markets. at 9:15, a look at the latest trends in school crime, violence, and safety. ♪ host: good morning and welcome to "washington journal". eric holder met with a handful of media organizations yesterday to talk about how the justice department has handled recent investigations of journalists. solvent media groups declined to attend because it was off the record. those that did have headlines along the lines of saying the attorney general will work to shift policy on the media. "the wall street journal," this morning -- we would like to hear what you

think on the story. you can also find as online, send us a tweet by writing @c spanwj. you can also e-mail us, journal@c-span.org. here is the headline in "the wall street journal," -- some of the other headlines on this story, politico says --

and "the washignton post" -- joining us to tell us more from " is sariington post horwitz. thank you for being here with us. who met with the attorney general and who did not? guest: very interesting, this 90 minute meeting with holder, the attorney general at the justice department, was attended by representatives of politico, the tew yorker, the wall stree journal, the new york daily news, and the washignton post.

-- the washington post. several media organizations, including "the new york times," did the huffington post, not attend this meeting because it was off record. the justice department insisted the meeting be off of the record because they felt it would foster a more frank and open discussion with out a lot of posturing of the participants who -- what happened during this meeting is the department of justice reached an agreement with participants in which they could come out of the meeting and describe what occurred during the 90 minutes in general terms. that is why you're seeing the stores in the headlines.

host: how are you reporting on the story? tell us the difference between reporters who are following this story and the representatives of the media organizations that were inside the enclosure. guest: i am recovering -- i am covering this as a reporter. jane mayer from the new yorker attended and other top media representatives. i am covering this as a reporter so after the meeting i try to talk to the participants about what they could say and they could talk about in general terms without giving specific quotes. that is how my story reflects this morning. the attorney general and other officials in the median pressed

concrete -- the attorney general pledged to take these steps and to address concerns that the department of justice had overreached in this investigation. what my understanding is is that they both pledged to take a procedural and internal change in their guidelines and possibly legislative changes to protect journalists' first camendment rights. host: in an article this morning --

was the response from the justice department about concerns of freedom of the press and sources feeling safe that they can talk to reporters? host: use at the beginning of your program that eric holder gave the impression that he gets it. i think that is right. the journalists at the meeting felt that some of it was contrite, that perhaps he would be overreaching of the department. it talked about looking at their internal guidelines and perhaps advising them for issuing subpoenas to obtain reporter's phone records. in one of the cases with the associated press the officials from the justice department obtained records for more than 20 separate phone lines from the associated press and its tallest. the justice department was allowed not to notify the ap about what they did. they are looking at whether they

can make changes in that. there are also looking at -- they said it would consider supporting statutory changes, changes that would lessen the chances of a journalist being described as havinbeen a co- conspirator in a crime as part as an effort by the doj to obtain a search warrant. right now in order to obtain a search warrant they have to call them a conspirator of a crime. there was an agreement in this meeting that was not very useful. host: how significant is this? how big of a moment is this for the attorney general to meet with these media organizations? have we seen anything like this before? guest: it was a big moment. the department of justice is expected to meet with other news organizations and media lawyers in the coming days.

said shee participants thought this was very constructive, the justice department was willing to sit down and address the criticism directly. but she said what is really going to matter is if they follow through and make changes. host: sari horwitz, national reporter. thank you so much for talking with us this morning. guest: thank you for having me. host: we are asking you what you think the story today. other headlines, "the new york times" -- we are also sharing with you "the wall street journal" headline, which is -- 585-crats can colin at 202- 3881, republicans 202-585-

independent scholars 202-585- 3882. this tweet comes in -- think?u mike in north carolina, welcome. caller: i am not a big fan of eric holder and the administration so i will tell you where i sit before tell you where i stand. i think he is damaged goods. i think that the media that has been -- to be diplomatic, from it to the obama administration for the last five years is waking up to that fact. jonathan turley, who has been on your show numerous times, is a liberal democrat that i respect as a conservative. he is pretty much saying that eric holder is damaged goods and he has to go. he pretty much lied under oath in front of congress, saying he did not know anything or did not know the details of signing the

warrant or order regarding the -- regarding the investigation of james fox. people need to lose their jobs and they need be held accountable. no more un-accountability. more politicos as organizations are planning meetings today. the los angeles times and chicago tribune also accepted invitations and will attend meetings on friday. here is what josh ernest told reporters --

what do you think about this story? let us reflect on what brought us here. says it comes in the wake of -- we are talking about this because president obama has called for stronger shield laws, something we have talked about here on saturday, a law that would go farther than the first amendment to protect the freedom of the press. here is where the shield law is in congress. a bipartisan house group is backing it. they are advocating for the shield law to protect the press in light of two recent cases in which the justice department obtained a journalist records. we see some republicans, some democrats from the states of texas and new york supporting it. digging into the story from

politico, it says -- it is called the free flow of information act. according to the bill journalists only have to disclose the information if a court compels them to. let us go to cap -- let us go to patrick and the independent line. that you am surprised mentioned that supposedly the justice department let news corp know they were investigating that fox reporter. this ties back to the yemen leak, the government begged us not to make that public. they kicked us out, they would not let us do any more operations for over eight years. this ties back to that leak

about the bomb plot, the flying airplane -- to use the airplane as a bomb in the usa. you do not think we should try to put a stop to that host: elaborate on why you think it's significant that the fox news corp., the corporation that is apparent of the -- that is a parent of fox news, the dick caller: as usual the media starts hotting and hollering that fox is investigating. i care about the yemen situation, that we leaked it. why don't you ask some 9/11 families if they thought it was cool that an ap reporter devils

a plot that we would fly a plane -- reporter divulged a plot that we would fly the plane -- to curtis ingo virginia, a democrat. caller: good morning. c-span does a wonderful job. the attorney general is a good person. he is a very fair individual. ineel that each department the washington setting has a job to do. individually they should do it on their own accord, with no outsiders interfering. even when the president has anything to say in reference to outsiders that is not his place.

it is the responsibility of holder doing his job and doing his job well. i have no problem with mr. holder doing the job that he does. host: " we do like sue c. the justice department do? -- what would you like to see the justice department do? the headline -- we like to hear from you what you think about how the justice department should treat the media and what you think about this latest news development. "the new york times" this in context on how the law currently stands and the policy from the justice department. there have been previous efforts in revising the investigative guidelines --

let us go to rick in athens, texas. i do not see how it is

any different than it has always been. if the government wants to snoop on somebody they can. there was a huge boycott from some of the news organizations. i think this is probably more of -- i don't know -- what you would call a grandstand. excuse to kick them out the door. it is not like the national security agency cannot find out what the media sources are.

ofy have got recordings everybody's e-mail us and phone calls. they do that legally by using other countries -- there is a place just off the coast of england that monitors all of the phone calls and e-mail's in america because it is not legal for the american government to do it. has aerican government handshake agreement. that was boycotted. you brought up that the older news conference was boycotted. is not a first if reporters are going to be brought up on charges.

basically police action against them, like this thing or ofething, you have freedom the press were not. -- dom of the press decides host: justin rights in and says -- joseph rights in and says -- the new york times look at what will happen next. mr. holder wants to complete the overhaul of department regulations on leak investigations before his tenure is over. a senate adviser who spoke on condition of anonymity because

conditions -- because the deliberations are -- jumping down the story, it says -- joseph from connecticut, go ahead. i am concerned that there is so much mayhem going on around attorney-general holder. remember d. mallory flame controversy. valerieembered the flame controversy.

i am concerned when people are assuming there was some ulterior mullet here -- a ulterior motive here. --m wondering why are there what are we almost insisting upon the fact that reporters or anyone else who leaks classified somehowion should be another exempt from close scrutiny. i think that this is almost a catch-22 situation. dam it if he does, and damned if he doesn't. if they failed to somehow try to

people needs, many to understand it could be very harmful to the national security in that they put a abilityus chill on our to communicate with others who are american citizens to are of thean integral part securitynduct our apparatus. we cannot put these people in jeopardy. i think that is the crux of the matter. little offs maybe a base here.

to be a constitutional issue of the freedom of the press. i think there is a requirement that the leaks do not just get out there by themselves. the: what you think about justice department technique of going to reporters to find those leaks? look where have to you have to look. in thetly someone justice department concluded that that was the best way to when the leakse might have occurred. host: a couple of comments on

twitter -- let us go to politico, deere reported that door to the story -- a reporter that wrote the story did not attend. at politico we see john harris, editor in chief, commenting on it. he wrote this statement --

donnie, a republican from maryland, hello. needr: i did not think we new laws. people that are just as officials, we just need to do their job and be truthful. we do not need jobs -- we do not need laws to protect citizens from government officials. host: what would it look like? do you think they are following the laws that are in place now? would you have them change their tactics for their internal policies? caller: if you want to charge somebody you need to tell us you're doing that. when you are asked about it do not lie and say you had nothing to do with it.

administration has had double the number of espionage charges and all presidents before them combined. espionage is a serious charge. people have been executed for that. let us go to return the beach, florida. an independent college joins us now, hello, joe. caller: i think we need a review board for journalists. i believe that would weed out the propaganda. i believe there's too much propaganda in this nation. lawyers have a bar association, i think journalists need to be reviewed.

if they are propaganda they need to be stated as such. as commentators, opinion makers, not true news reporters. host: patricia rights and on facebook. onpatricia writes in facebook. gannett is up next from arkansas. holderi contacted eric little rock, arkansas. gave him the information. i'll tell you what the problem is. the problem is america -- the problem with america is racism and greed. the attorney-general has to understand that once you have met with white people that some are supposed to have rights they will come after you.

i am a black man. i told him about a federal judge the took a bribe. , they are going to conference. he has been told about this but he did not do anything about it. now add to it -- now they are coming after him. anybody can look at it, hunt forces wilson. -- hunt obverses wilson. host: we are talking about the wall street journal line -- -- tweets in and republican from georgia, what are your thoughts? caller: my thoughts are that eric holder can do it pretty well as has been demonstrated.

of regime can do anything they want. there is no expectation of honesty, responsibility, or loyalty from the democrats in this country. they get a free pass. host: why do you think that? caller: because they have gotten a free pass. --rything is now talk about what the republicans are doing. nothing substantial about targeting individuals, not just in the news industry but in different individuals. as a retired military i can identify as an enemy, as a supporter from the two-party --

as a supporter of the tea-party as an "enemy terroist." host: by a different organization or the democratic party? caller: by the democratic party. the homeland security identifies a turning reference -- identifies returning veterans, guns rights advocates as possible enemies of the state. some time ago was it not homeland security that britain a memo on that? -- that had written a memo on that? host: on twitter -- wisconsin, an independent. caller: i just called in to talk where the yemeni incident,

this was not an actual bomb plot. what they were trying to do was catch the bomb-maker. there were no chances this bomb was going to go off. thereole thing was that was no chance it was going to go off. there was no bomb. the thing is the government wants to control the information. release thisng to information that was like to make the obama administration look good and they got mad because somebody else released it. control the flow of information. that is what they want and that is why they targeted stocks. every piece of electronic data, everything is recorded.

they asked one person about the phone call records. the interviewee accidentally released that they did not listen to the recordings of the phone calls. y. said, everything is reported. the government does not like other people releasing the information that they do not released. when they do release the information, then they are targeted. that is all i wanted to mention. host: let us look at other headlines covering this story. "usa today" says -- some media organizations chose to take the organization, declined because they did not approve of the off the record nature. here is some more information

about that -- we see this headline in "the new york post --

jennifer writes in " the washington post" -- what you think about the pledge from the attorney general to shift on the media?

a republican is calling in. your thoughts. it is amazing to listen to some of the hypocrisy of some that the accused or charge racism. the this attorney-general did not go after those folks when president obama's administrative officials leaked information about the killing of osama bin laden. what the mainstream media are doing, they are experiencing the chicago-style politics that mr. obama has brought to at his administration and mr. holder is now participating in this. was interesting as some of the headlines yet shown in the newspaper this morning is it is an attempt to coddle them.

they want to remain and gain favor. is showingto state the chicago style politics. as mr. obama continues to support mr. holder mr. holder is dragging down this administration i believe he has to partner himself before the house judiciary committee a few weeks ago -- he should resign. i think the american people have lost their trust in this attorney-general. it is pick and choose as to what justice should be needed out. host: from facebook --

bob says -- next on the phones is richard, an independent. like peopleeems have a short memory. did they forget about rupert murdoch and some of his news organizations and the newspapers in england where there are

tapping into government employees, hacking computers, phone tapping, bribing. it is like most of -- both of them are involved. it seems like the whole world spies on each other. i do not know when this is all going to end. if somebody is leaking out of the federal government and it is legal, it is a crime. somebody needs to be punished. i do not know how they get the information. are they paying people to get it? if they are they are co- conspirators in the whole thing. the press isn't in -- is not innocent. they have been doing the same dam thing. host: you might be interested in a piece written for "the wall street post," --

he has concerns about whether or not this should be protected and whether or not a whistle-blower is someone -- is the same as someone who declassified

information. steve is a democrat from oklahoma city. previous caller stole my thunder. murdochow that rupert and fox news network has done quite a bit of underhanded and information-gathering of their own, much of which is illegal. would imagines they are doing some of the same things here. jeopardized national security. he stole my thunder on that. i watched all of these hearings eric holder has been. i would suggest that all of the fox news viewers take a moment "wide-reciever." if your news source tells you of the news is lying you have a problem. i agree with the callers who

said that this is not about racism. if hillary clinton had gotten in -- is aboute going power and greed. it is time for the slow dance to end. he does not know. power andth that much is much control -- he dancing abroad the questions just like j conti. answer the questions truthfully. in a slow dancing. just have the right answers. -- enough slow dancing, just have the right answers. host: eric holder pledges a

shift on the media. if you have a policy with like to see featured on "washington journal -- a policy would like to see featured on "washington journal," send us an e-mail. or send a state tweet, tweet it at @cspanwj. another- looking at story in the news -- that is the washington times, " the baltimore sun" says, --

a different headline from "the washington post," rights groups criticized fbi nominee but colleagues are praising him. other stories in the news -- this is in the economy section of "the washington post." you can see here household net worth over time not recovering. medicare costs are declining. that is the economic headline in " usa today." see some stories on gun issues in new york. the mayor of new york city's per se stance against guns creates a lightning rod. in illinois "the new york times"

says -- and they are facing a deadline to allow concealed carry. sequester and the cuts that were put into place this year -- an issue we are following here on "washington journal." the wall street journal has a story saying -- a couple of politics stories, a new battle for the tea party. looksall street journal" at mitt romney -- is hosting an event in utah

for 200 friends and campaign supporters. finally, this political story from "to the washington times closed " -- -- from "the washington times close " -- let us get a few more comments and a question this morning about what you think of attorney general eric holder pledging a shift on the policy. from maryland, an independent. caller: it is surprising how many people predict how few people understand the last call that made eric holder. -- putting that confidential at risk. when he reported that information in the story eric holder saw information on his records, his e-mail, his phone

calls, other information, to see where he was getting this data from. that was important because it potentially puts that informants at risk. that was national security. --t: jussive in maryland joseph in maryland -- canned in beverly hills, florida. -- ken in beverly hills, florida. caller: i would like to remind all of my republican friends the one question was "i cannot recall, i cannot remember at this time." i would like to look at that and wonder whether that is where eric holder is getting his ideas that it is ok to do this. thank you. host: coming up next we will speak with scott paul from the

alliance of american manufacturing about job creation in america. later on this morning the federal energy and regulatory commission, we'll hear from the chairman himself. span2, "book tv," is the string the life of palm springs, california. -- is featuring the likes of palm springs, california. palm springs is an iconic place. it is a place to go hiking. the natural beauty and energy and the mountains, it has this rich history from hollywood stars. it also has this richness in terms of native american history and ecological tourism to the modernism architecture.

it has a range of things that makes it a special place. palm springs is primarily a tourist-based economy. we also had some significant sickness -- significant successes in other areas. the valley has a significant agriculture. in palm springs we have some significant kinds of businesses and we are doing incubations for needs types of businesses. we're trying to get versify. -- we are trying to diversify. the city itself is a mixture. it is diverse in the sense that there is a large lgbt community. we respect and embrace diversity of all types. we have had to deal with the recession and the economy. we have worked our way through that but what has really helped us is we have put and

significant -- we have put a significant amount of incentives in our tourism programs. over $170d probably million in investment in our local tourism in the last five years. put 40 million in our convention center. we are emerging very strong and we will continue to grow our tourism economy. palm springs is an amazing place. it is iconic. it has a world reputation. more importantly we are changing palm springs in the way from our downtown renovation project that will blend in with the village atmosphere to our architecture and beauty of the surroundings. it is a great place to come and visit but also to live. "> "washington journal continues. >> thank you for being here this

morning to guest: tweet good morning. host: what is the state of manufacturing in the united states? are we seeing a comeback? guest: i think it is fair to say we are in a better position than we were four years ago. over the last couple of years we have added manufacturing jobs, we have added over half a million manufacturing jobs. that is the first extended period of manufacturing job growth we have seen since the early 1990's. that is positive, although i must say that over the last year or so that job growth has slowed down quite a bit. we have seen quite a stagnant job market out there in manufacturing. it is important to keep that in context because over the last decade we saw a significant shift downward in terms of manufacturing jobs -- loss of factory capacity, loss of global

share of trade, and other key measurements. we are not back to the point that we were before the great recession started but we are making progress, instead of digging the hole deeper. that is the first time we have been able to say that for a very long time to host: been let us look at the numbers from the bureau of labor statistics -- jobs added in manufacturing since 2010. we see the bigger job loss, 6 million jobs lost since the year 2000 and 2009. but that in context for us. where are we seeing those losses and gains? it is a good question. there has been a lot of research done by economist at mit and other academic institutions that say when you lose a manufacturing job and was a factory it affects the entire community. it is a little different than if a. macdonald closes or a wal- mart closes', where dealers -- where you lose some convenience. the ripple effects of job losses in manufacturing put the

downward pressure on wages because if you lose a job in manufacturing more than likely you are quite going to an occupation that pays less. -- you are going to go into an occupation that pays less. you have seen this ripple effect in manufacturing communities across the country. what types of manufacturing have been affected? that is a very good question because until the great recession and during the great recession we saw great job loss in virtually every type of manufacturing. whether it was aerospace and high-tech or the things we have been doing for a very long time, like steel and automobiles. you saw it across the board. and i would also add that since the end of the great recession you have seen a nice gains particularly in the auto sector. the detroit three are doing very well. they are putting people back to work. that has driven a lot of manufacturing job growth in other sectors of manufacturing. think of the class that goes

into the automobile or the tires that goes on the automobile. all of the parts. those are a lot of jobs. a lot of the success of any texturing at the end of this great recession has been an upswing in the business cycle but also the strength in the auto cycle. host: what can we expect this month? what are your concerns and hopes that guest: it is a good question. i do not get my crystal ball out too often because i am completely wrong usually about what the jobs numbers are on the forecasting. i will say that i do not expect a huge upswing in manufacturing jobs, based on other data point we have seen. we need to do better. 81 president laid out million new manufacturing top goal. we have been keeping track of that every month because you have to hit a certain number to stay on pace with that, which is 21,000 jobs added per month. the are already way behind that. part of that is weakness in

europe and china. it is clear the equation has to change if we are quick to make much progress on that. host: talk was about reassuring -- dccturing done abroad this happening? guest: it is clearly happening. the latest example being mote role and kugel announcing they ill -- motorola and google announcing the will make the first american smart phone. if you would ask me if that was possible five years ago i would say that is highly unlikely. because of the announcement motorola and google and mac computers building in austin, texas, flat screens in detroit, of have seen this assuring

consumer electronics and high- tech jobs. those of the hardest jobs to get back from overseas. you have seen other big companies say they are producing more in the united states. theyal electric, maytag, all have a mixed record on this. a one-way just being outflow of jobs and capacity be seeing it heading both ways. i think that is progress. i think it is too early to say restoring has an impact on the data. i think there are more positive things to come in the out years, say 2015 to 2020, because of low energy costs and rising wages in china, because of manufacturers wanting to mitigate supplies. i think the decision to invest capital to the united states --

host: here are the numbers -- the president has promised 1 million new manufacturing jobs in his second term. is that realistic? guest: i think it is possible to do that. it means 21,000 new manufacturing tubs being created every month. -- manufacturing jobs being created every month. it is reasonable to think that manufacturing can be more competitive in the united states. you now see a lot of literature coming from a manufacturing consultant on why it makes sense to reshore, the close to the consumers you are serving. you can control your inventory, you may not lose a lot

intellectual process -- a lot of intellectual property, the labor cost differential is going down a little bit. we are never going to have which is like a car in china and china is not a point have we dislike the are in the next six but we make up for that with proximity to market. it is a good goal. i am glad the president laid it out. one of the things we are going to be doing is hold him accountable for that. it is going to take public policy to get us there. we need to build an architecture to support manufacturing in this country, which has really been absent for the last couple of decades. we need a manufacturing policy in the country to make that happen. host: let us get to the phones. joe is up first in north carolina, independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i think in the big picture what we are looking at is of course

we want jobs. we want manufacturing to pick up. we want to know that what we are hearing from our commit is true. hearing from our government is true. a lot of that has come to light recently as to whether or not we can trust if they say wages will be better or jobs will be produced -- can we trust that? one of the problems is that for many years we have been told that there is no such thing as truth and what this does is it lets people to have the ability to live without consequences. you look at the president and you say "he is a nice guy." people like him but is he telling the truth? he said one thing in the -- and the opposite comes about, you have asked yourself is a trustworthy? whether manufacturing will be

increased related to our country and related to improving our economy, yes what governmetn does -- what government does will have an effect. there is such a thing as truth and lies. guest: on manufacturing it is a good question. the president has done a lot things that has received support from the business community as well as the labor community. which is very rare. you see in a program of innovative institutes that are designed to get new technology into factor, that is very helpful. you see a program designed to train 2 million workers to go into skilled professions. we have to rebuild the educational system in this country which was really torn apart as we saw manufacturing down slide. those are very positive things. i want to talk about honesty and

data. that is missing from the discussion in washington d.c.. hear hear a lot of politicians talk about how greek exports are. exports are fabulous. everyone knows that you have to look at deposits as much as debits. we don't look at how much it's having an impact on the community. we have a way to go to have zero little more honesty about the trade debate and the impact that has on our country. we can sign free-trade agreements, but unless they are guaranteeing reciprocity, let's get balanced trade with china and japan, we will not make progress we need. i hope that there's a little bit more honesty coming from both parties on that issue. host: president obama spoke about manufacturing earlier this month in austin, texas. before we hear from him, tell us

about these manufacturing hubs. the president is calling for an investment in this period, and what would it do? guest: these are innovation institute. the president would like to see 15 of them around the country that would specialize in various types of manufacturing. a first one is up and running already in youngstown, ohio, deals with 3d printing. that is something you may have in your own home eventually. you program something, like i want to make a yoda out of rubber, and it will create a little toy for you. it is a fascinating technology. the reason is very important. basic research like that is very hard for small and midsize manufacturers to support within their own capital budgets. they are living paycheck to paycheck. they have slim margins. public investment with academia and with private

sector and departments like the department of defense and department of energy and department of commerce, it makes a lot of sense to help do the basic research and find the applications that will work on the shop floor. that will give the u.s. a technological edge. this is very important program. our hi road competitors like germany already have well- developed innovation all hubs. it is impossible for small and midsize manufacturers to do on their own in this type of market. host: let's listen to president obama earlier this month in texas. [video clip] >> last year we launched our first manufacturing innovation institute in youngstown, ohio to develop new technologies and equip workers with skills required to master. the printing techniques. in my state of the union address, i called on congress to set up 15 more of these manufacturing hubs all across america.

i said my administration was going to move forward with three new ones on our own even without congressional action. today we are launching a competition for them. we are looking for businesses and universities willing to partner together to help their region -- helped turn their region into global centers of high-tech jobs, because we want the next revolution in manufacturing to be made in america. [cheers and applause] host: president obama speaking in texas. we see this story from local texas newspapers. a story that you mentioned, scott paul. cell phone pioneer motorola announces making -- and in the texas manufacturing facility. we have seen some companies opening up shop there. why and where else is that? guest: there are manufacturing jobs being created all over the country. advanced batteries in michigan. the auto industry is coming back

to the midwest. but you see this all over the place. texas attracting a lot of capital for high-tech. austin has been a pioneer in high-tech and computers for very long time. goog'e glasses being made in the bay area in san francisco. being made in san francisco. so there are benefits for every region of the country. we just moved into a new office. we made a point to find american a material from all over the country to put into the office. we have textiles, north carolina, chairs for michigan. i look forward to getting the high-tech equipment into our office, because that has not yet been available. std's benefits all over the place, not just limited to the south. that is something special about manufacturing. you see it it all over the u.s. host: scott paul, executive director of the alliance for

american manufacturing. let's go to michigan to hear from a democrat, polly. caller: hello. i wanted to ask a couple questions. how many companies have offshored jobs to china in the last 10 years? what do you think about the fact that the united states turns around and then borrows money from china? it seems ridiculous. thank you for c-span. guest: those are very good questions. in terms of the number of companies that offshored, it would be easier for a number of companies that did not do it. virtually every major multinational company has shifted some work out of the united states over last two states. on the question is whether it was mexico or to china. 5.5 milliont

manufacturing jobs. that's one-third of all manufacturing jobs, between 2000 and 2009. there are estimates that anywhere from 1.5 million to 3 million of those jobs were lost due to offshoring. we also downsized our capacity. factoriesbout 55,000 and some of them only employed eight people. some of them were larger, employing 2000 people. we lost 55,000 factories over that time. there was some of huge shift of offshoring.= to now companies are taking a second look at the united states, especially insourcing for selling in the north american market. that does not mean offshoring will stop. i also believe we need better

public policy on taxes, on trade, on workforce, and things like the innovation hopes that the president has proposed to encourage insourcing or reshoring. host: mount vernon, new york, jade is a republican. caller: good morning and thanks for taking my call. two questions and one comment. scott, i would like to know what kind of manufacturing jobs are building here in the united states and why do people need a college education for u.s. manufacturing jobs? i understand there are high-tech jobs out there. as i remember -- and i am pretty old -- even though i may sound young -- they used to be when

you had a factory you would go in on the bottom of, you would be trained on the job. and if you wanted to get higher pay, you would learn on the job how to get that higher pay. in other words, you became a high-tech employee. you would either go into management or you would be suchcing the best product, as the automobile industry, nobody went to college for that. clothing manufacturers, nobody went to college for that. now the president is saying we need to go to college. that means our younger people will have to put themselves in debt. is is very unfair to us u.s. citizens. host: let's get a response but. guest: it is a really good point and i'm glad you raised it. what kind of jobs are out there

for people looking at manufacturing? if you believe a lot of these reports that management consultants have put out on the type of work that will be available, it boils down to this. fabricated metals, chemicals, woodter and electronics, and furniture products, and even things like primary metals, steel, the auto sector. there's a diversity in jobs available. but there's one thing they have in common. but do require, most of them, more than a high-school education. that does not mean a college degree. that's the important thing. it could be anywhere from six months of training to two years of community college. we strongly support the program that would provide either employer-provided chaining -- training and worker could try to

achieve a skills credential and then get a job in the factory. it could be a portable skills credentialed and they could use the know how they have gathered to become a machinist at another factory. that a lot of that should be publicly financed or financed by the private-sector. i completely agree that it can be a barrier for a lot of young people at 18 or 19 to try to go to manufacturing who have to worry about piling on student debt. we have enough of that already. there's a way to do it. i don't like to point to germany all the time. but it does things very well in a collaborative effort between the government and private sector and labor unions to provide skills and training for a very high-tech work force where the workers are paid an average of $48 an hour in manufacturing professions. host: this on twitter -- it is a good question.

i think the image of manufacturing for the last decade was not a good one. the jobs were moving offshore. there were not a lot of opportunities in factories and now there are. some of the work is coming back. we also see the demographics changing in manufacturing. the average age of a manufacturing worker is 55. that means there's only a few more years they have left until retirement. that means there will be a lot of positions available. the image of manufacturing is now a very positive one. part of that is detroit is building good cars, people have a renewed focus on made in america, and they know they are contributing to the economy. the other reason is manufacturing jobs tend to pay a little better and have a few more benefits like health care than jobs in other sectors like the service sector. you can potentially have a family-supporting income, by house, and put some money into a

savings, if you have a manufacturing profession. there are few other jobs like that where you can attain that kind of lifestyle without a college dedication. manufacturing is one of the only paths. host: scott paul is executive director of the alliance for american manufacturing. bryan is next in pittsburg, massachusetts, independent. caller: hi. i don't understand why they passed that free-trade. that destroyed this country. a lot of people are not college material. why would they pass three trade with china? millions of jobs left this country. huge trade deficit in china. china is buying all our real estate now, our manufacturing and everything. they have all the money because of the stupid trade deal. what is wrong with this country? why would we do that?

china made sure if you want to buy something or sell something in china, you have to make,there. they care more about their people in this country does. guest: you raised one of the points i talk about a lot, which is are in balance trade policy in this country. i think we focused too much on the philosophy, which is we want to do free-trade and we don't look at the results and we don't look at the details. that's one of the challenges. i think we would be much better off if we had a trade agreement and trade policy that was based on reciprocity and on achieving a balance in trade so that our exports equal our imports. we would have a lot more jobs here. an interesting thing about the signed by, that was bill clinton, passed by a republican congress in 2000. one of the anecdotes that president obama has shared is

that he really heckled the histonites better in administration like rahm emanuel and others, larry summers, about the free trade , not technically a free-trade agreement, and how bad it had been for the united states. up trade enforcement on china like solar panels and autoparts and tires and other types of products where we have seen this massive infusion of dumping from china. here's the problem, the trade deficit has continued to go up under the obama administration. now it's $315 billion last year with china. a tremendous imbalance. the president is meeting with the chinese president next week in california. i hope they take the economic issues a little bit more seriously than they have been

and develop a program to reduce the trade deficit down to a much more sustainable level. it does cost america lot of jobs and wealth and a lot of know-how and it's not easy to rebuild. host: as the president meets with the chinese leader in a few days, what is on the line for manufacturing? guest: there is a lot on the line for manufacturing. we have the currency issue, which a lot of people are aware of. china has an undervalued currency that gives them a trade advantage. the administration is walking slowly on that issue. i hope that gets raised. you have the intellectual property theft. a lot of companies " stated in china complain about. you have the issue of cyber hacking, which impacts american security but as well as on privacy and on enterprise as well and the acquisition of business secrets. again, you see a surge of

production in china in items like steel and solar panels that don't reflect market forces. that is something the president has to address as well, otherwise i will see all this closing factories in the united states. the question for the president is how do you address that along with all the other security issues you have with the chinese? but i strongly believe the chinese have more respect for you if you are willing to be firm with them than if you dance around the issues. and we make our intentions clear, like we have to reduce the trade deficit or the consequence is such and such, and china will know the consequences and they will respond. host: looking at imports and exports, our relationship with china, but top imports we receive from china, we look at the mobile phones and broadcasting equipment --

we get this information from the heritage foundation. why are the types of items that we send over and we receive from china significant? guest: it's very significant, because you think up the value added of those types of exports. waste and scrap, what is the value added for the american economy of sending china waste and scraps? there are very few jobs supported by waste and scrap exports. there are some, but very few. things like semiconductors and airplanes, there's much more of a supply chain, meaning there are more jobs aborted. if you looked at the exports and imports, china exported to the ys but also some high-

value equipment like the mobile phones and computer equipment. if we have the capacity to do that in the united states, you see with that would do for our economy. one factory making a telephone will put 2000 people to work in dallas, tx. 5hat will support maybe 4 or other jobs in the community. we are a myth that getting low end stuff and we're sending over good stuff. it's a very mixed picture. we do lots of both, but many of our exports are very low value it, which supports very little job creation in the u.s. host: danny is a democrat in west virginia. caller: hi. first of all, it's not about china. it's bangladesh. all the world relies on the u.s.

as the market for their goods. germany could not last if they cannot export all over europe and to the united states. free trade, i regard free- traders as the worst enemy of the american people have ever faced. there's a small sliver of american society, mostly corporate managers and big shareholders, that are making a killing by using cheap labor in the third world in bangladesh and everywhere. they are able to sell their products at first world prices making them at. third world at if we don't stop this, you can kiss this country goodbye. there's 25 million americans unemployed. it is not just about the sliver of high-tech jobs building i phones. it is about the masses of people required to produce all the products that the american public needs. host: we have seen the front page of the new york times

today, this story about the bangladesh factory collapsed last month. guest: i would say that, danny, you were right about identifying it's not just china. as a lot of trade we have with less-developed countries. trade can be good if it is balanced. that's the point i want to make. it's ok to have some imports as long as we are doing a lot of exports. as exports when workers are faced with conditions like they are in bangladesh, many of them brought about by multinational companies with headquarters in the u.s., that raises a serious question. there are things that can be done through our trade policy,

like revoking trade status for bangladesh, to make a point. i do agree with you that our tiltedc policy is too towards the companies that have an outsourcing strategy. we need to bring that back into balance. our allegiance should be to job creation in the united states. that does not mean we should not trade or that all imports are a bad thing, but it means we need balance. that's exactly what has been missing from these policies. i am also very sorry to say that it is a tragedy like we have seen in bangladesh, that it takes that to make the front pages, because this happens every day in the developing world where the workers are toiling in horrible conditions to make our garments and they're not getting a lot of the money. the companies are, for their branding and for the marketing and for the profit margin. we need to raise wages in

developing countries overseas and that will have a beneficial effect in the united states and frankly it would not add a lot to the cost of things we buy today. host: mark in baltimore, republican. caller: good morning, thanks for taking my call. and thanks for covering such an important topic. is what hasg loss crippled the us economically over the last three decades. ourink the root cause for loss in manufacturing jobs was the passage of nafta. i believe it was ross perot who said that when nafta was passed we s would hear we sucking sound as jobs went south. he was partly right, because not only did they go south but they went all around the world to places like india, china, and

even vietnam, i'm noticing now. what can be done? fta and we change naph other policies to return american jobs to america? that ine last comment think it is very important for all of us to do everything we can to buy american products whenever we go out shopping, whenever we go into a store. once american companies get the ,dea that made in america sells then it will be an easy business decision to return american manufacturing jobs. guest: danny, your point about made in america is very good. we see that not only anecdotally but also in a survey and behavioral research now where

consumers are interested in made in america and they are willing to pay a small premium for it. they are doing it all sorts of reasons, whether it is the quality, for patriotism, or supporting their own economy. there are a lot of reasons why they are supporting made in america. use the company's advertising more things as made in america. companies like chrysler, ford have been making things here a long time. surprising companies like kia nd hyundai are all saying they have factories in america and it is a big selling point for them. polls have been done on this. it is a selling point. we have covered the trade topic, but what to do about it, the solution? it is not to not trade. that would be a disaster, because trade can be beneficial if it's done in a balanced way.

ifren buffett once proposed you want to import beyond it over and above what our balance would be, considering the amount we export, should have to buy a. certificate to do that would inject money back into this economy. that is one of it proposing that, not a socialist or anything like that. but it shows there are some solutions out there. i think the overall goal of trade policy should not be assigning more free trade agreements. it should be reciprocity and balance and also making sure that you are paying as much attention to labor rights and process standards and fair trade practices overseas as you are to the rights of investors and the free flow of capital and all of that, but there's a lot more balance in the equation than there is by now. host: here's a snapshot of u.s. manufacturing employment since world war ii.

our guest is scott paul, executive director at the alliance for american manufacturing. but this on twitter -- guest: we are pretty unique in washington. we are labor-management partnership. its labor and business sitting at the same table coming up with, and public policy solutions. we were founded by the united steelworkers union and some of its manufacturing partners. steelworkers are the largest industrial union in north america. they represent not only still workers but in auto parts and glass and paper and tires and they even make sponges and pop tarts. we sit down at a table and we have a lot of partners from small and midsize manufacturers to develop manufacturing policy. i think what gives us strength is we don't act a pac. we do it based on our solutions, a policy is proposing.

we have been able to work with a great group of bipartisan members on capitol hill to try to move our agenda for as well as with the obama administration and even with the republican presidential campaigns to infuse our ideas, made in america ideas, into the political mindset. host: conrad in pennsylvania, independent. what is manufacturing like in your town? caller: good morning. i am calling pretty much on the same agenda as the prior callers. i have been on this show couple years ago with the president of international banking. one of the inequities that i find it going on right now, we have an oligarchy. they seem to be able to control the votes in washington. fitzpatrick, a congressman here

in our county in pennsylvania, hwatz inson shor montgomery county, i've asked them to try to replace the tariffs we have lost through natfa and dachshund. you flashed some products imported by china a few minutes ago. those items are raw materials. we import raw materials to china. no tariffs going in. coming out, they're also tariff- free coming back to us as imports. we lost billions of dollars on those freebies that have cost our country billions of dollars every year. and china still has those tariffs. to chinay to import

manufactured products, they will have heavy tariffs. ronald reagan in the 1980's -- h host: conrad, why is this so important to you that you are reaching out to your members of congress? pennsylvania is a rust belt states. we have to balance our budget. there does not seem to be any interest from our government to balance it. we have an oligarchy. host: let's get a response. guest: first, on the budget balancing, the clinton era when you had balanced budgets was one of the reasons for that was we had strong economic growth. a lot of people were working.

that adds revenues. you could do that today if you added manufacturing jobs, it would reduce pressure on the budget deficit considerably. let's get specific. how we're able to break through this atmosphere in d.c. a china current the bill and has been around for a while passed the senate even in the last session, not in this session, but it was the only bill that overcame a mitch mcconnell filibuster. he was not able to do it because 15 republican senators joined with democrats to support this bill, which we had endorsed. i expect it will be introduced again by a bipartisan group of senators next week. that would add money to the coffers, which is what we are looking for in washington, d.c. the last thing and where i think this china intrusion is going to have an impact on this whole debate is it is now well documented that there has been

cyber hacking from the chinese military, that the chinese military has blueprints to our weapons systems. we issued a report done by retired general that shows there are a lot of chinese parts in our weapons systems. if the economic security argument is not enough for most people, i think the national security argument will be. that is something we will be making a drought this year with our representatives as well. host: we will show on the screen the statement from the alliance for american manufacturing, reporting that the chinese have happened to u.s. weapons designs. this on twitter --

what can be done? guest: that is the question, what can you do about it other than kind of put walls around our borders, which is probably not a solution? in terms of keeping the innovation here, there have been proposals including offers by the obama administration, offers by some in the innovation community, and offers by us. a research and development tax credit, used for innovation. you should make it more generous if the research and development is used in the united states, actually deployed in the u.s. and factories open in the u.s. rather than abroad. that is one concrete example of how you can occurred that insourcing. another is through the tax code more generally. there's been a big corporate tax debate in washington. some say just lower the corporate tax rate. administration proposes deepening the manufacturing tax deduction, so if you are putting the people work in the u.s., you

get lower corporate tax rates than you otherwise would. that is an insourcing incentives. while there may be some tweaks needed to perfect that, that would be a great thing. yampa trade policy, the tax policy, you do some worker training, you do some public investment for infrastructure, which creates a market for manufactured goods, and you have the framework for a manufacturing policy that it really drives a manufacturing job growth. host: scott paul, executive director at the alliance for american manufacturing, thanks for talking with us. guest: thank you. host: next we will talk to the head of the federal energy regulatory commission. the baltimore sun colorado jon wellinghoff the electricity cop. we will hear from him in a moment. later we will look at school crime, violence, and safety, in "america by the numbers." we will be right back.

>> ♪ t [video clip] >> when the attorney general arraigned in california after the extradition, he indicated that he wanted the death penalty on each of the three charges. the wanted the death penalty is three times. that made me realize how serious they were. and it made me realize that it was not about me. because first of all i could not be killed three times. it was about the construction of this america -- the destruction

of this american enemy. i was the embodiment of that enemy. >> she was not that interested in talking about what happened, happenedperiod, the crime, the implications, being chased by the fbi. she was not that interested in talking about it. and so, she is also one of these people you don't necessarily go to directly. and i will try to get to her directly. so i figured out there were very important people in her life and i chipped away at the people she knew and trusted and was a vote to write letters and get them involved ansel adams in my previous work. slowly she came around and she agreed to meet me. >> a filmmaker on the life of the 1960's activist and radical angela davis, sunday at 8:00 on "q&a" on c-span. she makes the first speech by

a sitting first lady, becomes the first president of the daughters of the american revolution, designs are on china, and establishes the white house china collection, and is the first to have a christmas tree in the white house. caroline harrison, wife of the 23rd president benjamin harrison. we continue our series on first ladies with your questions and comments. also on facebook and twitter, monday night's live at 8:00 eastern on c-span, c-span3, c- span radio, and c-span.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: jon wellinghoff is chairman of the federal energy regulatory commission or ferc. thanks for being here. guest: thank you, liane. host: the baltimore sun has this headline -- what do you do? guest: a lot of things. one of the things is we are, on the beat for the wholesale energy markets, gas and electric

markets, we are charged by congress to enforce the laws to ensure there is no manipulation or fraud in the markets. we have a great group of 200 people that do that headed by former u.s. attorney. one of the deputies is a former council of the fbi. we have people with great experience in that area in law enforcement to go after market traders and others who may decide they want to be the smartest person in the room. we try to do what we can to ensure that we are smarter. i think we're doing a great job. host: where do you fall in terms of the hierarchy, the pyramid of u.s. government, how independent are you? do you answer to anyone? guest: we are very independent. it's a five-person agency that is an independent regulatory agency. i am nominated by the president and confirmed by the senate. we have oversight by the senate and house committees. beyond that, we don't report to any other federal agency or

anyone within the administration per se outside of those nominations and confirmations. host: here's what the baltimore sun writes about our guest -- where does your jurisdiction end? guest: we're over the natural gas and electric markets. that's where our jurisdiction begins. primarily, physical markets, although we do have some ability to go into the financial aspects of those markets as well, because we are interdependent. we do a lot more than people, on the beach. we sent the market rules overall and the structure of those markets, so we can help do things like into great ternopol's and energy efficiency and demand response to the market as well as more traditional resources like coal

and natural gas and nuclear power. host: it has been announced new plans to step down. guest: i have been there seven years, which is a long time for a commissioner. i have been the chairman four years. i think it's time to move on and look for other opportunities and to turn it over to the next group. host: why now? guest: i think it's a good time now. we just finished our order 1000, which is a large rule on transportation -- on transmission planning. we have also finished number of other rules on demand response and regulations service that sets the market barometers that i think are going to help new innovative technologies come into the market. so i have done a lot to bear. i think it's time to turn it over to a new class. host: in 2005, congress gave you a new anti-manipulation authority. why and what does that allow you to do that you could not do before? guest: that all came out of the

of 2001.sis in 2005, congress recognized that no agency really had specific fraud and manipulation authority over the electric and gas markets. in addition, ferc had a very small penalties. it was only $10,000 a day, to increase postal million dollars per day for violations. so they added the fraud manipulation authority specifically to go into our general authority and they put in increased penalties. with those two things it's ultimately gave us the tools needed to start putting together the department, the office of enforcement that we have, that can effectively enforce the rules in these markets. host: a democratic senator washington state has given you and ferc kudos and says it is doing its itin and eric think things, in working on the minute

working on the manipulation. what have you done and why is it different? guest: it's different now because we now have over 200 people that work in this area now. ferc hadays of enron, ir 10 people. and we have a division of analytics that we just put into place, and at the people that really dig into all the data and can look for patterns and look for things going on that are anomalies so that we can delve into what's going on in the markets and discover people trying to do things that would throw the market out of whack and into a tailspin. we don't want to do that. we want people to have confidence in the markets. we want to assure the markets are fair and open and transparent. if we can do that, we can expand markets. by doing that, we can ensure

efficiency and lower costs for consumers. host: jon wellinghoff is the chairman of first. -- of ferc. the baltimore sun calls him the nation's electricity cop. if you would like to call -- how is the commission paid for? by fees, are paid for not out of the federal budget. it is paid for by fees on users. all the wholesale users of the system pay fees into the system. that constitutes our budget. we have a $300 million per year budget, although i will say we have already collected over that amount in fines from our enforcement actions. we almost paid for ourselves. host: what are the funds given for and how does that work? guest: fines are for things like fraud and manipulation. was a settlement recently in

every large case, consolation energy was one of the entities that we did settle a case. -- constellation energy. we believe that there were issues with respect to their activities in the market. they settled for very large amount, over to london million dollars ultimately. is to duty of things. to deter the concept it has to be a big enough fine so it hurts. second, to pay back the amount they extracted out of the market. so we have penalties and also the restitution. --t: details about ferc dallas, texas, col. aaron is independents.

caller: hello. i want to ask your guests what are his views on developing renewable energy for the consumer markets like the end user, like an individual? and won't guest:. that's a good: the development of solar energy, for example, at a distributor level for consumers is booming in this country. it is going to have an effect on our wholesale markets, because the people on the wholesale markets will have to know more about how consumers are generating their own power so we can integrate the two together. it's a very good thing. consumers really want this especially in light of a lot of the climactic event be a scene like hurricane sandy and others. they want more control. we will see a continued expansion of solar systems on homes and businesses. but we will have to integrate that better with the larger grid. because we have better communications now and better technology to do that, i think

it will be much easier to do in the future. host: this on twitter -- we have very extensive and course ms. powers. anyone who does manipulate energy prices in the wholesale gas or electric markets, we can go after and we have done that. we have a number of cases where we settled and we have a number of cases pending. i think we are doing it very effectively in the sense that i think we are corralling in a good portion of what fraud there is out there. we're seeing a lot less now than we did seem during enron. int: fred is a democrat bethesda, maryland. caller: hi. in the 1980's you wrote a book. i wonder, now that you are overseeing ferc, to use that as being applicable to the whole

country? guest: you have been doing some research. i did. i authored a statute in nevada on utility planning and help put statutes in, in 17 other states. future inor our utilities is very important. it is applicable to the country. we are doing some planning in morerder 1000, but that's transmission planning. we have to put both state planning and federal planet together in an organized way, because we're seeing more regional development, things like solar and wind, in areas where those types of resources are very economically attractive. we want to deliver that to mostly on the coast. solar is in the southwest of the country. wind is in the central part of the country. i think that kind of planning on a cooperative basis between the states that are doing it it and

the federal government that is doing the planning of the transmission and order. 1000 is. host: our caller from bethesda mentioned your background is as a consumer advocate in nevada. you had the backing of senator harry reid to take a position at ferc to take a vacant seat. what does it entail to be a consumer advocate and how is that specific and eastern and western state? guest: not really different. a consumer advocate position is one to represent the people before their state utility commissions and also before ferc, i did do some cases before ferc in that regard. and to ensure that rates are reasonable for those consumers and also to ensure things like energy efficiency and the nobles are integrated into the system in a way that consumers can take it that did oppose new resources. that's what i did in nevada. i wrote a number of laws that are included in the planning act

that our previous caller referred to. in doing that, i represented consumers to try to ensure that their costs can be controlled and that they have a choice and the ability to look at a number of new technologies that are in the energy sector. and taken advantage of sector host: ferc chairman jon wellinghoff is our guest. a letter from john in ellicott city, maryland, republican. good morning. one last try for ellicott city. moving on to dayton, ohio on our democrat line, dean. caller: hi. i am just commenting on the price of gas. \ towards the beginning of the month they tend to raise prices so it makes it more expensive for the government recipients of federally supplemented programs. if you have noticed over the past couple years this has

happened all the way through where towards the middle of the month prices tend to drop. and especially towards the end of the month they raise them again. so there has to be some kind of control on the prices. it is very apparent that this is out of control with this price fixing. thank you. host: reflect on his comments and explain the difference between what ferc does, between that and the federal trade commission? , you are referring to gasoline for cars and trucks. we oversee not that commodity but we oversee natural gas than heats your home and businesses and power plants. we also oversee the electric markets. i don't disagree with you that we all wonder how gasoline

prices change monthly and yearly and what controls there are. but that is not the purview of our agency. host: fracking is getting a lot of attention in states like pennsylvania. should anyone undertake a comprehensive environmental look at the impact of fracking to produce gas, does that stay here domestically or get imported -- exported? guest: fracking need to be done in an environmentally correct way. it's not the responsibility of our agency. primarily is the responsibility of the epa, i believe, and state agencies as well. i think is a very attractive resource for our country. it is one that's necessary for our country. i think it can be done in an environmentally responsible way. there's no question we can develop this gas and do it in a way but does not hurt the environment. host: in marysville, illinois,

democrat,ej -- joan. caller: hi. i am on illinois rural electric. i notice that my electric bill alone -- and i don't have an electric aus. otherwise i have a gas stove, a gas furnace. and my electric bill electric bill alone is almost twice what my son's house in town is for gas and electricity. this month i have a $135 electric bill. i think his bill in town was something like $68 for his gas and electric. you, i got a letter that could that youyou -- you could negotiate your rate with

different electric companies. i think they even had a vote on it. i cannot do that because illinois rural electric opted out. i get really angry when i see these little notes from rural electric telling me that the electricity is going to cost me more this month. it does not seem to go down where as intent on where they can negotiate these rates, they are going down. i will get off the line and wait for my answer. thank you. believesrtainly, ferc consumers should have a choice at the wholesale level and the caller speaking about the retail level. her particular utility appears to have not chosen to go into the retail open choice competitive options that are apparently available in that state. i would encourage her to talk to her utility and neighbors that our customers of that utility and see if they can encourage them to provide retail choice to

those customers. to the point that customers do , for electric and gas service and the other options to do things like put on solar and put in energy efficiency, etc., that will help them control their energy costs better. affecting the an keystone pipeline? guest: >> we have no control over that period because it is a line that goes across international borders and an international line, is under the purview of the state department. all lines within the u.s., gas lines that are fully within the u.s. that are interstate transmission lines for gas, we do permits and certificates, but not the keystone. host: do you have a take on it? guest: i don't. secretary kerry has to make the decision and it's a tough decision. host: how do you keep pipelines

safe? how does the public become protected in terms of save transmission and siting? guest: it is an important issue. from safety, we do review safety when the pipelines are going in the ground. antolin overview the construction and development of both pipeline projects. once the pipeline is in the ground and operating, then the safety responsibilities then go over to the department of transportation. and they have very strict regulations in place to ensure ist maintenance and safety uppermost in the operators of those pipelines. host: jon wellinghoff is chairman of the federal energy regulatory commission. john is our next caller in pennsylvania, republican. caller: hi. have come upes with customer choice where you

generatingyour company and the delivery system is done by the local power company. scamis has turned into a whereby they send you information or they give you a low rate. in my case, a company from new york had a six month rate for 6.8 since per kilowatt. the current rate for people in 7.8.- for ppl was so you switch. then my bill increased by 30%. 10.8 they raise the rate to

since per kilowatt because it's a variable rate. i immediately called them and told them i wanted to cancel my subscription with them. they said, it's not that simple , it takes us two months to get this generator back to the other company. theyhat happened was delayed me forint two months and i have to pay this artificially high variable rate until its with his back to my other regular company ppl. they have gotten three months of a user rates that wipes out any savings i would have saved. and my question is how many people don't see this or are not aware? onaware i imagine it is their bill. and they're being charged by lot power of choice that a

of states have. consumerrtainly, any commodity where we provide a choice, there are pitfalls and there are people who will try to take advantage of consumers. that's why we have to have government oversight agencies. in your case, i recommend that you talk to the state public utilities commission and your state's consumer advocate. you have a consumer advocate in pennsylvania, a very good one, and complain, because ultimately the types of switching you are talking about three you have a rate for six months and you should have been notified of the higher rate. this probably regulations in the state of pennsylvania that require that. we can effectively police the markets so consumers can have a choice, because the choice will provide for consumers have a lower bill overall. ultimately, it's a good thing, but we do have to have a program of government oversight of that as well. host: the baltimore sun points

out -- what kind of penalty could actually be put on to an entity the size of jpmorgan chase? what could actually hurt a bank of that size? guest: i don't want to talk about their specific case, because it is under investigation, although it has been widely reported that there was a leak of documents to the new york times and also we had discovered dispute in district court here that was public. the fact of the investigation is known. but the penalties, we believe, should be adequate to ensure that the entity, however they may be, a bank or a utility company or however, it hurts

enough so they don't do it again. so you are going into a market and you take $100 million out of it improperly, then the fine should be some multiple of that. certainly beyond that, so they know it's not just a traffic ticket. it is not just something that ultimately they can write off on their bottom line and to do again and not fear the economic consequences. they have to steal the economic consequences and insure those consequences are significant enough that it will not occur again. host: do we know any timeline? guest: we do not. it could go on for a long time, depending on whether the case is settled or whether or not we actually issued an order out of ferc. we have not issued one on that particular case. it is a case under investigation, i cannot give you a timeline.

host: let's hear from russ on our democrat line it. caller: hi. just seeing your appearance, you seem like a pretty serious guy. i'm sorry we are losing you to some other venture. i just think if we had more people like you who were overseeing the banking industry, the mortgage industry, and the other industries that seem to be taking advantage of the american people, the country would be a lot better off. applaud you for your demeanor. you look like a tough guy thank you. you go fore we let before today did you know much about ferc? does?ou followed what it caller: no, notea