the superpac did not even exist in the presidential race. nobody had ever heard of it because the term superpac was not in the english lexicon. here they are and they are outside groups that are nominally independent from presidential candidates. at least the ones that are supporting presidential candidates directly. they can raise and spend unlimited sums of money that can take from -- they can take from corporations and individuals. they can spend that money on communications that are over the advocating for or against federal candidates. it can be presidential and also congressional, house, senate. what we are seeing is that they are spending, at this juncture

in the 20 job election cycle, tens of millions of dollars in doing so in millions -- many cases not to lovingly promote the candidates, but to tear them down in as pilot of terms as they can with very negative advertising. messages that are some of the nastiest we have seen not only in this election cycle, but in politics over all. host: explain how superpacs are created and why we did not see them in 2008? guest: this all stems from two court decisions. the first was a decision called citizens united versus the federal election commission. this was a little more than two years ago right now. this decided that corporations or unions or anyone for that matter could go ahead and raise

and spend as much money as they want to. i directly or through intermediary groups. they could do so whenever they wanted, however they wanted. they could make what are called independent expenditures. these are sort of a half step further than what groups previously could do, which are called elections and communications were they can use and limited sums of money to make messages that would mention federal candidates. that would talk about presidential congressional candidates. not actually over the advocate for or against their elected or their beliefs. this took the shackles off outside groups when it came to their involvement in federal elections. you had independent expenditures in the past and you had vehicles through which you could come as an individual for example, a pump unlimited sums of money, but there was never a marriage of those two things going on in

the way that we see right now. a second court decision, one called speech now forces the federal election commission was the court decision that triggered the advent of the superpac as we know it today. it allow for these types of groups to spring into existence and since then, we have seen a number of examples going into the hundreds of superpacs being created. some do not do a whole lot but others such as we store our future, which is a superpac supporting mitt romney's -- mitt romney, which has raised tens of millions of dollars and has spent about $25 million in the presidential race for this state. host: we will get into some of those various superpacs and the people behind them. first, we want to let our viewers and listeners know that they can be part of the conversation with dave levinthal of "politico"

regarding our conversation on superpacs. 202-737-0002. 202-737-0001. 202-628.0205. you can also send us e-mails and participate in the conversation that is always taking place on facebook. before we get to the phones, dave levinthal, we want to go through and look at some of the people involved in this and we are using an item from the cbs news hot sheet, me the biggest donors of the 2012 campaign as our leadoff point. let us start with adelson. which tennessee is he supporting? -- which candidate is he

supporting? guest: she is a multi-billion there. -- he is a multi-billion are. he has pumped more than $10 million into a superpac called the winning our future. not to be confused with restore our future. he has sort of been the ultimate superpac man if you will because of the money that he has put in because a and -- and because of the promise of a hundred million dollars. a huge number. he would put that into support newt gingrich's candidacy. it remains to be seen whether newt gingrich is going to be in a position to benefit from that money. his poll numbers have not been greatly lee. adelson has allowed gingrich tuesday in the race at a level that he has been in today -- to stay in the race at the level that he has been in today.

when newt gingrich won south carolina on the 21st of january, his success to be attributed to the very negative advertisements that were coming from the superpac -- winning our future superpac. host: let us take a call. the first call for this segment comes from florida. you are talking with dave levinthal of "politico" -- go ahead. caller: in the senate race in florida, immediately after world war ii, i think it was 1945 or 1946, the incumbent was opposed by george mathers, a returning veteran. during that campaign, the camp of tribunate in an article published on the front page said that claude pepper had been identified as belonging to a

thespian society. that ruined claude pepper because the brilliant people in florida thought that was some sort of sexual perversion. i would say there is nothing new under the sun it in this sort of thing. the same thing goes on today. of course, there is a much more media. thank you. host: go ahead, dave levinthal. guest:-advertisement is all this country intel's. -- negative advertising is all this country in tails. the megaphone that you have in order to disseminate negative messages is around. perhaps what used to be pamphlets, if you go back far enough, you have more -- it has more to any type of media that you can think of. that is not just television or

radio, but obviously, that is internet communications and any one who is receiving very news and communication. it is easier now to go ahead and get those messages out, not just in the city or a state, but across the country and do so instantaneously. this does not take a whole lot of effort when you have a well- founded political operation. you can pretty much go up with the youtube video in a matter of hours or minutes that can be extremely negative on a campaign that you are running against. the message is being picked up by every media organization and the unit host: next up is frank from frazier park, california on the line for independents. >> thank you for taking my call. could you comment on "the new yorker" article on the guy who came up with the willie horton

ad? his name is mccarthy and man, alive, that is a really good factual article. if you have not read that new new yorker article about that, you have to read it. and one of the things i have been worried about is unfriendly nation nations secretly giving money to dummy corporations or already rich individuals and we american people could have our elections subverted by a nation like iran or north korea or china. we don't know where this money is coming from. so, in fact, a foreign nation could actually give money to one of these p.a.c.'s secretly and have a mountain of willie horton style ads. host: go ahead.

uest: to the question, i have n not read the article but i will check it out. but the point you are making in the question, that plays back to the fact that campaigns and political operations have been using negative advertising for many, many decades, many years going back. recently on television of course. what is different this time is many of those ads previously were coming from the campaigns themselves. so, when an advertisement that was very negative was going up on the air it was the campaign that was typically the one that was funding it or behind it. not always the case but definitely the case many teams. that is still happening today but it has been largely the super p.a.c.'s using the bulk of their money to promote very negative advertising. this is particularly true for the restore our future super p.a.c. the romney super p.a.c.

and the landscape of campaign finance is changing. there is sort of the bad cops of the election. not all super p.a.c.'s are doing negative advertising but the big radars are -- dollars are going toward that type of message. host: is there any sort of enforcement or oversight as to looking where the money is coming from? the caller's concern if the money comes from under the table or outside the united states that foreign influence could have a significant effect on the outcome of the presidential election? guest: that is less a concern with super p.a.c.'s because they have to say who is donating. writes a check for $100 million to the super p.a.c. it is a matter of public record. one point on that is that purpose p.a.c.'s are finding a

loophole in federal law to occlude there are donors for an extra amount of time. i don't want to get too technical but they typically have to file on a quarterly basis but many in december or early january switched from quarterly to monthly. what that allows them to do is avoid filing the pre-primary reports they would have otherwise had to file prior to new hampshire, south carolina, florida, et cetera. so it is something nobody could have predicted but good lawyers were looking at this and they, bottom line, didn't have to reveal their donors until all the primaries were over and we got the numbers on them on january 31. then to the point about foreign less a concern with super p.a.c.'s, but that is a specter that has arisen with n nonprofit organizations. these are organizations that are set up under the internal

revenue service's 501-c-4 code. it is an important point. many of these organizations have sprung up, some super p.a.c.'s have unanimous profit arms and these organizations by law are supposed to exist for the social welfare. they are not supposed to have a primary purpose of engaging in politics. but even members of congress and government groups have roundly criticized some of these groups for breaking that oren beginning in -- or engaging in politics and spending money on politics and the big difference between them and super p.a.c.'s is they do not have to disclose donors. so there is no way to empirically say they are getting their money from domestic sources or foreign sources or wherever because they don't have it tell us. host: david leventhal is a

political influence editor for politico. you can find his work at politico.com/politi politico.com/politicoinfluence. back to the phones, nebraska, jerry on the line for republicans. caller: whenever i hear anybody talking about super p.a.c.'s it is always about the republicans. president obama has super p.a.c.'s. and nobody ever brings that up. he's expected to raise up to a billion dollars for his campaign this year. become in 2008 -- back in 2008 when skrpb mccain agreed to take federal funding for kpeupcampai decided not to take matching funding when he found out how much money he could raise. i want you to comment about that. nobody talks about how much money president obama is raising

in his fund-raising deals. thank you. guest: one of the guys we talked about earlier film producer jeffrey katzenberg, tell us about his donations and comedian and talk show host bill maher. guest: we have been talking about it because president obama is the number one fund-raiser in the history of u.s. presidential campaigns. nobody has ever raised more than obama did or spent more than obama did in the 2008 presidential election. so, the issue of super p.a.c.'s is not one of republicans or democrats. it is one of the political process. republicans have been quicker to the punch. they have spent more and really ramped up the efforts through and no better number than what we saw a group priorities u.s.a.

action a super p.a.c. that is supportive of barack obama that is run by two former aides who worked in the white house. and what is happening there is in january they barely raised $59,000. so we are talking about millions and tens of millions in this super p.a.c. was not able to raise $100,000 say nothing of $100 million or $10 million. what happened? that was as of january 31. it was in the long after that president obama himself basically said ok, i have been rallying against super p.a.c.'s, i have been rallying against the citizens versus f.t.c. decision, you may remember the notable speech against outside influence in politics during the state of the union address where he got into a little fight with the supreme court as the speech was going on and a couple of weeks ago he is saying again that big

dollar donors whether katzenberg who almost funded about half of what priorities u.s.a. has raised you can go ahead and donate to this super p.a.c. i don't like the idea of the super p.a.c.'s but to compete with my republican competitors and certainly compete in the general election we are going to to play by the rules that have been given by us even if we don't like the rules. it is, to use a football me metaphor one teen has to go 10 yards for a first down and some go two. some will view it as hypocritical and others will view it the political reality they are faced with. but jeffrey katzenberg big money. bill maher gave a million dollars. host: we want to show our viewers and other listeners a

priorities u.s.a. action super p.a.c. ad that is running in michigan right now. this is the group that is pro obama and the ad we are about to show deals with former governor romney and letting detroit go bankrupt. a statement that the governor made when the auto industry was in trouble. >> his message was clear. let detroit go bankrupt. >> mitt romney. no question he made a fortune from businesses he helped dry. >> bankrupt. >> he pocketed huge fees shortly before companies collapsed. bankrupt. >> even when the businesses failed, romney came out ahead. are those the values we want in an american president? priorities u.s.a. action is responsible for the content of this advertising. host: our next call for dave leventhal is michigan, iris on

the line for ends. have have you seen this ad and how did it affect you? caller: i just saw it for the first time and they make me sick. i'm so tired of negativity i can't tolerate it any more. i think they are the biggest turnoff for elections that ever came down the pike. and i think they should be outwill youed. i think it is a -- outlawed. i think it is a shame washington doesn't live by the same rules we have to in the real world. imagine going into an employment office and knocking the people that are in the waiting room waiting to interview for the same job and there would be a foot mark on your back side. it is revolting. and if the super p.a.c.'s had to pay taxes there would be a shortage of money to give to the politicians. something needs to be done about

our taxes. everybody pays rent in the u.s.a. host: go ahead. guest: you do have to wonder if something is going to give after this election. the campaign finance system is in constant tumult. you have the mccain-fine gold decision. you have citizens united in 2010. if you go back, buckley versus val everyone -- valeho. now we have mitt romney calling p.a.c.'s, though he is benefiting greatly from them, a disaster, his words. barack obama has been critical of them and is now using them. but both republican and democrat people are looking for perhaps a different way than the situation we have right now. and a situation that is very

upsetting to people like our caller. ultimately, whether anything change in the future remains to be seen. it probably won't change for this cycle but it raises a points about negative advertising that they will be so sick of it they want to put restrictions through congress or federal election commission or the courts will get involved to change yet again the way things are. host: st. louis, missouri, tony on the line for democrats. how are you, tony? caller: good morning. host: your question or comment for david leventhal. caller: i want to just point something out. after the decision was handed down in the state of the union address the president warped us of the perils of the judgment coming from the supreme court and judge alito sat there and like not true,

no, it is never going to happen. yeah, right. alito has not been to the last state of the union address. i'm wondering if the president got re-elected do you think alito will actually show up at another state of the union address? because i think he is too much of a coward to show up again. guest: very difficult to say whether he would show up again. he is a member of the supreme court so he has a right to do what he wants to do or not do whether he will attend the state of the union address. to the point of the supreme court's involvement in outside spending and the types of communications and types of political groups that we are seeing right now, there is a school of thought that says the way things are today is actually even if it is tumultuous and even if it is turbulent for a lot of people, it is great for the first amendment because it allows groups, even if it has

side effects that are not very tasteful, to involve themselves in the political process in a way they have not before. a lot of policeman are not going -- a lot of people won't but it is out at there. and mitt romney, when we talked about saying super p.a.c.'s are a disaster his prescription for it is to allow political campaigns, not outside groups but the campaigns themselves to raise unlimited sums of money to take the money in for their use so that tend of the day when the go up and nts communications go out it is the campaign that will have to be behind it as opposed to an outside group which is often very difficult to track who they areers what they are about, why they are involved in the process and who is funding them. and, as we have seen now with the numbers that are coming in and groups that are funding the super p.a.c. organizations, some of the money, and most of it, is coming from individuals, donors

who have to put their names on a piece of paper and say i'm joan smith or jane smith and i gave a million dollars or whatever it but many of these donations are also coming from corporations, some of which are notoriously difficult to track down who they are and who is behind them and even in a few cases this is not prevalent but in a few cases they appear to be kind of shell corporations set up for the purpose to engage in politics and not sell groceries or make wages. host: we want to show our viewers some of the numbers involved particularly with regard to presidential campaign fund-raising through january 2012. a total of $315 million has been raised by the existence. the republicans have raised $177.6 million, the democrats and president obama $137 mill n

million. the breakdown among the remaining republican candidates, romney has raised $62.3 million, representative paul $30.9 million, former speaker gingrich $18.1 million. former senator santorum approximately $6 million. back to the phones and our discussion with dave leventhal of politico, call from indiana, possible on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. i'm not so troubled about the super p.a.c.'s as long as they disclose. what i'm troubled with is the corrupt media. you have this guy, politico based on the obama network, msn msnbc. i mean, the head of g.e. is on board for job czar.

g.e. got a big deal out of the tarp and they didn't pay no taxes. and all of this money that is collected, where does it go but the media? host: sorry about that, bob. go ahead, david. guest: sure. many people criticize the media as the unit backward and forward. people on the left think the media often is going it skew too far right and bring up fox news and on the left with msnbc. it is a debate that is out there every day. so, the caller i can only speak for myself. i have appeared on msnbc, fox and cnn and what i want to do and i think i can speak to colleagues is report the news as we can best report it and make sure that issues on super p.a.c.'s and influence might be that the best they can possibly

know about both sides of the coin and i wouldn't want to do anything less. host: we have a tweet from c-span junky, still an individual who talks about representative ron paul saying he gets no money from banks or financial institutions like other candidates. we've got a chart here that shows the january balance sheet and money raised and spent by each of the candidates. arguab arguably, ron paul's numbers are not as big as the other numbers. but it does show that he is getting some support from a group called endorse liberty. tell us about them. guest: endorse liberty is another super p.a.c. it is important to note all four of the main republican presidential campaigns have super p.a.c.'s that are independently supporting the campaign structure itself. endorse liberty is the outfit that is supporting ron paul. they have not raised or spent

quite as much as the other super p.a.c.'s supporting mitt romney or newt gingrich. but peter teal, founder of ebay he has been instrumental in giveing what is now about $2 million and perhaps more when we see new reports next month to the super p.a.c. funding for endorse liberty has been largely an online advertisement campaign. they have taken a bit of different approach in supporting ron paul. there is a gentleman, abraham, in utah who is really behind the day-to-day operations of endorse liberty. i have talked to him on several occasions. he's basically said we see ron paul is a different candidate, we want to take a different approach and we. the best way to get people excited about ron paul is not

through millions of dollars of television or radio advertisements but online entkpwpblgment -- engagement, connecting with performance in virtual space. host: back to the phones, tennessee, donaldor independents. go ahead. caller: good morning and i'm grateful for this kind of in the country where you can call in and put in their this cents' worth. i find it laughable, with all of the candidates, you know, campaigning about fixing the economy and being financially responsib is laughable t about how quick they can burn up other people's money, which is exactly what we are trying to get rid of in washington. they have a little becomes -- check if you want to give a dollar. why does the federal government the dollars and say this

is all we have to work with for you to campaign on. i don't know. thank you for your time. guest: the caller was referring to, i believe, a public financing system for presidential campaigns which has existed for many years but is largely obsolete as most of the candidates who are involved in the presidential election this time around and was the case with obama in 2008, have opted out of the system because there is so much more money above what they could get through the public financing system as they run as presidential candidates. so, the candidates, i would hardly want to speak for them but it seems their philosophy is why would i want to hreupt myself when there is all this money that i can raise because if i limit myself and the other guy doesn't then i'm kind of disarm i disarming when i know they have a big bomb they can drop on me.

to the point of public financing, there are many groups that think that public financing and radical reform that would change the way campaigns are waged in terms of fund-raising is the way to go. this has been something that has been notoriously difficult to task. if it was easy it probably would have happened. there are other people calming for a constitutional amendment, a constitutional convention. not a lot of policeman are happy on the right or left with the situation that we have. there are some who are but many who are not. it kind of goes back to the point that you have to wonder if after this election is all done and all over and we have a new president or not, that something is going to have to give and change. host: we have a tweet from spoony 35 who wants to know aren't the big banks and many corporations supporting both candidates via p.a.c.'s hedging their bets?

guest: yes, it is a very good point and one we have seen trendwise for a long time. wall street, financial institutions, banks, they are notoriously fickle in who they support. you go back to the 2008 election and look at the individuals who are giving money either to the campaigns or political action committees, wall street, the banks, were very supportive of democrats, very supportive of became. what happened -- obama. in 2009 or 2010 when financial reform was taking place, wall street, dodd-frank bill, all the things that were designed to change the way the nation's financial structure was shaking out in the aftermath of the economic collapse we had, the money went the other way and the political money really started supporting republicans. this is something that has persisted well past the midterm elections in 2010 and has been

rolling along just fine for the republicans. host: we want to show our viewers and listeners an ad being put out by the chamber of commerce. this is attacking tim kean in his run for the senate in virginia. then we want to talk about outside spending groups that are not super p.a.c.'s and groups that are putting big money in campaigns that are not presidential. >> i think healthcare reform will go down as one of the great achievements. obama care could cost virginia up to $2 billion. it will kill jobs across america. >> one of the greatest achievements of this president. >> higher cost, less jobs. these are no great achievements. call tim kean. ask him why he continues to support obama care. we need nor jobs. the u.s. chamber is responsible for this advertising. host: dave leventhal, talk to us

about that. guest: that type of advertisement is notable because like we talked about before it is not coming from a super p.a.c., the u.s. chamber of commerce is a nonprofit business trade group which has the ability, so long as it doesn't exist just to engage in politics, to make political communications like that one. that is called an election communication. but it with actually go out and say vote against tim kaine or vote against barack obama. anyone muching that ad won't mistake that for something that is supporting barack obama or supporting tim kaine but it is able to make a message that is based on an issue that mentions the candidates and go forward and basically get right up to the line of advocating for or again

against the candidate without doing it. host: back to the point of the chamber of commerce. guest: since it is not a super p.a.c. it doesn't have to disclose its donors. we do not know where the money that fueled that advertisement is coming from because whether it is the chamber or any other group that is organized as the chamber or as we were talking about like a social welfare organization is, they just simply, based on the laws we have right now, which are very contentious and a lot of people disagree with, they do not have to disclose the source of their money and therefore we know less about these ads when it comes to funding sources than the advertisements from super p.a.c.'s, which are a step further in terms of how overt they may be in terms of support of candidates but the down side perhaps of having to is disclose where the money is coming from. host: union bridge, maryland. bill on the line for republicans.

go ahead. caller: yes. what i wanted to find out is the amount of money spent on the campaign and amount of votes acquired divided into the money.for the votes acquired and what each vote cost the campaign running it. host: when it is all said and done how much per vote is this going to cost the winning campaign? guest: without a calculator and can't add it up on the fly but you have campaigns that are spending a lot more per vote than other campaigns. and it is easier, i think, to calculate this in the primaries

when you can really add up some of the votes. i haven't seen the latest numbers for the ones, the and caucuses that were waged in colorado and minnesota and elsewhere. but if you look back to iowa, look back to new hampshire, you had candidates spending more for the votes they were getting. and that really speaks to how expensive it is to run a nationwide campaign, how expensive to go state by state, primary by primary, caucus by caucus all across the country and be successful in a presidential campaign such as this. this is not a cheap endeavor or operation. doing it on the fly, doing it on the cheap, it is very difficult. rick santorum is learning that firsthand how difficult it is. he's doing a lot better now raising more money than he was before because he has to.

host: our last call is homer on the line for democrats from shreveport, louisiana. caller: i was wondering if all of this money that they are wasting is -- why don't they put that in the treasury and lower the deficit? host: we will leave it there. we have an article here that i can't find but the super p.a.c. that was supporting herman cain, now that he is out what can he do that, or what can the super p.a.c. do with that? guest: we have a story it was called the 9-9-9 fund. indeed its money to another super pac's according -- super pac supporting the plan.

have toc's do not support a specific candidate. they can have a broader approach. they said our work is done. herman cain is out of the race. we will give it to another group with the philosophy herman cain is promoting as opposed to the candidacy he is no longer running. host: dave levinthal, if you can find his article on politico.com. in 45 minutes, we will be talking with buddy roemer, a third-party candidate. after this break, we will be discussing the consumer financial protection bureau efforts to address overdraft

fees. you are watching the "journ washington journal." we will be right back. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> today, five civil war historians make their case for the 1852% of the year -- for the 1852 person of the year. that is on c-span3. >> one of the trickiest things about writing the book was the way rights were straddled as a moral imperative and aspirations

ideal and a practical and formal mandate. >> from distributing food to the port in africa to sex trafficking in japan, he defines human rights and how well- winning western reform can lead to increased exploitation. -- how well-meaning western reform can lead to increased exploitation. we look at the african-americans who served in congress. at 11:00, the book written by simpson's former press secretary. but tv is every weekend on c- span2. >> this particular telephone only rings in a serious crisis. vote for president johnson on november 3. >> bush and dukakis.

bush supports the death penalty for first-time murders. rackauckas allowed murderers to have -- dukakis allowed murderers to have weekend passes from prison. one was willie horton. >> randomly shot at civilians. >> we can all point to an outrageous commercial. on average, negative commercials are more likely to be correct and talk about issues. >> will 2012 be the most negative campaign cycle in history? a discussion looks at current and past political campaigns and their impact on american culture. you can watch online at the c- span video library. it is what you want, when you want it. "washington journal" continues.

host: joining us now is pamela banks from the consumers union. this week, a record trade -- richard cordray announced they will be looking at overdraft fees. guest: it is good they are looking at this product. there have been a lot of abuses. they have done a lot of research to determine if overdraft fees are reasonable. we have heard from consumers of the last few years complaining about the excessive costs and not even knowing they have overdraft protection. host: what is the average cost? guest: one study found for 2011 it was anticipated consumers would pay $38 billion in overdraft fees.

a study was done in 2008 by the fdic. they predicted for 2008, a consumer would pay it to $1,600 in overdraft. host: what do banks typically charge if you do overdraft? guest: generally the fee for each transaction to range from $30 to $35. i have heard it as high as $38 per transaction. perhaps your shopping and use your debit card, you do not have quite enough money and you are a dollar short. that could trigger your overdraft. you could be charged $35 for the overdraft protection.

a couple of coffee could cost $40. that is a lot of money. host: do we have laws that govern how banks to overdraft fees? guest: we have laws of the regulators were supposed to be enforcing. unfortunately, those regulators were not enforcing go law. they focus on the safety and soundness of an institution rather than the impact banks have on consumers with respect to their products and practices. now we have the cfpb in place. their sole responsibility is to protect consumers. host: richard cordray is in new york talking about this this week. guest: we thanked him for

looking into the issue. we told him the costs associated with overdraft protection were high. banks use tricks and traps to generate overdraft fees from consumers. oftentimes, consumers do not even realize they have overdraft protection. they start operating as if they do. the consumer checks their account and find they owe the bank money. host: pamela banks is with us to talk about this issue. if you want to ask questions about the cfpb, you can do so many ways. you can give us a call on the lines for republicans, democrats, and independents. you can send us e-mail or a

tweet. the banks put out a statement. they said, "we are not concerned about a steady based on factors. we believe is a service the customers freely elect to have." it sounds like from their perspective, the consumer is in the driver's seat. guest: consumers are in the driver's seat. consumers have to take responsibility for their own financial health. the problem is often consumers do not know they have overdraft protection. if the banks disclose it, it is disclosed in a way where the consumer does not understand the associated with

that. well it is true that disclosure helps, we need more. we need someone taking a look and being vigilant to make certain banks are not using tricks and traps to generate fees from overdrafts. host: when a consumer goes to the bank, do they not give a document that says you can accept or reject it? guest: with debit cards, they do. a federal rule came out that said banks have to ask consumers whether they want overdraft protection with respect to debit card transactions. we think the same protection should be extended to consumers with respect to their checking account and any other overdraft program the bank may offer. another thing i may point out is that while disclosure is extremely important, disclosures have to be made in a way that

consumers understand what is being disclosed. . did a study in the average disclosure was 111 pages. who can read through 111 pages of legalese to understand their overdraft protection? host: the first call is from virginia, ruth is all . -- ruth is on the line. caller: why are the charges so an outrageous? allied bank will work with me. if i need it, it is only $9. why would i go from $9 for an online bank to another bank where i would have to pay $40?

i will go with an online bank and only pay $9. i prefer that. if i go to an atm, i do not have to pay fees. the money is put back in my account at the end of the month. guest: i think you are doing the wise thing. consumers must shop for the best deal for them. online banking can offered the services at a reduced price. the other thing i recommend is not only trying to find an alternative bank, but try to hook your overdraft to a savings account. if you do that, you may just have to pay a transfer fee but you will not have to pay an overdraft the of up to $40. there is a big difference there. host: peter is on the republican

line. caller: of want to relay personal situation and i had. i have a credit card payment. i had a credit card payment i had forgotten by may. i did it again. it resulted in an overdraft. the bank charged with $32. the credit card company charged me in return check fee of $35. i wound up paying $78 for one credit card payment on an overdraft. i filed complaints with the controller of currency. i am a human being and forget. computers are machines. if you overdrafted at 12:01 that night, they do not care. you are getting an overdraft.

thank you. guest: that is one of the reasons why cfpb is taking a closer look at overdraft protection. not only did you have your overdraft fees and credit card fees, but you have late fees as well if you do not pay right away. i would encourage you to share your story with the cfpb. you can go online to cfpb.gov. they have a section to share your story. that might be an excellent opportunity for you to tell them what happened to you so that they can be cognizant of it as they proceed. host: we have a graphic of profits for overdraft fees. about $20 billion in 2011. the figures go back to 2007. talk about the banks depending on these fees as a revenue source. guest: it is unfortunate.

while the credit card act was passed that may have stopped some tricks and traps in general, we find that you close one door and the open another door. you may recall a few months ago there was the $5 debit card fee. we were pleased with a number of banks decided not to charge that. i had one bank tell me that we're not going to charge $5 for the debit card fee, but we have to charge it someplace else. that someplace else could be the overdraft protection. it could be they now charge a fee to talk to a person over the phone with respect to your account. you close one store and another door opens. host: massachusetts on the independent line, chuck, go ahead.

caller: i am so glad you are talking about overdraft protection. about five years ago, i had an overdraft protection. i had a business. let me give an example. if i overdraft $3,500, i go in the next day and deposit $2,000 in much of an account. it does not go to the overdraft section. i am still paying the interest of 18% on the $500 are was overdrawn. the $2,000 is getting nothing. i have to have a special transaction and identified to the bank the money and deposited it is supposed to go to cover the $500 overdraft. why would they automatically do that? i think you know what i am saying. host: what type of dollar amount in fees did you pay for this? caller: the point is you

overdraft $500. they bring it to your attention. you put $2,000 in your checking account. you are still paying 18% on the 500 unless there is a special transaction. you have to tell the bank to take the money and apply it to the overdraft. guest: that is a new one for me. that is the first time i have heard of that. in my mind, that is another trick and trap to make sure the overdraft is triggered. what we have heard and seen is that banks often reorder checks. you write a check and make a deposit. they will pay the highest amount check you have written to allow the other checks to bounce a way of generating fees. i find this practice troubling. another practices close to what

you have described. you will make a deposit. you know the money is there. it has cleared. is there. you write checks. you later find out the checks have bounced. the reason the checks have bounced is because the bank has refused to release the funds to pay it. they will say that your check is still on hold or there is suspicious activity associated with the check so we could not credit it to your account. meanwhile, you think the money is there. you are writing checks. you are triggering overdrafts. host: trawls from twitter -- charles from twitter says this. expand on that. guest: it is just a way to generate fees. this is something i know the cfpb will be looking at. consumers union brought it to their attention this is

happening. we hear from consumers all over the country. we have heard these types of stores. hopefully the cfpb will address this. host: illinois, sue, on the democrats' line. caller: maybe the government can check into regions bank. i have asked repeatedly to be opted out. when you talk to in -- when you opt in, the balance on the card is instantaneous. we knhen you opt out, it seems o

not be instantaneous. if you have $100 in your account and have $90 of overdraft fees, they will pay the two big ones like the $40.10 and a $30.10. they will let the smaller transactions go in so they can make more money on the big ones. why not pay down the smaller ones and only let two of the higher ones go through? because they make more money that way. the government needs to check into regions bank. guest: certainly that is one of the biggest problems we have seen with overdraft protection, the reordering of checks. in our view, checks should be paid out chronologically. another thing i would suggest to

you and others listening online is that not only can you let the cfpb know your concerns, but we at consumers union would love to hear from you. please go on our website www. defendyourdollars, and make sure we know about that. host: lawrence says maybe they could give the service to people deemed excellent credit risks. guest: banks often make the argument that we provide a service because a lot of people do not want to be embarrassed when they cannot make a purchase. that may be, but it comes at a

very high cost. unfortunately, it impacts the most vulnerable who are already cash-strapped. take someone trying to make a rent or mortgage payment. they are a few dollars short. triggering overdraft may be helpful, but it comes with these that cost more. you are already financially strapped. that makes a cycle of debt for the consumer. host: another perspective from laura hoffman. she says if they're really concerned, they can volunteer to help people learn to balance checkbooks. guest: i think that is a valid point. i can sit here and say the cfpb will address that as well. there is a large component of what the cfpb will be doing to educate consumers about how to

use their checking account and how to use alternatives rather than something expensive like overdraft. the point is well taken. i think it will be addressed. host: good morning. caller: the problem i see is that we are expanding government. this is just another branch of government with bureaucrats. i do not know how i have made it 75 years making these kinds of decisions on my own. what are we coming to? is the government going to make all our decisions for us? what happened to personal responsibility? it is just another branch of government with more taxes and bureaucrats. my lord, i think enough is enough. host: is there a sense of government intrusion?

guest: i would not call it interesting. i think it is more the government making sure you have the information needed to make financial decisions, that you understand the risks, and can take control of your life. the government is not saying you cannot have overdraft. they are saying if you are going to have overdraft, the bank has an obligation to make certain you understand the terms and that the fees must be reasonable and proportional. does this lead to the c a p saying they will impose best practice standards -- does this lead to the cfpb saying they will impose best practice standards? guest: there is an opportunity for consumers and banks to provide the cfpb with information regarding overdraft

protection. they will review the material and come up with a plan as to what they might do. they can issue guidance. they can require clearer disclosure of the fees. there are several things they could possibly do. they will not say that you cannot charge a certain dollar amount because they do not have authority to do that. they can mandate the fees be reasonable. host: maryland, you are next. barber is on the democrats -- barbara is on the democrats' line. guest: i am so glad they are looking into them. we have a local bank. i have had problems with them -- charging me. the trick they use to give low- income people to go to the bank as they offer $100 if you change your checking account to them if

you have direct deposit. lower income people and people on social security, those people are more likely to go over the limit because they do not have that much money. they are luring them in with $100. how many middle income or wealthy people are going to change their banks for $100? nobody, unless they're very limited on their income. that is one of the tricks they get you in there with. guest: absolutely. it is concerning. oftentimes when we think of the tricks that some banks may use, some of them who do not have best practices are akin to the payday lenders. they lure you in. you need money right away. they charge exorbitant fees.

there is no disclosure. is light, i will get you in the door and make promises, then i will hit you with all of these fees and you wind up paying more. host: jim asks you to differentiate between overdraft fees and overdraft protection. guest: it is the same thing. it is the dollar amount they charge you to process a debit transaction or check when you do not have enough money in your account. it is often referred to as overdraft protection. it could be overdraft service fee. it has several different names. is the same thing. host: in other words, is a short-term loan. go ahead. caller: the banks have this protection. on your checking account and on

an automatic withdrawal, there is no control. they can do what they want. if they really want to get hold of you, they have your phone number and contact numbers. they do not do that. they send you a letter that takes seven to 10 days to get to you. one bank in particular i was doing business with, after the fourth day, taking charge additional $30 fee. there is no limit. they can go to the sky. it is $35 in the beginning. they do not care. host: how many times have you been hit with an overdraft fees? guest: once unbeknownst to me. i thought it came out in august. it was an automatic withdrawal that came out in february for an insurance payment. it was life insurance. i thought it was august.

they would not reclaim it. they have the deal where it was over 10 days before they got the letter in the mail to me. the bank is right in my town. host: what are the disclosure issues like when you get a fee? guest: when you actually are getting a fee, often they use the mail to notify you. the male takes longer -- the mail takes longer. best practices dictate you have a phone call or text message that will notify the consumer as soon as possible that they are at the risk of overdrafting. when you go to an atm machine, best practices will tell you you could go over.

the cfpb will probably mandate a penalty box on your checking account statement. each month when you get your checking account statement, the cfpb would like to hear from consumers about the penalty box. in the upper right-hand corner of your statement, it will tell you how much in overdrafts you have paid and how much you paid with respect to going over your dollar amount. that is something they would like to have feedback about from consumers. host: we go to phil on the republican line. caller: i am calling about overdraft fees for bank of america. i am in a lawsuit against them right now. they have charged the over and over again for the last 10 years. i have been on the phone with

them about it. i have tried to work with them. i have called them time and time again. host: this is specifically for overdraft fees? what caused the fees being charged to you? caller: it was on checks i have written and also pay paul -- pay you name it. it maybe a week or two before your balance gets back to the regular bonds. i recently got charged about six overdraft fees. i told them the problem was that i was trying to balance my

checkbook but by imbalance. but on balance online kept changing. -- i told on the problem was and is trying to balance my checkbook, but my balance kept changing. guest: i did not have an opportunity to ask him what state he was in. host: north carolina. guest: you may want to check with your attorney general's office. there are several lawsuits pending around the country against banks. in florida, there is a class action suit against several banks. bank of america, citibank, and others for the way they charge consumers overdraft fees. i would point you in that direction. there may be something going on in your state. in california, the district court in 2010 said wells fargo was using unfair practices with respect to overdraft protection.

something is being started. consumers are tired of that and going to court to get addressed. host: cindy says i do not allow automatic withdrawals and have never been overdrawn. guest: that is admirable. unfortunately, many of us may not have that luxury with the economic circumstances we are facing. when you need a small loan to float the couple of days until you get your checks. as long as you manage it and know when to expect to deposit, those deposits are credited immediately to your account or as soon as possible. you know when you are going over. host: centennial, texas, good morning, norma. g

-- san antonio, texas, good morning, norma. caller: i am a small-business owner using chase. i have never had any problems before until about two years ago when i started to receive overdraft fees. i thought i would go take care of them and speak to a bank manager. i was totally turned away. i was redirected to another branch. i came back to try to speak to one of the business representatives at the branch that totally never called me. finally i decided to go to their headquarters and see if i could get some answers. i got some answers finally. the call me. i spoke to them. everything was by contract --

they called me. i spoke to them. everything was back on track until about six months later. i started getting overdraft fees. they had taken about $15,000 in overdraft fees. every deposit i was making was being held. they were doing reversals on things coming in because i was doing some insurance business. a lot of the companies i have dealt with were doing the payments through the bank in check form. host: if you have a question or final statement, what would you say? guest: need some help. i wrote letters. i tried to get my money back. i thought it was very unfair. i thought those were bad practices. guest: my heart goes out to you.

i assume you continue to be irresponsible consumer and did everything possible to stay on top of your account, you still in. these overdraft fees. i would suggest you go to cfpb, tell them your story. go to your local offices in your state where you can get help with respect to filing a claim or making a complainant. there are a lot of websites. we would love to have a record of this type of abuse. we can make certain the cfpb and others focus on it. host: the fdic did study in 2008 saying consumers paid $69 in fees for overdrafting 20 times or more. back to the calls. connecticut, beth is on the independent line.

caller: i recently got a settlement, an overdraft settlement from wachovia bank. when you do the settlements, do not expect a lot of money back compared to what they took from you. i did direct deposit from my employer. when i would look at my count, there would be no money. then my bank account and closed. -- and then my bank account got closed. i tried to make them understand they were the reason my bank account foreclosed. then you put it on my credit report. if you have not done the overdraft fees, i just do not understand how we do not know what is going on with the banks. they cannot control what is

going on with not letting the people know what is happening. guest: this is so instructed for me. it is did for me to hear the settlements may not make you whole. perhaps we should be looking into that more closely. this is exactly why the cfpb has decided to take a close look at overdraft protection, because of these types of abuses. host: she said overdraft settlement. guest: that means they took the banks to court. that is an aspect of it. i also heard her say the practices that got her in trouble was she had to take them to court for were unfair. that is what the cfpb will focus on. i can say these suits are

relatively new phenomenon to a large extent. we need to take a closer look at the settlements to see what is happening. i know there is one in california. there are some in florida. i find it interesting that she does not feel she was made whole by the process. host: georgette is on the republican line -- georgia is on the republican line. caller: i have received several letters that said they were having a class action suit against nine. when i read it, it said people had been incentivized to sue the bank and that they were receiving $5,000. the people who would be included in the settlement would give about $10 -- get about $10 when it was settled. i thought that was terrible.

when we got letters saying we could opt in or out, everything was fine up until then. then they said that we will do what ever we want to do in charge do what ever we want to charge you. they are charging $35 overdraft fees. after a certain amount of days, they start charging you $5 a day or an additional $35. this is killing people on social security, disability, fixed income, and poor people. you are either facing a $35 late charge on your bill that you need to pay, cancellation of your insurance, or go to the bank and overdraw it and hope that you can cover it later. guest: you are right. those of the types of stories -- those are the types of stories.

you raise the issue of the settlement. we will look at that. that concerned me. tell people your story. let your concerns be known. this is the opportunity. if the cfpb is aware of it or we are aware of it, we can get help for you. host: akron, ohio, you will be the last call for this segment. caller: i am calling regarding overdraft fees. i think there should be some limit on what they can charge and that the fees should be proportionate to the amount you have gone over. we had a bank account with national city. they switched to pmc. pmc took over. we had an overdraft of $6. they charged us $250 an overdraft fees. they never called us or send us a letter.

we did not even know they charged us this amount until we found out this money was missing. it should either be a one time fee -- i do not see how they can charge $250 on something that is $10. that does not seem right to me. guest: 80. i know there is concern about the number of fees being charged to consumers. last year, there was legislation introduced in congress that would limit the number of fees that could be charged to consumers a day or month. your points are well taken. we will continue to look at that. host: how long until we hear from the cfpb about what they're doing? guest: some time between now and december, we will know what they will do. host: pamela banks is with the

consumers union. guest: defendyour dollars.com. please tell us your comments and stores. host: buddy roemer will join us to talk about the decision he made this week about his campaign. c-span3 has a special all-day event today with coverage of a forum from richmond, virginia, that will look at who was the most influential person in 1862. it is sponsored by the museum of the confederacy and the library of virginia. it is an all-day event that you can see on american history tv. >> american history tv will be live all day on c-span3 with coverage of the forum looking at

who was the most influential person of 1862. this is an event taking place in richmond, co-hosted by the museum of the confederacy and the library of virginia. joining us from richmond is the president and ceo of the museum of the confederacy. last year, we were here doing the same event, looking at the year 1861. last year, abraham lincoln was selected as the person of the year. what is your feeling on who will get it for 1862? >> i think choosing the person of the year is a great way to get people into history. history is all about people. to have historians nominate five people, one thing we have enjoyed doing is not having the audience know who each of the five historians will nominate. the speculation in the hallway outside is lively and exactly

the question you asked me. is it robert e. lee, abraham lincoln, stonewall jackson? a lot of suggestions are flying around with the audience right now. >> tell our viewers who some of the historians are and how they will go. >> each historian will stand up and nominate for the man of the year. it is not a popularity contest. it is about who drove events, who was the most influential person of the year. it is kind of like "time" magazine. we have a great group of historians. bob crick, in re- thomas, and david white -- blight. they have lectured.

they're very knowledgeable folks. i am sure your viewers have bookshelves full of their books. it will be an interesting group of historians. each one has a reputation of who they like and do not like. that is driving some speculation of who they will nominate and how well they will present a case for their nominee. >> waite rawls is the ceo of the museum of the confederacy. our viewers will be able to participate as well with phone calls. we will take a look at tweets throughout the day. that is getting underway at 9:30 eastern on american history tv. host: joining us from boston rouge, louisiana, is buddy roemer. you decided this week he would become an independent.

explaining the strategy behind that. -- explained the strategy behind that. guest: in the 21st century, elections are decided by debate performance and opportunity. i have been a republican for 21 years. i am proud of the republican party. i was a democrat before that. in the course of the last year, there have been 23 nationally televised debates. most americans now get their impressions of candidates in the debate format. newt gingrich rose and fell in that format. rick santorum has risen in that format. herman cain, in that format. some have not done so well. debates decide it. the governor of texas fell in

that format. michele bachmann felt in that format. debates are important. of the 23 nationally televised debate, i am the only republican candidate who was not invited to the debate. i am the only republican candidate who has been a congressman and a governor. here is the key point. i am the only republican candidate who does not take pac money or special interest money or wall street money. all of the other republican candidates are financed by those people. i am not talking about super pac's. that is another issue. i am just talking about that take my money and do what i want you to do kind of campaign. for one year, i talked about what we can do in america. i love america. i think there is a lot we can do. i was not invited to a single debate.

i had a standing in the polls higher than rick santorum. i had a standing in the polls in florida higher than jon huntsman. they were invited to every debate. i began to get the feeling after a while maybe the republican party did not want to hear about corruptive power of special interest money and their candidates. host: you decided to split your efforts between the reform party and americans elect. tell us why you have chosen those routes for independent bid. guest: i have been shut out of all of the debates and not been able to talk among the candidates and to the american people about what this country could be. i am the only candidate for president in either party has been a congressman and a

governor. i began to try to figure out a way to get on the national stage. the trouble with the primary debate is that the rules are set debate by the bay. every time i would call to see if i was invited to the debate, and said i did not quite have enough money. you do not have quite enough standing in the polls. i reached 1%. i called. they said it is 2%. i reached 2%. they said it was 3%. i got tired of it. i decided i would take my case to the biggest party in america, the independent party, and that i would try to get independent republicans and democrats interested in a candidate who would try to unite america, who would have a vice president from another party and join together. that is where i am today, an

independent. you should know there is a law, rule, that says the debates in the general election. that lot is if you reach 50% in the national poll and are on the ballot in all 50 states, you have to be divided -- invited to the debates. that is what i am trying to do. i will join with americans elect in getting all 50 ballots. i may or may not be with the reform party. that has yet to be determined. i will be an independent candidate joining with another woman or man to put a team together to rebuild america and get in the national debate. host: 80 roemer is a presidential candidate, former governor of louisiana, joining us to talk about his candidacy.

you can call or e-mail us or send us a tweet about the americans select organization which heat reference. it is holding an on-line presidential primary. it hosts and non-partisan ticket -- it hosts a non- partisanship. their efforts to put the candidate on the ballot. brian, go ahead with your question or comment. caller: i have always found it amusing that in the land of the free and home of brave, we only have two parties. you are either going to be in

first or second place. it is ridiculous and embarrassing. i would like to switch topics. i would like to ask c-span to show on the treaties we signed that called for this over a number of years. i am a citizen. i contacted the chamber of commerce. he indicated i am and isolationist. just one second. i will make my point and get off. we can make peace against mexico or china. it has nothing to do with health care or taxes. guest: he is absolutely right. listen to him. we have this fetish for free- trade. i love it, but it takes two. it is hard to have a marriage with just one person when the other person is not talking,

cooperating, not listening, not loving. we have given permanent, normal trade relations with china. have you ever been to china? i have many times. their products will across this country is like a tsunami. they're often made by child labor, forced labor, prison labor, with no environmental standards or worked safety standards. that is china. what do they do with our products? they stop them from coming into their country. it took us nearly half a decade to get a fire engine built in louisiana into china. here is what i want, fair trade. i would start by asking the department of treasury to tell the truth that time it is a

currency manipulator and it must stop. i would revoke permanent normal trade relations. here is what i am trying to get, fair trade. i want trade with china, but i want our products to have the same axis they do. i would like that the workers of china know that there is a nation in the world called the united states that is their biggest market, and we will stand for them to be treated as human beings, not like little pieces of dirt on a chess set. i believe the caller is absolutely correct. host: our next caller joins us from lafayette, louisiana. caller: governor romer, i am so proud of you. you have been the only republican -- i know you are an independent now. i think it is wise that you have

to look over. you are the only canada speaking any common sense. i think that is probably why you have been locked out of the system. i am so proud of you. i really hope you are going to be able to shake up the system. i am so proud of you. keep up the good work. guest: thank you. you have heard me say it before. let me say again. i was eight years a congressman, incumbent democrat, i won again and again. i never took pac money. i do not think washington is broken. i think it is bought. i am a conservative economically. i believe in full disclosure and transparency. the super pac's do not worry me so much about the amount of money they give. is that they do it in hidden fashion. it is illegal.

"the wall street journal" had a good editorial praising the super pac's because people were participating in free speech. they had an interesting phrase in there. they said it is legal as long as they do not corroborate with the canada. i am not a fool. i am a 68-year-old granddad. i am a successful businessman. i love america. i am lucky to be born in america. but we ought to tell the truth. there's full cooperation between the super pac's and canada's. mitt romney spoke to the fund- raiser for the super pac and then declared he did not know what they are doing. politics should not be an ally. politics should not be controlled by special interests. we need a bank reform. we need budget reform. we need tax reform. we need immigration reform. we need trade reform.

we need help care reform. we need all of these things. but they will not happen until we reform campaigns in this country. andneed full disclosure as broad limits to let the people decide. here's how i am running. $100 limit. no pac money. they say and the good candidate. i went to harvard and studied business. you know how to grow jobs. you are not a lawyer or lobbyist. you do not live in washington. those are not the issue. the issue is, are you going to have a president free to lead first think about the kind of president that you want. then can you be competitive in the system? host: how can you compete by

limiting donations from individual donors? guest: very good question. let me answer you. i am not depending on a wall street check. i hold no fund-raisers. i have raised half a million dollars across america, average contribution is $25. i need 1 million people, i need 1 million americans to stand with me. if they would give me $70 each, that is $70 million. that is more than any two candidates have raised in the primary. if we continue business as usual and let goldman sachs and g.e. be the major contributors, let the fat cats who want to move the capital of israel to jerusalem and by candidates to say that, if we just sit back in

our arm chairs as spectators, if we do not get involved, what do you think will happen to this country? this country is in trouble. china trade, lack of education, a budget that is not balanced, a tax code that you cannot read. here is my solution. get a woman or a man with experience who is free to lead and 1 million of us contribute $50 or $100, and that candidate will get on the stage and win the election and be free to lead. it can be done. obama is saying $1 billion. that is a disgrace. host: the next call comes from the democratss line. caller: good morning governor

roemer. i would like to say i appreciate what you are saying, but i will be voting for president obama. is the i think he is the most intelligent president we have had. none of the candidates on the republican side, romney, santorum, gingrich, in the sell- off happened to herman cain and rick perry, they are totally not qualified. you have these blue dog democrats in office who will not get my vote, but i fully support him, and i appreciate what you are saying. we have the best man for the job and he will be reelected. thank you.

guest: i appreciate your opinion, particularly because you are from new orleans. there is a lot of love there. my granddaddy lived in new orleans. he lived on bourbon street. i hear what you said about our president. he is not the best president we have, he is the only president we have, and i will honor him in this campaign. i always show respect to the office. i'm very disappointed in him. we have a president that has not submitted a detailed budget plan in three years. we have a president does not call for tax reform in the three years he has been president. it is a difficult time in america. i know the parties have divided and split this party in half.

i know that. i know the president has a hard time, but i expect the president to lead, to talk about how to grow jobs, to have an energy policy, to have a simple, clear, progressive tax code. i expect the president to hold wall street to the same standards he holds commercial banks. here is what i do not expect. i do not expect the president of the united states who talks a good game and has you in his corner to sign a bank reform bill, go to wall street the next month, have a fund raiser with the wall street banks at $35,000 a ticket, but does not change too big to fail, does not increase capital ratios, does not reinstalled glass-steagall,

and is hosted by goldman sachs. i do not expect the president to be bought. i expected this president to bring change. i have seen none. host: tulsa, oklahoma. go ahead. you are on with governor roemer. caller: i am a former truck driver, and i have seen your state go from bad, and they have done a lot of good building in your state. i have a car loan financed through my trucking company and i just got that car. guest: by the way, i am -- go ahead. caller: ibm a conservative.

i used to be a democrat. i changed to a republican, and i want to be independent. i believe in limited government, strong border control, and obama seems like a good guy, but i think he is trapped by his own party, and the politics as bad. he hired the wrong people to do the wrong job. it just seems like he can not find a way to leave the country. he is a good speaker, but not a great leader. guest: thank you. i'm a member, to, by the way. i have to go to a $650 million bank here in louisiana -- i have built a 67 $50 million bank.

louisiana. we did not foreclose on homeowners. we are old fashioned that way. for a lot of obvious reasons, i think the president is trapped. he is trapped in his own party. he is trapped in partisan politics and a corrupt political system. let me give you a fact. four years ago, when president obama ran against john mccain, they received more pack money and lobbyist money from washington, d.c., then from 32 states combined. washington, d.c., is bought and sold by pack and lobbyist money. i think we should have a law that says you can't be a registered lobbyist in

washington, but you cannot bring a check to a politician. i would have 48-hour disclosure. if a politician receive the checks, he would have to disclose that in 48 hours. i would do away with super pacs because they are illegal. they are in full cooperation with the candidates. i would have criminal penalties. we need to clean up the system. we did that in louisiana and it made a big difference. we've had good governors like mark foster and bobby jindal. keep cleaning our state. i will start, and i will do it by having a campaign reform bill that is heavy on disclosure. i am a conservative. i like disclosure. we will have broad limits and full disclosure.

theodore roosevelt said 100 years ago last month "are we going to be the party of privilege and wall street, or are we going to be the party of plain people that build a great nation? i asked that today. i need 15% of the national poll to get on the debate, and i will ask president obama why has he not submitted tax reform, comprehensive immigration reform that seals our border, why has he not demanded fair trade with china? host: providence, rhode island. ana, independent line. go ahead. >> i am and independent from -- caller: i am an independent of rick santorum.

he won me over with his made in america plan. i do agree with you that there are serious problems with our primaries and they're not helped by the mainstream media refusing to allow all candidates -- allow candidates to direct the conversation. i was a democrat for nearly all of my 52 years until 2006 until mike -- 's my eyes were open -- until my eyes were opened with the affair left tried to infiltrate the parties. i have seen a lot of the machinations that go on. i have serious concerns with americans elect, which is run by douglas, who was involved in

the clinton administration, the people dead and post naphtha up -- the people that imposed nafta upon us, mayor bloomberg, who is also a member of the international crisis group, of global list. they are seeking to manipulate our elections. host: governor roemer, go ahead. guest: good issues. i have the same trepidation that you do. i'm fiercely independent in my approach. americans elect do, a non-profit organization, is provide ballot access. you have to run on your own. i will select my running mate. i will look at any american who

has strong views about loving my country and making it better, but i am independent of americans elect. all they are doing is building a platform. they're not picking a candidate. their membership, 600,000, 1 million people, we will do that on line. i do not even though who finances americans elect. i do not care. i am fully disclosed. i will not get any money from them. i will not get any ideas from them. all we are doing it is challenging the political system, a system that is institutionally corrupt, and it is dependent on institution money. look at health care. president obama head insurance

companies, lobbyists, bankers, pharmaceutical companies, lawyers -- here is who i would have in the room. doctors, patients, nurses -- this is the way you do reform. i need 1 million people to look at buddyroemer.com and say let's take this country back from special interests. >> what is the website, and the second along -- second, if you're looking at gop candidates, who was at the top of your list that -- vice president candidates, who was on the top of your list? guest: i am looking for a person with some political experience, not too much. i will not mention rick santorum

and others who have too much. newt gingrich, my god. i call mitt romney the 1%er, and i think newt gingrich is the lobbyist. host: what is your website? guest: buddyroemer.com. look at it. i've been a congressman, a governor, i've built a bank. i am hard-headed. i will join with a unity ticket. i am not interested in building a party. i'm interested in building a nation. i am asking every american to stand with me and pulled this nation together. when i talk to congress and listen to congress, i will give

them praise, but ask them one thing specifically -- let's reform campaigns, then let's rebuild america together. host: you see the website. while you are looking at the website, upstate new york, don, democrats line. go ahead. caller: i just wanted to say that it is refreshing to see an independent candidate, and i just wanted to make a comment, you know what really burns me about this whole thing with china? we have these companies that are people that live in america and go over to china and hire chinese workers rather than

american workers. guest: yeah. caller: in my estimation that should be treasonous. guest: i take it in that spirit. don, you are right. our tax code was written by the lobbyists for ge. they get to charge their expenses on building a plant in china off of american income taxes. did you know that? you are paying for them to go to china. here is what companies like that do. they close a plant down in america, bill the new one in china, a charge it against american income, and they do not make the goods to sell in china. they do not sell anything in china. they send the goods back to america. we are the only nation on earth

that allows the big boys to own the government, buy the tax code, which is unfair, unreadable, and documented for the lobbyists. they change the tax code. i will take on ge. they are a good company. they are as old as thomas edison. it is a disgrace what they have done. they are taking advantage of a convoluted tax code, and they are diminishing the americans and building up outsourcing. it is not right. i will not blame this system on one company. i will blamed it on the system were the largest voice in the room is not the american worker. the largest -- the loudest voice in the room is not the american worker, the american people,

the small-business men and women that create jobs in this country. the loudest voice in this room is the company with the biggest campaign contribution check. it is called tyranny. i think we need to change that. i would not stop them from giving. i would have flowed -- full disclosure, broad limits, and asked the american people to get involved. host: garrett, republican, orlando, florida. caller: good morning, governor. i have been hunting down in louisiana. guest: good country. i will never go.

host: go ahead. caller: i think it is pretty simple, and in terms of finance, it goes back to being a citizen and a voter. the way it works is if i'm running for congress, the only people permitted to contribute to my campaign are my constituents. if i'm running for senate, the only people who are allowed to contribute to my campaign are the citizens of my state. president,ing for the only people who are permitted to contribute our citizens of the united states. then, when it comes back to states legislature and so on,

let the states control their own rules and regulations. guest: thank you. here is the question. it is bigger than me or you. it is reform. can we take this wonderful america and make it stronger? can we take this wonderful, chaotic america, with its 50 states and its 50 rules -- i mean i did not get on the ballot in south carolina because they charged $35,000, the republican party did. i did not have the money. that is okay. it is their decision. i like living in a country where we do not all look alike and think alike, but we need to think about participation. we have become television spectators. we let the big boys finance the

candidates, and then we are all upset when the big boys write the rules. ge makes $5 billion and does not pay federal income taxes. why don't we do something about it? i need 1 million people were two million people to get on my website, buddyroemer.com, and say i am going to do something i have never done before, held a man who has the courage to stand up to the big parties and the big companies and say i will work for you, but we will ask plane people to come in, too. when i was running for congress i took money from my constituents. i did not take any pac money. they say you cannot win, buddy. yes i can. i 1 four times jim converse and

once he and -- i 1 four times in congress. caller: what did they do with the last light bulb factory? obama just had to give back money that he took from a criminal mexican family. you said the republican party as part of wall street. wall street gave all of their money to obama in that election and he paid them back, just like he paid the union back. i was a union member. i did not support obama. now they're getting their waivers from obama-care. you need to get your facts straight.

guest: let me give you effect. both parties are joined at the billfold. that is a fact. i have been 21 years a conservative democrat. i have been 21 years a republican. they have a problem. money comes before ideas, people, and performance, and as soon as they get elected they are worried about one thing, and you know what that is? it is not tennessee. it is re-election. i do not need to put anybody down. there are good people in both parties. i was proud to be a republican the last 21 years, but i have come to the conclusion that if we want the change that obama promised four years ago then we have to stand tall and put the country first. host: cleveland, ohio. you are on with governor roemer.

caller: thank you, c-span. there will be a unique set of problems when you reenact tarriff -- tariffs. all the products will go up. people will not be able to buy a television set anymore. how do you feel about what they call entitlement programs? i am considering voting for you. i have never voted for a republican in my life, but i would like some answers on how you feel about different programs. host: governor roemer, go ahead. guest: tariffs -- i am not a atriff guy.

there could be exceptions. we ought to drill for natural gas safely in this country. we have enough for 250. -- years. let's be smart. let's have an energy policy. less generate nuclear power safely. let's open up yet come mountain. we need to be smart. we need to form a relation with china and mexico on energy. become energy independent. that ought to be our goal secondly, you talk about the kinds of things that we need to do -- goal. secondly, you talked about the kind of things we need to do in this country in terms of china and jobs. i am for fair trade, but i think the president of the united states some time, some place,

has to stand up and tell china "if you do this to us, we are going to respond." i will give you an example. china raised their import fees on american-made cars by 22%. do you know what the president of the united states said? not a damn thing. on entitlement, i am eligible for social security and medicare. i'm talking about myself. we need to change these over time. i would do four things quickly -- i would raise the retirement age by one month a year for 24 years. it would not affect anyone already on these programs. one month a year for 24 years. we would not have to raise social security taxes or lower benefits. on medicare, i would require insurance companies to compete.

do you know that insurance companies have 50 monopolies in the country? you cannot buy medical insurance across the state line? did you know that insurance companies give massive amounts of money to the politicians to protect them? why should we protect them? this is a free enterprise system. we need full disclosure and competition. we need choice and competition. host: 5 more minutes, sir. virginia beach. go ahead. caller: my question to you is what is rapidly taking over the country are the unions. there was a time in our country when unions needed to be there. it has gotten to the point where they aren't dixit -- dictating policy. -- where they are dictating policy.

like the boeing plant. they put detroit under because of the prices they are charging. now, we want to bail them out. host: governor roemer? guest: i hear you. i come from a respect-for-unions background, a deep respect for workers' rights to organize -- i still have that. i am a competitive soul. i do not think that unions ought to dictate policy in america. they ought to have a voice. they ought not be given special advantage, like in the highway bill. we fought that in louisiana and as a congressman. i am not against unions, but i am against a monopoly or a dictatorship. they should be a player. they should be respected.

unions should join with me. let's create jobs. these are not union jobs. these are american jobs. if the union can organize them, fine, but they have to do it fairly and squarely. let me say this. as an independent, a former democrat and a former republican, a successful businessman, and an american citizen i like a nation where unions can exist, be strong, be heard, and be loud, but they ought not be given or guaranteed. they have to compete. on the automobile industry, i was in japan once with the governor of mississippi and bill clinton, and we ask the head of toyota, what was the problem with it right? was it the unions? he said "no, it is management."

be fair. we can blame the unions, but management runs the company. if they do not have the guts or the brains to think and behalf of their company, shame on them. host: we have about one minute, but if you look at the americans elect web site, you are not in the top three. how do you hope to change that? guest: that is why i announced. this election is not today. you are like a scorecard keeper. what are you going to do? if you are behind, you're going to score once. most americans are undecided, filled with anxiety, and do not know who to choose. here is my goal -- give them a choice.

give them a president free to leave. show them a plan on 15 different issues on how to build a stronger america. this is a campaign i just started. host: governor buddy roemer, the independent presidential candidate, we have to leave it there. thank you. guest: thank you. host: we go to cnn's coverage of the national governors' association meeting. >> as governors, we face similar challenges, and our meetings offer us an opportunity to discuss the challenges we face governing our states. every day, governors work with legislature's to find real solutions to real issues. we are redesigning state government to work more efficiently and effectively. we are finding ways to do more we are finding ways to do more