rams.llance 57bd later, daniel wise talks group's review of ederal disaster relief spending. ♪ host: good morning, it is monday, june 17, 2013. congress is in session this week. on to continue debate immigration overhaul measures, the house is ready to take up a five-year farm funding measure on tuesday. --nwhile, president of president obama is in ireland for the group of 8 summit. we want to hear from you this morning about the american standing in the world community. what issues do you think are the most important for the president to address on the world stage?

here are the numbers to call. for republicans, 202-585-3881. for democrats, 202-585-3880. for independents, 202-585-3882. if you are outside the u.s., 202-585-3883. you can catch us on your favorite social media pages, twitter, facebook, or e-mail us at journal@c-span.org. a very good monday morning to you. to want to take you right the story in "the washington post." "obama visit europe, policies cost him goodwill."

host: that is "the washington

post" story. "theis the story from washington times," talking about the economic and trade issues already on the agenda for the summit. this story notes -- this story notes --

host: as we take you to the issues that are overshadowing the summit today, we want to hear your thoughts on america's place in the world and what issues the president needs to address while he is over there. phone lines are open, the facebook pages already getting comments. open,our phone lines are we want to hear from you about our standing in the world and the issues the president needs to address. the president has already made one speech today in northern ireland.

here's a story on that.

host: that is president obama this morning in northern ireland. he is over there for the g-8 summit. another headline, "g eight summit likely to disrupt trade negotiations in europe." ga.,ll first go to job, hello. caller: you do an incredibly great job. i want to say that i am

incredibly excited. i do not think our world standing is terribly good, but i think it will improve. ,e have got some people running it will be a big election for the republicans that will help our world standing. host: why is our world stand not so good right now? taxes are too high and we have too much debt. we have a guy running here in georgia, pennington, for governor. we have got to elect more taxpayer champions and i think we will in 2014. host: he think they are concerned about the economic situation in the u.s.? you do not think they see us as having recovered from the recent downturn? we havethe problem is

to get growth and the only way to get growth is to get taxes down. if you get economic growth, that gives you more jobs. but it all goes back to who you elect. right now we do not have enough, but i think we will in 2014. host: james is on the independent line from winter haven, florida. caller: good morning. we enjoy c-span and the fact you bring in all points of view. host: your take on the u.s. standing in the world and what the president needs to address? caller: hopefully when they get together they can discuss the fact the unions and taxes are the two things that bring down the nation's economy. anyone that loves history can see it over and over again,

taxes, high taxes, they drive businesses out of a country to another country and it is hard to get them back. when you unionize to the point where it is ridiculous, sitting around pretending like they are union bosses, sucking up the workers' money, it is never going to work. never, ever. maybe if we look at greece and these other failures, you can see what is behind them. host: what can the president do this week at this economic gathering? that maybe hek can listen more than he speaks? -- caller: i think i can -- i think that maybe he can listen more than he speaks? host: what is your take on who

he should be listening to? caller: i am not sure. you have a bunch of people with similar mindsets trying to solve problems they have all proved they cannot solve. florida, thankm you for the call. this twitter message from murray -- host: we want to get your thoughts on america's standing in the world and these issues hanging over the president as he .s that that some at

"leak at a conference."

cominghose revelations on the eve of this g-8 summit. goodthat in mind, we will to brady in miami, florida. what do you think america's standing in the world is right now? caller: right now, unfortunately, we should not have to be spying on american citizens or other people.

at one time america was one of the greatest nations and we have lost that's because of education and the family. if you break down the family, you break down society. when you break down education and the people overlearning, you an headed for action ron, ancient empires. america was a great nation. host: how much explaining to you think the president needs to do about these leaks that have come out? revelations about u.s. tracking of phone and e-mail messages from overseas? how much explaining be think he is going to have to do? lot of he has a explaining. like lucy. lucie, lucy. is up next on the

democratic line from buffalo, new york. caller: i believe that america's standing in the world is extremely low. number one, the massive knowledge deficits, but mainly this complete and total disconnection from the natural world to the point of natural distain. when it comes to economic growth we have a basic reality, even not grow indefinitely on the planet with finite natural resources. we are leaving the world in terms of environmental degradation and that this will will bring the total demise of the economy. it is a very difficult subject that no one discusses. it is constantly economics. job, jobs, jobs, without realizing we are part of a complex biological continue on. host: how do you think the european union is doing on that issue? there are folks the president is

meeting with this we. your take on those at environmental issues that you bring up in the european union? caller: the european union does not try to emulate the u.s. and does a pretty good job in protecting the countries that make up europe. countries like china, they are vying to have no choice. when you cannot see the sun in beijing and you cannot look up, you can no longer build a fire in london. home fires building, part of the tradition, is gone because of the concentration of people becoming so great that you literally could not breathe. in london right now you cannot build a fire. china will be forced because of its massive population to

institute strict environmental regulations eventually. the problem is -- how long will this take? will you have such degradation that your life support systems become so frightened that you are going to have a massive degradation that makes it unravel when the -- makes it uninhabitable? host: thank you. monte writes in -- host: one of those foreign policy issues in the news right now is u.s. involvement in the syrian conflict. here is the headline from "the globe and mail." putin sides with funds, prime minister says as g-8 splits over syrian

conflict." "leaders gather to seek common ground." here is the story from the financial times, same story. this has broken out over the army of civil war on both sides. host: the syrian conflict is also hanging over the meeting in northern ireland. josh, give us your take on the

u.s. standing in the world. independent line, indiana. caller: what is up? first of all, i like the things you guys do. secondly, man, what is up with america hopping into every little debate that everyone of these countries have. let them deal with them. we need to keep our focus on economic growth and keeping the jobs staying. popping up after a few years. buildings built with nothing in them. here just this world tried to get a not but i see everyone going from country to , it is everybody.

everybody is going up. host: we will stick to international issues and a standing in the world. robert, of virginia, democratic line. good morning. caller: the most important thing the president has to accomplish in terms of standing in the world for the sake of achieving peace is to carry out the president's pledge that iran will not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons and that he will do whatever is necessary to prevent iran from obtaining of their weapons. host: thank you for the fall. that takes us to the lead story in "the wall street journal" this morning.

host: that is in today's "the wall street journal." editorialso a lead the talks about this issue and iran possible nuclear

capabilities, called "the iranian nuclear unicorn -- the search for the moderate iranian leader has beguiled every american president since 1979." in today's "the wall street journal." ray, aliquippa, pennsylvania. give me your take on america's standing in the world right now. iller: i think it is so low, do not see how we can rise above it. one example, from the 1960's, when we had fidel castro takeover and he turned on us in cuba.

no one in the world dealt with cuba except the russians. now everyone in the world heels and trades with cuba, except to? -- who? the united states. all this president does is talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, and never lives up to what he says. member he was going to change everything about the nsa and the bush policies? calling them unpatriotic? look at them now, they are on steroids. i will tell you this, the young man who blew the whistle, they are not afraid of what he has exposed the terrorists. cheney joins on television and calls him a spy for the chinese, they are afraid of what he may tell the american people about what the nsa is

doing in america to american citizens. thank you. host: you bring up the leaks from the nsa, we will have a segment on that specifically later today. you brought up cuba, one international issue is the prison in guantanamo bay with news on that this morning. chosen at obama has high-powered washington lawyer to be the state department's new lawyer overseeing closing down the base in cuba." ist: back to the phones, sam

from hillsdale, michigan, democratic line. your take on the place of americans in a world right now? caller: the united states is very arrogant. recently i saw a film when asked -- what the you call someone who speak many languages? the answer to the question was [indiscernible] someone who speaks only one language? an american. not willing to get involved on a person to person basis in the world. about the small response to the they make itghazi,

sound like benghazi was down the street at the corner. it is another country. libya is a country. thank you, bye. caller: a few more treats coming in -- tweets coming in. host: another issue hanging over international affairs is north korea and its nuclear capabilities. here is a story from today's "the wall street journal."

other international affairs story for you, this is from "the wall street journal."

host: we have some time for a few more comments from you on the american standing in the world and the issues you want to see the president address at this g-8 summit this week. rea, if the bird, new jersey, independent line.

caller: i think we have been lowered by in the estimation of the world and we will continue to become bankrupt because of our policy of globalism. essentially the people in our government, you cannot serve two masters. our trade agreements only help foreign countries. the armed services are used as mercenaries. many times they say they are invited in by saudi arabia or some other person. corporations that own us are either blackmailed or bribe. hoopstizens jump through with a border that is completely open. we are expected to help and provide for 23 million people. our social security has been ent -- spend on foreign --

host: can the president do anything this week to address the situation to bring up? caller: yes, he should revisit all of our trade agreements, which is deleterious to our security. china even makes our secret weapons. he has the power to say that in six months he is aggregating every trade agreement. he has that power and i would like to see him use it. host: more rhea, new jersey, warning the president to revisit our trade agreements. is an economic summit, first and foremost. this story from " washington times" notes --

bom host: frank is from memphis, tenn., democratic line. your take on america's standing in the world right now? live that, mywe community, we have been talking

about, we really don't have really know, you know, out word understanding. the thing about our jobs, you talk about jobs, we want to work. what other countries think of us? i do not wake up every morning thinking about what no other country think of us. the president got to come back over here and deal with congress what ain't going to deal with nothing he thinks. it is a lost cause any way, he might be going three more years wherehe get out of office they talk about some jobs. everything, going to work, and with that have a nice day. host: thank you from memphis, tenn. this morning. our firstit for

segment this morning, next to will take a look at the we dead in washington with our reporter roundtable and discuss the latest on the nsa surveillance issue. we will be right back. ♪

host: going as far back as abigail adams and martha washington, you find first lady's played an active role -- >> going as far back as abigail adams and martha washington, you find that first ladies played a important role in elections and political strategies. avia adams would talk incessantly with her husband about the politics of the day and legislation that needed to be passed, the senators and congressmen that he could count on, the ones he could not. >> as we continue our conversation on first ladies, john roberts, author of the book of "raiding first lady's -- rating first ladies," tonight at 9:00 eastern on c-span. >> we think it is critical that

any regulation or lack thereof keeps in mind that we need to continue to invest in the physical infrastructure supporting the products that we deliver. if we are going to be a world leader in the delivery of high- speed data at the fastest speeds with the most capable access points, it is key that the fostersry environment rather than having, should we have more packaging flexibility and options. that is something we are hopeful for and working on. finally, this question of the government's role between content distributors, my view is that that is served in the business relationships, not in government laws and mandates.

it is an important subject and we want to again look at that dialogue. with a look at the cable market place with two of the biggest companies in the field on c-span 2, tonight at 8:00 p.m. >> "washington journal" continues. host: this morning we will kickoff the reporter roundtable with a discussion of the week ahead on washington hill. we're joined by rebecca sinderbrand from "politico" and the hill," of "of over here on capitol hill. we will be taking your comments for the next hour, but let's start with the push for immigration reform. where is the senate after a full week of debate on this?

guest of the immigration bill is going to go to a bunch of amendments and pass out of the senate before the july 4 recess. we are expecting a really busy week on capitol hill. republicans and democrats trying to come to different agreements .n the bill you cannot say that it will be a , puttingcertainty pressure on the house once it goes to a lower share. host: here is a story talking about how big this bill is from "the washington times." not the biggest in recent years, but the immigration legislation can be challenging.

dominating actions on capitol hill, one group, coming to about 24 pounds. you say that harry reid wants to get this done by july 4. is this still on track to happen by then? guest: probably it is right now. but could be an interesting story in the news today. the congressional budget office could be telling us a lot about whether this bill will pass. that was a very important number. the host: any estimates on what the number might be? guest: we will see the first estimates today, but there is a lot on this bill around border security. those things tend to be very expensive. there are also things the people want to add to the cost of the bill.

that is something to watch in the house, it could get much more expensive. host: the deputy white house editor over there at "politico," what have you been discussing as this bill hits the floor? guest: for much of this process the president remained silent, coming out a couple of days ago, unusual and unexpected by several advocates. theave a story today about move that the straight level and now you are seeing democrats and room of lincoln's taking it as a political winner.

senator nunn and as it was talking about this issue up in new jersey over the weekend. but we cannot support and of in terms ofve border security and the impediment to the pathway to legalization. host colburn ian swanson, -- host: ian swanson, talked-about the gang of eight. guest: what was interesting about what they said yesterday was they were about to mention the politics of this, which are starting to heat up. some of the democrats were almost warning republicans that you have to get behind this bill 2014u will pay for it in

and 2016. let's not forget that the immigration bill has momentum right now. barack obama 170% of the he pretty much worn his party did you have got to get behind this. host: here is a bit of lindsey gramm on "meet the press," yesterday -- [video clip] >> it positive note, a political breakthrough passing reform with enough votes. i have never been more optimistic about it. host: we are doing our reporter roundtable this morning. alliance are open if you want to talk about immigration or any of the other issues we are talking about today. for republicans, 202-585-3881.

for democrats, 202-585-3880. for independents, 202-585-3882. before we leave the issue on immigration, talk a little bit about lindsay grams relationship with the white house on this immigration issue? guest: you have seen the white house really take the lead on this, one of the reasons for that is of course a lot of democrats saying -- look, if the president is out in front it can only stall the issue. one of the interesting things that is a political calculation where theect in 2014, elections are likely to look very different. upcoming elections are looking to look more conservative,

traditional, more white. it may not show the same affect being predicted. the question is -- how much of an impact will that have? host: the hill for action blog had at a senate reform citing, one of those amendments is a same-sex couples amendment being sponsored by hatcher leahy. can you talk a bit about this amendment? guest of this is an amendment that he wanted to offer to the judiciary committee when they first considered the bill, in part because of pressure from republicans and democrats who said that if you add this bill -- at this amendment, you will kill the immigration bill and it will not get through congress. he offered to add it on the

floor. on the floor it will be much tougher to get it into the bill, as you will need 60 votes. in committee it was just majority. it was a big deal for him to back off and not offer it in committee, and it is unlikely, you can pretty much guarantee that it will not. host: talk a bit about the gay marriage same-sex couple benefits going on as this amendment is being offered on the immigration bill, could we hear from the supreme court on this issue? guest of that is right, the term is coming to a close and we have several days of decisions coming. -- guest: that is right, the term is coming to a close and we

have several days of decisions coming. we have the defense of marriage act and also prop 8. you have a situation where whether of not this -- whether or not this issue is included, it may possibly be somewhat moved by the end of the month. a lot of the regulations in limbo, when it comes to federal workers and the department of defense. so, you have a situation right now where same-sex marriage ban the immigration bill may not be as much of a factor. host: the cases on the docket, we do not know what they will be announcing? guest: we do not. host: this is from today's " baltimore -- "of the baltimore sun." -- "the baltimore sun."

ist: the other big issue about married gay couples and the defense of marriage act being unconstitutional. , talk about how capitol hill is preparing for the possible rulings. host: -- guest: i think they are waiting on their hands. same-sex marriage has been pretty dramatic, especially for the democratic party. there are only a couple of republicans in favor of gay marriage, but nearly all of the democratic senators have felt the tidal wave of change in public opinion.

i do not think that we are going to see as many of the culture battles over same-sex marriage coming out to the degree we had seen before. it was not seen as much as a local winner, though it will be seen within the republican party, particularly with primary challenges among members. host: we are talking with ian .wanson and rebecca sinderbrand we are taking your calls and comments on these many discussions that we will be discussing for the next 45 minutes or so. bridge, first, metal republican line. caller: good morning. host: your comment or question? caller: i just wanted to comment on the immigration bill. i have heard a lot of republicans saying that it is

important to pass, but from my friends and relatives we feel like it is being rushed through and we do not like the idea of amnesty and are very suspicious of the bill. , can you talkson about who the key republicans are who are supporting this and who are opposed? guest: a lot of republicans feel the way the caller does and you have seen that reflected on capitol hill. certainly some senators have talked about the idea that this is being rushed through. and chuckons grassley have been working hard to change it. john cornyn of texas is , lookingber to watch

to tighten security provisions on the border. people would not be able to get citizenship until there was a tighter border. democrats are calling that a poison-pill amendment, looking for some kind of middle ground that could get the bill through with more votes. host: a story came out late last week where john cornyn emerged as the key to the threshold for immigration reform vote. talk about this threshold, if you could, miss rebecca sinderbrand. what is the president doing to help? guest: we have been hearing this for a while and it has been a huge 44 supporters of the bill, seen as a benchmark for what is needed to make it through the house. so, for some time there has been a push to make sure the bill is

free, and even the amendments that are not poison pills could make the bill tougher for members on the edge to support it. joe, democratic line, virginia. caller: i was that the judiciary hearing in the senate when it passed the immigration bill and it was very moving. a lot of people were very excited about it. there is a situation suggested doese immigration bill, anyone have a suggestion about how to get that to the attention of people? i married a lovely one from china who first came to the

.nited states on a j1 visa she has not met requirements yet, so we can not be together even though we are married until she goes back to china. i am just baffled. there is a certain amount of irony, when millions of undocumented immigrants are able to be on a path toward staying in the united states and i am married to a woman who has to go back to the country and we are kept apart longer. do you have any suggestions? the group of a, a gang of eight, and how to get traction? heard anything

about this so far? guest: i have not heard about these visas, he did the right thing by calling his congressman and calling c-span. host: then there is also going out to vote as well. for 2014 implications and 2016? the election in 2014 will be very different. there will be a handful of states for new what senators up for reelection and will be interesting to watch how they vote. mark friar in arkansas has been seen as the least likely to go for immigration reform. last week he said he was inclined to support the bill, showing how more and more people on looking at these political tea leaves thinking that there is more in it for them to vote

for the bill. host: new york, bill, republican line. you are on with ian swanson and sinderbrand. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. a couple of comments, republicans have trounced the democrats since 2010. but was that all of it when they squeaked by in 2012? the problem is with security as this has [indiscernible]

in chronic unemployment like we're having, bringing in 12,000 workers to compete with americans? that is my immigration question. on the nsa spying, my and the foreign countries to the u.s., the -- , but not domestic. thank you so much. host: which one do you want to take first? guest: turning back to immigration for a moment, that is something he has heard from a lot of republicans. definitely why now. it is not even necessarily the , it is of a breakdown

the overall warming management of holding onto this support and building on it. looking at for what that could mean a head for the hispanic population, they continue to am're starting to see i looking to rush to a toll, many felt that it was not a complete surprise. that there was not a huge sense of shock. in the latest numbers, this is a era -- host: you

followed her in terms of and in a villa region new and -- even if the president's personal approval rating goes down. host: to give you those latest numbers from a cnn poll, june, and 57%oved, 54% approved with 45% disapproved." and the possibility where it comes -- guest: the possibility where it comes down to personal honesty and ethics, that is taking a hit.

there is the possibility of finally having some sort of lasting impact that we do not know. yesterday we wanted to show that cbs show, who will face the nation," yesterday. , "face the nation," yesterday. [video clip] >> we have many neighbors in the area who have significant concerns. here is what we want to do, we have to be very discerning about what is in our interest and what the outcome is and what the price is that we will pay to get to that place. if we rush to war in the past, and we not do it here

have got to talk to them about the issue this week being treated. guest: both sides of the leadership have joined together and said that the programs in question, they have put a lot of their fire into the man on the programs. nancy pelosi calling for the prosecution of edward snow band, john boehner calling him a traitor. that has taken the fire of. the question is less about the programs and more about the man. more than half the senate did not even show up for a briefing on the an essay on thursday. host: even all of the political

publicity? guest: even after all the publicity. so, the story has not been getting the kind of attention that is full of a damaging for the president right now. maybe you can point to lawmakers as a source for the reason. [video clip] >> let me get you on the record, as the president feel that he is violated the privacy of an american? guest -- >> he does not. >> ronald reagan used to say to trust but verify, but in this and you will hear him

saying and what he said in his speech earlier this month at the national defense university. you will hear what he read -- what he said when he responded to reporters' on this question, there has to be a direct balance in this new question where we find ourselves reliant on internet, e-mail, texting. we communicate in different ways, meaning the bad guys are doing it as rel. ridgy as well. the president is not saying -- unless you go to the heart of the changes to the as a nine -- of 2009, and he said he won every member of congress to understand this and brief about it and become comfortable with

it. sinderbrand, does the white house feel they're getting control of the story of? guest: the president came out pretty strongly. he was speaking about privacy and security. with thethe legal case department of justice of pursuing. we heard from the white house that he will be speaking out in the days ahead. issue byot a partisan any means. ,ou have not seen republicans out unified with a message against the president.

that is the president some breathing room. "st: here is a story from politico." talk about some of the strange bedfellows this story has made on capitol hill. as much ofdo not see the partisan divide. , the rankingcrat republican on intelligence, all pretty much say the same thing. john boehner called on the white house for the president to give a stronger defense of those programs. you are seeing some people on the same side that you would not have seen or did not see when

president bush was in office. of course of the programs were a little bit different. see thatbe hard to nancy pelosi would take the same tone. host: mike is waiting in minnesota. good morning. caller: my comment concerns immigration. the key focus is making employers responsible for the verification of their employees. up to now employees could hand out fake id. the employer knows it is fate. -- it is fake. "i saw identification.

i thought he was a legal citizen." hit the employer with a stiff financial penalty. -- takes the modification motivation for those people running into the united states. duncan.is comes in from if you can talk about from the political side. guest: we have 11 million people in the country who are undocumented right now. there are arguments you should do something about that right now. getting records on all of them and granting them some kind of .ath to legal residents people argued that is a good thing to do for security.

politically, president obama won vote. the hispanic to thatsomething constituency to do something in his second term. republicansssure on to do something as well. they feel like they are becoming a party that has less of a chance in winning presidential elections. --t: bill writes in host: marie from washington, d.c. you are on with ian swanson and rebecca sinderbrand. caller: good morning.

most of the discussion has been about latinos. whatabout provisions -- provisions are being made from african-american people? . am 62 i will never forget how the haitians were put into camps. what about 25 million latinos? what provisions are being made for people and match is focused on people with color and language? it is not fair. guest: this thing called

diversity vises. that has allowed people -- diversity of visas. by thisbeing phased out bill in favor of people more in terms of the skills that they have. there is an increase in visas. shift see a bit of a from looking at people based on where they are coming from to what kind of skills they provide to the country. host: you brought up the president's approval rating. "ere's another story from politico." bottom." hits rock

host: is this something that members of congress are worried about losing their jobs over? guest: not necessarily. you might think members of congress might be concerned. the way thek at district has been set up, members of congress have far more to worry about from the

base then in a general election. they have more to lose with compromising with the other side. if you have a member who decides to take a hard-line with the other side, that is likely to get that number reelected. compromising may make for a more productive congress and possibly could cost him or hurt their job. from here's a story street jounal."

host: some of those seats held by democrats have been hard to fill. haveprominent republicans elected not to run. in georgia, democrats hope to foot the seats and suffered a setback. why is it so hard to run for congress? because ofbe partly the approval ratings you mentioned. democrats are looking at a tough political map. there are a bunch of seats that they are defending. we have seen both parties having

trouble in recruiting members. sometimes the timing is not right for the individual member. bee rogers was thought to the best republican candidate in michigan. he is going to stay in the house. he thought he could have more to leadership if he remained on the intelligence committee and the house. sometimes it is hard to recruit. cards and'd read the do not think they have a good chance of being elected. maryland.ie from good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question. we are losing a lot of for good

teachers. i live in maryland. our fire and police. how can the president justify day vacation.ht- how many of our good teachers could we save all over the world with that $100million. you do not hear that. people do not talk about that. travestyownright a what these are spending. host: these are estimates of the president's upcoming trip to africa. guest: that is something the president's would hope will be more of a topic of conversation,

the sequester. beeneconomic numbers have a bonus for the president. congressthe case that needs to work on the sequester. it has not been as much of a public focus the white house had hoped. capitol it members of hill not bringing it out? what has capitol hill been doing? guest: democrats are complaining that the republicans are not bringing up a fi x. the economy is doing fine. the sequester is having a role as well. it seems anybody would turn off the sequester before september.

the budget caps will continue for some time. i would expect the kinds of cuts will continue in the foreseeable future. callswe are taking your and comments on sequestration, the and the save leaks -- anthe and any other subject you want to talk about. caller: i would like to make a few comments. payingas immigration -- taxes. when you go out for a job, if you do not have a ged,

you cannot get a job. that needs to be changed. this would give jobs from the middle class -- they have been working all these years. , making young people ends meet. as far as thent, surveillance, they should not be doing that to the american people that pay taxes. people with lines are not criminal. the republicans and democrats will lose focus. host: ken from delaware. we have a few tweets about

that. host: ian swanson, if you could jump in. guest: half the senate did not show up for an nsa briefing. host: do they list who does and does not attend? guest: they do not. host: there is no roll call? guest: not that we have been able to attain. miningephone data

program was taking american numbers and putting them into a system where they could look for patterns in terms of who is calling who. another program was focused on foreigners. somebody was the mailing somebody in the united states from saudi arabia. there are two different programs. host: do you thin the prwide house is doing a good job in explaining that? administration has tried to do a bit of a sales job. voices is thedest president has been silent on the issue since snowden came forward.

i'm sure that is one of the points he is going to make. was talking about the difficulty about finding a job without a ged. without a ged, the economy has not been improving in the same way. fromconomic message republicans has been, where are the jobs? income do notr necessarily turnout in the same numbers in midterm elections. you would think that republican message might resonate with that group of people. next fromie is up oklahoma.

you're on with ian swanson and rebecca sinderbrand. caller:yes. you are not an american citizen that you cannot vote. host: correct. are you concerned about that in the immigration debate? caller: yes. in without the w latino count. host: the support the president had from the hispanic community. are u.s.me hispanics citizens and can vote. a lot of these people that would become legal residents and citizens if the immigration bill passes could be seen as likely

democratic votes. a bill thatthis is if passed you would expect a higher proportion of these 11 million people, a higher portion of them would possibly vote democratic. host: the republican party has also been pushing for immigration reform. bit about reince priebus, the chairman of the republican national committee. isst: the republican party worried about becoming the party of older white males. those are the people they are doing the best with. reince priebus is making a more appealing to hispanic americans

and to everybody. believeslican party they can be a part of the solution on immigration. ofk at the champion immigration reform, marco rubio, who may be running for president in 2016. just 29% going to get of the hispanic vote. he will get a higher percentage. host: we have this from lms. talking about securing the border. leonard is up next from detroit, michigan. caller: good morning. i have two comments.

i'm a lawyer. have we forgotten the law in the united states? is calleds government the bill of rights. it is called the fourth amendment. you do not have anything to hide. that is not america. there is a thing called the fourth amendment. americans have the right not to be intruded on by the government. i do not understand what we are talking about. host: rebecca sinderbrand, talked about the white house walking the line on security verses some of these privacy issues. skeptical, and the

president was. he made the program functionally different. directorhe former nsa saying the same thing. administration was more transparent than the bush administration. that is not going to make the sale for many americans. different. a little would not make these programs fully transparent. will sayno way a judge the aclu doesn't have some kind knowing the details.

emergence makes things a little different. -- : 90 get your thoughts let me get thiyour thoughts on this tweet. the government would it tells the terrorist what we are doing and what we are not doing. we can make it easier for them to get around to try to catch them. president obama has talked about a needed debate on this issue. we will learn more about them as we go forward. host: kim is from virginia on

our republican line. caller: good morning. i have a comment about the immigration bill. understand that they are going to pass this bill and allow these people in here to have citizenships. look at the boston marathon bombings. how do we know these people are not here to do this to us? they're putting american citizens' safety to risk. we do not want what is going on in israel, the suicide bombers here in america. , it the time to realize could be more bombings.

the blood of american citizens will be on their hands. the: talk about some of security provisions worked into the immigration bill. there is a nexus of the stories we're talking about today, immigration and the nsa programs. they were legal residents of the united states. i'm not sure this bill would have done anything to prevent them from getting into the country. them, you have to hat have depended on some of the programs the white house is now defending, these telephone

programs where they are trying to find patterns. perhaps they could have found a message from one of the tsarnaev brothers and a russian. i do not know there is something specific in the immigration bill that could have prevented the boston bombings. thehere anything in programs that could have prevented something from happening? question ona has a twitter. guest: on the phone program, that's something the white house has tried to make the case from

the beginning. nsa is not to save the cannot listen in on calls. this is not an impossible thing. the program was about looking for patterns and numbers dialed and only then tracing them back to the identities. and notnumbers dialed necessarily connected to names. host: there is a story from "the washington post," a lot you can get from meta data. bring people up on the latest of what we know about these programs.

guest: the government was collecting phone records and trying to find patterns. they were looking at internet data from the seven big internet company servers, looking for communications among foreign users, and sometimes looking at domestic users as well. those are the two programs. ofy could take other steps possibly listening in on a call. courtould have to get a order to do that. we are still getting new revelations. there was a story about them possibly tapping the russian during at pasquale''s calls summit.

host: how do some of those revelations play into the present's trip? he is in ireland today for the g-8 summit. guest: this is something he is going to hear about from european leaders. there is some concern from the germans. thatf the things is european regulations are far different and stricter than american privacy regulations. havecan tech companies may some concern that the u.s. intelligence is looking in on their servers. that is a number of issues for the white house to deal with.

summit taking place in northern ireland. dominic is awaiting from new jersey. good morning. caller: about this snowden character. he did not tell us anything we did not know. the nsa is doing their jobs. the nsa has got to do what they got to do. people are complaining about this. i believe every time you lose a little bit of your privacy, you used your freedom. but we are at war. you have to give. the government has an obligation to protect us.

host: domenic from new jersey. lee from new york. good morning. this sequester question keeps coming up every once in awhile. it was the president's idea. veto anye was going to budget that tried to override his veto or to not pass this. and blamesns around it on the republicans when it does pass. biggests. story is the story in the country. there were suppressing votes and opposing view s.

dangerous.ery, very our news media is clamming up. i stopped watching c-span. c-span carries the line of the democrats. you never hear any scandals about the democrats. away wither got stuffing secrets -- host: we want to talk about the issues that viewers are interested in. let's talk about the i.r.s. with ian swanson from "the hill." where is congress going from here? nsa scandal pushed

the i.r.s. scandal off the table. ist week is when it i.r.s. due to come forward with its 30 day report on the progress they have made since they abroad and a new commissioner. ourbig hearings to watch next week when this report comes out. your: rebecca sinderbrand, perspective on the i.r.s. scandal. for theemocrats pushing chairman to release the full transcripts of interviews about the scandal. only partial transcripts have been released. tore is a bit of a showdown show what he has.

we have not seen evidence of a theirthat was denied status based on the additional scrutiny. some were waiting and left in limbo. the more details that come out about these programs, the white house is hoping that full transparency is muddying the waters on this story. taken the windas out of the sails of this story and knocked it off the front page. host: good morning. you're on with rebecca sinderbrand and ian swanson. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. a cousin of mine, was anyid not know

same-sex relationship. torn with was sort of the idea of same-sex marriage because of our religion, background, and beliefs. i have come to look at the whole spectrum of same-sex marriage. if you are an american and iorking and paying your taxes, do not see a problem with you being able to have a legal partner. is the wordear o "marriage." i do not know if they can change it. the person ixpire,

choose to share my life with would reap the benefits. i think the whole thing is digesting marriage. it does say -- religion plays a big part of it between a man and a woman. it is thean be where person's legal partner and they can reap the benefits of working and sharing their life together. host: jumped in and talk about what is expected from the supreme court. what of the options the supreme court could take on these big cases? guest: same sex marriage, a lot of people have been waiting for the supreme court to wait until

the end of the term. determiner ends at the end of the supreme court term ends at the end of the month. thee is a lot of directions supreme court could take, ranging from the most dramatic -- most people believed they would strike down the defense of marriage act. 17 has been in place for years now. some inear a move among the evangelical community. some are saying the word " marriage" and they're like to

see a different definition. the government take another direction. that is something that will be argued at kitchen tables all over the country. couldhe court is deciding have an immediate impact. place in onet take state would be recognized. thatmeone is marries, removes the whole issue. host: are there members of congress who are readying legislation after what we see from the supreme court today? what are members of congress doing to prepare? would i'm not sure they

be getting ready for legislation. wherettle is taking place states are legalizing same-sex marriage. i doupreme court could make not think anybody has an idea of what the supreme court is going to do. there has been a shift in public opinion. back andwant to sit not get involved as much and let state legislators duke out. make aaps they want to revolutionary stock in the debate. host: craig is up next from california. caller: you failed to respond

abouthe caller who asked holding employers responsible for the e-verify program. no one seems to want to take on this subject. even the press. it seems a simple and effective to askd i would ask you your guests to respond to this place. issuecan you explain the at the caller brings sup? andt: there are provisions they are introducing a verification system that would areto ensure that people hiring people in the country legally. that is a critical step to

tightening the border. sending ank about army to the border or building a big wall. who comeblem is people to the country illegally and stay illegally. they overstay their visas -- they come to the country legally and stay illegally. strongerhave had a immigration system earlier bills had passed. we are now six or seven years later and we are doing the same thing. host: we have a question on twitter. host: can you talk about either

of those issues and where we're headed? guest: term limits and campaign finance reform are issues that pop up every few years. after thesome talk most recent decision by the supreme court about money and speech to try to address it at the legislative level and it did not go anywhere. one interesting point from the past election is a lot of people were talking about the overwhelming advantage that some republican outside groups have had. that was not reflected in the election results. a win. more money means

host: a comment about this story. wants to move the gop convention earlier. he put out a proposal to move the convention to june from august. move?u explain the guest: this was an issue for romney. thenominee cannot use party's general election money until he is officially nominated. if the nomination this not take place until the end of the essentiallys running on fumes for the summer.

and so what reince priebus is sense oncen makes the contest is over that that person should become the actual nominee and we can take advantage of the machinery. some of the long-shot candidates will say this is an attempt to short circuit the process before it can play itself out. host: how was that proposal being taken on capitol hill? guest: there is some interest in doing it from republicans. some of theto see smaller candidates have more time. i do not recall seeing anything recently.

it is not like conventions always took place at the end of august. i am skeptical of the real u.n.on you are what when -- will be because of when the convention is. ifwould have helped romney he could have had access to the general election account earlier. it, comes down to clear candidates are. host: a couple more calls. carolina onom south the democratic line. good morning. questions.ave two colon cancerring survivor.

mye sequester -- representative and we have met with him and we talk about the sequester. of everyfour cents dollar is taken away. other thing about the sequester or the troops. -- i thinkays democrats and republicans, we talked so much about our troops. they are feeling the pinch of this. coming home from war with no jobs. why isn't that our first out?ity, helping them host: take us through the

sequester. ofst: it lasts until the end september. people have been furloughed from the government today. year will bel subject to a new cap. cuts ifl require more congress does not do something about it. unless the congress and president come together on a grand bargain of the deficit and to tackle things like taxes, social security, you will see them coming around the edges with going into the discretionary domestic spending and cutting to try to make some kind of effort and reducing the deficit. host: ian swanson from "the

hill." rebecca sinderbrand from politico. thank you for joining our roundtable today. up next, juan zarate. your taxpayer dollars are being spent on responding to natural disasters. but first, a news update. nsa datan the collection program from apple. accesssist no agency has to its servers. any request needs a court order. they received between 4,000 and request for data.

china is joining calls following disclosures of nsa data collection programs. lawmakers are pressing washington for information following the disclosures from edward snowden. president obama is in ireland at theirour and said that generation must begin taking the lead to continue the ongoing peace in the country. to president endorsed a plan tear down so-called peace lines, by 2023.walls president obama in ireland for the g-8 summit. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. except it gettysburg as a to fe defeat.

he reckoned the logistical outcome had been very good from the confederate perspective. he argued the heavy losses at gettysburg to not exceed "what it would've been from the series of battles i would have been compelled to fight had i been in virginia." from they coverage gettysburg battlefield, sunday, june 35. >> "washington journal" continues. talk about mcdonough some of the claims and we're joined now by juan zarate, a former security adviser in the

bush administration who now works at the center for strategic and international studies. what is the white house strategy in handling this and as a leaksansa leak? guest: they want to get a handle on the damage that has been done. andade his way to hong kong is in chinese territory is problematic. it appears he's using the information as a potential leverage. aboutite house is worried what he may have in his possession. think they are trying to explain more clearly what this program is and the checks and balances built into it that provides protections

that has been so much a part of the controversy. being more open is what you saw denis mcdonough tried to do on the sunday talk shows. balance?t is the right i believe you take an oath to hold this information classified. what snowden did was wrong. has ak the administration responsibility to be as open as possible about how the program works and about what the checks and balances are. most people don't have a clear takes its how the nsa role. there are lawyers devoted to

that. generale inspector reports and audits. we haveportant because entered a new era where the government has access and is retaining more and more data. we have not had much of a public with all the new technologies in play. very important a moment for the demonstration to be open about what this program is. host: we will open up the phone lines for comments about this issue. the numbers are on the bottom of the screen. aboutolks a little better your experience with these

programs. terrorismas a young prosecutor before 9/11. i was at the treasury department during 9/11. out the money systems and programs that are now in place. i joined the white house in 2005. i was a deputy national security adviser. my job was to oversee the implementation of our strategy. i was in the middle of a lot of these debates and of these questions as to how you balance these issues. you have the leak of the nsa wiretap program.

treasuryleak of the tracking program, which caused a controversy. "the newc editor of apology andissued a said it was a mistake to leak that story. that is a program that should have been of viewed as an example of how to do that. of ay constructive use massive amount of data. a great example of how we should proceed. "st: do you expect that from "the washingtonr post"? guest: it was illegal and edward

snowden should not have done it. to press has an obligation publish a things. they have a responsibility to do it responsibly. think "the washington post" has held back on publishing other details. how do we insure this is not being abused? we cannot take the president's's word for it. courtnderstand the fisa at how the oversight is happening. host: we are talking with juan zarate. our phone lines are open.

their chiefuse sent of staff on the sunday talk shows yesterday. he cast some doubts on some of the claims made by edward snowden. guest: i think some of what he said appeared to be hyperbole. wiretap that he could anyone he wants including the president of the united states is probably not accurate. that did have that access, would be illegal. some of what he is claiming is hyperbole. he had access to a lot of which heon, some of probably should not have. host: will open the phone lines.

dennis is from winchester, virginia. caller: good morning. two.e a quick comment or -- the president is a liar and needs to be in peampeached. i do not understand how the american people are alone in this to happen. host: talk about the public reaction. guest: one of the interesting parts is not that the government is looking at this kind of data. know the government is looking at this. there has been a debate in 2004."

balloo about?ulla the bushd in administration and has expanded under the obama administration. the administration was seemingly bent on retreating from some of the bush policies. we're going to see fundamental continuity and think we have seen that. we have seen that with the targeted killings. long term preventive detention. and now in this with the revelation of surveillance programs. there is a bit of this juncture between what the obama administration promised and the reality of the counter terrorism

policies. concerns you have any during your time in the bush administration about the expansion of that? guest: i cannot speak to what i knew on a classified basis, but we constantly grappled with this. to suggest that the bush administration did not look at these issues is not looking at the record. the tracking program was fairly unique in that regard. it started in 2001, and we embedded in it the privacy and protections. our access was restricted, monitored by the company providing us the data, outside auditors, and our own internal

ig and practices and at the time it became public, also monitored by the european union, who sent the famous french magistrate judge to look at what we were doing. there are ways to strike that balance between security and privacy. there needs to be more of a public debate. we did it in the bush administration. perhaps not perfectly, but every administration has to grapple with these balances. host: there has been a roundtable held in "usa today" and one question they asked to security experts is good for and government terrorist organizations get information that he did not have already because of these leaks by edward

snowden? guest: i think there is a problem with assuming, knowledge among all terrorist actors. certainly, osama bin laden, the leaders of al qaeda ones new and certainly do know the kind of surveillance underway and there practices are sophisticated. but the reality of the terrorist threats we face now are more fractured, and we have younger individuals that might not know the practices and modalities used to track their movements. the general notion that government services are looking at communications is not a big deal. i think we know that. the problem is exactly how it is done, and that is where the u.s. government gets worried -- where sources and methods are revealed and then you see the sophisticated actors react

around that knowledge. everyone says these leaks do not matter -- folks overestimate the amount of detail adversaries know about exactly what we are doing. a seniorn zarate is adviser in washington, d c, and is taking your questions on the nsa leaker story. , onsa from columbus, ohio our independent line. seek out i had an interesting -- caller: i have been interested in watching these issues, and it makes me feel like the republican party is dumbing down america. why are we not fixing what we need to fix in this country, and why are these congressmen and senators not doing their job?

being from a military background, with my father, brother and husband serving, i do not understand why we cannot take care of is the instead of at ourtching fire president, who many americans were not even given the respect of president obama. he might not be your guy, but we have to take care of america. we have children living with their parents until they are 30 years old, disabled people that cannot get care -- we have children being killed because we will not do a mental health registry. as the caregiver of a mentally ill son who is 29 years old, i spend every day with him. there are no services for him. host: juan zarate, are we spending too much time on this and it's a issue dish on this nsa issue -- on this nsa issue?

guest: i do not think so. the debate about how they use and leverage information is critical. teresa, thank you q you and your family for your service -- thank you for your family and your service to the country. one of the things you will see in terms of the question of of these programs is if congress really doing their jobs? do the members of congress that have a responsibility on behalf of american citizens -- are they doing their job? you will start to see their stories, how many senators and representatives have attended the briefings. are they asking the right

questions? the questions that date back to post-9/11. do people remember the briefings? did they ingest what was happening question these are critical questions -- happening? these are critical questions. we rely on them to oversee these medical programs. host: a couple of twitter questions. first is from boring file clerk -- how did a high school dropout work in $200,000 to hawaii and manage our secret. the real scandal is government. >> -- guest: is a good question. his access to this data, the fact that he worked for a contractor and at the cia with access to sensitive information,

that raises questions about our security processes and whether or not we have outsourced to aggressively elements of nashville security. that is -- national security. that is a debate that is part of the broader debate about the national security. host: how could outside audits be used to increase trust in nsa ectomy? guest: -- at a meeting? -- activity? guest: what you could do is not only have a greater sense of what the controls are now -- how the inspector general and the nsa looks at this program, but perhaps have an outside audit. there is something called the privacy and civil liberties oversight lord to start -- oversight board. that word is supposed to be doing this kind of oversight to

make sure that the government, especially in these sensitive programs, is not overstepping its grounds. the obama administration was criticized for not having anyone on the board. the board exists now and they could do the outside audit. you have to have these new kinds of structures to get greater comfort and visibility that the balances being struck. host: is there a way to make us more secure without taking a heavy price of undermining our constitutional rights and basic freedoms? talkedpresident obama about false choice between security and liberty. he has backed away a little bit, but i do not think it is an all or nothing proposition. i think you can design these programs to ensure the government is doing this in a targeted way, in a way that is not just trolling and data mining with big brother-like

elements. i think there are ways to design the programs and give people visibility as to how they are implemented to ensure the government is not over-stepping. to the extent that people overstep the bounds, that they are held accountable -- they are fired, fined. host: juan zarate is a senior adviser at the center for strategic and international studies, where he works as a transnational threats project advisor. he is also the author of a couple of books -- "forging ," and a new book coming out on september 10, " treasuries were -- were -- "treasuries war."

what is that about? guest: the story about how the treasury department, a group of individuals within it and the u.s. government has put financial power and influence at the center of national security. between diplomacy and military power, there is often not much in between. the u.s. has devised new and aggressively seize financial power to drive national security interests. the book is about not -- about that. host: joe is waiting to talk to you from north carolina on our republican line. good morning. caller: good morning, sir. guest: good morning, joe. caller: the president swore to uphold the constitution, and everyone swears and then they

make a deal to violate the constitution for the greater good. snowden broke the law. he should be put in jail. if a man is a murderer, you have a legal procedure. if you do not follow the constitution for him, follow the constitution for immigrants when they do not have papers. wrotemembers of congress the law -- explain that more. guest: they all agreed -- caller: they all agreed to the patriot act behind our back. they all got caught, and they want to hang the man that told on him. host: did congress break any laws in the patriot act? guest: i do nothing congress broke laws in passing the patriot act or in the reauthorization that have come since, but joe raises the important sensibility that

maybe we are pushing on the bounds of the fourth amendment, the prohibition on unlawful seizures. perhaps we need to recalibrate what that looks like in the era of big data and technology. host: how were these discussions handled in the bush administration? guest: in many ways, it was a work in progress. you need to think about the bush administration in stages. immediately after 9/11, there was deep shock and also an attempt to understand what was coming next. it was a deep sense of the unknown in terms of what al qaeda was doing and planning and what was possible. a member we had the anthrax .ttacks here in washington there was a sense of dread and of needing to get as much information as possible to ensure that 9/11 never happened again. there was an evolution through

the second term of the bush administration. i was honored enough to serve in the second term. what you saw was a recalibration, some by diplomatic russia, and others by litigation, -- pressure, and others by litigation. at the heart of that was making sure that what we were doing andlegal, defensible understandable, not only to the american public, but to our friends and allies abroad, and to make sure we had built programs that would keep america safe in the long term. and i left in 2009, one of my wasments for continuity you might oppose what happen in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, a what you have now a different set of systems for how we protect the country and those

balances have been drawn with legislation, with counterparts abroad, and you will see that continuity. the revelation that the obama administration largely continued these practices and programs is a manifestation of that continuity. -- clayton,clinton louisiana. caller: good morning, mr. zarate. guest: good morning. caller: i used to drive a truck across country, and i was about 15 miles when they hit the towers and after that they made us go west. it came out the nsa knew about that, and we were understanding from state troopers. host: what are you saying the nsa knew about?

caller: the nsa knew this would happen. host: are you talking about september 11? we will hold off on the conspiracy theories. let's go to collage from oceanside, california, on our democrat line. i have a question for mr. zarate. we should not have a problem with what the nsa is doing if we do not have anything to hide, however the government continues to classify information. the lady who called earlier said she has family that is military. i'm a military veteran. with the budget deficits and everything, it is almost impossible to get everything. host: you were going in and out. what is your question?

caller: why should the american people be ok with the nsa doing wiretapping when the government continues to classify information? guest: well, it is a good question. there are some that think there should be no secrets in government at all. that is the julian assange extreme view. there are others that think we should classify everything and keep things under cloak. you have to have a balance. the government has to be able to defend the country. you cannot have sources and methods of battle plans and how we gather sensitive intelligence -- you cannot have that on the front pages of the paper. that is a given. you can also not have simply the american public being told you can trust us, especially when we understand the data being

acquired is mass in quantity with huge technology to access it. there has to be a way of balancing come up where the american public -- balancing, where the american public knows what the program is about and has confident in the oversight. this is where congress come a the president -- congress, the courts and the president have a important role to play. i would argue we need the nsa to look at this kind of data. we need to be able to put the pieces together. part of the problem with 9/11 was we did not put the pieces of data together. we did not do the deep analysis. the 9/11 commission argued for an information sharing environment that was wide and deep, and in some cases what we

have seen with the bradley manning case and this case is too many people having access. host: there are about 5 million people in the united states that hold security clearances, and 71% and lower confidential clearances. the pentagon issues about 80% to military officials. are you comfortable with that many people having access to our secret and top-secret information? guest: i am not. host: is there a right number? guest: i am not sure there is a right number, but the snowden aak indicates we have to take hard look at how we give contractors access to information. a do great work for the country. i do not want to besmirch them. is done by oversight contractors. i do not want to besmirch the

entire industry, but we have to rationalize who has access to what, especially as we get two more sensitive hogans where lives are at risk. wheres -- sensitive, lives are at risk. we need to keep secrets to protect lives and do the defending of the country properly, and at the same time we have to have an open and transparent system where the citizenry knows to government is not overreaching. is a seniorarate adviser at the center for strategic and international studies. you can see some of his work at csis.org. war "o has "treasuries coming out on september 10. tax, we will look to your dollars on a different

government program. this week we're focusing on -- naturala after disaster spending. first an update from c-span radio. in secret data gathering from the g-8 summit. finnish prime minister david cameron was questioned -- british prime minister david cameron was questioned, and while responding he said he is not about to start commenting on security or intelligence issues. meanwhile, president obama holds one-on-one meetings today with british prime minister cameron, russia's president and italy cost prime minister. turning to iran, the country's new president is vowing to follow a path of moderation. he spoke at his first news conference since his surprise victory in friday's presidential election.

's will learn more about iran new president later today. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> we think it is critical that there ofation or lack keeps in mind that we need to be incentivized to continue to invest in the physical infrastructure that is at the core of every product that we deliver, and if we are going to be a world leader in the delivery of high-speed data, with the fastest speeds and most capable wi-fi access points, it is key that the regulatory environment in which we operate actually fosters as opposed to inhibit further investment in that plan. >> and we have more packaging flexibility and options for consumers? that is something we are hopeful and we have worked on. we have more packages and we

have ever had before. finally, is it the government role in negotiations? is best served in business relationships, not in government laws and mandates. we are very respectful. it is an important subject and we want to be part of the dialogue. >> a look at the cable industry and video marketplace with leaders of two of the country's largest community should companies tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. -- >> "washington journal" continues. host: this week we will look at how your money is being spent with federal disaster relief spending. to do that, we are joined by daniel weiss, a senior fellow at

the center for american progress who co-authored a recent report on federal disaster spending over the last three years. mr. weiss, start us off with the price tag on federal disaster relief spending over the last three years. guest: thank you for having me. we looked at the covering spending in fiscal years 2011, 2012 and 2013 and we found the federal government spent 136 billion dollars over the three years, or about $400 per household per year. >> the name of them -- host: the name of the report is " ."sastrous spending for folks that want to follow along, it is available online? guest: and american progress .org and you could put in the title "disaster spending" or my name, daniel weiss.

host: you equate it to about $400 per household per year. break those numbers down for us as we show a chart on the different bills that you added up -- the different appropriations and supplemental spending bills and what they cost. guest: it is important to note that the federal government itself does not have an accurate tally on how much it spends on disaster relief and recovery. ,e scrubbed the federal budget looking for every program that has an element of disaster relief and recovery in it. we found there were 96 programs in 19 official cabinet departments that had some element of disaster spending. a lot of these received money for only the superstorm sandy disaster relief act. the fbi got money to replace damaged facilities in northern

new jersey. that is not typical. nonetheless, this reflects the fact that we have had 25 disasters in the last two years that cost at least $1 billion in damage each. 180total price tag of billion dollars just for these 25 events. this is what some call the new normal as climate change continues to accelerate, as we floods, droughts, storms, heat waves and wildfires that will cause an increase in disaster relief spending. finalsandy alone, the number was a little over $60 billion. you said 96 different programs across federal agencies. here is the department of agriculture on your chart. what are some of the 19 programs in the department of

agriculture that have to do with federal disaster spending? guest: the department of agriculture sent the second highest amount of money over the last three years after the homeland security department and the reason is we have been suffering and extreme drought, particularly in the southwest, but at one point last year tubule thirds of the continental united states which in severe drought. there are programs that include crop insurance, money for emergency efforts to get water, to help them with hay payments -- things like that. these programs are there to help farmers during droughts. host: awareness flood insurance fit into the equation? it is a program we hear about. there are a lot of political debates. where did that spending fallout? guest: flood insurance is part of the homeland security department. host: that is spent -- the

homeland security, that spent over $55 billion over the course of the three years you .ooked at guest: that is right, and a good part of that was due to superstorm sandy, and also to the 24 other, severe, billion dollar in damage events. flood insurance comes under the federal emergency management agency, which is part of the homeland security department, and a supplement insurance to help protect people from flooding. it was in the tens of billions of dollars over the last three years total. host: we are taking your calls in this segment as we talk to daniel weiss with the center for american progress. he is a senior fellow. the phone lines are open. as folks are calling -- you make the argument that some of the spending might be better off on

,he front side, pre-disaster preparing for it. talk about that aspect of your report. host: -- guest: the federal emergency management agency did a study that found for every dollar we invest in community resilience, of the community to resist the impact of extreme weather, we reduced damages by four dollars. here it is a case of an ounce of prevention. clearly a case of an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. unfortunately, the amount of money we invest in his after resistance is relatively -- invest in disaster resistant is relatively small, and we will release a report on that, looking at federal resilience investment.

say -- can you say howe much money the obama administration is putting in that preparation spending? guest: just let the government does not know how much it is spending on disaster recovery, it does not know how much it is spending on resilience either. we will be releasing that tomorrow. it is safe to say disaster resilience cost money, but it saves in the long run. joplin, missouri, which was wiped out by a horrible tornado kill your years ago, they had to rebuild -- two years ago, they had to rebuild their hospital, putting in new windows that cost more, but that will enable the hospital in the future to withstand severe tornadoes. panamaatricia is in

city, florida, on our democrat line. seek help during sandy hook when they started -- caller: during sandy hook, when they started arguing about $9 billion -- that was insurance everybody had paid, flood insurance. i thought that was appalling. i have been paying flood insurance for years. host: this was after hurricane sandy? guest: the caller is correct. i do not mean to be partisan, but the vast majority of republicans refused to grant $9 billion to replenish the flood insurance for graham fund -- program fund that had to be spent in the wake of superstorm sandy. eventually that was passed.

many more balked at the $50 million invested for relief and recovery. for the first time, some republican senators wanted to cut spending for other programs in order to help clean up after sandy. in other words, we will help you clean up the damage from hurricane sandy, but you have to cut money from health care, federal education spending or medical research in order to spend it, which is not the american way of doing things. the way we do things is pitch in and help americans when they are in trouble through no fault of their own. host: for folks that do not know what the center for american progress is, explain your group. is a progressive think tank that helps to help americans become a stronger, more vibrant middle-class society with vibrant economic growth. host: american progress.org is the website.

i want to go back to the phones in newston is waiting york, new york. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. one needs to be brought up when it comes to this federal -- thing isief that climate change. i saw climate -- and reports called the barry bonds effect. barry bonds hit more home runs because he is on steroids. as a regular player he would hit x, but on steroids he hits more. they said what we have is whether on steroids. the carbon that we are putting into the air is affecting our weather, making it more severe. i live in new york city and mayor bloomberg has announced a plan to default our resistance

-- beef up our resistance against storms. we will be paying for that. look at the midwest, oklahoma, getting blown apart by more and more severe weather. where in the heck is a carbon tax -- what role does a carbon tax say when we know for a fact that so much of the carbon we are putting into the air is caused by coal, methane and all of these things. how do these companies get away with the helping to pay for the results of putting carbon in the air? host: daniel weiss? guest: thank you, preston. a number of scientists have compared the client to being -- climate on steroids. you cannot say any storm, just ,ike you cannot say barry bonds a home run, was due to steroids, but weather is getting more extreme.

will haveictably more extreme weather in the the future if we do not reduce the carbon pollution responsible for climate change. that will be more damaging because we have an infrastructure that is built for a stable climate it will be facing a climate with more extreme weather. preston also mentioned a carbon tax that would make it more costly to produce -- pollute the atmosphere, and you can use the money to make committees more resilient and reduce other carbon pollution. we think that is a great idea. president obama also has the ability under the clean air act to require power plants, the number one source of carbon pollution in the country, to reduce carbon emissions and we hope he will use that authority this year. host: one is that decision expected? that is something folks in the environmental and energy communities are watching. when do we expect a decision?

bloomberg reported that he would make an announcement next month, and it is important that he reduces the level. host: preston also brought up michael bloomberg's to armor new york city against climate change over the next decade, as reported in "the new york times account talk about that -- in "the new york times." talk about that program. guest: the program would help to protect new yorkers from future stream weather, particularly see storm surge and huge rain storms and flooding. this could mean everything from making some areas off-limits to development, to raising the height of some facilities and infrastructure, and make

insurance star generators in -- making-- make sure there are generators in buildings. some of the program is coming from federal funds. every community in america should have the same support from the federal government that new york and new jersey are getting to do their these aliens. we believe we ought to create a dedicated fund, a dedicated center of revenue that helps communities increase their assistance. it will be different things in different places, but every community deserves that support. sid, from louisville, kentucky, you are on with daniel weiss. caller: good morning. guest: good morning. caller: when i was looking at the statistics on who spent the

most money, who had the biggest budgets, i had no clue and still cannot figure out why homeland security has any budget for disaster relief. can you talk about that a little bit? guest: sure. it is a great question -- what is the apartment of homeland security get money? host: this is part of the hundred $86 billion that you added up. guest: right, and that is because homeland security includes with and it the federal emergency management agency that helps people in the wake of disasters and provides technical assistance. the flood insurance program that was vital to get people on their feet after superstorm sandy, that is part of fema. they also spend billions of other dollars in helping communities recover after a huge flood or tornado. that is why they are number one in spending.

number two in spending is the department of agriculture, because of the severe drought we have been under. number three is the housing and urban development department, and that is because they help it will rebuild their homes and help people-- rebuild their homes. number four is the department of transportation. host: a question from twitter -- how much did it cost taxpayers four add-on amendments that did not not deal with the immediate outlook or disaster? this is something that one of the conservative think tanks here in bc, -- washington, d.c., the heritage foundation, has brought up in a recent report, noting that fema is incapable of ensuring a significant amount of its funds are not wasted. it notes there is a significant amount of waste, fraud and abuse in fema disaster relief.

talk to that issue. guest: the money for fisheries in alaska was because they were suffering from drought, and that is to restore the fisheries that are in vital part of the economy in alaska. the money for the roofs in washington, d c, it was damaged by the same storm that hit new york and new jersey so hard -- superstorm sandy was not just in new york and new jersey. it had impact as far west as ohio, and as far south as virginia. host: do you think the claims of waste in fema spending our overblown? guest: absolutely. most of the money helped people rebuild highways, subways, getting electricity back on the grid, providing relief for businesses.

one thing that is interesting is that a sizable amount of businesses, nearly half of all businesses do not reopen after they have been hit by a severe severe disaster, so we're trying to give those the opportunity to reopen. host: john is next from covington, georgia, on our independent line. .aller: talking about money and herdisastermrs. dianne fein husband are spending post offices for personal gain -- selling post offices for personal gain? could that money not help with relief? the president is talking about going to africa and these people are not in houses in new jersey. you progressives are a bunch of

crooks. the: let's not insult guest, and give them a chance to explain his thoughts. , john.thank you there are a lot of places to get money to help people where they have been hit. for example, the big five oil companies of bp, chevron, conoco phillips, exxon mobil and shell ineived $2.5 billion a year tax breaks even though combined they made over $100 billion in profits last year. that two point $5 billion a year could be invested in disaster relief and in resistance to reduce future damage. that is one example of a big source of money. another example, a lot of coal is taken from federal lands owned by you and me, the taxpayer, given to coal companies, and they pay a small

royalty amount. they paid $800 million in $7alties on: they sold for billion. .et's raise the royalty rate of the get our fair share back, and invest that in -- let's get our fair share back and invest that in disaster relief and recovery. -- host: charlie is from carmel, indiana on our independent line. caller: good morning. i am recently retired from homeland security and tsa, and i cannot tell you about the waste they spend on sending empty suits and booking hotel rooms and just throwing money away. they go to areas and do nothing but stand around and dictate policy during times of trouble.

additionally, i would like to know when they will do ig reports on some of these shell contractors that are sent in government for work that is usually never done, and then they are gone, back to where they came. host: charlie, you think that waste extends into federal disaster spending? caller: you would not believe. they get volunteers, like the tsa, they stand around in airports all day, then volunteer to go to emergency areas for taking up hotel rooms that families and people need to use, and after that they get bonus money for hanging out at a disaster and then they come back. it is such a waste. homeland security, specifically tsa is a money pit. guest: i cannot comment -- caller: what they spend --

host: let's give the guest chance to respond. host: i cannot -- guest: i cannot comment on homeland security spending, but i have a fema, andt works for i can tell you it is no luxury trip. if you go to a disaster area, there are nothey get volunteerse tsa four-star hotels open. .hey really rough it i agree there needs to be careful oversight to make sure the money is well spent and americans get one dollar of work for one dollar investment, but from what i know from my phil from minnesota and looking at the record is this is money well spent. she want to save, we should invest more in community -- if you want to save, we should invest more in community resilience. in texas, they are building storm shelters big enough to

hold 5000 people and withstand hurricane winds of up to 200 miles an hour and when there is not a hurricane, it is used a community gymnasium and community center. those kind of investments make a lot of sense for saving lives and money. host: we are talking with daniel weiss, a senior fellow for the center for american progress. the phone lines are open. omb has different numbers than what the center for american progress found. you put it as 100 $36 billion over the last three years. the last time the white house office of management and budget looked at this, their numbers were in the area of 11.5 alien dollars per year, going from 2001 to 2011.

why are the numbers so different? guest: the office of management and budget looked only at homeland security and fema. in 2011, they found we spent byghtly over $2 billion .ema we looked the wider range of programs programs and found more than 10 times that. we found $21 billion worth of spending. the reason for that is we look at all programs, not just fema. for example, 2011 was a serious drought year and a high number of declared disasters. there were monies spent four droughts, hurricanes, all kinds of things. i was the year we had hurricane irene. by looking -- that was the year we had hurricane irene. , we found broader

spending. we found that we should have the office of management and budget look for spending over the entire government, and not just fema. we estimated to be $400 per household per year over the last three years. estimate.layperson let omb turn accountants and at alls lose and look departments to come up with this number. host: kerry is from philadelphia, pennsylvania, on our democratic line. you are on with daniel weiss. caller: i have a question for mr. daniel weiss, but for the caller who wants to trash the progressives, i wonder if he trashed the bush administration for hurricane katrina, we found. i saw where there was support in west texas, the chemical

explosion, do you know if anything will be coming forward for those people? they are taxpayers as well. guest: i do not know what the status of that is, but that is different since that was, at some level, a human-made catastrophe, a chemical plant exploding, as opposed to a natural disaster caused by some element of the weather. that might be why fema is ruling differently. one thing that is important to note is that extreme weather is getting more extreme. in the 1980s, there were an average of 23 presidential disaster declarations a year. any the lastntil three years there has been an average of 73 per year and the damages are getting more expensive, too. host: here is a chart from your report. the red line is the average number of billion dollar damage

events per year from the 1980 'sst through the -- 1980 through the present. guest: it is important to note the blue line is in $2012. we are not comparing 1980 dollars. 2011 1980'srage cost in the was $11 billion. in the last three years it has been $86 billion. host: again, the latest report, you can find that on the center for american progress website. kevin is up next from evansville, indiana, on our republican line. good morning, kevin. caller: good morning.

my question is for mr. weiss, and i think he is misleading the american people that for us to believe when the federal government taxes exxon mobil or the coal companies that that is a tax to the company, that the company is somehow damaged by the tax. the tax is passed onto the consumer. that becomes a cost to each individual. if somebody wants to do disaster preparedness in their area or town, let their local jurisdictions tax them, right out of their paychecks, income, property tax, but to force a national tax, like the progressives always do, on national or worldwide corporations, those taxes filtered down to those of us that do not want disaster preparedness in our community, and 80 we prepare well enough on our own and we do not need the federal government to prepare for us.

guest: there are economic studies that show that when taxes are levied on big corporations, the entire amount is not passed on to consumers. second, we are talking about five corporations that made over $100 billion in profits. 2.5cing that over -- by billion dollars, they would not have to raise their prices by one set. we are talking about a product that is made from a commodity where the price is set on a worldwide market. it does not affect that at all. what it comes to local resistance, it might be fine if a community designs whether they want resilience efforts, but the reality is if it is an extreme weather event, the federal government will come in and help. that is what we do. if evansville, for example, were hit by a horrible storm, of

course, we ought to come in and sop them repair and recover the economy can get restarted. we are americans. that is what we do. it is not think or swim on your own -- sink or swim on your own. i guess i have a fundamental disagreement with kevin. by investing in resistance it will reduce costs and by reducing carbon pollution it will reduce the threat of extreme weather in the future. host: margaret is from chester, connecticut, on our republican line. caller: has anybody been able to put together a definition of what is a disaster, and secondly, why are people allowed to build houses of great expense) to the beach? beach?t next to the i have been through hurricanes since 1938, and i can tell you nobody helped our house when we

had a disaster here. thank you. first off, you sound way too young to have experienced a hurricane in 1938. second, there aren't changes. in -- there are changes. in new york and new jersey, they are buying up houses so they are not rebuilt in those same areas. we need to do more of that. in addition, we need to update the flood maps, so people have a better idea of where flooding is likely to occur. our flood maps, in many cases, are 30 or more years old and do not it -- reflect the new reality. that is something they do in new york city. host: margaret wanted to know how you define disaster? guest: there is a legal definition that i cannot quote

on the air because i do not have it memorized, but to me what it means is when you have a disruption in poor functions, including wastewater treatment, drinking water, electricity, transportation -- whether that is highly washed out or public transit is unavailable. when the local government disclosed, when local businesses are closed, that is a disaster. from norwalk, connecticut, on our independent line. , first ir. weiss wanted to state that i voted for president obama, but i'm .ery disappointed in him that is why i'm independent. i want a third-party that cares about the environment. while we talking about these disasters after the fact, and i

have are the case -- articles where this professor had come up with seaweed -- a solution for biofuel. thee was another one about impact of fresh water. i do not see anyone on c-span talking about the environment, attacking this before the disasters happened. this is our top priority. nevermind these other topics coming up, this back-and-forth with the republicans. planet.to save this i want to see action taken and i want people on c-span, leaves, talking about the environment. if you could get this profession from the unit -- professor from the university of connecticut on. he seems like a smart man. host: we will take that under advisement. is this part of why you did

this report in the first place? guest: thank you for the question. we are making slow progress in reducing carbon and other pollution responsible for climate change. since 2005, we are about 40% of the way things -- to our 2020 reduction goal thanks to president obama establishing new fuel economy standards for the first time in three decades. if you want to know he made a deal with china to save on the coolant you put into the atmosphere. we also need president obama to use the clean air act. he has the authority to set target pollution standards for new and existing power plants. that is the next step and that will help us reach our 2020 goal. host: hanging over a lot of this is the issue of the keystone pipeline.

if you can give us the latest on what the obama administration is on the approval. guest: the approval process requires public comments that have not been completed, and the state department is looking at its draft analysis, which many people, including the environmental protection agency was -- believe was flawed. i believe they will have to make a decision sometime in the mid--two-late fall. hopefully the president will conclude this is not in the national interest and set it aside because the pipeline will make it possible to more than alberta,e tar sands in which will unleash huge amounts of carbon pollution. host: michigan. paul on our republican line. caller: good morning. i have been watching c-span for decades and i constantly hear

about the over abundance of subsidies to oil companies. in obama's first two years he had total control of the congress. what did the democrats due to cut the subsidies of the oil companies, and if they did not do anything, what were they afraid of? guest: first of all, the president has proposed in every one of his budgets to cut subsidies for big oil companies. second, with the 60 votes required to get anything done in the senate, you need some republican cooperation and under president bush we came very close to cutting some of those subsidies and at the end of 2008 we reduced those subsidies a little bit. we have been unable to make further progress, but perhaps we will be able to do so under tax reform. it is interesting to note that dbl investors, a private investment company, estimates that over the next 100 years,

$41 in subsidies we have -- for every one dollar in solar and wind power, we have provided $80 in subsidies for oil and gas. host: daniel weiss for the center of american progress. thank you. that is our show here on "washington journal echo we will see you right back here at 7:00 a.m. tomorrow --"washington and we will see you right back here at 7:00 a.m. tomorrow. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> president obama is overseas this week for meetings with g-8 leaders. he arrived in northern ireland

this morning. -- effects of those talks the subject on those talks is expected to be on syria during the president touched down his e spoke with students, calling on the audience to take on responsibilities for the country's future. president obama also meeting today with british prime minister david cameron and russian leader vladimir putin. the summit wrapped up tomorrow with the president returning to the white house on wednesday. both house and senate are in session today. the house gavels in at noon eastern. legislation spotlight will be on two bills this week, one sponsored by republican senator trent franks, would ban abortions after 20 weeks. lawmakers also pick up the farm bill. the senate will gavel and at 2:00 eastern today. lawmakers will