[captions copyright nationalcable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed bynational captioning institute] host: the u.s. congress returns from a break today. well members of hundreds continue to talk about federal spending, -- members of congress continue to talk about federal spending, the white house has put out a report on this eight by state effect of the sequester. some in the gop is claiming the white house is exaggerating the effect of the sequester. we want to know what you think on this monday morning on "washington journal."

be on the phone calls, if you want to weigh in on twitter, here is our handle. we will get to the phones and written comments shortly, and here is the cover story in "the washington post." susan davis rates -- susan davis writes the fbi might have fewer agents tracking down bad guys. these are only a few of the sweeping effects in the ongoing budget battle between the president and congress.

across-the-board cuts start to kick in on friday if washington does not have -- act. -- susan davis writes.

writes usa today in its cover story, and making the rounds, ray lahood, transportation secretary who came out friday announcing cuts at airports. here is more from the secretary. [video clip] the largest number of employees is at faa. we will try to cut as much as we possibly can out of contract and other things that we do, but in the ended there has to be some kind of for of air traffic control -- in the end there has to be some kind of furlough for air traffic controllers, and that will begin to curtail or eliminate the opportunity for them to guide airplanes in and out of airports. host: the secretary expanding on comments first made friday about airports. the white house put out this

state-by-state report. we printed out a version that was put out last night in "the washington post." if you want to check this out, it is in alphabetical order. the "alabama. just as an example, -- they begin with alabama. they point out that illinois will lose 34 -- 33.4 ms. million -- $33.4 million for funding primary and secondary education. "the washington post."also, job-searl be curtailed. childcare will be curtailed. the stop violence against women program will lose money as well. this was a report put out by the white house last night. it is spurring lots of headlines. here is "the boston globe" front

page. we also have the front page of "the miami herald." they say that in florida 750 fewer kids could receive vaccines. they also talk about california and north carolina talking about teachers losing their jobs, and in north carolina victims of domestic violence could go without treatment. one more headline from "the denver post." this is colorado specifically. the first call this morning is from texas, houston, a republican named mike. caller: good morning. the president put out documentation on the impact of

these cuts on the states when they go into affect, but the real issue is what would be the consequences on the country when the debt keeps going up, heading to $17 trillion? those are the answers that we need from real leadership in the white house that we are not getting. host: sam. maryland. you are on the air. caller: nobody should be using the word trillion. people need to say there is 16,000 billion, and then we can talk about other things. that would help the problem. what i really want to talk about is how the sequestration actually began. the republicans had six people

on their team, the democrats had six people on their team, and they pick people far to the left and far to the right. the democrats picked -- should have picked three democrats, and the best options they had on the republican side, and that way there would have been five or six people in the middle that would have been able to move left or right to bring on a couple of people and we would not be in this situation. host: as we sit here in washington for days before the sequester is set to begin, we will let you know congress is in session and a couple of pieces of legislation are possible in the senate. we know the president is traveling around the country to talk about this issue and the impact and dave williams writes on facebook this morning that this is an entirely

manufactured process by an inept administration. don writes congress caused this whole mess, let it happen, you voted, many did not, now live with it. i'm sick of hearing we have to keep on spending. delaware. how are you. caller: it is hard to get real, straight facts out of the media. it seems to be playing at people's emotions for political reasons. is this basically just a reduction in the baseline increase, instead of spending 10% more, we will only spend eight percent more? are there actually any cuts in this? is this just washington afraid

that there ability to keep taking money from people -- host: they have been described as across-the-board cuts. is there a particular area of the budget you are most concerned about? guest: -- caller: the entire budget is too high. we ought to give every federal employee a 20% haircut and go from there. people do not know what the future is going to be in the private sector. let's see what the federal worker and the federal politician feels about getting a haircut. to be that would solve the problem. if you saved 20% instead of the spending cut back, let's get some real cuts going here. it is out of control. host: thank you, jim.

we will have more segments on the impact on the states and for federal employees. we will also focus on defense and homeland security specifically in the last hour of this program. as you know, defense will take a significant cut and john mccain, the senator from arizona was out there all over the weekend talking about that. [video clip] >> we have already cut, and now you lay on top of that he's enormous reductions as well, and, by the way, defense is 19% of the overall discretionary budget. defense is taking 50% of the cuts. if we do not believe military leaders, who in the world do we believe? i think what we are doing now to

the men and women better serving is unconscionable because they deserve it predictable life in the military, and also these federal employees who did not know when they are to be laid off or not, not to mention contracts. host: "the new york times" reports on a little bit of a twist. here's the lead story --

host: fort worth, texas. democrat on the line. tony. caller: good morning. host: what part of the budget are you most concerned about cutting or most eager to see cut? caller: i am concerned about cuts in the military because i am former military, and i am concerned about cuts across the board. i feel it is a self-inflicted wound, and i am tired of congress, the president.

the leaders of the country are ruining the country. this is caused by leadership -- the congress, the senate and the president, and they are killing the american people. this will not affect the people making the that checks. -- that checks. they will affect people living in the day-to-day lives. these people are suffering and they are playing chess with our lives. i think it is ridiculous. host: vick is calling from peoria, illinois. we heard from the white house on illinois, what you think will happen to your state? caller: we are way out there. one of the things that i called about, the military needs to get rid of independent contractors.

they have people that run the commissaries. let the military run that stuff. jim said about the politicians -- start with their pay, social security, all those guys. we talk about taxing the wealthy. i am in the middle and i am worried that they really going to hit me. they talk about warren buffett paying a little. i did somebody's taxes,. $400, and got back $3400. that has to be completely wrong. host: a tweet from liz smith. to me, this blaming each other is totally useless. just fixed the problem. here is the lead in "the washington post."

they paid him from the reading this morning, it does not look clear legislation will pass before friday, but they're looking beyond.

we have another texan on the line. mike, houston, again, republican. caller: thank you for having me. this was the president's deal with jack lew, and a ticket to area -- took it to harry reid. if nothing was done, this would happen. i do not like the defense cuts, but if they cannot cut 2.5% of $3.6 trillion, where is this country going? this is ridiculous. i have had to cut my budget 40% , and they cannot cut 2.5%? host: that was mike in houston. roy is an oak park, michigan. caller: good morning. i am a first-time caller to c-

span and a longtime viewer. thank you for taking my call. my comment is to the republicans who are seniors, my brothers and sisters, calling into c-span complaining about the national debt and how we are passing this debt onto our grandkids, and i do not want to be too devastating by saying this, but the seniors should just die off. they have taken away from the medicare and medicaid system far more than what they contributed by the mere fact that they are living longer, having triple bypass operations, heart pacemaker operations, it and knee replacement surgery, and the cost for numerous prescription drugs. if they would just die off, their insurance policies that are being billed to their

offspring, they can take that insurance policy, the children will end it, and this will create -- spend it and this will create a big bumping the economy. host: comments from roy and no part, michigan. daniel, portland, oregon, you are on the air. caller: i have basically two comments or questions. one is first of all, they have never taken care of the wall street problem and the trouble with the stock market. we are still at day to those banks in the future. the second part of that, what makes it necessary that they have to go 10 years in projections to straighten out the budget and the trouble with the stock market? they should learn how to float

before they learn how to swim. they can take care of the budget year to year. you cannot predict budget -- hurricanes, ramifications that might affect the budget throughout the year. it seems to me they should be able to learn how to deal with taking care of the budget on a yearly basis. host: raymond, georgia. republican. what are your thoughts on the sequester? caller: any time you all talk there is nothing discussed about the white house cutting the budget, cutting some of the secret service, or the representative senators, laying them off to cut spending. everything is out here, cutting , not out there, like some of those airplanes that he flies

all over. why not sell some of those? everyone is talking about the people, cutting them, but nobody is saying anything about the white house cutting the capital. you talk about taxing the rich. who owns walmart and all of those places? you tax the rich and they will charge you more for those products. host: 85 billion -- those cuts going to affect friday. we will hear lots of voices. edward christianson writes 2.5% of the budget and the world is falling apart. give us a break. congress and the president need a wake-up call from the people. we all should march on washington, and dc, and throw

them all out on the street. "the washington times" writes on sequestration follies. they say it does not restrain enough. they write that it will produce an honest to goodness cut in defense, but the sky will hardly fall on the rest. gail, tacoma, washington.

you are on the line. seek help i am concerned -- caller: i am concerned that all they are talking about is either the reduction of spending in cuts, or taxing groups of people. i remember in world war ii when we had luxury taxes. if they had luxury taxes, it would be on things like extreme diamonds they were wearing at the oscars last night, and the big salaries that these people are getting -- entertainers, sports people. those are choices that we could make whether we spend on them or not, and there should be luxury

taxes on the big sports games. if we want to go, we should be willing to pay more to do those things, and it would only affect people if they wanted their luxury bad enough to pay the taxes on it. there are things that are certainly not needed by anyone in the country. so, i wish the congress would look at something like that. if we had to choose what we bought and knew that if we paid taxes on it -- if i had to buy an extra diamond ring or a luxury car, i would just realize, lucky me, i have that much money, and go ahead and pay the tax. host: dave, casper, wyoming must a republican. -- wyoming. a republican.

caller: good morning. i think the sequester should go through. a little bit of pain might wake us up to what is going on in this country and hopefully we can straighten this out. host: we will talk to the governor of michigan rick snyder who is in town for the governors meeting. the president hosted the governors at the white house. here is a look at the post. [video clip] >> i want to wish everyone a toast for the work that we have done, the work that we look forward to doing. we look forward to seeing you

again over the next several years. cheers. host: one of the headlines coming out of the meetings in "the new york times." we will ask governor rick snyder about that. this is the white house viewpoint, state-by-state. i talk a lot about teachers, clean air, water, head start programs, child care and on and on. for more detail, go to "usa today," which in the cover story lay out some specific areas.

the pentagon said a majority of civilian employees will be furloughed. they talked about agricultural department, with meat and poultry inspectors facing furloughs. this information goes on and on , no matter where you read today. june is calling from wisconsin. independent. caller: hi.

i just want everybody to remember that we sent the people to washington who are our "representatives" to represent us, not their own egos. they should be furloughed. everybody in congress who is against doing things to make this country grow, they should not get paid. they should be laid off and not get a pay raise for years. they are always big on cutting public workers. listen, it has always been about good government jobs. government workers spend the money, and other businesses hire more people. the republicans know that, and it is just a shame that we are at war and the things we are doing in congress are, like,

treasonous to me, because it is bringing down our country. my senator, ron johnson, he needs to fully explain why he is not encouraging his peons in congress to do the right thing. host: thank you for calling, june. maverick on twitter says that the cia, dhs, the fbi and most of all military contractors. jeff on facebook writes debt ceiling, fiscal cliff, and now sequestered -- anyone ever hear of a boy and wolf? we have 15 minutes left for your calls. the two "usa today -- back to "usa today" --

you can watch the senate on c- span two. they are in today starting at 2:00 p.m.. you can watch the president later this week. we will get you air times for those events. the wall street jerk -- the "wall street journal" lead story --

all of those people that are beneficiaries, they worked hard all their lives. that guy needs to probably not even be on air anymore. he had something disturbingly wrong with him.

i want to also say that i think that the president, right now, is probably a good guy. i am not going to comment on going dead with president obama, but you know, i believe that our country is still the same that it was with our founding fathers when they found it. i just think that because of all the debt to all of these, all these is actually, you know, maybe the legislation and the senate has had to go, go through tough times now because of the actual follow the -- fall of the economy and maybe they actually resorted to borrowing or helping the wrong hand. there is so many people in the it would house that are, you know, secret societies and, you know, it is just that there are so many people in the white house that are actually the wrong people.

it is scary. so i can see where the president is actually, you know, taxing the rich people, and it is a good thing because if he wouldn't be taxing them, they would waste the money on trips, you know? >> host: we hear from trudy now in mexico. hi, trudy. republican. hi, there. >> caller: hi. >> host: what do you make of this? >> caller: just keep it going. the reason i called is a couple of weeks ago, big durbin was on one of the sunday talk shows. cannot remember which one it was. but he said, they asked him about the president's idea for sequester. he said, well, it was threat, not a strategy. so i think that the republicans ought to go stay with it, and let him own up to it. as far as that guy that called

about the elderly. i am 72 years old, and i try my best not to even go to the doctor because i am very healthy. i did have a hip implant a couple of months ago because i broke my hip, but i want to see that bill before you send it to medicare because i believe in fraud, and i just want to make sure that i am charged for what they did, not for what they think they ought to do. >> host: and grg is on the line from pennsylvania now. welcome, george? >> caller: , yes, thank you. my comment is this, they preach getting a good education. we fot to kate our children. the first thing they want to do is cut education. they talk about national security how they are trying to keep the country free, then they want to cut defense. then we talk about the golden

years, and what do they want to do? they want to cut social security, which people have already paid in for that social security so they can benefit in their golden years. now this guy that called in about dying off, maybe they would be better off, too. >> george from pennsylvania there. a little bit more of defense via facebook this morning. mills writes "cut the spending by all means" 100,000 military contractors in afghanistan. stop the insanity. little bit down the page, a little bit more on defense. long writes "our defense is crucial. a weak nation shows to our neighbor how we manage at the home front." an american hero writes at twitter this morning, the cuts are not being made because of the republicans or the democrats. the cults are being made because we're out of money. american hero there. to the pages of the financial

times, they focus on page four today, about the long-term unemployed and the sequester. they write that the u.s. long-term jobless will be among the earliest to be hit by the sequester on march 1st. benefit payments will be cut by up to 9.4% and a blow to consumer spending among lower income households. about 3.8 million people who have been unemployed for more than six months have received emergency federal bennetts worth about $300 a we can on average. to the editorial page of the financial times, they think that washington needs some adult supervision. they say that the republican-controlled house should pass its own pack age of entitlement reforms and bargain from there. at last, such courage is lacking on both sides. politics know how unpopular any cuts women be, thus on friday, sequestration will happen. most expected to last only to march 27th the date when a government shutdown looms and all likelihood that will happen, too. the fiscal circus keeps rolling and washington remains

in desperate need of adult supervision. that the financial times this monday morning. linda, you are on the line from buena park, california. democrat. hi. >> caller: hi, good morning. >> host: good morning. >> caller: god bless you. and i was seeing that they are going to be making the kits across the board, but yet, the corporations are willing to take the cuts. they are saying they will. they are just kicking it down the road. this is what the republicans do best. i feel, now, bipartisanship coming together, working together, it has always worked. the only president i have ever seen had a struggle through anything he has ever wanted to pass through congress, and now they are going to shut down the government. they take away some money from our guys that went over there, and for protected us with their lives, with their lives. i am an elderly, handicap. i have lots of problems.

if they take that away from me. they can also drop me off in the middle of the desert. he cannot survive. not even two weeks without my medication. i am not in this only one out there. now i have put up a proposal. i doo have a patent called seize coring the u.s.a. that would put 10% of the population bac back to work in every single state and profit $1.47 trillion. look it up. you will see it. they need to put that in action. and no, it is not policing the internet. it is securing the internet from all kinds of different areas. >> thanks for calling. front page of the washington times this morning, the lead story touches on this, white house ups rhetoric on sequester. again, they are talking about the state by state report that was put out last night laying out in the white house view, what is going to be cut, the way they are prioritize things for states. the gop in the sub head here

says the real impact is being hyped for political effect. s that the sub head of the washington times piece. when you go to page a5. they go further. they say the republicans accused the 79 of hypocrisy in all of this saying he has chosen to go on a nationwide public relations tour in an attempt to shame them instead of staying in washington to work on a deal "the white house needs to spend less time explaining to the press how bad the sequester will be, and more time actually working to stop this from happening. " michael steele, a spokesman. republicans also say the gop-controlled house twice last year passed bills to replace the sequester with spending cuts only to have the measures die in the democratic-controlled senate. keith, dal lance, pennsylvania, you are on the air now. hello. >> caller: good morning. how are you? >> host: doing fine, sir. >> caller: yes, sequestration needs to be dealt with. i am wondering why are

politicians down at the capital tee siding they need to take a vacation and they are not down there to actually take care of this problem. cal. >> host: what do you think is going to happen this week if anything? >> caller: partially, what is going to happen is going to happen. i mean, we need to do something about this problem. our politicians seem to be more concerned about themselves and their big business interests and not so much been the common math. again, every time we seem to have a problem. they do seem to feel that they need to take a vacation. i wish the average american could deal with problems in that fashion. >> host: the proj page of politico this morning. the outlook is bleak for any quick compromise. david rogers writes remindings that you congress is back today. all eyes on the senate, the last attempt to forestall the across the board cuts on march 1st to threat ton cripple government services this spring and roll back the

clock before the presidency. they are making the point here that the digressionary spending is slitted to fall below 2008 level s or the first time in obama's tenure even allowing to the recent hurricane sandy emergency aid bill. when adjusted for inflation, politico's calculation shows obama will have billions less than former president in nondefense appropriations, so important to his second term agenda. that is in politico. ann is calling from fresno, california, now. good morning. >> caller: cal good morning. i hope we speak a little bit. i have been trying to to get through for two three months here. the lines quite busy. the other two callers you had. the two men, the one said they need to stop popping out the babies. well, he needs to unwhyer stand that people who are having babies, they are not old enough to receive medicare. they receive medical and

welfare checks if they are in that situation and not working. the other man that was from michigan that thought people should, the older people should die, he must not be working because everyone that has been working all the years, ever since medicare started, they have been paying into it at not using it, and the most recent people are not using it because, you have to be sick or disabled, if you are not old enough, age 65, and social security president reagan cut that back, back in '83 where a lot of people don't even get that anymore. they have to -- because they have a pension from their job, they are not allowed to receive their spouse's social security. >> host: anything else, ann. >> caller: federal employees affect the most. i don't think it was too many perfect people.

also, the fact that the people that work for the federal g. and all the jobs where they talk about cutting back and the sequester hit and everything. well, they are the ones that is keeping the government going for doing the paperwork for people to get their checks, the social security checks, the tax refund checks, all of these different things that we use that we take for granted. >> that wasan from california there. the washington post talks about the legislative branch of the government preparing workers for spending cuts, they are sending out letters, spelling out the strategies and josh hicks rig wrights that lawmakers return today. the deal with this, congressional office and agencies have remained hargly quiet on the issue compared to the executive branch, where top officials were the president top the cabinet and defense secretary as well have warned against the budget cuts known as sequestration. that doesn't mean the

legislative branch would escape cuts they write it would not affect law americas' salaries since their pay does not come from discretionary spending but it would cut the individual offices as well as all agencies such as the library of congress. the congressional budget office and the u.s. police. they point in the post, agencies have sent letters to employees noted similar strategies imposing hiring freezes, reducing travel expenses, trending funding for technology upgrades and reworking some contracts. bob, trenton, new jersey new jersey, pen pent. good morning. >> caller: hi, good morning, sir. how are you? >> host: doing well. >> caller: good. i think this should go through. why is that every time there is a bad economy, corporations and everywhere else, they do cuts. they have to do layoffs. people take reduction in salaries. why? why is government workers in washington also except from this? why is that? can anybody tell me? i think the cuts should go

through. social programs have gotten out of hand and i will give you a good example. the way the democrats do this bus if you want to cut a social program, you look like you are a mean, cruel person. here is the social program they cut. the school lunches. fine. i am all for feeding kids, but then we got to the breakfast, then dinner. so we're serving three meals a day at school. then michelle obama wanted to change the menu to be healthy. you know how many schools are throwing away food now. did you see the report on that. then they are actually opting out from the federal lunch program so they can back to serve what they want. that came out just last week on the news. when are people going to wake up that government is causing the damage here? it is incredible. when are we going to stop this madness? >> host: california calling now, escondido, gary, what is on your mine? >> caller: well, good morning to you. i have been listening to you for the last couple of hours.

there is a lot of cuts across the board. they are okay. but i think if you cut the defense. you are cutting our country's strength. that could be causing trouble. and then, you cut the medicare or the medicaid and people are putting in it for years get short-changed and they don't get the care they need, and i am a diabetic. i need my medical expenses taken care of. i have been in the hospital twice and so it is a couple of mini stroke and quadruple bypass. i am glad it was there. nobody ever says is about the politicians. now they should cut their salaries because there is no politician, no politician, i don't care, on the president, who deserves a six-figure salary.

i mean, that is a waste of money. and they their expenses. who pays for it? the taxpayers. >> thanks for all your calls. we will continue talking about the sequester and economic matters here in washington and the country through the rest of the program. coming up next, it is governor rick snyder, republican of michigan. he will join truss the national governor's association meeting here in washington over at the j.w. marriott. later in the program, the logistics of how sequestration would work rooting here in washington. we'll be right back. >> at age 25, she was one of the wealthiest widows in the my. during the revolution, while in the mid 40's, she was considered an enemy by the british. later she would become our

nation's first first lady at age 57, meet martha washington, tonight, in the first program of c-span's new weekly series "first ladies: influencing an image" "we'll visit places like williamsburg, mt. vernon, valley forge, and philadelphia, and be a part of the conversation about martha washington with your phone calls, tweets and facebook posts, live tonight at 9:00 eastern, on c-span, c-span radio and c-span. org. >> people were traveling, traveling for a job, maybe they were on the way to the grand canyon. maybe they were on their way to working the agricultural feed fields in california, so at first route 66 was just way to get somewhere, i mean, your destination was out in california. but later on, after all of these snakepits started block up and the tourist traps, the

attraction, the cafes, and the motels, and the trading posts, with indian trading posts, when those things started springing up. it almost became like a big amusement park around route 66. route 66 became the destination. so it is not like, dad, can we go to the beach in california? it is more like dad, let's go down route 66 because the fun stuff is there. it was like a big long amusement park. >> get your kicks on route 66 in albuquerque, new mexico. one of the place you will see this weekend as book tv, american history tv, and c-span look behind the scenes at the history apt the literary life in albuquerque, march 2nd and 3rd on c-span2 and 3. >> washington journal continues. >> host: more coverage from from the national governor's association meeting at the j.w. marriott in washington. later, on the screen is

governor rick snyder, republican of michigan, of course one of the participants in the meeting. good morning, governor. >> guest: good morning, paul, great to be with you. >> host: what is your takeaway? >> guest: the big issue is what is going to happen at the federal level. that is a real concern. >> host: what are you anticipating? we will show the audience, "the new york times" headline again, if the governors meet, the white house is outlining a drop in aid to states. they laid it out in a report last night. what are you praise bracing for in michigan. >> guest: again, we are looking at cuts in many ways. one of the things i would say, though, whole issue of get though sequester is a failure. it was not supposed to happen. that just illustrates washington compared to the states. when you look at the states, i was sitting in the governor's meeting yesterday. as i looked around the room, probably most of us in that room had to deal with budget

cuts in the last two or three years, larger than what they are talking about. we got the job done. the question is why can't it be done here in washington in a more effective way? >> host: why can it not be done in a more effective way? >> guest: well, i should be done in a better way. one of thengs this i look at as governor, we do need to do better. i tried to be proactive in talking about ideas in how we can participate. understanding we need to cut the deficit. we need to have a better situation across the board for our citizen, our customers, so i thought of the concept of get rid of the number of programs. we have way to many programs from the federal government. i am not asking for a block grant but let's do outcome-based programs. an illustration would be in the work force area. there is over some 40 programs. let's sit down and agree on five different programs and get rid of the overhead, all the administrative expense, that would reduce cost and we

could provide better service. >> host: our guest will be with us for 25 more minutes. he is a republican. we'll point out our audience in additioning to the regular phone line. there is a fourth line this morning just for folks in michigan. that number is 202-585-3883. we welcome your comments. i am sure the governor does as well. to that white house report, governor schnideern they decided to highlight teachers and schools. they point out your state is going lose $22 million in funding for primary and secondary education putting around 300 teacher aide jobs at risk. they talk about how 25,000 fewer students would be served and approximately 80 fewer schools would receive funding. wrist one of the areas, i want to speak more about that? >> guest: well, again, we need to invest in education appropriatelily. that is what we are doing at the state level. we have increased funding for

education and to see it go the other way is not a good thing. it is more to the point of getting back to the sequester. doing cuts this ways not the right way. they should be done in a thoughtful way based on priorities of people working together about how we can be efficient. because we do need to have a government approved in terms of how we service the citizens. >> host: how would you describe the economy in the state of michigan these days? >> guest: we are the comeback state. it is great to see the improvement. we have a long way to go. if you go back to 2009, we had over 14% unemployment. we have come down five percentage point. we're the fastest-growing economy in the last year or so. we were at the bottom for decade. we made a significant comeback. woman's keep going. >> host: where are the bright spots? what why areas in michigan do you wish were better these days? >> guest: most people know autos are coming back. that is exciting. we are you at the auto capital of the world and things like

agriculture and twitter. the biggest challenge when we look at the economic situation as the mess here in washington. that is holding back a lot of business people are looking to say, if they done know what the situation is going to be, they are staying on the sidelines so when i did my budget message, that was the number one risk and concern is the federal budget. we need a budget. we need tax reform. we need deal well the deficit here at the federal level. let's get it done here. >> host: to the details in the state of my min the united states, in january, the unemployment rate nationally was 7.9%. in michigan, back in december 8! 9 for. infries the bureau of labor statistics. the michigan budget that is out there is $49 billion. the proposal for next year is $50.9 billion. governor, what will be the budget priorities moving forward in michigan? >> guest: yeah, two or three key things i dn the budget message. the reason for the increases. we are looking to get additional road funding.

we need to improve the roads. it has been an issue. we have a proposal there. one of the things we are looking at. going back to your point, paul, about education be where earl early childhood, we have a major initiative there to put over the next couple of years 29,000 kids more through preschool. that is one of the great investments that will last a lifetime for those kid individuals and make us a much better state so we're investing in thoughtful things that have long-term value be a at the same time we are paying down the debt. we reduced the liabilities by $20 billion and used a. plans to pay off. ing that is critically important. >> host: one more question before we get to a call, governor. it comes off a recent headline. a lot of news about the medicare expansion. they write here in the post, why republican governors are saying yes to medicaid. your you are named in the piece as a medicaid expansion convert. governor rick snyder i say its here. explain the thought process to dealing with this aspect of health care. >> guest: i wouldn't say i am

a convert. i am a cpa. i did the afallacies and looked at the numbers. there were two key facts. there is enough prime primary care capacity? could we get the people coming into caid into primary care inthe system now is uncontrolled with emergency room visits happening far too often. and it pays for society if we can get in an environment where they have a lower cost treatment. that needs to be the answer. was the most rite call thing. the second thing is, it actually saves michigan money in terms of the state budget and i am take half of those savings that we have at the state level and putting them in a health savings account like you do at home. copays, deduct deductibles that could help cover our share of costs through the year 2034. >> host: what has the rest of the health care law meant to the state of michigan? >> guest: well, it has been an extreme challenge. i don't think the priority care act was the priority first and foremost. i think are issues with it.

we are dealing with it. it is the law. the things we need to get to more start with primary care and i talked about that but wellness, personal responsibility needs to be a better part of medical care. i am trying to sign up to lose a few pounds. >> host: calls now from the governor of michigan. bill is from ann arbor, michigan, pent, good morning, you are are with your governor. >> caller: good morning, mr. snyder. when you ran for governor, you were supposed to go in and help us, i am al retired union carpenter. you we supported you. i don't want to say the bill is good. one of the things you ran on that is were you going to be a uniter not a divider. you were going to be prac call. were you going to be this and that. you get elected. you raised the pension taxes. now we are in a situation where you told us again and again the right to work that

were you not going to enter into any discussions about that at all. now i read in the paper yesterday that next year we'll have to pre veil in wage, i am 30 some years. i am into my pension to retire. i made my plans. i did everything right. now i am trying to figure out exactly, i got over $200 tax last year, starting last rear, every month, and now, we it did right. we did everything. we planned. we did everything we were supposed to do. now we are talking about raising the fees on the cars for the road. we are talking about doubling gas -- well, gas price tax. i mean, it is like, i am looking that guy who said he was going to be a unite. now i am sitting here scared to death. >> that was bill from ann arbor, michigan. governor snyder, what do you make of what he had to say? >> guest: bill, i appreciate your situation. it is a challengeng time.

if you look when i came into the office, we were dealing with a huge deficit. we had to resolve some problems and take care of issues. one of them included dealing with a law we haden the tax will you and dealing with the issue of do we tax pensions and how do we do that we put in a system to grand father the seniors but over the time, we need a fair system because people were still having to work as seniors paying a lot of tax and other people were not. we had to think about the kids. i appreciate that. with respect to right to work, that was a topic that i was not look for. that was a function of proposal two coming in our state which was terrible proposal that would have enshrined many things beyond collective bargaining in our constitution. it would have thrown our whole g. and our system off track. so i appreciate the citizens stepping up to vote that down. that created an environment that was divisive in our state. really led in to the right to work discussion. given that was there, it will be good for michigan long term because it is about standing up for workers and worker's

rights and their opportunities and then create jobs in michigan. we are going through tough times because we had big issues. we were at the bottom. now we are coming back. we do need to work harder on working better together so we can succeed. >> kathleen is calling from fort lauderdale, florida, on the line for democrats for governor snyder. good morning, kathleen. >> caller: good morning. hi, everybody. governor snyder, can you explain the law and what you have to do, if the sequester pass, when does it come into place? can you explain the law? thank you. you have a good day. >> guest: thanks, kathleen. i appreciate the question. i am not sure i am fully following it. it is not something we are doing. the point is, we have serious budget issues we need address. i think we need to do a better way than simply having some

hash cuts come across the board. that's the point of having people in the legislature and having a president to work through those issues in a thoughtful way instead of an arbitrary way. guest: the white house and

congress need to work together. that is their responsibility. the states have done this time and time again. we have done it effectively. there is no reason the same society should not people to get the answers at the federal level. guest: let's get everybody in washington, doing the job they were hired to do. again, there are smarter, better ways. as a state, i am happy to partner with them to say, we need to be more efficient.

that is where i come back and say, let's do outcome based programs. ours put dollars to help citizens. let's not have them spent by government to administer more programs. host: joe was calling from california, an independent. guest: democrats and republicans, one of the republic -- one of the problems is that if they look at cutting everything that means something to you, there are millions and millions of bureaucrats that are throughout the government that set in offices every day and shuffled papers -- shuffle papers. i was trying to look in my notes and find out, how many employees in the defense

department does the federal government have? the number is something like 3 million or 30 million. that strikes me. that is an incredible number of people. how is it that all the people you see are the ones that are going to be cut, rather than the ones that are sitting in some office? guest: that is in line with some of my comments. those are the activities and the way we need to look at it. anytime you ask somebody to lose a position, that is tough. you never want to minimize that part of it. in michigan, we had a deficit. good people -- good people can up with good ideas. we have a situation that come from the leadership of the state police, and when we asked them to take a budget cut, they got creative and said, we will close state posts across michigan. what they said is, let's invest

in technology and cars. we closed a lot of police posts, but we did not lay off any troopers. we put more sergeants on the road, going to the front lines, to be more present with customers or citizens, and we got rid of the overhead. that is the kind of thoughtfulness that needs to happen, rather than arbitrary cuts. host: a lot more stories about your largest city, detroit, and its economic issues. what is the future of that city? guest: detroit has many great things going on, young people moving in, some great projects going on. the challenge in detroit is city government. it is not a recent issue. there are good people in the recent administration. this goes back for decades. the city government is unsustainable in terms of its finances. it needs to provide better services. we have had a review team looking at the finances.

one of the question it asks is, do we need to take additional steps to get detroit's finances together? oddly partner with the city to get that happening? detroit will be a great city again. caller: what is happening in detroit is disgraceful. you run for office. you get in, you get that power, and all good ideas run out of your mind. it seems like all of the government, including state, is bought and sold to the highest bidder. you start off with a decent salary, and then when you all come out of office, your millionaires. who pays? it is always the people at the

bottom. you can do better than that. host: let's hear from our guest. guest: a lot of us are doing it to help people. that is the point. i am proud of the fact that i never held office until recently became governor. this is about making a difference. that is why i thought it was valuable to leave the private sector and bring some of the good ideas about how to better manage government and bring them into government. we're being more thoughtful, more accountable. the way i describe it, we need to do a better job in the public sector. coral government is customer service. my customers are the 10 million people of michigan. when i talk about the people of michigan, i talk about them as my customer. we need more of that across the country. host: governor rick snyder is in washington before the national governors' association is having its big annual meeting.

here is one comment viet twitter. one viewer wants to know -- guest: one of the great things about states -- we are the laboratories of democracy. we have 50 different states. people do things differently. the value of being a governor is the chance to talk and listen to other governors, new, innovative ideas or understand issues that they may see ahead of what what we might see. we can jump on them together. that works out pretty well. i found a number of cases -- i was talking about health care, where i have seen other states look at ideas on lummis that are clear -- that we're not doing in michigan, and we're going to do them. host: one listener once clarity on your comments about it right.

-- about detroit. guest: in michigan, we have an emergency manager lot. it deals with - manager law. i need to make a determination are not in the next 10-20 days, do we have an emergency in detroit? then we might move to an emergency manager. i have not made that determination. that is something any to do in the next couple of weeks. host: there is a headline in the washington post --

your posture following the president's reelection? guest: is a professional relationship. i am a non politician that came to office. i call this relentless positive action. i do not blame anyone. i was hired to solve problems. when it comes to working with the federal government, i do not fight with them. i do not blame them. we have to work together because we have a common customer. i want to deliver great results. i have not changed my position at all. i never criticized the president. i do not view that is my job. my job is to take care by customer. the best way i can do that is to

have a reasonable relationship with the president, to say, how can we work together? i think that is appropriate. host: are republican named john is on a line from michigan. caller: governor, would you suggest that our nation's lawmakers in washington, d.c. to the same as a lark -- is our lawmakers did in lansing? that is to raise taxes to balance revenues and expenditures. budget1 did the deficit, we made a greater -- we made major reforms, but we also made net cuts to revenues. we did some difficult things. we worked for it in a positive way. you can see the outcomes of that. we have been growing. one of the things holding breath -- growth back is the fact that the sequester -- the sequester is a bad idea. we're not even getting a budget

down. what the budget done so we can move on, have better certainty, and we would grow better if both things were accomplished. caller: i think you have a short memory. your -- do you remember and color have in a $1.7 billion surplus that he gave away to the 47% of rich people in michigan? i think you're trying to turn michigan into florida. kenya least set up reservation for us? -- can you at least set up reservation forecast -- for us? guest: we're trying to put dollars back into rainy day fund. we had a rainy day fund at $2 million. we're up over half a billion dollars now because we need to be putting money aside for the future and unexpected challenges and issues. we're going to keep coming back.

things are improving. we need to work hard so everybody has the opportunity to see that. host: here is a tweet -- guest: i can tell you on road funding where we need to make an investment -- we have been a donor state. we have a tougher climate. i cannot figure out any reason why we should be a donner state for roads. it is a case of, let's not pick winners and losers. host: clinton township, mich., a republican. good morning. are you there? caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i appreciate talking to the governor directly. the economy is bad, but i would like to make a point about the second amendment and the

constitution in general. the governor and the rest of the lawmakers in michigan have the right to secure the right to bear arms. it seems like there's a big push to not only take away the second amendment, but also to restrict many amendments, let alone the right to bear arms. the economy is a bad thing, but if we do not have the second amendment and the constitution, i would like to know what the governor would do to restrict -- to allow the second amendment, to separate ourselves from the federal government, saying they do not dictate to us what we have as law-abiding citizens to protect ourselves, our homes, our property? host: before you answer, i wanted to show the audience a

headline. i wanted you to explain this thinking, rick snyder of vetoes a bill that would allow guns in schools. this was a bill that would allow concealed weapons in schools, day care, sports arenas, places of worship, dormitories, and casinos. this is from "the washington post" -- guest: i think michigan has a good set of gun laws. i do not think we should be spending our primary time on this. we have made some improvements. to go to that bill you mentioned -- it was going to allow concealed weapons to be taken to all those different venues. my view was is that there should be a local option or the people locally can make the decision, do they want them or not? it was a balance on both sides. the issue i found missing was, i thought the local people should

have the best value of knowing what was best for them. let them make that decision. that was not part of that legislation. the overall gun question -- that is coming up a lot these days, because of these terrific shootings. these are terrible tragedies. one of the things i have focused on, i think this should be a focus on mental health, that is where we should be spending our time. how we deal with that more effectively, particularly with young people and more people could be future shooters? that is something we looked at in our budget. i believe mental health is our most important issue to address. gu our host: our guest is rick snyder, in washington as part of the nga meetings. we appreciate you taking the time of your time -- the time not to talk with us this morning. plenty of "washington journal"

left. coming next, we'll talk about sequestration a little bit more and what will exactly happened on march 1 and beyond as the countdown takes -- ticks towards the friday deadline. later, we're spending this whole week focusing on different agencies and how the sequester could impact different programs. we will begin with defense and homeland security today. we will be right back. ♪ >> we know foreign countries and companies swipe our corporate secrets. now our enemies are also seeking the ability to sabotage our power grid, our financial institutions, our air traffic control systems. we cannot look back years from now and wonder why we did nothing in the face of real

threats to our security and economy. >> you hear a lot of different concerns. one of the concerns that we hear and you see it reflected, volume, quality, time limits, great, you have shared information with us about things that happened three months ago. what about now? that is one reason why we are trying to increase our timeliness so we're out ahead of the issue. we're making progress. over the last year in particular, we have improved our ability to share information faster with the private sector. i also hear concerns from different sectors about insuring that the other sectors that they rely on also are increasing their cyber security. if you are a bank, you are reliant on power, water, transportation to conduct your business. what i frequently hear is that all companies want to make sure

that all the critical infrastructure sectors are moving together to increase their cyber security because everything is so interdependent. >> the president's new cyber security executive order, tonight, at 8:00 eastern on c- span2. >> at age 25, she was one of the wealthiest winnows in the colonies, and during the revolution, while in her mid- 40s, she was considered an enemy by the british who threatened to take her hostage. later, she would become our nation's first first lady at age 57. wheat martha washington tonight in the first program of c-span kos weekly series "first lady's ." we will visit some of the places that influenced her life, including the colonial williamsburg, mount vernon, valley forge, and philadelphia. be part of the conversation with your phone calls, tweets, and his post, live tonight at 9:00 eastern on c-span.

-- facebook posts, live tonight at 9:00 eastern on c-span. >> "washington journal" continues. host: our guest is tom shoop to talk was more about the sequester. that is up to the beginning of this. what is the sequester? guest: it is an across-the-board cut in federal agency spending, so it gives very little flexibility for agencies. it says, it is a certain undefined percentage, it should be cut by the same amount. host: remind us how we got to this point. guest: you have to go to the budget control act of 2011. it gave congress until the end of the year to create a super committee to try to come up with an additional $1.20 trillion in cuts. that had until the end of the year. if that did not happen, then a

sequester would go into effect at the beginning of 2013. as we know, the super committee did not get its job done. the sequester was slated to go into effect at the beginning of this year. in the fiscal cliff negotiations, congress did not come up with a short-term fix. they extended it until the end of february. host: how do the cuts take place? guest: they are cumulative. it is a certain percentage of what remains of the fiscal year. it is not like a shutdown situation where things stopped abruptly. they take place over the course of several months. a lot of the impact will not be felt right away. host: this is already complex enough. it gets more complex and knowing that about a month from now, the temporary funding of all the government expires, and you put the two together? guest: that is another hard deadline.

that is the continuing resolution that is currently funding government in the absence of an official budget for agencies. that is when congress has to decide what is going to happen with the rest of the fiscal year. it is lagging about one month behind the sequester deadline. it could go into effect while congress is continuing to negotiate over the final budget. host: our guest is tom shoup. he will be with us until about 9:00 eastern time to take your calls. in addition to our regular phone numbers, we have a separate line to talk about the sequester, for federal employees, they are affected in washington, d.c. and around the country. we want to hear what you are bracing for. tom shoup, explain how the government prepares for something like a sequester.

guest: it takes place over an extended period of time. there are a bunch of different things that get done. they look at contract spending. agencies look at hiring freezes. for the past months, it is clear that agencies have been slowing down their spending, particularly in the defense department. if it does go into effect, they will do things like furlough employees. there is a 30 day warning. they have to give employees before that can take effect. that is when they negotiate with labor unions. it is usually written host: communication. host: we're hoping to learn about non-defense areas of the government as well. what should we think of as a non-defense areas? who is going to get cut? guest: pretty much everybody, with certain exceptions.

the big exception is the veterans affairs department, which is carved out in the legislation. they are not subject to cuts. there are also other areas that are not subject to cuts, like social security and medicaid. medicare is subject to separate out of about two%. other than that, it pretty much affects everybody across the board. host: some of the facts and figures, from "the wall street journal" -- anything you want to add to those numbers? guest: the only thing i would add is that it is not clear entirely what the effects will be in terms of employees. they have not said things specifically. there could be a fairly wide

range. it is not guaranteed that every agency will furlough its employees. some have already said they would, such as the defense department. last week, ray lahood, the transportation secretary, said that employees would be subject to flood. the government accountability office says that there will not be for lows. -- furloughs. some agencies can get it done through hiring freezes. host: explain the role of the office of management and budget. guest: they provide overall direction to agencies as to what their budgets are, how much is subject to sequester, and how it will go into effect. host: let's hear from frank, from pennsylvania, a democrat. caller: good morning. i'm finding out -- i'm calling to find out why it is taking so long to get this through and stop trying to block the president. when the banks were bailout,

calling it was a three page bill for $700 billion. here all they want to do is cut $85 billion from the budget. i think all of these republicans do not want to do anything that is beneficial to the average person. thank you. guest: that is a good question. part of the reason is that congress tends to wait until the last minute to do things if they can. it is possible we can see action this week. the other thing is, with the sequester, it is a little bit different from other situations, in that it will not be immediate. in some cases, there is a school thought that says, agencies can manage this, at least four months, while congress works. there is less incentive for them to get this job done. the bottom line is, there are substantial differences between the two sides on exactly the mix between revenues and cut.

host: we have a group of students this morning who had some questions for you about the sequester. the cspan bus is finishing up a two week tour through ohio and virginia. today, the final stop is mount vernon high school in fairfax county, virginia. over this period, we are going to talk to a group of students from the bus mount vernon high school was founded in 1939 and is located about 50 miles south of washington, d.c.. more than 1900 students in grades 9-12 attend the school. we want to thank cox communications for sponsoring today's visit. gabrielle is on the line, she is a student at mount vernon high school.

go ahead. caller: how will sequestration affect the military's ability is to meet its commitments around the world? guest: military leaders have indicated that this will have a success -- a substantial impact on their ability to conduct operations. the navy has already stated that it has pulled an aircraft carrier that was headed for the persian gulf record tippled that back. the navy -- they pulled that back. the army says there will cut back severely on training. according to military leaders, this could have a big impact on them, partly because they are already under situation under the budget control act where they are making a fairly steep cuts in operations. they are trying to deal with the situation overseas in places like afghanistan. host: if congress does nothing, is there a chance that they could pass something in the defense area?

guest: it is always possible. that is something house republicans have wanted for some time, to put cuts on domestic spending and protect the defense department. it is also possible that congress could move simply to give agencies more discretion in implementing the cuts and eliminate this aspect where it is across the board,, what the president characterized as a meat cleaver approach. host: more students are coming up. they are with the c-span.org bus. a federal worker is online. -- on the line. where do you work? caller: and airforce base. compared to last year, aren't we spending the same amount of money as we did last year? this is just a cut in the rate of growth? isn't that right?

guest: that is correct. i am not entirely certain whether at the end the day there is more spending this year than last year, but under the budget control act, spending caps are supposed to go down a year after year. there are supposed to the overall cuts in federal spending. it is important to remember that it is true, that these are measured against an overall increase in the rate of spending. host: thomas is with us by phone, he is a student. caller: hall sequestration affect students that need financial aid to attend college in the fall? guest: it could have an impact on the education department. i'm not sure that it will mean cutbacks in student loans themselves. it could affect housing. employees could be subject to furlough. there could be other cuts to the education budget. there could be a variety of

effects on students if sequestration goes into effect. host: will states be in a position to help out? guest: it depends on individual state budget situations, which until recently, have not been great. they are beginning to recover from the effects of the recession. a lot of governors are seeing that this could have an adverse impact on them. host: how is it decided to get furloughed at a particular agency? can you explain that? guest: generally, it is across the board. it is little bit of untrained territory because furloughs have not been attempted on the scale in a long time. there are some things that remain to be worked out, including whether there is a security exemption or protection of life and property, certain people not being furloughed, but in most cases, it will take all civilian employees.

uniformed military is exempt from a furlough. it will not affect every agency equally. some agencies could have up to 22 days of furloughs. some will have less. host: how about benefits for ?ederal employes guest: in general, federal employee benefits are protected. there are some areas that could be affected. if you're not getting paid, that could affect on employees' contribution to a 401k. host: james is on the line from arizona, a republican caller. caller: how're you doing today? thank you for taking my call. my question is, i have a couple

-- one of them is, we live in a very dangerous world. all we have to do is pick up a newspaper and understand that it gets more dangerous every day. i'm retired from the army. i am wondering how it is going to affect my benefits from the va. i saw a photograph a couple of days ago on a norfolk, virginia , and aircraft carrier parked out there, with maintenance and not being able to be done and one that is not more than five or six years old. i think it was the uss abraham lincoln. and of the enterprise is out there. -- i know the enterprise is out there. the democrats and republicans do not get what is really going on with our government. these are elected officials that should be there for us. we put them in office.

i really do not think that they understand that if we show weakness in our military, we broadcast that all over the world. host: a broader view about the cuts. guest: veterans benefits are protected under sequestration, good news for you. they would not be affected. as for the broader question of military readiness and congressional responsiveness to that, there are serious issues at stake. one thing that the defense department has pointed out is that it is not just the sequester for them that presents a problem. under the continuing resolution, they are operating under last year's budget levels and budget restrictions, which do not apply very well to the set -- to the situation they are under this year, where troops are being drawn down.

they say it will have a serious effect on readiness. host: back to the c-span boss. one of the 1900 or more students at mount vernon high school in fairfax county, virginia. go ahead, michelle. caller: how will sequestration affect families who receive federal assistance? guest: most forms of federal assistance are protected under sequestration. social security is ok, and medicaid is fine. there are some areas such as unemployment benefits that are subject to the sequester or there could be an impact on families. there are a host of ordinary federal programs outside of the assistant -- assistance that could affect individuals and families. host: 2 donald in virginia beach, a federal worker. caller: i am curious with everything that is going on, one

of my worries is being able to support my family. if these cuts have an affect on the receiving pay or leave without pay, is there anything that will be done without that? you have tons of people who will not be able to afford to keep their houses or feed their families. host: are you in the military? caller: know, a d.o.t. employee. -- no, a dod employee. guest: civilian employees will be hurt the most. it means a direct loss in income. under the law, and lead a cannot be cut. the rate of pay cannot be cut. their compensation can be cut by preventing them from working by as much as one day a week for the rest of the fiscal year. that could amount to 20% cut in people's income.

that could have a very real impact. host: there is a question on twitter that is related to all of this. has there ever been a situation where a federal worker did not get back pay it? his back pay part of the equation? guest: it very well could be. traditionally, in these situations where there has been shut down or a lapse in appropriations, then they were made whole at some point. with furloughs, that might be a tricky thing to do. under the current budget situation, things are very tight. congress has shown little inclination to boost employee pay or benefits in any way in recent years. i think that would be a tougher sell. host: jerry from north carolina, an independent scholar. caller: -- an independent caller.

caller: i wanted to give some information, i am retired veteran. what is happening more is that there is more of the blame game , more demagoguery, morse during the pants off of people, when really this small amount that they are trying to cut from will not really affect the people as bad as they are saying. what they are really doing is shifting blame. instead of the president running around and spending millions of dollars on air force one and try to take it to republicans, he should be sitting down at the capitol with republicans and democrats and coming up with a better deal. guest: it is true that there is a sense in which this could be much worse -- much worse than it is. it takes place over an extended period of time. it is a cut factored in with the increase in the rate of spending. it is not a huge, automatic, immediate reduction.

there is a sense in which the situation, there are worse budget situations. certainly, the administration is doing -- is doing its best to try to highlight the ill effects that would happen under sequester. they're out there giving the worst-case scenario of how things might unfold. there is still a huge gap between the two sides as to how this ought to be addressed. host: tom shoup will be with us for about another 20 minutes. he is talking to us about the sequester, the 85 billion across the court -- the $85 billion across-the-board cuts that are set to kick in this friday. our guest was a supervising editor at macmillan publishing. he is currently editor in chief at government executive magazine. we do have another student on a line with our bus from mount

vernon high school in fairfax county in virginia. anna, go ahead. caller: hubble sequestration a fact -- how will sequestration defect school lunch programs? guest: i'm not sure that specific program. on the whole, assistance programs are somewhat protected under sequester. there could be effected. i am not sure about that specific program. host: patricia, a democrat from pennsylvania. caller: i would like to know with all the talk they are having about the cuts, why do they never talk about all the money they give to foreign countries? why can they not cut that?

host: we got that point. is foreign-aid part of the equation? guest: yes, it would be subject to cut. it always comes up in discussions about the budget. people think that is an area to cut first. it is a relatively small slice of the budget, so even a "you eliminate it entirely, it would not have a huge effect on the overall -- even a call you cut that entirely, it would not have a huge effect on the overall budget. host: the white house report came out last month, a state-by- state report about the facts of sequestration. this speaks to alabama, teachers and schools, public health, child care, head start, vaccines for kids, all of that, and more, being cut. where else can folks find information about the details of the sequester? for federal employees, how about

the process itself? you mentioned they will get written notice. is there a place they can reach out? guest: i will plug our own webstie. we have -- website. we have regular reports. the office of management and budget has specific agency budgets. for federal employees, the office of personnel management has a lot of information on their website, especially about furloughs and how they might unfold and how they will affect things like benefits. host: the story in the washington post --

guest: presidential appointees are not subject to furloughs under any circumstances. i think some have already indicated that if their agencies have to furlough employes, that they themselves will take a pay cut and returned to the treasury. i would be very surprised you did not see that happen across the board. they are among the groups, as are members of congress, or not subject to having their pay cut. host: a republican form -- from florida, dennis. caller: the question about the $85 billion that we're spending, that being difficult of a $1 trillion deficit -- what does

that say about our current state of government? host: what you mean, that it is not enough? caller: why are we having such difficulty obtaining something like this, the $85 billion. it is only a bit of our deficit spending. are we in that terrible condition? guest: there is a school of thought among republicans that this is not the global of cut to take. -- not a big local of a cut to take. part of the problem is that it is not the size of a cut, but the fact that is across the board and no flexibility. you could see a circumstance develop in which congress says, ok, we will be more specific about what can be cut, or we will give managers more

flexibility about what they can cut, but still leaves the same level of cuts in place. host: a student is with us, adele. good morning. caller: my question is, what is the expected effect of sequestration on the financial market? guest: there appears to be less concern in the financial markets about the potential sequester then there was either about the debt ceiling being breached or the potential shutdown of government. that is one of the reasons why you're seeing relatively little action on this, because there is a consensus that this could go into effect and not cause a major problem in the financial markets. that is partly because it is not that steep level of cut. it takes a long time, relatively long time for all of the impacts to be felt. you could go for a month or so and not see a major impact on

federal spending. host: how about the financial markets relationship back here in washington, and sequestration and government employees? maybe the sec or the treasury department -- are they seeing cuts? guest: all these agencies will be subject to the sequester and potential for lows. it will vary a little bit agency by agency, in terms of how they will implement it. especially when it comes to personnel. in certain agencies, they can absorb the cuts by doing the hiring freeze or slowing down spending on certain projects are not starting certain things. they would not be required to furlough employees. basically, with certain exemptions, everybody will be subject to a percentage across the board. host: you mentioned social security is not impacted? guest: social security employees could be, but social security is not.

offices might have to cut back on hours, but benefits themselves are affected. host: will check come out on time? guest: that -- so security has a very good track record with that. caller: good morning. i would like to know what effect the furloughs would have on calculations on retirement benefits for federal employees. or even their health benefits. host: we touched little bit on the street guest: -- on this. guest: health benefits would be protected. retirement benefits would not be affected by a furlough, because they are based on an employee's overall rate of pay, not the actual salary that they get in any individual paycheck.

things like federal -- one of the things it is based on is your highest three years of average salary. that would not be affected. your salary rate would continue even if there was a temporary cut in pay. host: allen rushing has been preparing students for participation in this program. we have heard from several students at mount vernon high school. here is kevin. caller: how will sequestration affect parents on overseas deployment? guest: it depends. generally, they will not be affected. if you are a uniformed military personnel, the budget control act give the president the authority to exempt military -- military folks from the sequester. civilian employees in combat

zones are going to be exempted if there is a furlough situation. in general, overseas defense department employees are not effected. host: we used the phrase across the board to describe the cuts. somebody who described themselves as right-wing rights in on twitter -- is there anything else you want to add? guest: medicare is not protected. it takes a smaller percentage of it than the rest of government, but it is subject to about 2% cut. the other programs, congress decided -- this goes back to the first sequestration legislation in the mid 1980's, that programs, benefit programs, by and large, would not be affected -- not to have a dramatic impact on people.

host: jeff is a federal worker from indiana. what is your question or comment? caller: they are trying to make all the cuts. there are huge number of federal employes ready for retirement. incentive for the retirement program is antiquated. it is a very small amount. it has not been raised for 20 years. i would think that they would really want to implement this during this troubled time. guest: overall, v-slips are voluntary early retirements. certain agencies have taken this approach already. they might offer incentives to cut down on the overall size of the workforce. as they are under continued budget pressure, because even going forward, even without the

sequester, there are increasingly tight budget caps, and is very likely you'll see agencies do that, because they prefer to do that as opposed to going through a reduction in force process, which can be messy and expensive. host: a student question from jon miller. caller: hubble sequestration affect the safety of the food supply? -- how well sequestration affect the safety of the food supply? guest: food safety inspectors could be subject to furloughs. it will not mean that they will be shut down. it will not mean that right away, all food will just go out of the marketplace without being inspected. there certainly is the possibility that there could be an adverse impact on the way that operation works. host: jr is calling on the independent line. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. my question is this -- i have

been looking, trying to find as much information as i could about sequestration, going back to when it was first part of the bargain for an increase in the spending of over $2 trillion in the debt ceiling debate. this was agreed upon by the president, from the video i have seen, and then he went so far -- in november 2011 -- he said he would veto any attempt to change the sequestration. now it seems that there is this a chicken little type of disguise rhetoric, we might have to act like cut spending in washington, d.c.. i think this was an attempt to basically make it impossible

going forward to ever be able to ask for reductions in the rate of spending. i would like your comments on that. i'm very interested. guest: the president would say -- and i think he has said some are in the area of $2.50 trillion in spending cuts they have agreed to over the course of the next 10 years -- and as we said before, you have to factor in rate of growth in spending -- there are a lot of different ways you can slice and dice the numbers. the problem with sequestration is that it is an approach that neither side really wanted. both sides now characterize this in an attempt to characterize the blame for the other side, an approach that is nonsensical in that it cuts across the board and does not make intelligent cuts in the way that agencies spend money. that is where we are now. this was not supposed to be a process that was supposed to be implemented.

it is a process that would be so terrible that would cause members of congress to reach an agreement. the problem is, we reached a point where they have been unable to reach an agreement, and it is starting to look that maybe this is not that bad an option. maybe it does provide an opportunity to cut spending, albeit in a way that people do not find desirable. host: take a broader view, the 20,000-foot view -- what does this whole process me to the future of spending cuts? guest: we have reached a point where the two sides are looking at something that was supposed to be off the table as may be something that could theoretically happen. as we go forward, there are additional cuts, reductions in the budget built into the budget control act. this is actually the only year

where the sequester in domestic discretionary spending goes into effect. in subsequent years, the budget caps that lord, and it is congress's job how to cut the money. that opens up the opportunity for a more rational approach to the process. right now, we're sort of stuck in this interim period. host: our next student on the line, go ahead. caller: my question is, will sequestration affect federal funding for transportation, especially roads? guest: yes, transportation funding, i believe, it is affected, pretty much across the board. you could see a situation where that could come into effect. there is a highway trust fund. i do not know exactly how that is affected. there may or may not be impact there. they talked mainly about the impact on air travel. host: "usa today" talks about

that -- anything else to add on that? guest: they highlighted last week the transportation defects. there are a couple of different ways -- air-traffic control, the talk about closing some towers for some period of time. with a reduction in the number of air-traffic controllers, this could affect overall operations of the system. the other went remember is transportation security administration -- they said their security screeners would be subject to furlough, which could result in longer wait times. host: does the president have any executive power to prevent something from happening? guest: basically know. -- no. because the legislation was assigned a something -- was

designed as something nobody wanted, there is not much flexibility. with the sequester of this nature, it is really uncharted territory. there may be more opportunities to exercise some flexibility, but it has not been affected -- attempted before. host: ray on our independent line, from tennessee. caller: i have a question, i was curious about it. i have not heard anything mentioned about possible furloughing -- why do they not to reclassification of jobs? in other words the pay scale for the job? i retired from self supporting government agency, and they re- evaluated the pace scales for several -- the pay scales for several different departments.

i have not heard anything mentioned about re-evaluation. guest: the reason for that is that under the law, the employes rate of pay cannot be altered under the sequestration. rate of payyees' cannot be altered under the sequestration. furloughs or reductions in force are certainly the only options on the table. reductions in force cost money in a short term because the payouts for annual leave. that leaves you with furloughs as the only option. host: 1 last student from over -- from over at mount vernon high school. francisco? caller: because sequestration affects federal funding, how will that affect public school districts? guest: there are areas that will be subject to cuts in terms of support from the federal level

for public schools. the administration has been highlighting the impact on headstart, where it says, up to 70,000 children could be affected by that. there are a whole range of the facts in the education area. host: one more caller or two. we want to thank allen rushing for preparing the students at mount vernon fiscal -- high school. the bus is finishing up its two week to work -- tour through ohio and virginia. there is a special segment tonight on martha washington, our new segment "first lad ies." over 1900 students at that haskell. several of them took place this morning. he thanked them for their participation. sharon from massachusetts, a

democrat. caller: i have a question. simpson-bowles recently aired on c-span, and they both said that there is 180 rubles in the tax code worth trillions of dollars. -- loopholes in the tax code worth trillions of dollars. it affects our benefits, just one quarter of the population. if we cut loopholes, wouldn't that far exceed what would be cut with sequestration? guest: guest: the short answer is yes. this is something the administration has been pushing to make changes to the tax code that would affect the highest earners. you could come up with a balance that would take care of these kinds of cuts. these kinds of cuts.