christian science monitor joins us to discuss his cover story of a government role in protecting and tracking tornadoes. plus, calls, e-mails, and tweets. >host: the morning and welcome to "washington journal, it's wednesday, may 16, 2012. john boehner is demanding spending cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling. democrats say that could hurt the nation's credit and economy. congressional leaders would meet with president obama at the white house today. and if republican voters in nebraska had decided ben fischer will face democrat john kerry in the fall. states makes decisions about their budget and some are facing

shortfalls, prompting questions of where the money should come from to plug the hole. if yesterday's two congressional republicans say not from the federal government. what do you think? call to weigh in on whether or not states should receive bailout money. you can also find us online. our question for you this morning is whether or not states should receive bailout money. california has been wrestling with its budget. we will speak with a reporter from the l.a. times about that in a moment. first, let's look at this piece in the wall street journal yesterday by representative kevin brady and senator jim demint, both republicans.

what do you think about this story?

there's another store in the news today looking at how states are trying to make up for some of their gaps. it says needy states are using housing a cash. jonathan is a democrat in houston, texas. good morning. caller: how are you? are you talking about the debt ceiling? host: we are talking about whether states should get the bailout money from the federal government to pay for things like teachers' wages?

should they help pay for firefighters in local communities or do other things that states the say they might need help with? caller: i think so, because this is the united states. you have people who paid into these programs, people that paid their taxes so when they get in trouble that the people have a safety net. i think it is just the southern part of the united states that is really having problems with the president, with helping people. you also have these people who regarding subsidized housing, these republicans that owns the apartment complexes, they are getting money from the government and then they are complaining about it, but they have section 8 housing that they own.

they are complaining about government spending while getting. money from getting. thank you. host: now bruce is on the line, a republican from chicago. good morning. caller: good morning. with the state bailouts, is another case of government rewarding irresponsible behavior. states going into debt and punishing people who act responsibly, by taking their money. it's not right. it happens throughout the government. host: let's look at california in particular. we have on the phone with us "los angeles times" reporter chris megerian. . caller:hi. host: you have been covering the budget process in california. you wrote a story about the governor brown's plan that includes things like switching

state offices to -- what else is he planning to do? caller: those are some of the big ones right there. we are talking about a 5% cut in employee payrolls. some of the other big cuts are to the health care programs to support. reducing reimbursement rates for hospitals and nursing homes. also, cutting funding for the court system in california. so here is really spreading the pain around. host: you have a story today that says the governor is stymied by the same budget dysfunction that has plagued his predecessors in office including republican arnold schwarzenegger. darrick brown is a democrat of course. what was unexpected about the budgeting process? caller: people were very hopeful this year. of the deposition would be only around $9 billion. they thought the economy was rebounding fast enough and tax

revenues would come in and a higher rate. what surprises some people with the deficit was much larger, $16 billion. for people who were talking about turning the page on california's budget problems, this was an awakening. host: let's take a look at some of the cuts we are talking about. $0.3 billion in spending cuts. reducing the state's work week. -- $8.3 billion in spending. spending and what else might be on the chopping block for kids and the elderly? caller: medicare is one of the biggest items where there will be a cut its governor brown oppose the plan goes forward. -- medi-cal. the state has had problems with the federal government and the federal government rejected some cal. to accoumedi- the state is trying to find

other ways to save money, by cutting different programs or retooling their proposals from before. up evene to wrap more savings. host: our guest wrote in the peace -- tell us about how the governor finds himself caught between republicans and democrats in the state of california. caller: sacramento, like washington, there is some partisanship. republicans will not support tax increases. that means it because he needs a two thirds vote in the legislature to raise taxes, you cannot balance. the balance democrats are resisting cuts to social

programs. governor brown is stuck between those two sides. they are fairly it on willing to bend. host: where do we go from here, chris. likely is what the governor is proposing go through? caller: somebody has proposed has got a pretty good reception. first, no part of the proposal has gotten a great reception. he realizes it is a difficult proposal. nobody really wants to see this level of cuts go for at. at the same time there have been some good responses. some worker unions have said they are open to a reduction in compensation, four-day workweek. some democrats have said they are open to some cuts.

looks like there will be some pretty strong battles over welfare and some of the other social services that the democrats don't want to cut any more. host: about where governor brown is looking to fill the gaps. there was a story in the new york times talking about taking money that was intended to help with the housing crisis and the mortgage problem. busy reaching out to the federal government for help at all? caller: the main place he wants to get help from the government is to approve cuts to federal health-care programs that california also supports. but he is also reaching for every pot of money that he can find. there were some local agencies that were resolved this year. that's $1.4 billion that the governor wants to use to pat the deficit. there are trial court on reserve. he wants to use that money. he is counting on $1.5 billion

from the facebook ipo. wherever he can find money, he will use that to try. to pat try. to try to patch the deficit. host: thanks for joining us, chris. caller: no problem. host: let's hear what john has to say in long island, an independent scholar. caller: good morning. i definitely believe states should receive bailout money from the government, because the government of the united states allows corporations to send thousands of their companies to foreign c countries. these corporations outsource american labor so that the american worker lsot thousands -- lost thousands if not millions of jobs over the last

decade or so. this was permitted by the u.s. government. you could almost say the u.s. government was in collusion with capitalism and allowed millions of jobs to be outsourced. consequently, the states have lost millions of dollars in revenue from american workers who should have had jobs, but these jobs were gone. consequently, the federal government is greatly responsible for the loss of these jobs. now that the states have these terrible deficits, the federal government should be bailing out the states in consideration of the responsibility that the federal government had in helping these millions of people lose their jobs to outsourcing. consequently, nobody seems to pay attention to the fact that millions and billions of dollars have been lost to the states

because we have lost millions of jobs. these millions of jobs are the result of outsourcing. the federal government is partly responsible to have allowed this to happen. host: let's hear from mike, and independent caller in west lake ohio. good morning. caller: good morning. i don't believe the states should get a bailout. i believe it is the responsibility of the people voting them in office. specifically, california, those people voted him in office and maybe they will get an education and the next time they vote they will be a little smarter. host: let's look more at this column that appeared in yesterday's wall street journal. it says --

dallas, tx -- lost mary. let's go to new york. the caller is francine on our independent line. caller: i don't think the federal government should bail out the state's.

the federal government is grandma and grandpa. the states have to learn if they want their states' rights, they will have to learn to pay for them. host: columbus, ohio, john, republican caller. good morning. caller: good morning. my comment is i don't believe the federal government should bail out the states. these municipalities and different places that are overpaying their city managers and godly amounts of money, especially in california and around a lot of places. there have been so many scandals. these tiny towns paying millions of dollars to their city manager. if they would just cut back on that and get that in mind and

prosecute the people that are cheating, then i think that they would not need a bailout. host: all right. let's look at a comment on twitter -- you can join that conversation by writing to us. we are on facebook, also. s --e riwrite atlanta, georgia, evelyn, democrat line. caller: good morning. i love your show.

the federal government has a lot to do with the states. the other states of north, the managers have gone and -- the governors have gone and the managers have taken over. they sold a stadium for a half million dollars. the guy that was the governor put in charge is in cahoots to make a casino out of the stadium. the federal government has to ates stay in line. if they don't, i don't care how you vote, the people in those

states voted for their city councilman and there are no good anymore. he took over completely. i don't know why people are not screaming to the top of their lungs about this. i just see our country going one-sided. i am a democrat, but i am for people that need the help, that need jobs. if you build one bridge, you put it over 100 people to work. host: let's look at facebook again. we have a poll that you can weigh in on. we ask whether or not states should receive bailout money. more people have said no. you can join that dialogue as

well. that is c-span on facebook. governor brown talked about his proposed budget cuts earlier this week. let's listen. [video clip] california has been living beyond its means. the u.s. government has been living beyond its means. a lot of corporations have. a lot of people have spent more than they take in. there has to be a balance and a day of reckoning. this is the day of reckoning. we have to take the medicine. that's my recommendation. host: that was governor brown of california. let's go to florida, jean is an independent caller in brookeville. caller: i love the show. i need to address global economics. global economics is not talk about often enough. it is a self-serving for the businesses. if i'm a business owner and i find cheaper labor, i would have

to constantly chase that cheaper labor because my other competition would then do a better job than i would in the marketplace. this will affect global economic conditions. global disasters will affect those businesses and constantly we will have an imbalance. the u.s. and other countries are suffering because of global economics. each country is responsible for itself. our wonderful businesses have been allowed to go. i believe the u.s. should give a business deadline for them to re-enter the u.s. and we should severely. -- we should severely limit our imports. the u.s. is very capable. our workers are educated and capable to do the job and take care of the united states. we as people need to go out global economics and we need to what the amount of mechanization that goes in this country that takes away jobs that people need

and that are capable of doing, we have machines doing. host: we have a couple of stories on the international scene, the interconnectedness of the u.s. to the outside world. here's the new york times -- there's a picture of the german chancellor angela merkel greeting to francois hollande of france. that was in berlin yesterday. the story says the new beginning started tuesday with an apology and a sense of harmony that seemed somehow more sincere than the adversity that came before. the plane that the president of france was on was struck by lightning after takeoff. he had to go back to paris and get on another plane, but he did make it and they did meet. the international news continues --

the g-8 gathering is about to get under way in a short while. the french president will visit president obama in advance of that. and this is from the washington post -- he was just sworn into office a yesterday. in greece, the president is expected to name a caretaker government. the greek president warns about the possibility of -- and from the times in the u.k. --

that has riled england and has had effects in the u.s. because of the news of the world corp.'s great reach. the couple says it is a witch hunt and declined to defend themselves. one last or about the g-8 summit and nato gathering that will be happening in the united states. chicago is pressing for nato, reports the wall street journal -- we will read some more news in a little bit, but first let's get

back to our question on whether or not states should receive federal bailout money as they grapple with their budgets. now to a republican in new jersey. go right ahead. >> i implored and what terry brown said in his proposal. it's not going to work because he is losing his tax base. people are moving out of there. u-haul as a premium on their trucks because they had to pay people to drive the ttrucks that. this is a good lesson for the democrats out there. people are leaving because they can no longer afford to live there. you can only tax people so much. look at the guy from facebook. he is leaving the country. do you blame him? people need to start living within their means and so does the government appeared building bridges would create jobs, but where's the money coming from? it comes from taxpayers. we have to stop pulling money

out of people's pockets. it's that simple. host: now this e-mail from new jersey -- and on twitter -- new york city, mark is on our democrats' line. caller: good morning. the federal government should bail out the states because it would only stimulate the economy. host: tell us more. did we lose you? caller: i'm still here. if it is directed in the right way and the money is directed properly, people will tend to spend money. host: what would you like to see the stimulus used for, road

projects or paying a teacher salaries? caller: paying teachers' salaries is a good beginning. host: kevin, independent caller, florida joining us. caller: how are you? give me a little latitude. i am nonpartisan. i take issue with both sides. do i feel the federal government should be bailing out the state's? that's a no-brainer. we are the united states of america. we used to refer to as these united states, 60 years ago. that is what our taxes are for. the gentleman who called from new jersey, when you look on the internet and hear the rhetoric why not go on the internet van dusen fact checking -- go on the internet and do some fact

checking. i have a friend who works for you haul and that information was not true. when the trucks are shipped back, they ship them back in. what we need to do is have checks and balances. wisconsin, for example. let's take a look at florida. we have a governor who wanted money for a bullet train and all of a sudden there's a private company being allowed to build a bullet train on the same property that was going to be used that the government was going to give us, tax dollars. host: you say you are an independent. but let's look at the independent movement in america and where that's going. the washington post has a story

--

dana ways in on the washington post editorial piece -- let's go to pueblo, colorado, carole, a republican callers waiting in on whether states should receive bailout money. caller: i think most states have contempt for the federal government until they need something. the federal government should provide accounting expertise and advice only and help look for corruption and waste.

a lot of states don't have a state tax. in texas, that's a good example of that. state and local governments tend to be less transparent. there's more crony capitalism. cannot be trusted with federal money. often the taxes are not paid on public land. that seems to be fine with many states. it would go along way in helping them with their budget problems. host: here's an e-mail from richard in minneapolis -- woodstock, new york, michael, democrat line. go ahead. caller: first time i ever got through in 10 years. host: thanks for calling. caller: well, after 10 years.

i am a man in his 60s that graduated college in 1975. i can even tell you a particular article that was in the futur ist magazine. i cannot think of the guy's name. but let me get to the point, number one, all these people calling about taxes, you really think you are going to get any money back out of the federal government like $28 or $180? i find that amusing, all these people. what i find even more amusing, in that article there was about the protestant work ethic and automation was taking 41,000 jobs per week. so this should be no surprise. this was 1971. the magazine, in the education

section, about how they tried to make everyone feel guilty about having extra time. just about all the articles and all the talking heads, what if this saved energy from stopping to go to and from jobs, 15% work-force could provide all needed goods and services. that means we could deal with 80% unemployment, but -- the guy was a professor and the broken- down just before he predicted that german reunification and what are regarded do with the extra money and we could have had buses going around teaching people instead of the same cnn one story over and over. a should have a program from a-

z. you should take people to austria, teach, educate. people would have an opinion on the great plays and movies and theater it. what is all of this about things that are not really needed? the whole attitude is wrong. obama is not the guy. we need a new president who is going to come in with leaping change. host: thanks for calling. thanks for your persistence. we are talking about whether or not states should receive money. twitter --- you can weigh in on facebook by looking for c-span. we have that poll and you can judge for yourself what you think about states getting federal aid or bailout money. here's something from the

national council of state legislatures of looking at the 2013 budget gap. clanew york, john, independent caller. caller: >> the federal government has to fund all the unfunded mandates that it has pushed onto the states before you can call it a bailout.

the federal government is a responsible for the safety and well-being of the states. they have caused a lot of problems by pushing these unfunded mandates and they have to pay for them. if the states are in trouble after that, make sure they have a state income tax. as far as these big businesses outsourcing jobs overseas, they have caused a lot of the problems by taking away the jobs that used to be done by americans, where they were paying taxes. now that they have gotten their jobs outsourced and free trade, now they want to be built to take that money home that is stuck in the overseas banks without being taxed. big business has caused this with their agreed. -- greeed. -- greeed. host: jim writes --

let's listen to presidential candidate mitt romney, former governor of massachusetts, speaking yesterday talking about moving programs to states or to the private sector where they can be run more efficiently. >> there are 94 federal programs in 11 agencies that encourage green building. a report found the results of those initiatives and investments are unknown. we see this and bureaucracy and overhead and are anti-property programs. the of the government spent more than $600 billion last year on more than 100 different anti- party programs. all of them designed to help those who cannot help themselves. my approach to federal programs and process it is entirely different. moved programs to states or to

the private sector where they can be run more efficiently and where we can do a better job helping the people who need our help. host: that was mitt romney speaking yesterday. president bush has given romney his endorsement. let's look at the washington post -- in the new york times it says --

the "washington times has this front cover story -- the times also has the story that says the former presidents are factoring in to romney pose a campaign. he has been invoking the name of

president clinton a lot. it says -- so he has been using president clinton's name. and another story says ron paul is aiming to shape the party platform and rules now that is not actively campaigning. but he is not conceding. he will not totally given up. he is continuing to try to win supporters. here are some stories in politics. let's go to nashville, tennessee. david, republican caller weighing in on state bailouts. caller: good morning. i was just thinking about these bailouts.

people that are governing the states, i think this requires a little more of being responsible. i am looking at redstate and blue states. lot of the red states are budgeting pretty good. it's not perfect, but it seems there has been not budgeting properly. as far as bailouts, our deficit is so high, it's not going to melt. -- to help. as far as roadwork and construction, a lot of that gets presented in the house. people are having jobs because

of the money that is being processed out. host: david said he feels the rest states are doing a better job of budgeting. now this in the wall street journal -- spokane, washington, is our next location. michael, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i think it is kind of a combination of -- i would not say bailouts. california has a huge deficit. and so, maybe instead of setting bailout money, just sent a

package for infrastructure -- send. it will get the jobs they need it and then once those people go back to work than it would help the economy better in california. i would not say that it needs to be a cash bailout, but take some of the states that are in the most trouble and go from there with maybe a percentage or something. about the outsourcing, if you are company and you want the labor to compete, then it makes sense. but if you are the worker, it does not. make not if a company does move out, they should compensate the plant that they closed down when they moved to another country, especially if we don't have a 50-degree of agreement with them. i want to ask, i was

substituting the other day and i had some kids and i have them to watch c-span3 times a month. if they saw in the house people were saying every dollar that we borrow, that 40 cents is interest and i see on my schedule that ed schultz is going to be on. would someone explain that so i can go back to my class and this has been brought up several times on c-span. host: the question is for every dollar that americans borrow? host: that the government that the government borrows. host: we will ask ed when he gets here. thanks.

now tony on our democrat line from new york. caller: the gentleman from washington is correct. if we could tax the companies that move their products offshore and with the tax money that we collect from those manufacturers we would put into a government bailout stimulus pot to give to all taxpayers who currently have jobs who earn up to $100,000, this gift card that would look like an american flag could be used to go to wal-mart and buy products that carry the american flag logo, because they have been made 100% in america and use the gift card to buy that product. if there were two toasters on the shelf in walmart, one that was made in china that cost $10 and the one next to it that cost $15, the american a toaster, if you could make a choice. you could take $10 out of your pocket and by the less expensive one made in china, or you could pay for it with a gift card, $15. that toaster is 100% made in

america and it would make jobs for other americans who would pay taxes and bail out the state -- the states. host: yesterday we had a guest who wrote the book "buying america back," in which he answers a lot of your questions. and representative ann marie buerkle will be here so you can ask about some of these questions. now to missouri. caller: good morning. i want to switch my party back to a democrat. i'm a born-again christian. i miss read president obama. he was a constitutional lawyer. i believe that he tried to bring the country together, to unify.

that was his whole thing in the beginning. i believe republicans have been obstructionist since day one as far as trying to get anything he was trying to do put through. in addition, i feel that privatization is the downfall of america. by privatizing something, you are trying to make money through corporations. corporations make a profit. making a profit, they are going to charge you more. example, like overseas in iraq and afghanistan. host: let's leave it there and get one last comment on twitter -- how our facebook poll is looking right now.

should the states receive bailout money? coming up next we will talk about progressives and campaign 2012 with tv and radio host ed schultz. congresswoman ann marie buerkle will talk about the economy and republican plans in the house. we will be right back. >> when people are saying to him don't take the vice-

president say, right now you are a powerful majority leader, don't take the vice presidency, you will not have any power, johnson says, is where power goes, meaning i can make power in any situation. his whole life, nothing in his life previously unmakes that seem like he is boasting, because that is exactly what he had done, all his life. >> sunday night, the conclusion of our conversation with robert caro, the passage of power. his multivolume biography of the 36 president, denied on c-span. >> this memorial day weekend on c-span will take you to colleges and universities around the country to hear commencement addresses from members of congress, from the president's cabinet, state and local leaders, and business executives.

we also want to hear from you about your commencement experience. did you graduate from college this year if or attend a ceremony for friend or family member? or something about the past amendment that sticks with you. call us and tell us your story. we may use your comments on the air. >> "washington journal" continues. ed schultz is joining us this morning. thanks for being here. guest: nice to be here from alaska. host: by way of pennsylvania. we want to talk about campaign 2012, the progressive vote. let's start with this new york times poll done by president we done about president obama's stance on gay marriage. it says the majority of americans feel it was politically motivated. guest: the climate in the

country is so politically motivated, t that it is easy to think that. if president obama wins reelection, he will be viewed as someone who took a very historic and a very brave stance on marriage equality. if president obama loses, then the critics will be saying that he never should have gone down that road. really, is about the election. personally, for president obama , i think that he has evolved. i take him at his word. obviously, the gay community in america is very influential, getting politically stronger all the time. in business, they are very strong. and they can raise money, of course. i think that president obama made a personal and a moral choice on this. he has proven in the past he can

raise money. i don't think he did it for the money. i think it is a beneficiary of it. but the final judgment, politically, will be election day. all that will. way will. i think that when you look at what president obama campaigned on, "don't ask, don't tell", he delivered. he did not do it right away, but he did what he said he was going to do. he said he was gone to get us out of iraq. he did that and that was not easy. he has told the gay community over the years that society is changing and views are changing and this is a very pivotal moves for america. i think it was the correct. move to correct host: there's a story in the washington times this week -- and another piece in the wall street journal looks at contentious senate races --

do you think this could cost the president votes in swing space? guest: it may, but there may be a political upside as well. this discussion will go on all the way to election day. it is a courageous stance. it is a stand that is not an easy. one to easy that is why a lot of rural senators don't do it. rural america sometimes comes around a little slower than more of a highly populated areas of the country. that does not mean they are not going to eventually get there. marriage equality is a big issue. it is a legal issue as well. inequality in our country is something that is not point to be tolerated. and so, i think that,

generational a speaking, as we evolve, it was the right move. -- generationally speaking. host: you have been heavily involved in the recall in wisconsin. do you think this is a bellwether moment for unions? if governor walker is able to retain his seat, what does it say about the political climate in america? guest: this is really a test case for citizens united. i think that the country is watching wisconsin. it's hard to watch the story unfolds for 16 months, but this is a state that has been through protests and recalls, recall elections. the democrats have won five. they have met every benchmark to get to this stage. walker has done what he has had to do. he has developed a war chest to defend his office. he has done it under the guise of citizens united. he has outspent the democrats

20-1. we will find out if it is corporate money or the people who will win out. this is now a battle to get out the vote. i believe the democrats are a little frustrated by now about some national help they could use and that will all work itself out. i really believe this is a test case for citizens united. can money win over the people's choice? can money and influence people to the point where a guy who was involved in a john doe investigation, who has the worst jobs record in the country, who has seen six of his associates be brought up on charges, and he has a legal defense fund. there are many things swirling around this governor. if it were any governor in any state being involved in these circumstances, it would be politically an untenable situation to be in.

the fact is the money that has poured into wisconsin is helping save this governor. he leads in the polls by five percentage points. it will be important for the democrats not to lose their faith and to do with a half to do and to realize sometimes when there's so much money floating around, everybody can buy a poll. the democrats and independents will have to believe change will be good for them. i just think this election in wisconsin, this recall, it's only the third time in american history. there was a governor in the 1920's recalled in north dakota. and there was gray davis in california. it's only the third time in american history. it is one for the archives. it has all the ingredients of political terrorists that people are interested in. we put this story on television

for two nights in a row and now it seems to be in the mainstream media all over. it is a big story. wisconsin is a big state for president obama. the one thing about republicans is. they are is. they have the republican governors association. they have a super pacs working. they have the koch brothers working. they have sheldon adelson's money. going after the same guy that was supporting newt gingrich. there's a lot of outside influence coming into wisconsin, because they view this as a benchmark issue to attack collective bargaining, go after labor, and go after the public sector. and to reduce expenses. the resources are not coming to the states from the federal government, because we have spent all our money on two wars, but pharma, and tax cuts. this is a very pivotal moment. i think the democrats, nationally, are making a serious

political miscalculation if they don't resource the effort. a lot of people say this is about unions. it is a component, but it is not the issue. the mayor of milwaukee, mr. barrett's, did not have union support. kathleen falk, a madison, had union support. and they quickly turned and said we will support mr. baruch. the union did not get the candidate they wanted. but they don't what scott walker. . we will see how it . host: if you would like to talk with ed schultz, here are the numbers to call -- let's get to the calls. we will hear from roger, the democratic line in waterloo, iowa. caller: good morning, thanks for c-span. i have watched your show quite a bit, mr. shultz.

i always wondered, during the bush years when they were putting all these unfunded moneys against the wars, i don't believe they paid a dime on any of it yet. what do you suppose alone adds up to? guest: we will be paying for iraq and of can stand for generations. iraq and h afghanistan. the fact is spending is down, the deficit is down, and taxes are lower. that's a fact. it just so happens president obama is in the office and this is what is happening. maybe his policies are working. 26 months of private-sector

growth. president obama said let's go big. he was willing to take the big three, medicare, medicaid, and social security and say we will rearrange it, but let's go big. the republicans said, no. you can say the president was politically calling their bluff. this president has tried to do something about spending. spending is down and the deficit is down and taxes are lower. wall street in march of 2009 was in the 6000's. look where it is today. there are some good things that happened. whether it is president obama mopping it up or anyone else, the next president will have to deal with the cost of the war, too. if romney been collected in this country, the iraq expenses are not point to go away. the expense of protecting this country is not point to go away. so it comes down to an

ideological bent on exactly how you want to pay for all this stuff. so the president has been obstructed poor record amount. over 190 filibuster's. that is a fact. guest: total obstruction. this is what your tax dollars are going to. two parties that cannot come together in one president -- president obama has thrown just about everything on the table. host: our guest is host of "the ed show." he is a veteran of 30 years in a broadcasting. paul, republican in tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. i feel like i'm talking to the mouthpiece of harry reid here.

i want to talk a minute about me and my family's. we're all disabled coal miners. you're talking to people who helped run this stinking country. what we have in office right now is a man who said he could fix this thing in one year. he said if he could not fix it in an three years, it would be a one-year proposition. party would not pass his own budget. the senate has not passed a budget in three years. spending more than all the other presidents combined. peoplee's enough stupid to vote for him again, i hope they get a bellyful. guest: i understand his frustration. there are a lot of people who feel frustrated, but we are

making progress. i think we need to realize, from a historical perspective, how close we were to losing our entire financial system. president obama was handed something. the country was handed something that was historic. you would have to go back to the great depression to compare it. it is going to take time. along the lines of healing, there's going to be some frustration. it is going to take some time to do it. back to what i said a moment ago, when president obama got in, the republicans made a concerted effort, as a strategy, that they were not going to allow anything to proceed. they went along with constant obstruction. they have played in that strategy out and i don't think it has helped the country at all. the gentleman from tennessee, who is a coal miner, who is a

laborer, i think you'll see there's one party, the democrats, who are in favor of labor, who are in favor of collective bargaining, worker protection and safety, and all those types of things, and there's one party that has been lax on that. the record speaks for itself. host: how do labor union activists motivate people like our caller? guest: first of all, labor did not get everything it wanted with president obama. president obama did not do the employee free choice act. that was the number one issue that labour in this country want it. the president decided to go healthcare and jobs. health care and jobs, in that order. the unions were told, you need to step back a little bit. they were told early on they did not have the votes.

there were some broken noses for a while. there were some people who felt they had everything to do with getting president obama into office and they felt a little bit adrift. they also looked at what the situation of the country was, and to a generation we move healthcare -- and to move health care. they have to come up with a plan that would do more for people and bring the cost down. it was not everything everybody wanted. the republicans in 26 states challenged it. now it's in front of the supreme court. to answer your question about organized labor and what role they play in getting people like this gentleman from tennessee to think their way, he has to render his own personal judgment as to what's best for him. does he believe in collective bargaining? does he believe in workers' rights? does he believe in fair wages,

health care, attention? does he want to be thrown to the walls of the private sector and be thrown around like furniture in his career? it is a choice that people have to make. host: boston, mass.. kim, independent line. caller: i am your biggest fan. guest: thank you. i appreciate that. caller: i am a wealth-creating union machinist. everyone i have ever worked for, i guarantee you, while they paid me a living wage, they walked away with millions. that is a fact. the lexicon has been hijacked by the frank lutz's of the world. it slays me with anything the

government does to benefit the middle class, the poor, the elderly, the weak -- that the government handout. these same democrats and republicans go around asking these same people to write them a check. what kind of nonsense is this? there was one other thing i wanted to comment on. oh, yeah. you mark my words. this is a prediction. i do not know exactly when the peak year is going to be with the vast majority of baby boomers are going to retire -- we have been sold this con job of how great these 401k's are -- i guarantee you there will be another recession, another crash. it is just another big con.

the money is going to be walked away with by wall street. guest: he hit on a locked there. -- a lot there. wall street pretty much runs the senate. the banks run the senate. they can hold all the hearings in the world. the fact is, dodd-frank to not go far enough. it will take a tremendous amount of political courage to step forward and say this is what we need to do. obviously, wall street does not want to be regulated. the fact is, this country has changed dramatically when the investment banks in the commercial banks can pretty much get together and do what they want to do. i think the gentleman is right. there will be another hit to the economy. it may not be during president obama's term. there are no safeguards put in place to deal with the kind of

casino gambling that is going on on wall street and what the financial institutions and banks are doing with people's investments. this is a huge campaign issue. i think president obama has to be very clear on this. i think the democrats have to talk openly about and advocating for reinstating glass-steagall. there has to be conversation about breaking up the banks. this is all very hard to do when you have the fox guarding the henhouse. it may have gone too far. the political system in this country may not be able to reel in wall street. this may be the way it is. with citizens united and with the unbelievable amount of cash that can be thrown around campaigns right now, and the way politicians can be propped up, and campaigns purchased, it is pretty dangerous stuff.

in my opinion, as a liberal, that's how i view it. host: anna joins us from las vegas, nevada . you are on with ed schultz. caller: i'm one of your biggest fans. thank you very much for getting the union members out to vote. for all the people who are not union members -- if it hadn't been for the union, their wages, their benefits in things -- if republicans got their way and then they could go back, especially in the south, they barely want to pay above minimum wage. also, on the stimulus, when they talked about the stimulus -- when people like louisiana angot the stimulus, they used it

toward balancing their budgets and then turn around and try to make the president look bad. republicans in congress and all, they do not want to give the president the due salutation he is due. you have people like bachmann and all them -- barack obama. palin and all of them. it is ridiculous. you never hear them say " elizabeth." you hear them say, "queen elizabeth." in the south, you were always taught, you do not respect a black man.

like i said, all you people -- get out and go. if you think things are bad now, if you put romney in there, and he has already said what he is going to do, and you think you are harming the middle class, you will definitely see everything go completely bad. host: let's wrap that up and get to the point she made. she talked about the issue of race and how that will play in the campaign. also, stimulus money. guest: race is always going to be an issue in america. it is a constant conversation we have to keep having. the disrespect toward the president -- there was disrespect toward president bush. i think it has been notched up quite a bit with president obama. party has had aparea

lot to do with that. i think the 24-hour news cycle has had a lot to do with it. as parents in this country, we have to teach our kids respect. that's where it starts. it starts at the home. yes, sir. no, sir. yes, ma'am. no, ma'am. there has to be respected. i think the political climate of the country is so volatile right now. in many respects, respect has left the building. parents have an obligation to teach the younger generation that disrespect for the president is not healthy. it is not healthy for the country. disrespect for leaders is not. we all make mistakes. we all say things we wish we could have that.

in the overriding tone of our communication with one another -- it is has to be one of respect. i think the country has come in a sense, gotten away from that. host: how do you do that as a talk-show host? do you blame fox for setting a different tone for what we see from msnbc? do you bring to bear yourself a certain tone on your show? guest: the country is rendering judgment right now that anger is not going to work. the country is ready to drill down and address the issues and reset the priority list of where we're going to take the country. as a table host and as a talk- show host, -- as a cable hosted a talk show host, it is easy to get wrapped up in the lomas. we are constantly pointing out what is at stake. there's a lot at stake.

people get emotional about it. i think that you can advocate and be positive. you can be fair and be positive. you can be critical, if you have the facts. i have never worked at fox. i probably never will work at fox. i don't know what their mantra is. where i work, i can tell you. i can have my opinion. i can say what i want. i cannot have my own set of facts. i cannot make stuff up. i do not make stuff up. i give my opinion. if the deficit is what it is, if spending is what it is, we have to report the facts. i have never been told that i cannot give an opinion on a certain subject.

there's quite a bit of freedom freedom in-- cablei cable. host: we've been using a new way to send a brief video message. let's listen to one of them. caller: ed, what would you say is the most important issue? how will its outcome impact middle-class society directly and indirectly? guest: i think he asked me what the most important topic is right now. i think it is the economy right now. there is no question about it. this is an election that will be decided on the economic future the people have and how they feel about the country right now. are we moving in a direction that suits them the best?

do they understand what the economic goals of the country are right now? president obama versus the challenger, mitt romney? income inequality is a huge issue right now. there's no question about it. fairness in the workplace is a big issue right now. we have too many people in this country going broke because of health care. what are we going to do about it? are we going to the supreme court to decide what we are going to do about it? what do the people want? in the ryan plan, they want to go after the institutions. they want to attack the entitlements -- what they call them. socials year the, medicare, medicaid -- social security, medicare, medicaid. where is the march? i don't see anybody outside. where is the march for change?

have we seen an uprising of the ing, " across america singiay let's get rid of social security"? why do we want to take things away from people that they have earned? had we had not gone into two wars, gone into tax cuts, we would have more money in the treasury right now. we would be able to do these things. my opinion -- i believe the republican goal -- they think in terms of generation. they have wanted to blow up the federal budget deficit to the point that they could pare back government and programs to where they want them. they want less obligation. they have made labor the bogeyman. the people are satisfied with social security.

satisfied with soc medicare. what to the people want? the people in this country right now want the wealthiest americans to pay more, to pay a little bit more. the democrats, they do not want to raise your taxes further than what it is right now. they want to go back to the old rates. the democrats gave the republicans what they wanted in the lame-duck session of the congress. they extended the bush tax cuts. this is a very interesting political time in america, a huge election. we always say this one is the most important. maybe it is. we will still be wrestling with the same problems of taxation, inequality, if we are one to have a thriving middle-class, do we believe in manufacturing, do we believe it's important for people to have a living wage in america?

the president is focusing very hard are trying to rebuild that sector of the economy. host: let's hear from a republican. beverly joins us from st. cloud, minnesota. go ahead. caller: it's very easy for him to say what transpired in wisconsin. first of all, i believe that with all the unions stuff, they bust people in and got money from across the country. the democrats always say how the republicans are getting all this help from outside. in reality, it has always been the unions and the democratic party that have brought in outsiders to the state of wisconsin lydia thew. n. guest: that is fair enough. there's no question that there are people. i had a gentleman, a radio show

yesterday from a southern state saying that he was so motivated by what he saw in wisconsin that he went and help out. there are people that have been motivated from all around the country. with respect to the caller, you cannot deny the fact of where the money is coming. the story today in the mainstream media is that the democratic national committee has still not made a decision as to whether they're going to put in half of $1 million to get the vote out for democrats, which has been requested by the democratic party in wisconsin. you are right. there are people who have come in to help wisconsin. host: joe joins us from indiana. independent caller. caller: i am so glad to talk to you. i am combat veteran, a vietnam.

i fought for three years there. it has been a nightmare my whole life, ever since then. my next-door neighbor's son went to kuwait, believing that the babies were being thrown out of the incubators. he got shot and killed. my other friend lost his grandson in pakistan. it is pretty hard for us veterans to watch this, knowing that our country is the muscle for the corporations. we're under corporate rule here. veterans know. we left iraq and then turned around and said, does anybody want all this for nearly nothing? we dropped $15 trillion and blood all over the sand and

soil there. the oil companies have raised the prices on our gas. guest: you could tell by the gentleman's voice that he is borderline distraught about what happened to him in his lifetime. there are a lot of veterans out there. that is one of the things that turned to me politically from 15 years ago. i saw what was happening to the veterans in this country. why we have a fight over helping our veterans, a political fight over helping our veterans, is beyond me. the v.a. does a fabulous job. we do not have enough of it. we have got hoards of servicemen and women coming back with posttraumatic stress disorder. they need treatment. we created this. we decided to go into iraq as a country.

we, as a country, decided to do international intervention. there's a long, hard pressed to be paid for that. for those of us who did not go in for those of us who were not called on to go, we have to do our part to make sure that we do not push these veterans to the side like road kill and we live up to our commitments as a country. we must realize that this should weigh on our lawmakers' minds. when they do something like iraq and afghanistan, we are committing not for the moment. we're committing for the long haul. there will have to be sacrifices from every american to meet our obligations. it is unfortunate. i've met a lot of combat veterans. i've met a lot of people who observe this country who feel like they've been left behind.

they feel like congress has forgotten them. we cannot. we just have to live up to our obligations. the fact is, we need more money in the treasury. there's no question about it. host: a couple comments on twitter. mary weighing in. that is her opinion. we will get some more as we go on. ed schultz is our guest. jack joins us next from indianapolis on the line for democrats. caller: hi, ed. good to talk to you. guest: thank you, jack. caller: i have a couple of questions for you. i used to watch you all the time when you were on earlier in the day. in 2007, 2008, you did not go after dick fuld very much with lehman brothers. maybe you were not on the air at that time. guest: i was not on television

until april of 2009. when i first got my job at msnbc, i was doing the 6:00 show. i made a commitment that "the ed show" was going to lead every night with health care. it was the story of our time. it was the chance to do something for a lot of people. that was my focus when i first came to msnbc. in reference to the story you're talking about, you are correct. host: jack, republican in south dakota. hello, south dakota. caller: i would like to point out a couple things. you're getting it all wrong. for the first two years, who owned the congress, the senate, the president. mr. obama. guest: it's good to hear a voice from south dakota, where i spent a lot of time.

you are exactly right. the president, the white house, the house, and the senate. he also had a record number of filibusters. he also had a minority party that stopped absolutely everything. i'm not making that up. host: our next caller, mark i. in anaheim, california. caller: good to see you there. you look a lot healthier there. a couple comments. earlier in the program, you said spending is down. this is the type of, i see on your show almost every night. where do we get to the point where we are at 25% of gdp with our spending and that is down? traditionally, it is 8%. you talked about citizens united. i recommend you go to

opensecrets.org. it lists all the money poured into our political process. guest: ok. first of all, i do not think i'm angry when i'm on the air at night. i am very passionate. that could be misconstrued by people who have a different political persuasion. as far as the money is concerned, it is easy to track. there's no way the democrats will be able to keep up with the corporate money that will be thrown in this election cycle. you would be unfair to the facts if you said citizens united was not a major player in all of this. look, money and politics. there is a discussion, an undercurrent of a discussion in this country that i think a lot of people know is probably not

achievable, but really what the people want. that is public funding of campaigns. if we really want people's voices to be heard, there cannot be the overspending. if you have publicly financed campaigns that have limitations, where people had to get up and actually answer questions with substantive answers and be forced to be vetted by the people, i think we've had -- i think we'd have a different country. host: our caller mentioned opensecrets.org. a caller on our last segment said he is a teacher and his students watched c-span. he said that people talk about how for every dollar that the

u.s. barrault's, we are paying x amount of interest on it. do you want to talk about that and weigh in on your concerns about borrowing and how we end up spending more money through the process? guest: let's get to the basics. we have a record trade deficit. we have a record deficit, record tdebt. we have a number of things going through the roof. there's no question about it. spending is down under president obama it is a fact. debt is down under president obama. taxes are down. that's what republicans alike. republicans, when they were in the minority, they did a good job of getting what they like. if we're going to fix all this, there are a number of things we have to do.

we have to recommit to buy american and consumers have a tremendous amount of power. we saw that in social media in our business when certain broadcasters have the leg put on them for dissatisfaction with the public. let's face it, the social medea is changing a lot of conversation in this country. for us to do this, we have to focus on jobs and investment and we've got to reduce spending. we cannot be invading countries to the tune of $5 billion per week and these things have taken a toll. to get back, it will take time and i think we will have to make though 2% income earners in this country go back to the old rates at 39% and many people say when i say this, they say how much do you want me to pay? it is not a question of how much we want you to pay. it is what the country needs you

to do like a veteran that called earlier that was somewhat distraught. we have to do our part. we have to pay little bit more. i used to be a middle-class guy and i have had good fortune in my life. i'm in the top 2% centre we need to pay more. in need to take a 39% in my lifestyle -- in my lifetime and would not change my lifestyle. many people feel the same way and we will have to sacrifice and come together as a country and realize we have to do our part. the president talks about shared sacrifice. there is one party in this country that views this as some kind of unbelievable economic threat as if you cannot raise taxes on the job creators. really? i think that is just so wrongheaded. it is not statistically proven very we have done it before. generations and the past have done a we just had to have the will to do it. the stores in washington to

watch our money have to be willing to debate and not stock in ideological country where they cannot move into a for the people. there has to be some level of compromise in this country if we're going to get our finances in order. the browbeating has got to stop them up this is from "usa today" - north carolina, democratic caller. thanks for calling. go ahead. >> good morning. [inaudible] you bring out the truth of the american people.

[unintelligible] i draw a social security check and they have taken have my social security check. mitt romney as always my overseas in the cayman islands. it is disgusting. take his wife -- she raised five children. [unintelligible] >> i had trouble understanding and but i think he mentioned social security. host: he was talking about the mitt romney wealth and social security and said that mrs. romney had assistance in help raising her children. even though she was a stay at home mom and raised her kids, she was not going through hard times that he feels like he has experience. guest: i think it is wrong if we start attacking people's choices. this is america. it is a free society.

there are people who have died for our freedom garrett we have to respect that. if someone chooses to do something with their life, we should celebrate that instead of vilify it. i think stay at home moms are critically important to america but i think the choice is the most important thing. host: here is another to lead tweet --\ >> guest: the occupy wall street movement brought to light a great deal of frustration. whether that maintains its momentum politically remains to be sitting pretty only benchmark you will have is an election. you can show a videotape of a protest all day long and interview people but when it comes to making a change at the polls, are all of these people in front of these people, will

they actively participate in getting the vote out and going down the road of what they believe in and what they want to advocate for? protesting is a part of the process. beyond protesting, like we saw in wisconsin, there has to be the groundwork of 30,000 volunteers that go out and get the signatures and go out and set the table within the function of the system and have the election. they have done a good job, the wall street occupiers of getting the attention of the country and changing the conversation and focusing the conversation on the frustration of the country which is also very much part of the process. whether they will be politically viable or not remains to be seen. they have an opportunity. it is coming up in november. host:ed schultz, thanks for

coming in and talking with us. guest: it has been a pleasure. host: coming up next, republican congresswoman anne- marie buerkle where we will talk with budget issues and the john boehner issue and later are spotlight on magazines will look at the christian science monitor magazine on tracking tornadoes. >> at 8:36 in washington, here are some of the headlines -- the $2 billion misfire at j.p. morgan chase could figure in the discussion of a house subcommittee hearing today on how best to regulate those buying the big enough to bring down the broader financial system. democratic lawmakers and others say the trades that led to the losses point that the need for to stricter rules. republican lawmakers said it will not help. the house financial services subcommittee meeting will be live it 10:00 eastern on cspan radio and cspan 3 television. president obama raised $43.6

million in april for his campaign and for the democratic party. his campaign said $400,000 contributed last month included 169,000 who donated for the first time. presidential camper vans and supertax have until midnight sunday -- presidential campaigns and super pacs have until midnight sunday to report. the federal reserve's april policy setting session and industrial production figures will be out. more credit cards have been going out in the mail and more people are getting them who have less than stellar credit. the credit reporting agency transit union says credit card users are making more timely payments. with fewer people 90 or more days late. finally, the european human- is hearing at

case of someone who was taken to afghanistan and was brutally interrogated for four months. he says the cia kidnapped him in 2007 from macedonia, mistaking him for a terror suspect. those are some of the latest headlines on >> cspan >> "washington journal" continues. host: rep anne-marie buerkle, thank you for coming in. guest: it is wonderful to be here. host: john boehner said if we want to see an increase in the debt ceiling and the debt limit, spending cuts that to happen. what do you think? guest: i think he is absolutely right. this nation right now has close to a $16 trillion debt and we will reach that debt ceiling soon. in order to get this country and the right direction, we need to get the spending under control.

to just raise the debt ceiling is irresponsible. we cannot do that. host: are you concerned about the implications to the economy in terms of our credit rating? we saw what happened last year. guest: i think we missed a good opportunity in the last discussion regarding the debt ceiling. the cut, cap, and balance was the way to go. we could have avoided the downgrade of we have gone with that. there is a comprehensive spending plan to balance the budget for the amendment for this country. i think that would have been a good way to go verses what ended up happening. the budget control act has become a very big problem. host: house speaker john bennett spoke about his ideas of increasing the debt limit and we heard from secretary of the treasury tim geithner. [video clip] >> when the time comes, i will

again insist on my simple principle of cuts and reforms greater than the debt limit increase. this is the only evidence i see right now to force the elected leadership of this country to solve our structural and fiscal imbalance. >> this commitment to meet the obligations of the nation, this commitment to protect the credit worthiness of the country is a fundamental commitment you can never call into question or violate because it is the foundation for any market economy that allows us to govern and fight wars and deal with crises of recession and adjust to a changing world. only congress, of course, can act to raise the debt limit. we hope they do it this time without the trauma and pain and damage they caused the country last july. host: when the treasury secretary gives a warning light tha, what do you think? > guest: i think is one is more irresponsible than anything. we have to stop spending money

we don't have. we are headed down a path like greece and like many countries in europe. we've got to stop spending money we don't have and to raise the debt ceiling without a responsible cutting spending plan and a prodigious growth economic agenda which needs to be a factor, we will continue down ipad that is unsustainable for this country and quite frankly is irresponsible of him to suggest we just raise the debt ceiling. i would say what is the plan? you raise the debt ceiling and continued to amassed debts? we continue to bar afford to 2 cents on every dollar we spend? that is irresponsible host:: this is your first term. she represents new york boss 25th district. as you look at your first term in congress and the this lame duck session, sequestration is

on the table. there will be automatic spending cuts that kick in and taxation issues. what are you doing to lay the ground -- robert for the lame- duck session? what do you think about sequestration? guest: the house has taken up reconciliation which will deal with some of sequestration which is the right way to go. i did not vote for the budget control act because i thought it was not the right thing to do to give my authority, what i was elected to do, to the super committee and to hope they reached an agreement which they did not so now we have sequestration. i don't like that is the right way to govern and it is not what the american people expect that that is the situation. i believe reconciliation will begin to address sequestration and avoid those deep cuts. we have heard about the concerns of the defense cuts and we have men and women deployed in iraq and afghanistan and throughout the world. the country has a moral obligation to give them what

they need to make sure they have what they need in order to keep them safe. host: how you talk to constituents about what you are getting done right now verses the media attention and focus on the lame duck session? even your colleagues say we will not get much done for a couple of months' time because we are waiting on the election. guest: i think there is a lot we can do. we really need to talk about making our government more effective, efficient, more accountable to the american people. the responsibility of we -- this administration has not been good stewards of the american -- hard-working american taxpayers. the money has been squandered. when i leave this morning, i will go to a hearing in oversight in government regarding around $14 billion that was given to the department of energy -- they get out as part of the stimulus plan. they gave this money to 26

programs, 22 of those programs were solar companies. there is an irresponsibility of spending going on down here. i think at the very least, before we can talk about raising taxes, we have to be more accountable to how we spend the taxpayer dollars spent let's get to the telephones. the numbers are on your screen. brooklyn, new york is first, a democrat, go ahead. caller: when the president came into office, we had a surplus. bush gave us tax cuts that drained us. what you republicans have done is you have cut taxes first and then you say we should cut spending. i thought you would cut

spending first and then you give a tax cut. isn't that putting the cart before the horse? guest: thanks for the call for my fellow new yorker. you bring a many good points. the first point is that the spending and debt and deficit we're looking it did not start in this administration. this has been a slow progression. the last administration added to this, certainly. it is unfortunate that we had 9/11 a car and we engaged in two wars. whether you agree or not, they are expensive wars. you are right, this is not a democratic issue only. this is where republicans are to blame just as much as three -- as democrats for this cycle of spending taxpayer dollars unaccountably. this president had the opportunity in the last day lame-duck session to raise taxes any chose not to for a good reason. the reason was in a fragile economy, it is the wrong thing

to do to raise taxes on the job creators. we need to create an environment for our job creators that allows them to flourish and buy new equipment and hire people. that is what we should be doing. we cannot cut our way out of this debt. we've got to get a progress of economic agenda and send a message to our businesses that you are the answer to this stalled economy. you are what will get the american people back to work. we want to get out of the way, the government, we need to get out of the way and let our job creators do with they do best./ host: republican in las vegas, nevada, go ahead caller: thanks for cspan. one thing that pains a clear picture of our situation is the state of california and the problems they are in. it is similar to greece and all european countries have to bail

out greece. the rest of the united states taxpayers will have to bail out california. do you see that as a problem in this country? guest: you bring up an excellent point. if you look it california or new york -- new york is a highly-tax states and we lost two congressional seats. there's a reason why these things happen. when states and/or the federal them and provide an environment where business cannot flourish, they will go elsewhere were they can. that is part of this irresponsible spending and regulating and creating an environment where our businesses cannot do well. caller: here is a tweed coming in from darryl issa, the chairman of the oversight committee. what are you up to in the committee now?

guest: as you all know, our chairman has been aggressive and rightly so with regard to fast and furious. eric holdser must be held responsible. we may hold him in contempt which many of us feel he should be held in contempt. there's a certain level of arrogance and on accountability of the government not being accountable to the people are loss of lives that have been the result of this very flawed fast and furious program. that is what the big issues. later this morning. we will have a hearing with the stimulus money that went from the department of energy to the solar panel companies. many of them had very low credit ratings because of their financial situation. oversight is really the eyes and ears for the american people. we have spent the last year looking at waste and fraud and duplication. last week, we had a hearing

regarding been tsa and hundreds of millions of dollars of equipment that are in stores that are not being utilized because of their very flawed procurement program and their deployment of that equipment. when people talk about raising taxes on the american people, you say wait a minute, let's make sure we are spending money they're giving us correctly, officially, before we can begin to talk about raising taxes. host: we have a pole and our facebook page. asking whether states should get money from the federal government and 76 people -- 76% up people saidno. you can weigh in on that. charleston, south carolina, an independent caller: caller, go: 94 cspan. -- thank you for cspan. , * as the debt ceiling been

raised? guest: that is a great question. it has been a number of times and it has been raised in all administrations. this is nothing new. the question becomes how can we raise the debt ceiling without cutting spending? that is what the speaker talked about yesterday. that is what so many of us in the house felt passionately about that before we can raise the debt ceiling -- this president has amassed more debt than the first 40 presidents before him. we have a problem that we as a nation must face. it really cannot be republican or democrat. i think it is an american issue. how will we get our spending under control and not jeopardize the economic stability this country -- of this country which i think is in jeopardy if we continue on the same path. host: the debt ceiling has been raised 75 times. peoria, illinois, democrats line, go ahead. caller: i need to address what

you were just talking about, the dbt. this president has a -- has come amassed more debt than any other president. you neglected to say he inherited most of that debt. if you borrow money to fight wars and you do not pay for it, you collect interest on that. you are paying that interest which is making the debt grow and grow. it is not all obama's debts. they need to just tell the truth about the debts. thanks for your call. i said that before because one of the previous callers talked about there was a surplus when george bush came into office after bill clinton. i will sit here as a republican and say the republicans squandered a good opportunity to

maintain that surplus. george bush had a record of some programs that were irresponsible in spending money but also had the two wars. it is a combination and i mentioned is the president because i look at the stimulus, close to $1 trillion, and a failed and flawed program that did not work. the health care law, the spending that he has incurs while he has been in office -- i hasten to say that this is not a republican democratic issue. the republicans squandered a great opportunity when they had all three houses to get our spending under control and get a good spending plan in place. your point is extremely well- made, thank you. callhost: you are supporter of e house violence against women act.

guest: some of that is not correct because since the house bill came out, we now have a manager's amendment. last week, we brought the bill to the floor and we went on for the weekend and i know my office personally is in daily and sometimes multiple times a day, in contact with the advocates for domestic violence and the domestic violence shelters. i have been involved for many

years. i volunteered vera house and i am wearing their white ribbon. they have come to us and we work closely with them to address these concerns. and also members of congress who are native americans and who have a large and native american population in their district and they came with regard to the house bill and said we have concerns. one in three native american women will be victims of domestic violence. we have a manager's amendment that begins to address all of these issues that were brought to us with concerns. my concern with domestic violence is that the senate has made a political issue out of this. rather than coming up with a manager's amendment like we did and when we look to the bill initially, it was not let's sing aloud groups. let's make sure that every

victim of domestic violence gets the services they need. a domestic violence shelter or services not available because of their sexual preference or because of whether they are american or native american, we have a problem with that facility. if you begin to delineate and take out and the numerous special groups that you run the risk of leaving someone else out. our plan was equal protection under law, a victim of domestic violence is a victim. having said that, we went to the district and talk to those who are on the front lines and we came up with the manager's amendment. other members of the house who had concerns began to address them. i was said to the senate, come to the table. do not make this a political issue. let's work together to make sure all victims of domestic violence get the services they need. host: let's hear from a

republican joining us from phoenix this morning, what's your question? caller: no man or woman, a democrat or republican, would invest their money in america when they get taxed. which make a 20-30-year plan with republicans. you can make a plan that you will not be taxed so high as long as you invest that money into america. no person will wait 20 or 30 years for their investments so republicans can retire. if you are willing to do that, you could say we need jobs and you have the money to invest in jobs to get programs to work.

host: we got his point and we can't get a response from the congresswoman. caller: part of your point was repatriation and allowing companies to bring money back into this country to invest in our economy without paying a second tax. and there have been a number of plants and as a big discussion for the republicans in the house, allowing these companies to bring their money back into this country for a little while after tax and in the sec and the time. we think there are billions of dollars that would combat into this country and be profitable. host: georgia is an independent caller, go ahead. caller: i think most americans do not trust washington to be efficient. the gsa had squandered money and use of the waste, fraud and

abuse in the secret service system. i would like to see every election -- elected official plus salary cut by 5% and every program cut by 2% until the 2013 budget. that should be a good incentive. we need some people a principal. if they wanted as the principles we need, we should set standards that they have to live up to. just punish them. guest: i couldn't agree more. our job as representatives is to fight for and be the voice for hard-working american taxpayers. that should be our mission. when i sit in the oversight in government forum and i hear the gao tell us we don't know how many programs there are for food

and shelter in this country? we don't know how much they are spending. what of all, we don't know the outcomes are and whether they are spending more on administration of the programs verses money getting to the services that people need. you mention g is thesa and a secret service. there is such rampant waste down here, the culture of washington and these agencies and this bureaucracy is irresponsible. this government has to be accountable. we need -- we need more effective, efficient, and accountable government. the mra's for our offices were cut 5% the first year and maybe 6% for the second year. we understand we have to tighten our belts. unless we do that, we, as a nation, are just on an unsustainable path. i think which you talked about is probably the most important

issue down here and the issue that darrell i said, the chairman of oversight, has done so well and work so hard in doing and that is holding these government agencies accountable. -- making them the efficient and accountable. just getting rid of the waste and fraud. thank you very much for your call.

>> we will continue to do that. if we go to conference with the senate bill, so we can continue

the discussion which is to be political which is the sense that the senate has dug in their heels. they are not going to change, talk, debate, discuss. that's not really in the best interest or operating in good faith for those victims of >> let's hear from wade. a democratic in new hampshire. >> caller: good morning. i'd like to bring up a very important point about what the lady had said as far as extending the tax cuts. there was a real wise decision made on president obama's part. i'm interested. bush tax cuts are extended for the wealthy people. i'm not trying to vilify the wealthy people, a majority of them earned their wealth and a majority got it through good fortune or whatever. the point i'm trying to make is the bush tax cuts are extended for the wealthy, but yet the wealthier the job creators, but

yet they are having a hard time creating jobs apparently. our economy is still in peril by everybody's account. so if that's the case, then how is it that the presidential candidate coming in to -- i mean by what i'm seeing vilify president obama, how is it that he has enough money he can put elevators in his garage. i mean he's got all of the advantages of being wealthy along with everybody that's wealthy, and there's an old saying that you lead by example. that's my problem with everything that's going on in our country right now. i'm finding a lot of people talking and the exact same thing that the united states government is doing. then the media. i understand the media has certain limitations and it's designed for journalistic purposes and the truth.

but when there's a bias against -- when everybody has -- is on one side of the aisle or the other side of the aisle, it only stands to reason that we get nothing done in the middle. >> guest: well, you brought up a number of excellent points, wade. my concern with raising taxes on the wealthy is what we've heard is at $200,000, those who's income is $200,000 as a couple, $250,000, what i hear in my district and what i have firsthand knowledge of is so many small businesses file a personal income tax return. on paper, these small businesses, these mom and pop businesses they look like the growth receipt are much higher. they may gross a million dollars, so they will be subjected to the higher tax

rate. they pay all of their bills but the bottom line is less than that. when we look at not the real wealthy, that part and the loopholes we address that with a comprehensive income tax code revision. that's really, i think, at the end of the day something that nation really has to look at and to eliminate those loopholes for the wealthy. those who can afford the accountants and attorneys and that creative. my concerns with raising taxes are all of the businesses that file personal income tax, they are the ones, they are the job creators who have 5, 10, 20 employees. they are the ones that will get hurt. i think we've got to revise the tax code, eliminate loopholes, and make sure the small business owners, mom and pops, are allowed to do what they do best and that's work hard and be successful. >> host: president obama is holding a white house luncheon that includes house speaker john

boehner, and nancy pelosi. let's listen to president obama. >> first, congress should stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas and use it for companies that bring jobs back to america. second, congress should help the millions of americans that have worked hard and made their mortgage payments refinance and save at least $3,000 a year. third, congress should help small business owners by giving them a tax break for hiring more workers and paying them higher wages. small businesses are the engine and growth in this country. we shouldn't be holding them back. we should be making it easier for them to succeed. fourth, if congress fails to act soon, clean air company could see the taxes go up and could be

forced to lay off employees. they are putting americans to work and helping break the dependence on foreign oil. congress should extend the tax credits. finally, congress should help the veterans returning from iraq and afghanistan by creating a veterans job corps. our men and women in uniform have served the country with honor. now it's our turn to serve them. that's the to-do list. now we need them to stop crossing things off. i need you to call your member of congress, write them an e-mail, tweet, and let them know we can't afford to wait longer to get things done. now is the time to take steps we know will grow our economy and create jobs. >> host: president obama giving his weekly address. congressman buerkle, jimmy tweets in and asked whether congress made an effort and what kind of relationship he's cultivated. >> guest: you know, i'm

disappointed with this president. he had an opportunity, whether you are democrat or republican, so many people were hopeful we will be a relationship builder and that he would cross lines and be -- try to build some consensus. what we've seen in this attack on congress, the attack on the supreme court, he controls the executive branch, but he should be engaged in relationships with us and conversations, and we are constantly getting lectures and not being helpful. he doesn't work with us. beyond that, he's created divisions among classes, among races, among gender and he's really, i think, squandered an opportunity to turn this country around and to make sure that we're working together as a nation. and so many of the things that we brought up in his to-do list for us, we've already done. we've spent the last year and four months voting on jobs bills, focusing on how to get the economy back on its feet.

we've voted for keystone a number of times, keystone pipeline, because we know the cost of energy in this country is too high. let's increase the energy sources. what do we see $14 million to solar companies rather than working comprehensively as a sound energy policy and making sure we reduce the cost of energy. gas prices are higher now than they've been. they've doubled since he's been in office. these lectures and campaign sound bites aren't helpful. in fact, what we've done in the house is we've sent so many pieces of legislation over to the senate. if he's going to lecture anyone, the president say to the senate why don't you pass a budget. why don't you help get a spending plan in place for the nation. it's been since 2009. well over 1,000 days. we need a spending plan and pass a budget so you in the house can reconcile and the nation have a

budget. >> host: republican caller, james. >> caller: good morning. how are you? >> guest: good morning. >> host: good, you? >> caller: first of all, i appreciate everything that you are doing. i'm a fellow new yorker, not as far north. i thank you for everything. i've been with the party a long time. i'm going to keep this brief brief. i'm a business owner. my major issue and concern is often we talk about incentive. we are the ones creating growth and jobs. my issue is when i hear incentive, my incentive for hiring people is because i love america. my incentive for giving american an job is because i love america. that is my incentive. when i hear the need for a concern tax benefit in order for me to hire someone, i don't think that's appropriate. you know, the reason why i don't send a job over to india and have them handle my it work is

because i can have someone here in america who comes out of college here and wants to be an it professional. so i guess my question is to my party which i love and i appreciate, why can't we be in agreement that the incentive that we need in order to build jobs here and increase our growth sheer the fact that we love our country and we love americans. > host: pay traytism is an incentive. >> guest: thank you for your call. you bring up good points. the best thing we can do for the government is to get out of the way. the regulatory environment that we are asking businesses to try to conduct business in, and in new york you have albany and washington on top of you, whether it's the dec or the epa, every time you want to do something, you have to go to either the state or federal government to get approval. the cost of compliance, the

question of the health care law how that's going to effect people, the question about the tax rate and what the businesses tax rates are going to be. businesses can't plan, there's such uncertainty for small business owners throughout the country. that's the biggest reason why we don't see an economy booming. we don't see an economy moving forward. because businesses have hunkered down, they are sitting on their cash, uncertain as to what's going to happen next. you know as a business owner, uncertainty is really the enemy of growth. until and unless we send a clear message to our businesses, you are the solution to this stalled economy. we want to get out of your way and let you do because of whatever your motivation is -- hopefully most people are like you, they love their country. even those that just want to be successful and make money for their kids and grand kids, that's also a good motivation. that's america. that is making sure that every american has an opportunity at the american dream. i'm afraid that some of the policies coming out of the

administration are really diminishing the american dream for the american people. >> host: ann buerkle represents new york's 25th district. she went to nursing school and received a degree. she also has an undergraduate and later in life after raising a family she returned to school to go to syracuse law school and become an attorney. she's worked in a private law firm and was appointed by then attorney general, dennis vacco as the assistant new york state attorney general for over a dozen years. you are in your freshman term in congress as we mentioned earlier. lee writes in on twitter and asks i haven't seen the house put forward any budget proposal reasonable enough for the senate to pass. when will you work together? when you won your election, it was a squeaker. it was a close race.

how do you reach out to your constituents and talk about bipartisan and get some of those independent voters or democratic voters who might make all of the difference in your re-election bid? >> guest: i think the discussion regarding a budget is a very important one. what the republicans did was put forth something. a place to begin the discussion. it is suspect the end all and the be all. what we need is now for the senate to send something to us to sit down and hash out a budget. that's where the compromise comes in. that's where you figure out how we're going to move forward with the budget for this country. i voted for bowles-simpson, i thought there was at least a good place to start the discussion. but we've got to do something. i think the house worked extremely hard. paul ryan has a done a magnificent job putting forth ideas. this is about putting forth ideas and working with the senate to figure out how to put

a spending plan in place. until and unless the spending moves, we as a nation set. again as i mentioned earlier there's uncertainty that the businesses and defense contractors and our construction industry, they don't know regarding funding, they don't know about projects, and it puts them in a mode where they are just hunkered down, sitting on their cash, not able to invest. i think that is the biggest problem that we have as a country. we are sending the wrong message to our job creators and businesses out there. >> in the second part of that, how do you appeal to bipartisan back in your district? >> i think that the american people whether you are a democrat or republican or somewhere in between and an independent, are very concerned with the waste, the fraud, the abuse, duplication in government. you know, we mentioned the tsa, the government services gsa, the secret service. the american people are saying wait a minute.

i work hard, i send my tax dollars down to washington, and this is how you take -- this is how you handle my tax dollars. we need to and we want better. that's not a republican or democratic issue, that is really an american issue. that's where we -- this efficient, effective, and accountable government. that's where we -- i think that's the common ground for all americans. >> host: one last quick call. paul independent from green bay, wisconsin. >> caller: good morning, ladies. >> host: good morning. > guest: hi. >> caller: first thing i want to say i was a republican, i'm now independent. the republican party under reagan, bush senior, bush ii ran up $10 billion worth of debt. and the second thing they did was they deregulated the savings and loan in '87. look what happened. they had a recession then.

a bad one. i went back to college and got another degree because i couldn't get a job. >> guest: thank you for your call. i mentioned this earlier. we focus on this administration because it is the administration that's in power. but i think we need to look back, we need to be careful about its both parties that contributed to the debt and deficit. but the question is now not at the past, it's about how we're going to really move forward as a nation. how we collectively are going to figure out how we can cut spending, stop spending money we don't have, and most importantly put together a pro-growth economic agenda where we can send a message to our businesses and we can get the economy back on our feet and get the american people back to work. we've had 30 plus months of unemployment above 8%. that's a disaster for the american people. and underemployment probably around 17%. we've got to get the american people back to work. those aren't republican or

democratic issues, that's what america is about. it's really what we all need to work together to do. >> host: ann marie buerkle represents new york's 25th district. thanks for coming on. >> guest: thanks for having me. >> host: coming up next, our weekly magazine segment talking about tracking tornadoes. first the news update from c-span radio. >> at 918 here in washington here are some of the headlines. they began work on more homes last month. evidence that the battered houses market is slowly healing. the congress department said builders broke ground as a seasonally adjusted annual pace of 717,000 homes in april. that's 16% more than march's total. a memorial service in washington today honors the life of watergate figure turned

christian. he spent the last half of his life as a christian and founded a large christian ministry. they will air calls between president nixon and charles coleson wednesday. the defense and the john edwards trial has not yet said whether the 2008 presidential candidate will take the stand. he is charges with trying to hide his pregnant misstress with money from wealthy donors during his presidential campaign. and the state of greece is reporting the new elections will be held november 17th. the leader of greece's communist party said all of the leaders agreed that the interim government will not make any internationally binding decision. a nine-day deadlock in

negotiations after inconclusionive elections have forced greece to new elections. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> reading has become over the last 200 years the ultimate democratic act of the ultimate democratic country. because it makes it possible for the many to teach themselves what the few want to help close. the president can quote mark twain because he read "huck finn" and the postman can understand because he's read "huck finn" too. the big lies, although still possible, require more stealth and cleaverness. because with careful reading of books, newspaper, and new materials on internet, the flaws are reviewed. it wasn't for nothing that the nazis made bonfires of books. >> in 1992, anna won a pulitzer

prize. in a few weeks, you can talk to the best selling author on c-span. get a head start by watching some of her other comments overt years on her writings, briefs, and convictions and her life in journalism, all archived and searchable at c-span.org/videolibrary. >> "washington journal" continues. >> host: every weekend we take a look at a magazine. this week we look at "christian science monitor" the cover story by pete spotts, "inside the funnel." learning more about twisters. thanks for joining us from boston this morning. >> guest: thank you for having me. >> host: you start off your story with a very dramatic account of a family who had a

twister come through, and they did get a quick warning. tell us about how much warning time can people get before a twister comes through? >> guest: it's actually -- i hate to use the word complex. it's a bit of a complicated answer. let's say start with on average the national weather service is providing about 13-19 minutes advanced warning as a national average for tornadoes. now that can vary by region. the tornadoes that hit the dallas-fort worth back in early april, there was four tornadoes. there the warnings were from 21-45 minutes in advance. often you can get -- you know, the official warning can come out with a respectable amount of lead time. unfortunately, particularly in the case of the example i use, the tornado struck late at

night. and there if you happen to be awake and happen to have your television on or happen to hear the outside sirens, you might get sufficient advanced warning in the case of the family that i talk about in the article. they essentially had two minutes. it's not just sort of the lead time that the national forecast and the national weather service offices can provide. but it then -- how will those warnings arriving and the users which are essentially the people out there who have to respond and how they respond to that. these are some of the big questions that forecasters and forecast research are focusing on among other things at the moment. >> host: pete spotts writes about the lord family. they got the warning and it's a dramatic tale. the gentleman's father was halfway across the road. they tried to run back, they were holding hands and they were

ripped apart, their grip was separated and one ended up where and where did the other one end up? >> ? >> guest: well, the elder lord who was running across the street. that was paul lord, i believe. basically got blown back outside and was able to hunker down basically in like a gutter and ride it out. and his son, chad, wound up getting blown back into the house up against a wall. he managed to kind of collect himself and reach for a doorway on an interior bathroom and there was nothing on the other side. at that point, the fireplace collapsed on him and he was in the rubble for a bit opinion the twisters are traveling at 35-40 miles per hour. the whole incident lasted

perhaps ten seconds. at that point, people start to -- when they can, start to pick themselves up and put themselves back together. >> host: and the family survived. i wanted to share that. >> guest: everyone. >> host: pete spotts, what parts of the country do tornadoes most effect? >> guest: well, tornadoes -- let's start with the second part. tornadoes can occur and have occurred in every state of the union. last year which was such a huge year for tornadoes, somewhere around 100 nationally. you had maybe a half a dozen tornadoes over the course of the year in northern california, couple in oregon, certainly the traditional location that is we think of, the great plains, gulf coast, eastern u.s., there were even tornadoes in the northern tip of maine last year. they can hit every part of the country. but the dominant location is in the central part of the country. we tend to think of tornado alley as southern texas up into

north north dakota, and somewhere in the east and into missouri and elsewhere. these days a lot of researchers are basically taking anywhere between the appalachians and rockies, they are basically talking about the tornado capitol of the world. it requires a unique geography as well as particular atmospheric conditions. one the it reasons that tornado alley is where it is because you have a tremendous amount of warm water in the gulf of mexico. that warm water flows north up on to the continent. at the same time, you have winds blowing up over the rocky mountains. you have essentially a big layer of cold to the east with warm air closer to the ground underneath. it's the warm moist air that essentially supplies the energy for these powerful

thunderstorms. that alone isn't enough to do it. you have to have something called sheer, which is a change in direction or either a change in wind direction with altitude, or a change in wind speed with altitude. you might think of it as one layer and where those layers come together, they set up a kind of rolling pin like vortex that's, you know, within the first several thousand feet off of the ground. and if one of these rolling vortexes gets pulled up into the up draft of one of these powerful thunderstorms that imparts the spin and that's the super cells of the storms that tend to generate the most tornadoes. all of that is happening fairly high off of the ground. that doesn't tell you how a funnel gets to the ground. some of the most recent research suggests that the thunderstorm itself under the right conditions can form one of these

horizontal sort of rolling pin vortexes of air close to the ground. if that gets pulled in, that can be the trigger for tornado formation. so it's a multi-step process, and, you know, when you are out chasing these things and seeing them out in the open country, they can be the generation of these things can be quite dramatic. obviously when they start approaching the area they become quite less fun to watch. >> host: pete spotts. you can join the conversation. we're looking at the recent story in the christian science monitor. tornadoes and how people are learning more about them. you talk about how the lead time is 14-19 minutes, but you say

that's about -- it may be about to increase dramatically and that this is really longer the lead time that still seems so sort. >> guest: well, it does. when you think about it. but again that's a national average. you do particularly in the area where they get a lot of tornadoes and the forecasters have much more experience in working with tornadoes and forecasting them, you tend to get longer lead times. but the national average is about 14-19 minutes. now the national weather service numbers show that back in 1980s, around 1986 or '87, the typical lead time was about six minutes. there has been improvement. interestingly, there's another analysis done by the national severe storms lab out in norman, oklahoma, which actually gives you sort of the 19-minute estimate. which is a better number. on the other hand, their analysis shows that that 19

minutes hasn't changed much over the period of 1986, '87 to today. the difference is basically for both groups that tepid to include different ways of counting the tornadoes in their analyses. but either way the national average again is on the 14-19 minutes. but there is research under way, you know, both in the field to understand how tornadoes form. there's also research under way to develop new forecasting techniques that forecasters hope over the next -- actually given the pace probably over the next 5-10 years to see some of those warning times increase to at least 40 minutes on average and perhaps longer. >> let's get to the phones and hear from brian, democrats line in connecticut. good morning. >> caller: good morning. mr. spotts, i wanted to ask you a question which kind of coming out of left field, so to speak.

but i've often wondered when i hear about the monster hurricanes and tornadoes what the -- is there anybody with this knowledge that we have seem ingly, is there any research being done to get these or push these things or knock them apart before they can get into the monster mode of tornado and hurricanes, you know, to the point where they -- get them in the beginning of their beginnings and try to somehow disrupt them. i know there's -- that sounds crazy. is there anything afoot to let that happen or try to get that? >> guest: well, actually it may not sound as crazy as you might think it sounds. because there was a fair bit of research in the '50s and '60s, i believe, somebody may

have a better number on that. i'm going from memory here. there were attempts to try to figure out ways particularly for hurricanes if one could reduce their intensity or even induce them to break up before they made landfall. with tornadoes it could be really, really challenging to even think about that because they are such small-scale phenomenon, and usually for all of the publicity they get and for all of the damage they do, they are actually quite hard to produce for these super cell thunderstorms only about 10-20% of them ever form a tornado, and of those it tornadoes only about 20% of them are the most powerful sort. about 50% of them are relatively weak. so doing is -- you know, trying anything like that on a small scale as a tornado would be really, you know, hard to

conceive how one could do that. the other thing that researchers have found over the years is that it also raises some ethical questions. because while hurricanes, for example, can be very destructive when they make landfall, they can break droughts, they can bring much needed rainfall to areas of the country that need it badly, and even these powerful thunderstorms that come up in the spring and the summer as destructive as things like hail and tornado can be, they bring quite a bit of needed rain. so trying to sort of figure out how the storms work to a significant level of detail to where you could come back and say if we turn this knob or turn that knob we can throttle back on tornado or on hail generation, the state of the science is nowhere near there. and i'm not sure that anybody really knows what the affect would be downstream of the

storm. there might be conditions to say okay, you've fixed it at one location, particularly for a thunderstorm. but after that area, it might reintensify. so there are a whole lot of unknowns about how the storms work. then there are also -- as i said there are sort of ethical questions do you really want to do that? because the weather you modify here may have an unforeseen consequence upstream or downstream that, you know, might not be pleasant for people who would be under that. you know, people have worked on it, particularly for hurricanes. but nobody has found the silver bullet yet, for sure. >> host: mark republican lines, good morning. >> caller: well -- they have it pretty much to the stuff i was curious about. but let me ask you this, did they -- did the government ever try to use powerful lasers to

heat up the air and like i said. you kind of answered pretty much everything. >> host: mark, have you -- mark. >> caller: these powerful lasers. would that do any good? >> host: have you ever been in a tornado? >> caller: hurricane in hawaii. >> guest: you had to go from pennsylvania to hawaii to go through a hurricane. i never went through one until i got to boston. i hear you on that one. i've never heard of anybody thinking about lasers, i'm not sure it would work. remember that the engine that drives the thunderstorms and hurricanes is warmth and moisture. if the laser is essentially heating the air, that -- i have -- i certainly am not smart enough to work through the mathematics, but just sort of

intuitively, if you are heating the air you might wind up doing more to fuel it rather than suppress it. i'm not sure that would work. somebody else might be able to do better math on that i can. >> host: rose, democrat line, ohio. >> caller: good morning. i don't know if i've got a good idea or not, anyway, i would like to know if a person -- it is a technology now. if they could have something in technology that a person could wear on their body to signal them that there is a warning. every household would have it because a lot of them are sleeping at night. they don't want to be -- there's a lot of problem there where people don't even know about it. they have a system where they can alert somebody that don't know about it with some kind of

a thing on their body that tells them that they need to get to a shelter and everybody needs to have built of their home that they could go to. >> guest: well, i suspect that folks at the national weather service working on this are going you go, girl. as a matter of fact, there are several approaches people can use. one the most commonly available at the moment is called noaa weather radio. they are available a lot of outlets, i don't want to sound like i'm fronting. since they are ubiquitous, you can pick them up at radioshack. one the features if there is a severe weather alert, not just tornadoes but thunderstorms the local forecast sends out a tone and it activates the warning on the radio. and frankly there are some folks

inside and outside of the national weather service who have told me that these should be as -- these should be as required inside homes as smoke detectors and carbon monoxide alarms, particularly in areas where severe weather is more common than others. >> what about the modern technology, people using cell phones and getting text messages, things like that. >> i was about to get to that. and, in fact, this month the federal emergency management agency, the department of homeland security, is activating a new system -- i've got it written down here. pardon me for looking down. it is essentially through cell phones and wireless emergency alert, thank you. it's the wireless emergency alert. and essentially you will get 90 -- what is a 90-character text message in the event of a severe

weather warning or some other serious emergency that is in your area. one the nice things about these potentially is that they are keyed to the area being warned. it's kind of interesting that last year when you think about it for all of the tornadoes that we had if you sort of totaled up all of the, you know, the square miles of the storm tracks and those tornado and actually added a little bit of space on either side to include people that might have felt like they were affected by the tornado but certainly weren't as seriously as people closer to the center, the total square miles of all of those footprints would have been about 5,000 square miles. about the area of the size of connecticut. that seems big. except when you total up the square mileage of all of the areas warned for all of those tornadoes, it turns out to be two million square miles,

roughly equivalent to the eastern 1/3 of the united states. one the things that happens with both this new wireless alert service, as well as other localized services that people can subscribe to is that these alerts go off if your cell phone happens to be tightly within the warning box that the national weather service has issued. so one of the goals of warning research is to try to reduce the current frankly 70% false alarm rate. that rate is because of the big, you know, sort of the big areas that wind of getting alerted at the moment. these technologies either by smartphones, or this new homeland security approach look like they hold a promise of really sort of zeroing in. now i will say that i check with my cell provider a few days ago about this. and they are currently only offering it on a few of their --

you know, maybe six or eight of their most recent smartphone models. they plan to provide additional models capable of using this service over time. the smartphone i picked up about a year and a half ago at a moment won't receive that particular service. there's still others that can prescribe to. between that and the noaa weather radios that are available, that can go a long way. >> host: let's talk about the national weather service which you mentioned. it's funding includes a budget of $812 million for 2012. it was founded back in 1870 under president ulysses s. grant it provides weather forecasts and warnings. how does that compare to the work they are doing on hurricanes and other natural disasters? >> guest: oddly enough, it's hard to tease that out.

you know, i've gone through at least a quickly gone through the national oceanic and weather service budget. you do find a discrete line. that's being funded at about $3 million a year. but a lot of the hurricane research is folded into other storm research. and it's kind of hard to tease that out. that said, there have been several really large scale tornado research projects. the most recent one actually took place in 2009 again in 2010. it was called vortex ii, two months in the height of the tornado season in the midwest for each of those years. that project was $12 million. so tornado research is certainly getting money. but it's not -- it's more sort

of spread out amongst various activities and kind of harder to peel out as a discreet line item the way the hurricane forecast improvement project is. > host: pete spotts is a staff writer with "christian science monitor." he profiling the national weather service employee who goes around and learns from tornado wreckage, learns from what's happening on the ground. tell us about james, national weather service meteorologist, and people like him and how how much people are contributing to what we know. >> they are doing some really important work. it's sort of dived up. they are the official federal present if you will when the tornadoes occur. what their role initially is to

survey the area damaged to try to establish the tornado track, the length and width of the track from the kind of damage that it does to the various sorts of structures they inspect. they try to establish some sort of intensity, maximum intensity for the tornado. but they are also going around, you know, talking to residents and some of the conversations are sort of geared towards you might say national weather service shoptalk. did you hear warnings, how much lead time did you get? the information they gather will be used to help sort of evaluate how well the actual forecasting of the tornadoes, you know, how well that came off. and the -- a lot of the indication that they gather also feeds into a broader effort to try to analyze the impact of tornadoes on structures so that one can come up with so that

researchers, civil engineers, and engineering researchers can look for ways to try to come up with structural designs that might improve a home or office buildings or hospital resilience to hurricanes -- sorry, tornadoes. so the work they do is quite important. and it's very interesting to see how, you know, how they go out and go ahead doing their job. >> host: albany, oregon, will, independent line. good morning. >> caller: good morning. good morning, pete. thank you, c-span. back in 1985 i was a storm chaser and verify indication team at the national center research and ground observation coordination. and i'm highly aware of how difficult it is to spot tornadoes, of course, especially at night but in difficult

terrain and on the run. i've seen the vortex, the vertical vortex merge with a horizontal vortex. it's very difficult to see up there in the sky. we don't have eyes in the sky. it seems to me there's a certain type of crossing vortexes where energy gets transferred and becomes a tornado. where is the research currently being conducted? i know the university of chicago used to be the center for research and the university of oklahoma. would you tell us where the university research is being conducted these days? >> guest: yes. you mentioned two big ones. and interestingly years ago the national weather service, as you know, you know, set up a national weather center there. the work that was being done at the university of oklahoma at the national service noaa severe

storms laboratory out there and with the forecast offices and storm prediction center could be in close proximity for the nice feedback and interchange between the researchers and people that want to apply what they do. the university of oklahoma is big one. texas tech, the university of alabama, the university of wisconsin, those are just a handful of -- of course, you know, university of colorado as well are doing a lot of work in this. there are a lot of really top-notch places. but for reasons i haven't looked into but sound intriguing it seems like many roads tend to lead either to texas tech or the university of oklahoma. >> host: bill, democrat line. >> caller: yes. good morning. could you tell us regarding where the science is with regard to the correlation between global warming and the size, the

intensity, the frequency of tornadoes and hurricanes? for example, this year has been an unusually warm year, and i know when you go back to hundreds of years sometimes you'll say, well, this happens before et cetera. but do we have any hard data that shows a linkage between the global warming effect and the intensity and size of these storms? thanks. >> guest: well, let me take the hurricanes first, then i'll move to tornadoes. thanks for your question. the sort answer is there's little evidence at the moment of an effect from global warming on either the number or the strength of hurricanes. it may be there, but so far the -- you know, this is kind of radio jargon. i apologize. sort of the signal to noise is

not all that great. if there is a signal from global warming, it's not strong enough to poke through and prevent itself against the noise. and that a number of prominent tornado and hurricane researchers agree with that. they do not say that there will not be an impact. the modeling looking forward suggests that actually there maybe a reduction in the sheer number of hurricanes over the course of the coming century as the climate warms. but the proportion of hurricanes of the more intense type may increase. as for tornadoes, a sort of intuitively one could sort of make the case that because warming opens the atmosphere to hold more moisture, there would be more warm moist air to form the kinds of thunderstorms that tend to spawn tornadoes.

warm, moist air alone isn't enough. earlier on i mentioned the presence of sheer. for tornadoes to form, sheer has to be present. and i'm talking to some researchers about this actually for this story. you know, they said that it's entirely plausible that you might see, you know, there are no modeling studies at the moment that show this, you know, any sense of confidence. but you could sort of see that you might get an increase in the number of severe thunderstorms. but the sheer that's available, it's sort of ambiguous. some studies suggest the sheer might increase, some suggest it might decrease. without sheer, you tend not to get tornadoes as frequently. so i guess the sort answer, a long winded one is they don't know, but they are working on it. >> host: if you'd like to join the conversation, tell us about your experience with tornadoes, things you've learned, things

you've witnessed please call us. ask for questions to pete spotts, staff writer at "christian science monitor." tweets come in. smartphones have the weather apps, and mary says one thing if you are hearing a siren, do not pass go, cover immediately. it could mean your life. let's talk about how you actually protect yourself if you do hear one of these warnings. when you look at the severe damage that was done in joplin, missouri, are there building codes and things coming into place that can help protect people when a hurricane hits? >> guest: yeah, the tornado -- it's kind of a challenging question in a couple of ways. i mean the tweet talked about sirens. interestingly in joplin, missouri, the warning sirens

went off it was about 25 minutes before the tornado struck. they ran for about three minutes and then they shut off. it was the last that anybody heard of warning sirens until the tornado actually struck. so the -- you know, the tweeter is right. if you hear the siren, take shelter now. don't fool around. unfortunately, one the things that social scientist are finding out, social science researchers, is that humans have a tendency -- they pay attention to the warning but they tend to act only after they have confirmation after, you know, the effect that the warning is talking about. you know, it's sometimes we delay the warning -- we hear the warning but we delay action because we are looking for confirmation. if it's any consolation, we went through the tornadoes up here in massachusetts as well. my county fell under a tornado twice. as the tweeter suggested, even though i had a sense we were

probably not going to get hit, i didn't want to take any chances. i got familiar with my basement for two twenty-minute periods. as for what you can do for building codes, that's an interesting question. up to this point what people have tried to improve the wind resistance of their structures, they have based the activities on what's been learned for hurricanes. a lot of those hurricanes are straight winds. they are just sort of moving in the horizontal direction. tornadoes, particularly if you are close to the center of the vortex, there's a strong upward motion into the vortex. there's a vertical motion that building techniques don't account for. so a number of researchers are beginning to look at. there's one that i spoke with who has actually just gotten a five-year grant from the national science foundation to began looking and conduct experiments and research on ways

to improve structure resistance to the vertical winds as well. the techniques that they use now, at least on new construction, can range, you know, again from just having -- using some of the tried and true methods that have been developed for hurricanes that can help particularly reduce damage on the outskirts of the tornado as with any wind storm, the winds diminish in intensity with distance. so, you know, in a wind that might otherwise have damaged your home might not if during it's construction you take some of the extra -- the strapping of second floor walls to the first floor exterior walls, the strapping to the ceiling to the exterior walls. some of those can help reduce damage. in effect, when you are -- as in joplin, when you are hit with an ef5 tornado where the wind

speeds are upwards of 200 miles per hour, you really want to get out of the way and if there's a storm shelter get into it. because that is just going to be a -- you know, that's going to remove structures from foundations particularly, you know, homes. so when you hear those sirens, when you hear those warnings, yeah, it can be inconvenient. and there may not be a whole lot to do for the 20-30 minutes you are down in the shelter except play solitaire. but the alternative is not present. >> host: a tweet says i'd sleep in the basement if i lived in tornado alley. >> caller: i'm a retired air force meteorologist, i would agree that global warming is a factor in hurricanes and tornadoes. last year i think we had a record number of tornadoes and the temperature we had a record

high temperature. so i would have to disagree that the science does not handle that. and that actually not just temperatures involved in global warming, it's more moisture held in the atmosphere when you have warming temperatures. i just cannot agree with 2% of the people who say that global warming is not a factor and tornadoes and hurricanes and severe tomorrows and droughts too, by the way, and forest fires are all related to global warming, we are experiencing global warms, and it is due in part part -- if not mostly -- to co2. we now co2 has a direct correlation with temperature. scientists know that. i've seen studies. we know that. so the fact is in on this. we need to start doing something about it. the solution is if we go to the

moon and mine the helium 3 we have a radiation clean energy source and a tremendous amount of energy and we bring that back to the earth, we can take ourselves completely out of this problem of global warming. >> guest: well, that's -- that's an interesting prescription. i know there are some folks that think mining helium 3 would be a good solution to the energy problems. you could get it back and design and use the fusion reactors that would use it as fuel. as far as the global warming and the tornadoes and the hurricanes, i would only say that it's not 2% of the -- on the hurricane issue, but people who have come to this consensus that up to this point if there is a global warming signal, it is not obvious in the hurricane record. there are a number of well known

hurricane scientists who are convinced that global warming is a serious problem. it's not that these folks aren't looking for it. and the same holds true with severe thunderstorms. the folks that i talked to who are -- who say these are such small scales -- particularly tornadoes are such small scale events that it's really, really difficult to attribute those directly to climate change is, you know, it's just -- the data isn't there. and they too are very concerned that global warming is a serious problem. i think part of the challenge is for the global warming issue that we are so consumed with trying to attribute every little blip and burp in the weather to global warming that we miss the bigger pictures that you were pointing to about the rising temperature, the rising moisture in the atmosphere, and it's affects on, you know, arctic ice which can change the weather patterns and other things.

there is certainly enough other evidence out there to make global warming, you know, a problem that we need to deal with. and, you know, sort of debating the finer points of whether this or that tornado season is result of climate change. >> host: we're going to have to wind up in a minute. i wanted to get the last call in. we're going to have to keep the question and answer short. russell, independence line from kansas. go ahead. >> caller: hi. you were asked about storm stories. in 1964, i was six years old. i was out in my grandmother's front yard. i heard a noise where i was and it was close to the airport space. i expected -- i looked up and i expected to see a jet plane. and i saw six white funnels way up in the sky. this reminded me of a commercial that was playing at that time of mr. clean and the white tornadoes.