business week kicks off here in d.c. at 9:15, a look at the national flood insurance program. last week the house passed a short-term extension of the program. we will speak to a fellow at resources of the future. >> we still have a lot of work to do and there will be great challenges ahead. the loss of life continues in afghanistan. there will be hard days said, but we are confident we are on the right track and what the nato summit reflects is that the world is behind the strategy that we have laid out. >> ♪ host: president obama talking

about nato efforts in afghanistan. he is in chicago for two days of meetings with leaders of the north atlantic's reorganization if afghanistan. is high on the agenda and it took center stage just today. welcomed to "washington journal" on this monday, may 21. we would like to know what you think about the afghanistan discussion and the future of u.s. efforts, the international pressures, and what the afghan leader cahamid karzai has brought to the table this weekend. here are the numbers on your screen -- you can also find us online. or join the conversation on facebook. you can also e-mail us. the papers this morning are covering the nato summit in chicago, on the heels of the g-8

summit in this area. let's look at the headline in "usa today" -- while obama and world leaders huddled inside chicago's lakefront, thousands of demonstrators took to the streets, but inside the building, members of the lines are expected to consider today a plan that would transition to afghan forces into the lead of security --

hamid karzai is here in the united states and is said to be launching a charm offensive. he is best known for periodic jabs and his nato allies, but he is embarking on a charm offensive as he faces the prospect of fleeing troops and possibly dollars -- let's listen to what president karzai had to say in chicago. [video clip] >> afghanistan reaffirms its commitment to the transition process and to the completion of it in 2013.

and the withdrawal of our partners in 2014, so that afghanistan is no longer a burden on the shoulder of friends in the international community or the shoulders of the united states and our other allies. afghanistan, as you actually put it, mr. president, " looks forward to an end to this war and a transformational decade in which afghanistan will be working further for institution building and the development of sounder government in the country. host: that was the afghan president for the nato summit in chicago yesterday. we are getting some tweets and you can join that conversation. joseph writes -- --e's the baltimore sun

and we see some images in the newspapers today of what was happening both inside and outside the summit. here's a picture in the wall street journal -- then we also see images of

protest from outside. here are some pictures of the washington post -- 45 arrests reported, war veterans marching and some have discarded their combat m metals -- protesters were beaten with police batons and one serious head injury was observed. police have made 45 arrests and four officers were injured including one in the leg. several protesters were also hurt. we are still getting more tweets and we will get to your facebook comments as well. let's also look at some details as the afghanistan plan starts to form in chicago as nato leaders gather. it says there finalizing plans

to turn control of the afghanistan over to its own security forces by the middle of next year, a milestone on the way to concluding the combat role of the alliance by 2014. is nato moving at the right pace? what do you think? do you think u.s. involvement has the right tone and the right amount? let's hear from ralph, democratic caller in kalamazoo, michigan. good morning. caller: my comment is it looks like everyone is running into the same problem. the europeans and the united states, we cannot afford to use costly war. all the recent reports that i hear on c-span, it looks like the taliban is not going away. they may in fact be stronger hamidthey were, but the car karzai government is weak and that the country is under development and that we're not doing a good job of developing the country. i don't see the outcome -- it

seems like it is a stalemate. i hope we can get out as soon as we can, and it looks like the europeans are trying to get out of afghanistan. cannot afford it either. they have their own economic problems. host: michael is on our independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. russia this year has 5% economic growth. germany has to%. -- 2%. nato was set up to defend against russia. now russia has sold aircraft carriers to india and other aircraft to china and has scrapped its tanks and aircraft. what should be done is to invite russia into nato. europe imports 80% of its oil

and russia has used the model of canada and supplies the oil that the eu needs and then russia would not out arab oil influence. host: here's a comment on facebook -- here is more from the baltimore sun piece yesterday looking at hamid karzai's visit to the nato summit and putting it into historical context of what's been happening in afghanistan and what's happening now. it says --

what do you think? they succeed? inorge's on the democrats'

miami, florida. welcome to the conversation. good morning caller:. i remember a line from "the "the godfather" it says to keep your enemifriends' clothes and your enemies closer. we will not get the soviet union in nato because of past troubles. we don't want china to get in there because of lithium and opium. can get close, but not close as friends. just close enough to keep an eye on what they are doing and maybe c-span.org. host: steve tweets -- looking more at karzai's will

relationship with the west, it says -- the article points out that he is bringing back sort of that spirit to nato yesterday and today. paul is on our democratic line calling us from oklahoma this morning. caller: good morning. on afghanistan, what needs to be done over there is get all the countries surrounding it -- it is a landlocked country -- the other countries need to get together with the un and get agreements and invest money in that country on its national resources -- natural resources so that money can stay there for the people, good jobs in that

country, get them away from the poppy plants. want jobs just like everybody else does. get those jobs in there and get the natural resources out to some ports or trains or some way to the other nations and that country will be better off. if you don't, when we leave somebody else will go in there at, maybe china, take over the country and all its natural resources and the people will be in the same shape they are in now. that is my comment on that subject. host: if you like to join the conversation, give us a call. we just heard from a democrat. we also have a line for people outside the united states. 202-628-0184.

monty writes -- let's listen more to president obama speaking in chicago yesterday. [video clip] >> we are working with the afghans over the next several years to achieve a complete transition to afghan lead for afghan security, one in which we continue to provide support for afghan national security forces that have made excellent progress over the last several years. and, also, painting a vision post 2014 in which we have ended our combat role, the afghan war as we understand it is over, but our commitment to french and partnership with afghanistan continues. host: that was president obama speaking yesterday.

are talking about afghanistan, what nato is talking about, the drawdown, if not just of u.s. troops but also troops from around the world. let's look some more at how "usa today" is talking about the meetings that happened yesterday in chicagoland are continuing today. it says -- randy, independent caller in shreveport, louisiana, welcome. caller:hi. kind of a bottle for the last caller about sending the un.

the un and nato are a bunch of white collar criminals murdering at the world. that's not going to do any good. we are the ones sucking out all the resources over there and wherever we go. it is. is. -- it is all corporate. these people are just a bunch of crooks, a bunch of them. all the way from the local areas to the white house. it's a shame. it really is. people need to wake-up. , that's whol runs a they should vote for to get these people out. that's the only place to start. then we will go from there, i hope. have a good day. host: on facebook, r -- the question is where is afghanistan falling into

politics? we see a story coming out today that says --

laura in baltimore, maryland, on our democrats' line. caller: hi, thanks for c-span. hamid karzai thanked president obama for your taxpayers' money this weekend. we all should be really alarmed that we are spending $700 billion a year, getting back to the pentagon to spend on whatever they want. i am outraged, personally. a lot of people i talked to are. finally, people are understanding that we are having to choose between social services and unwinnable wards

that we cannot afford. we are really hurting financially. i'm looking at a humongous class sizes in our schools, teachers laid off, and the republicans are talking about cutting medicaid and other social services. people should be outraged, absolutely. thank you. host: going off what laura just mentioned, let's read the hamid karzai comment. here's the "washington times" --

what do you think? you take umbrage about was president karzai has had to say about receiving american dollars? thomas in silver city. caller: there is compartmentalizing of our needs in america. they are good at growing opiates. government grows that stuff in the philippines as well and employees mercenary soldiers to grow it and protect it. we have a huge demand for opiates. if they can grow it, why don't we whyit?

they could move to mexico and there's a similar climate and there's plenty of land. new mexico is a very poor state that could benefit. host: why build afghanistan's infrastructure, writes gaso kathleen. good morning. caller: they had no idea that a couple hundred years later we would be able to communicate so freely with one another. maybe it's time we removed power from congress and give it to the people. the first order for business to declare war, they should immediately petition the people first and give power back to the

people to send our brothers and sisters and sons and daughters off to war. i think that it would be an opportunity to really change the world as we know it when we fight only just wars. host: would you think about protesters who have been out in chicago? we have a picture of mostly peaceful demonstrators in grant park in chicago. caller: peaceful protest is one of the great -- our greatest moments of the country have come from -- in oeace. -- in peace. at the end of world war ii there will people celebrating in the streets because they knew people were coming home and we were not going to be? at war any more losing thousands of people.

having thatk that com power in a concentrated group of people is not the way it should be any more. we could definitely, with the technology we have today, we could get a vote rather quickly, and it is just a different world. with the weapons we have today, is a dangerous world. i think the people have that vote, it could change the world. it is a freedom and a. right we should host: for republicans, this is ray in california. caller: good morning, madam. i have a question. on afghanistan, i think the americans have made many mistakes, myself included. we don't go into a country this

way. we should be respectful, take them supplies and tell them we are there for a short time and we're going to leave. but the way it was done, it was with a bullet. what do we get in return? a bullet. so it depends who is holding the gun. the only way we are going to appear that is for us to send people there with compassion, not idiots that believe in shooting and killing because the only thing that will happen is you are going to get the same in return. my only conclusion on this war is take goats, food for the people, whatever they need on a daily basis, because money in that country is not point to buy anything but weapons. thank you, madam and have a good morning. you look great. host: a facebook, nancy --

let's hear from a chicago resident, matt on our democrat'' line. caller: good morning up here you are a great host. host: how are things in chicago? caller: things are fine. i live not far from the protest site. i think the chicago police department has acted very well. many of the protesters that i have seen are dressed in all black. i think they would protest anything. i do tend to be left on viewing. i may have a little bit of a hard time getting to work this morning with the street closures, but that's ok. host: what do you think about afghanistan and some decisions that are being made right now? metro's presence and the u.s.

effort? do you think the u.s. is pulling too much of the weight? caller: the u.s. is, but i just after say the president deserves a tremendous amount of credit. i have read somewhere somebody like into this war to -- likened this war that there's a couple of people having a problem living in one area. instead of those folks who live in that area, a whole community, with the technology we have, we don't need massive amounts of ground forces. there are terrorists we have to kill. we have smart bombs. we have remotes that we have used, but the president has used. so i think it is good. once again, i am not shocked at all. the president deserves the credit for bringing this to an end. and, of course, from our friends

on the right he will get no such credit. but i suppose we should not be surprised at that. host: keenan writes on twitter -- our next caller is in fort lauderdale, florida. on our independent line, good morning. caller: good morning. host: hi, ramika. caller: it is important that we assist with helping rebuild the area because we are partly responsible for the damage and destruction that was done in the area, in the region. second, if we are supposed to be encouraging a better rapport, we should have the same interest and concern for the well-being of the afghan people that we

want them to have for us. and i am not trying to get biblical, but i hear the other comments and people have a standoffish attitude as if we are different people. we are all here on the same earth and we are all here sharing the same space and oxygen. i don't understand this attitude as if we are separate in a sense that a sense-- that we exist outside other people. that's night. host: is there an amount of money that you think would be enough to send? how do you know when it's time to leave afghanistan? he spoke about how you would like to see rebuilding, kind of to help the people there.

if it's there a time limit or a money limit? caller: i think that it's probably time for our troops to go, but i think that in order to rebuild, we need to eliminate what could be the fear aspects of people seeing people in uniform. you know? if they see friends coming help to rebuild, they might be more receptive, knowing that we have the same concerns and the same love for one another. host: we have a comment on twitter -- let's take another call on this topic. in connecticut, jeffrey joins us on the republican line. good morning, you are on the program. caller: hello, hello.

host: let's go on to willie on the democrats' line in houston. caller: good morning. yes, well, i am not really into that. they need help, but people in the united states need help. they are doing me over. they don't give the grandchildren any royalties. host: anthony, a republican in new york city, good morning. caller: we went into afghanistan by the bush administration and we started the iraq war. ,hat was his father's war

because they stopped showing on channel 13 and the educational channels one of sadaam hussein's . hussein's they had a picture of his father and they were wiping their feet, the people who worked in the palace's. -- palaces. we should never have went in there. we should have just went after the right people, which we have not done all these years. host: you think things are different now that osama bin laden has been killed? caller: yes, directly. wherever he was, we should have gone. but we went into the countr ies making more. and the bush father, they've

done it for the bush father. we went into iraq. if that was my father, i would have gone after him too, if i had the power of the country behind me. host: sam writes -- we will talk more about the news for nato this weekend, but first let's look at other stores in headlines today. if "usa today" looks at polling data and which americans are supporting mitt romney versus president obama.

looking at presidential politics and the races that are going on right now, we see some issues that are coming up. the obama campaign is spending about half of the total it has raised. it says that supports a large political infrastructure.

outside spending is turning from the presidential race to congressional contests instead. federal filings and other data show a shift starting last month. looking at what is going on in terms of newt gingrich's campaign and so on, what happens when you still have bills to pay after closing up shop. congressional gop leaders are revisiting the. debate over the. this is a story that we saw a

little bit of on the sunday talk shows yesterday. spending cuts and the debt ceiling are linked -- house speaker john boehner is doubling down on the strategy that ended in mixed results last year after the country came to the brink of a federal default before a deal was struck with the the president. the house is out this week on recess, but the senate is in and we will watch what they are doing here on c-span, of course. looking at a couple other news stories. the blind activists in china has come to the united states and is

in new york. chen guangcheng is out of house arrest in china now, out of the hospital, and in new york seeking an education. the usa today" weighing in on that, saying it signals maturity in u.s.-china relations. for lauderdale, florida, jonathan is up next on the phone lines to talk about afghanistan. what? -- what do you think? caller: it would have been interesting if we could have totally concentrated on afghanistan instead of iraq and what the results might have been. unfortunately, that was not the case. so we were kind of left with a c + effort in that country. host: what do you do now? how do you take your concerns about the past and apply it to what to do next, jonathan? caller: >> there's no way to do what we could have done.

what we have to do now is reduce the number of troops, like they are doing. we have realized even if we put a large amount of troops in after the fact, it will not fix the problem. this is the graveyard of empires. alexander the great, the russians, and now us, unfortunately. what i would like to see come out of it is a stable political system for them, whether or not it is a democracy. it does not matter at this point in time. just so that terrorism cannot come back and take strong roots in that country. that is what we are looking for as well. , i well host: let's look at a couple of facebook comments that have come in. madeleine writes --

veni writes -- pittsburgh, pennsylvania, james on our democrats' line., line caller: the morning and thanks for having me on. i want to comment on afghanistan. we have already discovered gold, silver, and copper over there. the china boys are over there working on the biggest copper mine in the world. we will never get out of afghanistan due to the fact. you never read about in the papers or hear about it on tv. that's all i have to set. host: thanks for calling. let's take a look at some details of nato's troop presence in afghanistan. who is there and serving it?

the u.s. has 90,000 troops. we get those numbers from nato. what do you think about those numbers? next up is chris, and independent caller in washington, d.c. hi. caller: thanks for taking my call. we have our priorities all screwed up. afghanistan is about 0 p.m., oil,. and oil, we have a national defense budget of six under and $72 billion. -- afghanistan o afghanistan oil, opium and oil pipelines. philadelphia has just announced its closing a quarter of their schools. we should be spending domestically instead.

host: what you do with those feelings? how would you mow fort? caller: first, we have to wake up to what is really going on and get behind constitutionalists like ron paul. host: ok. let's look at a couple other stores in the news. 's upbyan's death brings the pan am flight 103 over lockerbie, scotland. the only man convicted of the bombing died and there's always been controversy over who was ultimately responsible and whether he was one of them. prime minister david cameron

said that he was convinced that abdel baset al-megrahi, a libyan intelligence officer, was guilty of murder, as judged and 2001. there was controversy over the fact he was allowed to go home to libya a few years ago because of failing health and that he had a few months to live. but he managed to live three years. families are talking about this and weighing in and expressing frustration of the fact that he was allowed release so many years ago. another story looking at politics. the washington post writes --

we will talk more about some news stories, but here's one last piece on politics. democrats are worrying about wisconsin --

we will see how that unfolds in the next couple. couple in michigan, a republican on the line talking about a afghanistan. good morning. caller: good morning. we talk about sending all that money over there to afghanistan and helping the people. my problem with that is do we forget about 9/11 and how many american people, kids in day care centers back there at the twin towers, that were killed that day? think about that before we think about sending any money over there whatsoever. and as far as president obama, i think that he's doing a great job, although i don't think we should be sending any kind of money over there. we should be thinking about the

great united states before we think about them people over there. host: on facebook -- otis writes -- one last comment on twitter from bill -- coming up next, we'll talk about global food security with the head of usaid, rajiv shah. and then hector barreto joins us to about national small business week, from the latino coalition . >> ♪

>> i think this is one of those markets that i think people vote for -- don't vote for the party. the city of wichita of votes for the candidate. i think you are seeing much more that even though it's heavily republican midwest, which is dynamic, but you are seeing more that in recent years in the midwest. they are really voting a little bit more for the person stands for. >> june 2 and june 3, exploring the heritage and literary culture of wichita, kansas. >> the first thing i want to show you is among your house, the only remaining original structure from 1865 to 1870. -- the munger house. it is a residence, but it is also the headquarters of the wichita county land company that came down here to create the

city of wichita. >> that's on june 2 and june 3 on c-span 2 and c-span 3. >> consumers are very frustrated right now. thereforir mobile devices are working so slowly. >> competition for wireless and two new commissioners. that's tonight at 8:00 eastern on tonight2. -- on c-span 2. host: rajiv shah it is the administrator of usaid. guest: good morning. host: i want to talk about global food security. guest: basically it means there are almost one didn't people that go to bed every night hungry. as a result of that, there's tremendous consequences. hundreds of millions of kids don't have the energy to protect

themselves from disease and died of malnutrition. those children don't necessarily learn well if they have the chance to go to school. it holds them back and in hold their economies back for decades. when we know that when food prices go up and when more and more people are struggling to get access to such a basic commodity as food, we tend to see food riots, failed states, famine, if an serious national- security threats and risks. so the basic comment of food security is to have more people having the access to food, to not be hundred, and as a result to build a more stable and secure world. host: in an earlier conversation this morning about afghanistan and nato discussions about afghanistan, if some of our callers said let's worry about hojme. why should -- home. guest: secretary of defense bob gates used to say it is cheaper

to invest in development than it is to send soldiers. he meant that in financial terms and and very human terms. the reality is lulz security and expanding access to health care so children can live beyond age of five or building a more secure planet where everybody gets to go to school and be in a position to pull themselves out of poverty is part of how we keep our country secure and how we make sure we are getting ahead of the next conflict as opposed to dealing with the consequences of it. in afghanistan, the united states and other countries in the late-1980s essentially stop engaging afghanistan, stopped investing in sending kids to school and helping that government drive over time. the results were deeply consequential. we do this work because it is in our moral interest and because it is in our economic and national-security interests. at the end of the day, we spend less than 1% of our federal budget, less than 1%, on the

types of development activities. caller: there's a sports you security -- on friday it was announced that there's a new alliance for food security. here's president obama talking about why the u.s. is involved. [video clip] >> food security is moral and it is an economic imperative. one of the most effective ways to pull people and incarnations out of poverty is to invest in their agriculture. as we have seen from latin america to africa to asia, a growing middle class also means growing markets, including more customers for american exports to support american jobs. we have a self-interest in this. it is a moral imperative, an economic imperative, and a security imperative. host: president obama speaking on friday. rajiv shah, the head of usaid. the president mentioned why it

is important in his view. sac more about why it is a security imperative. guest: in the 1960's, korea, south korea, and taiwan were the largest recipients of american food aid we sent food in to prevent people from starving and to help them survive. but then we spent the next two decades actually helping both of those countries invest in their own agricultural production, to diversify their economies, to build systems of higher education so they could pull people out of poverty. today both nations are tremendous trading partners with the united states. we have signed a free-trade agreement with south korea that will lead to an hundreds of thousands of american jobs. there are companies that my institution helped invest in and get going in the 1960's and 1970's to deal with food and hundred that today employ thousands of americans in america as part of their global enterprise. we know we can get ahead of this

problem. we know sub-saharan africa does not have to be mired in extreme hundred and party and in fact can be the next economic frontier helping us grow our economy and create jobs and home. that is what the chinese are doing. it is what other countries are doing. it is what we need to continue to do, because we have a very proud legacy in this area. host: we're talking with rajiv shah, from the agency of international development in america, usaid. if you would like to join the conversation, call. usaid, its mission and its money. here is where money that it works with ends up going to a. we see countries like afghanistan, haiti, kenya, jordan, pakistan, and then african countries.

what is this money being spent on? guest: we invest primarily in a few subjects. security is one of them. the new alliance president obama announced on friday and that we discussed at camp david with the group of gay leaders around the world was an effort to say if we are going to tackle ron rear end party, we cannot do it alone. if we need other partner countries investing with us. -- that we discussed at camp david with a group of 8 leaders. we want to make investment to help reach small-scale farmers in ethiopia and tanzania and many of the countries you mentioned. we see the results of that. when we partner with american firms in haiti, we can double or triple rice production and help patients move out of poverty and not be as vulnerable as they have been in the past and as we

saw after the tragic earthquake the. we have seen in bangladesh for the first time in history the poorest state with more than 40 million people, in partnerships with american universities and scientists, have not produced enough rice to feed themselves and have had the first-ever surplus in decades. this partnership is part of our program president obama launched called feed the future. it's our top priority. it is an effective effort to partner with the private sector and eliminate hunger around the world. it is one example of what we are able to do when we invest with focus and declared a round of results we seek to achieve it. host: now we have a caller on the democratic line in waldorf, maryland. caller: thanks for having me. i am concerned about how the commodities market in chicago affects the food shortages in other countries. i am not talking about hedging.

i'm talking about the speculation in with investors are not required to actually physically take possession of some of a soy, corn, wheat, rice and the markets. i just noticed there's a connection between food and stability in some of the eight riots that go on and the speculation have here. i hope your guests can address the issue and thanks so much. guest: thank you. that's an outstanding question, because it's absolutely true that when we see food prices if spike considerably, we know that populations that are vulnerable around world suffer dramatically. in many sub-saharan african countries where we work through the feed the future program, a typical family will spend 55% of their total of disposable income securing food for their children

and their families. we spend about 10% in the united states buying food per household. that means if food prices double or triple, all of a sudden the kids are not eating, mothers are not eating, if kids are not going to school, and families suffer dramatically. here it is inconvenient, but in other parts of the world did lead to food riots, failed states, and sam in. in 2008 major commodity price spikes lead to a reversal of a trend. the trend was for the first time -- over four decades every year fewer and fewer people were going hungry. that changed dramatically in 2008. 100 million people were pushed into a condition of extreme hundred and extreme poverty because of price spikes -- extreme under. hunger. we know the consequences of not

addressing this issue now, dealing with the high costs in blood and treasure and resources of failed states and the famine and the types of things that are moral outrage is that require immediate and very costly interventions. host: rajiv shah is the head of the agency for international development, usaid. we have been talking about an alliance for future security -- food security. here are some details. it is an agreement between g-8 african nations, and the private sector. it will kick off in sub-saharan africa. the goal is to get 50 million people out of poverty. talked about private-sector involvement and why look to them for so much capital. guest: we look to the private sector because they bring more than they bring technology, they

bring logistics capacity, if they bring the ability to organize product supply chains and reach hundreds of thousands of farmers. the reality is we know how to end extreme hunger in sub- saharan africa and that's what the president can boldly claimed we will work with international partners to assist millions of people out of poverty. it will not help with private investment alone. the president was clear we will meet our global and international obligations and we will continue to prioritize our own public investments in this area and demand as much from our african partners and others. but ultimately it is small-scale seed companies and entrepreneurs that are creating drug-resistant or disease resistant seed varieties that can be used by small farmers to help protect themselves and eliminate salmon and hunger risk during pouring -- eliminate safamine risk

during poor rainfall years. companies like unilever creating markets for farmers to grow themselves out of poverty. farmers in nigeria that produced a product called sorbitol, for example. those are the kinds of public- private partnerships. by doing the work this way, we have stretched american taxpayer dollars. for every taxpayer dollar we spend, we leverage to dollars to $3 -- $2 to $3 dollars from partners. it's because of this innovative approach. host: let's hear from el paso, texas. caller: good morning. i can only attest to what this

gentleman is saying, the miracle that happened over the span of my lifetime. i am 64. my first memories are seeing more footage from korea. if you visit seoul, south korea, you see an economic miracle. that could not have happened without our help. those folks are our best friends. they are among our most loyal allies. the same same things with the japanese and the taiwanese. we can count on them. motives.'t suspect our we went there to help. they have not forgotten that. guest: i appreciate that question. you're pointing out a basic reality that we had a choice in the 1960's. we could have invested in a

bright future for the south korean future or we could have avoided that. that was our choice at the time. we help them to build roads and universities and to improve their agriculture, which was our focus. they can produce more food themselves. today they are a dynamic economy. they posted the major international summit on nuclear disarmament. that is the value of having partners that are connected to us in a fundamental way. i visited there last year. so many people came up to me and describe their own personal circumstances. they were getting american food aid. many have the opportunity to go to american universities.

they have gone back and help to grow a stronger and more stable bulwork that is the bo -- we can ensure that the world that comes together is connected to american values and safe and secure an economical prospers or we can let others define the future. president obama and secretary clinton has been clear and this is been a good example about how we do the former. host: john from new mexico, welcome. good morning, john. let's go on to reach in fairfax, virginia -- rich. caller: hi, how are you?

everybody wants to do what is right in the world but it comes down to priorities. my concern is we have people in this country who could use the same help that we send oversees all the time. i watched a show last night on "60 minutes." tel aviv is doing extremely well. look to the middle east and the oil countries. i don't understand why it is always on our back. why the united states has to go out and take care of the rest of the world. that is the general comment that i have. maybe you could help me understand why we should do more when we have so much that needs

to be done in this country. guest: the sentiment you're expressing is very important. these are tough times here at home. president obama and secretary clinton asked us to we imagine what our work around the world could be light. we took a tough approach to reforming the way we work. we now know the concrete results our investments generate in country after country. we have restructured the way we do preferments. if we can save 20%, 30%, 40% in terms of the operation of how we can work, we can save the american taxpayer resources. but times are tough and we have insisted on these reforms and on delivering concrete results when we make investments. if the united states steps back,

others are already stepping up. you can visit a village in africa where somebody will say they have a deep admiration for president obama, president clinton, and president bush because of the strong legacy we have had in a bipartisan way in trying to make the world a better place by putting our values first. if we step back now, we will be ceding that world to other nations like china and others that are stepping up their investment and offering people a different picture of what the future would look like. host: we have a comment coming in from rabbitran. talk about where your money comes from and tells about the funding levels and how you

justify getting what you need from congress. guest: the entire budget for the state department and the united states agency for international development is just over $50 billion and comes in the foreign appropriations act. there has been strong bipartisan support for some of these initiatives we're discussing. there is a development assistant account which is about $2.5 billion a year. this is less than 1% of what we do as a nation in terms of our spending and our budgeting. the returns on it are tremendous. look at the malaria initiative. that spends about $660 million a year and is saved approximately

children.,000 there used to be about a million kids who die from malaria. they are sleeping under bed nets, getting better medication, and they are surviving. 80 partnership with our country. they are seeing our values. they have a deep affection and appreciation for the united states. the president of tanzania it was just here. they have seen a 20% drop of children who die under the age of five. as you walk through those villages, those communities are forever associated with a

proud, value-driven away with the united states. the threat of islamic extremism will not threaten those villages. that is the vision of success we want to continue to replicate. host: usaid was started in 1961 and has its roots in the marshall plan. host: brent from annapolis, maryland. -- at what curious point does the human population exceed the ability of the planet to feed it? guest: that is a question that

has been asked every decade. there was a time in 1968 when a sociologist wrote a book called "the population bomb" predicting about 3 under million people in south asia would starve to death because population outstripped the planet and the region. scientists invented a new form of wheat in mexico and that led to the green revolution which help to double and triple food yields in india and pakistan and other parts of south asia and it helps saved hundreds of millions of life. he won the congressional medal of honor.

these are examples where we have overcome the pressures that you're describing by investing in smart technologies and by improving that our own capacity to innovate and improve food production has avoided widespread starvation. we expect the same to take place over the next several decades on this battle against hundreger. host: a question on twitter. guest: yes, absolutely. if we can get -- we know 9% of calories that are consumed in places where they are produce. we have enough food commodities to feed the world. a typical african a former who is currently a woman and working

on one or two acres of land and producing food for her family. if their production goes up, there will moved their families out of poverty and that will set off a chain reaction where economies can diversify and grow in a more high-growth manner, creating a more equitable world. host: joe from damascus, maryland -- joan. caller: i want to thank the gentleman for what he does. our congregation is participating in their letter- writing campaign. not to cutg congress the budget when it comes to hunger programs.

the first question -- whether or not aid works for partners with bread for the world? we are concerned about the house budget right now. less than 1% of our total budget goes for these hundred programs. -- hunger programs. if she could give us an update about the south sudan. the chinese are making inroads. they are taking farm land in south sudan and working the farm land but the food is being exported to china and that is a concern to me because of all the issues in northern sudan and south sudan. guest: thank you. bred for the world is a great

organization and movement and we're proud to work with them in food security and health for the most vulnerable people. thank you for serving as a part of that movement. hunger issues need to be tackled. this administration has made commitments to do so on both fronts. president bush recommitted to tackling this issue and to ending hunger here at home, especially for children. there are plenty of democrats and republicans who come together around these basic issues. i've been amazed in my two years of to learn that across both parties, there is a deep

commitment to doing this work if we can prove we're doing it in a way that our investments are sufficient in leveraging others and we're generating the kind of outcomes that people cared deeply about. on south sudan, right now is a critical moment. they have an opportunity to make some decisions about the future if they choose. president obama has been clear in his request that the south sudan choose peace, investing in the health and growth and unlocking the potential of their people. the land is incredibly fertile. it is beautiful soil, plenty of sunlight. you can create a significant breadbasket of food in south

sudan. a young girl born in south sudan is more likely to die in childbirth than to complete a secondary education. we need to work with them to make sure they are prioritizing education and that we offer a different model working with the american government to create better future as opposed to the model you described. host: there are now two separate countries and fights happening on the border. the country's creaking situation for poverty in each other's countries by dealing with an oil pipeline and withholding money for it. how does usaid deal with

geopolitics? guest: conflict in war or development in reverse. people destroy their assets. they get injured. any infrastructure that was being billed like roads -- being built like roads get destroyed and they get set back decades. stability and peace are fundamental. that is why president obama and secretary clinton have urged. we have brought together our resources to work in a more integrated common cause method. south sudan is a great example. focusing on creating the conditions for success and

supporting a development portfolio. helping to build roads and help farmers improve their production so they can require less food aid which will save less significant resources and provide those communities a dignified pathway out of poverty and hunger and conflict. i'm glad you asked that. there has been false conflicts between those who support development and those who are trying to bring about peace and stability. we have to work together to make sure we're generating the best results. host: diane from new jersey, a republican. caller: hello? good morning. thank you for your hard work, sir. do you handle all the funding

yourself through your own agency, or do you have to go into a country and kind of fight with them about how much they will spend? you go when and control all the funds -- you go in and control all the funds? pakistan wanted the money we're going to give them and not the product a couple of years ago. guest: thank you, diane. we have been committed to working in partnership with host countries and communities, not just the governments, finding an unlocking the talents of local entrepreneurs, whether they are media countries in afghanistan that help bring visibility to that nation's

struggles and inspire its people to commit for the long run. we have tried to change the way we work so that we are not working in the mindset of patronage but focused on building those reached an important partnerships in country. pakistan is a great example. we had 140 different projects when i started. with people who are fighting on behalf of those that were left out. today our return from a visit where we were able to launch new reading and education programs. by doing our work, we're able to help 3.2 million pakistani children achieve literacy

outcomes and that brings more pakistan it resources and dollars to the task of educating their own people and begin to envision a pathway where our resources can overtime be tapered off. that kind of transition is a big part of creating the conditions where aid and assistance is no longer needed. we can live in a more prosperous and peaceful world. host: maverick writes in on twitter. that is his opinion. we have been talking about a new alliance for food security and nutrition. it has a lot of private partnerships. is there a danger in relying on companies too much?

guest: we have worked closely with the companies to make sure their investments are targeted and transparent. this is the first time in this area that anyone has brought together 45 different firms from the united states -- most are from africa. some are from india and asia. all of the companies have agreed to abide by the basic principles of transparency and openness. we will be able to measure the outcomes on small-scale farmers. many are women-headed households. we will measure the nutritional status of children. at the end of the day, we need these companies -- one company is committing to reach five under thousand small scare out vodaphone.,

it is time to rethink what it takes to get the work done and to bring different partners together, and to get on with the business of ending hunger, which is a solvable problem. host: what is happening? guest: this is a reference to a larger reform we've put in place to get better results for american tax dollars. if you look at the last decade, usaid was asked to triple its spending in some countries while

also taking a 40% cut in the overall levels. that led to widespread outsourcing of doing the work and evaluating and judging the next set up programs. it was costly and inefficient for american tax dollars. we have implemented a new approach to accountability. we are insisting on tracking resources and trying to lower the expense of overhead of doing work, and investing in local institutions so we have a path wipeouts. our goal is to create the conditions where aid is no longer needed and have more success stories like south korea. we think we can do that if we take a businesslike approach to

reducing our cost and encouraging more diversified partner base. that reform has allowed us to expand our partnerships with american businesses. i think the distinction -- what president obama announced yesterday it would not be possible if we didn't have this approach. how work differently with unilever in nigeria? it is part of diversifying our partner base. host: welcome, jonathan, in florida. caller: i appreciate the idea. i want to know more about the details. you have a government-subsidized program with private sector intersection -- where is the divide?

will the commodities be sold on the global market and will not affect whether africans can afford to purchase them? you guys will be setting up something in somalia. what if there is political unrest? transporting these foods to the market -- kind of captured -- will the u.s. government stepped in to insure their investments care of?g care oken guest: 3 or four decades ago, the majority of the dollars would have come from agencies usaid like, the world bank. today, it is the opposite is true. africa has grown at roughly two

or three times the global growth rate. investment dollars are now going in at a rate of three or quarter times that of official development assistance. we believe we ought to change the way we think to be more effective -- at the rate of 3 or four times that of official development assistance. we can steer those resources towards benefiting small-scale farmers who will continue to be the vast majority of the world's most extremely poor and hungry households worldwide. we can insist basic principles

of transparency and responsibility so we can track the results of these kinds of investments. our aspiration is to bring all partners to the task in achieving these goals -- ending hunger, ensuring kids have clean water to drink when they get thirsty. those are basic human aspirations. we want to bring the private sector into that task. most private-sector firms are not choosing immediately to invest in somalia. this program will start in as places where countries have taken the tough reforms to create an open and save for business climate and that will be places like tanzania and guyanhana. ddage jason chairs the at

on twitter. you're hosting a conference next week about frontiers and development. how was the field changing? who eard somebody h volunteers with the organization. guest: it is changing rapidly. we would go to the world bank and you would have your experts. today, pepsico is a company with expertise and his help countries transform their economies. there are students on universities that are

volunteering on projects, inventing new mobile phone applications that help people in far-flung places of the world lead better lives. i met a student that invented a product that would take arsenic out of the water. that is now widespread throughout parts of bangladesh and helping kids avoid heavy metal contamination in their water. we can tog everything change the way we work with american inventors to make sure we tap into that great energy. host: pennsylvania, alice honor emocrat's line -- on our democrat's line. caller: please keep your finger

on thoff the button. we heard mr. obama say food sufficiency is the moral imperative. we need to create the conditions for aid is no longer needed and to expand u.s. business partnerships. iraq -- we came roc in and said, "you must use only genetically modified seed from unilever and monsanto." we're attempting to do the same thing in iran. we must cause iran's leaderrs to starvation. this is what americans do.

first we starve them. then we say our companies will come in and sell you the seeds so you will no longer a star ve. this is a moral outrage. host: ok, alice. guest: alice, war has consequences and that is why it is important to make these kinds of smart investments to build these new partnerships to avoid consequences of war and to avoid going to war in the first place. those types of technologies may not add value over time-- they very well may. some of the technologies that

will be real in five to seven years could do is a real shot at ending the kind of cycle of famine that we see when we see excruciating droughts. but they are not relevant right now in sub-saharan africa. there is a long way to get to the point. we're not focusing as part of an effort. i would question the history. america has a proud history. americace the 1860's, has been the scientific leader elped toulture and h transform our own economy. that ine trying to do sub-saharan africa. we have a lot to be proud of.

hundreds of millions of people have survived because of the food security and american investment. host: have some real innovation whether on college campuses or in company board rooms. how do you thread that needle? we go in and mixed things up and then have companies that can help solve the companies. how do you walk that fine line? business conducted with transparency and basic values can do both and create tremendous amounts of value for consumers and producers. that is the story of our own economy. that is the story of what is happening and needs to

accelerate in africa through this new alliance. more than 45 companies are making these commitments. we are not looking for philanthropy. we want you to bring your best talent and your business acumen in helping to create a more modern food system in areas of the world that are hungry. we have seen the results of that. a company has help commercialize a seed variety that has reached tens of thousands of small-scale farmers that has helped them in double or triple their food production. that one act of leadership helped protect millions of yans.en that is what success should look like. host: president obama announced

the new alliance for food and nutrition. his administrator -- journal@c- thank you for beingv shah, with us. up next, hector barreto. the weeklyook at your money segment with carolyn kousky. first a news update. >> and update on the situation in north korea. glen davies says it would be a serious -- if north korea conducts another test and will be met with swift international punishment. his remarks, after meeting with his south korean and japanese

counterparts. an article estimate'mitt romneys net worth at two under $30 million and that medtronic is not the richest person to run for president -- $230 million. inflation adjustments might favor plantation owners if mitt romney is elected. in terms of total dollars, a president romney would be the wealthiest white house occupants. the latest ad from the obama zeros in on mitt romney. it focuses on the purchase of american pad and paper which went on to lose 5000 jobs before going bankrupt. those are some of the latest

headlines on c-span radio. [video clip] >> between 1971 and 1973, president richard nixon secretly recorded nearly 4,000 hours of phone calls and meetings. hear more on the nixon tapes. also j. edgar hoover. >> somebody think i should make a statement about the freedom of the press and that we were trying to center them. >> i think you are right. >> what is a relationship? >> absolute silence about it. >> xm channel 119 and streaming at c-span radio.org. guest: "washington journal" --

>> "washington journal" continues. host: our guest is hector barreto. this week is national small business week. back: we're happy to be for national small business week. every week the president declares one week for small business. small business is the engine that fuels the economy of the united states. 27 million small businesses represent more than 52% of the growth output of the economy and create most of the net new jobs . host: if you like to talk about small businesses, here are the numbers -- democrats, 202-737- 0001.

republicans, 202-737-0002. callers, 202-628-ar 0205. a number for small business owners, 202-628-0184. mitt romney, president obama -- how are you looking at their plans and goals? guest: t deposit both of them are focused in on small businesses. small businesses are still dealing with the same issues they are always dealing with. those problems become even magnitude in a down economy. access to capital is critically important. small businesses need the same thing big businesses need -- they need more business.

host: "the washington post" looked at some of the goals of president obama and mitt romney. three specific things they would do. mitt romney would reverse the executive order about using union labor on large projects. a lot of union issues there. guest: i think there's a lot of things that we need to do around government contracting. white it is so hard to get access to these contract -- why is it so hard?

small businesses are getting less contracts and minority businesses. i think there's a lot of stuff we need to do. we need to do more our reached for small businesses. we need to make it easier for them to get access. you have to earn a contract. host: let's listen to comments made by mitt romney last week. [video clip] >> i think the president is being guided by things that have been spoken about by liberals that of been proven not to work. the idea about raising taxes on small business. it doesn't help. it hurts jobs. he has tried to change the

deal between labor and management. the workers are not given a right to secret ballot. that will not create jobs. host: taxes -- is that a key point for business owners? guest: it is, especially if they do not know what their taxes are going to be. i agree with the governor. when small businesses keep more of their own money, they put it back into the business. they are not spending it on frivolous things. host: "the washington post" looking at president obama's position. nearly $100 billion a year ago to small businesses.

host: he give some examples of new programs. host: he launched a program last year. guest: i think we need to do more. government spent more last year. the total dollar should keep going up as government spends more money. here doing our conference next week and we're doing business matchmaking for small businesses that attend.

we have invited fortune 500 companies to come. my father used to say small businesses have know-how but they do not have know-who. we're doing some of that ourselves. host: let's listen to the president. [video clip] >> we want to make sure that when it came to government procurement, we break these up into pieces so that a small business -- [unintelligible] as you guys are hiring, part of what we want to do is to maintain momentum. we propose that every time you hire or you increase your wages on orders, that you get some tax

relief for that. that means at the margins come in my decide each employee is costing a little bit less and maybe you can hire a few more. maybe you could have the capital to open the next store after this one. host: your reaction. guest: he was talking about unbundling contracts. i think that is very positive. we're doing some of that this week where we are introducing decision makers to those buyers. that is what the small businesses are. host: mark is a republican in albany. caller: good morning.

my father is a small-business owner and a lot of my friends are. one thing that concerns me -- i think the business climate needs to be reinforced by another round of spending along the lines of paul krugman is talking about. businesspeople are concerned fiscally. a lesson from the great depression is that there is a need to have pretty significant spending from government. i would like to see that go to small businesses. recognize the need to reinforce the ideas of paul krugman and have a cash infusion to the turn of $30 billion a year over the next five years so our economy is not slip. guest: i agree with the fact

that we need to do more to help small businesses get those contracts. theseweren't a lot of projects that we heard so much about and that small businesses would get their fair share. if we're going to do additional spending, we need to make sure it is targeted and smart spending and that it does go down to small businesses. it all depends on the details. anything that fosters that environment is something that we're supportive of. host: hector barreto with the latino coalition. let's look at that website. tell us more about what you're doing this week. guest: we start off today with the procurement initiative. we have a full day of events at

the omni shoreham hotel. we'll have speakers from federal express and sam's club. on wednesday, we have mitt romney coming over and speaking to our small business owners and also marked rubio. -- marco rubio. it will be a great week and something for everyone. if you want information, we will have that. benefits, ways to help your business grow -- all that will be available. i enjoy it people to visit us online for more information or if you want to register. we still have some tickets available. host: silver spring, maryland is up next. caller: my husband and i have tried to start small businesses.

we have never been able to put our full attention to it biggest one of us always have to keep a job because of health insurance. what are your feelings about divorcing health insurance from the job. you cannot take a flier if you're dealing with someone who was cancer in your family. guest: when i was at the fda, i used to feel the main problem small businesses will have will be around capitol and contracts or regulation. the number-one thing i heard was the problem they have with their health insurance. it is not fair for small businesses -- they generate most of the economy. they are the only group having problems getting health insurance. if you are a member of a union,

those things are taken care of. you can get a policy that maybe has a large deductible and a couple that with a health savings account. lisa talk about allowing small businesses to form large p ools so they could negotiate better rates. buy insurance across state lines. there are private sector solutions that would be helpful. they do not know what will happen with health care reform. we will have to wait and see what comes down from the supreme court to see what the impact will be on small business. i would encourage you to follow your on to burn merrill dream.

-- your entrepreneurial dream. there's a lot of resources and a lot of help to get to going. get more information on how you can get help with your small- business dream. host: a comment on twitter. guest: a lot of small businesses are concerned about what they believe is a takeover of the health-care system by the federal government. there are issues and problems and we need to work together on a bipartisan basis to solve them. i would not say that one party has all the good ideas with regards to tackling this problem. host: a caller from ohio. caller: good morning.

i am hearing standard republican chitchat. go back to the paper you show about president obama's record over the last several years for small business. and if your guest can explain what happened what he had that of us from2001 to 2006. what improvements did he make compared to what this administration has made. , wedn't like his tone that can do more. i will hold. guest: thank you for the question. we're coming off of a recession or what was the beginning of a recession. one thing i was concerned about is the number of small business loans have been stagnant for years. we were doing about 50,000

loans. a lot of small businesses complain they were not getting big enough loans. the average loan was over to roger $50 million -- $250 million. i am proud of the record we had. we doubled the number of loans that we did. we went from 50,000 loans to over 100,000. we were able to train more people than ever before. what small businesses often need is help or information on how to plan their company. we trained millions of small businesses. federal preferment increased over 60% while we were there. there was a lot that one on

there. onenot talking about administration needs to do more. there are millions of small buses out there and they need help. it is incumbent upon government and private sector to surround small businesses with the tools that they need to succeed. we cannot grow as a country unless small businesses are growing. thank you for your question. host: nordo write in -- guest: thjames carville will give his opinion on what is happening in the election. these events are not political events and we are not a political organization. we invite people from all areas. it is critical that everybody be

engaged. host: and c-span will be there later this morning at 10 eastern this morning. -- 10:00 eastern. the at&t vicefor president. oslo the president and ceo, darlene miller. that is beginning at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. robert is a republican in detroit. small business owner? caller: yes, i am. host: tell us about it. caller: i've been in business for the last 12 years. i ran into some problems --

i was one and where i could find some help to get my capital started back up. host: what kind of business? caller: a security service. host: what are you looking for? caller: financial issues. guest: there is so much hope that is out there and sometimes small businesses do not know about this help. visit to local office. the sba has offices all around the country and we have a great office in michigan. i would encourage you to bvisit the small business development centers and look at the score program. those folks are incredible about helping small business.

a lot of times you're dealing with eight seasoned executive who is volunteering their time to help small business. they have been there and done that. i encourage you to reach out. you can go online and searched these resources out. it doesn't have to cost a lot of money. i wish you a lot of griood luck. host: if you're a business owner, you can call 202-628- 0184. maggie on the democrat's line from new jersey. caller: good morning. jobs are created in a consumer- based economy by the consumers. if the consumers don't have money, you can create a product that can change the world.

but if they cannot afford to buy it, you're out of business. the unions don't create a feeling, they create a platform for wages. we have become a country of wage slaves. in the last congress, there were 400 jobs bills and a lot of buy american bills that died because they never got on to the floor of the senate for discussion because of the insane use of filibuster. in new jersey, to make clear how the tax structure is killing the economy, lots of small businesses started out for solar panels.

big boxving tax cuts -- stores like home depot pay no taxes. the administration you work for, they were giving tax cuts to import chinese fans. guest: there is a lot in that statement. congress needs to do a better job of dealing with some of these issues that are important to small businesses. both parties to talk a good game about small business. we need to measure them by what they get done. there has been so much of legislation has been proffered by one chamber then it dies. we need to hold our elected officials accountable. it is too complicated and too

expensive. we need to do a better job of streamlining that. i am concerned when i hear about the millionaires and billionaires and a lot of times there including small businesses that are not millionaires or billionaires. they are not rich. i would like to see the congress and the administration work closer together. host: off of twitter. our next caller, republican in chula vista, calif. caller: i am a small business owner.

i am main supplier. it is a home-based business. it is my business. i am accountable to no one. it is getting harder for small businesses to survive. in my industry, there are large corporations that are gobbling up all the work. it's hard to compete with that. i will be unable to hire because of health care. i want to higher sales people, but it is getting harder and harder to compete with these large corporations. here in california, the business taxes 6%. state sales taxes 7.75%. to 35% ofg at close my income because of the small

business. guest: i'm also from california, so i feel your pain. i know how expensive it is. you are right. small businesses are having a harder time accessing capital. we need to do something about. there are lots of sources of capital, not just one source. you can go to a bank, a local bank. you can go to micro-lenders, other investors that can help you with capital. i invite you to visit the sba office in san diego. i know them very well. with regards to competing against the big guys, some of the best ideas to partner with those of larger companies to get your foot inside the door. there are a lot of companies out there looking for small businesses to team with because they have their own goals and requirements, for example the

u.s. government. i invite you to follow up with the sba. good luck to you and your business. host: hector barreto is the author of "the engine of america," and is the chairman of the latino coalition. tell us about it. guest: it is a nationwide organization with membership. small businesses also get active in the four c's -- capital, capacity, costs. we do events of the country. this is the small business summit we do here in d.c. we do things on the west coast and all over the country. we have a database of over 1.2 million hispanic businesses, about 40% of all of the businesses. we are very excited of the future for small businesses in general but also for the

hispanic community because we believe the numbers double every five years. we have 3 million hispanic citizens today and we could have 10 million within five years. this has a lot to do with work. host: do latino businesses have particular needs, goals, problems they face as latinos? guest: not necessarily. the latino businesses have the same needs that every other business needs. sometimes, depending what market they're in, and there may be some language issues, cultural issues. the basics of business are the same for everybody. host: jim is our next caller in michigan from the democratic line. good morning. caller: my colleagues concerning small businesses. i have been in a small business since 1975. i have worked for corp. and have had my own business.

my concern is keeping employees and still make money for yourself. their biggest problem is no health care. the health-care costs are way too high. in corporations and private businesses, there are no funds to pay for health care. the other things, finding money and getting loans, that has never been a problem for me. guest: you're very fortunate. with regards to health care, we spoke about this already, but it is still a big problem and they need for small businesses. one thing i think is really important is for small businesses to really understand health care and the different choices that are out there. we do not spend as much time on health care that we do for car insurance or other programs that we have. there are a lot of different ways for you to get health care.

as i mentioned, you can buy a policy that maybe has a higher deductible but it will lower your premium. maybe you buy a policy that only covers catastrophic issues. there are organizations that offer health care plans that you can get a part of as well. there are a lot of options out there. one thing we'll have to deal with, as consumers, is to understand healthcare better and understand how we can take control over those costs. thanks for the question. host: "tells wall businesses there is an option to create an insurance pool to help them afford health care." what do you know about them? guest: we do not know much. the language has not been proffered yet. depending on what happens in the supreme court, that could change the implementation of the affordable health care act.

small businesses are waiting on what they should do and waiting on what those costs would be. i read a story today saying that health care costs are continuing to go up, and it is not necessarily about utilization is they're getting more health care. everything is costing more. there is an inflationary sector in this. healthcare is important. as i said earlier, businesses is the only group that has the biggest challenge getting access to health care. while you are reading to figure out what is going to happen with health care reform going down the pipe come you really need to be looking at what you have right now, what those costs are to reduce them, but i agree with you. it is critically important for small business to be able to attract an employer and retain one to be able to provide them some type of benefit. host: nebraska, joe, republican

caller. caller: my husband and i have had a ranch since 1975 where we raise cattle and quarter horses. we're very concerned about the pipeline going over our land and polluting the water going through the aqua for, polluting our rivers and creeks that we have to water our animals with. we're very concerned about our own water, that it will be polluted and we will not have water for ourselves to drink. what does a small businessman do when all of of water -- all of our water for the livestock is polluted? guest: a lot of times people forget that ranchers and farmers are also a small business people. i appreciate your question.

with regards to the pipeline, it depends on what happens. my understanding is that it has not been approved to go forward. if it is approved in the future, we have to insure that it is safe, sound, protect our environment. i think there is technology available now that enables us to do that. there are already pipelines in the united states. we need to be concerned about energy sources in the future. whenever we can take more control over the energy we use and we are not dependent on foreign sources, that is a positive thing for our economy. host: silver spring, md., independent. good morning. caller: how are you? i have heard a lot about regulatory issues, but the fact of the matter is the same people talking about the regulations,

like the chamber of commerce, republicans in congress, and lobbyists, they are the same ones gumming up the works in order to slow or stop regulations, sabotaging them in some cases. the same group says there is regulatory uncertainty, but they are the ones causing it, stirring up the process, and therefore the business owners are not able to get a clearer view of what will happen from a regulatory perspective so we can move forward. as your listeners are listening, the key thing they need to know is that these people are creating the uncertainty specifically. the key thing is demand. it is not what the government does. it is the demand for my business that controls be moving forward. we need to work hard and maybe

the government is also part of the answer for demand. host: what kind of business do you have? caller: my wife and i run a small business store. it host: are you working long hours? how are you making it work? caller: we work long hours, seven days per week. you control your own destiny. i appreciate being able to do that. i hire people to work out my establishment. my hiring decisions is made on demand and not with the government is doing or not doing, not taxes either. host: thank you for sharing your story. guest: regulation is a very broad and sometimes complicated issue. it depends on what industry you are in.

by the way, i would tell you that a lot of regulation is the proffered by the congress but actually the administration. a lot of the regulations that come out are not necessarily voted on. when the epa puts out a recommendation, for example. you are much more effective by local regulations, whether that is your municipality, county, state. ronald reagan used to say the difference between a business and a small business is that a small business could become a big business if government would get out of the way. i agree with you with regards to demand. the government does not create the demand for your product. the consumers do. i like the saying that the role of government is not to create wealth or jobs. the world of the government is to create an environment where

they are willing to take a risk and risk capital that celebrates those small businesses. sometimes they do not feel that they live in that environment and that is incumbent upon both parties and also for big business to help create that environment. again, it is not a philanthropic thing. there is no way for us to grow unless small businesses are flourishing. host: in addition to being the chairman of the latino coalition, he is the former director of the small business administration from 2001-2006 and serves on the board of the u.s. chamber of commerce and is the founder and president of barreto associates. next caller. caller: hello. how are you today? guest: good. caller: you made a statement earlier about small business owners using money to reinvest

in their businesses and not spending it frivolously. i have had 63 jobs in these 35 years i have been in the business. one out of the 63 was to be an honest businessman. i will give you an example. we worked for this man for five years. we went and asked him for a raise. he said he could not afford it. three weeks later he drives in a $300,000 motor home. he cannot afford a raise but he could not-- he could buy that? there's no loyalty return from the employer. host: with so much experience, did you ever think about starting your own small business?

caller: i tried. i could not get anyone to help me. the doors were slammed in my face everywhere i went. guest: i'm sorry that you have had such bad bosses. my view of small businesses are completely different. i grew up in a small business household. my father had a menial job until it could afford to start his small business. he loved being a business owner. i wrote this book called "the engine of america," and interviewed 50 of the most successful small business owners i have ever met. when i asked them how they are so successful, they always give credit to their employees. it always surprised me. i did not think all of them would say that, but they were very humble. they said they could not do anything they did or accomplish anything about -- without the

people that worked with them and for them. at the end of the day, most business owners understand the most viable asset is the people who work for them. i wish you luck in your next endeavor and hopefully someday you may reconsider starting your own small business. host: last call is a republican from alaska. hello. good morning. caller: i have been in and out of business since 1975 dr. coming back from thailand and the vietnam war. jimmy carter said what we had here was the moral equivalent of war. i started a solar energy company on the starting edge and i found out one thing for sure -- you cannot trust anything from the government but to take your money. now they want me to submit an electronic 941 so they can get in my checking account.

i let go the hands of had because of that. the government does not encourage you to do anything. i am fed up with the government. i'm for ron paul and small government. i have an electronic contracting company out here. i do it all. host: the belong to many business groups or business advocacy groups? -- do you belong to any groups? caller: it does not make me money, i do not belong. i have lost my train of thought. host: thanks for your call. we will take the question to hector barreto. guest: first of all, thank you for your service to this country. we have to remember we have millions of veterans coming back who would also like to start businesses, so we need to

make sure we're helping them, those of separate feist so much, so that we can live the way we do. i have visited alaska and it is a beautiful state. people there are very independent, resilience, hard- working. they do not mind some government, but they do not want the government to be involved in everything they do. we hear those comments a lot. government has a role. the role is to make sure they create a positive environment for small businesses so that they can be incentivized and that -- it to grow over time. we do pretty good job of creating businesses. we have 27 million of them. we also lose hundreds of thousands of them through no cost of their own. it is not because they did not work hard or had a good idea, but because they did not have something they needed. maybe they were good at doing

one thing and not another. is critically important for us to make to the businesses survive past those first four years. if they do, we lose 50% within four years. if they make it past that, that is when they start making contributions to the economy, create jobs, create technology, when revenues grow, and actually pay more into the government. we need to make sure we are not just starting businesses but growing them over the long term. continued good luck to you. host: hector barreto, the administrator of the under president bush and the chairman of the latino coalition. small business week in washington, d.c., this week. we will hear from the small business administration administrator as well as the executive from the national corporations hector barreto. , thank you for joining us this morning.

up next, your money. looking at flood insurance. from resources for the future will be our guest -- carolyn kousky from resources for the future. >> setting up a new database of people who were falsely convicted of serious crimes. researchers found more than 2000 people over the past 23 years or convicted and exonerating. the registry is the most complete list of exoneration to ever compiled. in chicago, the nato summit wraps up today and protesters are planning more demonstrations. activists are gathering at a facility for illegal immigrants. yesterday, the police made 45 arrests. president obama and fellow nato leaders plan to solidify their agreement to ending the war in afghanistan in 2014 and hand

over the lead to afghan forces next year. president obama will hold a press conference at 4:30 p.m. those are the latest headlines on c-span radio. [video clip] the city of wichita but for the candidate. we're seeing more of that, even though it is heavily republican in the midwestern and the dynamic. we are seeing more of this in the recent years in the midwest. they are voting more for what a person stands for. >> june 2nd and third, and exploring the heritage and literary culture of wichita, kansas. >> this is the only remaining of original structure from 1865- 1870. it was a very important building in our history in that it is a

residence in the headquarters of the budget called town and land company that came down here to create this city. >> on c-span2 and 3 all weekend. host: on monday, we have our your money segment looking at how $5 are spent, what the program is about, who participates. this morning, talking about the national flood insurance program. our guest is carolyn kousky, a fellow at resources for the future. talk to us about why there is a federal program. when we think of insurance, we think a private insurance, for things like fire or theft. how is flooding different? guest: the idea date back to the 1950's. it was created in 1968 in

response to a widespread belief that private flood insurance was not readily available for american homeowners. if it was, it was extremely expensive. congress created the national flood insurance program and decided for it to be a partnership. communities design the program. when they do, they have to pass minimal flood plain regulations and the government that makes insurance available for the residents of that community. currently, homeowners can ensure the structure for up to $250,000. they can ensure the contents for up to $100,000. insurance is also available for businesses which can ensure each of those up to $500,000. there are 22,000 communities participating nationwide that covers much of the area of the country that is subject to flooding. there are 5.5 nil it -- million

policies and represent $1.20 trillion in coverage. host: who has these policies? has yet worked? there are over 5.5 active -- 5.5 million at deppolicies. the average claim of a payment is $15,000. that does not sound like an enormous amount. how far does this go in helping those who have suffered from a flood? guest: the average claim is not that high. there's a lot of small claims flooding, but it does not destroy the whole structure. if you look at the average claim payment after 2005, the average claim that year was $95,000. we do get these severe events that can cause more severe damage. we then saw an increase in the

claims. host: congress is working on the national flood insurance program, but unless the senate also does the same, the program actually runs out of money on may 31st. >guest: it has been operating under a series of short-term extensions since 2008. several times, it has completely lost. what is going on right now is that there is an effort to try and have some comprehensive reform of the station for the nfip to extend it for five years. the legislation has already passed the house with overwhelming bipartisan support, i should say. the senate has passed a bill out of committee but has not yet acted. the house passed a short-term extension to the senate time to act. but people are looking to see this week is if the senate will pass a short-term extension or

whether they will take up the more comprehensive reform. host: what happens to people if they have a flood in the fall in the window when the programs expired? guest: noted policies can be written which can be an issue when people are trying to buy or sell properties in the flood plains. for property was already in force and expires and a flood happens, you can still submit a claim payment, as long as there are bonds available to claim. people who already have a policy will not be in too much jeopardy. they just stall waiting on writing new policies. host: carolyn kousky is a fellow for resources for the future. let's go to the phones. first caller, kenny, huntington, new york

good morning. are you with us? caller: yes. well, i live in an area slightly off of huntington bay. every time it rains, the streets get flooded. it was only during irene that i finally had to put everything up in my apartment and leave because the area flooded badly and it ended up in my apartment. i would like to know, seeing as i did not have any home owner's or renters insurance at

the time, even if i put in a policy, how long would it be that i could still make a claim for any damages that may have been there? host: after the fact, is there anything you can do? guest: after the fact is too late. you need to be holding insurance at the time that the flood occurs. there is also a 30-day waiting period for when you can sign up and when it takes effect. in response to the caller's question, for most homeowners insurance, flood insurance is not included. but is also an important thing to keep in mind. if they want flood coverage, they need to purchase it through the nfip. an important aspect of the program is that, for homeowners

located in 100-year flood plains, on the nfip map for designated areas, flood insurance purhcases are mandatory. there is a sub-class required to purchase. host:here is a map of teh 100- year flood zones and where fema considers areas that could potentially flood. florida, good morning. caller: how are you? i appreciate you taking my call. i live in a flood plain in florida. i have to buy flood insurance because i have a mortgage. i know there are certain people in this same allotment that are

exempt from having flood insurance even though they still have a mortgage. i'm confused as to why certain people it is mandatory for them and others it is not. maybe you can help me out on that. guest: flood insurance purchase is mandatory if you are in the 100-year flood plain and you have a federally-backed loan. there are some lenders were this would not apply, certainly you do not have a mortgage or alone, then you are not required to purchase flood insurance. there has been ongoing debate about how well they have been forced this precedence. we do not have good data for those with qualifying mortgages. it is hard to say the extent of compliance with the mandatory purchase requirement.

after a few years, lots of people let their policy lapse and it is unclear whether lenders are around to make sure they hold onto that for the life of the loan. host: our guest is a managing scholar at the wharton school at the university of pennsylvania in philadelphia. our guest, carolyn kousky, mentioned what is going on in congress and the flood insurance program. you can see here in this story from nola.com, some debate over how the flood program should go forward. tell us about the reforms that republicans in the house want to make to the program before allowing it to get reauthorize. guest: the first thing is to talk about how prices are set. right now, prices in the nfip,

there are two differences in rates. one is a determinant on the fema map. you have higher rates of your in the 100-year flood plain. there's also a zone for areas subject to wave action that have a different rate structure. on top of those difference in rates ,fema has two classism policies, those that refer to actuarial where the premium is said on the modeling of expected it damages and historical damages in the area. there is a small group of policies, about 20%-25%, that receive discounted premiums or are referred to as subsidized policies. they only pay about 40%-45% of the full premium.

to have been concerns over the nature of these discounts. they were initially have been put in by congress to encourage communities to participate and encouraged homeowners to purchase insurance. it was thought it was not fair that people who may have located in the 100-year flood plain before they knew of the rest should be penalized. it was thought that the discounts would phase out relatively quickly over time because, as structures were modified, the idea is that the discount would phase out but it has been persistent. those paying discounted rates are also some of the most risky properties and they see the highest claims and highest damages and they are not paying enough to cover it. that has been part of the problem. what happened in the early 1980's is that fema decided the

combined revenue should be enough to cover the average historical losses which in accord required increasing the rates. fema was taking in enough for the losses. in 2005, on the amount of claims they paid out was more than the sum of all of the claims they had paid out through the entire life of the program which plunged the program deeply into debt. the nfip was designed as ole years there were excessive payments that it could borrow from the federal treasury and repaid with interest, which works find that there is a few losses, but in 2005 and had to borrow billions of dollars. it peaked in 2008 after hurricane ike it is currently at $17 billion and it has been a focus of the reform efforts with

the current premium structure that they will be unable to repay this debt, essentially. one of the key things in the house and senate bill is phasing out those discounts on that sub- class of owners for business owners, second homes, vacation homes, the riskiest properties. they differ slightly. every time the property turns over or if the policy lapses, they phase out the discount. host: there is been some push back on the program generally overall. let's listen to this republican from michigan. this is debate from last week on the national flood insurance program.

[video clip] this charges some of the highest risk areas a subsidized rates and charges some other areas astronomical rates. you can use my home state of michigan as a great example where our residents have been forced in, charged thousands of dollars, even though there is little to no risk of flooding. we look down at the water, not up added. we pay multiple times more in premiums than have ever receive in benefits. mr. speaker, the people in the greeks did in michigan are getting fleeced by this program. -- in the great state of michigan are getting fleeced. host: is it really based on geography? guest: it is widely understood that the program is not priced or designed to suffered catastrophes like in 2005 and

put us in the terrible position now. the question is what to do? there is broad, bipartisan support for handling the discounts. they want to bring rates closer to what would be risk-based rates. that is something in the reform bill that would move forward. more radical reforms, there is less consensus. she is one of the individuals that believes we should simply abolish the nfip and privatize it. that is getting attention from other stakeholders and it was one of the potential reform options considered by fema to improve the nfip. there is a little bit less consensus on that. my personal view is, while i understand people questioning why the government is involved in a program that under-prices

of risk, there's a lot we still need to investigate and understand before we launch a complete privatization and eliminate the program. this gets to one of the concerns about flooding in particular. it is a catastrophic risk. there are years where there are very few, but then again have a very severe loss year, like 2005. that is very different than other lines of insurance, like automobiles, where the claims your to your are more or less stable and it is easier to match premiums and pay for them. to ensure a catastrophic risk, like flooding, you need access to a large amount of capital, like an event like 2005 occurs, it does not bankrupt them. you can build up reserves of bonds. you can also provide private

reinsurance, more broadly diversified more global companies that can help primary insurance companies manage their risks. both of those strategies are expensive. the costs are passed on to homeowners. private insurance for these disasters can often be expensive. one concern is if the nfip were to privatize that homeowners might see huge increases in the premiums that they face. that may not entirely be the case, but the question is then what happens to homeowners who cannot afford it? do they simply drop coverage? we need to see what the implications of that are. host: democratic line from california, good morning. go ahead. you're on with carolyn kousky. caller: i question is why?

i am in the central valley of california and we are mandated to pay for flood insurance because they say we are in a 100-year flood zone. we are paying the very same rate they are paying in new orleans, the high risk flood zone. they are using 1986-1987 maps. people like my neighbor, for instance, who was on social security is in the flood zone and is mandated by bank of america to pay. they take her social security checks and leave her no money to live on. this is ridiculous. we even have a dam raised 23 feet to not be in the 100-year flood zone. they are still going by the

1986-1987 maps. guest: you raised an important issue as we think about improving the program. the first, the outdated map. it has been a problem. fema was criticized for years because a lot of the maps had not been updated in years or decades and this was based on outdated data and methods. in response, they have launched some programs to update the maps, digitize them, bring in better data, more and affirmation. the have been rolling out of the country. not everywhere has received them yet. hopefully when those come it will more accurately reflect risk and incorporate new flood control structures, such as the dam you mentioned. the second thing you mentioned

is more difficult, that these rates are based on these very broad class's. you are mapped in a 100-year flood plain and you pay the same rate. if you take that home and put it in new orleans and you pay the same rate. there are lots of people who say that will create issues. host: can you challenge this by going to an assessor? her neighbor is only partially in the zone or in the area. guest: you can challenge the designation in their work is a way for communities to do that, especially when these new maps come out. there is a way for individual property owners to do that. if you think the map does not reflect local conditions, maybe you are up on a hill, you can appeal that to fema and get

marked out of the 100-year plan and get deducted from the requirements. you cannot change the rate if you are mapped in though. host: off of twitter. talking about the national flood insurance program. our guest, carolyn kousky, a fellow at resources for the future. next caller, republican line. caller: my next question, my parents had a flood. it basically in covered half of the 2x4's, half the dropped ceiling, etc. insurance is insurance. my brother is a lawyer and he could only get half of what was lost or damaged because of the flood. could you speak to that?

guest: two things dimension. with -- two things to mention. there are some things that are covered and some that are not covered within the national flood insurance program. i do not know the details with structural damage, but this has also been in an issue with basement damage. in some cases there are excluded, so it's important to know that. you choose the coverage. this is not the question raised, but you choose your own coverage level whether it is $10,000 or $100,000. you will also have to pay the deductible on the policy, which is standard at 100 -- at $1,000. it host: -- host: how and where do i buy flood insurance? guest: they are purchased

through "write your own" and ites through fema is all underwritten by the nfip. host: democrat in portland. welcome. caller: you kind of just answered my question. first, i wanted to point out that my lender requires me to carry flood insurance because i do not own my house. some people do and some people do not, well the probably own more of their house. my question to you is fema considers me in the 100-year flood zone but portland, ore., does not. my street is on the sand bag

route. house specifically do i asked fema to reconsider this issue? on their plan, my house is included, but on the city's my house is not. what can i do? thank you. guest: there are many ways of designating the 100-year flood plain depending on the data that you use. there is difference in the way that the army corps of engineers and fema does this. i cannot specifically speak to what the city of portland is doing. for the regulatory requirements of the program, it is the fee not mapped that matters. whether you are going to be -- it is the fema map that matters. if you think there is an error, there is a process of submitting a letter of appeal. you can google the website and enter that in.

host: when was the last time new york city flooded mentioning the image that we showed on the screen. guest: what exactly is a 100- year flood? and actually means there is a one in 100 or a 1% chance of that magnitude flood occurring in any given year. if you have two in a row, statistically you could go more than 100 years. there is a 1% chance every year and that is difficult for people to wrap their heads around. they say that translates into a 26% chance that your property would be flooded over a 30-year mortgage. the requirements of the national flood insurance program, in or out, the changes your re in the mandatory purchase requirement, but the risk varies continuously through the 100-year flood plain

and beyond it. there are places beyond doubt will be flooding and have higher damages. and then there will be others that will see less frequent flooding. host: bedford, pa., independent scholar. good morning. are you with us? let's move on to sand point, idaho. hello, james. caller: i would like to explain the problem we have. fema is taking control of our property. in 2008, we purchased a property for nearly $900,000. we did not choose the flood insurance. in december of that year, now we have gone from a 100-year flood plain to a floodway, so fema has

mandated that the county should remove us, throw us in jail, fine us on a daily basis. we seem to have no option but to move off our property. the house has been there for 20 years, they went back 20 years and said that the house was improperly permitted. we are in the process of losing our property, going to jail, or getting fined in this power grab a bite the month. i would like to hear your comments. -- power grab by fema. guest: that's very troubling. guidelines within a flood way are much more restrictive. if you have been mapped in that zone, there is much tougher

requirements. what is a bigger concern is that when these new maps come out, homes will be mapped from outside of the 100-year flood plain it to within it. fema had policies to help homeowners with that adjustment. if you have a policy at the time that the 100-year flood plain is expanded, as long as you maintain your policy, you can keep your less-expensive rates. there is actually a group those policies for homeowners outside of the 100-year flood plain with low loss histories and those are called preferred risk policy. you get a much lower rate. if you have one of them and get a map in a bun hundred-year flood plain in a new map, you can keep that for two years and moved into the grandfathered category of paying their rate as if he were outside of the 100- year flood plain. both of the legislation is

include that for many years so that there is not such a shock to homeowners going from paying low rates to much higher rates. host: off of twitter. is this true? guest: that will vary by lender. they think there is significant risk, they could mandate it as a condition of the loan. that is outside of the national flood insurance program. it is similarly how their require homeowners insurance. host: new jersey, independent caller. welcome. caller: my sister lives in fort lauderdale, fla., 5 miles in from the beach. the flood maps work redrawn and she now pays $6,000 a year in flood insurance. she is 67 years old, working as a nurse, and would like to retire. one reason why she cannot is

that your early flood insurance bill. i live 10 miles in from atlantic city and i'm not affected by any flood plain or danger maps yet, but there have been numerous articles that in new jersey the keep adjusting the flood area oinland. when it comes down to, really -- i'm an independent. i think both the tea party movement in the occupied movement is that this is a case of the wealthy transferring their expenses on to the backs of average people. i give you an example of a community just south of atlantic city. you cannot buy the smallest cottage there for under $1 million. most of them are multimillion- dollar houses. they are subsidizing their flood insurance. when the beach needs replenishing, the state and

federal government has to replenish them, but if you want to go on their beaches you have to get a tag and they do not provide facilities. you cannot find a place to park, and a public restrooms. this is just another case of why i am so frustrated. but this has become a ripped-off nation. of the things transferred to the middle-class. the wealthy get subsidized. the poor get some supplies. people like my sister, a nurse, and i'm a retired police officer, we pay the bills. thanks. guest: the caller raises two important points. as we have talked about already, the types of rates can vary substantially. properties at risk from storm surges and hurricane-related flooding, if they are in that special class of policy, they have a much higher rate. i believe the caller is sister is in one of those zones and she

could easily be paying the rates. that is a lot of money to pay especially when that is only flood insurance and they often need homeowner's insurance policy to cover wind damage. because this only covers the flooding, knocked the wind. insurance in hurricane areas can be steep because in assuring that can be expensive. the war broad point is the question of who should really be paying for the damages? it is something that we need more conversation about as a country. the people who choose to locate in hazardous areas, should they pay most of the costs? there is only a disaster when people are there in structures to be damaged. in 2005, should it be born generally by all the taxpayers as a whole and it is our duty as a citizen to help others?

we have not come to a good agreement yet on how those costs should be apportioned across society. it is my personal opinion with regard to the national flood insurance program that the rediscount are structured is in need of serious reform. the reason for having those discounts is people who did not know about the risk are no longer valid. these maps up and around for a long time. we should replace those with discounts based on the need for income so that these premiums where it is a burden can get a discount for those reasons and those that can readily afford to pay them. host: carolyn kousky with resources for the future, recently with the wharton school in pennsylvania and a study in risk-management. she has a ph.d. from harvard and did undergraduate at stanford. alberto weakens, the first of

the season. it hovered off teh coast producing showers and serving as a reminder that the 2012 atlantic hurricane season is just around the corner. it starts june 1st. guest: that is why it's imperative that congress figures out what they're going to do and not let this lapse as hurricane season is beginning. it brings up a point worth mentioning. the national flood insurance program ishas over 40% of polics in florida. host: republican in beaverton, mich. caller: when the comments or guest made about how we can "share the burden," i guess, of disaster relief. i live on a small lake in

michigan. fema did a flight photograph and the bottom of my hope is -- home is 12 feet off the river. two dams create a lake. two feet means it would go over the spillway, so we would have to have a catastrophic flood before my home would be touched by high water. but i will be forced into buying flood insurance. york, with the previous caller about sharing this, i am paying flood insurance, which i will never use, for people that are not really smart and have built structures below sea level. every couple of years, we have to go back down and rebuild the dykes and it's ridiculous.

if i built my home below the flood level, shame on me for being that stupid. guest: the costs right now are not based on the risks that people face. there are homeowners with lower rates paying much more than those with higher risks. they shoudld take it up with fema. the rate varies in relation to where the water comes. if you are up out of it, you should have lower rates to compensate you for reducing your risk. to date, there has been an unpleasant assumption that doing these broad categories of risk would not produce enough benefits for fema, but i think

it is not in need of much more research. host: independent caller from texas. caller: i am an insurance agent, but the banks are selling all of this for home buying, auto insurance, they are throwing all the agents out. you now have a rep. i don't know what that is. in oklahoma city, i lived there and we got hit twice by tornadoes. fema had good sandwiches, but as far as insurance, you do not get any help. they gave you a $2,000 shelter, so now everyone has a shelter. so now everyone has a shelter. anyway,