doctor's host: a new poll out on the supreme court shows approval near a historic low. what is your view of the supreme court? that is our opening question on "washington journal." there are your numbers. you can also contact us via social media. you can post to comment on our facebook page, facebook.com/cspan. you can send us eight tweet --

us a tweet -- @cspanwj. here are the results of the peer study that was taken march 13 through 17. before the same-sex marriage cases that were in the court this week. a national survey conducted march 13 to 17. ithe court favorably. those ratings have changed only modestly since last july, shortly after the court's willing to uphold most of the affordable care act. republican views of the court, which stumbled 18 points following the court's ruling on the health care law, have rebounded somewhat in the current survey. nearly half of republicans have a favorable opinion of the supreme court, up from 38% from last july.

that is the headlines from the study on the supreme court. historically they have a chart that shows how court has ranked in it favorability. you can see here it goes up to 80% back in 1994. it was a 72% in 2007. here it is in january 2001, right after the bush-course decision. decision.re recentent is the most

period 53% last thdecember. 64% back in 2009. we want to hear your views on the supreme court as it considers same-sex marriage cases. ellen is on our democrats line. what is your view? caller: i think the supreme court has failed. in my opinion the election of bush over gore, that was the final nail in the coffin of democracy. it continues to fail. the fact that we had to sit back and watch them talk about the debate against abortion -- to think about the fact that women's rights have been

consistently taken away slowly but surely. concened the supreme court as an entity that does not have any value for anyone. >> this is harold in an choosy on our republican line. good morning. caller: i agree with the last caller. my point is this. the supreme court has failed us yourably and the reason is have to have the rule of law and we do not have the rule of law. the earth did not create itself. god issued commandments, increase and multiply.

host: tie that in to the supreme court. roe v. for example -- in wade they ridiculously violated our founding documents. reason we did that is because we did not want what king george or whatever king henry or all the kings of england did -- they did such terrible things. king henry the eighth started his own religion in violation of god's laws. 68 years ago today i was in germany with -- the day we moved into germany general eisenhower issued a command.

of any violated a law command and he was only a human being. host: we are going to have to let you go at that point. we appreciate you calling in this morning. this is joe on our independent line from iowa. what is your view of the supreme court? ofler: there are a couple supreme court justices i have been impressed with. obama'sack appointments, i liked the way they have done their job. -- the also like to know republicans always talk about the rule of law. until george bush and dick all theye imprisoned are doing is lying through their teeth.

i dare anyone to challenge me on that. we cannot have people doing that and everybody just letting it go on. would you like to see the court rule on these two same-sex marriage cases. both should pass in favor of same-sex marriage. theirre not minding business. they need to keep stare -- we appreciate it. from our facebook page, ramona says -- a little bit more from the pew

steady. jamie in manassas, virginia. good morning. what is your view of the supreme caller: court i think they're doing a good job. i think the democrats are having a hard time trying to determine -- overall i think they make a

decision in putting these laws through. think they're gonna have a hard time overturning either one of them. we are allline is -- trying to adapt with this new thing for the and enjoy each other's lives. weirdest try the accused to a new concept. -- we are just try to get used to a new concept. host: albert, you are on "washington journal." caller: sometimes i think the supreme court is like a seesaw. republicans are in power they get a majority.

opinions are conservative and vice versa. proposition 8 puts the supreme court in a problem. they don't have anything to choose from. be takeawayt would only. 350,000 registered voters. the move to wyoming and change the constitution for state marriage. that would give the supreme court choice. that would be a quagmire for them. thank you. host: some of the headlines regarding guest today's arguments in front of the supreme court, a lot of similarity in these headlines read it here is "the washington

post," -- "politico," -- here is "the miami herald," -- carolina,north republican -- good morning. caller: i want to make a thomas appears to at the wheel.

like to ask why he never gives his opinion. words.not heard three he is asleep at the wheel. host: vincent is in charleston, south carolina. what do you think of the supreme court? caller: my comment was that i think the supreme court the supreme court was originally -- they wouldn't be influenced by voters and elections and everything. this supreme court that we currently have -- they seem to be following the winds of social changes.

the constitution is the rule of law in this country. they should and to dig it bishop interpret the constitution in the way it was originally meant to be interpreted. -- they should interpret the constitution in the way it was originally meant to be interpreted. thank you. host: that was vincent in charleston, south carolina. top story in "the boston globe," -- right below that is the story about the supreme court. most justices voiced stats on the defensive merit act. i was watching yesterday morning and this morning and i got to reading the transcript

yesterday. i have a lot of thought about the specifics. i am calling because i am finding it disappointing how many callers just don't seem to understand the basic function of the supreme court in how the process works. the perception that court's swing this way or that we in response to which party is in the presidency or has the majority in the house is just kind surprising. people do not understand the basic function of the supreme court. >> what is the basic function? the individually police and perspectives and history. the way the court changes and the way it interprets overtime is not something that changes the way things change.

all that said what is your opinion of the court? caller: i personally hope they will be struck down. when it comes to prop 8 there are some different concerns and the fray. it looks as if there is a better chance that the bill will be struck down. i am just waiting to see. i am more concerned of what has come out of the conversation in the sense of understanding how the supreme court functions and personal ideology is really not where i would hope it would be. host: do you think the structure of the court works of the lifetime of nine people? caller: good question.

and i had the pleasure of being at a lecture of years ago with about the history of the court. i am humble enough to acknowledge the limits of my education when it comes to the supreme court. i feel like i have a basic knowledge that every if american citizen should have. host: that is bo in philidelphia. another similar headlined -- we have a correspondent from "the wall street journal." what was it like to be in the court today? guest: it was a full-court and everyone was aware of the significance.

the court has its own rhythm and it proceeded. be atessure seemed to first on the attorney hired by the house republican leadership to defend the defense of marriage act. as expected most questions of him came from the more liberal members of the court when it was -- liberal members of the court. most questions came from the right side of the core. host: there is a related article this morning, conservative justices rip obama about the fact that the justice department did not defend doma yesterday. that is one of the killer aspects of both cases. in both cases the normal defender of a statute or a legal

provision would be the government that enacted it. in this case, the u.s. government for doma or the state of california for proposition 8. in both cases the execution -- the executive branch has decided the law is not constitutional and have defended it. it did lead to some criticism from the more conservative members about the obama administration's legal position. they had asked the supreme court to review the lower court decisions striking down doma, and yet they agreed with that position. it is unusual for the party that wins for the lower court to ask the supreme court to review that decision. several justices were asking why they were here. they are only supposed to decide

cases when there are two parties opposed to each other. bloom host: sees debt has been covering -- c-span has been covering a lot of this. some of the questions to the justices were about popular opinion. andpopular opinion conferences, do they sway the justices at all? guest: popular opinion is relevant as a legal matter because of the way the court has examined was the target minorities. one of the factors that comes up is whether or not a minority that has been targeted for discriminatory treatment is powerless in the political process. if they are powerless in the political process than the court sees itself as having a somewhat stronger role in protecting it from oppressive or

discriminatory measures. the legal significance seems to be whether or not gays and lesbians really are a kind of powerless group that needs special protection from the court in a way that african americans did as certain parts of u.s. history and in some ways still today according to the court. that was really the legal significance. you can also draw some other implications from it. whenwas what was going on the chief justice questioned the attorney. he was asking how can you say you are so politically powerless when your movement has started winning popular referendums and have political figures falling over each other to take your side. in effect you are not powerless. she responded, "think of it this way, look at all the measures we have lost in the past decade.

" host: is one of the two cases more important than the other? could one of the decisions of the year? veer? of the decisions guest: the court issue behind them is same-sex marriage. the legal issues are somewhat different. theainly if the court in proposition 8 case were to say the federal constitution of equal protection clause requires all states to recognize same-sex marriage, that would honestly be a very significant decision. it doesn't seem to court was inclined to go that way on tuesday. of course, all options are on the table. they could, of course, assert that in the doma case. it is not necessary for them to resolve it. even if they decide that that unconstitutional,

they do not need to wait in a more broadly. it is a question of whether the federal government has justification for discriminating between legally married heterosexual couples and legally married same-sex couples. host: what happens now in the process? guest: the public part of the process is going to be over for a long time. it is when does seem like the cases been dormant. we will be hearing more from the press conferences and people sharing their own opinions. what is learned happen at the court, it follows its normal process, tomorrow the nine justices will have a private meeting with only themselves present in the supreme court building and they will take a preliminary vote on the outcome of the cases they heard this week. based on that there will be an

assignment from the senior justice and majority of who is going to write the court costs majority opinion. the justices will start drafting their opinion and in the following weeks they will circulate different drafts of their opinions. it is possible some may change their views on these issues as they read what their colleagues have written and think about the various legal implications. it is possible they may further developt heir views. that process of sharing drafts and responding will go on for a number of weeks. it will all be behind closed doors. we won't see that until likely years after their justices somee did in june, at point -- justices retire.

in june, at some point we will know how they decided. host: when they meet on friday, they will not necessarily vote? guest: they will. it is not a binding vote. it is a preliminary votes. they can always change their minds before the premium comes out. if they follow their normal practice based on their views on friday they will vote. host: they can also change their mind? guest: it is not a public vote is part of their process of assigning opinions. that is what they are going to do. we all know what the voters unless someone comes out and tells this. that doesn't happen much. they will know where they're

going but we won't know. if the court votes and they formed their opinion, does that ever leaked out? since it hasn't to me have been covering the court in 2005. faint leaks that occurred regarding the health care case. that was not immediately after their straw vote. months offter several internal deliberations. it seems like there are some kinds of rumors that were not totally baseless that emanated from the court. that was extremely rare. there might be sufficiently charged in this case. i wouldn't count on it. >> if the justices dismissed one of the two cases on technical

grounds or procedural grounds, would we know that right away? host: we wouldn't. guest: he may not have decided that yet. it is likely they will immediately reached -- they will not come easily reach that conclusion because they know how serious these issues are. to the important issues regarding jurisdiction and would have to think about them as well. i do not think we will hear that very quickly. i do not think we will hear that the cases are dismissed until the end of the term, either. not all of the justices may agree and then maybe some dissent from the majority decision to dismiss the cases. they will probably have a lot to say about that. as well the justices may decide to dismiss the case. they know the country will expect an explanation for what will seem to be a very strange

outcome to a lot of people. but, from the court's point of view, a very odd way the case got here where you have the state of california saying its own law is unconstitutional and the united states government saying its own law is unconstitutional -- that creates an issue that is very significant to the court and the legal system. it is much less significant to people who care a lot of the same-sex marriage issue. the question is really under what circumstances can a court exercise its jurisdiction? that is very important to the court as it thinks about future laws that might arise in similar situations. it is less american to people who really want an answer whether or not the constitution agrees on same-sex marriage. host: it seems there were some reporters or some spectators tweeted out from the court yesterday. i did not think electronic

devices were allowed. guest: they are not allowed in the courtroom. i did not see anybody pleading. -- anybody tweeting. i would be surprised if it was in the courtroom. they have strict security. building wheree yu can hear the argument people may have been tweeting. allison is i got out of the courtroom i posted items on my website. -- as soon as i got out of the courtroom i posted items on my website. it may be that it looks like they were tweetetweeting. to give outne there how to the fate the court's security. >> we hav

ost: here is the article -- we appreciate your time this morning. back to your calls on your view on the supreme court. missouri.rom caller: i would like it called chuck schumer. this is his court. host: why do you say that? caller: why you say it is his host: court he is the head of the judiciary committee and he had to approve every one of them. i would like to know what his opinion is and how the court might vote. i hope it stays as a marriage between man and woman. i appreciate you taking my call.

host: john is in maine. you are on "washington journal." you that fanatics on both sides. bothu have got fanatics on sides. if you got a good lawyer presenting the case, no matter what party elected the judges, if you have a good attorney he is going to convince those judges no matter what. that is how it works. if it becomes a real hot potato i suspect the judges will throw it back to the state. ofhink it's in the bill

rights where the states have their own constitutions seperate from the government. that last part of a case about , thereancing, obama care it shows impartiality. a column from both sides, they need to do their homework first. if they got good law clerks and the law clerks know their business -- host: a couple more facebook comments. this is jeff --

if you like to continue the conversation on our facebook page, facebook.com/spcspan. tweets -- some of the twitter comments.

anthony in columbus mississippi. caller: i believe that the supreme court goes beyond its authority sometime in ruling on the cases as the previous caller said. there is a whole lot of impartiality shown by chief justice roberts. personally i believe that if we could see, as one caller asked, justice thomas speak a little more about his own thoughts as to the cases before them and not just sit there silent then the public will get a full view of what their justices are feeling about the cases that come before them. i believe in the end the decision between these two caces

will end up staying the way it is. that is what i have to comment on this morning. thank you. host: bonnie in maryland on our republican line. you are on "washington journal." good morning. caller: they are taking away all of the power from the people. white folk on anything if they are just going to go to the supreme court to overturn it? differentple vote on things and they say we do not want this, then it turns around they take it to the supreme court, that it's wiped out. why even put it on the ballot if they are going to overturn everything? if they do this they are going to of return everything. they are taking away our rights.

host: ryan, what do you think of the supreme court? shows howthink it divided america is on these issues. -- it is it is about more divided on these issues. as far as the drop in their i do notrating -- think americans understand the law. i do not think that shows much about whether the rules are constitutional or unconstitutional. the supreme court is there to protect minorities. i happen to be married to a christian woman with a child. i have no problem with lesbians

and gays getting married. i don't need tending of my gut -- of my marriage from u.s. government. host: thank you for calling in. from " usa today," --

kathleen in ohio on the democrats' line -- good morning. view of the supreme court definitely changed. i got into the supreme court during the 2000 bush-core vote. you have probably had a program about this. the states' rights issue versus they are always

saying they are for states' rights. during the 2003 count they voted against states' rights. they thought the recount. on this particular issue states have said -- states have passed same-sex marriage laws. clear on what their decision -- rather logical if they stand behind states' rights. if i did make it into the supreme court hearings -- it was kind of exciting to hear the extremely intelligent people talking about our constitution. i do have respect for their intelligence. -- they are not

bipartisan. it is a fascinating issue. it is exciting to watch. host: how did you get into the court in 2004 that case? caller: i left at 3:00 in the morning from ohio, drove to dc, caught in a long line and, i didn't think i was quite make it in. they were rotating the public in and out so we could observe what was going on. i recommend it. if people have never gone into the supreme court i would say take that opportunity. i left it 3:00 in the morning and got in line at 9:00 in the morning and made it in. it was really exciting. host: are you associated with ohio university? i am. it is a fabulous school. athens is a great town.

today," --

there's an opposing view from a professor at itt college of law. she writes --

amon "the new york times," --

and "the wall street journal street "the wall journal" also opines on this issue --

bob is a republican in jackson, georgia. what is your opinion of the supreme court? and 10 i would 1 say five. cases it is one of the of the terms -- in illinois, what is your thought? caller: i think the supreme court of rock as a very good job. several of the people who have how theave discussed court is very activist. recently the court has struck down chicago's ban on guns.

it was put in place by legislatures. that went to the legislative process of the people. my guess is most conservatives would not see that as activist. what they did was overturned pre-election of the people. if the overturned doma that is exactly what they will do. their role is not to put into place public opinion but to decide if what public opinion did through their legislature was legal to the constitution. one last comment about this -- it would work better if they were elected. people misunderstand the point of the court. it is to protect people. the idea of being a majority putting in place a law that fayalite other people's writes -- if the supreme court were elected it would not be able to do its job at all. host: 3 guest segment coming up

on "washington journal." we are quick to be talking about america possibility to retire. later in the program we are also quick to talk about nurse practitioners and their role in the health care world. up next, a discussion on politics. people be right back. -- we will be right back. >> when i first moved here he sent -- he spent a lot of time at home. the primary people who would have visited prior to 1812 would have largely been friends and relations from the area. cordial and welcoming. during jackson's fame at the battle of new orleans from 1815 on through the rest of her life they have lots of company.

or eveningny parties dinners here at the heritage. they appreciated find things. she had very nice things. of her as a image country lady -- she wasn't that exactly. i think it was more about her comfort in the big cities than her appearance. wife of theackson, president andrew jackson, is now available on our website under c-span's " the first lady's." november 24, 1963 -- dallas nightclub operator jack ruby shot and killed lee harvey

oswald. hear firsthand about the trial -- who kept a diary from the proceedings. >> he looked forlorn. he just really look to pitiful. he never smiled. i made eye to eye contact with him. his eyes were really fixed. they had a vacant stare. they look like he was feeling his way through the world. >> this saturday at 7:15 p.m. eastern, part of american history tv on c-span3. continues. journal" >> joining us is josh kraushaar.

he is the politics editor at "national journal." how has the political conversation on same-sex marriage changed in the last six months to a year? guest: the political evolution has been dramatic. politicians are very normally cautious. even those who advocate for change are normally very cautious. they look at the polls and the political winds. to see how much movement we have seen in the past month alone where we have over half a dozen democratic senators switched their position and support same- sex marriage -- we saw kate hagen from north carolina, a southern state. last year it passed him -- it passed an amendment defining same-sex marriage as between a man and a woman with a 60% support.

a democrat from missouri, a very culturally conservative state, over the last week decided to support same-sex marriage. when you see democrats from some of the more conservative parts of the country it shows what we are seeing in these national polls. there has been as rapid speed in which the public has evolved from having a majority opposing to now 58% supporting it in the latest abc news washington post. host: what about the conversation in the republican party itself? guest: the evolution has been a little more subtle. instead of hearing republican candidate's campaign against same-sex marriage by making it a major part of their campaign your seeing more republicans is not focus on it as a central issue. social issues to be one of the key wedge issues with the central part of the rally in the base. in the 24 -- in the 2004

presidential election, that put the issue of the rights on the back burner. there was a very important signal. if you talk to a lot of fromlicans, especially the democratic leanings states, you will see they are not openly supporting gay marriage. they are not talking about social issues. they did not have the same level of opposition that you would see just two decades ago. senator hagen's approval rating? guest: she is not very well defined in her home state. on the map herself in a big way. she risks the prospect of social conservatives in a midterm

election rallying to the polls, the vote against her. she is someone who's gonna be campaigning very hard and as current be one of the marquee races of 2014. host: you mentioned all of the senators changing their position. here's a list of them. democrat of missouri, democrat of virginia, democrat of west virginia, democrat of montana, just reelected, jay rockefeller. there are two big takeaways. it is striking that the senator from virginia, one of the most culturally conservative states in the country, is switching their view. jay rockefeller is retiring after this term. the big takeaway is from folks like mark warner in virginia

and mark baggage in alaska. both of them are up for reelection in 2014 tweet alaska is a very republican state. this could be a very significant issue in the alaska senate race. host: let's look of the nine democratic senators who have not spoken out in favor of same-sex marriage. arkansas, delaware, pennsylvania, indiana, south dakota, -- you will see that all of those senators are from very solidly republican state or states that have voted republican in recent presidential elections. pryor was one of the few senators who responded to a washington post request on where he stood on key marriage.

he is one of the few who defended the defense of marriage act. he actually went as far as defending where a lot of democratic senators have actually declined to comment or have been much more hesitant to talk on the subject. you're seeing this evolution. -- it is oneouth of the few holdouts we have a great hold up of evangelical voters, an electorate. you're not seeing the movement at the same speed as other parts of the country. host: banter is up for reelection next year? guest: yes. host: do you think we will see an announcement in the next year or so? guest: i would not expected. one of the challenges for southern democrats is the electorate in a midterm election is more conservative and more republican than you

would see in a presidential election. you would see higher turnouts from college students and minorities that may be more supportive of overturning these the marriage bans. you're not seeing that same kind of turnout in midterm year. i doubt eurydice anything before 2014. host: bill king tweet sen. --tweets in challengeis a real for the republican party. we are hearing two issues that are in the national debate, immigration and the marriage. -- and a marriage. immigration is a lot easier to move to the middle because it is not a value based issue. it is an issue where there is

more room for compromise. on a marriage, when evangelicals and christian conservatives and religious opposing, there is no room for compromise. there is no move to the middle. if republican officeholders move to the middle they could lose what are some of their strongest supporters. they may lose support of social conservatives, which is a key part of the party. situation.a tough dc the movement among other voters, the generation gap when it comes to gay marriage. they do not want to risk losing the support they receive from older religious voters. " this"washington tim4s morning -- guest: it was not all that surprising.

her name is out there for several months. democrats thought that this race -- they are fun to be putting in a lot of money if they get a good candidate. they've realized that ashley judd would have made this an interesting race. she had so much baggage when it comes to are socially liberal position. she was a candidate that have some much baggage. they realized that she may not be the right candidate. i am sure there were a lot of back channel conversations between her and kentucky democrats. more likely now

that secretary of state, who is a 34-year old state-wide official. kentucky is still a very conservative state. mcconnell has already gone up with his first television ad and we are only in march of 2013, over one year before the election. he is taking his reelection very seriously. his job approval rating is not in good shape. he is vulnerable against the right kind of democrat. the right kind of democrat is a more socially conservative democrat in the role of the governor's rather than someone like ashley judd. the key is for democrats to raise enough money against mcconnell. and can they basically get a candidate that it's the kentucky electorate?

sequestration a political victory for republican? guest: is short-term victory. the white house did not expect to lose in the short term. like in the case in the '90s between clinton and the house republicans, they thought it could betray republicans as not being willing to compromise. -- portray republicans as not being willing to compromise. instead you're seeing a lot more nuanced support for balancing the budget, for spending cuts. there is a lot of distrust in washington in general. going withters were the notion that both parties were at blame. that is not good for the white house. when you're the president, when -- hearties are to blame took the hit. he seems to have lost seven or

eight points. the white house knows -- perhaps immigration and gun control. they did not want to be distracted. host: you called it a short-term victory but it benefited republicans. it could if they do not fight every battle and they do not bring themselves oin cutting spending. the risk for republicans is they are still focused on cutting every line in the budget that they are losing the forest for the trees. making sure the economy is in good shape.

there's a lot of anxiety among americans. both sides are eager to come up with a plan so they can convince americans the economy will be growing. host: joseph tweets in. severalt has only been months and we are seeing the prospect of small measures when it comes to gun control. assault weapons ban is no longer part of the picture. it is hard to get republicans on board with those measures like background checks. mayor bloomberg is trying to persuade members of congress to get on board with background checks.

even he realizes the limits of the campaign. he except a small measure and enforcing background checks as something that would be a more significant win. is theosh kraushaar politics editor for the "national journal." we take your calls and we begin with this call from ohio. hi. please go ahead. caller: on the gay marriage debate. i am a democrat. becomesappointed it has a political issue more than a social standard issue. it is become a popular issue

with republicans changing their minds after they campaigned against it. democrats saying it is a popular issue among voters. now it is becoming a political game instead of a social standard. be, where isould america going to go after this? repeals theme court ban and opens the floodgates. only allow every lifestyle to be an issue -- that is their life style and now we allow heroin addicts. that is their life style.

?o you see what i'm saying guest: the supreme court seems to be content to leave it up to public opinion. -- i do not think there will be a sweeping ruling defense ofnd the marriage act. i think it will be left up to the individual states. is what isal support -- thato allow something has provided the momentum for gay marriage. public opinion would drive this issue. the caller identifies as a

democrat. -- the change his vote would he change his vote? guest: that is an interesting question. there are four states that are liberal states. hey passed by narrow margins maryland and oregon. movements might show and majority support but it is still a divided issue. not all democrats are on board with gay marriage. it divides democrats less so than it did 10 years ago. african-americans are not as supportive of gay marriage. there is a divide in the

democratic party. host: connie, good morning. caller: good morning. i have five granddaughters. one decided she wants to be homosexual. i should say i'm happy for her but i am not. that. whygod say you -- that is what god says you do. the bible says god straight sodom and gomorrah. god destroyedays sodom and gomorrah. destroyed the two cities, man, woman, and child.

are you going to stand up for god's word? are you going to go along with a few people? this country was dedicated to jesus christ. host: would you consider yourself a social conservative? marriage? caller: those are very important to me. word.up for god's you want a few things given to well, i do not, care. i have to stand up for god's word if i am a born again christian. guest: this is the challenge for

republicans. you have a significant base of the party that is socially conservative. whether members of congress came out with a more moderate view on gay marriage, it would upset and likely lower the enthusiasm for voters like connie to support republican candidates. this is a dilemma that republicans face. they want to cater to young voters. they need to understand that seniors should be a part of their coalition. ast: hillary clinton plans round of speeches. guest: i think it is about time we will hear more about her 2016

plans. of nowhere simile with a video to the human rights campaign talking about how she is supportive of gay marriage. that is a crystal clear sign that she is thinking about a presidential campaign. public opinion has moved on the issue. hillary clinton was secretary of state. she could not have a political position in that role. she comes out for gay marriage. host: she is giving a speech in new york on april 5. c-span will be covering it. will we be breathless every time have a clinton steps

outside her house? guest: we look at this democratic potential field. candidates.t many -- a serious candidate for president. there are no up-and-coming prospects that fit that void. see muchns, you'll not serious opposition. she will be a formidable candidate. she can continue the clinton dynasty. host: what has happened with rand paul since his filibuster? guest: rand paul is the republican to watch. bet thereis making a

is a sentiment within the republican party away from the divided. bush hawkin shness record. he believes in already first and foremost. he took a rubio-like position on immigration. savvy.ery at nationalg office. he is busying himself as someone who is fiscally conservative. host: married in west virginia -- mary. thank you for holding on. caller: thank you for c-span.

the first prominent national figure that supported gay duringe was dick cheney the vice-presidential debate. president obama has evolved to where dick cheney was. that was my comment. guest: the republicans like dick cheney and portman have changed because of a family member and they have a connection to the issue. someone might have a family member and they know somebody that is openly gay and that is responsible for that sea change . cheney and poor men have done so in direct response to a family member coming out of the

closet. host: brenda in washington. caller: hello. doma andto talk about the sequester. everybody wants to -- there are massive divorces. ma. back to do this all started from hawaii that wanted to do something within their state and congres'' jumped in and said, "no, you don't.' then with the sequester. i work for the government and my husband works for the government. and three yearst

of at the pay freeze. they want to take 20% on the backs of ordinary, hard-working americans and you cannot get 3% wealthy?he ultra- that: a lot of the workers been affected are around the beltway. talk to someone in the midwest or in the rust belt, there is a perception that government is doing very well. what is the harm in trimming salaries or the waste? the virginia- maryland-d.c. area being affected by the sequester. they said certain benefits will not go out.

they said the white house would not offer quatorze. the most damage -- they said the white house would not offer tours. the public did not have the same reaction as they did with the other fiscal fights. it is an open question about whether these cuts and people start to feel the pain, whether that will hurt the republican party. there are challenges to show they can get people back to work. mexico on them republican line. you're on with josh kraushaar. caller: hi. how are you doing?

we have talked about gun control. -- the criminals will keep the guns. they are not going to give them away. if you want to have one, you should be able to have one. with gay marriage. my concern is where do we st op? another small step away. issue.first with the gun polling shows overwhelming support for background checks. we will not see any action taken by congress in terms of any kind of law being passed.

the intensity is on the side of the opposition. ecb majorities that supports gun do see majorities that support gun control. they do not think some of these gun control measures will have a significant effect on crime. the types of voters that will show up on the polls. we're seeing a divide between the polling and what is going on in congress. it is the intensity that favors the opposition. host: we have a tweet from sport-dog. guest: i don't think you'll say too much of george w. bush. -- his biggest

baggage is his last name. his talk about education reform, immigration reform and equality in his most recent book. like those from marco rubio. my gut is that bush will not run. .here is too much baggage i think they are looking beyond bush or clinton. if marco rubio runs for president, the issue that bush had advocated will play a prominent role in the campaign. host: do you think that jeb bush has the same power that hillary

clinton would have? guest: he would. a bush and clinton running against each other. of ithink voters are sick by now. there is baggage for both candidates. people want to get past the clinton years. bill clinton is still a popular past president. he legacy of bush's brother still looms large. he has different views and he is his own man, i did not think he can overcome some of the bush baggage. this there is an op-ed morning talking about some of the governors in the red states . mr. someone out there in a

governors mansion that could appear on our radar screen? guest: scott walker from wisconsin. he seems open to a run for national office and he has the credentials with budget balancing. he could get reelected for the 2014.time if he wins in .e would be a formal candidate that has thatrnor balance is chris christie from new jersey. paule talking about rand and marco rubio. you'll hear more about the governors that will be building

resumes of their own and can argue that they grant a state and more successful. bobby jindal is already promised that territory. daniels?t about mitch guest: he accepted a job at purdue university. he has divorced himself from politics for the time being. he would have been a compelling candidate if he ran in 2012. fiscal reformr of and balancing the budget. i wonder if he could leave the university and run for president when there are so many talented republican figures also in the mix. from tampa, florida. caller: good morning.

my question is for josh. madeice the courts have several comments regarding the 8llot initiative with prop in california. warye the court would be un into treading whether they would have a voter ballot initiative with a similar process that we have in florida. maybe this is a political question and whether this matter should be left to the states then establishing a federal right. said he did not want those types of cases coming towards the courts. ost: what you think about two

potential floridians running for president? caller: i think marco rubio would be an excellent candidate. he seems to bridge the gap between an older electorate and a younger electorate with his positions in florida. i think he could do that nationwide. host: thank you for calling in. guest: i do think there is not going to be a chance there'll be some kind of a grand ruling that what a firm gay marriage as a constitutional right. the public movement on the issue has made it more possible for the justices to say this is needssue that the states to decide.

there was a lot of conservatism in their questioning about whether gay marriage would be a constitutional right. ost: kevin from maryland, you're on with josh kraushaar. caller: thank you for taking my call. i wanted to comment on an e arlier call. the woman had mentioned sodom and gomorrah. you said, what does that have to do with politics? quotationsd take that defined america such as " bless america" and "in god we trust."

no onerstand there is type of sin. man is of man against pretty serious and the country stands behind as a as possiblyion being blessed by god. this would create some condemnation for the curse of the century. host: we got your point. guest: when you deal with something that is a deeply held religious belief, no matter what the polls show, it is going to be an issue that causes a lot of challenges for democrats and republican office holders. you're seeing momentum on the

side of gay marriage supporters. there is a lot of intensity among supporters but there is a lot of intensity among the opposition. if you're a democrat in the southern state, that's something that should be on your mind. host: we have a tweet from sasha. republican line. caller: yes. homosexuals.e i would welcome them in my church. i would pray for an opportunity to tell them what she's a says -- what jesus says. because god will

forgive it. i guess we will not know until jesus returns. i have been thinking and i believe it is possible that people come into this for to the temptation and trying it and liking it and becoming addicted as alcohol the same and drugs are adaptable. able.dict the president got his last election because he enticed these people that he would do these things for them. in a way he is responsible for some of the stock that is happening now. guest: we have talked about the

evolution among democrats on gay marriage. president clinton supported and signed the defense of marriage act. had opposed the marriage in 2008. biden cannot in support of out inriage -- came support of gay marriage. this is the speech in which public opinion has changed -- this is the speed in which public opinion has changed. you see this level of opposition among democrats and conservatives. is been a month since reince priebus gave the new direction of the republican party. what is the reaction? guest: he said it wasn't about

policy but structure. he highlighted immigration as the big issue where the party needs to moderate and reform. he wants the primary process to be shortened and to have fewer opportunities for candidates to stumble. open raisins and no incumbent in 2016 -- we have a lot of names that are up-and- coming candidates. beenlicans may have shortsighted in this approach of trying to compress the primary. republicansthat could have more of a debate,

especially if the democrats don't have as young and vibrant as a field. republicans always try to fix what is broken. on immigration and on the primary process, those of the areas that he chose to focus on. host: dan in washington. -- frommy question is religion should be part of the judicial system and the political system. but that is separate. religion is your own faith. it has to do with government issues. the people that are fighting for the gay-rights,

it is not to be gay. .hey want to be as equal if they loved each other, it doesn't matter if it is a boy any boy or a girl and a girl. they want the same medical benefits. i do not see that as being a problem. if they believe god will not punish them, god will not punish them. some: 1 argument that conservatives make is they do not want the government to get involved in religious marriages. the government could decide to penalize or punish religious organizations.

every traditional religion opposes gay marriage. sanctions to gay marriage, but religious organizations in a bind in the long term. host: 7 retiring senators that we know of at this time including tom harkin -- host: only two republicans on this list. four are from states that mitt romney won in 2012. how does this fit in to 2014? map.: look at the senate

with seven contested seats that are up held by democratic senators. tsere are more than seven sea in states that mitt romney carried. landscape.ervative they're looking at the national and state polls in these conservative states. there are democrats like mary that arery landrieu going to want to position themselves to the middle or the center right. virginia.ota and west regin these are states viewed as prime pick up opportunity.

retiring.eller is a skilled campaigner and fund raiser. democrats are trying to land a recruit. south dakota, we saw tim johnson retired this week. democrats have some candidates winning in the wings. you have to johnson's son. 2010 midtermin the elections. there is a former governor that is very well liked. it will be competitive. they areot a seat

throwing away. look at the deep south states and alaska with mark begich. democrats cannot lose six seats when you look at the big picture. .hey think it is doable host: what about the house? guest: the house is safer for republicans. the redistricting process entailed a loss of gerrymandering. there are about a dozen seats that democrats hold where mitt romney won the popular vote. republicanst -- need to hold onto their 70-seat .- 17-seat majority

host: we have been talking with josh kraushaar of "national journal." thank you for being with us this morning. two more segments coming up. america'son not ability to retire and whether we're ready to do so. but first a news update. politics. republicans working with outside groups to develop tools designed to improve communications with voters and to attract democratic opponents. ? officials are turning to younger voters to play a bigger role in the midterm elections and beyond.

an update on the situation in syria. several mortar shells have discussed the damascus university campus causing multiple casualties among students. rebels hit damascus two stays with mortar shells that wounded dozens. nelson mandela has been admitted to hospital with a lung infection. he went to the hospital just before midnight last night. he's being treated for a ung rrence of his l infection. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. [video clip] down as undecided. [laughter]

mr. chairman, as i listen to ck me comments, it stru what a wonderful thing free speech is. guest: he was making the justifications for attacking iraq. is heliborney going to make from this war -- how much money as halliburton going to make from this war? medea benjamin sunday night at 8:00 p.m. "washington journal" continues. now on your screen is

susan apold. what is say nurse practitioner? that: it registered nurse can diagnose and prescribe physicians.h like --son bring a nursing model we also bring a nursing model. we are nurses and first. we are taught to take care of the whole patient and take into consideration their family background, their perceptions and their knowledge level about health and illness. we bring an extra level of care. we have advanced education and training. host: how much schooling goes into being a nurse practitioner?

guest: four years. we also must have a master's degree in nursing. there is a growing trend to have a -- host: you are right doctorate of nursing? guest: i have a ph.d. up.s try to clear this a ph.d. isn't academic research is an. -- a ph.d. degree.c research to gra as folks left after clinical experience. host: how many years of schooling have you had? guest: i have a master's degree and a post master's certificate.

rs ave a post maste certificate and a ph.d. 8-10 years. host: 19 get your medical degree? -- why not get your medical degree? guest: because i wanted to be a nurse. we each bring something viable to the patient care situation. medicine has a wonderful diagnoses and cure model. it's a model that has served this nation well. each of us can do a little bit of what the other can do. it is an approach to taking care of patients. i enjoy this and continue to

enjoy it. host: how do nurse practitioners differ from physicians' assistants? -- t: a nurse practitioner we have licenses that are our own. we practiced on our own. license.n independent that means we are responsible for our practices and for the quality of our care and for the standards of care and the ethics surrounding our profession. except supervises us other nurses. if this is a system operates under direct supervision of a physician. they prescribe -- the licensing

is difference and they have a different approach to patient care. you workan apold, do for yourself and do you work with a group of doctors? guest: i work with a physician and a private practice in new york and the work in the same office as a physician. host: are you required to work with a physician by new york law? aest: i am required to have collaborative practice agreement. for me to practice as a nurse practitioner, and thus have a document signed by a physician. i have to identify a physician who will serve as my collaborating physician.

the oversight is a retrospective chart review. mym required to identify charts and taken to a physician and sit down and do a review. the visit will look at my charts and say, "this is great or you could've done that differently." rounds?n you make can you prescribe medications or order tests? to all those things. host: is that nationwide? guest:no. states and 50 different laws that govern nurse practitioners. barrier foround patients to access to the care

that nurse practitioners can provide. host: we are talking about nurse practitioners. we have set aside our fourth line for nurse practitioners and health care workers. you can see it there. 202 is the area code. how many states are like new york? guest: we are -- there are states that are better. there are 16 states and the district of columbia that allow nurse practitioners to practice without oversight by another profession. new york state is not as restrictive as some controlling want nurse practitioners can prescribe, how they can go about

doing that. your state is pretty good but we continue to seek room the statutory requirements. host: when you look at the 16 states, it is to anything in common with those states? we don't have a list of the states. last, i will, mai host: what do these have in common? guest: that is a great question. they are largely rural. is that true? i think they have great need. asy states started out

states that didn't require physician oversight. that might be something they have in common. host: how often do talk with your core operating physician? -- corroborating physician? guest: collaborating physician. all the time. possible. not be sometimes he is not in office. i practice the way every licensed health care practitioner practices. offices,ortant that in we're consulting with one another all the time. primary physician will come to me and say, what about this?

it is very much a collaborative process. we don't need statute to tell us to do it that. i sought assistance whenever i needed it, as did everybody else who worked on that team. host: what is the goal of the american association of nurse practitioners when it comes to legislation? provide guest: the quality and affordable care to all patients in the country that need it. million of2 more people entering the health-care system. when barriers prevent nurse from functioning

at the top of my license, it is theatients that do not get care that they need. they are seeking to eliminate barriersand to remove from patient access. apold.ur guest is susan deborah is in houston, texas. good morning. caller: thank you. i am right cancer patients on medicaid. i had surgery last week. was poorly treated. some of the nurses acted like it was coming out of their

paycheck. they were not sympathetic to pain. i would like to know if nurse practitioners will get educated about the practice of pain because people should not be in pain. sorry to hear about your experience and i hope you'll feel better and do well. trained in pain management. we have no intention for taking over for physicians. hopefully your experience will be better. hopefully you get the level of compassion and concern that you need. the knowledge that we have qualifies us to provide pain management.

host: can nurse practitioners run emergency care clinics? guest: yes. host: do teh hey? guest: there are many throughout the country. what do you have in mind? host: urgent care. clinics affiliated with pharmacies throughout the nation are run by nurse practitioners. from arkansas, greg. caller: good morning. to ald like to say nurses great job and they need more of them. i think they should have been involved more in this health

care law because they are good at what they do. there is a shortage of them. they are cutting back because of the costs. i think they need a lot more of them. their input is probably better. crone'srumbs disease -- disease. there is no cure for it. when you have it helping hand when the doctor is not there, they have to make a decision right there. they are there for you. host: have you ever work directly with say nurse practitioner who has prescribed medication for you and author a procedure when you've only seen a nurse practitioner and not a

doctor? caller: yes. i just had the surgery a few months ago. my lungs collapsed. i had five nurses around me. they acted professed and got the problem fixed and, so i could breeze again. again.the they're cutting back on nurses. ts anddd more patien less nurses. healthcare is a serious situation. host: thank you for calling in. guest: thank you so much for the endorsement. atm happy to hear you been

the hands of some excellent care. the prediction is we will need more nurse practitioners and more registered nurses. int: three tweets have come which are similar in their nature. we want to get your response to this. guest: ok. all health-care professionals are required by law to practice within their scope of practice. that is not new.

we have been doing that since there have been laws. toare legally obligated function within our scope of practice. one of the first things we learned is what we can do at we cannot do. we always function within our scope legally. we don't have a choice. lookingdifferent way of at delivering health care. we have been around for 50 years. seeking to replace or need ar -- we do not legal requirement for another oversee ourto practices. we are highly trained, highly

educated professionals who understand what it means to be a seekingonal and we're statutory authority to practice to the full extent of our license. this is supported by major national foundations. . report from the governors' association. .he institute of medicine this is what the nation needs. the nation needs to look at the profession of nursing and allow us, require us to practice at the top of our license. when are going to utilize this precious resource that our patiencts need? host: richard in ruston, virginia -- reston, virginia.

caller: everybody is about shortcuts. extra six years and that means something. note practitioners are just well enough trained. the uniformity of nursing schools is not the same as the uniformity of medical schools, which are pretty much controlled. i have a number of general felt it practitioners that use nurse practitioners and .hey are dumber than dog-doo i've had three catches of the had three -- i've catches of the uterus --

it is bad enough that doctors don't get all this. nurse practitioners need to be supervised closely. i get suits all the time. the doctor cannot step in and say, you're blowing it. when patients get shia labeouf to a midwife or nurse .ractitioner, that is deceptive those people didn't have the training, keeping up with all of medicine. host: i think we got a good poin. .uest: i am an ob/gyn i have seen at least eight pages they areroid cancer --

not well enough trained to do these things. saying that they are doesn't make it so. tell me out six years is equivalent to 12. and the6 states district of columbia did not have regulation that requires oversight. some of these states have experienced in excess of 20 years in working with nurse practitioner. .one are pulling back i think that speaks volumes for the educational preparation of nurse practitioners. i mentioned the reports that every slit, out supporting the safety of nurse practitioners. a point myducation, colleague made was that six years and eight years are not

equivalent. that's not the intent of nursing education. far as uniformity is concerned i respectfully the point out that is a fallacy. as practitioners in this country are uniform. all nurse practitioners must be accredited by either the collegiate nursing. organizations receive their authority to of credit from the united states department of education. the fact that nursing practitioner education is not uniform is false. complaint about his that there has been mis-

diagnosis? -- isrse practitioners that part of their real house? guest: absolutely. we are educated to diagnose and treat. there is no evidence that nurse practitioners fail to diagnose. host: wild and wonderful is following up to an earlier tweet. guest: scope of practice is a legal debt -- is a legal term

that defines what we do. is it possible we are talking about a difference between scope of practice and scope of authority? am i hearing that when a nurse practitioner -- when it is perceived a nurse practitioner stepping outside of his or her scope of authority it is a -- iem for the physician think that maybe the point. in new york i do that. the liability is mine and mine alone. unless the physician has been working with me on the patient and both our names are on the chart, i am the only person who sees the patient. the collaborative practices agree that it does not convey a level of legal responsibility for that patient on my patients. they are my patients. it is me. host: are you covered by health insurance generally reject your work? insurancelth generally -- your work?

it is a federal issue that there's practitioners are looking at to work on. some private insurers the burst .s -- reimburse us we carry malpractice. host: is it expensive? guest: it is less expensive than for the physician. pam in detroit, the law for holding. caller: i am calling to give two two two -- to give kudos to the nurse practitioners. i have a nurse practitioner and she is just wonderful. i am on medicare. they know what they are doing.

they do diagnose. they write prescriptions. the medication for my blood pressure. good for menger any to switch. since.'t had any problem they spend more time with you. they take care of you. theyklisten to you and pinpoint what you are talking about. i just want to give kudos to the one i've got. host:susan apold?

guest: congratulations to tracey and her grateful patient. often patients will say they are at least as satisfied with traditional care or even more so. host: you get more complaints from patients or doctors? about guest:? host: being who you are. guest: i have not gotten any complaints from patients. i don't get complaints from physicians either. the complaints are organized medicine and that is where most of the pushback comes from. unloaded onally nurse practitioners. is it common to hear that on a complaint? host: there is a lot of fear,

ucnertainty, and doubt. nobody likes change. but this kind of change can be very threatening. yes, we do get push back. the fact of the matter is we have been around for 50 years. we provide quality care, affordable care, 80% of us practice in primary care. that is where we are looking at the problems in this nation. there is a health-care worker shortage. by 2020 -- by the time the last of the baby boomers hit the medicare role we are looking at a quarter of a million shortage. the key to health as primary care and prevention. tocannot afford to gauge -- engage in a conversation.

we're the united states of america. we have one of the educated health-care professionals. it is time to take the lead and sit down together and talk about how to make this system when it can be and what it needs to be. the conversation about who is better and who does it better -- that horse's left at the bond. we are here, we are good. our patients care for us deeply. the data support, the expertise of our clinical practices -- it is time to not abdicate leadership and engage in that dialogue. it is time to step up to our table except to the table with our colleagues to talk about how we're pointed to this. host: she is an important member of the american association of nurse practitioners. matilda is a nurse. she's calling from maryland. hello. caller: good morning.

i cannot say enough good things about me practitioners. view is skewed. i cannot believe that that is a blanket representation of nurses. i like nurse practitioners because the approach things in a family centered manner. they provide a lot of family care services that i believe many divisions prefer to specialties. i think what the health-care law, with the aging population, north's practitioners have a very important role to play. -- nurse practitioners of the very important role to play. there should be assistance for educating their practitioners. to address the needs of an aging

nation. host: what kind of practice to you have? caller: i am retired right now. worked with a lot of practitioners over that time. my experience has been nothing but wonderful. i see a great collaborative relationship between the nurses and doctors. i see the doctors as having high regard for the ability and professionalism of the nurse practitioners. host: let us give a response from our guest. guest: thank you. 20 years pediatric nursing? you certainly do deserve a break. as i mentioned, on the ground this works well between their practitioners and physicians collaborating to get there. he asked me earlier about what kind of feedback from

physicians. i have to agree with matilda, it is universally good when i am working with my physician colleagues. host: kathleen is a nurse. she is calling from st. john's bill new york -- st. johnsville, new york. i am a hospital trained nurse. i regret that the hospital has given up these programs for our end. taken forever for the ama to except nurse practitioners. they were willing to take positions assistance over the years practitioners and they the physicianve assisted only has two years community college training. theing at the difference in training is unbelievable. the gentleman who called in to

complain about nurses misdiagnosing and having terrible petitioning, they should be taken to task. there are a lot of positions that mr. agnos. his feeling to do his job -- he is failing to do his job. i think nurse practitioners dybbuks temporary care to patients. you couldn't ask for somebody think there's practitioners get exemplary care to patients. you couldn't ask for somebody better. you talk about the programs in the hospitals. but the mean by that? >> a lot hospitals have two year and programs. i trained in new york city. they had three nursing programs that they converted to a two year nursing program. then they affiliated themselves with colleges so that they could

graduate on our end with an associate's degree. of these dropped a lot hospital programs, which gave the nurse and a lot of hands-on go with for your programs. -- with four-year programs. i am sure the woman that is with you now understands education. guest: the education system has evolved and grown over the last 50, 60, 70 years. diploma programs affiliated with hospitals. they are three-year programs. many. yours are uncertain with it. the decision was made in professional nursing to move nursing education out of the program intercollegiate programs. the model has served the nation well. evolves, technology

evolves. we learned it was important to take that education and putting it into a broader time. with different course work and additional course work. basic education has moved from the model from which your caller has identified to a collegiate model. previous caller -- i missed this opportunity -- she talked about funding for a nurse practitioner education. the affordable care act as identify programs that help fund nurse managing centers, nurse midwives, and also the american association of nurse practitioners is supporting any legislation -- all legislation which continues to support north practitioner education. host: garner's practitioners worldwide? -- are nurse practitioners worldwide? guest: there are pockets throughout the world.

england has missed practitioners. australia. i want to say new zealand. i have a colleague from new zealand. is a trend. very nursing is viewed differently. it is moving. we are seeing other nations come to the united states and take a look at what we are doing. host: roger green tweets in -- guest: i think so. i think we need all hands on deck here. we need as many providers as we can get to the table. nurse practitioners -- because of our focus on primary-care, primary care prevention and itself as much more cost- effective. it is more cost-effective to keep someone healthy. the single most important value of human beings is their health.

if we can keep them healthy we do not have to pay for expensive intervention. i believe the success of obama care does depend on increasing the use of nurse practitioners. we need to use this. host: michael from louisville, ky. good morning. caller: i want to comment on what the physician said a moment ago about nurses not being educated enough. my wife is a nurse practitioner. she has been so for about eight years. she takes very good care of her patients, better care than some physicians i know. , ther as misdiagnosis person had hemorrhoids and they diagnosed as cancer. i went to a cardiologists and was told i had the heart of a 60-year old and i went home and

had a heart attack. doctors are human it's just like nurse practitioners. they are not gods. that is my comment. guest: once again, thank you so much for the accolades. it is important to remember that what we need to talk about here are outcomes. but as the data show about our outcomes? and there's practitioners have studied for almost 50 years. i can think of no other health- care discipline research has been done to demonstrate safety and efficacy and affordability. we do a great job. our education is steady throughout the nation. our legislation is not and it needs to be. the oversight costs our taxpayers' money that is unnecessary in this economy. there's practitioners' knee to be able to practice to the full extent of their license.

detroit, you are the last call. i have been listening to the discussion and there were some comments made about physician assistants. i have been a physician assistant for 20 years. i just recently retired. a statement was made about physician assistance under the direct licensor. our licenses are not tied to the physicians. we have our own license share. we have our own certifications. we have to retake our board every six years to show that we are still qualified to practice. practitionerse also has your own dea licenses. the main difference between our professions is how we are

trained. a physician assistant is traineda s physicians but we just don't go to schoola s long as they do. an earlier caller talked about physician assistant education with only community college -- that is not true. we are now masters based professions. upanted to point historically, before our profession became into existence, when the medics were coming back from vietnam there was a position -- there was a physician who wanted to use these people for their expertise. theffered what is now position of physician assistants program to the national association of nursing.

host: we are a little tight on time. we appreciate your clarification. susan apold? guest: i meant to comment on the point of education. indeed it is not true that ansician assistants have associate's degree. i thank you. host: are there still lpns? guest: there are. fewer and fewer but they are still there. host: susan apold of the american association of nurse practitioners. guest: thank you for having me. host: one more segment. we are going to learn how and if america is ready to retire -- ready to retire. >> jobless numbers in this hour show the number of americans seeking unemployment benefits

rose by 16,000 last week. it is the second straight weekly increase. the labor department says applications increased to a seasonally adjusted 7300. the longer-term trend in layoffs remains consistent with an improved job market. the commerce department says the economy grew at an annual rate of 0.4% in the october-december quarter. the revision reflects stronger business. gun control supporters are continuing their efforts to get democrats to support background checks for gun purchases. gun-control groups are holding rallies from the country aimed at pressuring senators to back the effort. president obama meets at the white house with gun violence victims. c-span is covering that event. you can hear it later on c-span

radio or watch it on c-span. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. host: when they first moved here they spent a lot of time at home. the primary people who would have visited prior to the war of 1812 would have largely been friends and relations from the area. rachel was acknowledged to be a pretty nice hostess, very cordial and welcoming. during jackson's fame after the theye of onew orleans had lots of company. they had many parties or evening dinners here. hey were entertaining people to use to find things. she had very nice things. as adual image of her frumpy country lady, she was not

that exactly. i think it was more about her comfort in the big cities than it was about her actual appearance. >> our conversation with historians on rachel jackson, wife of the seventh president, andrew jackson, is now available on our website. "washington journal" continues. host: on your screen in nevin adams. he is with the employee benefit research institute. here's the story -- workers saving too little to retire. is america ready to retire? >> as you might expect from most things, some people are and some people aren't. most people to not have a good sense of it.

it is still a ways off. most people have not made a single attempt to figure out what they need for the attachment some people won't even guess as to what they need to. if we don't conduct the survey every year -- most people .aven't host: what percentage has retirement savings? guest: we have about two-thirds say they are currently sitting something for retirement. about 80% of the people we are surveyed are participating in a soft form of an employer-based plan. it is not everyone. obviously that is cause for concern. host: if someone is turning 65 years old, how much money do they need to have? how much cash would you

recommend they have? that is as durable as the individuals. it is a matter of where you are living and where you plan to live. how much are you living on now and how much would continue to live on? what are the sources of income you have? do you own your home? social security is there for most people. the you have a pension from a current employer? have you cumulated any savings at all? it ends up being this huge "it depends." the reality is it depends on how you want to live your life. you might as well say to somebody, " he how much do you want to make?" they adjusted for reality. the unexpected it a million dollars. it is a function of what are you qualified to do. retirement is just as complicated. host: nevin adams is our guest with the employee benefit

research institute. we're talking about retirement savings. we divide our lines differently today. b/age group. to conceive the numbers they're on the screen. if you are 25 and under call that line. those between the age of 26 and 64 -- and finally if you're 65 and older. taking those calls in just a minute to their dividing our first line by 25 and under. what is the savings monks that group? the great thing is when you're at the understate to allot of time working on your side. the bad news is at that stage you're not making as much money and you have a lot of other things that you like to spend your money on.

--re are a lot interesting people have always had trouble making retirement a priority. it is not really a new trend. if you start for your yard don't -- if you start when you are young -- bill in the short question -- the employers frequently match that. 6% of youratch up to pay. you certainly want to do that. continueas it can, into bitter on. adams the next group. of our where a lot discretionary spending tighten up. you have to pay for the kids' college education. these days increasingly it is a point of time in which your parents started to call on you

and need your help and assistance. on the other hand, that is a stretch to where people's discretionary income goes up a little bit. when you get those kids in college and to take the money that you have been setting aside to help deal with that. saving for retirement is putting aside money so that you can pay yourself later on. youquestion is how much do want to be paid when you are in retirement? to federal laws encourage people to save? guest: they do. one of the most common promotions you hear in the workplace is people talking about the advantages of pre-tax saving. he put money into the plan and the employer will put some in on your behalf. that is an instant retirement of sorts.

the advantage is with the money putting you do not have to pay federal taxes on it until such time as to take it out. $100 out ofibuted your paycheck, that only feels like you're taking about 80% because you're not having to pay taxes on that money right then. it feels like you're sitting more than it actually feels like you're saying because you do get that tax to advantage. certainly you have to pay it back. you do in fact pay taxes of this money. a lot of the focus here on washington lately has been this notion that people -- that tax advantage is a giveaway. with retirement plans it is basically a giveaway for a little while. the money will come back in the form of taxes. old and most 65-years older folks rely on social security more than their own

savings? guest: yes. it probably always have. for the near term, based on the savings we have seen, i think they will continue to do so. if we did not have social security in place we would have a massive retiree living crisis. it is a major source for a huge number of people. it is all funding for the segment of the population host: it has always been that way? guest: since it has been around. long ago retirement wasn't an issue we were worried about because it didn't last very long. many people cannot even get to the retirement age of 65. what sometimes people did not retire at all. they are able to retire and did some extent they are encouraged

to retire. it does provide a form of sustenance. host: nevin adams is our guest. our topic is u.s. workers and retirement savings. susan, who is in her 50s, is calling from florida. i have savings worth 1.1 million. i am 54 years old. i am worried i am going to run out of money before i die. i have no health care, anything like that. know you act like a million dollars is a lot of money but i know personally it is not very much. i do own my own home but i have seen -- it is expensive to live.

i am bored i am going to run out of money. host: do you pull money out of that trust? caller: right now the trust is assigned to me. i folks are in their late eighties. it is not going to last forever. there is money coming in on a monthly basis to that. a lot of it is in annuities and a lot of it is in the stock market. it could range anywhere from 1.5 million to 1 million. guest: the good news is 1 million dollars can go rather quickly. have a loton you ahv more than a lot of people have. you are in a better starting point. your point that $1 million to as

quickly as a good one. ticket to the point in time when you are 65-years old -- you are either living another 20 years -- to take whatever you have set aside and say that it does point last 20 years. do the math simply cannot do not worried about inflation. you can see how quickly that million dollars goes away. keep that ino mind. you still have some years ahead of you before that time and hopefully before the start drawing into that. obviously that is an opportunity for the portfolio to grow. it is also an opportunity for you to set aside some of the kind of funds or income to help it grow as well. are rising life expectations hurting social security funding?

guest: sure. i only say that because if people are living longer, that means that it is up assad security to pay them a certain amount of fremont and will have to be stretched out over a long period of time. was forial security setup you have a situation where a lot more people were calling to be drawn on that fund whereas back in a point of time people were not the right to collective. i know my father died 10 years into retirement. he is drawing on that fund. there were people who lived longer than the expected rate. that obviously creates a challenge. host: do see policy changes? what is the confidence level? guest: people have not been confident with social security. that has been relatively consistent over time. how confident do you feel about social security's existence?

its continued ability to pay the kinds of benefits the people are getting now -- i think certainly in the context of the dialogue, i think people are concerned that one way or another if you make the weight logger or there will be a cost-of-living adjustment, one or all of those things will translate -- that is not really a new thing. i had a discussion with my children if you use ago. they were not very happy at the amount of money going to social security. particularly the that -- particularly they said they would never see it anyway. i said the exact same thing when i was their age. differentompletely perspective on my ability to draw.

are all real. i would say the concerns about some security are not new. host: from florida, 18 years old, hello. are you ready to retire? caller: not quite yet. my comment was about social security. seeing as i am only 18 -- i know as a baby boomer you are about to take advantage as a security opportunities i was just wondering if i would have anything to to the venture when i reached retirement age -- to take advantage of when i reached retirement age. guest: it is hard to say. when i was 18 i would put the odds of me getting social security too slim to none. the way i view it through my working career and my savings career was i always try to view it as something i was not always good to count on but

--her as something like something a little extra. it would be a cushion as opposed to something out completely dependent on. i think that is probably the best way to look at it. a lot of people having -- a lot of people have to end up spending on social security. i did not think they necessarily planned that when they started out. know that it is there. keep an eye on it. be concerned about it. at some point it is a cushion. host: do you go to work or school? caller: i could school and work. -- i go to school and work. host: do you think you are quite have social security? do you think there is current the money put into your account every month? caller: i truly hope so.

the way the economy is looking the baby boomers are the majority of our population -- i am not quite sure about it. host: we appreciate your time. speaking of the large baby boom population, they are just starting now to retire. that creates a real political force to have all of these baby boomers of social security. is that pretty relevant? guest: older americans have been a very powerful voting bloc. even when they wanted a new numerical majority they tended to vote in numbers that got that result anyway. the numbers i have seen about the millennials, the dow talked about the same way the baby boomers have. i think they are quite to be as big and vocal. i think you can already see that showing up as they come into the

workforce and into the voting booth. that will perhaps be a counterbalance. i encourage my children to keep me in mind when they think about things. host: next call for nevin adams comes from rochester, minnesota. she is in her early 70's. thank you for taking my call. i am in rochester because i am -- the admittedly for lung cancer. i have a small bump. lunghey admitted me for s cancer. i have a small bump. we have a nice life. [indiscernible] expenses are outrageous. you cannot depend on medicare.

you have to pay enough out of your own pocket. is depleted.nt and medical concern is that most people are not aware of that. not aware if they are of pharmaceutical expenses. insurance do not want to pay for the drugs that you need. you have to really fight with insurance. it is really a struggle. can we ask how much your illness has cost you personally? believe -- would not more than $100,000 host: has it changed your

retirement plans? caller: of course. it is upside-down. faithall me a woman of and i have faith. have to bet you open to whatever happens in life. thank you for letting me explain. .ost: that was ida calling enough therestingly retirement survey said shows the people were more confident about their ability to handle basic expenses in retirement than they were about health care and long- term care. those can be huge expenses. people were concerned about it. they are more concerned about

medicare's funding and sustainability than they were for social security. it is a great point. at the gulf of people assume that have eluded that medicare pays more than that actually does. those are all important issues. we know when we modeled out people's projections in retirement to see how many people are going to run short -- the costs of long-term care as well as health care can have a devastating impact on somebody's portfolio. everyone is not stricken with the need to find long-term care. when it does hit you it can take your retirement plan and turn it upside down. about supplemental insurance plans? are those beneficial to people like ipad? -- like ida? difficult to find those policies these days. the economics with the variables

in health care we are looking at now has made it more problematic. in terms of looking at those kinds of risks i think, like anything else, if you do not by some kind of insurance yourself -- some kind of insurance you are self-insuring. host: bill tweets in -- guest: sure. that's not a new trend. frequently you hear people talk about their 401ks not being as good as pension plans. given what a defined benefit pension plan can offer, that was a program you could look forward to.

you didn't have to put any money in. the employer worried about managing money. want to get the point of retirement he would collect a paycheck. if you worked for the employer for 30 years you can look to get 60% of your income. very few people ever worked that long for a single employer. one of the things my kids think is we just invented this job changing all the time thing. we have done this all the time. i worked at the company for nine years, not exactly a high turnover. i walked away. i had a nice 401k balance. i had 0 in pension.

i had not worked long enough to accumulate any pension. my second employer i worked for 13 years. we had a pension plan. i had a years there pension that when i retired i could look forward to 25000 dollars per year/ it is nice to have a regular reliable source of income. people,good sign that most of us -- only 10% of america ever put in the kind of time that allow you to get from those plants that are capable of peru -- gets to those plans we are capable of producing. the reality is for most americans they never had a plan

and the ones that had won specifically have not walked away with enough to replace the kind of income they were capable of producing. we changed jobs. tweets in --ing guest: real annuity plans? there are a lot of different wasy tys to look at social security. i don't look at that as the primary thing. i consider it to be a nice cushion. it might be the difference between poverty and not. as i look at those kinds of things it does kind of social insurance program. you are paying for insurance, you hope you get your money out. you buy a car insurance. are you going to get all of that money back? yes if you have a bad accident.

we insure against certain life events to insulate us from the result. i think that looking at social security as a retirement plan, i would look at it differently. host: what about these products were you can give a company x number of dollars and they can say for the rest of your life we will give you a monthly stipend? are those popular products? what used to call attention. that is really what a pension is. the difference is in some cases in annuity your buying and in a pension somebody else is buying. on a personal level you're making some decisions that do not have worried about so much of a pension. there are concerns about those kinds of programs. there are concerns about the efficacy of the program, the

ability to get your money back. there's some about the entity to give the money to. are they going to be able to return it to you? there is a lot of that. you hear people say a lot of times that they do not want control. they decide the muscle that control back. that impacts the costs and things like that. that is a long way from saying that these programs are far from what america wants to have. they are looking for something that would deliver to them a dependable stream of income in retirement. you can tweet the products. there are a lot of service out there that should americans are interested. we will see how that develops. are you ready to retire? retired now.

my question is a red education. i know it is hard to get younger folks about -- the younger folks excited about retirement. i know there have been a few changes in the past few years that have been made in regards to education. i think a big part of people of all ages is understanding what it takes for a better plan. i do not see employers with providing that much information to employees to get a better understanding of where the need to be. host: you are semi-retired at the age of 54? caller: my company let me go and no one wants the back. host: it wasn't a case of saving are making a lot of money? caller: i grew up in the business and planned pretty well. i am comfortable and happy but i would like to go back to work.

host: if you did not go back to work at this point could to go for another 30 years? caller: yes. from 65 on i am fine. right now i have my wife working. a big portion of that is the concern of medical care costs and health care plans. having that is a big savings: four. .ur houses are paid for it is more of what to do with your time. his situation is not all that you need. our surveys found that people -- this is over a number of years -- people are leaving the work force earlier than they planned but not because they found -- because they are checking out earlier. in a lot of cases it as

something negative. either a job situation or some sort of disability. when you see a lot of surveys saying the people think they will work longer, they will choose to work longer, that is certainly a plan. i was a piece of the realities of the retirees that we can this is not necessarily something you should count on. question about education is an interesting one. i have been in the business for more than 30 years. part of the problem is we are waiting for until people get to work to tell them anything about the kind of things we are talking about here. some side of classes, junior achievement business things, for the most part it is not tweeted into the curriculum of our schools. people do not learn about investment.

people cannot work about neutral funds -- people do not learn about mutual funds. they should look for work and among the other things they have to learn that stays on the job. --y are sitting there they'll have somebody stand in front of them for 20 minutes and throw in a lot of numbers of them. i always thought it peon -- ellis but it getting to people earlier in their lives -- i getting to people -- y in their lives with a do would be better prepared as adults. it is a function of people getting out into the world and for the first time of their lives have been to deal with

their personal finances. it is a real problem. we talk about private savings but obviously if you have $120,000 worth of college debt, that is when to squeeze out your ability to do any real productive savings. host: nevin adams is with the "2013 retirement confidence urvey -- nevin adams is with employee benefit research institute wehre you can read their findings on worker savings. my question is if this ryan budget goes through and the cut off at 55, anyone younger than that on a voucher type program -- if your family member is 50, how much money are they going to have to plan on savings to reach retirement in that

system and have a decent retirement? a lot of people are having a hard time finding work. how much money are they going to have the plan to save to retire a decent retirement in the future? host: can you give us a snapshot of your personal situation? caller: my ex-principle used to tell me i do not need dissertation, i just need an answer. 65 to 91.rom i paid into social security. way throughd my college during the upper years andhat and became a teacher pay into my teacher retirement. , but suchi am retired

security has been cut in half. i am down to $100 on medicare. i am glad i took that route. i did not tell how anybody can live also says to the benefit of the future -- how anyone can live on social security benefits in the future. with the economy the way it is most of the jobs i see apartheid and they do not offer as much as far as retirement or health care. i am on medicare. the last lady you had on, i was wondering if the nurse practitioners are taking over for medicare patients. host: thank you for your time this morning. nevin adams?

i cannot answer your question because i do not know. i think the cost for people below 55 on the proposed budget -- i think that hasn't been fleshed out yet. at some level think providing some sort of insurance supplement to help people afford it. given the way health care costs are going now and the status of even the current medicare program -- if no changes are made to it some changes are still going to have to happen. what is going to be it is hard to say. it is obviously something everyone is concerned about. host: susan from florida. give us a snapshot of your personal situation and then go ahead and ask your question. i have been working for

a company for 21 years. i was out in 2008 for breast cancer. they tell you to save up six months' worth of savings in case something happens to you. i was out for nine months. i was 44. have a 401k. i rolled over that for 01 k to pay for the rest of the time i was out for breast cancer. now currently out right because i need to the replacements. replacements. i have something happen to my kidneys. all of that is unexpected. i have a 12 year old daughter. i have my own home. i have a 401k. i have everything by employers told me to do.

like i said, i have been with them for 21 years. now they are telling me they want me to apply for social security benefits. i have worked for my long term benefits. host: mr. adams? guest: what kind of long-term benefits? host: a. what be to apply for so-so security benefits but i have worked 21 years -- they want me to apply for social security benefits but i have worked for 21 years. i am a bill could save her. -- a real good saver. my question is why wouldn't they want because i would want me to apply for social security benefits at 55?

is a company required by law to pay long-term disability? employers don't have any kind offering of those programs. it is difficult to get into the particulars of a specific situation. it sounds to me like she has done the right thing in terms of setting money aside and taking care of her home. unfortunately, just like ida these kinds of things did not strike everyone. when they strike to make a big impact. it is a problem. people do need to take that into account. host: nevin adams has been our guest for the last 45 minutes. ebri.org if you wish to find the final savings and retirement.

we will be back tomorrow. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] live on c-span 2, the new aviation summit. of is the president and ceo the association. that is live now on c-span2 we will pick up live coverage of that summit at 11:30. at 12:45 there will be a panel of ceos from airlines around the world, including jetblue, and