officials discusses a voter turnout in the fall campaign. after that, the center for science in the public interest examines federal food safety programs plus your e-mails, phone calls, andtweets next on [video clip] ." n "washington journal." >> in the race for the white house, when the polling data from the primary is average, mitt romney leads with 39 percent, followed by rick santorum, followed by gingrich, then ron paul with 8%. c-span coverage of the illinois state primaries start the 7:00 tonight. go to our web site for details, c-span.org. the president will host the irish prime minister today for st. patrick's day lunch and a reception later this evening. the house republicans plan to release their vision of the 2013

budget. paul ryan, the budget committee chairman, has an op-ed in the washington journal this morning. when looking at the plan, consolidating tax rates, reduce corporate taxes, if it rejects the call to raise taxes and it does deal with medicare reform. in our first 45 minutes, we will go over some proposals made out in the budget and get your thoughts on what they do overall especially as they will have to be meted out with democrats. here's how you can participate this morn iing. [numbers on your screen] if you would like to send us an e-mail or reach out to us on twitter, or facebook, please do so. paul ryan is the chairman of the house budget committee. he lays out his thoughts for the

proposals he will lay out for the 2013 budget. the gop budget and america's future. he writes -- to go through some of the details laid out in the plan,

the pages of the wall street journal have a chart. talking about the policy and philosophy behind actual numbers is jonathan allen from the "politico," serving as their congressional reporter. good morning. he is on the phone. >> good morning. >> can we start with the idea, is this an actual blueprint from paul ryan or a starting point for republicans to deal with their budget? >> the starting point to look at this, it is a vision that the house republicans are putting forward and one that they know will not be realized in the coming years. so, senate democrats have not produced a budget in a few years. the hope is they will come to some sort of agreement, but very unlikely that they would agree

with democrats. you can look at this as what republicans would like to do if they could wave a magic wand and put a budget in place. but this being washington, there's no magic wand and it is not going to work that way. much in the way the president's budget when it gets released is a blueprint for what he would do in a perfect scenario, this is much like that now. >> to talk us through the philosophy and thinking behind the actual decisions and what is laid out in the pages, when it comes to tax rates, according to the ryan plan, it would go from what we currently seated and wooden bullets down to only two. a 10% and a 25%. lot of desires a on capitol hill to come up with

a more simple tax code. problem is there's a lot of disagreement between republicans and democrats about fabric the burden of taxation should fall. there are two brackets that. you that they are moving very close to a flat tax type of proposal. i think a lot of folks who want simplification don't want it applied to the level where it's like this in the income tax rate. the other thing to remember about this budget is the budget itself does not actually accomplished these policies or even really put them in place. the budget itself is a set of numbers. congressman paul ryan will put out a white paper or a little booklet to say how he would do these things. really the budget just sets the numbers.

host: when it comes to the actual numbers, calls from the republican side, we've seen this as far as corporate taxes are concerned, it would lower the top rate to 25% and then change the way multinational earnings are done. it would eliminate taxes on american earnings overseas operations. how will that be seen by democrats? guest: bringing the tax rate down without crippling revenues, the difference between 25% and 28% is probably negligible. that's the kind of difference that could probably be bridged. as far as the treatment of overseas profits and how they are taxed, if there's a big difference in the way the two

parties perceive how that should be done and the degree to which there is fairness in the system. there's a lot of money sitting overseas right now. there's a desire to capture some of that through taxation on both sides. how you treat those profits overseas in the future remains to be somewhat of a sticking point between the two parties. democrats are worried people will bring the money back and pay a lower tax rate, repatriate, and sort of go back overseas. there's a lot of different issues to deal with out there. host: one more thing, how they handle medicare. there's a store yesterday --

guest: that's right. last year congressman ryan put forth a plan to do premium plus for seniors so they could basically purchase private insurance and with cash. this year the republicans got hit pretty hard with that. this year's plan would allow for a modified version of that known as the ryan/widen plan. the oregon senator has worked with paul ryan and it would give an option for the private insurance plan. the idea paul ryan has had. or to stay in the traditional medicare system. republicans want to use that because they believe it is in part because they believed they have gotten political

cooperation from widen in the senate. it's hard to make a case that democrats are trying to shrink medicare, which has been a talking point for the last 20 or 30 years. host: and surprises with this proposal? guest: not really. one thing to notice that we expect to see the republicans make room for a deficit- reduction bill that would supplant some of the sequestration from the budget control act and the failure of the super committee to come to an agreement. the automatic cuts are going into place. they are proposing to put forth a plan that would -- $260 billion there is in deficit- reduction -- a reconciliation bill through an expedited procedure in the senate. i did is to remove some of the pain from the automatic cuts

with congress making some decisions on what should get. get host: that was jonathan allen joining us to a help us through what has been released. he serves as congressional reporter for the "politico." guest: thank you. host: with all that in mind about the various proposals that the 2013 house republicans may, now's your chance to make comments on them on the respective phone lines. reach out to us on twitter like jan did this morning. she says -- that's one way you can do it. we started this segment with six comments on facebook. 21 now, including that of richard smith. he says this --

again, you can reach out to us. send me an e-mail and you can talk was on the phone as we look of the house gop budget. raleigh, north carolina, john, you are up first. go-ahead. caller: good morning. it seems a lot of your commenters on twitter are hitting my points, at least the republicans are doing something optimistic to try to reduce the deficit instead of destroying the economy through the 10's in hrough keynesian c model. paul ryan is one of the best folks up there. i would support anything that he puts forward when it comes to fiscal sanity. one of the biggest things under the radar that we're not to

watching, many people are not paying much attention to what happened friday with the national defense resource preparedness executive order by president obama. this is a take on what has been out in the past, but also it is enhanced. when people look at it, they can go to the net and look at this order, but also corporate stafford act, on page 81 of the stafford act, i think, it has a lot of sweeping powers and there are a lot of people talking on the net that they think this is somewhat of a setup of martial law takeover if the elections don't go the way the democrats want because of supposedly disenfranchisement of people at the ballot box. i think a lot of people want to check into this and ask themselves why now? host: one of the other things

that highlights as far as the proposal from mr. ryan is that of the alternative minimum tax. currently there are two rates. that's 28% and 26%. the alternative minimum tax if it's affecting growing numbers of middle-class households -- the proposal that's in the budget is to eliminate it altogether. there's a message from one of our viewers -- columbus, ohio, scott, good morning. caller: i'm watching you guys and seeing how the house gop released their budget. some of those things are good and long term, but in the short term we have that we are reaching a trillion dollars on the trade deficit. i was looking at a pennsylvania

congressman, his plan for the dead tree america act calls to put a 1% fee on all consumption taxes, which could generate if around $3.50 trillion in revenue and for us. why not constitute something like that? host: as far as the budget, it should deal with more trade matters, is that your opinion? caller: keynesian economics, put the reality is the trade deficit is really our problem. everybody, republicans and democrats, they focus on jobs and that kind of thing, but the deficit is what is killing us. the jobs, like congressman ron paul talks about, we will probably have more economic growth and job growth. host: paris, illinois, good morning to james. caller: yes, it always seems

like republicans want to balance the budget on the middle class' back. if you look at, what is it, three times an increase in profits right now for the corporations and so forth and we don't want to put higher taxes on them when the rest of us are staying the same in the middle class. i don't understand this and i don't understand why people in the middle class cannot see this. if you look at apple, where do they make most of their goods? china. this is getting kind of old. seems like everything goes overseas and nothing comes on. -- home. the republican support this because they are backed by large corporations like the coen brothers. -- koch brothers. they are trying to do things for large corporations. host: it would eliminate the taxes on american corporations

earnings from overseas operations. caller: i would like to see overseas operations somehow putting a tax on that. because it seems like that is where a lot of loopholes and a lot of our tax dollars are lost through overseas operations. host: marx, mississippi, you are on. caller: i think the paul ryan budget is going to tax the poor and the middle class. it is not going to help the country. 'the -- the republicans' main objective was to defeat barack obama and keep the rich from paying more. i think anyone that votes for republican votes against their own interest, especially if you

are middle and lower income people. host: that was minda in mississippi. planning to release the 2013 budget today from the house gop. we would like to hear your thoughts on the phone lines. dayton, ohio, tom, hello. caller: good morning. the guy mentioned apple. anybody that looks at the apple corporation and the budget we have going, how can we give them more tax breaks when the guy for apple makes $165,000 an hour? he is paying its employees $2 an hour. we have legalized slave labor for our corporations. this is the reason we have a

budget deficit. anybody that tells me give rich people more money -- this man is paying them $2 an hour. he install suicide necks so the people would not jump off the roof. host: should the house issued this in the address? caller: if they worked over here, maybe steve jobs would be worth $6 million instead 10 million -- instead of $6 billion. guhost: there's a question on twitter from ron -- now our next call in south dakota, bonnie. caller: good morning. i don't believe that the gop has the american people's well-being

in mind. they hijacked the conversation when they began to speak about debt constantly instead of looking into the recovery for the american people, such as president obama has put in place with the stimulus plan. as we were just starting to recover, they hijacked the conversation and brought it true debt.o i don't believe they will have a successful conversation going forward. it will probably finance the wealthy and not provide real jobs for americans. host: is that part of the conversation? caller: it is part of it, but it should not be the main focus for america. right now we need to get our country back on its feet. host: part of what mr. ryan says this morning is that we reject calls to raise taxes, but revenue remains steady under our budget --

when nikki haley clinton township, michigan, dorothy, hello. caller: good morning. i am registered i republican, but i'm switching independent. phil ron paul is trying to make a difference. if they don't do something, the money is going to run out. all the entitlements and benefits people have put their money into, it's not going to be there. we are going bankrupt. he is trying to roll it back and restructure it to save it, not to get rid of it. the other comment is people are getting their news other than abc, msnbc,, nbc, they're not getting the news.

there's so much out there they they need to know about the impeachment bill of and about the nda or whatever it is called. so much is happening and people need to get informed. host: what do you think about the proposals as they stand, as far as the first part of your statement? the house budget that we are talking about? caller: it has not even come out yet, correct? host: there was an element that came out this morning as it relates to corporate tax rates and such. caller: i did not hear the first portion. i did hear that, just like when they brought out a budget last time, they portrayed him as trying to appeal granny and throw her off the cliff. my goodness, the democrats never even brought up a budget. host: next call is in ohio, maryln.

caller: i am repeating what was in the miami herald. $45,000 was found in medicare fraud. they took it away from -- they gave it back to medicare/medicaid. the prosecuting attorneys turned around and gave the license back to medicare people that were taking -- i don't know who would steal it, but anyway, i don't know. i earned my medicare all through the years. i don't want it being taken away. host: here's what mr. ryan says. he says "budget medicare forms make no changes for those that are in or near retirement --

what do you make of those proposals? are you there? caller: yes, i feel that we paid into it. that's all i can say. it should not be changed. they still owe me money. why are they taking my money away from me? host: philadelphia, pennsylvania, good morning, bob. caller: i have to comment on the last guy complaining about a ceo making 100 something thousand dollars an hour. there was a sports guy that was let go last week and then signed for five years, $100 million. wake up, liberals. they make more than all the ceo's. you could ceo's. host: what about the budget

proposal we are talking about? caller: at least they are trying. harry reid in the senate is doing nothing. do something. republicans are trying, so why are you sitting on your laurels doing nothing? why don't the democrats complain about that? at least we are trying. democrats are doing. doing host: the new york times talks about fund-raising numbers released. it says president obama raised 45 been dollars in february --

again, if you want to see this, it's illinois primary day. you can see that coverage tonight's starting around 7:00. the best thing to go. our campaign 2012 website at c- span.org with a complete listing of what's coming up as far as the candidates are concerned and information you need including recent events. it's all there on our web page at c-span.org. the house gop budget for 2013 said to be released today. some indication of what's going on in the pages of the op-ed

pages of the wall street journal this morning. virginia beach, virginia, good morning. caller: hello, thanks for c- span. i wonder if the grand old party has turned into the greedy old patriarchs and if this budget will reflect what they have been doing lately and campaigning for lately. it seems that we need to address the fact that workers are not getting paid living wages. just having a job at a non- living wage will not answer the problem of the greediness of the top executives. and we need to address that, to spread the wages so there's enough going into social security and to have it be solvent in the future. we would not need to tax

executives so highly if they pay people in the first place. host: massachusetts, hello to stan. go ahead. caller: [unintelligible] 51% of all households don't pay any state or federal tax. the point is i don't like what they do with the money. host: how does it relate to the release of today's budget? caller: i saw one thing on the screen, the alternative minimum tax is still in place. inthey don't get a fair tax there and replace the irs, which can be mandated any more. host: the you fall under the alternative minimum tax? caller: i was in court in 1990

and i lost. i did it as an experience. host: so that's on the table. there is the reduction of the corporate tax rate and there's also reduction of tax rates overall for personal income, too. caller: i did not study all the parts. host: north carolina, charles, eloped. caller: how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: i was calling about the paul ryan plan. i don't think it's going to work, because i think it's for the upper-class people. this is unnecessary for people to have to go through these types of things. i look at the money they spent on campaigns. they could spend less on the budget. they spend all this money just to get someone in office. republicans and democrats -- and i'm a democrats-- we pay

this kind of money for them to tell lies just to get in there and just to do things for other people. not for us. ork hard. host: what about the proposal is not for you? caller: the upper-class is not -- they are tax free in. they are not paying any taxes into it. just like we have. if they can have tax breaks like that and said on the money and not put it back in there to help the budget, i feel that we probably would come out even. everybody could have something. as much as the rich people have, i don't have anything against rich people, but if you make money in this country, if you want to put it back in this country. why do the things that they do to confuse things? it does not make sense. host: when it comes down through

tax rates, the proposal would reduce the two we did would reduce the current tax rates to two, 10% and 25%. if the top rate for corporations would come down 25% from 35%. it would nearly eliminate american corp. earnings from overseas operations. when it comes to the alternative minimum tax, it would eliminate that. there are two rates currently, 28% and 26%. the amt is affecting a growing number of middle-class households. maverick from twitter says -- turning to the campaign, the daily telegraph out of london has the story --

north conway, new hampshire, jan. caller: this morning. i have an interesting idea. i thought maybe we should stop buying apple products for a while. the whole part of this is to bring jobs back to the united states. host: we're getting a little interference on the call. we will go on to new hampshire with jan. are you there? one more time. when it comes to the debate over the jobs bill, there's a

story in the new york times this morning. this is the senate bill aimed at startup companies. it reads --

omaha, nebraska, bill, good morning. caller: hello. about the tax thing, i think everybody should pay taxes including farmers. i don't know why they get away with paying no taxes. host: when you say everybody pays taxes, who should pay what? caller: anybody that makes an income should pay taxes. there should not be anyone out there that is not paying taxes. everybody has to help with this situation. you cannot have a few out there -- 51% don't pay taxes, i understand. has this --as this , this has- in florida, william, hello.

caller: good morning. in looking at this political situation with the gop and their budget, every time they put up a budget is like a bridge to nowhere. obama goes to use anything but put in their budget if it's good for the public and the people of the united states, he uses it. and the republicans voted against it. if they cannot continue to have it both ways. they said there and play games with people's lives. they have to wake up and remember this is the united states. we have poverty, we have real party, we have white property and black poverty and property all over this nation. they are sitting there playing games. host: what needs to be done to correct it? caller: they need to sit down and analyze this. if you look on the streets now, you have people walking around

that should have health care. but they are sitting around panhandling. and you have children that are hungry and they are worrying about the president giving them food stamps. they take this as a game. it's not a game. it is our lives. as long as they keep playing political games with our lives, the scale from the richest to the court asked, we're not mad about people who make money, we just cannot want money to sustain our own families. host: financial times has a story taking a look at oil, particularly when it comes to oil coming to the u.s. from saudi arabia. the headline --

it goes on to say --

silver hill, alabama, mary, good morning. caller: good morning, sir. i keep hearing and obama re- election ad. nobody tells me why in 2008 was a supreme democratic congress or they could pass anything. we have gone over 1100 days without a budget. every time mr. ryan comes forth to stick his neck out he gets slammed by everybody for at least trying. i do believe the president, his simpson-bowles commission, saying that he wanted to go along with whatever they came out with to face the budget crisis. as soon as their paperwork came out, he ignored them. senator harry reid will not push anything. that is all i hear is mr. ryan this and mr. ryan that. at least the man is trying.

and simpson-bowles tried. but nobody seems to want to compromise or listen or move forward. that is what politics was in my day. i have a degree in political science. john kennedy compromised. lyndon johnson and compromised. bill clinton compromised. we benefited from both sides being heard and both sides accusing one another. i think we benefited quite a lot during the clinton years. this congress and this president and this senate and this president is now refusing to sit down and face facts that the country is in debt over its head and we need to do something desperately. our military men and women coming back from abroad have no jobs and they are being cut for their benefits. host: last week the supreme court made the decision not to televise the oral arguments when

it comes to the president's health care apps. -- act. in an opinion piece today --

this is in lieu of three days of thdebate that will take place on monday. the court will make the audio portion available. as soon as they do, we will bring it to our viewers. starting on monday, not only look out for three days of audio arguments, but also look for special covered on this program starting on monday about the oral arguments that take place starting on monday when it comes to health care. silver hill, alabama, mary, go ahead. hello? caller: this is harald from waldorf, maryland. host: go ahead. caller: how are you? regarding the paul ryan budget, i believe we should have tax

fairness. things are not equal. there is no fairness. host: what is not fair about the proposal? caller: it is just a burden of taxes on the poor people. people often talk about 51% not paying any taxes. that is ridiculous. they pay sales tax, payroll tax. the reason the democrats have not proposed a budget, in my estimation, is probably because there's no fairness or shared responsibility. i am a retired veteran from the u.s. air force. we believe in shared responsibility. this is ridiculous. until the republicans believe in shared responsibility, we should not have a budget. the rich should be taxed proportional to their income.

i spent years in europe especially in germany. we could use that as a model. it's one of the best economies in the world. host: the story this morning in the wall street journal about laws that allow you to openly carry handguns in public, this is the right up from the writer from oklahoma --

colorado city, colorado, joyce, hello. caller: hello. i'm one of those single-issue voters. over the past i have probably mainly voted republican. this year i will be voting democrat, based on tax rates. i believe that the republican party pets made a mistake with their pledges not to raise taxes. i think we need to go back to -- that the bush tax cuts. we have not done well financially. host: why is it a mistake not to raise taxes?

caller: i am saying taxes should be raised. i am saying the bush tax cuts, we should go back to the old rates before that was put in place. host: one more call on this. trenton, new jersey, frazier. caller: good morning. how are you? [inaudible] host: i am sorry, caller, is there a way you can back up a little from the telephone so we can hear you a little more clearly? caller: yes, we have been [unintelligible]

[inaudible] i believe that the whites and blacks should come together. host: caller, are you there? i think we lost that last call. that's the last call we will take. later we will talk about latinos when it comes to 2012 issues. up next we will talk about women and campaign 2012. first i want to take you to the campaign trail to give you a little sound on both sides as candidates are talking about issues. this is from illinois. it is holding its primary tonight. romney and santorum on monday made their closing arguments at two campaign stops. you can see our coverage of the illinois primary starting at 7:00 tonight. to get ready for that, here's a little of what happened. >> for centuries, the american dream has meant the opportunity

to build something new. some of america's greatest success stories are people who started out with nothing, just a good idea, perhaps a corner in their garage. often today americans look at what it takes to start a business and they don't see promise and opportunity. they see the difference standing in a letter of the real cost is not just the taxes paid and the money spent complying with regulations. it is the businesses that are never started. the idea that are never pursued. the dreams that are permanently deferred. we want build an interstate highway system and the hoover dam. today we cannot even build a pipeline. we are being outspent 5-7 or 10-1. robocalls all tearing down. no vision and no hope and no

promise of what america could be. we must do better than that. [applause] so i am asking you what our founders signed in the declaration, to pledge to each other -- wrote "our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor." no one is asking for your lives or your fortune for the next 24 hours. although if you go to rick santorum.com -- [laughter] but your honor is at stake. the honor of dixon, of the town that molded this man. what will dixon say? will they stand up and uphold freedom, uphold the legacy of

this great man and what he did for this country, what a difference he made? will that have been in vain? will it lead to a generation that reagan feared to talk about in his farewell address, that forgot what america was all about? i need your help. i need you not just to vote for me but i need you to go out and talk to your friends and neighbors all throughout the state of illinois. i need you to rise up and speak loudly from the place of freedom here in dixon, illinois. let the voice of reagan be heard all across this land. >> washington journal continues. host: our first segment, taking a look at women in campaign 2012 when it comes to female voters. the executive director of the independent women's forum, sabrina schaeffer, welcome. guest: thanks for having me.

i think the phrase has been growing as a crescendo and it's been a mantra repeated continually since the 2010 midterm elections. i was on some left-leaning television more than a year ago when they were pounding this idea. my sense of it is still in 2010 resulted gender gap clothes for the first time in two decades. i assume that sent shock waves through democratic political circles. i think republicans, there's a lot of reasons that may have happened. they squeaked by. it looks like things may be reversing in 2012. i suspect that is the impetus behind this woman message. host: no truth to the message on its face? guest: 2010 happened, women moved towards republicans and the war on women statement happened. there's a notion oaks war on women is a little hysterical and

we should probably tone down the rhetoric in general on both sides. there has been some nasty comments, there's been some legislation out there. this has been heated up over the contraception mandate. ultimately, it is not the republican party waging war or actively hostile against women in any way. host: the contraception and they brought it to light, did not have anything to do with women specifically, in your pen and? guest: that's how it has been framed. the left and is bringing this as a women's health issue, which is in some ways. the right is bringing this as a religious freedom issue, which is partially. it's about freedom of choice, freedom not to have to sell things or purchase things. it's about the government getting into the business of health care. all of that combined have is what i think americans are responding to. unfortunately the conversation has taken the form of one about control rather than talking

about if this is the proper role of government. this is about the changing relationship between citizens and state. host: 4 the women you represent, this is not a top level topic of concern for them? guest: no. despite the fact the economy seems to be improving a little. on friday they said unemployment is down to under 8%. there is some sign the economy is recovering. i think that is what women are interested in. still, democrats are talking about reproductive rights. they are talking about women's bodies. women want to see a strong economy, job growth, they want to see the national debt trained in. if they want to know they have more choices in controlling their education and help care for their families. but for some reason we are still talking about women's bodies instead of all the issues i think really matter to women. host: as far as conservative women, where are they as far as 2012 and the of for york canada is currently running for office? guest: very socially

conservative women are moving towards rick santorum. we will see what happens in illinois today. race willre how the continue in the shape. i think republicans have a lot of work to get out their economic message. it's hard when you have these other forces working against you. host: is this ultimately going to be about who can win the office and secondly about the issues involved? guest: i hope so. my personal preference is the issues involved and then followed by the person who can win. host: who do you think that will be? guest: i thought romney would maintain his momentum, but i am not sure about the recent conversation about pornography. host: what is wrong with the conversation? guest: it is certainly not what is going to get me personally and to vote for a person. there are bigger fish to fry.

unfortunately, we need a candidate able to respond to those issues. we have the two-year anniversary of obamacare. the supreme court about to start or arguments on the individual mandate. this is what we should be talking about. if republican getting into all this will repeal this and replace it with better free- market oriented ideas, that is what we would hope romney would be out. there talking out host: sabrina schaeffer is talking about issues related to and female voters in campaign 2012. here's how you can ask her questions -- if you want to send an e-mail or tweet, you can use one of those avenues. since you brought of economics, the telegraphing of the paul ryan budget plan, is there anything about the plan that is new to you or surprised you? guest: no, i'm not a tax expert

and not look at the fine details. my understanding is paul ryan is putting -- advancing ideas that will spur economic growth. his roots in social security reform is something women should pay careful attention for traditional women's groups have stayed loyal to the original social security design. it is really not good for women, despite what women's groups will tell you. in many ways it is geared to men. to the extent i think paul ryan understands that, i think we are in good hands. host: the violence of women act being voted on this week, what is your take about what is being proposed? guest: what is different this time around -- we have somebody w at the independent women's haveho works consistently on that and tracks the legislative history -- but what is different this time around is that it has been expanded.

the definition of what constitutes violence against women has been expanded. our biggest concern is that we don't lower the burden of proof. this is across the board. we don't want equality for women to be an expense of men or other individuals. host: our guest is the executive director for the independent women's forum. our first call comes from doris in illinois and. caller: good morning. i don't think this young lady realizes everything and has been going on in these republican-led states all over the country. they are passing all these mandates and supposedly the mandate in the health care law is what they are against. they are passing mandates for ultrasounds, vaginal ultrasounds, all kinds of mandates that affect women only. i thought they were against

mandates. ipod they were against big intrusive government. -- i thought. and texas, they have cut the network that provided care for 220,00 women, they have cut all the screenings, cervical, cancer, anything down to 40,000. that is a war on women. host: that was on the state level she was referring to. guest: your caller makes a good point. that is why in the advocate against government getting into the business of health care. i am not here to represent the republican party by any means. i am here to talk about what i think is best of women, which is limited government, individual rights, and free-market. to the extent your caller is talking about the virginia law, i agree with her. i don't believe we should be mandating if anything at the state level or at the federal level. that is one part of it. the other part is many feminist

groups worked hard at the national level to negotiate specific benefits and the state level. your reference in texas these benefits for women. the problem is we often underestimate what these benefits actually cost. that these have actuarial ramifications and that we often are not thinking about what it costs taxpayers in terms of dollars and why is it that if the young 23-year-old man maybe try to pay off a college loan is burdened with paying for my birth control. host: we go to fort washington, maryland, andre on our republican line. caller: good morning. one thing i would like to ask, earlier she stated that it was the democrats primarily focusing on the birth control topic. similar to what doris said and

what i'm concerned about, is the republican party that is advancing this legislation that is speaking specifically at to overreach. if we get back to the basis of more limited government, i believe the democrats are speaking primarily to what they are seeing in the form of legislation being brought to bear by the republican party. and so, i am concerned. second, it also seems like a major problem is that health care as we know it is a function of an employer-based provision. so i think that government, although not optimal, is the only way to get to universal type system of equal access. the problem is if it is based on your employment, then for those that are not employed or

underemployed, they bear the brunt of not being able to get health care. i would like to hear your comments, please. guest: absolutely. i think a lot of people are concerned about state level laws. i cannot explain why this is all happening right now. for democrats, i think they probably are looking at this and thinking this all fell into our laps. certainly, the war on women narrative has been going on a lot longer. it has been directed to economic issues and directed to shock jocks like rush limbaugh. now this has all come together at the same time and it's been a perfect storm for republicans. i don't think they necessarily handled it as well as they could. to your point about health care, i absolutely agree. we need individual patient- centered choice. the only way you get that its market. market-based health-care reforms, not through government, one size fits all systems where the problem is when we advocate

for specific benefits for people, we ignore the fact that this costs. the benefits don't come out of thin air. if insurance companies are forced to push those costs onto other subscribers. that is i i am paying for somebody's viagra. it does not make sense. host: pensacola, florida. independent line. caller: thank you for taking the call. a smart young lady. women are concerned about the economy. i am upset when people say free. there is nothing free. i do not wish to keep working for 10 more years to make sure someone else gets birth control,

that is yogurt, more educated. -- younger, more educated. i have to worry about my family. there is nothing free. this is what we are worried about, the economy. thank you, a young lady. guest: thank you. i am glad that this resonates with you. the other thing that concerns me about this discussion around birth control is it helps perpetuate the myth of women as victims in need of government protection. when you look at the cover of "time magazine" women outperform men educationally, professionally. the wage gap myth has been busted. women are doing well in this country. when the conversation revolves

around birth control, a lot of women take offense to that. host: what has been your organization could tell take and what elements of job creation should look like? guest: we want to take government out as much as possible. if we want fewer regulations that will make to the business world less predictable, and we want lower taxes -- we want to see things even out. we want to eliminate crony capitalism, where the white house picks winners and losers. at the world economic forum, numbers were released showing you oil and gas industry as the number one creator of jobs in the energy sector, yet the white house was funding solyndra, a failed company in the green jobs sector. women want to see that we are allowing market forces to

control where the economy grows and ebbs and flows host: jacksonville, florida. -- flows. host: jacksonville, florida. democratic line. caller: i think the best thing for women and people in general is the government is involved in health care. we know that wages have come down for normal people, and they have gone up for higher-level people. that only in slaves people to the company because they need the health care. if the health care was not attached to jobs, more people would be the entrepreneurs, where they could use ideas themselves and not have to sell themselves to corporations for

health care. guest: i agree with you. i believe this is an antiquated system. it limits flexibility in the ability to move on to new opportunities. i think a better option would be a market where people could buy insurance plans that fit their lifestyle, there needs everybody does not need a one-size-fits- all plan. it decreases the quality of care. to the extent that health-care should not be connected to employers, i agree entirely. i have a health savings account through my husband's work, and it does require more interaction. i have to think about what i am spending money on, if we have money in the account, and how it flows just like a regular

checking account. it allows me to have more flexibility. host: privatization would look like a savings account, or does it go further? guest: it goes further. once you hit the deductible, it is higher than most planes, and the insurance kicks in. i do not run to the emergency room every time someone scripps their knee. host: what convinces you that that is better than an employer- provided system? guest: this isn't a player- provided, but if my husband were to leave -- this is an employer- provided service, but if my husband leaves his job, we can keep our account. caller: i think people are tired of the high price in guess that is driving the price of the

food, and this is for low-income people and middle class. they need to do something about that. the jobs down here in -- obama put a hold on drilling because of the few migratory birds. that will cost us thousands of jobs down here. i do not think our president is doing anything. he just guarded helping out last year. -- he just started helping out last year. the first few years he was running around over god's creation instead of helping the united states. host: thank you. guest: he picked up on an important point. women are the number one purchaser and everything from groceries to automobiles, and there is no group that is more

acutely aware than the cost of groceries. i was appalled at the price of milk over the weekend in deciding how much my children need to drink this week. energy prices have an impact on job creation in the cost of food. it is equally offensive when we see the president has the opportunity to greenlight the keystone pipeline, which would have created 20,000 new jobs, and opened up new supplies of oil, which would bring down the cost of energy, but he said now to appease environmental interests. -- no, to appease environmental interests. host: how does the independent women's forum handle endorsements? guest: do we indoors? we do not.

we do not take a stance on social issues. we see them as divisive. the recent discussion of the contraceptive mandate it is -- we see as much more than about abortion or contraceptive. host: a video was put out looking at presidential candidates and how they relate to women's issues. we want to get your reaction to it. guest: right. [video clip] >> defy president, i will pick -- repeal obama-care. >> we will repeal obama-care. >> the repeal of obama-care. >> i will repeal obama-care.

host: the argument they are making as the health care costs more for women and it connects it to republicans wanted to repeal the president's plan for health care. guest: the fact is women have different health care needs than men. i'm a mother of three children. there are times we will have more health care needs than other members of society, and we have to recognize that. this is not blind gender discrimination. we are talking about what it costs insurance companies to provide coverage for people. i think there is a lot of rhetoric wrapped up in this, but there are actual economic numbers we have to consider, and when democrats try to make this

that republicans are trying to charge women more because they are women is misguided. the affordable care act is trying to mandate that you can not charge people differently, but somebody is paying for this. that is why we need the individual mandate in order to afford these coverages. it's called fort lauderdale, florida. kevin, independent line. caller: i wanted to correct a couple issues. as far as the pipeline, she said she is upset with president obama because the pipeline would bring jobs and gas prices down. we all know that is not true. for her to get on television and make -- try to convince people of that, she knows that is not true.

gas goes up to the world market, and that is out of president obama's hands. as far as the war on women comment, one of the first bills the president signed when he came into office was to give women equal pay for equal day's work. why would you be against that? guest: i think your caller is referring to the first bill the president signed when he got to office. the problem is two-fold. we already have the equal rights amendment of 1964. this bill increase the window in which women could file claims. it essentially makes it indefinite. when thing we are concerned about is -- one thing we are concerned about is we do not assume the work force is hostile towards women. on the whole, women are an

extremely important part of the work force, and they are accommodated. passing legislation perpetual it's the myth that women are victims, and suggests the workplace is openly hostile to women. the third thing is it actually costs women. when we make it so expensive and risky to hire women, guess what? and players are not going to hire them. -- employers are not going to hire them if she makes a mistake, and i fire her, i will be held liable. host: arlington, virginia. george, democrats line. caller: i am not sure if you are adequately representing your

organization, but you might want to bring yourself a republican women's forum. let me remind you step -- remind you that the savings accounts ourselves -- subset best. there is a limited amount you could contribute. it would be great if we all knew what health-care needs would be. we do not know. the role of government, generally speaking, it is meeting the needs of citizens. the free market needs the wants of consumers. health care is not a want, it is a need. that is a guiding philosophy that congress realize when they enacted medicaid and medicare. secondly, with regard to your

criticism of obama's policy regarding the energy, gas prices are set in world markets. the u.s. is for the first time in decades a net exporter of oil. to not give me baloney about not doing enough. a pipeline would not produce results for years. these are undeniable fact. please acknowledge this. talk reality, and stopped it -- sticking to talking points. thank you. guest: i'm sorry we disagreed with some of this. i agree on the energy global market. i realize that he storm pipeline is not the only factor in reaching the keystone pipeline is not the only factor is the keystone pipeline is not the only factor -- the keystone pipeline is not the only factor in energy prices. that said, it would create job

growth, and we are in an environment where we need more job creation, not less. we're constantly talking about schwab all-ready jobs, and here the president charges back on because of the environmental lobby. gas prices are effected by the global market, but also what is due to be coming down the pike, if you will. if we saw more supply was coming along, it has the potential to bring down prices. the third point is just because we do not tap, it does not mean they will stay there. the chinese will come in, they will work with canada, and they will control this oil line, and they may not do it in the way we think it is environmentally safe. host: joseph ramirez off of twitter brings up the fact that america lost seven and a 50,000 jobs in the last month of the

bush administration and the aisle as the president's record of adding jobs. guest: the economy is doing better, which is why i would hope this rhetoric would told del. six months ago it was very difficult for the president to run and his record. his signature legislative act, the affordable care act, is still wildly unpopular. the economy was doing terribly. the markets were going up and down. things seem to have settled. the markets were up yesterday. unemployed is down. there are signs of growth. challenges lie ahead, but things have evened out. at the same time, the republican party has not settled on a candidate. the president has the opportunity to rise above all of this, talk about his goals and ideas, but that is not happening. host: would you attribute the

growth we've seen to stimulus spending? guest: now. host: because? guest: i do not think the white house should pick winners and losers i think we need the -- losers. i think we need to allow the markets to recognize where growth and investment is needed. host: where is job creation coming from? guest: entrepreneurs who feel there is more security. the best thing we can do is extend tax cuts, make it clear that the national debt is not running awry, but we are going to have money in this country, that we will not be dependent on china -- those are the kinds of things the business pays attention to more than putting money into shovel-ready jobs that are temporary in short- lived. host: virginia.

drew, republican lines. caller: we have enough oil in this country to survive for a lull times. -- for a long time. birds are not an issue. about health care, thousands of women cannot afford health care. -- we have had health-care programs for women in this country for a long time. guest: we do not need a one- size-fits-all government plan that will bankrupt the country. by doing that, we almost

guarantee we will not take care of those most in need. host: buffalo, new york, john, democrats lied. caller: republicans are giving way to misogynistic impulses, to transit that to the state and federal level. have say the republicans their way, and we continue to see a decline in wages, no head start, know this, know that, i want you to explain to me how a woman earning minimum wage with a couple of kids will go out into the marketplace, as you guys go on and on about the market, how will she buy decent health insurance? explain that to me. guest: sure.

i want to talk about women in need. the best thing we can do for low-income women is have a robust economy that gives the -- gives them more opportunity. we talk a lot about greater choice in education. women that are low-income, perhaps single mothers, need as much flexibility as possible. we encourage for-profit education because we think it gives women more opportunities to better themselves, take control of their lives, and make things easier for themselves. we are not anti-women. when not anti-individual. we do not believe government is the best solution. host: buying health care for low-income women? guest: right. if we did not have a one-size- fits-all system, we would be able to buy health care based the needs and opportunity.

we are a charitable country. the united states has been the most charitable country around the world. when government steps in, it removes the need for those charities, but for centuries, more than 200 years, we've had religious and nonreligious groups that have reached out to their communities to help them. we need to remember that americans have that history, and that willingness, and continue to give even during economic difficulty. host: this from twitter which it guest: i support green energy if it is yielding better results. i do not think that we should be subsidizing oil and gas. i am just saying that we need to allow the market to go where there is promising results. when you see the white house

failing -- backing failing companies like solyndra, it should give people pause. called the -- host: judy, republican lines. caller: you're doing a great job representing the real american woman. i listened to so many outlets that say women are not involved, or they do not relate to women. this is the year of the women's vote. host: caller, are you there? caller: we are the mothers and grandmothers. we buy the groceries. we drive the cars. we multi-task our lives. we do not need the government making our lives --

host: we will take her comments as they are. guest: thank you. what is frustrating it is in 2010 we saw that as the message coming from the republican party, it was the year of the republican women. women were running unlimited government platforms, addressing those concerns. -- limited government platforms, addressing those concerns. women made it to the house. many of the gubernatorial level did not make it. i think it is still there. i think there are a lot of women who want to see government out of their lives, greater individual freedoms, allow markets to direct things, and to the extent that we can get more women out there talking about that again is very important.

host: our guest is the executive director of the independent women's forum. what is the form of about? guest: we advanced the idea that limited government, free markets, and individual rights is better for women, and we pushed back on legislation that is put out there in the name of protecting women. host: you say all women's which colleges are women's issues -- all issues are women's issues. guest: health care, education, the economy, the debt, that is what women care about. host: whether it issues are important for this election cycle? guest: the affordable care act is on everyone's mind. this is something we push for -- greater individual, patient- centered choice.

host: several stories looking at conservatives member -- conservative members of the court. are there concerns on how this might come down? guest: there is still some ambiguity. we brought on a new general counsel who will talk more about it in the next two weeks, but we are concerned about executive overreach that is part of this bill, and what this means. people that support this now shipping about what overreach will look like it is someone they do not like in office. host: if they took out the individual mandate, would that be ok with you? in guest: note, but it would go a long way in dismantling the law. i do not believe in the government try to impose a government system, a one-size- fits-all system that does not

work. host: maryland, an independent line. caller: sabrina, i am thrilled to hear a woman that can speak her mind without the same talking points i hear from progressives. that is the major problem in the democratic party, progressives. if we could get rid of the progressives, get them out of this country, tell them to go back to wherever the communist party is that will take them -- you know, go for it. anyway, thank you so much for being intelligent, talking intelligent. do not give in to any of the people that are putting you down, because you are an independent thinker. thank you, again. guest: thank you. i could not agree more about the kind of women out there

representing "wiggins interests." it is important to keep our eye on lawmakers dahna running on -- lawmakers and those running on limited government platforms. host: to those in your group, it is -- is it mostly conservatives? guest: our group is probably more libertarian-leaning, but we have women from all shades. host: detroit, michigan. tanya. caller: i want to know what you think about obama's jobs bill sitting in the house? that would put three to 4 million people to work right now. did your group ever fight for

the house to vote on this bill? guest: we are actually a 501c3 organization, so we cannot advocate for certain bills, but to the larger point, what concerns as the most is that the government is trying to pinpoint where growth is coming from, rather than allowing businesses to say i need to invest money in my research and development, or i am ready to open up a new franchise. when we try to do it from a top- down standpoint, it is usually inefficient. host: when it comes to the jobs at that will be debated this week, where would you fall on that? guest: i always have some reservation, even when we talk about giving money to small business -- i have concerns with the government chooses where to put the money. there will be start-ups that are

fantastic, but there will be ones that are not worthy of investing taxpayer dollars in. is very legitimate business and they need a loan, we should allow that, but we do not need to take a risk just because someone in the white house thinks that is a good place to put our money. host: mich., chad, on our independent line. caller: i want to comment on what seems to be targeted dissonance between your guests statements and positions, and what the and act truly would be. for instance, -- the impact truly would be. for instance, she talks about things like health care in freedom, but it seems to me -- and freedom, but it seems to me the mindset she represents is more about protecting their freedom to impose their will,

and it seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding about what government is there to do, and that is to protect those that do not have the financial wherewithal to protect individuals who, like your guest, might prefer to cite a company. in a neighborhood where did not have the financial wherewithal to protect themselves against environmental degradation, dangers that might be created through oil pipelines, because i certainly believe 100% that none of this stuff will be anywhere near the neighborhood she lives in. guest: thank you for the call. you are right on many levels, that this is all about different philosophies of the role of government and the relationship between citizen and state. to the extent we can encapsulate whether the discussion is about health care, education, or job

creation, very often we lose sight about what this is all about. with the contraceptive mandate, for instance, a friend said this is a much -- as much about birth control as the american revolution was about tea. i feel the same way about a lot of these issues. i recognize that when we allow markets rather than government to direct resources, we are better off, because we know that is where actual demand is, rather than washington coming in and try to identify hit from a top-dog perspective. host: you have been listening to sabrina schaeffer. thank you for the time. guest: thank you for having me. host: we will talk about latino voters in their role in the 2012 campaign with arturo vargas after this word from c-span radio. >> it is 8:31 a.m. eastern.

an update on syria from russia's foreign minister -- in remarks earlier, he said moscow will support a united nations resolution endorsing coty and's plan to deal with the crisis. the former u.n. security general has met twice with president assad on proposals to end the bloodshed. as for russia's stand on the missile defense shield, president of the dead says russia must be -- dmitry medvedev says russia must be ready. nato says they want to cooperate on the missile shield that is intended to counter an iranian missile threat, but nato rejects the proposal to run the shield jointly. without a middle-russian cooperation deal, russia wants guarantees that missile defense

is not aimed at russia. tensions over iran could of nuclear program could push oil prices higher than expected. the result could be more than $5 billion in losses this year for airlines. profit predictions for the industry have been slipping since december. those are some of the latest headlines once he's been radio. >> my friends, i need a new america where freedom is made real for all, regard to race, belief, or economic condition. [applause] >> i mean a new america which everlasting league attacks the ancient idea that men can solve their differences by killing

each other. [applause] >> as candidates campaign for president this year, we look back at 49 that ran for office and lost -- 14 men that ran for office and lost. >> the profits of the radical, liberal left continue to offer only one solution to the problems that confront us, telling us again, and again, we can spend our way out of trouble, and spend our way into a better tomorrow. >> c-span.org/thecontenders. >> "washington journal" continued. host: arturo vargas, when it comes to latinos, how was 2012

different? guest: we expect an increase in voters. we anticipate 12.2 million in 2012. host: when you the potential voters, what do you see as far as issues? guest: the most important issue is the economy. latinos have been most effective -- effected by the recession, to have the highest foreclosure rates. the loss of jobs has hit the committee more than any other. there are concerns about health care, public education, immigration reform. folks think that immigration is the latino issues. it is one of the many latinos care about. host: when it comes to the economy, is there anything among the republican candidates that could be of interest to latino

voters? guest: latino voters are looking to see what republican candidates have to say to them. from what we have heard, the have focused very much on immigration. i think what they want is to hear how any candidate is going to create more jobs and help those most effected by the recession. host: they have not heard that yet? guest: i did not think they have heard that from anybody yet. host: what good pr show as far as mitt romney? guest: i think it shows there is not really latino support for any candidate, because border regions would vote for someone. -- porter ricans would vote for someone. host: supporters for the present, where are they now? guest: and he still enjoys a

higher approval rate, but there is disappointment with the lack of moving immigration ford. he needs to speak to them directly. host: as far as immigration reform, and starting there, why has it not advanced? guest: in my view, the president used his political capital in his first two years, with the majority of congress, to move health care reform, and he got that through. once that happened come he lost the congress and was not able to move any initiative fourth. host: we saw the effort being made in the previous administration as well, why does this issue not in advance? gee, it does not advance because we do not have support from account -- guest: it is not a dance because we do not have enough support from the congress, and it is unfortunate because many people suffer and the economy suffers.

we do not have enough workers coming into the country to take the jobs that need to be taken, then we have families that are separated. it is an issue that needs to be fixed, and we need the courage to get this done. host: what does a fixed look like? guest: i think a fix looks like a rational way for people to emigrate to this country because right now it does not exist. we do have 11 million people living in the shadows in this country. we need to recognize their status in some way so they can contribute fully to our economy and society. this is a way to keep families together. right now, families are separated by immigration laws. if we really believe in the strength of the family, we need to keep families together. host: our guest will be here until monocoque 15. you can ask questions on 3 -- phone lines.

host: woodbridge, virginia. scott, republican-led. -- republican line. caller: good morning. i did not expected to speak for the entire looking a community, just like i do not speak for my entire community, whatever the heck i am. that being said, i wonder what your perspective is -- you mentioned immigration reform, what would be your preference, i guess, to deal with illegals currently here, that are under a legal status? number two, what are your feelings as far as the constitutional argument regarding someone that comes here illegally, then has a child here, and then the child is

considered a u.s. citizen? guest: on the first item, what do we do with you 11 million people that are here? what many of the candidates have said is that it is not rational to think the country will deport 12 million people. i think we need to give them an opportunity to regularize their status, pay their taxes, pay fines, then get in line to become permanent residents. many of them are to to begin members of society. they have created families, a home. they contribute to their community. let's talk to make them full members of our society. host: n.c., robert, independent line. caller: thank you for taking my

call. kai reed general comment eni when your observations. -- i have a general comment, and i want to have your observations. a lot of republicans are running away from president bush, who was a wartime president, but when he got in before 9/11, the first thing he did was reach out to mexico and he tried to start rational immigration policies, and regulate amnesty, and some sort of rational policy for workers to come up so we can know who they were, and they could pay a fair amount of taxes, then 9/11 started, and he had to make a shift. we have to respond to the attack, a pearl harbor-type event. how would like you to make a

comment on that. -- i would like you to make a comment on that. guest: you are right. before 9/11, the president stood up and said the most important relationship this country had was with mexico, and in 2001, he said the most important relationship this country had was with him england, and that change the paradigm. we have worked -- moved 11 years from 9/11, and the country has not fix the broken immigration system. i'm hoping we have a congress and the white house that is moving to push this forward. host: new york. democrats line. caller: i am concerned about the issues addressed from the economic perspective. with recent immigration and services that are being utilized by the population -- social services -- these should be

social services for the aging elderly in this country who have worked input into this system for their working lives. when they are aging in needing nursing care, long-term care, etc., there will be contradictions as to who will get the benefit of that money. i think that is one of the issues that is creating all lot of anger among the population -- a lot of anger among the population, and the persons that are born now and the ensuing conflict between those elderly people who paid and supported that system for 30 years and the people who do not pay income about our consumers.

guest: data shows that undocumented issues -- immigrants in this country do not use social services to the extent people think they do. the only support they use our one, it emergency health care services, or two, public education. then you address the issue of the elderly. in fact, it is immigrants taking care of our elderly. they are doing a long-term health care for our aging population, because that is one of the jobs people in this country do not want to do. we use immigrants in order to take care of our aging parents and grandparents. host: the affordable care act -- is this a concern for your organization, and latinos overall? guest: we focus on political engagement, but we know latinos are the most uninsured population in this country, and we want to make sure people have

access to quality health care. callcock's 12.29 -- host: 0.2 million projected latino voters this week -- this year. talk about that when it -- in relation to voter i.d. laws. guest: i think voter i.d. laws proposal.rous it represents a new barrier. the department of justice, i just last week decided not to declare a voter i.d. law in texas because the debt showed the lifting of were either 46% or 120% more likely to not have the kind of idea -- id required.

it presents a new barrier. host: 30 states with the law. states with photo id, 7. host: it is a dangerous development. -- guest: it is a dangerous development. there should not be a requirement. host: michigan. austin, a republican line. go ahead. caller: i have three points that would be interesting. i'm getting in my car right now. i'm sorry. one thing that has been overlooked in the upcoming presidency is the possibility of ron paul getting the nomination because of the delegates there be a been looking at. it is interesting because i

wonder how the latino community would be impacted by austerity measures that he would take two, i have noticed that when people talk about immigration and illegals, the argument is skewed toward latinos, but in all the actuality, latinos are not the only people that would come in legally across the border. i guess that would be it. guest: i think you are absolutely right. the majority of people who are here in undocumented status are people that have overstayed their visas. your typical undocumented immigrant is not someone that has come across the border they overstayed their -- and they do so because they want to be reunited with family's.

immigration does not allow that for a rational -- in a rational way. -- host: it is more of a statement from twitter -- g code data shows there are about 12 million, and the most recent data shows it as a decline to about 11 million. e-verify it is and in precise data set. there are people included that have every right to work, and they are being denied the opportunity for a job. we need to make sure that this is actually accurate. host: is the current state of the economy affecting how many immigrants receive illegal immigrants are in the country? guest: i think it has.

people come here for jobs. if there are no jobs, people cannot come here. host: waldorf, maryland. tony, in the penn line. -- independent line. caller: i'm in the construction industry. i see a lot of latinos. i myself-contractor. i picked them up quite a bit. they pretty much set their money back to their country. i am wondering what your guest would feel about -- or, has it been brought up to have them pay some kind of flying to become a citizen? it would help our economy. that is all i have to say. host: i would ask if you are paying their -- guest: i would ask if you are paying their implants taxes. one of the reasons we need to fix the broken immigration

system as many workers have been exploited by the people that hire them. they're not been paid fair wages. they are not receiving the kinds of benefits that other workers get, such as health insurance and vacation time in so forth. they're working very hard, and they are sending money to their families in home countries because families are suffering back there, in the do not have the kind of economic means that we have here. host: this is a different topic, but american hero says are latino voters concerned about the violence in mexico? guest: i think everyone is very concerned with the violence in mexico. there are people there that are suffering, and there is an untold number of murders and people that have been killed in drug wars them ahead involved in the drug trafficking.

i was in mexico one year ago to visit my family, and they asked me how was mexico viewed by the united states? people think it is like colombia. they said that is how they feel. it is that kind of environment. host: virginia. stan, democrats line. caller: i heard mr. arturo vargas says there are immigrants that come in and do all sorts of work, and he said we want to take care of our elderly, and i think that is a misconception. i think immigrants do work that americans do not want to do cheaper and under the table, because it would not make sense to have immigrants that do not speak english take care of senior citizens.

when i go to wal-mart or mcdonald's, u.s. for ketchup, they do not understand what you're talking about -- you asked for ketchup, they do not understand what you are talking about. i would appreciate if they stopped saying they are doing work we do not want to do. they are undercutting other minorities, coming here you legally. guest: the real issue is that employers are not paying workers what they should be paying. that is really what we need to do. we need to go after the employers and require them to pay their wages for their workers. if we did not have people there were so desperate that they would work for less pay and be taken advantage of, we would not have this situation and enforcement needs to be among employers.

host: univision and abc did a poll. fix the economy was high on the list. one of the things that came up were abortion, gay rights, and family values. relate that back to the debate we have been having as far as contraceptives are concerned. is this an important issue? guest: i did not think so. people are focused on the economy and the lack of jobs. the issues that affect them day- to-day -- jobs, health care, public education. the candidates have not talked about public education. its defects latinos more than any other population because we are -- it effects latinos more because we are such a young population.

48% of every texan under 18 years of age is latino. the quality of public education is effecting the future of the country because children in the clauses are largely locking up. host: when they hear about efforts like race to the top -- your opinion on those things? guest: that is really only effected a small margin of public-school students because it is a small role in public education. it is a state in a local issue. the fact that many states are cutting -- and a local issue. the fact that many states are cutting budgets, that is affecting public education. host: alan, republican lines. caller: how come latinos a road for democrats when they ship guns to mexico to kill their

relatives, they put farmers out of work when they shut off water in california, thinking more about fish and then mexican workers, and also when be illegals come in and take jobs from lug the legal latinos. how can you vote for democrats that do not want to vote -- close the border? guest: latinos really are the swing voter. if you look at how they have performed, and they have demonstrated the ability to cross party lines. for example, in 2000 and 2004, 40 percent of latinos supported george w. bush and helped him win the presidency in 2000 by him when in florida. in 2008, florida and went for barack obama. latino voters look for elections, candidates, and then make decisions.

host: let me take you back to mitt romney and pr. this is a ". host: the middle part, standing for something and the values he touted? guest: let's talk about the p uerto rico primary. it was a republican primary. a republican was going to win. every candidate needs to speak to latino voters in all 50 states and we need a candidate to deal with the loss of jobs in the latino community, the foreclosure rate, and figure out

how we can move the country afford. host: pensacola, florida. eric, independent line. caller: you come out of left field of a few things. first of all, your foundation of identity politics, i consider it somewhat racist to think that everyone simply because of their national origin will think one way or vote one way, that is stereotyping. you would call that profiling. why it is not the name -- why is your name of the organization not american? this is america. we're supposed to be in it together. host: do you have a question? guest: -- caller: yes, who will determine what organizations

should be paying? it is not the government pulled the decision. you are doing people to slave labor by continuing immigration, saying it is lowercase simply because people have a need. there is a pest to -- saying it is simply because people have a need. there is a path to citizenship and she called but he knows have demonstrated they will vote for democrats or republicans -- citizenship. guest: democrats or republicans will be elected by latinos. are the swing vote. they represent the future of the united states. we need to invest in latino children today, making sure they receive a quality education. they are the future work force of this country, the future leadership. if we are going to continue to be a global leader, we need to develop the human capital of all our people.

host: shreveport, louisiana. joe, democrats line. caller: i hate to item a democrat. i've played by the -- to tell you the truth. i democrat. i played by the rules. i'm paying my dues to society. i play by the rules. once you come here illegally, you are liable to do anything illegally. this is very common among the asian and latino. the resolution is all of them get deported. i do not care who you are. that is the name of the game. i'm sorry. guest: the best solution is to fix the broken immigration

system. we have 11 million to 12 million people living in the shadows. we need to figure out how to regularize their status and get a rational way of immigrating to this country to meet our own economic needs and keep families together. host: are there host: there are more latinos running for office this year. guest: there is, because of redistricting. states like texas, arizona, nevada, florida have a new congressional seats, and all have the opportunity to draw new districts with latino voters to select the candidates of their choice. i expect there to be five to six more hispanics in the caucus. host: massachusetts. this is john, republican on

line. caller: i have a couple of things to say to you guys, and please, you let everybody else talk. this system is being controlled by the global list international bankers, ok? sooner or later, because of this going on, we are not going to be able to get everybody into this system, the system is going to collapse. we hear that there is going to be a man in the background waiting to come in for the nwo, the new world order, ok? that is why bush did what he did. the gentleman just said we had a pearl harbor, but people in government, like the president when we at pearl harbor, knew we were going to be attacked with these globalists come in here and set up these corporations and we don't have any rights. we are under the patriot act.

host: so -- caller: excuse me. ethicali -- the globalists say they are helping people while they are wiping people out -- it is depopulation. host: question for our guest? caller: i have a question. there are laws being broke and not only by people coming in from other countries, because i guess international, ok? -- it is international, ok? host: there are laws. guest: there are laws that don't work. we hope we get a congress and presidency that will fix our immigration system but also fix our economy and make sure that all of us are able to take advantage of living the american dream. host: north carolina. thanks for hanging on.

caller: all right. mr. vargas, i would like to say to you that all the people that are here are coming from latino countries. they don't have any rights. you can say anything you want to, pretend you don't understand, but what you are doing, he or overloading our country -- you are overloading our country. your country is going free -- the people that have these big businesses are moving to your country, but your people are not staying there and taking care of their own country. guest: my country is the united states of america. i was born here and i'm doing everything we can as an organization to make sure that all americans are able to fulfill their dreams and live the american dream. we want to make sure that people who immigrate to this country are able to immigrate to this

country and become -- are able to integrate into this country and become members of society. host: california, democrats' line. caller: mr. vegas. host: vargas, actually. caller: mr. vargas, good morning. you speak up latinos. are you speaking of those who are american citizens, or those who are not american citizens who wish to be? how is that -- in my opinion, you are separating us from being american. the fellow from florida hit it on the head. it is america, and we have to stick together. are you speaking in terms of an american and latino, or -- that is pretty much my question. guest: sure. i am speaking of the millions of

residents of this country, at citizens, some of them immigrants, who are contributing to our country and society and want to live the american dream. what we want to do is we want to help them succeed, we want to help them integrate into society, make sure they are contributing members of our economy and democracy. that will make our nation as strong. host: integration -- we go back to puerto rico one more time. this is mr. santorum saying there should be english only before they have a statehood. guest: mr. santorum needs to do his homework, because english is the official language of puerto rico. it was an insult to say they should speak english,, because as a territory they have been officially bilingual for years. host: judy, republican line.

caller: mr. vargas, i have several problems with your point of view. you seem to be representing mainly illegal aliens. let me remind you that illegal aliens in this country abuse our health-care system. they get free dialysis, are free cancer care, are free organ transplants. it is all been written up in the newspaper so don't tell me you don't know about it. on top of that, we never get to send it back to their own country to pay for them. also, all these illegal latinos and organizations like you or against laws like 287g and a secure communities. you are against anything that exercises any form of control and discovers illegal aliens and the ports of them. host: what's 287g? caller: 287g is the law that

empowers the police and gives them immigration authority. guest: so we needed to fix our broken immigration system. there are laws in this country that are not working. nobody wants to have an illegal immigration population in this country. certainly we don't in this country. we don't want people living in the shadows are being exploited. we want to make sure that people are able to fully develop their human capital and potential. that only happens by a rational system by which people can legally migrate from country to country. host: she mentioned secure communities. guest: secure communities is a program whereby law enforcement is able to corporate with immigration authorities at the federal level -- cooperate with

immigration authorities at the federal level and check people's immigration status as they are being detained or arrested for any violation. the problem with that secure communities in some areas is that some people are being taken in -- for example, a woman who reports of domestic violence. typically what happens is that law enforcement shows up at the home and arrests both parties, the woman and a man. the woman is undocumented and is reporting domestic violence and she herself might be subject to deportation. all she is doing is reporting a crime. what secure communities may end up doing is depressing the number of people who are willing to call police to report crimes. that is a problem that law- enforcement agencies see with secure communities. host: new york city is next. jason on the independent line.

caller: i got to say, you mention education. most of the callers calling in, yes, that education is badly needed. i agree with mr. vargas on a lot of points. the reason people are illegal here is because of immigration system. i came as a green card holder with my family when i was 10 years old. i note that the system has changed a lot and it has become more difficult. i have a wife outside the country. host: what country? caller: she is japanese. she is not breaking any laws. it seems state bank, making it more complicated. people want to -- but it seems they are making it more complicated. people want to be with their families. they don't have the money or the legality to come into the country to be a legal citizen or permanent resident. to illegal point ting

immigrants saying they are causing all this conflict. they really are not. the system needs to change. asians have someone speaking for them, latinos have someone speaking for them. they are the majority in here illegally. mexico is, hello, right over the border, right next door. i think mr. vargas has a very good point. we need to find another way. guest: i think he demonstrated our broken immigration system keeps people separated. what we need to do is a nation -- as a nation is figure out how to keep families together and strengthen this country. host: is there a cost to become a legal resident of the country? guest: you need to wait years and years and years, because there isn't enough visas for people to migrate legally.

there are many people who take advantage of immigrants and charged that hundreds of thousands of dollars and don't provide any services. people are being exploited. we need to fix the system to make sure that people are able to live their lives. host: how many visas allowed per year? guest: it changes from country to country. host: dallas, texas, hello. caller: yes, yes. i was calling just to -- calling to congratulate mr. vargas, because, like i said, what he said about the congress and obama, he lost a lot of seats in the congress, and that is what held us up. like i say, in schools, when i go to elementary schools, high schools, they are showing spanish kids are excelling over

our kids. the melting pot await it is, it is something we need to allow and make work for our country. they are not here to be worked by the older people but to support our economy. we need to find a way to get them in. guest: we need to make sure everybody in this country is able to develop their full potential, their human capital, which is why public education is so important. we need to make sure schools are educating our children. they are the future of this country and we need to make sure they receive a quality education. host: shreveport, louisiana. bill. caller: wishing everybody a blessed day, and bless our military. first off, ok, you take msnbc, like ed schultz says, we want

the communist party in our party. let the blacks, hispanics, muslims takeover that wing of that party, and the progressive spirit that the independents, the tea party, the conservatives, come together as one, and if the hispanics and blacks want to come to the right side of the aisle -- host: caller, what is the point? caller: can have this country back for another 200 years. host: education, are you part of that? guest: we're doing everything we can to make sure that as that latinos vote in the next election, it will be a historic number of latino voters, 26% increase over 2008. we are doing a voter engagement

campaign across the country and working with english and spanish language media to make that happen. latinos want to have a voice in public policy debates. we want to make sure their voices heard in november. host: connecticut. margaret, independent line. caller: mr. vargas, i have been married to a green card holder for 30 years, and we went through the process and we got here illegally. we live in this country for a while, -- got here legally. we lived in his country for a while, a european country. the woman's dilemma where she is undocumented and she has to report domestic violence, and she has to worry about reporting a crime. she herself is participating in a fat war crime, she is here -- federal crime -- she is here un

document, illegal. would you be in favor of making mandatory the e-verify system? guest: the e-verify system is in precise, and that is one of the problems people have a bit, and people ar -- people have with it, that people are being denied the opportunity to work. it is a broken system, and we needed to make sure that people are able to emigrate to this country in a rational way and we are looking to the presidency and congress to make that happen. host: arturo vargas is the director of naleo, and the website is naleo.org. mr. vargas, thank you. guest: thank you. host: we will look at federal food safety programs. that will be after this word from c-span radio. >> housing construction numbers

this hour showed u.s. builders began work on slightly fewer homes in february, but building permits, a gauge of future construction, jumped up to 5% last month, the highest level in more than a year. builders broke ground on a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 698,000 homes, down over 1% from january. an update on the shooting in florida last week. the justice department says it will investigate the shooting of an unarmed african-american teenager who was killed last week by any bird watch captain who was armed with a high-power -- a neighborhood watch captain who was armed with high-powered hundred department announced its civil rights division, along with the u.s. attorney's office for the middle district of florida and the fbi, will launch what they are calling "a thorough and independent investigation into the facts and circumstances of the shooting at." the announcement follows a day of protest yesterday calling for the rest of the george zimmerman, 28, who claims he

shot 17-year-old trayvon martin in self-defense during a confrontation in a gated community. secretary of state hillary clinton meets with historians and scientists from the international group for historic aircraft recovery as they prepared to launch a new search for the wreckage of amelia earhart's plane. the group believes she and her co-pilot may have managed to live on an island for a time. others believe they crashed in the ocean. turning to international issues, a pakistani parliamentary commission has demanded an end to american drone strikes inside their country. the commission has been tasked with coming up with new terms for pakistan's relationship with the united states. the demands were announced as parliament met today and open to debate on reinstatement with the united states. this move could complicate

efforts to rebuild ties severely damaged by u.s. air strikes in november along the afghan border, which killed 24 pakistani soldiers. meanwhile, the top u.s. commander in afghanistan, john allen, in prepared testimony, that says that the u.s. plans to stick to its strategy afghanistan, including the planned withdrawal calendar, despite recent setbacks that have tested the american relations with afghans. general allan said that while the last few months have been trying, the collision and afghan allies have made real, sustainable progress against the insurgency. as the general testifies before the house armed services committee, he is expected to face questions on the koran burning and last week's shooting spree by a u.s. soldier. you can hear coverage at 10:00 a.m. eastern time on c-span radio or watch it on c-span3. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio.

>> a new america where freedom is made a real for all, without regard to race or beliefs or economic position. [applause] i mean a new america everlastingly attacks the ancient idea that men can solve their differences by killing each other. [applause] >> as candidates campaign for president this year, we look back at 14 and ran for office and lost. go to our website, c- span.org/thecontenders, to see video of the contenders who had a lasting impact on politics. >> the politics of the radical liberal left continue to offer only one solution to the tothe

problems that confront us. they tell us again and again and again that we should spend our way out of troubles and spend our way into a better tomorrow. >> c-span.org/thecontenders. "washington journal" continues. host: our guest is caroline smith dewaal of the center for science in the public interest. guest: thank you, pedro. host: it has been called pink and slime. why is it in the news lately? guest: consumers always surprised when they learned something new about the food supply. ground beef has been made of low quality ingredients. this paint slime it may seem a very unappetizing, but really there's nothing on safe about it. it is a product they are taking

a very minute pieces of beef that otherwise could not be used, separating it out, treating it to make sure if it contains the s e coli and salmonella, and then a small percentage of it is added back in when they make ground beef patties. it is the marriage of super- production, super-produced food, and consumers are always a little surprised. they think that ground beef comes from all cuts of meat they see at a supermarket. in fact, it is the mixture of meat coming from all over the world. host: we showed a picture of a burger side-by-side, one made with this finely textured beef, one not. can the average person tell the difference? guest: you never find a hamburger patty it just made with this product. it is only being used at the

mix when they are producing ground beef. for example, i went to the plant down in texas. they were taking fat strip off american cows, combining it with a lean meat coming from australia, grinding that meet together with that fat, and here they might be added in a small percentage, 15% might be added in that is this new product. part of the recent they are adding it is because that product has been treated to be a less likely to carry e. coli or salmonella, some of the hazards that cause serious illness from ground beef. host: who was responsible for regulating the use of what we're seeing and what kind of meat is added and those kinds of things? guest: the u.s. department of

agriculture is in charge of regulating meat and poultry in the u.s. it is every important job, but only about 20% of the food supply. the food and drug administration regulates the rest of the food, the food that doesn't contain meat. host: when it comes to the oversight of use, at they are responsible for eight. do they have the manpower to make sure that everything about this product is following the standards? guest: usda definitely had a role in approving the process that, at the time at this particular production that it was approved, usda would have played a role. the big question is really about whether the product should have been labeled so consumers can see them. in fact, they are not labeled today. people really cannot distinguish between hamburger patties that have a and one that does not. but again, the bottom-line is a

hamburger production long ago left the way that consumers think it may be happening, which is that you take steak and grind it up and it becomes ground beef. in fact, ground beef is the components, the mixture of meat coming from all over the world. and sometimes a very low quality parts of the cal. this is just an example of the super production in our food supply. host: the numbers will be on our screen, and you can send us a tweet, too, @cspanwj. we hear usda, at fda. how are they doing -- your take on the ability for them to monitor food and make sure it is safe, whether it be what we're talking about initially, or food in general? guest: the biggest risk we're seeing right now is the fact

that the federal budget and deficit means that food safety programs are facing cuts this year. in the past few years, and they have seen increases. we also have concern, pedro, because the food and drug administration has to implement a new law, an important new law, that will bring our food safety system into the 21st century. this law was passed in 2011, and it is critically important that the fda have the resources to implement it. but right now with the budget the way it is, it looks like both usda and fda will have less resources in the next few years than they may need to effectively manage food safety. host: resources as far as cash

or manpower? guest: usda has sectors in every single ford facility in the u.s. -- food facility in the u.s. the meat processing plants, like the plant that produces a fine , and it'd mean products are inspected daily. host: first call is maryland on the independents' line. caller: i had a question about -- i wonder if she could tell the listening audience what chemicals are used in the process. one other question, is it true that bpi has been exempt from inspections in the past? thank you for taking my call.

guest: thanks so much for your question. the meat is treated with a mixture of ammonia and water. when we think of ammonia, we think of the cleaning ingredient, but in fact, at this is a different product. it is not what you have in your home cabinet for cleaning purposes. the bottom line is that treatment is not result in a residue that has any significant concern for consumers. our food can be treated with a number of different additives. this ammonia-water wash has been treated as a cleaning tool for the industry. they sometimes applied lactic acids to meat, the liquid you find in yogurt when you open a container.

these kinds of products and cleaning agents can reduce the level of harmful bacteria in the meat. your second question had to do with whether bpi was exempted from, i think you said it fda expainspection. i am not as familiar with that issue, but it wouldn't be exempt from usda inspection. by law, usda is required to be in all facilities like this on a daily basis. host: the louisiana, democrats line, jane. caller: i am a very particular about my ground beef, and i bought usda choice angus beef. does it still have this added to it? guest: it could have this type of meat mixed in. for consumers who don't want to buy anything that might have at

this particular additive or mixture of ground beef, we recommended that you go to your local grocery store and pick out a roast or steak and ask them to grind it on site, and make sure you tell them you don't want anything added. that is the best way to ensure that what you are getting is what you think you might be getting. host: we have someone on our twitter feed. does turkey get a pass as far as additives are concerned? guest: no, ground turkey is a healthier choice. however, we have seen some problems with ground turkey -- especially last summer, there was a major outbreak linked to an anantibiotic-resistant

strain of salmonella. that gets to another very important point. it is a good thing -- consumers are very concerned about the food they 8. but sometimes they overreact to an issue like this pink slime, which has gotten a lot of publicity, when in fact the real concerns are things like e. coli that can cause your child to end up in a hospital, or these new antibiotic-resistant strains of salmonella. it is critically important that consumers focus both on the additives they may not want but also on the pathogens which are truly a danger to them and their family. host: what about ground beef served in schools? is there some type of the federal authority over that, what type of beef gets served? guest: the school lunch program

is operated in part through product that are bought by the u.s. department of agriculture and set out to the schools. the usda last week announced that schools would have a choice, that they could bite me that did not have to this mixture -- could buy meat that did not have this mixture. i see no evidence that usda will be purchasing beef like that to provide it to the schools. i think it was an announcement that schools would have a choice or the option, but whether let me is really available -- whether that meat is really available, other than how i advised your last caller, to go to the butcher and say to grind this piece of meat, we are not sure how much is really available on the market. host: william from california on our republicans' line.

caller: i was reading last month's "discovery" magazine and it had an article in -- 74% is what they are saying all ground beef has pork in it? has pork in it? if it were combined with beef, it would have to be labeled. frankly, i would be a little surprised at that, because really, the way the production systems are operating, beef and pork production are usually done in totally different facilities. it would be very unusual if -- that these products be intermingled that way, because they would have to go to an extra effort to do that. beef production is really streamlined from the facilities

into processing. i would be surprised. but certainly, we will look for that article, william. thank you. host: who was responsible for setting the standards for how food is labeled, content or otherwise? guest: there are two agencies in the federal government, and they each played a role. with respect to food additives, fda decides what kind of labeling would need to be done on a food additive. usda will look at the fda's recommendations and they set their own guidelines for labeling of meat and poultry products. really, usda is responsible for the label that you see on meat and poultry products. they take the advice of what is recommended as well by fda, and their sister agency. meat,when it come tom what is required?

ucb 85 percentage or whatever it is. is that the only thing that is required? guest: they have to tell you information about what is actually in the package. they have to tell you what species they are eating, they will also often at tell you what is the fat percentage in the media or eating. we have been advocating for nutrition labeling on meat products. that process has moved slowly through usda. at we have -- been working have cspi we have been working on that for over 15 years and it is just now coming into being. any additives, including for some products, even added water would be listed. host: peter is on our

independent line from new jersey. caller: by common is on -- my comment is on gmo foods. if we are so worried about labeling, what we ask someone on gmo, and people like tom vilsack, head of the usda right now, he is a monsanto shill. if you did studies on gmo foods and they turned out to be so dangerous, why in our country are we being forced, discreetly, to in just this stuff went it is known to be just totally bad for you? gmo's go through vegetables, meats. it is everything. host: gmo? guest: pete, thank you for your questions. -- question. gmo products have been in the

food supply for over 20 years. it started with soy, it is also in corn. it is used a lot in cotton production -- luckily, we don't eat cotton. if you don't want to eat gmo products, buy organic. a former secretary made the decision that for organic, they could not use gmo product. you canhan that, i assume that if it has soy or corn, it is probably a gmo product. it was technology developed in the u.s. we have been eating it for many years and we do not see adverse health affects. for a while there was concern about allergies associated if you mixed a gene from one

type of plant with another type, whether he would get allergies. those types of products were never marketed. gmo's are not actually bad for you. we have been eating them every day for many, many years now, consumers who really want to avoid the products can do so by choosing organic label. host: a viewer off twitter -- guest: the question is a very good one. we have a concern about especially the rise in the use of antibiotics in animal production. we published a report last week that talks about how many outbreaks have been associated with animal products, like

ground beef or dairy products, that were traced back to strains of salmonella or e. coli that were antibiotic-resistant. this is something we can control. if factory farms today -- t hey -- at factory farms today, they are often applying these antibiotics on a daily basis, giving them to animals to promote growth and to ensure that when a bank or credit, the animals don't get a -- 6. when they are crowded, the animals don't get sick. that is not the way we should be using these priceless antibiotics. it is very important that these antibiotics are preserved for medicine. we need to use them much more discreetly with animals. we actually documented that in 2009, four times as many

antibiotics or given to animals in a food-producing animals that in human medicine. that is really shocking. these are drugs that are so critical plus human medicine. that is where we have been most concerned about factory farming. host: this is the cover of the report, "antibiotic resistance in food borne pathogens." can they get this at your website? guest: absolutely. there is a page called "outbreaks" and you will see all of our recent reports. this came out last week. it is important for policy- makers to understand that they can make changes. fda could today withdraw certain approvals for the use of these important drugs, important

antibiotics, in animal production. fda holds the key to managing this problem. there is legislation pending and that will give fda mortals and ensure -- more tools and ensure that they go back and look at approvals so critically important antibiotics are preserved for medicine and that we're not using them irresponsibly. there have been groups like ours to have been working for decades to encourage fda to take much -- a much tougher stand with respect to the use of antibiotics in animals. fda, i think, is getting a lot of pressure from the drug industry to allow very liberal use of these drugs.

we at cspi were involved in a lawsuit against fba to preserve certain antibiotics for human medicine. we also petitioned the agency to do that. most recently, last year, we petition that the usda -- petitioned the usda. fda is in charge of drug approvals, but usda has to be ensured that the meat is safe to eat. we petitioned usda that they should declare certain strains of salmonella, the once , somented in that report - that whenever they are found in the food supply, the products would be recalled. host: nebraska. line.s on the democrats' caller: when you go to the store

or a meat market and you buy ground sirloin, are you getting that product? guest: you are certainly getting the cut of meat on the label, but you may be getting other types of meat that can be mixed in with thait. for example, the use of this meat product, it is a finely ground meat product that they not so affectionately call pink slime, this product can be used in 10% to 15% of ground beef. you might be getting 85% of what is on the label, but you may be getting and the mixture -- getting a mixture of other types of meat as well. host: pennsylvania. charles, republican online.

caller: basically, on the wording she is using, i have studied this and the aluminum hydroxide they are using in the midst is found in many industrial products and cleaners. it does create poisons in the system that can affect airways and lungs, eyes, ears, throat, and esophagus. this is not something i think it should be fed to our children. guest: i absolutely agree with your caller that we should not be feeding children any chemical agent that could cause those problems. the way this chemical is being applied to the meet, however, it is not resulting in residues that are of concern to the public. at cspi, we found a chemical

agent being used in certain caramel coatings being used in coke and pepsi, and we blew the whistle on that. we are very concerned about chemical additives that pose a public health concern. in this case, though, the weight it is used does not result in residues at any concern to the public. that is what our scientists who have looked at it and have reviewed it decides on this have determined, that this just isn't really a concerned. your caller is right, pedro, that for people working in the factory, it certainly could be a concern. it might be an issue of worker safety, and that is a very important consideration. but in terms of the actual meat product, it is being fed -- it is really a very small percentage of the product, and

the additive itself does not come through at high enough levels to those concerned. host: a viewer wants you to explain what "free range" means and whether it is controlled by the government. guest: there are a series of terms that are not controlled by the government. free range can mean that the animals just have access to the outside. for example, i think in organic production. -- in organic production there is a requirement for certain access to the outside. it may not mean a they are on pasture lands like we imagined. for many cattle, they spent a certain portion of their life on the range any way. cattle often are born and are allowed to graze for a big part of their lives. right at the end, for beef

cattle, they are trucked to the centralized feeding areas where the animals are crowded together and fattened up before they go to slaughter. life -- beefimal's cattle -- for much of that life they are on a the range. free range where it is used for beef production may well mean that that animal was never sent for the final fattening, and it's that its whole life -- it may also be a grass-fed animals. host: there is a variety of government definitions of "free range." guest: it is in marketing term more than a term regulated by the government. host: democrats' line.

caller: i am so relieved to see usda is known that involved in this, but i did not realize it was other people involved. i worked for different companies, and i have seen the tricks and things that go on, corporate, business, and you are right -- you hit on something earlier -- in fact, everything you say, i have no disagreement at all with you, but years ago, swift was injecting a tenderize supposed to be tender. do you know, as there an element, are there any other chemicals they are injecting

into our meat, has there been resistance to this? guest: that sounds like a very interesting topic, and one t hat hat we would certainly want to look into. the industry, in my experience -- what the industry hasn't done it to ensure -- has done to ensure meat tenderness is to use these fine needles, and they tenderize the meat much as our mothers might have done and our fathers in the old days, with a mallet. they use fine needles. i am not aware of a drug or chemical being applied to the meat in the plan, but it is certainly something we can look into. that might pose a concern. what i am familiar with is more fine needle tenderizing, which is done after the meat is fully

cut. host: the food safety modernization act, where are we in its zero implementation? guest -- its implementation? guest: excellent question. it was signed into law last year by president obama in january. they are late in getting a number of regulations out to the public. we would then have a comments period on those regulations before they can take effect. it may not sound long, but this is critically important, because each of these deadlines feed it to additional deadlines. let me tell you just for a minute what the food safety modernization act will do. it was designed to make sure that all food producers in the u.s. have a minimum level of food safety controls operating in their plants. this applies also to imported

foods. that is one of the rules that could be delayed right now. it requires that imported food meet certain new standards. that is one of the regulations being delayed right now. it also requires that growers, people who produce the food on the farm, have the standards, minimum standards for food safety that a bank also have to apply. that is one of the regulations that is being delayed. we have talked to fda. they said the rules were sent over to the white house for review. they have gone back and forth a few times. the bottom line is that these regulations are vitally important, and it is critically important that omb the white house office that reviews regulations, released them to the public, so that we have our comment period and they can proceed with implementation of the new law. host: michigan, thanks for

waiting. michael, republican line. caller: good morning but i have a couple of comments. i was a butcher for many years at the retail level. you know, 35 years ago, you couldn't believe what was going on in some meat markets. i am sure the young lady there has heard stories about it. today, if you are going to eat meat, you should know your butcher, talk to your butcher, because he would love to talk to you, and asked him the questions you got, because he can tell you he has to deal with the inspectors. when they come in, it used to be once a month, but when they come in, those guys are tough, and you better have it together when they come in. they could come in at any time, unan ounce.

it is much better than it used to be. the second point about ground beef -- when you see grounds for l -- ground sirloin, ground chuck, or hamburger, even though it says "ground sirloin," it could adjust the ground -- could just be ground chuck. guest: thank you so much. it is nice to hear from the people who worked as butchers and worked in these plants, because this is very important information you are getting out. the bottom line is that the retail butchers, people in the grocery stores and year-old butcher shops, that job has changed. they are getting much more prepackaged products that they mix together in the back of the supermarket.

there are still some that to the old -- do the old traditional grinding, but it is getting fewer and fewer. they are moving what are called these big packages of coarsely ground product into supermarkets, coming from plants that maybe mix meat from u.s. cattle and australian cattle, new zealand cattle, all mixed together to produce want patty, one berger, one package of hamburger. these products are moving into supermarkets as coarsely ground products and are coming out at your butcher in the meat section in packages. it is not coming from individual animals. if you want to have the greatest assurance that you are getting ground beef in the old- fashioned way, coming from one a

particular animal, you need to ask the butcher ito grind up meat you have seen in the package as a roast or steak. host: is there a cost with the guest: that? is there a cost with that? guest: i think there will be a cost difference. the industry needs to recognize that the concerns consumers have about these products that are blended raises the question about whether consumers are getting enough choice in the ground beef products available to them. host: 4 worth, texas. logan, republican line. caller: i am a student, and make greater, but i was watching this, -- and i saw us -- an eight grader, and i'm watching this, and i saw a story on yahoo.com, and is it all the meat, or just parts?

guest: it is in a fair portion of ground beef products. a number of fast-food chains have said they would no longer use this type of meat mixture when they make their paddies. a couple of fast food chains are not using this product any longer in their ground beef patties. for products going through your supermarket, this product is really unlabeled. we cannot tell you for sure what percentage it is in, but it could be in much of the ground beef on your grocer shelves today. host: from twitter -- guest: mad cow disease has not been eradicated, but it has been controlled a very well.

in the u.s., we had a handful of animals that were ever even identified with the disease. at cspi, we had gone back in the mid-1990's and look at the parts of our food supply that might be vulnerable to contamination if we had an outbreak of mad cow disease here. i can assure your viewers that at least we have taken a hard look at how meat was produced and we have asked usda and they have complied to take out the parts of meat that would be most vulnerable to contamination with bfc if an animal was sick. today we do not have a problem with it in the u.s. at all. host: pennsylvania. caller: i have a simple, quick

question here. the lady talks about how long it takes the government to do a study, how long they have been studying this, how long the government takes to act on anything. how are we as consumers out here is supposed to trust anybody went it takes so long for congress, for anybody to get anything done? it is frustrating, it is maddening, and i just don't understand why there are so many delays. thank you. guest: i totally share your frustration. you know, we work on the food safety modernization act for over a decade. we worked with a number of members of congress, people like rosa delauro, henry waxman, john dingell in the house, and big durbin, tom harkin -- dick durbin, tom harkin -- these are

senators. we work with so many wonderful, caring members of congress who wanted to put food safety at the front of the congressional agenda. and even so, it took a decade. i share your frustration, but i also know there are also lots of important things happening here. during that time there was a major oil spill in the gulf coast that delayed things. there were also -- it was during that time that we went through katrina. a lot of times and things can happen that get in the way of people's best intentions. but i share your frustration, and that is why many of us are here in washington working every day to ensure that the best policies do advance. host: we have time for one more call. house coming in in just a few minutes.

george, independent line. caller: i worked on a turkey farm one time and i cannot take a break if only people knew how those words were treated. there are so much hormones pumped into these birds that the -- that it takes over a year for turkey's without hormones to become adults. they have to be killed, and wants to turkey -- once the herkeys are down, the oteh birds gang up on them and eat them alive. something needs to be done about these corporations. guest: i think that is such an important point. what your caller was just relating was truly shocking