allowing them access to employee personal social media websites and later, the chief operating officer for the government accountability of his talks about a report on duplicating federal programs. "washington journal" is next. ♪ ♪ host: the white house is the topic of discussion today with president obama and the canadian prime minister steven harper and the mexican president. they will talk about economic issues. the house and senate are on break. looking at the race for the white house, preparations are being made in wisconsin, d.c., and maryland and you can follow what is happening on our web site and see our coverage at 7:00 tomorrow.

we are interested in what you think of the idea for an extra year of high school students, disadvantaged students specifically. you can give us a call at the numbers below -- if you want to send us an e- mail, you can do that, too. you can send us a tweet based at a baltimore but ranyard kingston is the president of grendell college. -- grinnell college.

this is the thought that we want you to weigh in on this morning --

we will examine the options that he lays out. the question for you this morning is about an extra year of high school for disadvantaged students. we will divide the lines for parents, teachers, and others. you can send us an e-mail if you wish and twister is always available. let's go to a call to set this up from missouri on our ot hers line. are you there? go ahead. caller: this is what i think --

i think there was a time back in american history where people used to not go to college or high school and ended up fine. one of our presidents and abraham lincoln never went to college. many great presidents never went to college. we may live by more advanced time today but in my opinion, i think the four-year way we do things in our high school and the way we do things is a bunch of fuss and is not necessary and we don't need an extra year. we need to keep that the way it is. we have to demand that the parents know more about what is going on in their kids' educations and demand that more kids have personal responsibilities of they know what to do in any situation. go to wilmington, delaware, caller: good morning and thank

you for cspan. my answer would be, there is definitely a better way. you should send a privileged kids into the inner city schools for a year and see if that changes the parents' minds. we have the charter school fight in delaware and what what they want and what more for their kids and they don't think of anybody else or how we should change the system. there is a big problem. some kids can eat in the morning before the, the school and some kids cannot. the whole situation has to be fixed. backing someone else to go for an extra year because their parents are working four jobs, that is ridiculous. >host: where the start to change the system? caller: all those people with degrees to think they are educating our kids have to start listening to the people without degrees and what their kids to get degrees. that is where you start.

have a big mess of forum. if you have to go door-to-door, those people have enough money and time that other parents don't have. get on their doorstep and get in their lives, show them that you care. if you don't care about their kids, get out of teaching their kids. host: this is off of twister -- -- twitter -- a couple of more thoughts from kingston - he suggests a couple of different models --

we'll take a few more calls -- in dayton, ohio, you are a teacher. caller: i'm a teacher in the date in public schools which are urban schools. i'm a high-school teacher. let me give you an example -- the valedictorian of our school last year took his college entrance exams for college and had to take remedial math and remedial writing. i'm talking about developmental courses like english 095 that

they don't count toward his degree. i think they should be getting those for free if you are coming from an inner-city school and want to take developmental class is at york college, they should not pay for those. sure how much good it would do. are we talking about keeping them in the disadvantaged school for an extra year? that is no good. host: it would help them prepare for college and he suggests several models. caller: they definitely deserve that and it is a long time coming. this is not equal education. we have the highest kids and our school getting 20 on act or as a valedictorian should be getting in the 30's. host: with the current four years they've got, are there

ways to help them better prepare for college? caller: we are trying. we're working really hard. we are staying after school and doing college prep tests and we are trying as hard as we can to get the kids engaged and get those kids who have the potential. we're working. really working -- we are working really hard. in the cities, you have concentrated on employment and concentrated drama, things going on in the family. we need to get them up and out and give them a chance to succeed in college at a local four-year college may be. they work hard the last 10 years to recruit from city schools and now local university has a 15% greg georgian rate -- graduation rates.

they need something. host: that was from airline for teachers. if parents wish to take advantage, you can call on that line. laurel, maryland, you are next. caller: good morning. i have a problem with keeping somebody in school -- if this school is bad, why keep them there for an extra year? i think the school system -- it goes back to the poor kid situation. there are laws protecting people from not going across county lines to go to better schools. why don't we set laws that would change -- fix the schools and make them better? the only way you can change these days is to make the school better. they could go for 10 years and they would still not and do

better. host: "the detroit news" has a different take on education -- this is about schools in dearborn offering high school students a chance to start later.

this is the of bed this morning that we are taking our question from -- this is raynard kingston, the president of grinnell college. we want to get your thoughts on that. amsterdam, new york is up next on our teachers line. good caller: morning, my view is there is a practical matter here. is important to get our kids ready for college after they graduate from high school. my school district is very died fours socio-economic later we still consider improper is and students from wealthy homes. the practical challenge in many places is that students are judged by -- teachers are judged by how many of the students graduate in four years.

we have to think about a change in our idea of what high-school is and what a successful high school is. there are many students into a nice job in five years but schools and teachers and even states are penalized if students do not graduate in four years. it is a culture shift. host: is anybody willing, in your opinion, from a teacher's point of view, anybody willing to take on the idea of taking on the mentality of how schools operated? caller: nationally, from my experience, there is a real push to meet standards and get kids done in four years. that is what schools are held accountable for. there is a debate that brings in lots of different ideas. host: does higher education, to this debate to help prepare

those especially in high school to better prepare them with the idea of going to college if they decide to do that? caller: it is important to include people from higher level education. our goal is to get our students college-ready. without including the stake holders at a higher level than us, you won't get them there. host: this is from "the new york post" -- alexandria, va., good morning.

caller: thank you for taking my call. i am a parent and i disagree with an extra year for students at disadvantaged schools. i don't understand why they would want to keep the same students and a school that is not performing and give them another bad year of the same stuff. there's a reason why the schools are not performing. you would think they would try to get to the bottom of the reason the school is not performing. it is probably not the students and what you do with the students that are performing? do they get an extra year? they need to look at what we're paying our teachers and astute -- and the schools that are not performing and be more productive instead of giving them an extra year in school, in the same school district. host: @ of those ideas of helping students, was the most effective from a parent's point

of view? caller: for me, my son will not be the most brilliant child in the school. he struggles academically but his school has programs that help him after school. hours spent an hour after school once a week. i have them attending those extra activities after class, academic activities in the areas he is a week in. get the parents involved. i have to figure out why my son is not performing and figure out what the teachers can do and how to work with them. i want to help them better understand my son. it is a two-way street. host: here is more from the of

bed this morning -- -- the op ed this morning. annapolis, maryland, a teacher, hello -- caller: good morning, i taught at the u.s. naval academy and a couple of universities and i am

currently teaching at johns hopkins. the idea of an extra year of school is a fantastic idea. it is important the way it is done. what it accomplishes is it gives the student another year of maturity to be able to handle school. the way i would employ much does and what i did with my son, in the sixth grade, i sensed he was doing rather poorly in school and he needed another year of maturity. when i moved him from one school to another, i had him to the sixth grade over again. he did it with a different group of peers. rather than making into an extra year of high school, when he shifted school, by the time i got to high school, he had already done extra year and that given that extra year of maturity that you were talking about adding. in her son's case, it made a tremendous difference in his academics and maturity and he ended up going to the naval academy and being a navy seal.

i strongly recommend the idea for some kids that need that extra push for maturity that that is a good way to do it. >host: how did your son respond to all that? caller: isolate i think there was some resistance but once he got into a new environment and develop new friends and had a new set of teachers, he responded very well. by the time it got too high school, he was more mature and relate almost one year older than a lot of distance around him but that maturity is what made the difference in in being able to perform a high school. host: is yours the only example you can cite or have you heard of others? caller: i have not heard of anyone else doing that. the idea of keeping the kids in the same high school for another year is a real bad idea in terms of the pierre relationship. if you can move them sooner than that and let them get

established and give them a year of maturity earlier, i think it is a much better approach. host: we will continue with calls about this but first a look at the papers. this is from "the washington post"business section -- this is a listing of the ceo's. they takoma average othey have t

of the organizations that have been compiled by bloomberg, the top five are the pharmaceutical research and manufacturers, american petroleum institute, edison electric institute, and the securities industry and financial markets and there are others on the list it is not only do they are but how much they make. you can find that in "the washington post." this morning.

belcher town, maryland, a parent. caller: i fill the parents really need to get more involved at an early age with their school system to know what resources are out there. unfortunately, there is not a lot of dissent on for information for young mothers and fathers who might need help early on. our school area has a wonderful program and we have a lot of mentoring where parents come and help teachers with students at an early age in the classroom. kids need more help in certain areas are getting the help they need at an early age so they can catch up much more quickly. there does not have to be an extra year of school. we also have college students who are eventually going to be

teachers to come to our school and actually help students at a very early age catch up. i think the community has to get more involved with the education of their community. host: you say there is an increase in the numbers of those students trying to catch up? caller: in our particular school district, there are some areas in massachusetts where there is more a problem. the funding needs to go to schools that need more help. i also feel that as a community, we need to help the teachers. the teachers have students with different language barriers, learning difficulties, and very large classrooms. i cannot see how one teacher can be teaching 30 kids and on top

of that have learning disabilities and behavioral problems and the parents expect them to be able to do everything. host: louisiana, good morning. caller: good morning, i wanted to address your caller from maryland who said he held back his son and switched schools. i held my son and first grade because he was not mature enough. that was when he was young and has not affected him as far as his peers. i believe that if we stop the standardized testing and no child left behind, it is just leaving our children behind. the -- children tested differently. i believe they need to put more vocational programs and the schools. when i went to school, they had standardized tests but it was not a pass or fail thing. it was to get where your

strengths and weaknesses were. if you're good in science, you could go on and take science- related courses or if you were mechanically inclined, you could take vocational courses for that. host: what do you think of the notion that has been suggested about an extra year to help prepare a disadvantage student who has the potential to go to college? caller: maybe if it was an apprentice level, that might help. it will not do anything for the child's mental stability. it will make them feel -- it will diminish their psyche. host: that as a parent calling in this morning. -- that is a parent calling in this morning. you can give us a call in the next 20 minutes on this topic.

we're taking a look at technology later and talk about voting. "the new york times" has a poll looking at viewing habits.

wisconsin, hello. caller: could morning. -- good morning. i believe that the school system has to be changed may be in the last two years. some people of the doctors or lawyers and some will be technicians and i think we need to tear our educational system to that because not everybody

is a college candidates. . if they would do that, there would be much farther ahead in preparing itself for going out into the world and finding a job that meets his interests and where he is going to learn. i also believe they should focus on english and math. they should also cater to what the child is interested in. i have also noticed that as a mentor and tutor that some teachers through long years of being a teacher have lost interest in teaching. it is merely a function. they say if he does not know map by the ninth grade, he will never learned so i will not bother teaching it to him, he could use is calculated. it does not teach a child to think. host: have to pull these ideas

from how wisconsin looks at the last two years of high school? --ler: i don't think there there is probably more focus on children going to college than there is onto technical colleges. that is where the future is is in technology. many college graduates cannot even get jobs. they are taking jobs and hamburger joints and what ever. it is a well-known thing. technology is always changing and always upping the nate. i think kids need to get that education early. keeping a child in an inadequate school will not improve his chances of being successful. host: pennsylvania, a teacher, hello. are you there? he has left us and we will go

next to little rock, arkansas. caller: good morning. go-ahead host:. caller: we are spending more money locking up people than education and that is putting our priorities into different areas which is counterproductive. as we put more money into prisons, there is a for-profit business there and education is going to decide. congress just turned down were denied funding grants for college as and when you are poor, this will keep the port for and the rich richer and it does not make sense. host: what do you think about this idea as far as extra

education for disadvantaged students if they are preparing for college? what you think about an extra year of high school? caller: that is great. host: is it great? -- why is that great? you said it is a great idea, tell me why. caller: many of these kids actually drop out of school and end up in the streets and in prison. we're doing things backwards. instead of helping them and building a strong foundation at the beginning like kindergarten and first grade, we let them fall by the wayside. host: "the green bay press

gazette" this morning -- if you go to the federal page of "the washington post" this morning, you will find out that

today at about 8:30, there will be of release of the 1940 census data. the census data will be released at 8:00 dirty and we will cover it live. it says -- the census records that will be released at 8:30

today and we will plan to cover that so stay tuned to her website c-span.org for information about that and other things we are covering today. pittsburgh, pa., hello. caller: i think i school students should have a high gpa to go to college. i had a scholarship to play football and my dad tells me back and i'm glad he did because i worked for a year and i went into a summer school program at college and i was able to achieve my scholarship and play football. president obama has given out more loan money for college when

you get -- when you can get a loan that easily with a low gpa, it raises tuition. i live in a college town. kids want to party when they are freshmen. they want to get into school as a social thing. host: what to do to make sure students can get ready for college if they decide to do that? what should be done? caller: i think they should be more disciplined. i am a football coach and some of the kids that get scholarships to play ball, they are not ready. they're kind of stupid3 d. football -- sports got them through high school and we owe is instill in them to get their grades up to play.

i think kids should be held back until they are ready. the expenditures are high. that is why tuition goes up and it is easy to get a loan. host: here is "the financial times" and a picture of president obama -- lafayette, indiana is next, a teacher, good morning. thank caller: 4 cspan thank you for taking my call. earlier there is a call talking

about how schools are community centers. that is probably the most important and people need to become politically active in their schools. they need to be involved in the programs made there. i disagree with the extra year. on the basis that i think the grade level semester system we currently have in schools is what is failing the students. they need a more fluid ability. they could be at a first grade level of matt but a fifth grade level of reading. we need a system where the turnover of subjects that are having difficulty with are being focused on may be at the nine- week break. to give them flexibility to the students so they are getting the attention now as opposed to at the end of the semester or the end of the year.

host: stanford, n.c., a parent, good morning. caller: i am a parent. we need to be mostly concerned about our children, their mental health and well-being and their heart. the teachers make good money and i feel if they were concerned about how much they were making, maybe they would try another profession. i believe some of our parents, their generation of children kind of got lost some out. how. people my age were not raised to succeed in the real world.

i have a daughter in one high school that was doing cornicles -- clavicles and she went to school in pennsylvania. i have a son and he was going to woodworking shop in fifth grade. i feel my children should be together. they're not keeping families together like this should be. host: you mentioned the the roles of parenting and teachers -- what are parents doing in your school system to counteract what is going on? caller: i don't know that a whole lot of parents my age are even raising their own children. when my daughter and son were seven and eight years old, my

parents took them away from me because the standard of where they lived was not my standards. they had plenty of money. this is different. my daughter is doing clinicals in high school and my son is doing woodworking, i don't know what i am saying. host: here is a series of photos in the series of papers this morning of myanmar -- all the papers are talking about

this election of this pro- democracy advocate to parliament. rockford, ill., a teacher, hello. caller: i believe in the extra year but i also believe are the problem with the student's has to do with what i call a fabric problem. there are no jobs out there that they used to be. if you did in school, you could go out and get a job that paid eight livable wage and students don't see that said they are not getting -- they're not buying into educated as they used to. we have also lost parental support. there are parents who believe in the students that succeed and the ones that are not their parents, see it as more of a babysitting service. parents, teachers meetings and tell me that. i have to make a living and i don't care what they do as long as you take care of them is what they tell me. what kind of job can you get

from a high school diploma? they cannot live on that. we need to pull it together so we can get the parents and students involved with wanting to learn. we need the employers to state what education they want so that we can meet those requirements and has something for the students to buy into. host: you said you liked the idea of an extra year, tell me why. caller: if students don't understand things now and if we're going to bring the students there now, they need that extra time. one guy said he did not like it but let's cooperate with community college and put that students with the extra year of high school at community college level so they can be a part of that and see what will happen with that. that extra time will give them more time to learn. host: what should be done in that extra year? caller: the writing and math

skills are important and i makeged instructor. over 60% of students cannot pass the entrance exam level for the math requirements to get into college. that is where the focus needs to be. host: one more call on this topic, washington, d.c., a parent, hello. caller: i would say parents wake up -- go get your kids in school. i believe we do not need to do another year for disadvantaged students. i think parents should force the school to identify that there is something wrong with their kids. the school gets funding to be able to assist kids that are having difficulties. i also believe we should throw out the basic standard test without it being a pass or fail or just to evaluate a kid.

once the school system identifies that the kid has some difficulty in math or reading than i think we should make the eighth grade so that we will know the students comprehension level and the level they have in math and reading and to their iq and then make ninth grade like a basic math class, a proficient math class, and advanced math class and a sense of the english class and that way you are helping the kids and the schools are targeting and identifying the students that need help. i believe the school system continues to pass the student on knowing that they have some disabilities or that they need more assistance. i don't agree with having an extra school year. host: that is the last call on

the topic. later in the program, will talk about social media in the workplace the first discussion about campaign 2012. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> america will suffer a catastrophic cyber attack. they don't use those words indiscriminately. we're already for five months into that and it tells me we have to move rapidly but not in a way that either violate privacy or the basic tenets of privacy. and that encourages quick reaction, not sort of regulatory environment. >> tonight, the chairman of the house subcommittee on commerce -- on communications and secure -- and technology on 8:00

eastern on "the communicators" on c-span 2. the cspan 2012 local content vehicle city tour takes book-tv and american history programming on the road the first weekend of each month for this past weekend featured little rock, arkansas with book-tv at the high school collection at the university of arkansas. >> she collect -- he collected photographs and was interested in the 19th century. these are two friends, union and confederate who knew each other prior to the civil war who fought against each other in 1862, survived the war, came out and made friends after the war and here they are at age 100 sitting on the porch talking about the old days. >> american history to be looked at life and the world war two japanese internment camp. >> there was a wonderful book

called "the art of the gaman which means surviving the on survival and to talk about how the arts and crafts is how they kept their sanity and gave them something to do and how the depression was so bad -- how depression was a bed in the cans and there was a high incidence of suicide. people would make these little things of beauty to give to each other as a way to say that we support you and your bet you. >> our tour continues the week of may 5 and 6 in oklahoma city on c-span 2 and 3. >> "washington journal" continues -- host: we will not talk about the 2012 election. after tuesday, what does it mean for the various players involved in the gop candidacy. ?

guest: a lot of people are anticipating that if mitt romney wins -- there are three primaries tomorrow but wisconsin is what they are watching. if mitt romney wins that state, there will be a lot more pressure on rick santorum to stand back and let mitt romney get the nomination. many republicans believe that this race is beginning to go on too long and ultimately, if this continues, it could hurt their nominee in the fall. host: as far as numbers, apart from mr. runyan, if the other candidates, is there any way for them to catch up? guest: there is no way arithmetically for the others to catch up with mitt romney. what they could do potentially

and that window looks like it is shutting is denied in the 1144 delegates that he would need before the convention to walk in and say that i've got this nomination wrapped up. host: that was part of the new gingrich strategy? guest: that's right, it would make a contested convention and perhaps even a brokered convention. i think that hope is fading as well. host: if you look of the front page of "the baltimore sun" - they are looking at maryland but the headline says there is little interest in the primary but interest over all as far as republicans, talk about the interest that you are seeing generated about those who go out to vote for it is they're interested there? guest: there was earlier in the race but look at a state like maryland. it is one of the most liberal states in the country. the republican base there is fairly moderate and there is not a lot of suspense as to how that

race will come out. when people talk about voter interest, what brings voters out more than anything else is a good, close, a fiercely -- fiercely fought race. host: our guest is with "the washington post." if you want to ask her questions, you can call in t you can also send us an e-mail and you could also send us a tweet. from my reporter's point of view, what is the untold story? what might be of interest for our viewers that does not get reported often on the gop side is dax-co ? guest: it is a real testing ground for the candidates.

it is getting a voters a sense of how well they would perform in the fall against president obama. what i think we are struggling to get our arms around is the role of outside forces this year. it seems like the parties themselves have become less and less meaningful in part because people themselves are dissatisfied with the political process but also because there are so many outside forces but did not used to exist. chief among them is the super packs that there are others. host: there is a lot of spending going on. will this be the highest cycle when it comes to spending? guest: is on track to do that and we have never seen these outside organizations spent much of all in primary races. at least in presidential primary races.

the other thing the super-pacs can do is bring a real negative message to a race and await the candidates themselves would not dare talk about. they have turned this race more negative than might have been and i think it is a pale preview of what we will see from both sides. host: and wisconsin, there is a recall effort for the government. how much does that play into the primary process? guest: independents in wisconsin can vote in the republican primary said that recall vote may bring some people to the polls who would not perhaps already be there. most of the intensity and that race is to the right so it could increase turnout overall. host: wisconsin, d.c., and maryland are up for their primary tomorrow. attleboro, massachusetts is our first call on our independent line, good morning.

caller: i would like to know why the candidates, all of them, have a problem telling the truth. their nose will grow so big they don't stop telling us lies. we are not stupid and ignorant people out here. we want the truth. we want them to stop telling us how good they live and how bad they live and everything else. they all have a problem, one thing or another. nobody is above having something wrong. why can't they come out with the troops and stop lying? thank you. guest: one thing that has happened in my business over last few cycles is that most major news media organizations have made a greater effort than they have in the past in fact- checking the candidates. we have one of our most talented

colleagues run something called the fact checker where it takes the candidates and puts them against the record. host: was the influence on the information available on the internet? guest: these things get intensely debated on the internet but a lot of the blogging is done from the left perspective or a right perspective. what they are basically doing is kind of firing up their own partisans. i think it is a new role of major news organizations to be a little bit more aggressive ourselves, a lot more aggressive, about fact checking the candidates. host: idaho, go ahead, on the republican line -- caller: i'm calling about the harsh generalization toward the gop nomination and i felt one of

your callers talked about the truth of the nominees when one of them is clearly a consistent good voter does -- who does not have things against them. just like an education, one lady was saying in sports, she says she loves college and her town and there is no reason to go to college, just drop out and go home and live with my parents and no job. host: what are you trying to say with your first point? caller: the first lady was areing the nominee's untruthful. that is erroneous. host: we will leave it there. pennsylvania, republican line -- caller: how are you? i am interested in this subject.

i am very curious why candidates who are republican do not discuss the fact that millions of retirees like myself are not millionaires by any stretch of the imagination but we rely on the dividends to supplement our social security because i just cannot live on social security. the democrats want to raise the taxes on the dividends saying it is for millionaires. gosh, it does not make any sense for a guy like me. i work hard and i have investments in stocks that pay dividends. i don't think i am alone. i think there are millions of people like us. would you comment on that, please? guest: cutting the capital gains rate is another thing the

republicans have talked about to reward people and make prudent investments and have to live on them. the democrats would argue that they are basically talking about tax increases on individuals who make $200,000 and above. we have had a great deal of discussion in this election about what it is that actually qualify as a person for being rich. host: vice president joe biden yesterday talked about the election and the frame some comments toward mitt romney romney [video clip] >> i think governor romney is a little out of touch. he said the american people don't think the policies work and he argued about letting detrick go bankrupt.

they are hiring hundreds of thousands of new people, general motors is the largest corporation in the world again, 24 straight months of economic growth, america is going back to work and the unemployment rate dropped by 1%. host: maybe you can talk about the larger role that the vice president plays these days. guest: we're seeing more joe biden because we're getting into a campaign season. i think the president has had difficulty particularly connecting with blue-collar voters, middle-class voters, and this is what the white house and the presidential campaign believes is the strength of joe biden, that he can connect with joe lunch bucket out there in scranton host: fredericksburg, va., you are next, republican line -- caller: this is ridiculous because the facts that she is

talking about are irrelevant. she is talking about where the country is going to go. we have an export-import bank that gives money to foreigners in order to buy products here. who says they don't set up safe companies on both shores and milk the taxpayer? $140 billion -- we have the state department, $52 billion they want. the media does not get it. we see all this. we are not interested in these so-called small fax are not relevant in this election. whether capital gains is 15% or 25% is totally irrelevant. host: what is most relevant to you? caller: the fact that the government wastes a tremendous amount of money and we don't know where this money is going, they have all kinds of little corporations and little agencies

set up. whoever heard as such a thing as loaning foreigners' money guaranteed by the taxpayers of they can buy products from america? this is ridiculous bar. the state department, $52 billion for the state department when we have had war after war? we've got hillary clinton who has got to be the most bloodthirsty woman in the entire world. host: why don't we end there. i guess it is the idea people may vote on how government operates these days. guest: that's true. but what is great about this show is two calls and go to a gentleman said the tax rate is the most important issue because he is a retiree living on the income from his investments. and this woman is very upset

about what the xm bank is doing. its greatest supporters are corporations in this country that are very export-. -so there are many levels to the government. i think people are fed up with all sorts of things. host: is this election different as far as how people vote? guest: i think people are much more aware than they have been in past elections of the level of our debt, of the level of our spending, and are much more fearful about the future and what this leads -- means for their children if. i have covered a lot of elections. but i really think i hear people talking about the debt and the implications for their children and grandchildren much more than i have in the past. host: st. louis, missouri, fred, hello.

caller: hello. thanks for taking my call. i have english as the official language for my platform, like rick santorum. i ran on that years ago. [unintelligible] the house passed it. host: your question, sir? caller: i want to know why these candidates don't take a nickel out of every lottery ticket and put that toward social security. host: his concern is social security issues. guest: entitlement programs, especially for the baby boom generation beginning to retire,

are going to be under great amount of stress. even in worse trouble than the social security system is the medicare system. host: there's a blurb in your paper this morning when it comes to the campaign. it talks about mr. romney has supporters running in the state -- foreign policy as far as the candidates are concerned, where has that been in the campaign? guest: it has taken a backseat except for a few issues. there's a lot of talk about iran and what this country's role should do in preventing iran from becoming a nuclear power that could threaten the survival of israel has been probably the main foreign policy discussion. but maryland is an interesting state, as the article indicates,

because it is right next to the capital, we do have a lot of people who have made their careers and often retired from the foreign service. i think people in the capital area, there are a lot of people extremely concerned about foreign policy. host: a story says mitt romney will probably articulate more foreign policy speeches in. guest: we don't know what sort of external events are likely to happen, what the situation will look like on the ground in afghanistan. now we are seeing there is a lot of dissatisfaction with the way the war is going and whether it was worth fighting in the first place. in the 2008 election everybody portrayed afghanistan as the war that was more justified than iraq. those kinds of questions are also going to come more to the foreground. and they will be framed as

pocketbook issues as people look at the enormous investments. host: regarding the level of non-policy overall amongst the candidates? guest: particularly in parts of the country like nevada, the upper midwest, and florida, where people, their mortgages are run under water, at this point i think it. has really taken a back it host: texas, on the republican line. charlie in raleigh. caller: i will ask a question concerning the first caller, the woman who said that candidates are all saying untruths. she indicated the press is not doing its job revealing this. i have a question. in the last several years we

have seen our news information and multiplied exponentially. people get news from many sources including the internet. growing up, and i saw three news network's at night or one of the three, 15 minutes and that was all. no comments, no cable commentary, no internet. i want to ask how that has asked the washington post in this new climate? and is the newspaper suffering because of this exponential rise of information sources, many of whom are probably soft? guest: i think the entire newspaper industry is under a lot of pressure in part because the business model, which in the past ran on advertising. if you were looking for job, the first place and you would go is classified ads. now you go to a monster.com.

so newspapers are struggling across the board. we have a lot fewer people to cover the news than we used to. umc newspaper's closing their domestic bureaus and closing a lot of their foreign bureaus. at the same time, the amount of information we are being called upon to produce if has grown exponentially. you don't wait for the next day's paper anymore. if you have to have things out on the internet and have the video to go with it and the facts checked behind it. we are all sorts and out what the business model is for the future and what our roles will be. i don't think we have quite figure it out yet. host: how does it change your day today? guest: it is interesting. i've been with the washington post a couple years, but before that i was 15 years at time magazine. when i got to "time" magazine we had one deadline only. we would produce one magazine per week. we had a bureau in washington of well over 20 people. by the time i left them, the bureau was down to about seven

people and we had closed all the domestic bureaus for. at the same time we were not just putting out a weekly magazine. tweeting,ggin, a l writing stories for the internet. we don't get the time we used to for the third or fourth phone call to check a fact, or go thoughtful pieces that used to be everything's favorite thing to work on. host: in the gallup poll this morning, there is a piece in the usa today looking at men and women and how they approach this election. it says when it comes to the top issues for men, it is the deficit, -- hhois there anything there could be reflected in your

reporting particularly on how men and women look at the campaign? guest: we are seen in recent weeks a surprising amount of discussion on social issues. contraception, which is a fight that i think most people thought was pretty well settled decades ago. and there's some thought that there's this great battle for. the for. when i am out in the country talking to people, when i talk to pollsters, they say women are sort of confused on these issues. they don't understand why we are talking about this. my house is burning down economically, so why are we discussing these sort of side issues. host: economic issues are supposed to be at the forefront. guest: that is a reflection of how long the republican primary has lasted and this is a way in which the candidates themselves

distance themselves from each other. this is how mitt romney distinguishes himself from rick santorum. host: high-level nominations or at least backings of mr. romney over the last couple days, does that indicate the end is near as far as an eventual nominee? guest: i think so. some of the people he has gotten -- the mistrust of romney has come from the right of his party. some of the endorsements he has gotten are attempting to act to shore up people's trust from the right. paul ryan in wisconsin, the chairman of the house budget committee is a huge one because he is a hero to many conservatives. host: president george h. w. bush, marco rubio, and others. guest: >> and ron johnson, a tea party favorite. host: we have got an independent line. caller: good morning.

i have a question and i would like to somebody to explain it to me. if we borrow 42 cents out of every dollar as a federal government, how can we -- we borrow money to give to other countries and then we have to pay it back and they don't? and then you tell us here at home, cut back, cut back, cut back. hillary clinton wants to give $100 million to tunisia, billions to egypt. and we are borrowing this money? host: relate that to the campaign. caller: we are pretty much screwed no matter who we get. left and right are in it together. guest: foreign aid is always unpopular, but it is a very tiny portion of the budget. the real fiscal problem comes in the entitlements. the fact that my generation is

going to put a real stress on the system. people who support foreign aid will tell you that by spending this money in parts of the world we are attempting to create stable government institutions there, we are trying to lift people out of poverty that also leads to economic and political instability. and so, they will argue -- and it's not a popular argument -- but they will argue these are investments in a more secure world that will perhaps less and the external threats to this country. host: peoria, illinois, susan, independent line. caller: good morning. i would like to backpedal a little. a minute ago somebody talked about the bailout of detroit. i hear this all the time. nobody ever mentions the fact that every single stockholder of general motors had their stack

confiscated while their taxes were going to bail out the company. when they say then that the company has paid back everything, every stockholder is still at a total loss for any shares they had. host: are you there? what is the question? caller: my question is, how can they claim this to be such a great coup for the democrats when they have done something this country is never done before, which is confiscate private citizens' property without so much as even saying so. guest: well, i think that what general motors went through was a sort of managed bankruptcy, which happens a lot to companies and especially in this kind of economy. and often when a company goes into bankruptcy, people who

suffer are the stockholders. when people buy stock, they are putting their money. at money there certainly has been a lot of criticism particularly from the right as to how this played out. but i think that in the end, general motors is indisputably a stronger company. at that point, people look at the workers and they look at the economy of michigan. host: ron paul asked about the future of the campaign on the sunday shows yesterday. [video clip] >> fall-like mitt romney as a person. i think he is a dignified person. -- i like mitt romney as a person. we have no common ground on economics. he is not worried about the federal reserve for the foreign policy. he does not talk about civil liberties. i have a hard time to expect him ever to invite me to campaign with him.

>> would you vote for him or support him? >> i've not made that decision yet. i'm still campaigning. host: if mr. rana becomes the candidate, the other three and how they come along as far as supporting or what that means generally for republicans? guest: that john glenn ron paul is the guy to watch most closely. a few weeks ago i was interviewing grover norquist, the activist, and he said how they handle ron paul is going to be one of the most important questions, because there is such energy behind him, such abuses as a behind him. years ago of the republican convention, ron paul was such an outcast that he had to have his own convention in the minneapolis area. i guarantee that is not going to be the case this time. he is going to have a very prominent role and probably a prime-time speaking spot. because what they want is for ron paul to say to its

supporters all that energy that campaign,t to mymy it's now time to put it behind a republican party. host: ibm is on the republican line from florida. irene. good -- caller: i would like to ask the lady why is it the people in the u.s. cannot open up their minds and listen to what has been said. there has been such a difference between what romney did in massachusetts and what obamacare is. and also, why is rick santorum being so hateful about running? he's not going to win. for him to say what he is doing and saying is hurting the party

and it is hurting mitt romney. i am a romney supporter. i do believe the longer this goes on, the worse it is going to be for the republican party. i wish it was over so we could get on with the business. host: before you respond, i want to listen to what rick santorum said about his campaign on the sunday shows district at. [video clip] it is not the longest of long shots. so many of the delegates coming to the convention are unbound delegates provided that romney has all the delegates at a big lead, the numbers don't. bear that don't correct what you and knowledge he is the most likely nominee, as newt gingrich did this week? >> zeaxanthin right now, but less than half the votes -- less than half the delegates have been selected. go back there for your years ago, governor romney was still in the race at this point and he

was not doing nearly as well as we are. i just think we have a lot of panic out there among the establishment, because the establishment has tried to convince the republicans across this country and conservatives that they need mitt romney shoved down their throats and they're trying everything they can -- they're not making the sale on the money or the endorsements or the policies or what he stands for, because it's all over the map. so they have to make the case of inevitability. host: there was his take on the campaign. relate that to a the caller's interest in getting on with this business. guest: that was pretty much a direct answer to her concerns. the fact is rick santorum is talking delegate counts, but the primaries all happened much earlier last time. so by this point in the race it was looking like things were clearing out for john mccain to get the nomination. the first point the caller made

it is a point that you will hear from a lot of republicans, which is trying to stress that what mitt romney did with health care in massachusetts is very different from what president obama has done with health care nationally. the fact is the two programs structurally look very much alike. governor romney even four years ago when he was running said that massachusetts is good for massachusetts but that he never intended it as a national model. whether that is going to be se llable, i don't know. host: there's a story looking at mr. romney, specifically. where do we expect a goore's card te -- where do expect to gs far as pcik. guest: he will have to go with someone very conservative. there's a real question on whether he would choose someone like marco rubio, who would bring a lot of pizzazz, the

florida senator. or whether he chooses someone like rob portman is from ohio, which would be a safe tactical that would help bring ohio over in the fall. everything we have seen from the romney campaign so far show that they tend to be fairly cautious in pretty much everything that they do. often when a candidate picks a running mate who has a lot of pizazz it is because that and it really feels their campaign is in trouble. host: little rock, arkansas, fay on the democrats' line. caller: good morning. if the republicans go into august, the american people need to wake up, they will do away with your social security. it will be privatized. they said that. and the medicare. so the older people and the women better wake-up and see

what the republicans have done to this country and to the people, the workers out there. and if they do go in, the people will be sorry that they did not get that obamacare. it is good for us, the older people, and the younger people. but the republicans will continue to destroy this country as. we as. thank you. --the republicans will continue to destroy this country as we know it. host: how does the decision the supreme court will make in june play on the elections this year? guest: you hear people arguing about. -- about it. if the health care is struck down in whole or in part, this will be a setback for the obama administration and for his re- election at bid.

people in washington argue about the courts as being very politicized and divided between left and right. but i think most of the country still views the supreme court -- a lot of people in the country could not named two justices -- but they do see the supreme court as they are supposed to play this role. but if health care law gets struck down, i think the republicans will make the argument this is proof of this was some kind of overreached on the part of the democrats. host: this is atwater, maryland. susan, the republican line. caller: good morning. i wanted to make a comment in regard to the race. the news media is controlled by institutions that are controlled by the shadow governments. we don't have free media. and the other thing i wanted to say is i as a republican am horrified by the field of

politicians running. newt gingrich was talking in one of the debates about palestinians are all terrorists, that is basically what his comments were. i am disturbed by that because i think people like him should not be making statements like that. it is very ignorant, in my opinion. the other thing is the senator from hawaii many years ago talked about the true power is not our politicians, is a shadow government, the new world order. host: who do you plan on voting for tomorrow? caller: ron paul, because he is the only one in the republican field that i feel is telling the truth. he has talked about the federal reserve and foreign policy. he is the only one that is addressing the real problems. it is militarism, constant

aggression. i am a republican. what i want to do is change the policy. i want peace on this planet and i want some consideration given to other nations as well as the environment. i am horrified when i hear republicans talk about the environment and how ignorant they are about it. it is insulting. host: thanks. guest: the scholar speaks to the passion i was talking about a few minutes ago that we hear from ron paul supporters. this is -- the real question going forward is whether this is going to be a passion that is outside the republican party or of some of the party can figure out a way to bring those people into the fold and make them enthusiastic about the republican politics, as this caller is not?

host: this is newt gingrich from yesterday shows talking about the state of his campaign and party support for the nominee. [video clip] >> governor romney says that he has to earn 1144. we will not can see that to him. kansas last night said the second record for coming from behind. there were down nine points at half. if that is the second biggest margin to come back from in the final four series. i will choose kansas as a model. st. louis last year was. 10 was. that was a painful lesson as in the land to a braves fan. if governor romney gets to 1144 not counting disputed delegates, he will be the nominee. >> will you endorse him? >> absolutely. and if rick santorum becomes the nominee, i will help them. we are all committed to defeating barack obama. we think his re-election will be

a disaster for the country. host: you talk about how the romney campaign treats ron paul. how does the romney campaign 3 newt gingrich? guest: there were reports there's been a recent meeting between newt gingrich and mitt romney. we don't know a lot about what transpired in that meeting. but certainly we have seen many faces of newt gingrich in this campaign. i think we see him back to being kind of the elder statesman newt gingrich. in part i think it is because he wants to at this point he has pretty much given up on the idea he will be the nominee. he will want to retain influence in the party and remain a strong voice in the party. i think that is what we hear him kind of transition in to. host: binghamton, new york, kevin on the democrats' line. caller: thanks for taking my call. karen. a question for ron paul and bernie frank have backed initiative to throw out

the illegality of canada's under the 24th amendment. a medical dispensary in michigan is going to the supreme court where they may discuss that issue. in new york state, the republicans supported medical cannabis. andrew cuomo, the governor, refused to sign it, unlike his father. didlaguardia in the 1940's his own study which supported cannabis. my question is, when it means to billion dollars in medicinal sales per state and $1 billion in recreational sales, why is there not more talk even from the ron paul and candidates about this issue? guest: because i have heard probably more about this issue this year than i think i have heard since the 1960's. so there's more talk about. but at this point it is still very much -- the caller's view

is still out of the mainstream with the republican party in particular. so we did have ron paul during the debate and once again he affirmed his support for legalization. host: one more call, tennessee, independent line, dan. you are on the air. one more time for dan. good morning. we go past tuesday. where do we go from there? guest: the next big race will be pennsylvania later this month. if rick santorum cannot carry his own home state it will be very hard for an intimate the case of that he is a credible candidate going fort. host: what is the likelihood? guest: he was ahead in the polls and now it looks like a very tight race. there are number of southern primaries in may where he could -- where they very much like the

profile -- where they look very much like the profile in states where he has won. i really look forward to writing more about the voters and less about the candidates. host:kar you can see horror stories and postings at the washington post website. guest: thank you. host: later on we will talk about programs in the government that are redundant in the sense they exist in several agencies. up next, a discussion of social media usage and workplace privacy. first, an update from c-span radio. >> more on politics at 8:29 a.m. eastern. republican presidential candidate newt gingrich campaigns in frederick, maryland ahead of tomorrow's primary. he will be there today. he has conceded that mitt romney is the likely republican nominee. this is after laying off a third of his campaign staff last week.

former pennsylvania senator rick santorum is still continuing to campaign, hoping for the gop nomination. but mitt romney is favored to win to depose the primaries in maryland, the district of columbia, and wisconsin,. commenting on the race, former president bill clinton in remarks earlier on abc said that he believes president obama can win reelection if he can cansuade voters that he steady this economy. he believes mitt romney will have a difficult time reconciling positions he has taken during the primary season with what he will say against president obama in the fall. c-span's "road to the white house" coverage begins tomorrow night at 7:00 the minister and from the primaries. we will bring results and speeches from the candidates and simulcast a portion of election night coverage. those aren't the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> america will suffer catastrophic cyber attacks in

the next 12-18 months. they don't choose those words indiscriminately. they were already five months into that morning period. it tells me we have to move rapidly but not in a way that violates privacy or the basic tenets of privacy. and that encourages quick reaction, not regulatory environment. >> and i determine of the house subcommittee on communications and technology on cybersecurity and privacy at 8:00 eastern on the communicators on c-span 2. washington journal continues. orin kerr is a law professor at george washington university, focusing on computer usage. guest: thanks for having me. host: is it legal for a potential employer to ask for your facebook password?

guest: it's not clear. senator schumer has asked the justice department to decide whether it is legal. there are a couple of laws that may be in place. there have been a couple lawsuits involving similar scenarios and in one of them the employer was held liable for accessing the employee's myspace account. mostly it's on the theory that it is an unauthorized access to the employee's private account. that is akin to hacking into the employee's personal accounts. that's the idea. so there have been a couple lawsuits about this, but it seems to be pretty new practice that some employers are engaging in or prospective employers. a lot of this is arising in the context of application for employment where the employer is checking out what the person is about. want to know what information in order to investigate who the person is and what they have been approved. from what we can tell, what

employers are looking for is sensitive information that might show whether the person has good judgment. maybe they have been posting racist comments on the our facebook page or engaged in some sort of misconduct. the thought being that you can really get a true flavor of what somebody is about by looking at their facebook page. why not get their log information and actually take a look around and see what they posted and what their messages are? host: is there general consensus that at least suggests what the public feels about this practice? guest: a lot of people are outraged and i included in that group. it seems to be someone's password and user name for a social media, like facebook, asking for that is like asking for their house keys. it is like going into their most private spaces and running around. it's a pretty outrageous practices. i have not seen any polls, but my sense from blogs is a lot of people are pretty upset. host: how does this practice factor into the fourth

amendment? the right people to be secure in their persons and houses and effects against illegal search and seizure of. can the fourth amendment be applied? guest: it might be applied in the case of a government employee. reports have of employers using the practice, a lot of them appear to be police departments. so it is looking for potential police officers to hire and the police department says we are particularly concerned that we might hire somebody who it turns out is racist or sexist or has some other offensive set of ideas that are of concern to the employer. so they are the ones looking into facebook accounts. the government is regulated by the fourth amendment and are a couple cases that suggest online accounts like social media accounts are protected by the fourth amendment. so the theory would be asking for this is unreasonable and therefore unconstitutional. host: our guest is with us to talk about the use of social media and workplace privacy and

how the two intersected. if you want to ask him questions -- you can send us an email or a tweet. john is on the independent mind. go ahead. caller: good morning. i have been on the law and 30 minutes. i do have concerns about facebook. -- i have been on the line 30 minutes. everyone in my family has a facebook account. folks put out everything in the world on there. some issues have, on facebook in my daughter's account. someone the other day spoke of our biggest problem and it sounded pretty authentic.

the biggest problem in our budget is not the entitlements, but the military industrial complex. it was amazing to me that they say the budget does not really reflect the total cost of our military. i wish c-span will have some folks on there that would talk more about that. it is as much as $1 trillion in our budget. host: we will leave it there and try to stick to the topic. guest: facebook is free for users. the fact of so many people are on it is what makes the concern about handing over login information so sensitive. so many people are using these accounts that are using them as the digital equivalent of their home that handing over password information and saying go ahead and look around is just like letting someone search your home. it is extraordinarily private information that is being turned over. host: patterson, new jersey, democrats line, lena.

caller: banks or receiving my call. -- thanks. i am truly upset that employers are trying to invade our privacy by going into our facebook or any other account we may have on our computers. i totally agree that is invading our privacy. i believe that employers already have access to our -- they can do a criminal check to see if we have a criminal background as well as drugs. i hope that people will call up their congress representatives or whoever they have to call and make it very clear to them that we are totally opposed to this and that we are not in favor and they should stop using our founding fathers for everything. they should just basically

listen to us. there's constant abuse of our founding fathers for political reasons. care for it and i believe this will be a potential problem. i surely don't want my employer knowing my business as to what i do outside my work. host: we will leave it there. guest: that's correct. there's a line between that which is private and that which is in the workplace. it is important for those lines not to be crossed from the standpoint of employee privacy. and also, employers might think they have some interest in finding out disinformation, but the question is where doesn't end? some employees are using facebook from work. that is giving employers an opportunity to monitor what employees are doing without

logging into their accounts. simply monitoring the network if the communications are being sent or received over the employer's network. but employees have a way around that if they have a smartphones. they can log into the accounts using own phone and employers cannot monitor that as long as they're not handing over their password. host: once your employee changes social media usage? guest: >> if you log into facebook from the employer's computer, you live opened the door to employer monitoring it, because you are doing your private business over the employer's machine. you still have some rights, but the employer typically can obtain consent through an employee workplace policy. a lot of employees have seen this. it is an internet policy of that says we can assure the machines because they are our machines. and employee is

subjecting himself to that kind of monitoring. host: -- guest: if you have a smartphone or some other device that allows you to post without using the employer's network, then the employer will not have access to the communication. host: if someone is asked for their facebook code during interviews and their views, can the employer disqualify them from the job? guest: employment is employment at will, generally speaking. so the employer is not obligated to make the same decision regardless of giving up the privacy rights in that way. it is not a protected group or anything like that. facebook users are not a protected group under discrimination laws. if there are potential there is that people might use to sue if they are denied employment on that basis, the thinking being that it is essentially an illegal act of the employer wants to use the credential to lose and pulled because of not

consenting to a criminal act. so there are possible theories that could be used. at least under current law, it may be illegal for employers to do it, but it is not necessarily something that can immediately lead to lawsuits if the employer does it. host: suffolk county, new york, kathy on our republican line. caller: thanks for taking my call. two comments. first, i don't know what my password is. if a potential employer asked me to supply this, i have no clue what it is. it comes up on my machine. the reason i signed up with facebook is because i have two sons living out of the country and i wanted to see their pictures of whatever they wanted. to show wanted -- of whatever they wanted to show me. second, i have a teenage niece who posts really outrageous

stuff on our facebook page, a lot about sex and piercing eyes and that kind of thing. admonish her a number of times because we're now faced with the potential of having employers judging you because of what you put on these dumb pages. i would like your guest to comment on that. guest: certainly something we are seeing more and more. it is really the case in employment today, employers are doing searches for on-line information authored by potential employees. they want to know about twitter feeds, facebook public postings, blogs that somebody might have. certainly, people posting under their own name are saying here is who i am and what i'm about.

doing due are doing so diligence will be curious. some universities are looking to see what applicants have posted. we have entered a world in which you find out about somebody by googling them there that will be the case with employees just as it is with everybody else. it is time for people to realize that what they post on line in a public forum, which is anything that could be available to everybody else or at least a large group of people, that public and others will look at that and potentially make judgments about people based on it and will act based honest. -- will act based on it. the difference is with log on information is they could see things that were written

privately. you could write something on a blog or public pace that could be accessed by the world. but it is very different when you are writing a private message that no one else was intended to read and prevent someone else to come along and have access to that information. host: this on twitter -- guest: that's another approach. some facebook pages are publicly available. at least there's some amount of it that is public. an employee that wants to do that would want to hide the publicly available part of their page. but there are countermeasures' you can take. one would be saying you don't have an account and the other would be some individuals have suggested that maybe you have a fake account that's not really your account. whatever these strategies are used, the basic idea is i think

it is perfectly appropriate for a prospective employee if they are given this request just to say no. there may be some employeers making this a condition of employment. we have not seen reports of this happening often. at least my now it seems to be a little bit of a gray zone where employers are not demanding information as a condition of employment rather would like information because they think it would be useful. -- but rather would like information. senator schumer and others have said they will propose legislation that perhaps there should be a federal crime. the historic communications act and the computer fraud act. it may be illegal already and there may be legislation that the state level and also of the federal level making really clear this is an illegal

practice. host: the computer fraud and abuse act of 1986? guest: this is a general computer hacking crime statute that was passed in the 1980's and has been expanded over time. this story communications act is a very similar law. basically say you cannot access somebody's account without authorization or in excess of authorization. the difficult legal question is that if a person hands over their login information to prospective employer and says you can look around, is it authorized or authorized for the employer to look around? it is authorized in the sense the employee, the account holder, is it ok. but it is not authorized in terms of it is not what wants. it is not authorized in terms of what facebook wants. facebook has issued a statement

recently saying they don't want employers to do this. it is in violation of the facebook terms of service. so there's a lot of stern language from facebook saying please don't do this. exactly what the implications are if employers do it, it's not clear. host: springfield, virginia, democrat line, raul. caller: hi, i agree with a lot of what is being said at this point. i look at this issue as somebody trying to go through your mail that you would receive through the postal service. i believe it is completely illegal. whatever you receive or send out in this fashion should be private, with the exception that it is a public forum. but at the same time, when you are communicating with someone, what is in that communication

should be communicationyou and communication should be between you and whatever person you want to communicate with. no one should intercourse you into giving out that information outside the government. guest: i agree. it is helpful to see how the employers look at it. there prospective is they are simply asking for the information. if they do obtain the information, it is with the consent of the prospective employee. so their argument is we are only doing what employees are letting us to. the tricky issue is, is consent in that context real consent or is it really coerced consent? there was a lawsuit brought in new jersey. there was a decision in 2009 involving an employer who ask for an employee's login

information with myspace. there was a group of employees that had set up a chat room with myspace and there are basically talking about the employer. the manager said to give me your login information, i want to see what people are posted in the chat room. a jury concluded that the manager had violated the privacy rights of the employees by accessing their accounts without authorization. the employers said, wait a minute, this was with consent. then the jury essentially concluded that it was coerced consent, that it was not valid consent because the employer had so much power over the employees to force the employees to act. host: this person is asking -- guest: it would not be identity theft.

because usually it that would lead to fraud. it could be accessing and online account. they also allows civil penalties so they could force either lawsuit or criminal charges. host: this is fairfax, virginia, next, gregg on our independent line. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i am totally against this. the subject anchor's m -- angers me. the arguments i have heard does not apply like if they ask you to be their friend. when anything that you post publicly, anybody can see. if you? friend -- if you friend them, they can see everything that you post.

but giving your password is different. they could post something saying that is you, something slanderous. how can you prove you did not post that? most employers would say did not do that or would not do that. but how could you prevent them from doing that if they have your password? guest: yes, if they have your information, what would they do with it then? if you are the employee, as soon as you live and over the information, you can change your password all within a few days, you can change the password to limit the damage. but what stops the employer from using information in the meantime? it is a recipe for lots of misconduct and lots of problems, both because the employer could post something in the name of

the employee and people might not know where it's coming from? or because of the privacy invasion. an employer could find out information about somebody's age or marital status or something that lead potentially to some sort of employee rights and it might be in a protected class under employment laws. so that might trigger additional legal concerns. so there's all sorts of problems that come down once an employer knows that login information and it's a very good reason not to handed over in the first place. host: on twitter -- guest: it is a concern if a prospective employer thinks an employee might be looking -- if a prospective employee thinks employer might be looking through their account, it would affect their freedom of expression. it could be political concerns. it could be simply concerned

about the workplace people might not want to pose. i think there are reasons of good judgment to limit public postings about that information anyway and. it might be first amendment- protect. there's reason to say i might not set up a blog complaining about my employer because they might see it. people should expect employers could come across that information's. but there's a broader concern and handing over the information might chill the expression going forward. host: queens, new york, democrats lined. caller: hi, i have two concerns. if you are on an interview, an employer cannot ask what your race or marital status is or your religious views. how kendra circumvent the laws that protect employees such as these questions on an interview they circumvent

the laws? you may have a private setting so only your immediate friends and family can view your page. there's a reason you don't have the public viewing it. you have the right not to give them your password. they would have access to not only your political views, your religious views, your marital status, and opens up legal ramification that a potential candidate for a job is not hired because they fail to give their password to protect these already legal rights that we have on an interview and would open up lawsuits. guest: i think that's right. one of the concerns with employers using disinformation is that it could be a way of effectively circumventing the ban on employers asking certain

things, like the caller mentioned, merrill's status, for example. in my log in and see that this person is married or single. bacon gain so much pride in intimation that otherwise would be off-limits. for that reason, legislators that it looked into this issue have looked at it not only as a privacy issue but as an employment discrimination issues. senator schumer and senator blumenthal not only asked for the justice department for its views on the legality of the concept but contacted the equal employment opportunity commission saying you need to take a look of this as well. they of call for an investigation not only from a privacy criminal law standpoint but from an employment standpoint. host: pennsylvania, donald on our republican line. caller: i am looking at this and i see that there needs to be some kind of way to solidify our lawsnal privacy and via

or bills, because this is a very contentious area. not just your privacy but the privacy of those connected to you is that state here. we need to -- they say to change your password. but what if they cut and paste your information? they have it any way expect. bacon also view of inflation and your opinions total income unrelated to your job. so i think there needs to be something done to keep them from having that information. -- they can also view information and your opinions totally unrelated to your job. guest: the idea of online accounts is something that is new. 50 years ago we did not have anything like this. so now we are slowly getting used to this notion that you can have on-line information that is stored far away that you access with a user name and password in

which you can store lots of your most private information that used to be stored on the inside your home. when you think about where you would keep a diary, it might be in the dresser next to your bed in your bedroom. no one else can access that information. so we have entered into nea new on-line world in which privacy is just a password away. so i think we need to realize those passwords are extraordinarily sensitive. they are like kautsky's. -- like house keys. it is taking us time as a society to get used to that notion that passwords are not just access to a few pieces of information online. it is an extraordinarily sensitive trove of information online and needs to be protected. host: if someone allows employers to gain access to their facebook account, how many people within the company get access to that account?

guest: yes, giving a a password to an employer, who is the employer? that could be lots of employees at the company's who have access to it. you have to ask who will have access to information? the employer risks getting sued and they also have to deal with the question of what are we doing with this very sensitive information after we obtain it? it's all the more reason employers cannot be asking for information. host: a parallel could be drawn between an employer asking for facebook information and employer asking for a drug test. both are looking for information. guest: the difference would be a drug test is work-related. the idea would be that the drug test would be to make sure that somebody who is a pilot is not also a drug addict. somebody in a sensitive position, sensitive government position, for example, there are reasons the government has and

says we need to know this one important fact about somebody's physical status in order to know if we should give them this job. in contrast, facebook information and login confirmation is not just work- related. there may be some information that is work-related, but there may be a tremendous amount of intimation that is not work- related. somebody might have a year's worth of messages and contacts, their list of friends, all sorts of private information, photographs. some of that might have some marginal work related nature, but a tremendous amount of it does not. it is just private information. host: in virginia, ruthie is on the democrats' line, george washington university. caller: thanks for taking my call. my question is, they should not get the password for the fact what if i was talking about obama or talking about romney and they did not like it and

decided to fire me because of that? me because of that? guest: absolutely come at the example of political discrimination is a great example. a lot of people want to keep political views private. it might be work for republican employer and are a democrat. it is not the employer's problem as to what your political views are. handing over the information could certainly reveal it. it is a great example of how employers can gain access to information that does not have any legitimate workplace use. >>host: a twitter for you. guest: it might be used in political profiling. the nature of handling -- handing over the keys to the kingdom is it allowing individuals to do anything with

the information. it could include profiling, political discrimination. it could include almost anything. to go back to the question about drug testing, it is like if the employer did not want to test for marijuana or illegal substances, but they wanted to test for diseases or family history and wanted your full genetic code. why would the employer need that? i think the key is to make sure employers have a right to some information, but do not have our right to all information. it is critical for employees to maintain some privacy, even if they would like to know more information. is this an isolated incident right now? guest: great question. it is apparently becoming more widely used in the past few months. there have been more people

coming forward saying there were asked for the information. apparently it has only been in the past few months as this has become more of an issue. host: austin, texas. on the independent line. go ahead. caller: this question is directed towards mr. chair, i am wondering whose computer equipment are they using for their activity? are they using their own personal equipment or the employers equipment? guest: it is not clear from the press reports we have seen some of this seems to be employers asking for the information, and then it using their own computers to access the accounts of the prospective employees. they are not logging into the employee's physical devices, is using their online account. host: go ahead.

caller: the question, aren't they using the employers personal equipment? i just wanted to know which equipment are they using. host: tom keller off of twitter -- guest: certainly the tradition in the united states is employment at will. up to the employer to determine who they want to hire or fire. there are limits of the employment discrimination laws imposed on the deep ball roll of employment at will. there are two issues. one is whether it violates the employment law, and the second is whether it should violate criminal laws. criminal laws governing privacy,

access to private accounts. so the arguments that have been made in the new jersey case i mentioned earlier was that it was legal for the employer to get the information from the employee. what was the legal was the use of the information, the use of the information to log into the account. it may be illegal to ask for that, but it may be independently illegal for the employers to use the information and access the account. host: are there ways for employers to find out without having direct access to the account? guest: of course. google. entering their name and try to figure route what they have set online and it is certainly not be legal. i do not really know what your view is that one way

or another, but i wonder sometimes about george washington university, if they are on a liberal scale. i have been appointed democrats, but i go different ways as far as my politics. i lost my job because of politics. my question pretty much is basically i went to go send this information that someone else send me about a resting people that were protesting. i think you understand what i am talking about as far as what was going on at the time, that they could arrest normal citizens if they were protesting against the government. i lost my job about that. we do not talk about that%. i lost my job because there was

not a lot of work available. that is my comment. i am trying to figure out if you believe this is the right thing to do or wrong thing to do. i will kick off and let me hear your response. thank you. -- get off and let me hear your response. guest: my view is that it is wrong. there are very few justifications, and those could exist equally well to doing things that are clearly outrageous. for example, asking for an employee's private keys and say we want to look inside your house and going to your bathroom and see what is in your medicine chest and look around. i think it is a very clear invasion of privacy. my views are pretty clear on that. host: michigan is next.

republican line caller. caller: this is exactly the kind of thing some citizens were talking about after 9/11. the patriot act. the expansion of eminent domain. now even the media. now we are looking at delta and you have to prove your innocence. it is totally wrong. it -- now we're looking at guilty and you have to prove your innocence. the country is changing, and it is changing for the worse. caller: all we have to do is connect the dots after 9/11 when we got blindsided. we have slowly but surely over the past decade been losing our rights. this is like opening your mail. it is like one more thing. we are losing our rights. we have been trying to prove our

innocence. it is wrong. guest: i do not think it is connected to the patriot act or 9/11 or any of those issues, because it a lot of this is private employers asking for this information, so the government is not involved in a number of the request for information. in those places where the government is involved, it is in the context of hiring police officers. the police department saying hand over your information, and we want to make sure you are not being insulting to any particular group of people. basically we do not want to hire you and get in hot water because it turns up your racist, sexist or whatever the concern might be. i think it is a different set of concerns raised in the privacy setting of government surveillance. if this is really just about a

very sensitive information now being very easily accessed. it used to be very difficult to get this information. we are adjusting to the world were very private things are just a password away. a guest said this --hi certainly the fourth amendment does not apply to the private companies. on the other hand, the statutes do apply. there was a case i referenced earlier in new jersey involving a manager of a restaurant that access to the account of an employee to check out an employee group talking about the employer. the employee sued and recovered compensatory damages and punitive damages against the employer for accessing the private social media account. these statutory laws do apply to

private sector employers. host: are there unintended consequences once you get the information? host: sure. guest: sure. there are all sorts of unintended consequences. the holder may send private information when they think ithe person is on line. individuals do not know who they are talking to when they see someone called in. there are all sorts of space for misconduct, and unintended consequences of this practice. >> san diego. erica on the democrats' line. caller: technology is supposed to make life easier for

everyone. and it is making it more difficult. i do not know whether this technology in the future is going to. as long as i do not need a computer, i am not going to buy one. that is all i have to say. guest: a lot of people disagree with that. i notice my students on in class. anyone under the age of 30, a pretty good chance their logging into a facebook account. it is the remarkable chunk of inside users in the united states and around the world that are using this technology or other technology. a lot of people find this very useful. host: next calller from maryland. go ahead and caller:. . caller: if we can be demanded to

get our password for facebook, why can't we be demanded to get account information for banking or loans? what is the difference between giving someone our luggage before we board on the plane? it is not only viewing your page of logging in as you, it is looking at the history of your instant messaging and private messages. this is like an invading my person. it is not just invading or asking for access to information. guest: i agree. employers might say we need to do due diligence to find out who we are hiring.

there are so many other ways to doing the due diligence that the invasion of privacy is not warranted. host: john on the democrats' line. caller: i have the tv on your, and i realize i and critical for c-span, so i will not waste time. the point is, we are talking about an abstract categories, the employer and employe leak. the fact is we are real people. when an employer has someone interview me or someone else, i am 60 and paralyzed, so i do not have a dog in this fight. i am disabled. there are h are people who might take a personal interest -- hr people that might take a personal interest. host: we have to leave it there.

guest: this is a major concern. it goes to the point of what happens when the employee -- employer has the information? maybe they are attracted to the employee, no the employee from somewhere, and there are all sorts of room for misconduct involving employers and individuals. not just walking in that one time, but following up and starting to monitor people long- term. it is one of the many difficulties raised by this troubling practice. host: where do you see this going? guest: i think to congress. baby lawsuits that make sure this practice is illegal. my opposition is so strong to this that courts will stop it or congress will stop it. host: have privacy groups weighed in as well? guest: i have not seen any

lawsuits. there have been commenting clear opposition to this practice. talking about facebook and social media use when it comes to workplace issues. thank you for your time. host: in the last segment we will take a look of programs of the federal government. this time by recent report from the gao looking at redundant federal programs from what they do and what the cost. we will have that discussion right after this year. / . >> we as students to create a video telling us what was most important in the constitution to them and why. we're here to talk to the third prize winner. she is a 11th grader at walnut high school. why did you choose to focus on the 26 of them for your documentary? >> we wanted to really pick an amendment that directly related to youth.

we decided to go for the votes of them, especially this year since we will elect our presidents in november. we wanted something that would empower people who did not exercise the right to vote to get out to the polls this year and use the vote. >> you interviewed familiar. what did you learn from him? >> he is also a professor of political science. he had a lot to teach us about the amendment. >> we wanted to channel that true to go out and empower themselves to vote through education. >> what perspective to the college students add to your documentary? >> we interviewed andrew

rodriguez who is studying political science. he is studying the field. he was so well versed, and yet he also knew how to relate to the viewers basically by a youth speaking to use. that is why we wanted a more relatable perspective. we also used of other student who was studying at harvard university. she was also politically involved. she interacted with you on a daily basis and president of the future business leaders of america. she understood the powers they could have to vote, and the fact that they need to be educated in order to do this. they both really fit with the message. we wanted to convey the documentary, and they were really helpful themselves.

through speaking with him in the andrew, we actually learned a lot about how the elections have been in the past, and how into world youth are to the elections. the turnout is increasing each year. we really wanted to get the message across that one vote could make the difference ultimately. >> what is the most important understanding you could take away from this experience? >> when making anything, the power of collaborative effort is enormous. we have not worked together before. there were three team members. we have to work as one cohesive unit through creating a documentary people try to create a project. it was unlike anything we have done before. the positive attitude and dedication, anybody can create a documentary. >> thank you for taking time and

talking with us today. >> thank you. here is a brief portion of the documentary. >> i think educating the youth about political issues is extremely important. i really see how the intelligence, drive, passion that they all have. their willingness and initiative to make a difference in this world. i think by being educated about what is going on in the political scene, they confined to new ways to engage with the country and progressive to be better in future years. and i always say there are too great equalizers in light, education and the internet. i think combining those equalizers is the way to go in terms of educating today's body of youth voters. i think there needs to be more campaigns around using education in the form of information sharing and discussions and using internet. people have the capacity to go

online to act as resources, and that will be the best way to impact the most people and educate the largest number. >> you can see the entire video and all the winning documentary's at studentcam.org. host: every monday at this time it is the your money segment where we look a programs within the federal government to talk about not only what they cost, but what they do. ms. dalton joining us from the gao office. the covers as the 2012 annual report and opportunities to reduce duplication, overlap, and fabrication with than the government. what does that mean? guest: it means with time the government has evolved with many programs, and we have looked at parts of the government to see

where we have programs addressing the same objectives, goals, and seeing whether or not we really need all of the programs. >> so there could be one program in one department of the government, and the same program and others? guest: right. we will see three, five, 10 and agencies providing some overlap. there are differences. duplication is hard to identify. that means everything is identical. you are serving the same people. oftentimes you will find programs that may be delivering the same service, but to different people. or with fragmentation, and individual might be looking for housing assistance, and in terms

of trying to get their entire services, but they have to go to three agencies. host: how did this report come about? is required to report opportunities of duplication in the federal government. it was part of that legislation with the federal debt was raised a year and a half ago. in raising the debt limit, congress was looking for ways to save money to positively affect the financial situation. they have charged gao was looking into of the it hired photographer before potential duplication and areas of cost saving. we issue the first report a year ago. this is the second report that we issued at the end of february, along with a status report on the issues we identified last year and what had happened to them.

are we this year evea year later with a reduction of those programs? guest: two-thirds were related to duplication and overlap and fragmentation. we also identified another 30 or so that were potential areas of cost savings or revenue enhancement. what we found is only four of them had been fully addressed. the bulk of them had had a partial action on them. and there were 17 that have not had any action on them. guest: is there an estimate of what it costs to keep similar types of programs running? guest: we have not kept the ball estimate. y how you fully identifie could structure it to be more

efficient. in host: our guest is with us to talk about the report, the findings. here is how you can talk to her -- you can e-mail us. if you want to ask a question through twitter, -- are there departments that stick out more than the rest? guest: i did not think there is. we deliberately looked across the entire government. we found areas and defense areas and civilian areas. i cannot think of one department where there was not at least one issue. host: in the area of defense, there were a couple of reports. one in the area of electronic

warfare. there were multiple efforts when it comes to airborne attack programs. guest: right. that looked at communication systems. what has happened is the requirement for the systems have been stricken. the air force wants a system, the navy wants bus system. they have driven the requirement for individual systems, as opposed to looking at it from a common structure and adapting to unique requirements. as a result, we're spending billions of dollars developing multiple systems, and we may only need one common platform with adaptations. host: were the navy and air force going to talk to each other about what they are doing? guest: they do talk to each other and there is some coordination, but there is a lot more that can be done. what needs to be done is

commonality first, as opposed to this need in developing the system. guest: we are talking drones. the communication systems. same situation. there were needs identified in the battlefields. systems were developed, but the platforms are very similar. looking at commonalities among the system developed a common system, then developed the unique requirements. host: the third category is listed as stabilization efforts. what do we mean by that? guest: the callers may be familiar with the situation in iraq and afghanistan were we are providing assistance to develop the structures there.

normally that would go through the state department and usaid. because of the battlefield situation, there was money given to the defense department to help in those efforts. we have multiple agencies developing multiple projects there and not having information as to who is doing what. it has gone better, but now that we're moving, we need to have better sharing of information, and we also need to start thinking about transition as we pull out of the countries, how do we move towards a normal process the government would follow through the state department? >> it will go on as we remove through the remainder of the time. a couple of calls. democrat line. go ahead. caller: what are they going to do with the money that they supposedly are going to save

from the accountability and getting rid of the duplicates redundancy programs they have? you have a lot of people talking about saving money here and there, but what are they going to do with the money. are you going to take the money from that and put it toward something else that will be redundant somewhere else. what good is it really doing? how did you keep that money that you're gaining from our program or situation that is redundant from going somewhere else that will be redundant? guest: i think the biggest control over not creating more redundancy is the correct financial situation where debts are increase iing. their for where we can save

money in one area can be used basically afford deficit reduction. to meet those needs are already there in the budget. host: what happens to the people and structure? guest: one of the things that happens when you look of the programs is there a way to save at the history of cost? is there a way to deliver service in a less costly way? host: ohio. rick on the independent line. caller: i am 54-years-old. 1970 there were 100 lobbyists in washington. the lobbying bill was $300 million. there are 50,000 lobbyists in washington right now. they might be throwing $200 billion around. when i was growing up, taxes or 90 percent for corporations.

we have the securities exchange commission all in place to protect us. she is talking about military. 40 years ago we put 1.5 trillion dollars every year into infrastructure. today we're probably close to that going into the 800 military bases all around the world. we're talking about drones. there are 100,000 military contractors in the united states. the point is how can you be talking about a general accountability office when we have six trillion dollars sitting overseas? ibm is sitting on 50 billion. host: a couple of elements to

his point. contractors. how much of it played into this discussion? guest: certainly some areas are contributed to contractors, and how can we use them better? one of the areas we look that was in the energy department where much of the work the energy department does, particularly with the nuclear weapons complex, as well as it was our national labs are contracted out, and we found support services, we have better contractors. financial management, the fiscal plan in managing those. we have zero wide variety of ways we deliver those services.

is there a way to do that on a more centralized basis that will be less costly, more efficient? >> you mentioned the energy department. in they have been known for the grant problems they do. is the granting problem overall? are there several agencies handing out money grant-wise to do several things? guest: yes, we do. an example from last year's report where we looked at water infrastructure on the southwest corridor. there were numerous agencies that were providing grants. there were infrastructure's put in place that could not be used. there needs to be a better way to do that. and we're now looking more broadly at how we are using the

grant. caller: good morning. thank you for everything you do of the government accountability office. in contrast to the other agencies, you do some important work. one point, to questions. i think of this report highlights why washington, d.c., and the federal government are such a bad place for these programs to exist, because you are spending someone else's money and the taxpayer is nameless and faceless and all of this. there is a lose track of accountability because of the bureaucracy involved. it really ends up being a giant problem that no one is accountable for, because there is never referendum on the

policies when it comes to the election. what role does the politics play in this government's? and second of all, are there any efforts going on right now to localize these issues in some of these bigger departments to move them to the state level, and you do investigating on the state level to see duplicate views between federal and state programs? guest: on your last question, we have not specifically looked at that issue. we pretty much have our hands full with the federal government, but certainly it merits looking at what kinds of services are being delivered, and looking at it from the individual that is receiving those services. in terms of how we would move forward on this, these art difficult issues.

they evolve over time. i think the financial restraints but government is under, it is worth taking a hard look at these programs. one of the things we found really important that we found repeatedly as we look at these various programs is the need for good information on what is working and is not working. in many cases what we're finding is they did not performance information, and that makes it difficult to make decisions. host: you said this cuts across all agencies. how many people? guest: it does. there are a lot of people involved in this. we are the investigative arm of congress, so we look at all areas.

in providing the analysis, all of our teams involved, we have about 3000 people. they were not all working on this report, but we drew up from their expertise to bring all of this together. host: does the report is a how to consolidate and how much would be saved? guest: we do not summarize it, because there are a lot of policy decisions that need to be made. there are decisions that need to be made in terms of what we want to achieve and what is the best way to achieve it, and how we would want to deliver those services. host: another program you took a look at was health. i will give you the category. research funding. guest: primarily research funding is delivered through the

national institutes of health, which is what you would expect. we also deliver research funding through the veterans administration and department of defense. the main issue there is no wings what we are giving grants for. their systems do not talk to each other, so that if people are deciding whether or not an agency will give a grant, they do not know whether dod has has givenarantrant or doj a grant. what we do not have information on is the application process. host: when it comes to veteran'' health issues? guest: buttons held, one thing i would point out is coordination -- vetran's health, one thing i

would point out is coordination has improved. we did find instances where there is overlap and duplication. we were told where there was one instance where one wounded warrior had five different case managers. there are other instances where they are giving conflicting advice or more than one is working on the same issue. host: 4 wayne, indiana. guest: does it make sense or multiple issues -- multiple people working on the same issue? the root of this't problem the congress? don't they passed bills come and if it is duplicated, it passes any way? guest: i think there is a lot -- these programs were created with good intentions.

it was easier to create a program than to look to see if there was another weather service could be delivered. there is probably plenty of blame to be shared here. i think the issue is now we have the situation, how do we fix it? caller: there was a report on the interests of the 16 trillion is going to equal what we have to pay annually on the other case in social security. is that true? the other thing is, how can we find out exactly how much money comes in from the natural resources like the mines, oil,

agriculture and all of that? i think we do not have enough income on any of our natural resources that are being wasted. in terms of the money and what we're spending it on, i do not have the exact numbers. we do projections looking out to the future, and discretionary spending will become a much smaller percentage of federal expenses. the bulk of federal spending is on services of debt, as well as health care costs. host: when you interview folks to find out information, do they say this is a case where one person is not talking to the other? guest: i think that is definitely one of the problems. it is important to have

leadership so that the accord and later approach can occur. or at least have up partnership so that agencies are taking the lead in saying we're going to make this work. host: mark reed on the republican line. good morning. -- marguerite. ohio. auburn deal, florida. joe on the democrats' line. caller: i am watching the program, and i am just wondering about the fraud in medicare and medicaid and health insurance programs that we have and that we have to buy. if there would be any way they could start a lottery to fund things like this, but not to have it in a general fund, but just for health insurance and the va and all of the insurance

programs, medicare and medicaid. guest: i do not know about a lottery, but i would say is in terms of fraud -- i would rather call it improper payments. some of it would be fraud, but a lot of it is inaccurate payments, and correct payments. in medicare and medicaid, that is one of the largest sources of improper payments in federal government. there is a number of systems the government is trying to put in. one area we found in potential cost savings is those systems that would detect improper payments earlier as opposed to later have been very slow to implement. moving forward on those aggressively, i think, can start making a dent in the improper payments. host: are there areas that can

turn it around when it comes to redundant payments? guest: i cannot point to one in particular. host: social services, to areas of high lights. one dealt with the realm of housing assistance and social security benefits. what does that mean? guest: in this case i believe we were talking about overlapping patient -- payments between social security compensation and overlapping payments. they do not have good information on when someone is also receiving workers -- workmen's compensation. there is a series of rules as to when you are entitled to social security. better information in that case would improve and insure the accuracy of those payments.

in terms of housing assistance e, we found numerous programs. we did find areas where we were delivering the identical service, but potentially different populations. i think that is a good example of where programs have devolved over time. in one instance we found loan programs being given through the federal housing administration, as well as rural housing services. it was originally targeted towards rural communities. federal housing loan programs are more broadly based. those programs were instituted many years ago. now as the country has developed, their rural and urban are often overlapping.

we would find areas that have been identified as rural for getting services through the federal housing administration. the question is do we really need both of those programs? can we serve those same people through a single program? host: would that be the area of urban development? guest: probably. it would indicate it is housing and urban development. host: through other agencies these programs were similar? guest: exactly. as the country has evolved of the population shift occurred, with the way we provide loans and loan servicing and this electronic age, you often do not need to see a person to see things handle the electronically. hows a good iexample of

things have evolves. you may no longer made the individual lead come up but could be handled through an individual program. host: we have a link to this on the c-span website. guest: it is over 300 pages. it can be searched fairly easy liily. host: we have linked this fo for you. california. pauline on the independent line. caller: the reason i am calling is i have already looked up the gao report. on page 294, according to the report, the fraud or improper payments for medicare or medicaid was 65 billion in fiscal year 2011. i have found out about the report of the same time my representative duncan hunter was

having a town hall meeting. his staff was looking at the report. if we're going to cut the budget deficit come as 65 million is a big number. i think this is what we should be going after. host: was it this particular topic that through you to read it, or were there other interests? to go other interests. i do a lot of government research on my own because i am a citizen and want to know what is going on. host: give us your thoughts and impressions as far as the scope of these types of programs. fifth:i would sa caller: i would say 200 billion. i think they should go on the big stuff. they should call representative so we can get the waste, fraud, and abuse out of the government before we start cutting senior

citizen social security checks. host: think you for your time. any response to that? -- thank you. guest: i am very happy to hear the report has been read and used. the larger dollar amounts are areas to be focused on. i would say where there is smaller stuff, it may be easier to fix. so we should not neglect that, because the small things can add up. guest: we report every year. we will be reporting on what has happened this year. there has been a number of congressional hearings on the report. what we've seen is the of fenestration has proposed a number of actions to eliminate programs. -- what we're seeing is the administration has proposed a

number of actions to eliminate programs. seeing some movement for consolidation of programs. there is a lot more that needs to be done. the situation has evolved over time. there is not going to be an easy fix. there is a lot of work that needs to be done to sort out the best way to structure the services. >> this is the republican line. russell from maryland. good morning. calller, go ahead. let's try fresno, california. caller: hello. i was listening to your conversation of the contracts and how what the federal government is using money where you pull money from one agency

to another. a lot of times that happens because one agency does not know what the other one is doing. if you work with the employees and the managers and have one of those big, powerful meetings where you know the programs are coming from the floor new contract things out to another agency or for help or assistance, they need to work together so that they all can be on the same page and everything. also, the lady mentioned about the medicare and medicaid where they have overlapped. you have all of this extra money where they have overpaid. you need to do what they call of that charge. take their funds back where they were overlapping.

those funds would go back to the group that the money should have came from. that way congress or you guys when you go to do the budget to allow them to have some much money, then they will not get the same amount because of the extra expense they should have been paying out to begin with. host: thank you. guest: those are some good ideas. one thing i would say in terms of coordination, i do see more information being shared. i think that is one of the things that this report has helped with. they have highlighted areas where information needs to be shared, and that is happening more. there is also trends in terms of not just meeting and people coordinating, but sharing of information. this report has had a positive affect in people being aware in

that there is an need to share information earlier as opposed to later. >host: is there a sense for these departments are put on notice? guest: i do. one of the things that has happened as part of the budget preparation this year from the obama administration they needed to consider last year's record and the issues we identified as they were building their budgets. i think it is having an effect in the building of budgets. we will see what happens when congress considers the budget. host: is that the expectation if you put the report out next year? guest: it is hard to tell. the mandate that requires us to look at the entire government. we were not able to do that in one year.

we're trying to do this on a three-year cycle. the first year relied on a lot prior work. this year we identified 051 issues. we are now working it through the rest of the government, the government we have not addressed yet, assessing those areas for potential significant duplications. it may be less next year. and host: cape cod, massachusetts. paul on the democrat line. caller: good morning. last year the senator from oklahoma issued a report. he had a press conference when he issued the report. during that press reports he said based on government information, at the supplemental

security income and social security disability. he made the claim that 40 percent of the people who work on these systems are cheating -- cheating and gaming the system. based on his members, he claimed one out of every 19 americans, men, woman, and child, are essentially disabled. if you can believe based on how many people are collecting on these systems. what is the government doing about stopping obvious abuse of these systems? i would just like to know what is being done about it? guest: i do not know about the specific numbers but the senator quoted. i do know from the work we have done that it is important to have good information as you make those decisions on whether or not to grant a person the

disability benefits or the supplemental benefits. that means bringing data together to know whether or not they are entitled to the benefits. host: weary from georgia. democrats line. good morning. rry from georgia. caller: the social security trust fund has 2.6 billion on the balance sheet. that seems to be quite a thorn in the sack for some politicians of the whole so security program. i was wondering if the social security fund could be cashed in and sold the bonds for the government. i was wondering if they could

lift -- loan that money to somebody else. it seems like that would take quite a bit of politics out of the program. issue with only loaning the money is the money is intended to pay benefits into the future. the projections are how long that money can be used to pay benefits -- we basically need the money for the social security benefits that we are committed to paying out in the future. host: is there a standard applied to the programs to measure efficiency? does somebody say, is this program affected? guest: we should be looking to see if there is a effectiveness or not. there is a lot that is required, which congress and just amended

in the past year to modernize the act. so each agency is required to identify it measures to determine effectiveness. the amendment to the act did a couple of things that i think will help in this situation. one, it is required office of management and budget inventory is a federal program, which requires them to define what a program is. we did not have a definition of programs. host: there is no set definition? guest: there is no set definition. it is mind-boggling. one of the things that acted is defined the program to have an inventory available to the public. it needs to be put on a web site so the public can see what the programs are and how we define them. the act also required each

administration to identify priority goals, which would cut across agencies, so there is greater emphasis on coordination in information about how the programs and agencies work together. i think that will help in terms of identifying what is affected and what is a not and what is efficient and what is not. when the numbers that i remember from last year's report, we were looking at domestic food assistance. we identified 18 programs. only seven of them had any measures of the effectiveness. the other a 11 we did not know. they may be very effective programs, but we did not know if there were or not. host: we are out of time. if you want to look at this report, it is linked to our c- span web site. that is it for "washington

journal." primary coverage starting at 7:00 tomorrow evening. we will see you then. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> here is a look at what's coming up today on c-span. a couple of a banned from this past weekend's event from the clinton global initiative. chelsea clinton on onto the ownership and public service, followed by public closing remarks from billnt