mortgages for homeowners 62 and older. "washington journal," live with your calls, tweets and e-mails is next. ♪ >> with the presidential and vice presidential debates fully under way and both opponents reject both edited saying their opponents were liars, whether the candidates are making claims that have little basis in fact. good morning and welcome to "the washington journal." for the first 45 minutes we will

be talking about do fax matter. we start off with an item from cnn.com. he says it is not clear what impact the fact checkers are having on the public at large or nearly as important on the politicians. for the first 45 minutes we want to find out from you, do facts matter? the numbers are on the screen, and they matter. if you want to get in touch with us via social media, the address is twitter @cspanwj.

facebook.com/cspan. as we wait for the funds to heat up, we want to tell you a little bit more about the item, do fax matter? this is from cnn.com. he writes --

we want to find out from you, our viewers and listeners, do facts matter? this is dane from london, kentucky. caller: can you hear me? certainly it fax matter. we have some of the worst lying going on as far as obama and joe

biden. let's look at obama. the first thing he wanted to do is closed on, no bait. did he do it? no. -- guantanamo bay. did he close it? no. 38 -- the women on his staff make 38% less than the men with equal jobs. he lies about that. there is not anything that this incompetent evil man will not lie about. we need him out of office to get somebody in there that can put us back in track where we should be. host: we move onto roy on our line for independence. caller: fax matter a bunch. -- facts matter a bunch.

i do not know if you heard, it covers romnesia. that appears to be a mostly republican condition where they cannot remember their positions on the issues and recent history. i am especially concerned about the auto bailout. the republicans are trying to make it look like what he wanted to do is pretty much what happened. it is the exact opposite. president obama -- it was masterful. it had to be done quick to save 1 million jobs. a lot of dealerships would close down. the government still owns about half, i believe, i am not sure of the stock of gm. this is something the -- a

managed bankruptcy would be like lehman brothers. they do not want to get anything done. host: we want to leave it there. he mentioned the term "romnesia." it is featured in a headline in the washington post.

you can read more about that in this morning's "washington post." kent is on the line for independence. caller: thank you. i appreciate your show, by the way. facts matter to me, at least independence. some of them actually pay attention to what is going on. i get annoyed with both democrats and republicans for putting out misleading the -- they are distorting the perspective on the issues. host: have you made up your mind who you are voting for?

caller: i have because i have been following this for years. i am not for either one. i voted for ross perot way back when. i will vote for president obama again. i think he has the proper perspective. if you pay a tension over the years, i think he is putting the country in the right direction. host: is there one particular fact that has led you to vote for the president? caller: several. i cannot watch all of them. i just think that the opposition here has to conservative of a perspective on world actions and what is going on. i think obama has a better view on that. host: i will move on to friday

from los angeles, california. caller: i do not think they do matter. people believe what they want to believe. i remember when my political philosophy changed. i said, now, all people have to do is find out about free enterprise and how it works. people will realize it is the way to go. no. politics is almost like a religious belief to some people. you can point out any facts he went to and they will ignore them. i will admit that comes from both sides. people do not vote on facts, they vote on the motion. the vote on some kind of family tradition or racial or religious tradition for whatever reasons jews vote democrats. i wish facts did matter, but

most people do not care. host: what facts do you think they're being ignored? caller: when you make regulations on an economy and pretend that will not hurt the economy. when you put regulations to the point that if bankers make a loan and the loans did not work out and people lose their money, not only will you go bankrupt, but you might actually go to jail. do you not think that will have an effect on people making loans? you just ignore that fact? you are ignoring the fact of basic human nature that people do not want to go to jail. they will be careful with these regulations and that is holding back the economy. host: we have a couple of items on facebook. our address their facebook.com/cspan.

back to the funds. al in new orleans. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. host: do fax matter to you when you go to the polls? caller: yes, i spent 27 years in the military. i fought for this country and came back home to run into bigotry. the only thing i am looking at now is the fact of the matter is, this country is at a stalemate because you have a bunch of bigots politicians.

the country needs to -- instead of looking at what is wrong, they need to look at what is right. it is time these people start prosecuting these people who are actually creating these problems that distorts facts. the fact of the matter is that president obama has done everything possible to work with. when he had both houses he reached across the aisle and slapped him on the hand. you can go back and look at publications, these press conferences. every single one of the same republican said this man had never walked into their office. there were going to do everything to make him fail. it is time we get rid of the bigots out of government no matter what color they are and let the country moving forward. host: thank you for your service. we will move on to rick from

detroit, michigan. caller: can you hear me? host:yes. caller: hostfacts matter. i have been in the fact-finding part of research. i think the time it takes the citizens to digest what they hear, they distrust before they internalize something to make change. that is a problem. i think the large amounts of data going back whether 10 years, 20 years of what a candid and said or did, it affects how citizens are reacting to the information. some people are feelers. some people are thinkers. that time in relation to the research matters. you can tell facts and they may not believe them. many people will not go back and

do concrete research. it will turn to somebody telling them what is an alleged fact. host: we have a tweet. francis and the lake charles, louisiana on the line for democrats. caller: i would just like to say that facts do matter. i think it is important. there are people that deserve the facts and true facts. if all of us would take the facts and what is true and what is not in use that as our moral compass, we would not put these bozos in office.

host:give me an example of a fact you think is overlooked in now. caller: well, governor romney takes a lot of the things that our president says and cuts up pieces of it and uses what he wants. like for instance, this thing about "you didn't build that." anyone with a brain in their head knows that is not what the president was saying. if they would have listened to the whole speech, maybe he did not say it exactly right, but there is no way conceivable you

could come out with the president saying the "you didn't build that." that was taken out of context. it was light upon. most of all, the facts they wanted to get through to people -- and it worked for a lot of people -- host: i think we have lost that call. we are going to take a look at an item from "the wall street journal."

back to the phones. barb from newport, tenn.. caller: i am getting sick and tired of these guys trying to make things look good when i have learned over the years, you can make anything look good on paper. the facts are never going to change. host: how so? caller: there are people out here that are really hurting. yet their paperwork when they tried to do anything, these government offices they say that people do not qualify for this,

that, or another because of different reasons. they can always draw from how they can make it look good on paper. i learned some of the ways you can make something look good on paper to get a loan or you can make a business look good on paper. you can make the government look good on paper when actually it is still broke. host: you are listed as an independent. have you decided who to vote for? caller: know, because i do not feel like any of them are worth of voting for. host: we will move on to larry from tennessee on the line for democrats. caller: somebody tweeted there is faith based in fact based. if romney gets elected, 15

million people get kicked off of their health care. how do you go before god and say, i did not want people to have health care. why? because you did not like that negro or socialism? women basically got obama elected, but they could not do away with women. look at what they have done since then? there have been 1000 laws trying to limit their reproductive rights. a woman that would vote for obama, you know, render that which is caesar's. that does not belong to caesar. host: one of the editorials in the financial times --

back to the phones. from oregon, she is on the line for republicans. caller: i am actually undecided at this point. my question is regarding energy policy. i am very concerned about it. i am a retired air force veteran and served 20 years from my country. in addition to that, i have a master's degree graduate student i have been looking at these policies quite carefully. i have watched way too much c- span. host: there is no such thing. is there a fact about the energy policy that you feel has not been addressed by either candidate?

caller: i do. quite frankly, it is the barbara boxer hearings that has not been a revisited, all of the hearings that have been put on hold. clearly, from economics 101, we need to have an energy policy. that is what concerns me. host: we want to let you know and the rest of our viewers and listeners that later enter the program, we will be talking with a senior economic adviser with the american petroleum institute. she will be here to talk to us about oil production in campaign 2012. we have three more items from facebook.

we are talking about, do facts matter?

we will be doing this for another 22 minutes. our next call comes from andrew in georgia on our line for independents. caller: i would like to make a comment about how he cannot change washington from the inside. that is probably the most true statement i have ever heard somebody say. what man cannot change washington. we as a people have to change washington. we have to support our president whether -- whoever it may be. whether it is obama or mitt romney. if we do not stand behind him and whatever bills he has going to congress will be thought out anyway. host: have you made up your mind about who you will vote for? caller: i am still in the

balance at the moment. host: what fact are you looking for that will help you make a decision? caller: we are watching the debates back and forth. who is better and who can do more. the fact is, what is going to be done? we have heard all of these promises. i am still pretty sure all 43 presidents have not accomplished everything they sat in office to accomplish. host: in the new york times, it is national polling. it is gallop verses the rest.

george is on the line for democrats. he is calling from miami, florida. caller: good morning.

you are absolutely right. you can never watched enough c- span. as a matter of fact, a couple of months ago before i made my statement, i remember watching the show that a caller used some bad language on the phone and you warned the next caller to be careful because your mom is watching. i just wanted to say hello to your mom. she must be proud her son is on that not only one of the most watched but most respected programs on television. host: that is very kind. let's get back to fax. do they matter in your decision on who you will caller: vote:1 fact is -- caller: 1 fact is, mitt romney -- i am not blaming him for

being a mormon, but i wonder if people know they believe god is a man who lives on the planet -- if they look at the old osmond's album, there is a picture of the planet kolab. even more important, as a matter of fact, if we had fax, the world would be a bunch -- if we had facts, there would never have been a war in iraq. host: the philadelphia inquirer has its lead story.

back to the telephones. harold is calling from new jersey. harold is on the line for republicans. caller: hello and good morning. i think your mother must be very proud of you. you do a good job. host: thank you. let's talk about the facts. caller: myself and the republicans wanted our president to succeed.

the private -- the democrats have been setting the opposite for a long time. the fact is that the republicans said, we want our president to succeed masterfully. however, if he does not do what bill clinton did and encourage republican ideas to be accepted and so on and so forth, he then would be and should be a one- term president. he himself said he you should be a one-term president. he did not keep his promises. i wanted him and i prayed for him to still be successful. however, my children and grandchildren are suffering because he did not keep his promises. so on and so forth. the man is -- let's just say, i do not think his -- when it

comes to mormons and got it. god loves all of us 100%. facts are, there should never be war. god wants us to love each other and love our neighbor as ourselves. host: this comes from an article by sophie clinton in "national journal," do debate fact checkers matter?

what is your response to that? caller: the fact checkers are irresponsible because they do not tell the facts. host: the article since to say that despite the facts, the fact checkers are calling both candidates on items they have been using in their campaign that the campaign still keep hammering away at things that have been debunked. caller: those should be removed. the fact is that life begins at conception. the fact is that the supreme court said -- by the way -- roe v. wade is illegal because of the fact it is a state right. if we could just go back to article 10 of the constitution, everything would be much better

a in this country. if we would believe that god loves us. there is a and a heaven. -- a hell and heaven. god has always said i will bless america if you keep my commandments. president obama begins to keep the commandments. host: we will leave it there. steve in atlanta, georgia on the line for independence. caller: i think facts matter, but every time you think the president is what with the fact, at his head pops up and he says george bush did it or hillary did it or something like that and romney is a liar. my wife was telling me, she said she saw the other night when can be changed his diaper. it was like he was the guy on

the titanic. he was the captain of the titanic. now he is the guy running to the lifeboat to throwing the women out. we just needed some facts and not just barack i nthe box saying bush did it. host: that is stephen. we are moving onto keith in dayton, ohio. caller: good morning. facts matter, it is a fact when obama got elected that they promised to make sure he would only become a one-term president. the other caller said barack obama did not keep any of his promises. every politician run for office, they will make some changes. it will do this or that. i guess he did not expect the opposition obama would have to go up against.

all of the republicans in the house say no to everything. they do not want no jobs. they did this on purpose -- it is starting to come back. they complain it does not come back fast enough. it is a fact the bush administration had eight years to tear it up. when they tore it up, we lost all the jobs. lost over 800,000 jobs every month. those were all fax. that is nothing he made up. if he would have some people that worked with him in the congress, maybe the country would be turned read a little bit better. host: we went to remind our viewers and listeners regarding coverage on c-span of the final debates between the candidates president barack obama and mitt romney live on c-span on monday at 7:00 p.m. that is when our coverage

starts. at 9:00 is when the debate happens. at 10:30 we will have a viewer reaction. that will be on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. you can take an active part in the debate via the c-span.org debate hub which we will have up and running for the final debate on monday. the host will be online chatting at www.cspan.org/chat. viewers can continue to engage with us while the debate is happening. they can interact directly with one another and with a c-span moderator. the chat can be accessed directly at the above url or by a link on the debate hub. it will be strained alive. all four debates will be

available for viewing on demand. the question and answer segments from all of the debates will be posted as separate video clips. the debate hub has tools to help viewers create and share their own video clips. get them off, watch the debate, talk to our c-span host and other c-span viewers who are watching the debate. you can do that at the c-span debate hub -- cspan.org/chat. let's go back to the funds and continue our discussion regarding do facts mater? mary from illinois on the line for republicans. caller: i did want to comment on one gentleman that called and said many of the republicans did want obama to succeed. i know i did not vote for him,

of my children and family who were republicans voted for him because we wanted hope and change. just the idea they say he cannot get anything done because of republicans, but they were in charge of the first two years. they kept the republicans out of the meetings and everything else. i just hate to see him get back in again. my children wanted their vote back after a about a year. host: do you think the flow of information in this campaign is being controlled primarily by the campaigners themselves or the fact checkers? caller: i think it is the media that does not get all the true facts in there except for c- span. i watch it all the time. when i hear some of the other channels, they do not seem to get their facts straight. host: we are going to leave it

there. we are going to let our viewers know about an article in the washington post. we will take a look at other news items in the papers as we continue our discussion regarding do facts matter.

this is the way another newspaper is looking at the story. this comes from "the baltimore sun."

that is in this morning's baltimore sun. we will read a little bit more in a few seconds. back to the telephones. cj is on the line for independents. caller: i am calling because you had ann coulter on their a couple of weeks ago and she came out with all of these distortions and lies about the republican and democratic party. i called and several times about what the facts are. the fact about the 1964 civil rights act was that the majority of the democrats voted for it. i stated that 46 democrats voted for the 1964 civil rights act, 21 voted against it. every democrat outside of the

south voted for it. 71 -- 27 republicans voted for it, but conservatives had to be dragged and kicking and screaming. the republican party of the day is not the republican party of lincoln. the democrats were the conservatives and the republican party was founded -- they were liberals. host:fay, you are on the washington journal. caller: i do believe that facts do matter. mitt romney said he is for 100%. behind closed doors he talks about 47%. i think people really need to pay attention to this. i think he gets out in the public and tells people what

they really want to hear. he gets behind closed doors and he speaks what he really thinks. i really think people need to pay attention to this. do you want a president to get in front of your face and tell you what you really want to hear and then get behind closed doors and tell you something else. host:that is fay in tennessee. we have a couple of tweets. we are going to move back to the telephones. john, you are on "the washington

journal." caller: i guess the number one fact is to find out exactly what the democrats and mr. obama is trying to do is let's check his executive orders against history. fdr had 11 executive orders and 16 years. george bush had 64 in 80 years. -- in eight years. obama had 923 in four years. all of your listeners ought to really check that out. executive orders to take over every facet of our life. check it out. please, check it out. host: thank you. in "the washington post," we have this story.

after the break, we are going to be talking more with neil irwin. later, we will be talking with

rayola dougher. she will discuss oil production and its importance in campaign 2012. we also want to tell you about "newsmakers" coming up tomorrow. our guest is representative chris van holland, the ranking member of the budget committee. the top democrat on the budget committee. he talks to us about the potential for tax rick -- tax reform and the negotiations to not go over a fiscal cliff. [video clip] >> they come public with it, which they refuse to do so far. the only thing they have said is what they will keep off the table. they said they will keep off the table, capital gains. stuff that helps people like

mitt romney, you cannot touch that. we should have a conversation about tax reform. the other thing we should look at as part of the fiscal cliff -- i am speaking personally -- is the payroll tax. i do not think anybody thinks we should permanently extend the payroll tax cut. given the situation we are in, i do not think that should be taken off of the table. >> you are talking about the payroll tax holiday that expires at the end of the year. >> if you look at the congressional budget office reports, they say that will have a much bigger impact on the economy than allowing the top rates to go off. it is much more important. it means more money in the pockets of working americans that actually go out and spend the money rather than sticking it in a safe deposit box. i think that has to be part of the next. >> critics say that that is taking money out of social

security. just this week they can out against the idea. you think best of the economy, and that is not the time to be taking the money out? >> i think it needs to be part of the conversation. just to be clear, the actuary for social security has stated very clearly that this does not take one penny out of the social security trust fund because those funds are back fill the dollar for dollar. that has been true over the last two years. it would be true in any extension we have. i am just saying this should be part of the conversation. i know some people would like to take it off the table. i think it should be part of the debate. host:neil irwin is here to talk to us about whether you are spending more, less, or the same. this week separate reports from the commerce department and the

university of michigan show an increase in spending, especially when it comes to retail and restaurant sales. tell us about some of the specific areas where the increase is happening and why the commerce department and the university of michigan believe -- are they saying this is an indicator that the economy is getting better? guest: what we have seen for the last few months is a lot of measures of the consumer is looking better. retail sales up strongly in september, some of it is he spent more at the gas pump. that shows up as higher retail sales. even excluding, retail sales are up. consumer confidence is up to the highest levels since the depth of the recession. people are more comfortable. there are feeling the more optimistic about the days ahead. part of that is driven by the housing market. it is starting to improve.

we have good housing starts in september. that is a sign that -- it is uneven, but there is some progress at least on the consumer side of the economy. host: you wrote on october 17, the headline "september housing figures may be a sign of the recovery." is this a surprise, these housing numbers? have people been watching this as it has been moving along? guest: it was a surprise in the narrow sense. all the forecasters were expecting numbers not quite so good, and it turned out to be good, indeed it. what is not surprising is we're

finally getting a bounce back in housing. it is moving the right direction. it is hard to overstate how the press the housing market has been. by any measure of construction activity, of sale prices, this has been a rough time for the housing market. it has -- whenever i looked at that is interesting, if you look at the percentage of gdp and the economy going to housing construction, that has been lower in in this recession than ever has been. less than 2% of gdp. even in the worst quarter of the 1981 recession, and that was a deep recession, in the worst quarter it never got below 3%. now we have been below 3% for four years in. that is a really depressed housing market. we are starting to fall out of that. host: we are talking with neil

irwin. we want to find out, are you spending more, less, or the same. neil has been writing about housing figures showing a sign of recovery. will talk a little bit more about that. we want to find out from our viewers or listeners if you are spending more, less, or the same. that is how we divided the telephone lines. you can also send us messages via e-mail, twitter, and of facebook. you also wrote an article -- earlier in october regarding cars and big rigs and what they

say about the economy. he said cars represent the supply side of the economy. the big rigs are the ones that move the cars. tell us about the relationship between cars and big rigs. guest: i am drawing a distinction between supply and demand. demand is consumer spending. all of the stuff that we want to buy. it is restaurant meals, things of the grocery store, cars. it is all of the things it would be nice to have or we need to have to get by. supply is the production side. that is corporate spending. corporate investment. one way to look at those is cars and trucks. the trucking industry distributes goods all over the country. cars are demanded. it is something you use and consume. as i alluded to earlier, we are seeing different signs from the two sides of the economy. long term they have to converge.

one man's spending is another man's in come. you have to have a vibrant consumer demand to sustain supply, which is where people have their jobs and earn incomes. what is happening right now is a divide. it is a bifurcation. the consumers i alluded to earlier, retail sales are doing good. on the business side, things are not looking so good. corporate earnings are under stressed. for the story that you referenced, i actually looked at a couple of trucking company showing mixed numbers. things are not so good on the corporate hiring side. things are a little better on the consumer side. eventually they will converge one way or the other. we hope the business side will pick up and start hiring more and producing more goods. that will then feel more demand and so on. it could happen in reversed. we could get a downturn were consumers are not having jobs, income, and they cut back.

host: the pessimism, if i can use that word in the business community about the recovery indicated by your article this morning, it indicates a weak market? guest: i looked at the historical relationship between temporary employment and total employment. it is a pretty good indicator. it is a pretty good hint about what will happen in the future as to overall employment. last few months it has not been good. temporary employment was unchanged in august. down in september. that is a big change from the beginning of the year. that is a hand job growth will be pretty weak in the fourth quarter. we will only add about 72,000 jobs a month in the final three months of the year. it would be quite mediocre. host:neil irwin is talking to us

about if we are spending more, less, or the same, showing increases or decreases in consumer spending and how that plays into the strength of the economy. the first call comes from anthony in florida. he is spending more. caller: good morning. thank you for allowing me to call in. yes, i am spending more. they tell you about the gas prices, that is fine. go to the grocery store in your peanut butter goes up 40%. your vegetables are up. everything is up. and we are making less. now, i am not looking for a

judge of the percentages go down. 12% or 13%, no it is release 7%. host: so inflation is interesting. higher prices for food, higher prices for gas, it really cuts into people. people do not like it at all. overall inflation has not been that high for the last few years. under 2%, which is what the federal reserve ends for. it has been more like 1.7% the last year. when the inflation comes and things they buy a lot like gasoline and food, it hinges a little more because you are reminded of it all the time. when inflation happens and cars and clothing, i feel like it is less on the top of the mind. when wages are stagnant and people are not getting wages, inflation hurts a lot more than when you are actually -- when wages are rising, too. so what we have had is stagnant wages and even declines in some

areas. prices rising even a little bit is awfully painful. in normal times wages rise with inflation. what people get paid is stagnant and prices are rising at 2% a year. it certainly hurts. host: cheryl calling from ohio. she is spending less. caller: i am spending less because of higher gas, higher food, and higher health insurance. i spend less as far as other things that i would like to buy. i am in the 47% of the people that are in the poor category. i feel i am in that 47%, because of obama.

i also feel that, you know, it takes away our dignity and our respect. we have to pay more for these other things. so i have to spend less on things i would like to have. host: is her sentiments something that could stall the economic recovery? guest: we were talking about inflation earlier. what she is describing something pretty widespread. if your wages are not rising, if you're pay or what ever income you are living on a stagnant and the prices for things you have to buy a lot like gas, food goes up, you are in a tough spot and you have to squeeze spending on other things that she would like to spend money on. that is what a bad economy is. when we are in the very slow recovery, we only or something like 1.5% or 2% in the first

half of the year. when you are in a slow recovery from a deep downturn and coming back slower than i think any of us would like, that is the kind of story you have. host: host: in "the wall street journal" on tuesday, we will refer to the chart they have here, a snapshot on u.s. and retail restaurant sales. it shows that on a monthly basis, from september through october, that of all and parts dealers were up 1.3% in september from august. gasoline, the purchases of gasoline were up 2.5%. restaurants and bars, almost 0.5%.

non- store, internet sales, up 1.8%. building and gardening supplies, up 1.1%. is that an indication of housing coming back? guest: i think it is. housing is an interesting thing. even though housing construction is a small percentage of gdp, it has a much bigger ripple effect through the economy. when people buy a house, they buy furniture, garden supplies, whenever they might need. it triggers spending across the economy. housing is intertwined. it is part of their household wealth, confidence. if a home price has risen, i commit to a family more confident and more willing to spend money and other things -- that could make a family more confident to spend money on other things.

anything that has the economy getting better has a housing recovery at its core. host: neil irwin writes about the economy for "the washington post," and has also covered real estate development and the washington regional economy. we will talk to penny in oklahoma who is spending about the same. caller: good morning. facts do matter, and i think people are not taking into account the basic reason for the financial crash. another thing that i think is important, because i am a number cruncher, i am wondering how much public money went into these bain capital companies.

i tried to find out, but it is and astronomical paul -- problem trying to do all of that research and i do not have that much time to do it. host: thank you. guest: i spent a lot of time on the same kind of issues, figuring out how the bank figures added up to -- it is hard to get reliable members. it is in the hundreds of billions of dollars depending on how you count. how do you, loans against a backstop, but the money not actually been transferred or spent? it is not the case there is an easy, simple member for how big the bank bailouts was. there is a lot of research, most commonly by economists named

rolled off and reinhardt, but economic crisis are different. they are hard to fall back from. that is the world we live in. we like to think the u.s. is different and we would be in better shape, but this kind of slow growth, that is pretty typical when you come out of a financial crisis. so, that is very much the world we are in, and it is a good reminder of how we got into this, the financial crisis in 2008. host: john, decatur, ga., who is spending less. caller: i am spending less because i am making far less in the transportation industry, probably 30% less in the last three years. just a comment on inflation -- i

heard a bloomberg economist about one year ago spend about a half-hour talking about how the real inflation rate is over 9% if you consider the cost of food, gasoline and clothes, and he went down the list and the increase in price. that is really hurting a lot of people and it is not talked about enough. when it comes to economic growth, another economist i heard that you might find interesting, we came out of the recession in the early 1980's, in the last quarter of 1982, and in the 36 months that followed, we created 9.8 million jobs. that is almost 300,000 jobs a month. a lot of people call that trickle-down economics. i do not know why you would call double the job creation we experienced now trickle-down

economics. it should be questioned. host: thank you. what are your thoughts, and neil irwin? guest: first come on inflation, people are skeptical of real inflation numbers and i understand where skepticism comes from. gasoline prices, food prices, it goes into official numbers and less official members that private groups come up to, -- come up with, but we all by things other than food and gasoline -- clothing, computers, rent. these things go into inflation. just to take up the things that are growing the most and said those are up 9%, and that is what inflation is, that is misleading and not really true. that said, the broader point that this was a stronger ,ecovery in the early-1980's

that is true. we had several quarters in a row of 5%, 6%, 7% growth. now we are in the 1.5% category. i think economists would argue that it was a different kind of recession, as it was sparked by the federal reserve, raising interest rates to site inflation, and that caused unemployment to spike. when paul volcker and the federal reserve felt like they had conquered inflation, and expectations came down and things were in better shape, they cut rates, which left a lot of room for the economy to rebound and it was quite a recovery. ronald reagan was president, and he surely gets some of the credit for that, but it is an interesting question -- who you attribute that strong boom to? paul volcker gets a lot of the credit, along with ronald reagan. host: talk about how the fed is

working now against the way it was working when mr. paul volcker was the chairman as far as moving the economy forward and getting the kind of response out of this recession that they got out of the recession in the reagan administration. guest: these are different times and the federal reserve is fighting a different problems. then, you would have 10%, up 11% inflation. that was the deeply entrenched problem in the economy. trying to defeat that was the overriding goal paul volcker, chairman of the fed. that is why they hiked rates. they got short-term interest rates up to 20%, establishing credibility in fighting the inflation. the problem now with high unemployment, still around 8% even after all of these years

after the recovery began. inflation is much less of a problem. we are in a range the fed is aiming for. the reason the fed has been trying to lower interest rates and pump money into the economy is because they're trying to deal with a different problem. host: back to the phones. richard. california. he is spending more. thank you for waiting. caller: thank you. i just want to say, neil irwin, the idea that you would come on here and try to tell everybody that we are all feeling so much better and that is why we are spending more, that is ridiculous. come on. our insurance premiums for health have gone up $2,500, instead of down like obama said.

tell me one thing that is costing less now that we are all buying. i mean, what we by every other day at the store is food and groceries and gasoline, and those other things that we buy every day. for you to say that it has gone up 1.7%, let slip that the last four years, since obama -- let's look at the last four years, since obama has been in the presidency, not just last month, or the last four years -- four months. it has to be unbelievable. i know how much more it costs me to get a jar of mayonnaise, or one dozen eggs. host: we will leave it there. guest: in the summer of 2008, gasoline was $4 a gallon, now is

$4 a gallon. it hurts. of wages hurt. inflation is not the problem. people are making less money. that is the problem. in terms of spending, consumer confidence measures done by private groups, you are right, they're not back to boom times levels, but they're up from where they were three or four months ago. people are feeling a little better in aggregate, even though it is not where we want to be. it is all about levels. it has been tough as an economics writer to see people have arguments about the jobs numbers every month. it goes to the partisan lines. the truth is if you want to put an optimistic spin on it, we have seen growth for three straight years. if you want to give it a negative spin, we're still a 8% unemployment, growth has been too slow to get us out of the

whole but we are in -- hole we are in. host: melbourne is our caller from north hollywood. he is spending about the same. caller: i have been in this country since 1984, and i have never been on unemployment. self-reliant. independent. are these people not independent anymore? and these people depending on the government to help them? the government can help some of the people saw the time, but not all of the people of the time. do you know what the problem is? this two-party system. it needs to be one party. you guys love competition. you all are republicans and

democrats. are you guys human beings no more? prove you are human beings. host: what kind of business are you in? i am a painter. whenever i need a job, i let them know that i could take -- paint something for people. it is politics. host: are you getting more business, less business, or about the same? caller: i am always getting business, taking care of my kids, yet i am a poor diet. host: melbourne, in north hollywood florida -- north hollywood, florida.

guest: i am glad he is able to scratch a living, but it is tough out there. host: nathan, in uniondale, pennsylvania. he is spending less. go ahead, nathan. caller: hello. my wife just got laid off here last thursday. she was working for a medical laboratory. we are spending a whole bunch less. inflation has gone clean out of sight, and i have been listening to you talk about economics, and, man, you are out to lunch. i do not understand how you come up with your ideas. money is not worth money like it used to be. i mean, i have a $5 gold coin that was minted in 1914, and gold was $20.75 then.

a $5 gold coin. now, that same dollar -- $5 gold coin is worth $700. you tell me that is not inflation? guest: yes, i do. you cannot eat or drive gold. it is an interesting commodity, but the rising price of gold is not inflation, per say. i know ron paul fans would say that is the case. inflation is a rise in the price of the goods and services that we buy every day to live. in the framework that i use, and most economists that worked in banks and government, that is not the case and inflation when the price of gold rises. host: we have an article from one of your colleagues in "the washington post," with the

headline "retailers rushed to offer holiday bargains." it seems as though holiday shopping is starting earlier and earlier these days. is this away for businesses to recoup what they did not make in the previous eight months, or are they trying to close out the year with a big finish? guest: it will be interesting to see what happens this holiday season. what we have the trend were consumer confidence and retail spending is up, but the job market is not really back. you have pressure on businesses, cutbacks in the industrial sector, so the question is what story becomes true?

do consumers feeling better buy stuff and does that increase production in factories and on the supply side of the economy, where do they say i am not so sure about my job, i will cut back on my spending this holiday season and we had back into low growth or another recession? the holiday season is a big chunk of all retail spending. that is the s said -- acid test. host: a lot of people out there doing holiday shopping will be using credit cards. is that going up, stay in the same or going down? guest: it is one of the better real-time indicators of what is happening with retail sales. the question is, however they pay, will be the overall level of spending. host: the use of credit cards is not necessarily an indicator of

consumer confidence index guest: -- confidence? guest: it is a good way for people who write about these things to track what is happening with trends, but you still wait for final numbers to come in as big retailers report their numbers. host: back to the phone. edward is calling from spring hill, florida. he is spending more. caller: thank you for having me on your program. the only thing i have to say is that i'm spending more on everything in my home -- sued -- sued, electric, everything is up. the only thing that i am saying is if we elect romney, he will

be out sourcing just like he has been doing. that is why he has the money he's got a wake-up, america. ok? host: neil irwin? guest: a lot of this election is a hinged on what the agenda you think will be best for the economy, and it is a debate we have seen in the presidential debates, and around a lot of kitchen tables. but there is no question we want to see a better economy, and the question is what leader and what agenda will get us there. host: one of the items in the chart we referred to from "the wall street journal" regarding retail and restaurant sales, on the far end on the right is electronics and appliances, up 4.5% from august-to-september.

there was a lot of discussion when the iphone 5 came out that it would jack up the economy, and some people were saying it would save the economy. it says that spending has only gone up 4.5%. why is that? guest: this has happened with apple releases in the past. it creates a one-time bump in the numbers. it is not something that creates a long-term trend line changed. you could get one month with an extra two tenths of a point of retail sales growth, the water use spend on an iphone the koran ipad you have to not spend on something else. -- or an ipad, you have to not spend on something else. it shifts spending from a restaurant meal, to a tech product.

host: union springs, alabama. juan is spending about the same. caller: i am spending the same, but is it not true the dollar bill is weaker now, and that is the reason the economy is not picking up that the faster? -- picking up faster? is that true or not, not spending as they choose? guest: those are separate issues. there's the strength of the dollar on the international market. it has gone up and down. it is not tremendously changed over the last several years. from before the crisis, weary and the same ball park. i do not remember -- we are in the same ballpark. i did not remember if it has

gone up or down a little since obama is inaugurated. there is a question about what the congress is spending or is not spending. the deficit is large. 9% or so of gdp in deficit spending. over time, that has to come down. there is no way a country can spend 10% more than it earns indefinitely, for right now the markets are not sending warning signs that the deficits need to be cut tomorrow. interest rates are near all-time lows. the u.s. carbon can borrow money more cheaply than any other -- can go borrow money more cheaply than any other entity on earth, and that gives us some leeway to reduce the deficit carefully in ways that do not suck the air out of the economy, and the

question is can they do that? the debate over the fiscal cliff, that is what this will be. there are things that would reduce the deficit, but they happen at once it would raise taxes on a lot of people, cut spending and defense and other things. nobody wants to go over the fiscal cliff, but the long-term path is but the debate will be after the election. host: we have another one of your articles with the headline "is there good inflation?" and you talk about good, bad and neutral inflation. can you explain? guest: i absolutely agree that prices in food and gasoline going up, that is bad inflation, making it hard for people to live, especially low-income families. there is no question when

gasoline prices and food prices rise, which they have, just not as much as people are arguing, that that is a bad thing for the economy a more neutral inflation -- when goods that are bought more -- bad thing for the economy. a neutral- -- a neutral inflation? when people are buying things for cars, or computers -- if cars are more expensive and you have to keep your old car for another 20,000 miles, that is not the worst thing in the world, not like food, because you have to eat. there is actually some upside to inflation and housing measures. older equivalent rent -- what would it cost to rent your house? if you own the house you're renting it from yourself is the way the math works. if that starts to rise, it could

be a good thing for the economy because it could trigger housing construction and get growth going again in a way that is constructive for the economy. seeing a rise in rental measures would be a good thing for the economy. host: back to the phones. power line for people that are spending less. -- our line for people that are spending less california. caller: i am spending less. a lot of people on this line, i'm almost 50 years old. back in the day we had to live within our means. if you cannot afford that expensive whatever, and you have to downsize, you get something that is basically the same, but

less. everybody wants and needs these big things, just take it down a couple of notches, save your money, and you have more money. it is a simple process, you know? host: nuclear 1, talk to us about savings -- neil irwin, talk to us about savings. what do savings due in pumping up consumer confidence? guest: we think of savings and as an active process, depositing money in a bank or brokerage account. the way economists look at it, it is more of a residual. take your income, subtract spending, and what is left is savings. if somebody makes $50,000 a year, and spends $45,000, they saved $5,000.

that town says savings. what happened, and the caller -- that counts as savings. what happened, leading up to 2007, household debt levels got high, so people were not sitting, and they were taking on debt, doing the opposite, and debt levels rose tremendously, and that is part of the story of why we are in this dilemma. when everybody tries to get rid of that debt, and hike up saving at the same time, it brings a halt to economic activity and mentioned this earlier -- i mentioned this earlier, one man's spending is another's income. what normally happens in a recession is the government borrows more to pick up slack, the federal reserve cuts interest rates, making the debt burden is here -- easier.

it has not been enough in this situation. getting savings rates back to sustainable levels, paying down debt and building up savings, that will be critical step to getting this economy to take off down the road. we will never have a strong recovery until the repair of balance sheets has happened and people up their savings. host: we are sent this tweet that says at this point in time wage inflation would be good, yet that, in all caps, is tightly controlled. guest: wage inflation, both in what you by end on wages, prices have been dying slowly, but they have been bought -- prices have been going slowly, but as people

make less, higher prices really hurt. is what the if that person was thinking about, but it is true the fed will be more inclined to hike rates and slow down growth if there is broad based inflation that includes both wages and prices. if that gets much above 2%, they will start raising rates and prevent inflation from taking off in a big way. host: david. pennsylvania. he is spending about the same. caller: good morning. i have a comment and question. the comment is if you want to get the economy going, you have to increase wages. if you do not have customers, businesses simply cannot stay in business. that is number one. neil irwin, when you are talking

about people's spending more, are you talking about a strictly the amount of money they are spending, or what they are buying? do you understand what i am saying? guest: this is a distinction with a lot of callers saying the same thing but in different terms. is it real spending or just nominal? the retail sales numbers that came out tuesday, or maybe monday, those are nominal numbers. part of the reason those are up is because and that is not so much a real improvement in the standard of living. that said, there was some growth, even if you exclude gasoline, so there is an increase in real spending. host: richard in wisconsin who is spending less. caller: i called on spending less, but i feel like i'm

spending more, spending less, spending in every direction i am looking at. i feel like we're getting lost in this country. i am almost a theme of everybody else talking, but how can we keep going in this direction without the stock market -- it seems like big businesses or whatever, instead of the people of the united states -- really helping us. i could go on on all different issues to be honest, but the reality is how do we solve this to really help all of us, not just businesses or shareholders? guest: this is a valid concern. it is true that over the past three years that the stock market began, the stock market

is up a lot and corporate balance sheets are in good shape. their stock prices are not quite get to where they were, but they are getting back their month-by- month. things are much harder for ordinary workers. median wages, those in the middle of the income distribution, those have been falling. they are down below 1997 levels when adjusted for inflation. so, there is no question that this recovery has happened more dramatically and decisively on the corporate side of the larger than for ordinary americans. whoever wins this election in a couple of weeks, one of the fundamental challenges they will face in the next four years, will be how to make sure this recovery goes beyond large, the companies to something felt by people all over. host: neil irwin of "the washington post," thank you for

been on the program. we will take a break, and when we come back, we will be aboutng to rayola dougher oil production and then later, reverse mortgages. we will take a break, and be right back. >> here is a look at some books published this week. former goldman sachs employee greg smith expands and a recent column he wrote on why he chose to leave the company in "why i left goldman sachs -- a wall street story." on politics, a history of political thought. alan ryan provides a history of political philosophy.

a onetime biology student and now homeless day labor in "a free man." in "on learning liberty" the argument there is a failure in critical thinking. in "this indian country" american indian activist. watch for the authors in the near future on booktv. >> i have answered this question many, many times, and it starts with the fact that for the day i was born until the day my mother died she told me about why am, who we are, who my brothers are, who my family is, and i have never used the information about our native american

heritage to get any advantage -- not to apply to law school, college or get hired for any job. >> part of this race is integrity and trustworthiness. there is a testy, and i believe she has failed that test. nobody is questioned what her parents told her, but when she was asked by "the boston herald " why is she being touted as a minority, she said she did not know. >> all of this month and leading up to election day, followed the key house and senate races. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we will open up the phones

for a general discussion of items in the news this morning -- things you have seen, heard. give us a call and let us know what you are thinking about. the numbers -- host: you can also send us messages on social media. twitter. facebook conversation is always going on and you can also send this e-mail. "columbusrning's

dispatch" this is by randy who writes -- so, it looks like the millenniums are less in the siesta, at least -- less enthusiastic, at least in columbus about the president. lorraine is on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. i was listening of about money

-- about money. when president obama took over office come we might not have even had factories to make money again. he has brought this country so far. .'m so glad right now? in memphis is $3.28. it is getting better every day. i do not feel worried anymore. i do not feel the war coming down on us. i'm just so glad that we are moving forward. i feel a big difference. before everybody was losing their jobs. the economy was awful. host: lorraine, what did you for a living? caller: i work for the government, pre-trial. it's called a local government?

what has the employment by mike for government workers? -- ben like for government workers? caller: everybody is working. education, people are trying to go back to school because you need education for a lot of jobs. some it programs have opened up -- so many programs have opened up. if people in the jail systems are going back to school and getting jobs. jobs are out there. i am just so happy the economy is not like it was four years ago. everything is looking good and it is getting better. i was in the military almost seven years. it is a big deal to me. host: we will move on to ben in nebraska on our line for republicans. caller: good morning. i would like to respond to a couple of things.

the one guy said he was worried about heaven and hell, and that is actually a state of mind. there is no such thing. he will be in a big -- in for a big surprise when he passes away. i remember back in 1972 or 1973, when they have that oil embargo and gasoline was 25 cents a gallon. out in denver i took a trip to yellowstone park and paid 47 cents a gallon. by the time the inflation started, you could buy a new car, a ford maverick, for 1995, the house for 17,000. when they faked the oil embargo

and lined ships up and made a gas shortage, gasoline in four years was up to $1 a gallon. jimmy carter pointed to welfare. the only good thing ronald reagan ever did -- since ronald reagan got in there, wages went for health insurance. my wages, basically buying power, is the same as it was 30 years ago. host: how much of your wages do you have to use for your health care now under the affordable care act? caller: the affordable care act is not in full force for another two years, and my health insurance for my wife and die is

a bargain, i guess, total -- and pie is a bargain, about $7,000 a year. host: are you spending more or less the? caller: i am spending less time i bought a car made in montgomery, alabama. it's 45 miles a gallon. you do not mind, i will tell you what kind it is. host: that is okay. we'll move on to greece in -- reece in illinois. caller: i would like to see one day the democrats and republicans in the house of representatives and the senate, and the president wanting to work together. we need to step up and make this country better than this.

i have an opportunity to be in this country for over 10 years and i'm happy to be here. i have seen so many elections, and i want everybody to work together. host: we will leave it there. in "the washington post" this morning --

back to the phones. carmen in california is the maligned for democrats. -- on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. i enjoy your program. i watch it just about every morning, and i would like to comment on your previous segment, whereas in the 1980's about the economy moving faster than it is today. what i would like to say is with

two wars going on and barack obama when he was elected, stated to the nation that our country does not need two wars. we do not need any wars. he said we were going to get out of the wars. we are out of iraq. we are turning down in afghanistan, and i think that is the right route to go. i believe america will benefit by these things, and the economy will be moving forward. i love our country. host: sharon rose in missouri is on the line for republicans. caller: thank you for taking my

call. there are so many things we know out here that the media is not sharing with us. i think we owe it to be not one way or the other. we were told them one to three were going into bankruptcy, but it is ok because this state by another country, and that company is another company that is going to china. i know that because my husband works there. they laid off 15 just this week, and my husband lost a good job by being laid off. we are basically a truck driver with a $1,000 income that is down to $500. i am on social security. i have about $500 take home.

we are medium class, average people, did used to be a democrat, used to have a life where we used to go to the store. i go to the store with $45 and tell the girl that i need to put this back. we are suffering, romney is not telling us because he has to get in first to be president. he wants to do the old-fashioned thing, getting mom and pop out there making a living and getting people working again, and actually mom and pop are not able to do that right now because of all of the taxes that obama-care has thrown on top of us. we the people screamed out, became tea party, anything we could call ourselves to join with a voice. host: you mentioned the tea party. do you consider yourself a member? caller: people do not understand

what we are. we are just the people. they go with the tea party because of when they came over. it is basically a cliche. host: let me ask you this, are you satisfied with the performance of the members of congress who were elected with the assistance of the tea party? caller: yes, i definitely am, because they are just the blue collar person, or the doctor. a lot of the doctors, and they came in because of obama-care, a lot of them are household husbands that said wait a minute, we need to get our country back in line. we are just the people. that is what the constitution says, we the people. this is what we are doing, trying to cluster together. i'm disabled, so i cannot go places, but i still have an idea

in my mind, an entrepreneur mind. i was born here in america, and i do not care if you come over on a ship, if you have ideas to bring your household into a better financial place, you have the american dream. no matter where we come from. host: i will have to let you go. thank you for the call. i want to show our viewers an article from "the wall street journal" this morning.

those figures help explain how the strategic playing field has shaped for mr. obama and running as they compete for the small set of states that will -- romney as they compete for the small set of states that will decide the election. for mr. obama of ohio is the main piece of the fire wall that can help him build an electoral college majority, even if you lose his florida, north carolina and virginia, where mr. romney leaves in many polls. joining us at the c-span cable

is rayola dougher, senior economic adviser for the american petroleum institute and is here to talk about oil production in campaign 2012. welcome to the program. guest: thank you. host: talk about how energy production and oil production is factoring into the election and who seems to be taken advantage, president obama or governor romney? guest: i think both candidates are emphasizing the energy, and the differences can make in terms of jobs, energy security and the government revenue it could generate. it is gratifying to see both of them, right off of the start the other night, go to it in terms of energy. it ought to be a bipartisan issue -- not bipartisan, the opposite -- that we could get together and endorsed domestic

development. host: before we get too deep into the conversation, tell us, what is the american petroleum institute, and who do you represent? guest: we are a traitor presentation -- organization that has been in -- trade organization that has been in business since 1919. all members supply 62% of the energy that america uses and we contribute 7.7% to the gdp. we employ over 90 million -- 9 million americans, one way or the other. we think the investments we could make will make a big difference to the nation and the economic welfare of our country. host: in "the washington times, called thursday had this

headline and in the article it starts saying -- tell me, based on what you saw

in the debate last week, who is making their case the best to the american people about how to handle the oil industry and production in the united states? guest: well, in terms of best, both candidates are looking at an all of the above strategy, but you have to do more than just say you are for all of the above. you have to follow through with some action. the other night president obama took credit for increased production. it is absolutely true that our production has taken off in the united states, especially with natural gas and oil production, but it has not been happening on federal lands. it peaked around 2009, then fell off. a lot of this has to do with policy. we see leases, for example, down 76% since 2008 on federal land on short, and 72% of short.

-- on shore, and 70% off shore. we have seen a strong emphasis on wind, solar and geothermal, and they will be an important part of the energy mix moving forward. wind and solar have doubled, going from 0.6%, to 1.5%. we are concerned about opportunities gone missing. we have challenges ahead of us and we have the chance to turn those challenges into opportunities for growth, jobs and government revenue, and instead we really see policy that is calling for punitive taxes on the oil industry. that will not reduce the price or give us more energy. we would like to see, and we do see a lot in different focus groups and surveys that the vast majority of americans are

supportive of domestic development. we would like to see that translates into real political action and we do not feel we are getting that right now. host: we want to show our viewers will produced on federal lands with numbers provided by the energy information administration. again, those numbers provided to us by the energy information administration. we are talking to rayola dougher, senior economic adviser

for the american petroleum institute, about oil production in campaign 2012. the numbers around the screen. we want to get viewers and listeners involved. chad, ohio on the line for republicans. caller: thank you. i was calling because i see president obama talking about alternative energy, wind, solar, all of that fun stuff, but i do not hear a lot about what is going on with oil. i see a lot of natural grass -- natural gas fracturing going on, but not a lot happening with yes prices. -- gas prices. i want to see an opinion on what is going to change with either candidate? what are their plans? host: rayola dougher, go ahead.

guest: i think it does depend on to a great extent who is elected, the whether you are democrat or republican, you can get on board in times -- in terms of encouraging domestic development. we've seen a revolution in technology in the united states, and a lot of this is brought to us by hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling to excess resources in ways we never thought possible even a few years ago. if you know we can produce more here than we ever thought possible, then you need to have a policy that supports that development and realizes that vision. i think it is destructive to take one resource against the other. either you have this resources or the other. we will be hard put as a nation to supply all of the energy that we need, and our only choice today in terms of oil and gas is

where do we get it from? do we produce it domestically or rely more on imports? that is a fundamental choice facing us. we really do want to see in all of the above policy that is supportive of domestic development. it is making a huge difference in many communities. in north dakota, production has gone from 100,000 barrels a few years ago, to 700,000 barrels today. ohio is looking promising. texas has been out there and out front. natural gas production in pennsylvania has taken off. if you look at a map of the shell resources in the united states, it blankets a big part of the country. we are the leaders. there is caller: i am south of pittsburgh and in the last 3.5 years there

has been 3000 wells drilled here. we have a guess. we don't need any permits. shell oil co. is building in multibillion dollar ethylene plant -- plant west of pittsburgh produce steel is beginning a $3 billion expansion in one plant. with -- 2 miles from here is a brand new gas compressor stage -- station. we've got enough gas for the next 250 years. don't panic, the wells are here come the gas is here -- we have wind farms on our mountain and we have four new permits to protect hydro all along the monongahela river. when they drilled a gas wells, the state or the county gives them the right to use our public land to put pipelines in an transported all over the world. thank do for that

comment. you are right in the middle of the a lot of the activity that is happening. when i talk about government support, right now we have calls for punitive taxes on the oil and gas industry. that is not a part of domestic production. we have 87% of our offshore area dedicated to development and that is not supported for domestic development. like your areas on private lands and state lands, this production is taking off. it is creating a lot of new jobs and certainly a lot of new business. one of the exciting things about natural gas and having such a plan double supply is it is bringing in chemical plants and other plants and making manufacturing more economical here in the united states. it is going to be a real edge for us, a real advantage, in competition in global markets and that is happening. host: tell us how the price is

set for gasoline and how that is affected by the availability of oil either produce here in the united states or overseas in south america or the middle east. >> guest: we're in the global market for oil. the price is determined by all the buyers and sellers in the world market. whatever we can do -- and we're a big consumer -- we're the biggest in the world. we're the third largest producer. what ever we can do as a nation to produce more and consume less is a plus for us and a plus for the world oil market. there's much more that can be done. we think with these policies and open areas to development, we might be able to get another 1.5 million barrels per day into the market within the decade. another 12 years or so, maybe as much as 4 million extra barrels per day from us. bill that keystone pipeline, that is another 800,000 barrels

per day in north america for us to use. imagine if the world had that from reliable suppliers of fuel in our hemisphere. the difference that could make in terms of putting downward pressure on the global price of crude oil as well as 1 million or more jobs it could create, the $120 billion of government revenue and the energy between canada, ourselves, and are biofuels, in a dozen years, if we had a policy that said let's go for this, we could be fairly self-sufficient. will always be in a global economy. we would have the benefit of the jobs, the revenue, the energy and a downward pressure on the world's of volatility and the world prices if we were producing more. it is a big win for us. we should go for it. host:rayola is the senior

adviser for the american petroleum institute. next is our line for independences. we will look at the american petroleum institute website. caller: i am calling because one of the reasons gas prices are so high is speculation. the speculators should investigate the speculators. the bain company, they jump up and down. we're doing a lot of exploration right now. and on like the person that works, gas and groceries go up. you cannot say you need another 50 cents or $1 per hour. the reason the gas prices are so hot is the speculation, two, the

exploration, they have to pay for the equipment for drilling and frakking and everything else. the only thing that i get ruffled about is once we get all this gas, our prices will stay up and they shipped overseas. this is the united states. it should stay in the united states. guest: crude-oil does stay in the united states. or we have been fortunate in the past year or so is that our refiners have -- have been producing record amounts of fuel even as consumption in the united states has gone down which has allowed us for the first time since 1949 to be net exporters of refined petroleum products. in terms of speculators, they are a popular source of blame for the higher prices but one easy test of that is if the price were too high, you would see inventories rise of the press were too high. we don't see that in the world

market. we also have a commodities- futures trading commission that oversees this and many folks looking into markets to make sure their transparent. it really is a global marketplace driven by supply and demand globally. the speculators bring their knowledge and best expectations about supply and demand into the market but at the end of the day, host: more from the article this past thursday in "the washington times." -

we will take a look at a little bit of that exchange between the governor and the president that will come back and continue our conversation. [video clip] >> that's not what you have done the last four years. that is the problem. in the last four years, you cut permits and licenses on federal land and federal waters in have. >> not true. >> how much did you cut them by? >> we have produced more oil -- >> how much have you cut licenses and permits on federal land? >> there were a whole bunch of oil companies -- >> a question -- >> i'm happy to answer the question. here is what happens -- you had a whole bunch of oil companies who had leases on public lands that they were not using.

we said you cannot just sit on this for 10, 20, 30 years and decide when you want to drill and when you want to produce. these are public lands. if you want to drill on public lands, use it or you lose it. we took away those leases and we are now re-letting them so we can make a profit. >> production on public land is down. host: talk to us about those leases the president was referring to and how that whole process works. guest: leasing is down both onshore and offshore quite a bit, over 70% for both since the administration came in. there is a great deal of misunderstanding about these leases. you get a lease and you might have 100 leases, maybe 50 could leaves out of that 100. out of those 50 lead, you could

have 25 that look like good prospects and out of those 25, you will drill 11 and you might get one that gives you a return. you could have a lot of leases and they are characterized as idle until you produce a barrel of oil or a cubic foot of natural gas. even if you have activity going on at 11 of those, only one is counted. it is true that these are idle leases but they don't come with specifics as to where you can drill to get gas or oil. you have to pay rent on it and you have to give it back if you have not produced on it. no one gets a lease with the intent of sitting on it. that would be irresponsible and is not economical for a company to do that. there can be economic or technical reasons why you get the lease and you are not drilling on it. you have to turn it back.

it is a misrepresentation or misunderstanding of how the process works for the industry. it is a high risk business. it is a lot of money that goes into these things. they don't invest and leases that they don't have an intent to develop. clout of 100, you can narrow it down to maybe one. when the presence as they are not using their leases but these perspective is incorrect. host: how much does the federal government make of these leases? guest: it depends, they bid on them so it depends on the bed. bid. it is readily available for government records so i don't have it off the top of my head. it could be billions of dollars depending what you are leasing and how big it is. and whether it is onshore or offshore. they do open areas to development but the record

compared to 2008 is down significantly, 76% on sure, 72% on shore. -- offshore. >> rayola dougher is the senior economic adviser at the american petroleum institute and previously worked for the institute of energy analysis focusing on carbon dioxide- related issues and international energy demand and supply. she has a bachelor's degree from the state university of new york at brockport and a master's from american right here in washington, d.c. back to the funds, like arthur, louisiana, on our line for republicans. are you there? caller: hello? i was just listening to the lady. i am down in the gulf area.

i think president obama is a good man. i don't know if he is being advised from different angles on this petroleum issue or the energy issue. another has been tens of thousands of jobs lost down here in louisiana because of the permits not given out in the gulf or whatever the case may be. what was said in the debate the other night, there was a lot of inaccuracies and many levels. however, one thing the lady just talked about -- how much money are we leaving on the table by not getting a share of this high-priced oil off of these federal lands. and the jobs, mitt romney is talking about creating 12 million jobs. i can tell you now, if they opened up these federal lands

and pipelines and take some of these regulations offer these people and these people you are paying to oversee these things, that will create tens of millions of jobs. i don't know if obama -- i was just listening a few minutes ago to the president of shell oil and he said the gas prices would go up in 2008. he said the other night was in -- what he said the other night was inaccurate as to why the gas prices went up. if you let the drilling go on these public lands, how many jobs will you create and how much money will be pumped back into the economy? guest: you are right, for every job created directly in new orleans, there are three or four that are supported by it. that is the frustration.

we have missed opportunities and i agree with you. i greet the president is a good guy and very focused on renewable resources. that is fine up to a point. we really have to look at the big picture and i don't think we have had the full support of our government in developing our resources in the past few years. maybe some of that is because there has been a shift in what we can expect domestically, a big shift because of technological innovation. i think the idea that america has is fantastic but that has been slow to catch up to some folks that don't pay as much attention as the oil and gas industry does. when you live like you do, you know the opportunities and you can see what has happened in the gulf because you are right there. we can do better. i'm sure we can do better no matter who is elected. let's focus on a true all of the above. host: next up is from louisiana

on our line for democrats. caller: thank you. host: are you in the gulf area? caller: ask, i am retired from the oil and gas business. can you put that first chart that you showed with oil produced on federal land? it looks to me like we produced 200,000 more barrels per year than we were in 2008. could you pull that charged up? we've got host: up right now. in 2011 according to the energy administration administration, we produced the 626 million barrels a net was five under 66 million in 2008. it looks like we have been producing more as the years progressed. there is a little bit of a dip

their from 2010-2011 but more than 2008. what is your point? caller: facts matter and that lady sitting there saying we are producing less oil of federal land is wrong. i would like for her to answer this question -- why did they shut down the pipeline the other day during that toxic canadian oil index that had to shut down completely. that is the reason people have been holding up the keystone pipeline. it runs out into the rivers and wisconsin. -- in wisconsin. guest: terms of the production itself, you can do many things with numbers. 2008 was a particularly below year because of hurricanes in the gulf of mexico. we saw production going down offshore from september of 2009

onward. there have been modest increases depending on how you want to measure it. as a share of the total, it has fallen off dramatically. when you combine onshore and offshore, that is partly because of the leases. in terms of the keystone pipeline itself, that pipeline has been under review for four years which is twice the normal amount of time. would bring the equivalent of 800,000 barrels per day to the united states to our refiners in the gulf which would be about half of what we import from the persian gulf. more than that, it would employ directly along that 71800-mile route, many construction jobs. the big impact for america would be the trade impact. the difference in trade would give us about 90,000 new jobs. in terms of the composition of the oil itself in the pipeline,

it is similar to the heavy oil we have been moving for ever. we already have in california, we import 1.5 million barrels per day of oil sands. this is not new. it has passed every single review including two environmental reviews for the only thing left is for the president to decide of this venture is in the national interest. that is all that is left. he had passed last year or determine that he would like to postpone the decision until after the election. congress came back last winter and said no, we will give you another 90 days and the president came back and said he did not have enough time so the answer is no. we hope whoever is elected will take another look at this and approve this pipeline because i cannot imagine anything that is easier to bring oil to the market and make sure we have the

job and the energy that this country needs. host: our next call is from pennsylvania, on our line for independents. caller: i appreciate the opportunity. i love this show. the time has come for us to boost our american oil. we have been so networked world wide, wants to actually get the permits in place and you are getting drilling, i understand there is some discovery and ball before him but from start to finish, how long does it take for us to see the oil come into our market? guest: can take years depending on the process. -- it can take years depending on the process. there is a diagram showing all the groups you have to jump through and it can be stopped at

any part along the way but it depends where you are exploring developing. i'm sure it could be much quicker. offshore is much more challenging and can take longer. it could be five, six, seven years depending on when you decide to do it. policy has a cumulative impact in -- and every decision starts to add up over years and make a big difference in terms of what we can see in the market. the biggest difference we are suffering from is lost potential, what we could have had in the market and don't have a market. we don't want to see any further loss of that potential. host: we have been talking about oil production in campaign 2012. we have the senior economic adviser at the american energy institute. we will take a short break and come back, we'll take an in- depth look at reverse mortgages. you were watching "washington journal,"today is saturday,

october 20. we will be right back. >> the anime understands that there will be -- the enemy understands there will be a major defeat in their ideology of hatred. that's why they fight so vociferously. they show up in afghanistan because they tried to be less than it did not and they're showing up in iraq for the same reason. if we lose our will, we lose but will remain strong and resolute, we will defeat this enemy. >> second response? >> i believe in being strong and resolute and determined. i will hunt down and killed the terrorists wherever they are. we also have to be smart. smart mains not diverting your attention from the real war on terror in afghanistan against osama bin laden and taking it to

iraq where there was no connection to 9/11 itself and saddam hussein and the reason for going to war was weapons of mass sports -- weapons of mass destruction. this president, i regret to say, asthmatic colossal error of judgment and judgment is what we look for in the president of united states of america. >> you can see more from this foreign policy debate from the 2004 campaign later tonight along with other debates on the same subject for our archives. this is the schedule -- it all starts a 7:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> i think mr. nixon is an effective leader of his party. i hope he would grant me the same greedy question before us is, which party do we want to

lead the united states? >> you like to comment? endicott >> tuition, they had in mind we would deliberate and talk and elected officials based on reason and argument. you cannot argue against an image. and images just that. you just have to counter with an image. in a world with a whole lot of problems and the world and a whole lot of problems in the country, a reasoned argument has to dominate but it doesn't when it is on television. >> history of presidential debates as 1960 sunday night at 8:30 eastern on american history tv on c-span 3. >> [video clip] "continues -- >> we have the financial editor at the new york times and we're here to talk about reverse mortgages.

for the sake of this discussion, what exactly is a reverse mortgage? guest: the official term is a home equity conversion loan. it will not really be simple. does a pretty complex home loan. the best way to understand it is in a traditional loan, if you are a young person and you have a down payment, you then go to a bank and borrow the rest. you have a monthly mortgage payment and your loan balance comes down and the ownership value of the house, the equity goes up. in a reverse mortgage, the opposite happens. your balance rises and your equity declines. that is the difficult thing for people to get their heads around. in order to get one of these, you have to be 62 years or older, you generally have to own a home or have substantial equity in the home but you don't

have a monthly mortgage payment. you are still responsible for the property taxes, maintenance, and insurance payments which can be considerable but you can defer the payment of the loan until you move out or the borrower dies. >> we have an example of a notice of eligibility. this was sent out by one of the companies that offer these reverse mortgages. it says get rid of your mortgage payment now, no credit or income requirement, the u.s. government has approved a mortgage stimulus package for home owners 62 years of age or older as a result of the housing and policy recovery act of 2011. these applications, these

pitches, seem very tempting for someone who might be getting on in asia needs money to make it from day to day. guest: correct, there are risks all through the process here. there are circumstances in which these can work for seniors but the risks start with what you read their. that is the advertising which can be misleading. they can be promoting to take your dream vacation. you should only be taking these loans out if you really need the money. we will get into that in detail but there is -- they also require counseling. often that counseling is not effective or can be quick or over the phone and is not giving the senior is the information that they truly need to make an informed decision. when you take the money out, there is also the prospect that they can be targeted, the

seniors, in other complex ways where they take the money and invest the money and the seniors may lose a lot of the money through that process. the other big risks are that you still have to pay the property taxes and insurance and maintenance. if you cannot keep up with those payments, your in default and you can lose your home. there is a lot of things really have to be careful about before you enter into these loans host: what type of banks offer these reverse mortgages and what is the incentive the on the just profit for these banks to do these kind of mortgages? guest: there is a lot of lenders -- the big banks like bankamerica and wells fargo, last year got out of making these loans. those are the biggest companies in terms of mortgages in the

united states. they got out of it in part because property values were declining and it was hard to value the property itself. it was not clear the ability of the senior citizens to pay the loans and they were controversial. there were stories out there about how people were losing their homes at increasing rates. small mortgage lenders are doing it now. the primary expense for them is that they are making money on the front and with the fees they get and they can be considerable. they are higher than typical mortgage fees. it is also the interest rates. the interest you are paying on this loan increases throughout the life of loans to the banks will make it through that interest schedule. host: we're talking with patricks got about reverse mortgages and like all -- the audience to get involved -- were

talking with scott patrick about reverse mortgages. we would like the audience to get involved. the numbers are on your screen -- our first call comes from james in bay city, mich. on our line for republicans. caller: good morning. i understand if you have no children at all, it would be a good deal. on the other hand, what is the downside to this bank? -- to this thing? i am 90 years old. thank you. guest: the first thing people should think about is whether they really need to have this money. if you needed to stay in the

home and you have no other assets or way to borrow money, then you should look into a reverse mortgage. the thing you have to be careful of, for instance, if you have a property that is valued at $250,000, and if you're 65, you could maybe get a loan of $135,000 on a because they don't give you the full value of the home in the loan. the give you a portion of that. it goes up as your oldness or fewer 90 years old and having to order the $2,000 house, you can get close to $200,000 on that house. what are you going to do without lump sum of money? if there is another 10 years that the person lives, you can be adding $80,000 or more to

that loan. you could own $300,000 when the home has to be sold. through the aarp and the federal trade commission and the consumer financial protection bureau, there is a lot of information for when this is appropriate and when it is not. host: next is alexis in herndon, va. on our line for democrats. go ahead. turn down your television set. hwhat is your question or comment? caller: i bought a house in 2000. i tried to apply for the programs that are out there.

i have not succeeded. my husband lost his job and i still have to pay $3,000 per month for someone who owns only $3,000 per month. i am unable even to buy food for my children. what can i do? host: are you 62 years or older? caller: no, i' i'm 40. host: she would not qualify for a reverse mortgage, would she? guest: no, but it sounds like the caller would be a candidate possibly for a modification. that would mean that it would either reduce the amount of money overall owed the home or lower the monthly payments by reducing the interest rate. oftentimes, the value of the loan -- if you owe $300,000 on

that house and you cannot make payments now or have to make reduced payments, they will attack that on to the end of the loan. you have to go directly to your lender if you're in that situation. there is also help you can get through counselors and the federal government who can help you. you should not pay any sort of fees for a counselor to help you modify your mortgage or to restructure your mortgage so you can afford your payments. that should be a free service that the federal government provides. you can find out from your lender as well. host: our next call comes from pedro, ohio, on our independent line. caller: said you'd get the lump- sum on the reverse mortgage.

i know people lead on this before only getting a monthly payment. guest: right, there is a few ways. this is part of the complexity. you can take out the lump-sum in the example i gave you before if you are 65 that you have a $250,000 house. you can get a lump sum of $130,000, say, but you can also choose to take half of it in a lump sum and the other half in a line of credit that can either be tapped when you needed to or it could be a monthly stream of income that would be provided over a certain amount of time were over the time you actually live. there is a lot of different ways you can access the money. generally, a lump sum as a fixed interest rate or you can get a variable or adjustable rate that is more of a line of credit. host: basically, the difference

between refinancing a loan or mortgage on your house and taking a reverse mortgage is that with the refinancing, you still continue to make monthly payments. with a reverse mortgage, you get the lump-sum and you don't have to make payments? guest: pretty much, you're just lowering the monthly payments you are making. in a reverse mortgage -- mortgage the, you are on locking the money that is the equity in your house. you're getting to use it now as opposed to you wanting to downsize. you could sell that house now and move into a smaller place. host: what would be the difference between a reverse mortgage and opening up a home

equity line of credit? guest: well, the home equity line of credit, you don't have to take the money in. you don't have the temptation to spend it if you're taking a lump-sum. you take the lump-sum when you get that on a reverse mortgage but then through the interest, you have to increase the value -- the loan balance. host: our next call comes from amarillo, texas, on our line for republicans. caller: this is the first, called after watching for decades. i enjoyed your show. host: happy to have you on. caller: i noticed many colors on

your show on the republican line have democratic ideas and views. that was interesting. i have a reverse mortgage is that i took out in 2008. it has allowed me to retire when i would not have been able to do so until 2020. i had a problem with the mortgage company as to adhering to the terms of the contract. i could not afford an attorney so who would i go to or is there a government agency i can go to when i have a problem like that? host: before you go, what was the amount of your loan? caller: it was about $4,500 worth of fees that were added in. the amount of the loan ended up being $85,000. the equity in the home was

about 90 or something like that. host: 90 for your call. guest: the best place you can go to -- the dodd-frank block transfer the responsibility of rulemaking and regulations of mortgages to the consumer financial protection bureau. they are looking for whether there is deceptive or unfair practices. they have a hot line there and they take complaints about that and they can also help you get directed to legal help that can be provided. it can be provided at no cost. counseling on these loans, you should have had counseling before you took out alone. that typically cost $125 but

they're supposed to provide that for free if you can afford it. >> the consumer financial protection bureau also released a report to congress on reverse mortgages that can out earlier. you can't find that at the cfpb web site. you can find that at the cfpb web site. our next caller is from texas, on our line for democrats. caller: is this a scam for the banks to buy houses at low prices? i will hang up and listen for your answer, thank you. guest: there is a group in california and they are advocates for nursing home

reform. there's a lawyer with the group named the press got a call. one of his concerns is that it is particularly the maintenance cost on these loans. in to make sure that you have the money to keep this property up. as part of the covenant of the loan. it needs a new roof and seven years or a paying job, it could be very expensive. the suspicion is that in 5-10 years when the housing market starts to collect, there will be more agents going out looking at the expeditions of these properties and determining they are in need of maintenance. when people can afford them, the banks will take cover those properties. that is not the intention of the banks. they are trying to make money but trying to find a way where people can unlock the value of their home now and the relieve it.

as long as they fully understand the ramifications of this level. next up is kathy, in canton, ohio. >> i would like to know what is going to happen to all the people who could not get any help from you the president's program or their lender. people ended up walking away from their houses, thank you. guest: in those cases, when people walk away from their homes, that was something that people in the mortgage market really did not see because the homes are under water and that is where you owe more than the value of the house and it doesn't make sense for people to continue to pay their mortgages.

it all ended this whole rule all block and honoring contracts were if you can afford it, you send -- you have a job and you have a commitment to making that payment, you're obligated to make that payment. when the interest rates come down as they have now to historical lows, you can refinance of it is cheaper for you to stay in that home. if you lost your job or you had a difficult day with medical expenses and you can afford your mortgage and you modified with the bank and a larger interest payments that you still cannot pay the newly restructured mortgage. there are a number of people who have no recourse except they can't get another modification and they lose.

the foreclosure rate is still high in america. it has skyrocketed and many communities and there is still a glut of foreclosed homes on the market that are still keeping property value is low. that is a problem in the housing market and the economy that will take years to work through. patrick're talking with scott, the financial editor for " the new york times." reverselking about mortgages and oversight of the industry. in an article written last week, by jessica silver greenberg has this headline --

>with baby boomers retiring in greater and greater numbers and they are the largest consumers of these reports mortgages, is there a potential for a subprime disaster to repeat itself the way we saw earlier in this decade with people who took out home loans and could not afford them? guest: there is definitely concerns and risks and new abuses that were documented. disaster would probably be a strong word.

of the people are eligible for these loans, about 2-3% are tapping into reverse mortgages, they had really spiked before the financial crisis in 2007. it was over 100,000 per year. it is down to around 70,000. the concern is that baby boomers are looking for ways they can have more money in retirement. they will be taking more of these loans. the report showed a couple of things. more of them are not making the application for a loan. you're not using that money wisely.

they were finding that people are yoghurt starting to take out these loans. the risk is that if you have a greater risk of foreclosure, you'd run out of the money and not be able to afford to stay in the house. is a question as to how widespread this will be. their private loans being made in the subprime days when there were all sorts of loose lending practices, they were also packaged and sold to investors for bonds. that is not occurring now with these so that helps to decrease the contagion of plants like this that could go bad to. >> a corning -- according to the consumer financial protection bureau, these mortgages are insured by the federal housing administration. if the long x is the value of the home at repairman, fha covers the balance.

if the homeowner gets themselves into a situation where they cannot repay the loan and a foreclose, who takes ownership of the house? guest:wqell, the bank owns a house in a foreclosure if there is a default for any reason. you are paying for the mortgage insurance for the fha. the consumer is actually paying for that. it is not like the government will be stuck with a whole lot of houses. the government has a lot of houses now. it will typically be that the bank would take ownership of this home. they will either put it on the market or they will hold in their inventory because they may not want to have -- it puts a -- they might not want to have additional homes on the market. host: valerie is calling from

archibald, pa., on our line for republicans. patrickalking with scott of " the new york times." caller: i have an acquaintance who has a house that is fully paid for, ages 64 and disabled. she is having a lot of trouble maintaining the expense of the home. however, she is also eligible for numerous social programs particularly medical related for her disability. does the in, that you generate by undertaking a reverse mortgage, is that reportable income? how does it impact on your ability for social programs? guest: it is generally not taxed. it would depend program.

and the actual amount of money you have as assets. but that can reflect in your -- you'll have to check with that program. if they are struggling with costs already, with this give them enough money to be a the meet those costs are the life of loden? -- of a loan. it is really important for people to sit down with their parents and adult children and talk about finances and have those difficult conversations. the question is do you really need this money and is there any way to get this money or does it have to beat with the reports mortgage? some advocates look at peer to

peer lending were your borrowing from your children. when the time comes to sell their home, the children would get it but the siblings should cover up the assets and have some sort of inheritance. his important for people to sit down and have these conversations now. next is a call from white plains on our line for republicans. caller: when someone takes a monthly income on a reverse mortgage and they are in a desperate situation relatively early on, and they can i keep up with the property taxes and the insurance and the maintenance and you just said the bank owns a home. has it been your experience or predatory lending due to insufficient council actually had some it -- had significant

impact over a large amount of people? the bank doesn't have much equity at that point either. guest: that's the big risk particularly because in some circumstances, they found that the subprime predatory mortgage brokers originators move from that space and now they are into the reverse -- reverse mortgages space. people are really worried about that. they are calling up people and saying you need some repairs on your house or whatever. you don't have to pay her that because we can observe this in a reverse way. there is predatory lending out -- lenders out there now who are taking that money that they

would get from a lump sum or in monthly installments and the home owner is not paying any of that and the work may not get done in the house. there are definite concerns out there. the mortgage lenders association and the cfpb are trying to make sure they understand who is making these loans and how they are advertising and that people fully understand the ability of the person to make those payments. host: next is glendale, ariz., on our line for independents. caller: good morning. a person aged 62 and having disabilities related to

diabetes, that particular element starts to get worse generally. a lot of a quick and loans -- quicken loans and other companies that advertise, generally these companies are offering the reverse mortgage. pay attention to the word reverse. having a good knowledge of banking because i graduated and that was my major in college, at a junior college level, and beijing in construction for almost 25 years, commercial is

not much different than residential. many homes the people have been in four years, they turn to get a refinance at a later age like 63, like myself, and sometimes it is difficult because of the credit capacity and collateral and the rules of trying to get a refinance. they're difficult because the incoming is usually sufficient and the collateral is borderline in terms of debt equity. at the age of 63, you have been through quite a bit of life. your credit is not the greatest unless you have had no problems throughout your life. host: we will have to leave it there. guest: these loans, because they

are not additional loans and don't depend really i knew having in common, it is dependent on the equity you have in your house. if you are 62, you can borrow i think it is 56% of the value of the home. the bank wants to make sure that you have collateral and equity on the house and that is what they will base it on whether they get their money or not. they want to determine if they can turn the property for a profit get that money back. you have to be careful about that and if that is the best use of the equity in your house. host: what concerns have been generated in congress now about

the administration of these reverse mortgages? is there any investigations? guest: primarily, they have transferred to that today cfpb and required them to come up with this report. now they are looking to the bureau to develop new rules and regulations where necessary. they have pretty much put it in that court of the bureau. >> our next call is from houston, texas, on our line for republicans. caller: morning, can they garnish any of your first mortgage funds for defaults on student loans or maybe unpaid

medical bills? can they require a new to get money out of a reverse mortgage. guest: that is an excellent question. that is definitely something about the counselors who are supposed to be trained in all aspects of these loans would be able to advise. you cannot take these loans out without having counseling. that is a good question. i don't know the answer to exactly whether it's there is a lead on the house, you will not be able to tap into that and there will be issues. if there is other outstanding debt, that maybe are still in effect, you would not put it past and this sort of institution that might have sold

off to a debt collection agency or who is looking to get their arrears collected. as in all these cases, it is to make sure you understand that all the aspects of these loans are up. they are complex. host: we have been talking with patrick scott, financial editor @ " the new york times"about reverse mortgages. we want to let our viewers and listeners know about tomorrow's program.