host: what is attached to the aircraft? justin -- just a camera? most of the technology you could buy at best buy. we have some infrared technology that looks for heat signatures, but it is relatively low resolution infrared. that is a mechanism of the weight of the payload, the ability of the small aircraft to carry a payload. they could not carry something that would have the sophistication we could put on a manned aircraft. host: one policy -- what policy exists for how this information is handled and kept? guest: excellent question. in our policy we have a minimization section that would dictate that deputies would delete nonessential images and those are images that are classified as not having evidentiary value or value to the current search for a lost person or assessment of a disaster. they are in imminent --

immediately eliminated in the field. there is no archiving whatsoever. if an image has value in evaluating the effects of a natural disaster, that evidence or those images are handled as evidence, so they are safeguarded by the deputy and booked into property and evidence of the grand forks sheriff's department or the other agency we are assisting because we actually have a mutual aid area that encompasses 16 counties, and each department has slightly different evidence protection policies. the policy that would dictate how that evidence is stored would be the individual agencies policy that we are assisting at the time. host: because you are the chief operator, are you the one that makes the call to whether something is essential or nonessential? guest: no, that could be me, but more commonly it would be one of

our system operators. we feel they are in the best position because they view the images and actually control what we are capturing to determine what has evidentiary valley and what does not work -- value and what does not. host: pennsylvania. republican line. this is george. caller: good morning. thank you for your program. how are these small drones different from the old -- not old, but radio-controlled aircraft that amateurs fly around here? i have a radio-controlled boat. i guess it is satellite and peter technology. is that the difference, more sophistication? >> in some cases there is no difference. any of them is have it in remote aircraft so there is very little difference. their genesis is small department of defense systems and in those cases just the

testing this the components have gone through to determine their robustness is greater than what we would see in an r.c. aircraft. but as far as the sophistication of cameras aboard the aircraft, in every case i can think of no more sophisticated than r.c. hobbyists using. host: jeremy up next from lawrence, kansas. independent line. caller: yes. i think that everybody wants the emerging technology to be used for the safeguarding of people and public servants of good faith. the issue becomes the footing that is taken and in this case the kind of technology the footing taken by the federal government is a replication of the footing taken when the federal government started working with local law enforcement around the alleged war on drugs, which is

militaristic that inputs weapons of war and tools of war and a footing of that type into the hands of law enforcement. so, i would ask your guest to comment. when we see the actual implementation of federal law with these drone technologies, it is being done -- the homeland security has named generals as the people who are going to oversee this, not civilians. it is a violation and if you see the replication in terms of the war on terror it is what has created centers around the country to harmonize and have local law enforcement to do the bidding of federal government and disrupt constitutionally protected assembly and peaceful speech and local law enforcement to ensure they will protect the constitution against the feds if

necessary. guest: well, i'm an inadequate person to address the federal government's role and way they the addressing the issue of unmanned aircraft systems. but i can tell you that at a local level we are not addressing it as a militaristic application of the technology. we have a completely transparent policy with the press. any legitimate member of the press that has contacted us from the local paper to my knowledge news networks we have cooperated with them, given them access to the technology, allowed them to watch our training and given extensive interviews. so, there is no sniper on the grassy knoll. we are using it for humanitarian purposes and we want the public to know about that and we believe the public has a right to know about the capability of the technologies and how we are using them. host: does your state have any laws concerning drone operation? guest: no.

there was a bill that made its way in the house and senate but didn't get senate approval. so, that was defeated in the senate. but that was similar to many of the bills floating around through state legislatures throughout the country and had some, i believe, draconian effects and i think it would have had a clinicaling effect on the expansion of the technology and we are at a point where we don't know what we don't know and unless we can deploy the aircraft systems we are not going to be able to determine what their true capabilities are. and if privacy concerns are going to surface with the technology. host: you said draconian in nature. give an example. guest: just the reporting requirements. every flight has to be reported. there was a clause that said you had to archive all of the footage which on one hand you

would think that allows the citizenry or independent body to look at what we were capturing. but at least from our point of view at the sheriff's department, there were two problems with that. one, we felt that was counter to the privacy of the public to be amassing potentially hundreds of hours of many deployments of footage in many cases that would involve people not directly involved in the incident we were trying to analyze or gather and inevidence on. aso, we felt there was a problem there. secondarily, there is a problem especially as we start using the technology to have enough server space it archive say a large city that uses the technology frequently, being able to archive hundreds of hours of footage that is taken from it. so, we felt those things were somewhat misguided in the bill and were going to present

limitations to us technically and privacy-wise. host: david from arizona, democrats line. caller: it is arkansas. i'm a first-time caller. i have been listening to y'all and what seems to be the main problem with this technology is people's privacy and how it is going to be used. i was wondering -- and this may have already been touched on in your conversations prior -- is there any way to catch a g.p.s. unit to the drone in which that would be archived, not necessarily the footage but just the locations, where the drone was flying, times and stuff like that that could generally be, if it is for humanitarian purposes,

that can be accessed through one's iphone for example where the citizenry would know exactly where this drone is, where it is flying and what it is doing? thank you very much. guest: the answer is yes. in fact, each of the four aircraft we are current qualityizing are g.p.s. enabled. they capture that data and we do keep that. so there are mission files created each time we fly the aircraft. the g.p.s. coordinates that the aircraft were flown at are captured. now, making them available to the public, i think in a humanitarian mission there would be no problem with that at all. although aware only using them for humanitarian missions now there is the potential that they might use them for, say, a tactical mission in the fort dealing with barricaded hostage situations, that type of thing. i think the answer is yes. i think we are walking along the

edge of privacy concerns there as well. so, is it feasible that that information could be released to the public? yes. but it is something i would want to consult closely with our state's attorney on as to whether or not that with infringe upon the privacy of the public we are protecting. host: he's with the university of north dakota and mr.?frazier there was a story stemming from last year about your state when it came it drones. it said a north dakota court primarily upheld the first ever use of unmanned drone in the assist of the arrest of an american citizens.

host: can you expand on this case and arguments being made by the person in question? guest: i don't have a wealth of information on this case, but i'm personally acquainted with the sheriff of nelson county where it incident transpired. i have met with him on it. in fact, as the incident was -- it was a multi-week incident from his first contact with this particular individual and that individual's family. i want to applaud the sheriff for the restraint he utilized in that incident. essentially, it is something that i think cover expanded into a waco type of incident or ruby ridge type of incident, and through his, i think, very keen, thoughtful consideration of how to handle it, in reaching out to other experts in the area about an appropriate way to peacefully resolve that, i think he should be applauded for it. it is interesting, there was an

article in the "los angeles times" that wanted to characterize that incident as cattle rustling but that was the original thing cattle wandered on to his property but he allegedly said was going to utilize force to prevent sheriff deputies from coming on his property. so the use of the system didn't gather evidence. it was a citizen and officer safety tool to determine when it would be safe for those deputies to approach the accused persons and take them in custody on lawfully issued warrants from a judge in nelson county. host: call from silver spring, maryland, independent line. caller: thank you.

my question is regarding the use of these unmanned vehicles in public areas. we spoke about private areas and the way that would be. but say would there be drones on the highway taking a picture of my car when it is going fast? or, for example, god forbid there was an attack on american soil would these drones aid in capturing terrorists? i think these kinds of events, it could be said that unmanned vehicles -- drones -- would serve a beneficial event and with being implemented and just erode our privacy and in the end we are going to end up with very loose laws that will be misused and mistreated as we can see what the government is trying to do but in is a lot of corruption and that is my question. guest: thank you for your question. you really went into a broad spectrum from speed enforcement on a highway to trying to

prevent terrorism on u.s. soil. on the low side of that spectrum the utilization of these types of systems for speed enforcement, i hope we don't see that and don't think we will. they are not particularly adept at that. usually that requires markings on the roadway and these aircraft have very low maximum speeds and to pace a vehicle on a highway or key two marks on a roadway to do speed enforcement within their focal point of their camera simultaneously is probably beyond the capability of most of these aircraft. host: there is a town in colorado deer trail that is offering a $25 permit to shoot down drones and $100 if they shoot down a federal operated drone. you may have not heard of this or encountered something similar. your thoughts. . i have heard of it and my

understanding is it was something that was proposed as a city council resolution. i don't know the outcome. i certainly hope that the city fathers in that town determined that that was an inappropriate statue. i think shooting at anything in the air is dangerous. when you put bullets up in the air they are coming down somewhere. they are not staying up there to bring down this unmanned aircraft. i think it is almost humorous and ridiculous. but were that town to actually pass that ordinance i would hope the federal government would step in through the f.a.a. anden force federal statutes that make it a federal felony to fire at an aircraft. host: one more call from california, independent line. host: my question is about weather and drones and having something in the air can be dangerous. what are the guidelines as far as using drones during marginal

or bad weather? do you finded about weather can keep you from being able to use them? with you use them where you wouldn't send out a manned aircraft or are you more cautious with unmanned vehicles? guest: currently we are more cautious. we have a lot of different situations and all of the aircraft are dispatched through the university of north dakota flight operations and we have a robust safety system and operate over 130 manned aircraft. inover 130 manned aircraft. and each of our unmanned aircraft is dispatched and not only the pilot has it make the determination that it can be made same and somebody who doesn't have a dog in the fight and experienced supervisor who is not at the unmanned aircraft system operation location must also agree that that operation can be performed safely.

we comply with university of north dakota flight policies and procedures and we have specific sections that relate to each of our unmanned aircraft system air frames and they have specific maximum wind components. we can only operate the aircraft during daytime hours. we can only operate the aircraft when the ceiling or lowest clouds are at 1,000 feet and we have at least three statute mails of visibility. so, weather is a factor and because of the small mass of these aircraft wind is a huge factor. so, most of these systems can't be operated in winds greater than 15 or 20 miles an hour. host: alan frazier from the grand forks sheriff's department. thank you. hat's thank you, pedro. -- what is here is a look at

what you will see. clawback as you describe where you limit how much a person plays back, that is a person who is eligible for a subsidy. gets a subsidy they are not eligible for, which will major tool if your is not place, the law says you call black -- clawback that. >> hypothetical you gave had a lot of moving pieces. one question i have, we have discovered that this individual got an inappropriate subsidy. we have made connections with their employer to learn the information. be 2015 at the

earliest. >> we will get the official report in 2016. we'll make the effort to validate the coverage. >> somebody will get two years of the subsidy they signed up got,nknowingly that they and you will have to tax that back in two years time. that is the law. >> we are going to help the individual at the front and when they are filling up their taxes. to understand whether they have an employee or plan. >> if you do not have an employer mandate, which meet have to validate this, you're going to a lot of people getting subsidies they're not supposed to get. you're going to hit them with a tax bill in two years to clawed back. i go back. >> a look at implementing the affordable care act.

we will check in on congressional town hall meetings . you can call in to send your tweets. the focus of today's washington journal was arial and land-based drones and drum policy. this part of the program was about 40 minutes. host: we have been showing you sights r sights and sounds from the association of unmanned vehicles international taking place in washington, d.c. you met folks that represent the industry and law enforcement. joining us now in our washington, d.c. set is a voice that details with the privacy concerns that a lot of you have mentioned. jay stanley, aclu speech privacy and technology analyst and editor of their blog. you attended the event and you

have heard a lot of the voices this morning. the industry says this is a good technology because it replaces manpower, law enforcement says there are laws and standards in place, practices in place to make sure things are done directly. from the privacy aspect what are your concerns about the technology? guest: it is true that the technology does and will have a lot of good uses but in is a lot of potential to be used for surveillance. it is a very powerful surveillance technology and we need basic rules it enjoy the benefits without having to worry that from the moment you walk out of your front door until you get home some invisible eye is tracking your every move. our biggest fear around the technology when it comes to privacy issues is it will be used for mass surveillance. we don't have a problem in the police are carrying out a raid on a house and want to use a drone as a backup. away don't have a problem using it for search and rescue or other uses like that.

what we don't want to see is drones used to watch everybody all the time. that technology is here. the current deployments of drones by law enforcement today are very limited. but in is a huge amount of pent-up demand for this technology. the technology itself is continued of a funny situation because it is so advanced that we see this show and this amazing technology on the floor. but most of it is not legal to use in the united states right now because the f.a.a. has various safety concerns and are proceeding slowly. but those gates are going to open. host: you said there is a fear it would be too widespread. is there some basis or case to prove that fear? pblgts we have seen in american history cases where law enforcement likes to watch everybody all the time and federal agencies likes to watch everybody all the time just in case somebody does something

wrong. we believe and a lot of americans believe that is not our culture or history and our values. the government doesn't look over your shoulder just because you might do something and doesn't invade your privacy because you might do something wrong. it has to have specific evidence you are involved in wrongdoing. this is in our constitution. we have seen instances where law enforcement indicated their desire to put an eye in the sky and watch entire neighborhoods and cities. in ogden, utah, the mayor wanted to acquire a blimp to watch certain neighborhoods. we saw in dayton, ohio, they used not unmanned aircraft but manned aircraft to circle the city. there are technologies that can basically warm a 25 square mile area and record every vehicle and pedestrian, where they

start, where they massive, where they travel. where they finish their journey and put it in data bases and it can be sliced, diced and mined. right now we are in the early days and the f.a.a. is holding back the deployment. the actual deployments you hear are limited today. but the potential is huge and thank is why so many americans have been so concerned. host: our guest to talk about privacy concerns when it comes to drone use. you can ask him questions on one of three lines this morning. you can also tweet us. we have a couple of callers who said i don't do anything wrong. why should you be so worried. guest: that is a reaction we often hear about privacy questions and there are a number of answers. first of all there's a lot of things that are not illegal but you want to keep private whether

singing in the shower or what your salary is our financial information. i don't want somebody following me around that knows in my life and it not their business. that is my right as an american. also, you say i haven't done anything wrong and one answer to that is are you sure you haven't done anything wrong. there are a lot of laws on the books that are obscure and if some prosecutor you get falsely accused of a crime and maybe you get exonerated from that but the prosecutor digs it pin things on you and they will find something on you there is a good chance if your life is an open book. host: we live in an age where even in washington, d.c. there are cameras, red late cameras and technology taking information about us any way. why not think even the use of drones may ultimately add to that technology? guest: it is true, we are living

in a revolutionary time and there are challenges to our privacy and we work on a number of privacy issues. cell phone tracking, n.s.a. surveillance, we should have a right to communicate and send e-mails without worrying the government is keeping copies or copies of who we are talking to. we think that it is important to put in place privacy protections on drones and it is important to act on other technologies. i think that in this technological age there are ways we will lose our privacy. there are other ways in which we don't have to sit back, the technology is not in control, we are in control. for example, we have surveillance cameras all over the country, but almost none of them have microphones and that is not because they are difficult or expensive. it is because our wire tapping laws make it problematic to put microphones on cameras in public places. we put an expression of values in the law and it changed the

way the technology was implemented. people who say you can't stop technology, there's nothing you can do, i think that is not a good way to think because we are in control of our values. if we do nothing, then i think that the privacy that americans have always enjoyed and expected as part of our constitutional heritage all of that may disappear. host: jay stanley on this discussion. first call is george from west plains, missouri, independent line. host: good morning. my first concern is as far as the privacy issue goes we all know we have been peeked on by the government so that is not a big issue and we are all right with that, it is not that big a deal. but my concern and question is what kind of safeguard is the government going it take to ensure that terror cells that are hiding in this country are in the going it use these to

kill americans here like they have been doing. every attack on us has come from within our country. using what we have against us. is there anything that they can do to stop that before they get a hold of it? guest: well, i would say first of all i'm not sure i agree with the premise that the government watches us so we should throw up our hands and not worry about it. we do despite the technology and n.s.a. what we regard as unconstitutional spying we have a lot of strong privacy protections and we should fight for that. in terms of use of drones for terrorist attacks, a drone is a tool like any other and will be used for the full range of human intelligence and imagination and evil probably and we just need to do the best we can to manage that. there was already somebody who

was charged with a terrorist plot planning it fly an unmanned aircraft with explosives into the capitol building, i believe. host: republican line from pennsylvania. organic. host: good morning, mr.?stanley. we already have hundreds of cameras on telephone poles. what is the difference between having 100 cameras or a drone? what is the difference between having one officer watching a city with a drone or hiring 100 more or 1,000 more to put on the street? the constitution nowhere does it say that you cannot look and see anything that is in sight is lawful. to use in an investigation. guest: i think that is a very good question and very logical question.

in some ways drones are just an aerial version of surveillance cameras on the ground, and we at the aclu and those who carry about privacy don't love the factur public spaces are becoming networked with video cameras not just independent cameras but what we are seeing is networks of cameras run by the government, which is a new thing and brand-new in american life. i think drones do bring another element into it, which is they can hear from the sky and peer into private property and do so in a systematic way. when you have police officers in a city, number one when you are being watched by a police officer you know you are being watched by a police officer. he or she can see you and you can see them. so there is an equality there. when there's something in the sky you may not know you are being watched. and number two, is the systematic nature of it. it is not that a police officer sees this or that but the things

that can be recorded constantly and systematically everything recorded. i think one of the things we're seeing in a you believe can of cities are people complaining because police are setting up video cameras that actually point to their front door, front of the house. i think most americans would not want a government camera focused on the front door. i think that is what tkropbs have the potential to do. host: here is linda from knoxville, tennessee, democratic line. caller: hi. no wait time. ok. i want to make an argument against the false analogy argument that comes up all the time. pedro made the same argument earlier in this segment saying we have cameras on the streets. really, what is the difference to have drones? isn't it the same kind of thing? or companies are collecting data

about us all the time. why should away care that the government is doing it? this is the counterarchitect. this is a bad example but it is supposed to have been said by left hand anyone in the 1920's they had one of these huge military parades in most could you and somebody in the west looked at the display of force and said yes, it is not the quantity that counts, it the quality. then lenin turned to him and said smiling yes, but quantity has a quality all its own. meaning you get enough of something it creates a qualitative difference that violates the false analogy. so, when the price of surveillance becomes small you get more surveillance. so, in a drug surveillance you have to put two officers in a police car and follow the suspect that is expensive. you use it for the most

important things. when a service bureau is willing to give you 1,000 g.p.s. tracking devices and computers for $30 a month you get more surveillance. that is is wrong with drones. it will get cheaper and there will be more and in the end the qualitative difference you will have no more freedom. guest: those are excellent points and you have put them very well. one question i often here is we already have police headquarters and we have had them for decades. what is the difference? the answer is as you were saying police helicopters are very expensive. you have to have ground crews and maintenance and pilot shifts for a police department to run a helicopter so it is less likely to overuse it. but when it is cheap and easy they tend to be overused. in terms of quantity versus

quality the supreme court is dealing with this same issue. a police officer who is standing on the street corner and sees you drive by know you were at this corner at this time. but if you have a g.p.s. tracker on your car and tracks you 28 days straight this changes things. so the supreme court decided that the police cannot do that without a warrant. part of the issue drones is the potential for location tracking. host: alan frazier was on before and talked about the process his sheriff's department goes through. we have a viewer off twitter who asked who watches the watchers. what safeguards are in place to minimize abuse from the police. guest: i think people like alan, who are sort of the pioneers of this technology, they are being very careful. they are putting in place excellent collection and balances and oversight mechanic numbers.

but these are early days. i think it is something like 30,000 police departments in the united states. we will see all kinds of things and we're going to see if the technology and safety rules permit, we will see some police departments that won't to use this for pervasive surveillance. host: whether are best practices in there case? guest: we would like to see rules that sort of define when the police can use drones. when they have evidence, when they have reason to believe that it will collect evidence of wrongdoing in emergency situations or reasonable nonlaw enforcement uses. in emergencies and so forth. we would like to see rules in place that govern how video that is collected is stored and how long it is retained, who it is shared with, put in place some good best practices around that. then we also think that there ought to be openness rules so the police departments are open and federal agencies about how they use the technology.

police and federal agencies often need to be confidential about the details of particular investigations, but when it comes it a tool with such implications for our public life as citizens that is a discussion that ought to be public. too often what we see is what i call policy making by prekaourplt where there is new technology with privacy implications and instead of having an open discussion they just buy it and start using it. we have seen there with license plate scanners. they are recording the locations of americans all over the country in increasing numbers. we don't want to see that happen with drones or other technology. there should be a public discussion about the rules and police departments should be open about what their policies are. host: we have a call from takoma, washington. caller: number one, informational question. i read that there was something like 800,000 people who have the

same level of clearance as mr.?snowden. is that correct? guest: i don't know the exact numbers but there is an enormous number of people with security clearances in the united states. i believe it is in the millions. caller: my point in is how long before girl friends, wives, come forward because they have been abused by their spouses at work, jealous husband, et cetera, there's got to be a pretty large number to come out of that initial policeman. has the aclu come across any evidence of that sort of shenanigans? guest: shenanigans is sort of that. there is the legal and illegal privacy invasion. illegal is when you have particular law enforcement bad apples carrying out personal abuses.

in new york city, a police helicopter that was supposed to be watching a big bicycle protest turned its camera and filmed a couple making love on a pitch black rooftop and the new york police refused to apologize when the tape came out. that is the kind of because we are worried about. we have seen abuses of police data bases where officers do searches on their ex-wife's new by friends and that is a concern. i think the best practice we are increasingly seeing is put in place auditing mechanisms so say a particular video that was created by a drone, every time that is accessed or copied or what have you it is recorded. the officer's identity is recorded so any kind of abuse can be traced. host: kim from new york, independent line.

thanks for waiting. go ahead. caller: my question is what if they end up using this information to create lawsuits that might not have merit, and then the person defending themselves has to spend all of this money on legal fees and they could even lose their house or their savings or whatever because there is some shenanigans going on in the legal system? guest: well, i think that liability issues is a big concern around drones, especially private sector use of drones. i think that one of the fears in general of surveillance is, as i said earlier, there are so many laws on the books. it is illegal to own protected leather products from peru and you might be breaking a law without knowing it and there are so many laws on the books that

if a government agency wanted to go after you they could probably find something to pin on you. that is one reason that excessive surveillance is getting too much power to the government. it gives too much power to the government and disrupts the balance of power. individuals are supposed to be the boss of the government in a democratic society and if you give the government too much power it is unhealthy. host: states have enacted laws about drones. how many and how effective are they? guest: we have seen drone legislation proposed in over 40 states. i believe four or five have passed legislation. it is still active in 30-something states. it -- for somebody who works on technology issues i have never seen such a grassroots upswelling of concern about technology and it reflects legitimate concerns over where it can go. they are all over the map.

some are very good, some are probably overbroad, some weak. but overall i think that it is a healthy development and shows that americans are eager it defend their privacy. host: are they effective? guest: many of them are. they put in place on controls when the government can use the technology and we will see over time how they evolve and how the technology use evolves. but it is good it start with a good strong principle to protect our privacy. host: first, we should let you know there discussion is based in part because of the techniques of an want this week in washington, d.c. that is the so, of unmanned vehicle systems international holding their event in washington, d.c. at the walter e. washington convention center. we have been talking to people throughout the morning from the site.

our conversation now turns to privacy with jay stanley of the aclu. we hear next from lisa, north augusta, south carolina. independent line. caller: i would like to know what are some of the federal and state laws that would protect the people that would like to come forward and bring forward -- i mean they really don't -- one of the things they count on is privacy in being able to stay anonymous. so, how do these drones and the ability it use the drones -- i myself have been within an arm's reach of watching somebody use a drone in the city. but i would like to know are there any federal or state laws that -- and any audit mechanisms that the general public can

go to and research? guest: one thing we've been concerned about with drones is our existing privacy laws are not really adequate it protect us from this technology. we have the constitution, for the amendment which sets clear limits, for example, police almost certainly can't use a drone to invade where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy like your home and can't fly up to the third floor window and look in without a warrant. there are peeping tom laws on the books. in general it is very unclear how the courts moving forward are going to rule about whether or not a drone can follow you around in public, whether it would be stationed and watch a neighborhood and video your back yard 24-7, 365. as we said, there are states that have passed laws on drones putting limits on how the authorities can use them. but i think what we have called

for is a good strong standard federal law like one that has been proposed by the republican from texas so we don't have to worry about this. once we put the operatives concerns at rest we can use it for the potentials out there without worrying about the cloud of big brother. host: what are the high points of the powe promise? guest: it would been the weaponization of drones. that is one key thing. host: is there an appetite in congress to get this legislation done? guest: i think that there's been a lot of interest in there issue. it is a very difficult environment for anything to pass so who knows. but i think what we are seeing in the states is a strong indicator that a lot of people in congress are hearing from constituents and there is a lot of concern about this. host: jim is up next from new

york city, democrat's line. caller: good morning. host: you are on. caller: i worked as a commercial airline pilot in this country and the concern about personal information is one thing. you just mentioned not doing drone work that volumes weaponization. if you look at the way the united states uses these things overseas, the united states has a temporary advantage in this area and i'm really dread being the day when there is fatalities related to a drone. there is another side of this that will be way more serious if some legislative action isn't taken at this point? host: such as?

caller: that is my point. not only weaponization but safety of other people in the sky and safety of international people in the middle east. you walk outside the door and there is a drone. better start running. is that where we're heading in this country as well? guest: one thing we've said is that we really need to draw a strict line. no weaponized drones in the united states. there's been a pretty broad consensus on the international so, of chiefs of police have recommended against the weaponization of drones. the industry has recommended against that. proposed legislation has recommended against it. who knows -- at the same time there have been police officers suggesting that they could be fixed for nonlethal weapons for crowd control or other weapons. who knows what will happen in the future but that is a very celebrate line we need to set. the safety issues are significant.

the f.a.a. is very concerned about that. that is why they have been sort of moving very slowly on what they will allow in terms of doron use. they don't want them going into people's roofs or colliding with passenger aircraft. host: salt lake city, utah. democrats line. caller: when the local police began doing their training on learning how to fly drones they decided to do it over and around my house. i'm an american. pretty soon there was buzzing on my roof. then i was kept awake at night. then they were spraying whet killer on my yard. both my dog and i were being sprayed. then, after that, they started playing the base of a subwoofer so i would hear boom, boom, boom over my house. come to find out i was on prime

real estate property. so the value of my house is going to go up two and a half times. so, there was a land grab for my whom. so instead of doing good training i was learning to fly airmaned vehicles, let's get her out of the neighborhood and also became let's grab her home and then it became let's abuse her and do sleep deprivation, pain with high frequency drones. this is just winning -- this is one example of because. guest: one of the areas that has yet to be worked out with drones is this idea of harassment and nuisance law. it is an area of the law that is unclear.

if a drone is hovering 200 feet above your back yard and making a buzzing noise is that a nuisance? what if it is 10 feet above your back yard? it is a whole sort of new area of the law where the law doesn't know how to deal with it because this is so new. host: jay stanley with us. a couple of recommendations they have as far as drone use is considered connection with winter, images collected only in crime investigations. usage policy determined by public, not pennsylvania you should be open to audits and oversight and not equipped with lethal or nonlethal weapons. it is collection of data and what is done with it afterwards. guest: that is where you want protections in place so we cannot have to worry that this technology will be a big brother in the sky. host: if if is a booming industry how down keep track of that because we heard others mention technology often

outpaces law. guest: there will be an enormous amount of information and probably uses for drones that are great that we all like. there is no reason we can't have our cake and eat it too and enjoy the benefits of brilliant people coming up with confidential ideas of how to use the technology. at the same time, putting the privacy concerns it rest so we don't have to worry about that. host: will there be a lot of civil lawsuits when it comes to this technology? guest: undoubtedly. it sort of breaks existing categories of our jurisprudence and court rulings and the -- there will be questions about peeping toms, harassment, nuisance and privacy torts.

you can see somebody if you feel like your privacy has been invaded. it is going to be a whole new area of the law and the courts will figure that out. but right now we know that the government is going to want to use it for surveillance and we can put in place protections in that area without overregulating or stopping innovation. host: lancaster, south carolina, democrat's line. ken. caller: i would like to state that we already live in a police state with the e-mail and big data base places in utah and you have got the drones flying above now and cameras in neighborhoods. another thing, i'm kind of nervous -- snowden, that leaker. i'm reading a book about the secret wars of the c.i.a. and it

is all the information they are saying he released he already printed in the back, the spy tapping, cables undercease and how we control egypt. guest: we are living in a time of revolutionary technology. we love technology. but it also has big implications for privacy and we are sort of in the middle of a bit of battle over the extent to which we will allow technology to take away our privacy. the caller mentioned the n.s.a. scandal and in some ways the issue with drones and n.s.a. are the same, which is are we as a country become to allow the government to record everything that everybody does just in case you might have happened it commit a crime? if you come to the attention of the government they can play a rewind of your life and see who you have called and where you

have been and where you have driven your car and so forth. our view is that is too much power to give to the government. too much power of the government over individuals and violates our oldest traditions and we should not allow the government to use these new technologies that way. host: if i'm hearing you correctly, it seems like let's see where the technology goes and consider what regulatory efforts we have it make. guest: in some areas, yes. in other areas no. we call for regulations on drones in the area of law enforcement. in the area of private sector use that is where we think we need to stand back a little bit, see where innovation goes. there are potential invasions. i don't think most people would want a google camera over their back yard any more than they would want a federal agency camera hanging over them. but let's see what happens in the private sector because private companies also are responding to customer concerns.

they have reputations. so there may be problems, there may not be. we have not called for regulation in the private sector but we think regulation is needed when it comes to the government. host: what happens when it gets cheaper to purchase and more common use comes out of it? guest: that will happen to both the government and individuals. the government has spent millions for a helicopter and now for $50,000 today who knows how much with moore's law tomorrow they may be able to get a drone for $100 and get huge fleets of them and have them up 24-7 taking turns and individuals. we already -- the hobby community is huge and we are seeing innovation. host: do they have regulation, hobbyists? guest: the way the f.a.a. regulates drones is sort of an exception. under the current rule if you

have your own drone with a camera you can fly it around under 400 feet in daytime not near congested areas. but if you take photographs and sell the photographs, that is not legal because it is banned for commercial use. so if you are doing it for fun it is legal but commercial use it is not. this is a rule a lot of people complained about. that is the state of the law. host: call from leroy on the democrats line from new jersey. caller: one of your answers was what if the government privatizes those situations? right now most of the cameras in this area are run by private companies who make a profit on it. that would be a very good loophole to slip through, just slip it to privatization. guest: i think that is an excellent points.

i wrote a report in 2003 called the surveillance industrial complex that looked at how private sector surveillance and government surveillance have dove tailed and reinforced each other. we see that and federal agencies and government agencies using the private sector as an end run around constitutional protections. for example, f.b.i. and federal agencies are not allowed to keep dossiers and files on you because they want to. you have to be have a nexus to a criminal investigation. but they have data aggregators who do keep files on americans. they claim they have files on most americans and store as much information as they can about you and sell them to marketers. they are also selling them to the government so the government is not keeping a file but the companies are and the government base the file. this is a big privacy problem that needs it be addressed. one thing that drones are doing is it has received so much

attention and it is such a concrete interesting area it is raising the issue of privacy and people realize it is not just drones but other things, other technologies where privacy is under assault. we need to put in place good privacy protections. we need them to preserve the heritage that americans have always had. host: last call from victorville, california. duke on the independent line. caller: i was calling to -- you were talking about domestic drones up to now. are you going to have any control or is the legislature going to have any control over the military weaponized drones? >> the overseas use of drones has been a hugely controversial topic. we have been involved in that somewhat, for example having a lawsuit where the government has sought to use drones to kill american citizens without trial.

but i think that one of the things that has americans so concerns about domestic drones is overseas use they have seen and part of a larger trend which is called the green to blue pipeline where we see advanced technology deployed for overseas battlefield and military use and when the wars wind down the companies need new markets so they see 30,000 or so police agencies in the u.s. as a big market. police departments are becoming increasingly militarized in america and it is a problem in adopting military technology that often leads to excessive use of force and drones may be part of the trend. host: jay stanley speech praoeufrps and technology project and editor of the aclu east free future blog. guest: that is a blog on privacy

and technology issues and implications. we look at new technology and that have the potential to be used for surveillance or spying and what we think ought to happen with them. host: thank you. that is it for our program on >> organizations and advocacy agenda through the august congressional recess. more about preparing for the house and senate to return with andy roth. recent developments in the u.s. and global oil industries. and obama's decision on whether to approve the keystone pipeline. live aton journal is 7:00 eastern on c-span. townhall, and lamenting the

affordable care act. we will check in on congressional townhall meetings. your calls and tweets. it is live [captioning performed by national captioning institute] http://twitter.com/cspanw http://twitter.com/cspanw this rather stiff royal court, i know, having read about her, she was a very happy girl. queen victoria said she was wonderful. she was given the official title which wouldn't normally be given to a niece.

it would only be given to the wife of an ambassador. >> the encore presentation of first ladies continues tonight at 9:00 eastern on c-span. >> egypt and security forces cleared to sitting camps and cairo occupied by's supporters of mohamed morsi. 149 people were killed. the egyptian government declared a state of emergency. the obama administration is condemning that state of emergency. earnestcretary josh read a statement today in a briefing at martha's vineyard where president is vacationing. >> the united states strongly condemns the use of violence against protesters in egypt. we extend our condolences to the families who have been killed and to the injured. we have repeatedly called on the egyptian military and security forces to show our strength and

for the government to respect the universal rights of its citizens, just as we have urged protesters to demonstrate peacefully. violence will only make it more difficult to move egypt forward on the path toward lasting stability and democracy. pledgescounter to the of the government to pursue reconciliation. we strongly oppose a return to a state of emergency and call on the government to respect basic human rights such as freedom of peaceful assembly and due process under the law. the world is watching what is happening in cairo. we urge the government of egypt and all parties in egypt to refrain from violence and resolve their differences peacefully. >> more on the situation in egypt with former egyptian diplomats speaking in washington earlier today. he said he understood the condemnation of the government crackdown in egypt but that

egyptian police had to respond to protesters to ensure public safety. >> one thing we are hoping for is a wealthy donor to give us a new conference space. [laughter] so that we won't be a credit in the future. i am kate seelye with the middle eastern institute. i would like to welcome you to the talk with ambassador raouf adly saad visiting from cairo to share the adjustment -- the egyptian government's view on the road ahead for egypt after a tumultuous past several months. he is also here to hear the views of analysts, government

officials, and to convey these views and concerns back to cairo. i welcome this opportunity for an exchange, for dialogue. we are honored that he has agreed to join us today. thoughts.is as you know, many of you know we have lost -- launched a problem -- a program with a focus on egypt. we have been programming extensively highlighting a range of diverse voices and opinions from egypt in an attempt to shed light on the very complex transitions taking place in egypt. also, to underscore the fact that there are a diversity of voices in that country and we welcome them all. all that said, today's exchange comes on a grim day where a decision by authorities to break up a sit in using security has

led to many deaths and the spread of violence on both sides in egypt. many a day that raises questions and concerns about the future of egypt. willsure ambassador saad be addressing it today in his talk. he is an accomplished diplomat and civil servant, having served as ambassador to the russian federation and to the you. -- to the eu. as assistant foreign minister for economic relations, he has also been a member of parliament and served as chairman of the foreign relations committee in the people's assembly. he most recently served as a special envoy to africa for the interim president adly mansour. ,t is a pleasure to welcome you mr. ambassador. i would like to welcome you to the stage. >> good afternoon. told that i have to

-- for bullets and bombs coming from everywhere. opposing numbers. meet the especially to representatives of big banks and civil society. thatought it is important we have open channels to deal with the very distinguished representatives of the civil society, particularly the middle ,ast institute. in fact yesterday the situation had been very much different. the situation today is different. i know that everybody is having

an impression, a reaction. all of us are following the tickers coming from here and there. my advice was, hold your breath. because, what you may have heard from sources is different from what i have heard. it is a little bit too soon to judge. let's focus a little bit on what happened in the past year. very briefly, because this is very important. i have -- i will try to be brief in order to allow for discussion and questions. answer nicely as well. -- on the 29th of june, 2012

, former president morsi was elected. democratically. the egyptian people despite the controversy surrounding this election, and some allegations that there were mistakes here and there, the egyptian people had accepted that he is an elected president. since we are starting a new democratic civil country, that was a real experience in our history. real democracy, real elections, real -- that was the civil -- first solar zine -- first civil regime. -- between kind of the people and the president. advance thatn

president morsi was not chosen because he is dr. morsi, but he was coming to egypt as a representative of the muslim brothers. people knew that this is a risky business. topromised that he is here be the president of all egyptians, and we decided to believe him. in the interest of the country itself. what happened? we will go through the past year very quickly. of was egypt on the 29th 2013?f 2012 -- one, severe polarization of the country. environment of oncrimination, exclusion

religion basis. not only between muslims and christians, but between muslims and muslims, between sunni and shiite. between anyone who is not muslim brother and muslim brothers. founde first time, we that this kind of polarization is affecting the human relations between the people themselves. later, whicht and is very well known with peaceful attitude is changing. second, complete absence of security. rate of crime has risen dramatically. people started to feel for the first time in the history of egypt that we are unsafe. why? because the police was fragmented.

you know what happened in january, when the whole prisons were opened and weapons were smuggled and all prisoners were out. this is another long story. the fact is, security was rather absent. that if you go out -- some of you maybe were subjected to certain harassment or whatever. egypt, as much as i know, it has a potential. we have resources. sources oftain wealth and development. we have been seeing a deterioration -- deteriorating economy.

brink to be the declared a bankrupt country. why? not because of lack of resources. not because people are unwilling to work. it is simply because the whole productive life force paralyzed. , ihad this kind of anarchy would say social anarchy. people are taking to the street, feeling that while under what we itnk is democracy, in fact was determined as absence of law. the country was heading toward bankruptcy. with this kind of anarchy and economic deterioration, and the social fragmentation, we were on -- verge of being declared

egypt, this great country, as we know has an 85 million population, on the verge of being declared like somalia. was this return of a nightmare which is terrorism. what was happening in sinai, we thought that we were finished with terrorism. we found that terrorists are being brought from outside. hadi, all these kind of islamist movements are back. they are well armed with all kinds of weapons that go beyond individual weapons. with connections with other

neighboring entities, we found that there is a smuggling of weapons to egypt in big quantities. after the came revolution, simply that before morsircy issued -- dr. eschewed his presidency, there were taxes that stopped immediately after he assumed his presidency. the answer came from one of their leaders. i'm talking about after 30th of june. he said, i heard it by my own sinai willthe tax in

be stopped immediately once morsi is back so this is self- explanatory. to make the story clear and short, the people of egypt came to the conclusion that we will not accept that this country will be ruled by a religious a group which is armed with weapons, a group that they are misinterpreting islam and providing islam as a very, very uncivilized values, bringing the whole country back to the middle ages. they cannot continue having this country completely paralyzed. they thought that if he was

given the mandate to be the president, they came to the conclusion that enough is enough . it was the people, not anybody else. asked for early presidential elections. i think that was the right of the people to express their interests democratically. was very clear, that you are approaching a point where the people, the majority of egyptian people are expressing their views of a change of the regime, and a regime that has waited for 80 years for such an opportunity. they will not accept democratically the will of the people.

the confrontation was on the horizon. it was clear that the confrontation was coming, no matter what. ,eing the only power consolidated power, and the country, i mean the military. this is their responsibility to try to find a way out of this deep crisis. that is why it gave all forces a chance in order to reach a compromise, a way out politically. week has come, no answer, no response whatsoever. another 48 hours, then came the reaction. what was the reaction? the reaction came from the former president himself. orsaid, either me and power

-- in front of the eyes of the whole world. it was clear that choices have , either re- contradict or the people will accept that their wishes will not be listened to, or bloodshed. was either to wait for confrontation to take place or to prevent this confrontation. this is what happened. i know this long discussion whether it is coup d'état or revolution, i think we are wasting our time. what happened happened. millions and millions and millions of people took to the street supporting. what is important, the point

that you should focus on is whether the military ruled or .ot or took over or not in fact, what happened, they did not take power for a single minute. what happened after this announcement, there was a meeting between forces including masque, ande grand all political parties -- the grand mosque, and all political parties. the muslim brothers were invited as a party to this meeting. they rejected. what happened? this political forces sat down and drafted a roadmap that was implemented instantly from

minute one. constitution,he the head of the supreme constitution court was appointed as interim president. a cabinet was composed. it doesn't include any representatives from the military except the minister of defense. , the constitution committee was composed, and by the way, they have accepted conditionally to take part in this committee. there is a reconciliation committee that has already started. we have a kind of timeframe, that within 7-9 months we should , presidential

elections, and we should have a new president elected by the people by the end of nine months. then wasened since remembering that the country is economically getting to a very serious situation. not only declaration of bankruptcy, you can have a kind of implosion. with the kind of anarchy and economic deterioration, you can have a kind of implosion in the country with the policy, the high rates of crime. the situation, the government wanted to move ahead in order to work as a civilian cabinet to put the country on a development path. a democratic path. a civilian path. the reaction was that what we have been seeing, this sit in in

, we knew that is the best kind of reaction but the government has waited. you have seen hours of mediation trying to find a common understanding, a way out that they will not be excluded from the political process and there was no reaction whatsoever. the reaction was very negative. they rejected completely to abandon their ideology and to act as a normal local force in egypt. imaginetest -- just here in washington, you have peoplerators or city and sitting -- sit in people sitting

for weeks, occupying a large area which is becoming larger and larger. refrainingforces are from even coming close to them because we know that they are very well armed. i hope you have seen it today on the tv. there. weapons are infact, they are interested having this kind of confrontation because they believe that this is in their favor. thatis the ideal situation would convey their voice that there is a real resistance. for them, this is not enough, but to have a confrontation and bloodshed, they don't care. meanwhile, there is a tremendous

pressure from the people. they are asking the government to intervene. wait, if how long you you keep quiet, they will invent any kind of problems and violations because it is not in their favor to keep quiet nor to compromise, because for them this is a failure of their agenda. will ask about how that intervention took place . we can discuss this matter extensively, but i am talking about more important situations that a big country with this population is being a hostage. we were a hostage with a group of people who are occupying certain eras, paralyzing life,

and imposing a real threat on the development efforts. would single investor come while seeing this sit in everywhere. not a single tourist would come to the country while feeling afraid of what he or she could be subjected to. , people haveion advised we should be patient. for how long? knowing that if you become patient, they will not let you wait. this is what happened. what happened yesterday, i think what is really important and i one,you to listen to this, the crowd was dispersed very peacefully in one square. you know why.

there were no weapons there. accumulated ine the big square where they started. moment the police what was the reaction? apart from what is happening in the square itself, we found that throughout egypt, attacks on the churches, they have attacked more than 20 churches. government buildings, so on, it means that they are spreading anarchy. to distract the police from intervening. they are trying to attack the

people everywhere, not -- i was just on the phone with the people in cairo. civilian people, not the government. the people are so scared because they are attacking even people in the street. for those who have been dispersed, they aren't -- they are attacking people in the street. we are going through a difficult moment. this is a threat that has been hidden and then became -- came from underground to the surface. this is a very serious threat not only to egypt. one who i am not the would think for the united states, but for a group that is being religiously motivated with attitude of violent

and with these kind of weapons they are armed with, we have to see how that could help in combating terrorism. terrorism -- we have seen them in sinai. they are raising al qaeda flags. would listen to the advice to be patient. in fact, what happened, we not happened,d -- what and i assure you that my colleagues will never take initiative to use weapons, and wait and see to see what took place there. i wish you had seen the tons of weapons that have been confiscated from the square.

we are going through a difficult moment, but we believe that even in the coming weeks will be rather difficult, but we are sure that with popular support that we are having, with the popular determination that we have to go on as a democratic civil country, not a country that will be ruled by an agenda that will take us to the middle ages. we deserve democracy. we deserve development. we deserve prosperity. we deserve relations with all the powers of the world. here i come to the final point. i know there are certain feelings about difficult times in our relationship. i think this is quite logical.

here, ihe -- of being am here to listen. if you want to criticize me, go ahead. have friends. notnow very much that it is only that the united states is the strongest power in the world, it is the only superpower in the world. i was ambassador to russia and i have seen how the world order has changed from bipolar too and this is different from any country in the world. we know that. we know as well that egypt is important to the united states. us, butuse you love because there are interests. the middle east is of great

importance. he -- a region full of interests, resources, the american presence is something indefensible. -- on my tour in africa, one of my colleagues told me, egypt is broken. because we are a superpower. we are what we are. , a geographicgion area in the center of the world. canal,- we have the suez the middle east, israel, palestine, so many nations associated with egypt, and it is

important that a relationship between egypt and the united states should be based on mutual respect. a big margin of differing but being friends as well. that is why i am here, to listen, to explain. i tried, i know that you have warned me not to be -- i am trying to leave time for questions. so, i thought that i should just have -- i'm sorry if it was a little bit long. we can have not necessarily questions rather than discussion. we need to get into a discussion . i want to listen to you without being prejudiced. let's not be prejudiced, neither mead nor you. let's try to be logical and

understanding. among friends, it is not that we are picking on each other. we are in a difficult moment. don't jump to conclusions. i am listening to your question. >> [inaudible] elbaradei has resigned as vice president. how does this change your thinking about this difficult moment? how does this change your thinking about what you learn from your colleagues in the recent 24 hours? how does this change the situation politically for egypt? -- moha d alvarado hamed el baradei is free to

do that. he has been asking for peaceful means and so forth. but there is the voice of the people. thateople have been asking you have to bring the situation to an end. we want to have the country moving on. it is not a disaster. we owe him a great respect. he is a friend as well. in any regime, if somebody would , that should not make it a kind of change in the situation. the situation has changed because there is a direct effort by the government to bring a chaotic situation to an end. we willthat from now on

.ontinue containing this crisis to limit all kinds of casualties as much as we can. s resignation reflects growing concern that this government is carrying out tactics that they don't approve of, that it is looking more like a security state. my question to you is about long-term thinking about the islamists. how the government has been giving with the citizen -- sit in. at some point they have to bring islamists into the political process. it seems to many here in washington that a military situation only makes them

stronger, drive them underground and pushes them to resort to violence. supportoday's actions the demands of the people for a more inclusive democratic egypt? >> thank you very much. you have to make it for a clear that being an islamist is not a crime. we are not against islam. who aregainst those adopting violence as a means of action. you should remember that we have two arms for islamist groups. you have the muslim brother movement and the party. recognized as officially registered and was invited more than once to join the political association. that invitation is still open. that they are part of

the egyptian people we cannot just assume they don't exist. we are inviting them, provided you have to abide by regulations. you have to abide by the rule of law. there is no violence. you cannot accept that because of reconciliation that you will accept an armed group to join the political process. confirm. that was declared even in cairo. they are invited to be part of the political process. here, i want to make a point. they say, we would like to have too.il -- they say, we civil government means what? democracyuntry with a

, so on. there is always room for a kind of exchange between how we would run the country. there -- they were not there to impose a religious agenda and they are not there to govern egypt with -- >> are there any questions from the press? >> i know it is early days and the situation is still unclear, but there are credible reports of over 100 protesters dead. i know you said the country couldn't wait forever for these protests to die down. do you not accept that it could have been handled in a better way? >> i wish you could tell me. if you wait for five or six weeks, and with all kind of persuasion you are adopting.

your inviting them and even william burns, lady ashton, mr. zero and their, talking to them. -- ministers here and there, talking to them. this is an important point to highlight, this kind of helps --onal attention rather than helps to get compromise, it gives them more support to go on their own path rather than listen to reason. scenario after the police have intervened to disperse the crowd. see the scenario that the reaction to attack different parts of the country -- that means that they have it prepared plan. it would have happened no matter when. the situation is, while i agree with you and we wish there was

no intervention, the fact is the country is paralyzed. you have 80 -- 83 million people who are angry and pressuring the government that we cannot live under the situation anymore. you may listen to reports -- i will root -- assure you again, there was no initiative to shoot at the muslim brotherhood. we are getting reports from al jazeera and others. i know. let's not jump to conclusions. the figures i am receiving from official sources is totally different from the ones they are declaring. have a wonderful way of communication. i tell you, had it been possible that there was any other means to avoid confrontation, we would

have done it. we reached a moment where we had no choice. >> anymore? hold on one second, if you could speak into the mic, . >> while you were speaking, the white house released a statement condemning the use of violence against protesters. what do you make of that troubling signal to you? >> i find it quite logical. of course. i don't see that as something unexpected. underweight to as -- better wait to assess the situation. news,ou receive in the there is a possibility that they should make a statement. that does not mean that we have

come to the final position. i would like to remind you that at the beginning of the revolution, the position was totally different. the situation is changing. i don't want to take it as a fence. we -- as offense. may -- they made a statement, we listened to it and we will have to respond. more explanations are needed. that the united states is interested to have a peaceful democratic egypt, and they want to have it. it is only normal that they are concerned and worry. we perceive that and we respect that. we may differ on the kinds of statements and judgments, but it is not anything but continuous

understanding between both parties. can i ask about the state of emergency that has been imposed? that was in place for years under president mubarak. what is the justification behind that? you bute tell not only everybody. we have to stop talking about the past. we always compare the past -- we have a future. we have a revolution. why don't you believe that we have a new egypt and we are going through a difficult moment? during mubarak's time, this used to happen and the people didn't have a say in this. i want to stress this point. don't take egypt as only a regime or a government. take people as people.

there is a new factor in the equation. you have appreciated them, you have shown great respect to their revolution in january. thisnnot understand why position was not similar. we know how much you appreciate egyptian people culturally, historically, as civilized people. answering your question, i was talking to my daughter-in-law. people are scared. those who have escaped from the squares are attacking everywhere. they are attacking shops, homes, houses, people in the street. they are a kind of historic reaction. that is why in order to protect the people, you have to impose it. we hate it. we don't like it. i agree that we have bad memories of this. , if that would happen

comforted in any other place, that is the normal reaction for a responsible country. you have to impose curfew. that is too much for five minutes. >> thank you very much. my question is, do you believe that the continued detention of mohamed morsi is helping or hurting the situation. you spoke of exhausting alternatives. his detention seems like it could be one option. first, there is a kind of case. he has a legal case in the court. assume that he is innocent. think logically. release him and put him back to his house. you tell me the story, what

would happen? his supporters would go there. demonstrationd of , another demonstration from his opponents. then, you are creating even to protect his own life. i am talking humanely. is something, with the kind of attention if he was removed and went back home and his up -- his supporters accepted, there would be no problem. the kind ofn reaction industry. ,he violence that has been used i don't know why i was telling come you tend to listen to the opposition rather than the government. i am telling you that what the --ernment is saying today

nobody can buy today. -- lie today. the people have their eyes wide open. -- he has a case. he is detained legally now. becausetained legally he has a case. i don't want to get into that. nevertheless, i think it would have been a very risky business to free him. he would never accept. ask your representatives who met him, what he said. he said, continuously, i am the legitimate president. i have to goack -- back to my office, to my supporters. it could have compensated the

situation. >> can have a sip of water? >> quick question. with --. commerce and have caught on the u.s. government -- called on the u.s. government. what is the purpose of your visit here? will you visit some u.s. officials here? >> i came to visit you. i explained that. i came here in order to meet the think tanks of society as much as possible. it is important to listen to you. i am coming back with

information's questions, concerns, criticism, even with sometimes bitterness. this is very important. we have an ambassador here and the embassy is very active. still, to have a kind of face- to-face discussion like the one we have today is very important. tomorrow i will be seeing the minister of foreign affairs or maybe the prime minister to tell them where we are. the u.s. is a priority for us. been advising. that is beingue extremely mishandled. every time we have misunderstandings, we hear, we have to cut. eight, who said that eight is only in egypt's interest? you keep using this as a statement.

boy, idon't be a good will hit you. offended about this kind of argument. i know the justification for this. to undertake way respectable relations between countries. aid is not a charity. you have to forget about that. for achieving the interests of both countries. you need aid as much as egypt needs it. logically are mature and politically, when the vote was put, they voted in favor of aid. it is not because they like us, hope they will. they know that this is in the mutual interest of both countries. he might be aggressive --

noted bill burns's trip to egypt and his meeting last week. really criticize the u.s.'s role. the you think the u.s. does have a role in helping egypt find reconciliation or should we stay out of it? >> i do. it depends on what. said u.s. is the united states of america. their role is indispensable. again, why they criticize -- the first part of your question. moment, the first statement

made by the administration after the 30th of june was, it is a shock. great wasbered how your position in january and they found that you have a totally different question and that was a big disappointment. toause we cared, we had criticize this. you have to complete the story. -- once, johnhas kerry said we understand this situation. now we understand that morsi's regime was not democratic. it was the will of the people that we have to respect. the whole situation has been changed. i want us to discuss with you what you mean.

when we talk about reconciliation as if you were talking in a normal situation three or four political powers. what you are talking about is between the majority of the or an executive power. the people are on one side and muslim brothers on the other side. when you're talking about as if there is no revolution that has happened. i accept that you mean we have to find a way out. these --to include they are egyptians and they want them back as egyptians who are taking part in the development of the country. rules, by theal rule of law, by human rights, respecting minority rights,

respecting women's rights, respecting the rules of the game. >> thank you for being here. my question has to do with, what are your thoughts on the situation for the media in egypt and the harassment and violence they face, not just by pro-morsi supporters but by government security? >> i didn't get it. you speak very quickly. >> my apologies. there has been a great deal of violence and harassment of journalists both by pro-morsi supporters as well as by government forces who have been during the coverage of the situation. what are your thoughts on this? >> if it is true, i condemn that. this is really bad. the problem is, the media people

have such an appetite to get ,nto the crowds and to create maybe a policeman would think that to protect him is to push him. forcefully away from demonstrations. or, to take him away, to disperse the people and the problem with the photographer or mediaman trying to be on the spot. what i mean, it is bad. i reject it. officially and personally. you have to appreciate it is not arbitrary. of a situation where complete anarchy, you have people with weapons on the other side, you have to remember this. they have weapons. they are shooting. i understand that some journalists were killed.

they used weapons. seen this before. the guards of any president. president,the u.s. if anybody stand in the way, they pull him away. bad,kind of reaction is negative, but we have to appreciate that it was something that they had to resort to on the assumption that they protect these people or keep them away from the conflict. >> one of the major incidents before morsi was taken out of office was that 3000 people attacked shiites.

shiites were not included on the interim voting counsel. shiite ine role of egypt moving forward? >> that is a good question. before i try to answer this, i just want to remind you of the statement made by former president two weeks before he was removed. muslims, there were a all islamists who attended this undeclared meeting. the shiites were attacked vigorously. he did not make one single word. what happened later on? killed in a most uncivilized manner. they were tortured.

idea whereiving an the country was heading to. how polarization and politicizing has been the umbrella that is governing the country. very few in egypt. justin few numbers. nevertheless, that does not mean that they should be deprived of their rights to be part of the political process. i think it would depend very much on them to take the first step in order to express their willingness to join the local process. stage,e that at this they are in a state of lack of understanding. they don't know -- i think they want to protect themselves. of june, all they

wanted was to be protected from sunni attacks. i think this point is an important one. >> i have a question from the overflow room. how the injured government -- interim government treats n ngo's, can you comment on the ngo workers? thatthink i made it clear one of the objectives of my visit here was to meet civil organizations. we believe -- i have to tell you that we have more than 35,000 ngo's in egypt. compared big number with the number of population. i personally believe that they have a huge, huge force.

a very important role to play. on so many occasions, they are much better than the government. they can reach the people. they can deal with the street. they can deal with poverty, with women, with children, with such a power. it should be a kind of i would venture to say that with this government, their understanding of the role of ngo's, i think even the law is being reviewed so far. was delivered -- was criticized by egypt and internationally.

ngo's, if you the believe we're headed to a democratic path, then we have to because theygo's are one of the best expressions of democracy. the ngo's and civil society to work, you have to get used to hearing their produce. their views. you have to get into a partnership with the ngo's. >> looking across the way to the u.s. capitol, things are basically empty at the capitol this evening for the august recess. the issue of the health-care law continuing to come up at the town halls back in their own district. we're going to focus only

affordable care act and ask you about its implementation, ask you what you think about it, how things are going for the implementation in your state. what questions you need answered. we are entering your questions on facebook today as well. >> my question is, if this is such a great thing, many in government jobs and union jobs

don't want it. people inlion california live in medically underserved areas or health professional shortage areas. theis this loss crewing rural areas? example, tort reform. both purchases for prescription drugs like the viejas? we will get your phone calls and read more of those in just a moment. a quick check of some of the news happenings today and the major world news happening in egypt, in cairo today. the reporting of the associated press story on the death toll so far in egypt. egyptian officials say 278 people have been killed today in nationwide clashes between

police and supporters of ousted president mohammed morsi. 5 civilians killed and 43 others who were killed were police officers. formerington today, representative jesse jackson before a federal court sentenced to prison. here is the story from his home town newspaper, the chicago tribune. the right that he was sentenced to 30 months behind bars. his wife sandy got a year in prison for separate felonies involving the misrepresentation -- misspending of the funds, 700 feet deep thousand dollars in campaign funds. they will be allowed to serve their sentences one at a time with jesse jackson jr. going first. jesse jackson again sentenced today in washington. in nearby baltimore, outside baltimore, the sentencing

hearing today for private bradley manning. here is the recording rejigger reporting of the nearby baltimore sun. manning testifies, i am sorry that i heard the united states. -- that i heard the united states. wasold a judge today he dealing with a lot of issues at the time. from a statement that he held in his hand, 25-year-old man spoke for three minutes. he said he understood what he was doing at the time but did not fully appreciate the consequences. we will get to your calls on the health care law, the implementation of the health- care law in just a minute. a health-care policy reporter for the wall street journal has written a number of articles.

>> thanks for having me. >> how on track is the affordable care act, how on track is it for implementation over the next year or so? >> it claims that it is on track, the openings changes in all 50 states, the open enrollment season where people can sign up. this is only the cornerstone of the law where people can shop for coverage if they don't have it. we have heard there have been a number of delays with specific things that will be happening not quite on the day they were planned. it depends really what you mean by on time and on track. some things have shifted dramatically and running really behind schedule.

>> are those things all small things or there one or two items that are causing considerable concern from lawmakers are folks who have an insurance policy and wonder what the next up is? >> it is a combination of issues, the supreme court decision made medicaid participation optional four states. be up to 30 million people who are still uninsured, and that was really not quite expected at the time. a couple of changes affect people who get coverage through their employers, but the law affect them as much as the millions of americans who do not have coverage right now. take this back to capitol hill in the story reported on last week before

congress left for the august recess. rules forne, new lawmakers and staff to buy health insurance. the healthated by care law? >> there is a popular provision in the law, covered by people of all parties. members of congress and staff have to buy coverage through the insurance exchanges next year. for decades members of congress and their staff had been treated with federal employees. merging the two requirements that members of congress and this, itff have to get is a solution that has not satisfied everybody, but what they will keep is the federal government contribution toward the cost of claims which is

pretty generous come up to 25% in some cases. primarily in washington d.c. and maryland and virginia, for #'s to work on the hill. >> work are you hearing from sources and folks that you talked to on capitol hill about this change in their plan? >> it does require some changes. the premium is one element of it. there may be some people who end up having to move up their existing insurance. there is still some consternation and it will be a but if it can be sorted out under a tight timeframe. >> we are asking our viewers and facebook posters about questions they have about the implementation of the health- care law.

i wonder if you could hang on the line for a couple of minutes and we will be back in a minute. nancy is in montana on the democrats' line. good evening, you are first up. >> i have been working on health care reform for five years. it seems like every day, and unfortunately i live in a state that they will not accept the expanded medicaid. i was very excited to have insurance for the first time in 20 years. it has been brought to my attention that i don't make access they to market places, yet i make too much money to be eligible for medicaid in my state. i understand there are 30 other states that did not accept the expanded medicaid and i wonder if there will be some kind of

package or if they are going to tweak it somehow. there are going to be an awful lot of people that fall through that crack. >> it sounds like the situation with prescription drugs a couple of years ago. are 7 million people by my calculation on people who are -- thehe poverty line patch is not very easy. congress touire come to an agreement over how it would change, but they don't seem to agree with each other. >> a political question for you , a twitter's from bill who , not a single

republican elected official that wanted to defund obamacare has offered to give up their government health care. >> there are giving it up sort of in that they are going with the exchanges. i don't know if anybody has not offered to give that up bge has offered to give that up. heard of anybody doing that. >> for our viewers and c-span radio listeners, the lines are open. let's go to our independent line to alabama. >> alabama voted against its, as far as implementing it into the state. found it a study that

would actually increase the rates by 40% in this state and up to 50-something% in other states. >> what rate are you talking about? >> insurance overall. >> what are we hearing about so far, the early numbers in terms of whether the law is affecting this caller? >> i have been looking at insurance rates and a number of state senate is definitely the case that they are changing. in many cases the benefits are getting more rich. on top of that, the way in which people's individual insurance is calculated, based on their medical history -- everybody is becoming more equal in that sense. if you are young and healthy and getting low-cost -- if you are

sick and not able to buy insurance at all, your rate is coming down. particularly in states in the south. if it is a state that insurance was traditionally cheap, now is more tightly regulated through the federal requirements. the price tag is also greater. the democrats lined from north carolina. go ahead. go ahead with your comment or question. >> my question is for those of us that do not have access to information on the internet, can you give us an address or phone number how we can get this information, how to sign up? i know it is a very simple question, but north carolina has chosen to not -- there are

leaving it to the federal government. my other comment is, we hear people say if this becomes law, it is going to be a disaster. each one of those representatives were voted into office by their constituents. it was signed into law by the executive branch and ultimately by the judicial branch. it is of the law. -- it is the law. it is just stupid to say if this becomes the law. one of our producers is going to look of the health-care agency in north carolina to get a toll-free number we can announce on the air. any thoughts on his predicament there? >> it is a really interesting question. it does for ball around the idea that there is a website out

there that people can go to. the --understand caller may know something on their end. not a lot of money being spread around the states to uninsured people. you can read her reporting in the wall street journal, online, and follow her on twitter as well. thanks for being with us this evening. throughout the evening we are going to look at some of the questions that members of congress are getting on health care as they are back in their home districts and taking

questions on a wide range of issues that different town halls and different settings, including the democratic leader, nancy pelosi, in a town hall in san francisco. >> as you know, more than three years ago, president obama with a stroke of a pin it may help care for all americans a right, not a privilege. a reality. so, president obama honored the value of our life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. liberty, the freedom to pursue each of our own happiness. artist, ae an cameraman, a writer, an individual who could be self- employed, you could start your own business, you could change

jobs. if you even had a policy could be confined. make this ad to reality. that is a very important part of like it is important for us to have comprehensive affordable quality health care for all americans. 8.1 in california, already million californians are now receiving preventive services. are now safelys covered by their parents plan, just in our state. california seniors have saved over half a billion dollars a prescription drug medication and soon, being a woman in california will no longer be a pre-existing medical condition. hall meetingt town with leader pelosi is available

on our website at c-span.org in the video library. more of your calls as we get back to the implementation of the health-care law. pennsylvania, at independent line. >> thank you for taking my call. the national governors' association summit meeting, dr. brenner expose the law that says the crisis in health care [indiscernible] a committee of doctors who set the prices, you cannot download it or even look at it, you have to pay for it. negotiate a percentage of the schedule. the doctor says the system is by the negotiation.

>> we covered a number of panel discussions here on c-span. was that one of them? >> he did cover it. it seem like he was sort of the otherse law to in the meeting. >> what was the underlying question for the ama? why don't they released the information so it is available to everybody? >> why is it just a small group of doctors deciding what health care costs are going to be? the doctors are setting their own prices. i guess that is my comment and also questioned as to why is this happening? is the health-care industry unable to put their input into the cost?

.> thanks for your input the discussion she talked about at the national governors' meeting in milwaukee, you can find that in our video library as well. let's go to the republican line. good evening. san diego, joey, are you there? >> thank you for hearing my call. i just have a question about the implementation under both congress and the senate. as far as the oversight for them actually using it for themselves. we have heard a couple of things i am just to right, it has beenee if discussed. >> we have talked about a couple of issues in terms of the implementation. i am sure those issues will continue to come up this evening. back to the implementation issue and the delay the wall street journal talked about.

the reporting today about some of the delays. she writes that republicans scant luck inad .verturning the law in february, the administration delayed part of our requirement that some employer health insurance plans cap employees out of pocket costs. in june, a rule that small businesses offer either a single plan or allow employees to choose among different plans was delayed, and a month later, the administration postponed until 2015 a mandate that larger employers offer health insurance. that is "the wall street journal." let's take a quick look at our facebook comments.

christian says, people at a lot of fear and propaganda scare them of having 30 million uninsured people get coverage. now with those insured it would generate billions in revenue. it's making people fiscally responsible. to waldorf, maryland on the independent line. >> thank you for taking my call. theuestion/comment is, naming of the affordable care whoset depends on perspective you are talking about. 30-year-oldhealthy ,nd one of the southern states i have to pay $450.

subsidiesual with will be paying $2,700 for coverage. everyone buysat is basically saying that young people have to buy insurance to offset the cost of and help the people. how is that fair and how is it when forfordable certain individuals, the actual cost is going up? >> are you currently covered by health care plan? >> i am. watched our premiums go asand our services declined a result of things basically coming into effect. >> thanks for joining the conversation. a question or comment on the democrats' line.

i have a catastrophic illness and i want to comment on the new health care. i think is a wonderful. i think is still a step in the right direction. i have medicare right now and i have bluecross-blueshield federal, which congressmen have. it is wonderful. i pay like half of what i pay for bluecross-blueshield. it's the same rate that medicare gets. what i payss than them. i think as americans we should accept what the new health care is because we have in massachusetts, and it works. investigateinue to the insurance companies and see if we can get a better plan. whatld be willing to pay i've paid bluecross that blueshield a month.

plus more if everyone was .overed >> you are in massachusetts, so if your situation better because of the health care law passed their when mitt romney was governor, or because of now the passage of the affordable care act? >> i have always had health insurance, but i see from my family, i have a daughter who was out of work this year and she lost her health care. she can get health care under the massachusetts plan at a reasonable rate. this is a good plan, what obama has done. >> it is not only government agencies trying to figure out the implementation of the health care plan. we look at same sex marriage and how that is affecting implementation in things like social security and changes in the tax code.

here is the reporting from the washington times. the headline is pentagon to give benefits to unmarried days in september. as long as they present a valid marriage certificate to the proper authorities, the pentagon will provide leave to same-sex couples who travel to state that permits a marriage so that they may wed. defense secretary chuck hagel said that all military spouses would begin receiving the same benefits, regardless of sexual orientation. back to the issue of the affordable care act, the health care law of 2010. brian in arkansas, republican caller, welcome, sir. >> i have a statement and then a question.

first of all, i am against the affordable care act. understandnk people what they are getting into. hasobama administration already made it clear they are going to go to a single payer system. people are standing in line -- theyto get into a are going to be sorry that this ever came down the road. i question is, and maybe you can the affordable care act, one of the benefits that has been touted is that young people get to stay on their parents' health care until they are 26. >> right. >> they are counting on young people to help pay for this thing.

i don't understand how that you are because when 18-26, you are at your help is. >> so you assume it would make sense your premiums would be low. >> it seems to me like taking away eight years of young people -- ing to pay for that just don't understand. it seems like the two principals work against each other. >> do you have kids who are of that age who were still on your policy? were on mymy kids policy until there were 18 years old. >> what did they do back then when they turned 18 to get covered for health insurance? >> they went without health insurance for a while. a policy back then would not allow my kids to stay on my

policy once they reached 18 years old. they are allowed to stay on it up until the time they are 26. by allowing young people to stay on until they are 26 years old. , a democratic caller, go ahead. new jersey, are you on the line? all right, the independent line. on the independent line. where are you calling from, michael? >> i have a question. with this obama care, i worked all of my life.

i have not been in the hospital for years. what about these people who do not work? week, ok, a lot of money out of my check. what about these people on welfare? there was a story, and i will get it in a minute or two, about the tax credits that and ie to some folks, went to hear from tom in a minute. many members are back in their own districts doing the town hall. aswill see what is going on they have returned to some of their districts. this one is from a republican in ohio, bill johnson.

there is a short video clip that he has attached. it is coming into the picture, so a bit of a bipartisan meeting with bill johnson at this valley,in the mahoning tweeted earlier about russia's decision to criminalize the quality, that it was outrageous. and a senator from colorado. week, a very long town hall meeting held back in oklahoma, and among the issues that came up was the healthcare law. here is what was said. [video clip] >> getting around executive orders and executive actions, places, we are,

and the attorney general of the is involved in court cases, and we have multiple subpoenas to force testimony, so there is legal action underway. congress also things can do in terms of not approving presidential appointees, things they can do in terms of withholding funding, and we have done that in some areas, particularly where obamacare is concerned. i agree with your point. i think the president has more than any president that i recall worked outside of the .egislative framework i will consider it war. missileslook at the and the combat stories, the guys

on the other side think it is a war. had george w. bush ever done that, i think he would have been tried for impeachment, unilaterally suspended by the , and there is just a variety of issues. we have tension within the system, struggles, and this one is very serious. but there will be legal cases. bounceing to try and around a little bit, but we will get to everybody. >> thank you. little concerned to find out you were not in support of making the continuing resolution contingent upon removing what optional spending was there with obamacare. [applause] this is not theoretical for me,

because two weeks ago today, my husband and i paid in cash for our son to have major surgery. but, you know what? that is the price i pay for the liberty of my children. we have limited options, thanks .o our government i understand that i pay for $1000 perverage, month or $2000 per month. arere individuals who responsible, and we will make that sacrifice for our child. this is appropriate. you need to represent us. [applause] >> a great question, and i appreciate it very much, and i do try to represent the people. tost of all, do i want

?efund obamacare of course. or delay it. smallample, if you are a dismiss owner, you do not have to file a 1040 on some purchases. wit of that. republicans got rid that, quite frankly. there was an assisted living program that was not sustainable and would have bankrupted the government. we were able to get that through. and can you imagine that? we are going to be taxing you for your artificial limb. i do not think we should do that.

let me talk to you about what a complete government shutdown is. it affects the troops in the field. i am sorry. of course, i would not do that. i listened to your question, and i will let you have the mic again, if you want to, but let me finish answering. we have four vet rings -- four centers. the national weather center. just because you shut down the government does not mean the other side has to give in. it does not mean that the senate has to pass the legislation. they can pass that to the senate, and they will send it back to us, and then it will be

up to us. i think, politically, that is an extraordinarily dangerous thing , but i think it will put millions of people out of work. i think it will damage the economy and a whole lot of innocent people. you a chancel give to respond. >> i do understand that, but i think it is a false argument from this standpoint. a continuing resolution that excludes obamacare. granted, we know what the senate is going to do. we do. but at some point, obama care was passed against the will of the people, and look to our waseme court -- obamacare passed against the will of the people.

definition, is we keep doing the same thing. that is not going to cut it. tois more than who is going win the political power play if we shut down the government. once the tentacles are there, it is too much to dial it back. look at social security. i do not think it would come to that. >> well, i think it would come to that. if i can finish my point, i think it would come to that, and, look. we can do as you suggest. passing the original bill about it, that is fine, but it is going to come back. at that point, i really do think about the consequence of this kind of stuff, and i know you and i agree with you

that this was passed against the will of the american people, but the american people did not give us the presidency in the last election, and we actually lost ground in the senate. this is the last thing between a replay of 2009 and 2010. andgs like cap and trade -- thenorma's expansion enormous expansion. i will look at it very carefully and consider it. but i do not want to be disingenuous. i do not want you to think that shutting down the government is a good idea. i am not the only guy who feels that. are others who also feel

very strongly about this. some used to be -- some were here for the last shutdown. it is very reckless with people whose jobs are on the line, and our security, as well. i think it is very damaging. i am going to be a hard sell on that. what theok at legislative options are in september. >> from last week, one of the number of town hall meetings that are being held over the next month or so, and we will have them wednesday and thursday evenings on c-span and c-span radio. a headline of this story in a national journal today, it must be august. surfacehave begun to

about lawmakers and activists of all ideologies. plenty of lawmakers are getting and your full. earfull.g an journal" writes about obamacare tour, and there is a former tea party , from texas, who is one of the leading allies in the senate. question.llow-up to a a fellow from west virginia had a question about those who will not be able to afford it.

this is about the tax credit part of the 2010 law. the average health insurance tax credit for obamacare. write that americans can expect a average tax credit of 700 if they buy insurance outside. andtax credits will vary, moderate and low income people will be eligible to help pay for individual coverage next year on the state marketplaces, the shopping malls created by the affordable care act. and quickly, back to another caller from north carolina. he said he did not have good access and was asking about

finding out about health insurance in his state. this is with the state department in north carolina, dhhs customer service, and this is their toll-free number. let's get back to your calls and comments. it isalifornia, first up, debbie on the republican line. we got about $15,000 last year for our insurance. there was my husband's plan. basically, i am on medicare, and then i have the supplements.

it was actually really expensive. obamacare,d that compare is hard to pay -- -- hard to compare this apples apples, and we got a plan. it was aof years ago, certain amount for the two of them, and it has gone up. >> this is the same plan. it is just since the law was passed that it has gone up. >>) and it has up quite a bit. >> right, and it has gone up quite a bit.

extra.have paid upgeneric drugs have gone $12. obamacare.en since shopping on the exchange. this is something for insurance. >> california is going to do that, and if so, is that going to help your situation? >> the only thing that would maybe help, the only thing i know that would help would be the pre-existing condition. i also have lupus. i am pretty much covered with medicare.

but my younger son just went into the military. i think his is through tri-care now. 20, in basicd training. it actually says in their why the rates are going up. i have also looked up to see , and especially in california, there are , and they havens several of those.

all kinds of different things. there are so many things. that do notople have insurance. >> thank you, debbie, for sharing your story. let's check with folks on facebook. says, when are you going to change the name of the affordable care act? --ke says democrats prefer a single-payer, and we are compromised. will be passed. this came up in a recent hearing with paul ryan and the acting director of the irs, and here is a little bit from that hearing

recently. [video clip] the law you are in charge of enforcing, the clawback, that is only for a person whose income changes in a year in which the subsidy takes place, but if a --ifn--this is your law-- --erson -- this is your law it will require 100% of the subsidy. >> the hypothetical that you gave had a lot of pieces. >> they are not eligible for it. >> the one question we have is that we discovered that this individual got in inappropriate subsidy, so we made some connection with their employer to learn that information. >> which will be 2015 at its earliest. the officialt employer report in 2016.

either way, we are going to make the effort for each individual that is receiving a subsidy. subsidy, thate a they signed up for, unknowingly, and you will ask for that back in two years' time. >> we will help the individual on the front end to understand whether they have employer -- -- employer-provided -- >> you are going to hit them up again in a couple of years. a recent ways and means committee hearing meeting in our video archive. line, good evening. >> how are you? >> fine, thanks.

>> let me give you a brief introduction about my experience. i work for the federal government from the time i was 16 years old, during world war ii, and subsequently in the force, andn the air then in the military r&d for the defense department. decades for positions within municipal government in massachusetts, both in the legislative and in the executive branches. also, advisory positions. , did mathematics and research and there was i.t. analysis. patents, and i also have technical publications, and with

respect to the health issue, i ,id read when it first came out i did read the bill. i downloaded it onto my computer. it is still there. some beautiful things in their and some things which were totally inconsistent, but it definitely showed that you cannot maintain your health insurance if the policy were at all changed by the provider, and with respect to health, people have ignored in this whole debate the issue that health depends not only on medical care , which is prenatal and also upon food and shelter. now, a final comment that i thed like to make, and insurance companies duke of it, --natal care is available

and the insurance companies do pay for it, re-natal care is -- prenatal care is available. thisanks for your call evening, james, from massachusetts. we are talking about the implementation of the 2010 health care law, the affordable care act, called obama care by some. us at #cspanchat, and there is the food stamp program. on headline is about voters oles, where the participants doubled between 2007 and 2011. courtingn the area of to one source.

-- according to one source. a portion of the food stamp recipients. become athat this has target for republicans in their ongoing fight with president obama and other democrats over reducing the federal budget deficit, and this is the yet to be resolved situation with the food stamp program. to wichita, kansas, next up, we have our democrats line. welcome. make sure you mute your television. put you on hold. we will then get to you. we will go now to naples, florida. >> hello. thank you for your time. >> sure. >> i am a small business person. i am 59 years old.

i am a cancer survivor. when i had the opportunity to re pre-or the obamaca existing insurance, i gave up my insurance with a 10,000 dollars deductible, which was very i went without insurance for a long period of time to qualify for coverage. i i went into the program last , giving it opportunity to have insurance for $375 per a low and there was deductible of $2500 for the year. was said that the pre- existing condition program was no longer affordable, that we , and it,000 enrollees went up to $450 per month, and my copayment went up, and my

deductible has changed. through a health insurance program or through the state of florida? >> this is president obama's existing health insurance plan. i am one of the few privileged people who are allowed to enter the program, which is being closed because they cannot program, and the program is being closed, and as of october, i have to go to the public, and this is a public forum, and shop for insurance, and my question is, it if the -- pre-existing insurance. when i go to the doctors, they want their money up front.

this year, if i want to go to any new doctors, they say that i can come, but they want their fee up front first, and then you can turn that into the government. is $250,he time, it which i cannot do that. be alive, butto just so you know, that program is being closed down. >> i am sorry. go ahead with your question. if the, my question is government is going to sustain a pay my, where i deductibles, i pay for all of my medicines -- >> right. >> and my costs are quite high. if the government cannot afford to sustain that, how in the

world are they going to subsidize the rest of the united states with a large population of people who do not work, when they cannot afford to keep the program going for 100,000 people who are paying to be in it? >> we appreciate your being with this, and ifng for you want to join us on twitter, it is #cspanchat. program.more and this from steve -- let's hear from lorene, who is on the democrat line. lorene, you are on the air. >> ok, i am calling to ask, because since obamacare has taken effect -- i have a

granddaughter, and i have been raising her. we were told that she would be , and since under me she has graduated from school, she don't get nothing for medical. doctors have stated that she needs medical treatment. she has severe asthma, allergies, and things, and she has been told by the state that she has to be there get pregnant -- before she can get any type of medical help. >> this is state insurance? >> yes. she is going to community and she is also working part-time. the doctor gave her a number to call somebody, and they gave her a price per month.

your call is coming up on the c-span town hall. we will take your impressions of the implementation of the 2010 health care law, and we will continue to take your calls, facebook posts, and tweets. looking at some other news here, jesse jackson junior, the chicago congressman, was sentenced today according to the "chicago tribune" to 30 months .ehind bars they write that in addition to the 2.5 years in prison, jackson junior was sentenced to three years of supervised release. sandi jackson was ordered to serve 12 months.

the headline and politico says mike kinsey is attending a new york meeting about politics. the wyoming republican facing a primary challenge from dick cheney's daughter. he is heading to new york next month to face conservative donors. a gathering known as the new york meeting which puts candidates, elected officials, and others in front of a large gathering for potential supporters. he will appear at that meeting a september 16, indicating fresh level of engagement for enzi. is beingry race closely watched. liz cheney is familiar to a number of donors. the death toll in the violence of egypt. the associated press reporting 200 78, toll so far is including 235 civilians -- the death toll so far is 278,

including 235 civilians. in the early afternoon, secretary of state john kerry came to the briefing room at the state department and spoke to reporters and issued his statement on what is going on in egypt. here's what he had to say. >> sorry to keep you waiting, folks. i will make a statement, and and answerll stay questions and brief everyone. the united states strongly condemns today's violence and bloodshed across egypt. it is a serious blow to reconciliation, and the egyptian people's hopes for transition towards democracy and inclusion. in the past week at every occasion -- perhaps even more than the past week -- we and

others have urged the government to respect the rights of free assembly and of free expression. we have also urged all parties to resolve this impasse peacefully and underscored that demonstrators should avoid violence and incitement. deplorable,ts are and they run counter to egyptian aspirations for peace, inclusion, and genuine democracy. egypt since inside and outside of the government need to take a step act. they need to calm the situation and avoid further loss of life. we also strongly oppose a return to a state of emergency law, and we call on the government to respect basic human rights including freedom, peaceful assembly and due process under the law. we believe the state of emergency should end as soon as possible. violence is simply not a

solution in egypt or anywhere else. violence will not create a roadmap for egypt's future. violence only impedes the transition to an inclusive civilian government, a government chosen in free and fair elections that governs democratically, consistent with the goals of the egyptian revolution, and violence and continued political polarization will only further terror the egyptian economy apart, prevent it from growing, providing the jobs and the future that the people of egypt wants so badly. the united states strongly supports the egyptian people's hope for a prompt and sustainable transition to an tolerant civilian-led democracy. deputy secretary of state earns -- burns together with our eu colleagues provided construction ideas and left them on the table during our talks in cairo last week.

i believe they know full well what a constructive process would look like. the interim government and the military, which together possess the preponderance of power in this confrontation, have a unique responsibility to prevent further violence and to offer constructive options for an inclusive, peaceful process across the entire political spectrum. this includes amending the constitution, holding parliamentary and presidential elections, which the interim government itself has called for. all the other parties, all the opposition, all of civil sharey, all parties also a responsibility to avoid violence and to participate in a productive path towards a political solution. there will not be a solution through further polarization. there can only be a political solution by bringing people together with a political

solution, so this is a pivotal moment for all egyptians. the path towards violence leads only to greater instability, economic disaster, and suffering. the only sustainable path for either side is one towards a political solution. i am convinced from my conversations today with a number of foreign ministers including the foreign minister of egypt -- i am convinced that that path is in fact still open, and it is possible, though it has been made much, much harder, much more complicated by the events of today. the promise of the 2011 revolution has simply never been fully realized, and the final outcome of that revolution has not yet in society -- has not yet been decided. it will be shaped in the hours ahead, in the days ahead. it will be shaped by the decisions which all of egypt's

political leaders make now and in these days ahead. the world is closely watching egypt and is deeply concerned about the events we have witnessed today. the united states remains at the ready to work with all of the partnersnd with our and with others around the world in order to help achieve peaceful democratically -- a peaceful, democratic way forward. now jen will be happy to answer any questions. thanks. >> will there be any consequences for the military? i will be back in just a few minutes. >> secretary of state john kerry earlier today. since his comments, the death two hundred 78 according to the associated press. welcome back to c-span's townhall. we spent a couple of hours every tuesday, wednesday, and thursday while congress is in recess talking about politics and public policy issues. tonight, spending time looking

at the affordable health care act and its implementation. joining us, a health policy report of -- reporter for kaiser health news. thanks for being with us. >> my pleasure. >> this is the area you focus in. let's look at the states. was sort of budget challenges are you hearing from states across the country and their implementation of the healthcare exchanges in particular in those states? >> for the states that are doing of which expansion, there are about 15 and the district of columbia, there is almost unlimited money for them to implement these exchanges. for them, they have lots of money owing from washington to help them hire armies of people to go out to enroll people, fulfill the databases, do all the work they need to do to spend on advertising, for instance. in the states where the federal

government is doing most of the heavy lifting, those states are struggling because there's a very limited amount of money that those states can access -- or that the federal government, rather, can access. i think there's concern in places like texas, for instance, where the federal government is leading the charge and building the exchange that there will be far fewer government resources to be able to draw people into the site. because of that, you are seeing other groups step in like enroll america, which has hired ,omething like 3000 people volunteers and hired staff, to essentially go to some target states like texas or florida that are not building their own exchanges, and to essentially knocked on doors and ask people what their status is, and if they are uninsured, they are trying to help them figure out how they can get insurance on october 1. >> how many stages are choosing to do open exchanges? how many are saying no thank

you? >> all states will have exchanges. it does not matter whether or not the state wants it or not. they are going to get it. whos just a matter of builds it. there are about 17 states, including d.c., building their own. in some cases, they are very robust, like in california. the federal government is doing more than 27 states, and there is sort of a hybrid called a partnership model that the feds and the state's are working together in about seven states. >> we got a call earlier a short while ago from california, who had used a number of years ago e -insurance exchange. what will it look like compared to something like that? >> i cannot say for sure what look like, but it will be similar in concept. aswill not be as easy

buying. you will have to have financial information. it would be a little like finder of file your taxes online. you will walk for the process. you will put down your income, the number of people in your household, where you live because the price you pay for insurance depends on the region where you are. in california, we have a number of regions. , andill walk through that then it will determine that you are in a household that earns below a certain threshold, where you would actually qualify for a subsidy. itswebsite, if it is doing job, will come back and say, " here are the plans that are available and here is what you're subsidy will look like." 138% ofle who are below the poverty level and qualify for the medicaid expansion, you would also be able to essentially have a handoff between the exchange website and

your state medicaid program. sarah is a former health in california.ed on those states where the federal government is implementing the exchange, are you hearing any stories of us back or lack of cooperation between those efforts and the state government -- of pushback or lack of cooperation? >> i'm not hearing that. there were concerns the federal government would need access to some of the state medicaid aid a databases, andid it will be clumsy for a while. that is for certain. but the software and the kind of infrastructure that is needed are pretty similar in the states that are doing federal partnership and those that are not. we have seen, however, already some states -- one state,

actually, that has come out and said they are going to be ready on october 1 to sign people up, but the website will not be ready, so you will need help from navigators and insurance brokers to actually sign up for the coverage. not becomee does active until january 1, so everyone is very focused on this october 1 deadline because that is the beginning of the period, but people actually have several months into next year to enroll. where peoplestates are doing their own work, we will see a lot of people saying they are not ready. >> none of the delays or postponements the administration has announced have affected exchanges. to clarify, actually, because you brought up the point about these delays we keep hearing

about, the one that we talked about yesterday, which my colleague reported back in april, was essentially -- it actually had nothing to do with the exchanges. there is an out of rocket attacks on how much people have to pay for their total out-of- pocket expenses, both medical expenses as well as pharmaceutical expenses. year for a individuals, and about $12,700 for a family. if you buy your insurance on the exchange, starting january 1, that will be in effect. whatever you pay, you will pay your premium, and in addition to that, you will not be asked to pay out-of-pocket more than $6,350 or an individual and family coverage. what got delayed is the application of that provision to employer-sponsored plans. it is really only for people who generally work for large employers where you may have a benefit manager who manages the pharmacy, and then you have the insurance company that handles

the doctors visits, that kind of thing. what the insurers were saying and employers themselves were saying was the systems have long been so fragmented that essentially, we are not ready yet. there are groups from the patient advocacy side who say that they have had the last three years to do this and there should be no excuse, and there are people who need expensive treatments who will not have that consumer protection for an extra year, the companies are essentially saying they are just not ready yet. >> to the companies you the start of the exchanges as an increase business opportunity. whichhink it depends on company you are. we have seen a lot of companies coming to the marketplace here. some have already existed. we saw a lot of people angling

to try to get on the california exchange. there are a number of applications, and the state only excepted a small percentage of them. i think it depends on what state you are in. if you are in a state like wyoming that has half a million people, that is not a lot of business for you to go after. it has really been state by state or even in a sense region by region within a state, a business decision. >> sarah is with kaiser health news, and she covers the implementation of the healthcare law, in particular focusing on states. can you take a couple of comments from callers? >> absolutely. >> great. let's go to vincent who has been waiting in miami. go ahead with your question or comment. >> if you get the opportunity, i would love to see thom hartmann on one of your shows. i get the opportunity to watch bartlett and steele, and they really explain why it is so expensive to do anything in the

medical industry. the problem i have is the fact that in my state, florida governor rick scott stole a lot of money from the government as far as the medicaid, medicare fraud. in my state, my representative has voted against obamacare, but at the same time, she is against us having any relations with cuba, but at the same time, russia right now is saying that gay people who come to the russian olympics are going to be discriminated against. >> let's focus on the issue of the implementation in florida. what can you tell us? >> it is sort of an interesting case because you had a governor who was initially opposed to the healthcare law, but after looking at the numbers, he said, in terms of how much money would come into the state, it is something he actually advocated for. it is in the legislature, but the legislature has so far denied his request to do that.

florida is one of the states where you will have considerably large numbers of people who will not qualify for the medicaid expansion, but those who are earning more than 100% of the poverty level -- they will be able to go on the exchanges and receive what will likely be a pretty significant subsidy. the problem, however, is for the people who are essentially at zero percent of the poverty level, so they are essentially indigent. they now have this new doughnut as a result of the supreme court's decision to allow medicaid to be an option for the state. >> we go next to staten island, new york. lois is on the line. >> how are you doing, sarah? me and my coworkers are very confused. we have private insurance union contracts, but we are a small group. we are in need of jobs. we are very skillful.

our healthcare just keeps going up and up and up erie it we work for a billion-dollar corporation. people keep getting these million dollar bonuses, but every contract, our health insurance skyrockets. it has tripled since i have been here seven years ago. obama said it would be more affordable we were going to be able to keep it. it has gotten worse. coverage has been worse. co-pays are higher. i just want to know -- i do not have time to read that huge obamacare act. nobody does. all we do is work to pay off these fees, surcharges, taxes, everything. i want to know what is there to help the middle-class blue- collar workers because we are very confused. thank you. >> thank you. -- ie affordable care act can't talk about some of the cost-containment provisions in a moment, but it is like what massachusetts did, which was saying, "let's get everybody in here co a problem of 50 million

uninsured americans, so let's get everybody in the pool first, and then we will deal with the cost issue, and that is essentially what massachusetts did. it is now in its third iteration of the massachusetts expansion, and i think there is a sense that national expansion will follow a similar trajectory. i can tell you that healthcare costs, of course, have been many, above inflation for many, many years for a variety of reasons, including, you know, tremendous innovation of the united states and americans hunger for those new therapies. everything in the united dates is much more expensive than it is and any other country. from an mri to a hospital stay to childbirth. we spend a lot more on healthcare. we pay our physicians and a lot more. there's a lot of reasons for why the united states is so expensive.

in terms of what the affordable care act does to address some of those things and whether or not , whichows up in premiums is many questions down the road -- i think it is an open question. lot of work, actually, i should say, in medicare, that has the opportunity to go a separate direction for containing healthcare costs in the united states. just one example i give you is there are hospitals in the u.s. because of the affordable care act that are penalized for what are considered unnecessary readmissions. one of my colleagues has done a where ifiting on this somebody leaves the hospital, and they come back within 30 days for something that the hospital really should have been able to handle, then they are penalized. we are seeing that this is having an effect on hospital behavior. there's other things in the affordable care act,

particularly around medicare, that are forcing hospitals in particular to deal with some of the pricier things in the medicare system. the idea, of course, is that the lookse insurance industry to medicare to set examples. the idea is that medicare will lay some crumbs, and private insurance will follow. levers are in the a place yet to figure out how we are going to drive down premiums. in california, we saw the premium come in significantly lower. thousands and thousands of dollars lower than what we expected. some of the smaller companies are in this position where they will have to decide whether or not they want to stick together and continue to get insurance through these new small business exchanges, basically, and take a tax credit for reviving the insurance or whether or not they want to not offer insurance at

all and have each person essentially go on their own to the exchange and see if they could get a better deal. >> let's get one more call for sarah varney. this time from pennsylvania. bill is on our republican line. you are on the air. go ahead. >> i am almost 76ers old, and i -- that's not what i'm really calling about. tie inson with the help the irs with obamacare is the the fifthn who took amendment when she talked about targeting opponents of the obama administration. how do we know she will fairly handle this job? are talking about lois lerner, the irs official? >> party scandal.

>> bill, thanks for your call. let's end on that in terms of the tax implications for obamacare, for the healthcare law. what will people notice most once the law is fully implemented? where is it likely to help or hurt people most? >> he is absolutely right that the irs has been the linchpin in all of this in trying to figure out if you qualify for subsidies. you go onto the exchange and put in your estimated income for the coming year. those are based on your estimates. money, the more subsidy goes down proportionately. if you earn less money, the subsidy goes up proportionately. it is absolutely true the irs plays a big role in figuring out how much people will ultimately pay out of their pocket.

i think there's a lot of questions. i think it will be very messy for the first couple of years, for sure. people at the irs are working a lot on this and trying to figure out if they have the right data, through this data hub that the federal government is constructing to make sure that they can make those decisions pretty quickly. >> sarah varney, one of several kaiser health news reporters joining us via skype. thanks so much for being with us. >> my pleasure. iq. have a good evening. >> we will get back to your calls and comments as we continue to look at the implementation of the healthcare law. just wrapped up a final question about the irs and some of the tax implement -- tax implications of that. the founder of americans for tax reform, grover norquist, was our

guest this week on "washington journal" with his own thoughts on the law. >> clearly, this bill, the obama care legislation, was orley written, sloppily put together. we are finding all sorts of problems. finance chair, democrat from montana, said the whole thing is a train wreck. the president has admitted that big businesses cannot deal with the mandate, so he is giving them a year. it is not clear in the law that the president has that authority. he is just sort of not going to enforce the law that is there. we now have another cap, this is supposed to be one of the benefits. prices were going to stay down. that is being delayed one year. what is to stop it from being delayed one year every year for the next 50 years? i have beeneople working with that americans for tax reform is the -- is in

to delay alle idea of obamacare for one year. if it is not ready for prime time, if it is messing stuff up, let's just delay it. small businesses do not get the delay, big businesses do. individuals do not, big as this is. now, there's another piece that is not working. let delay it a year and take a look at what needs to be reformed. >> senate democrats and president obama say that is a no go with them. what is the strategy here? saidthink the president during his press conference the other day that a normal times, you go to congress and ask for a delay, but these are not normal times because tong chris will not do -- because congress will not do what he wants. the house of representatives passed a law to make legal the

delay he wanted, and he said he would veto it. he wants to either enforce the law or not enforce the law as he sees fit. it is a very assertion. we do have some situations with, like, the continuing resolution , whichdebt ceiling continues to go up. , "look, if youy want the debt ceiling increase, we can do that. we gave you the debt ceiling increase before and just made you stop some of the crazier spending. as a result, we are seeing some reduction in the runaway growth of government, so we have made some progress. we need to do something similar

with obamacare. delay the implementation. the taxes, the spending, delay them for a year, take a look at where we are and then move forward. >> grover norquist of americans for tax reform. this is c-span town hall. about another half hour of your comments and questions on the issue of the implementation of the healthcare law. a tweak here from steve stockman, congressman from the 36th district in texas about an article. another view from senator john thune. scott, the republican from south carolina, talking with the mayor of cheraw. manchin, the joe democrat from west virginia,

thanking those who came to the roundtable in lewisburg today and voiced their concerns and common sense ideas. you can find more of those tweets from members on our twitter page, twitter.com/c- span. just click on list, you will find them. let's go back to the phone. here is orlando and michael. thanks for waiting. >> my comment is basically i'm in a very bad situation myself. the laws in florida leave you in a very bad situation with work injuries. i ended up settling a case, and at this point, now, i have issues with my spine, and i have issues with dizziness, and i have no insurance. i have no idea what to do at this point. >> to you know if the new healthcare law will help your situation at all? >> because i do not have insurance at all, i am in a particularly bad situation.

i have dizzy spells. i lose consciousness, and i have no insurance. i have called all over the place to try to get help, and i cannot get that help. >> michael, good luck to you. we go to will on our republican line, who is in san antonio, texas. good evening. >> good evening. i would just like to say ever since this healthcare law has been implemented, i was able to see my podiatrist about her years ago, and he took medicare, and the deductible was $16 $.85 -- i was able to see my podiatrist about three years ago. noalled today, and they longer take medicare. and i have to pay a bill of $30 for an office visit and whatever else is wrong with me. this bill has been a train wreck since the beginning. the only obstruction as i see is harry reid and the senate

democrats that want to keep this train wreck going. it is a bad idea. it is bad policy. not only that, my hours have been cut. i'm usually working up to full- time hours. now they have been cut 25. even with the employer mandate the and put on hold for a year, they are not going to turn around and say, "we are going to give you more than 25 hours a week." if senate democrats want to gain their seats back and put a gain in the house, they need to repeal this bad bill. >> one of those senate democrats was in a maryland town hall this week and was asked about the implementation of the town hall and talk about some of the partnership that happened between members of the senate over the law. here is what he had to say. >> there has been some difficulty implementing this bill in washington because we have not had the resources made available through the budget

process so that it could be done. there has been no real effort in congress to take a look at the affordable care act and to make minor changes where you need to make minor changes in order to make it easier. that has not been done because of the partisan division. we have not been able to do that, so we are up against some deadlines that are going to be difficult for us to meet, but we need your help in meeting those deadlines. the first, as i said, is october 1 when the public will have a chance to enroll in the exchanges. ise is what the opportunity all about. we are talking about hundreds of thousands of people in maryland who do not have health coverage today, who have the opportunity to have affordable health coverage. when i say affordable, 75%, we estimate, will be eligible for subsidies. for a family of four -- and our state, around $95,000 or below

-- they will be eligible for some help if they do not have employer-provided benefits. we need your help in getting that information out. we are going to also see some additional help come through the expansion of medicaid, which will also provide some additional coverage that we can get people enrolled. there's a lot of exciting things. come january 1, the pre-existing condition exclusions are over with. we have been able to implement a lot of new changes. we have already provided small businesses with credits to help them provide insurance for their employees. now they will also be able to get insurance through the exchanges if they meet certain standards. for companies under 50, there is no new requirements under the affordable care act. i always like to say that because we are mindful of the impact that the affordable care act has on small businesses. i serve on the small business committee in the congress, and we wanted to make sure this was

workable for all businesses. we were particularly concerned about small companies. there is no new requirement. there's a lot of opportunity. they can get credits to help pay for the cost of their employees. they can get competitive rates, and they have a lot of different plants they can choose from under the exchanges that they could not before. there's more opportunity out there, but the question is how do we implement this? that is where you come in. you are the community group. you know the target people we are trying to get enrolled. it is difficult yet to see how you are going to work your way through the different plants that are offered. that information is just now becoming available. we need people to help us in a way that is most effective for the people we are trying to reach. there are a lot of young people out there who do not have coverage. we know that. they are going to want a policy that works for them.

those young people who have not experienced a difficult health issue think they are invincible. they do not look at why they need health insurance. we need your help the cause we know how many young people get into a medical situation, and they either do not seek healthcare, or they are responsible sometimes for their own personal bankruptcies. a lot of people go through bankruptcy because of health care costs. we are trying to avoid that. what i would like to get from you is how we can help, what tools you need from us, what we can do to make it easier for people to get the information they need. we want people to make the right decisions about their healthcare care needs. we know there's a lot of partisan politics played in washington these days. i am really trying to stay above that. i mean that. i want people to make the right decisions for what is best for them. this bill is not going to be

repealed. you would think that republicans in the house would get the message after the 30th time they tried to repeal it and it is still here. the public would not let us repeal this bill. they do not want to lose the benefits they have gotten. seniors do not want to go back to higher cost of prescription drugs. families do not want to see their 25-year-old kicked off their health insurance policies. people like adding a check from the insurance companies that have been charging more than what we think is an acceptable rate for their health insurance. quite frankly, americans are tired of paying the cost for people who should be responsible for their own health care needs. that is what this is all about, so how do we implement it in a way that makes the most sense for the american people? about two weeks ago, i was in southern maryland with steny hoyer, and we got into a great .iscussion tomorrow, i will be in prince george's county on a similar

type of discussion talking with people there. for the people of baltimore, what can we do to help? what changes do you think need to be made in the law if you think changes need to be made? what tools do you need for this to work? how can we get more people the information they need to make the right decisions for themselves and their families? what would you like to see congress to? what would you like to see your senators do or your congress to? what would you like to see the local people do? we are in this together, maryland. >> ben cardin's town hall from this week and more on the way here on c-span. a couple of tweets from members about meetings back in the district. here is the key heart, representative from missouri -- here is vicky hartzler.

mark kirk, the republican senator of illinois said -- and a picture from that meeting. let's get back to calls on the issue of the implementation of the 2010 healthcare law. carol from georgia is up next. then beverly. hello. go ahead. >> yes, hello. i'm a retired teacher, and i us. insurance available to there's a lot of confusion, a lack of information about the affordable health care plan. i would like to thank the woman from pfizer who answered many of our questions. she also has a site we can visit to get more information, but we are concerned about what will happen to our insurance as retired teachers. we have insurance until we are eligible for medicare, and under obama's plan, will be premiums go up? how much?

where can we get this kind of information? even our state department does not know that information yet. will we receive the same level of care from positions that we know and love in a timely manner ? >> how long will you be on that plan until you are eligible for medicare? >> a lot of teachers start teaching in their early 20's and can retire after 30 years, so a lot of them with the 55 or older when they retire and will be on that insurance plan until they are 65 or 66 or 67 even. >> our next call is from florida on the independent line. wish ms. varney was still on. she could have answered my questions. >> i apologize for that. we could not keep her forever. but i think she is watching. she appreciates the comment. it is all the

contradictions. the healthcarew, plan has not been instituted yet, but i hear people that are buying insurance, blaming the health care at for raising -- blaming the health care act for raising when they are not buying from the exchanges. yet, they keep buying from private insurance. .here's too much misinformation for me, that is the problem. the lady that called rom -- i believe it was was coastal florida, cancer survivor. >> yes. paying 450 dollars- something a month. .hat is how much i pay for life i'm supposed to have insurance through miami-dade county, but the part i pay is more than what

she is paying. she never mentioned what she was paying before. in florida, we do not have exchanges. i have no idea what she purchased. she said it was through healthcare three years ago. the other person in texas, same thing. texas isbelieve selling through the exchanges for healthcare. that starts october 1. >> right. the sign-ups begin october 1. >> right, so what are these they are talking about that were caused by so-called obamacare? >> thanks for your comments this evening. the changes ahead is how it is affecting businesses. headline businesses claim obamacare has forced them to cut

employee hours. they write that employees around the country from fast food franchises to colleges have told nbc news that they will be cutting employee hours because they cannot afford to offer the health insurance mandated by the affordable care act. "to tell somebody you have got to decrease their hours because of a law back in washington is very frustrating," says lauren goodrich, who owns 21 subway franchises. further in the article, they say the president of an influential union that supports obamacare says the white house is wrong in describing some of these stories as anecdotal. they quote the head of the united food and commercial workers union saying it is .appening the united food and commercial workers union has 1.2 million members. he will see a truman this impact

is workers have their hours and incomes reduced. the facts are already starting to show up. the statistics are a little behind the times. in a letter to democratic leaders on the hill, hansen leaders and labor warning that it could destroy the foundation of the 40-hour work week that is the back of the middle class. the reporting of nbc and cnbc. san antonio, texas, next up. phil, you are on the air. go ahead. >> yes, i think that this health care law is nothing but a power grab. -- the governor of texas says this health care law is not going to work. i think the people are trying to slow it down a little bit and turn it over -- turn the power over to the people and not the government. and that is it. is onnew orleans, jules

the independent line. you are on the air. >> yes, i was laid off from my job in february of this year. until that time, i had insurance through my company i was working for, building ships for the united states navy. since i have been laid off in february, i have been participating in cobra. my wife is disabled since 1996. i had an injury at the job, and i had knee replacement surgery. $1295ying cobra coverage a month. >> that's for you and your wife? >> right. and i'm not really using it. my wife is. it's eating up the little savings that i had. hopefully, obama care will not be as bad as the price i'm paying for cobra. it should be affordable, and

this cobra payment that i'm paying is definitely not affordable. >> what will happen there in louisiana? are they setting up an exchange? will that help your situation at all, do you know? >> i heard our governor, bobby jindal, is not going to allow the state to participate. that is what i've heard. i'm not a soothsayer of state politics. hopefully, we can participate in something because eventually, my savings -- i will have cobra year sometime. >> right. >> and then i will be out of cobra. >> just by example, cobra is costing you $1200 a month. before, when you were working, what did your monthly health insurance cost? >> it was about $200. >> so that is $1000 extra a

month you have to find. >> right. and i'm not working. >> thanks for being with us here this evening. we've been talking about the implementation of the health care law, showing you some of the members as they talk about it in town hall meetings across the country. roll call has a special section they have set up this year for pictures of members on what they are doing for their summer recess. here it is -- how they spend their summer vacation. they have set up this interest est website or webpage, and if you take a picture, you can tweak it -- tweet it to heardonthehill. let's hear from deborah who is in california. >> yes, hello. this is for the senators,

congress, and president. i have worked for companies for 20 years, had medical coverage with kaiser. after 20 years, i became an owner of a company, and i had to pay kaiser starting at $250 a month, which they helped me with. then they went to $450. then they went to $850. i could not have coverage. from gettingep sick. finally, i found a free clinic. doctors who donate their time come from all state hospitals to help you. they gave me free medicine and helped me and tell i can get back on my feet. then they suggested county. there are programs out there, everybody is looking. you can go there and get some help. i feel for the man who had a lawsuit and heard his spine. it's true. sometimes you do not know where to go. you cannot give up. there is good people out there

that makes our country beautiful. they will help you. you just have to keep trying. i'm not sure how the whole need to takewe care of our people here and take care of everybody here that is living here so everybody has medical coverage. >> whereabouts in the state? know where berkeley, sacramento area, san francisco area? >> yes. >> they can go to richmond. they can go to contra costa county. they can apply. you have to make a certain income. they can get help from here. there are doctors from kaiser that started the program. she was a nurse and saw a lot of people without coverage. you are ashamed when you go in, but you are getting the coverage. if your health gets worse, then it becomes a problem with the whole world, with all the united face. like, if you are a diabetic, you need to get the insulin, the

medicine, because if you do not take care of yourself, you have to amputate the leg. then you become a ward of the united eights. you get welfare. and if we want to get rid of welfare, we need to help the sick. >> we are asking you your thoughts on the implementation of the health care law. here is christian. >> ohio, are you there? independent line. >> i would like to make several comets. my wife and i as independents -- we will not be voting for any

democrats, republicans, or independents that support this onerous tax. this is an unfair tax put over on the people of this country, and it is totally unfair. i would also like to say that i do believe this hold system that is called obamacare one day will implode on itself. although i'm not a young person, from what i've seen out there with the young people, they are not owing to sign up for this. there's no reason to. to be trying to pay for something that is maybe on down the line 30 or 40 years for them, so i think this system is just going to implode sooner or later. i guess my last comment would be if obama care is so great, i would like for someone to call in and answered with this -- if obamacare is so great, why are the representatives and senators going to be able to opt out of this? their aides will not be able to go to the exchange or anything.

and these people are going to be given subsidies. they do not have to qualify or anything. it is just going to be given to them. that was on the other day. >> we talked about this issue a little earlier in the program. thanks for this call. still on the independent line. hi, there. >> i may have missed it, but i think the simple solution is what i think the gentleman just said. let's put the congressman and senators in both hearties -- , the irs, hhs, all the different agencies all under the same agency that the average citizen will have to be under. they are not any better than we are. i guess they think they are. why are they not under the same system that we are going to have to be under? i think that would be your answer.

if they were under the same system and had the same problems that i'm hearing other people have had and are going to have, then you see some changes, but as long as they are not having any problems, they are not going to change anything for the average citizen. >> thank you for your comment from mississippi. two cherry valley, illinois. >> they keep talking about this affordable care act. nobody has ever come up with any figures about how affordable it is. for people that do not have insurance and are supposed to get insurance, who is subsidizing these people that are going to pay for that? the government? are they taxing everybody else to subsidize that? where are the figures at? they keep coming up with these laws and saying we have to still implement it. they should have known when they passed this law what they were going to do with it.

but nancy pelosi said you had to pass the bill before you knew what was in it. they still did not know what is in it. >> we appreciate all your calls and comments this evening and more online on facebook and twitter. here is one on the healthcare bill from duane who says -- a couple of other comments. this one has to do with the death of jack tremont -- jack germond. also, from senator roy blunt of missouri. he says -- jack germond died today at the age of 85.

he was 85. he was on this network and number of times, including back in 2008. we covered the 100th anniversary of the national press club, and they heard from columnist jack jim on -- jack germond. >> by the way, i was here when helen and her colleagues were here. you have done better in the way of food. the food was terrible. i once got up on the table and the pressant to thank club for upholding its usual standards of food." everybody broke up in rowers. in those days, newspapermen on friday -- sometimes on thursdays -- wrote what was commonly called the sunday story.

it summed up everything that was going on in your beat and put some perspective on it. we got into a habit informally of giving or copy and coming up to the dining room, which was at the other end of this floor, and having a few bloody mary's or a because the copy was in. wewe gave up that day, and just got a bloody mary and were the bells wentd off like i have never heard ever. aboutbeen a reporter for 15 years, so maybe that is not so unusual. none of us had ever heard them

like this. we ran over to the machine. we were getting a flash on each wire service. smith had beaten jack l -- bell, so bell never forgave him. the flashes were that president kennedy had been shot. .he whole floor emptied out we put our drinks down. we went back. somebody gets on a plane to dallas. somebody else goes to cover the speaker because the speaker is now second in line. somebody else over at the white house -- i don't know. i do not know what we expected

there, but what were we afraid of? we thought this might be an attack on the government. we did not know. for an hour or two, we were in fellow -- we were enveloped in uncertainty with what was going on. we were gone through the day, and late in the afternoon -- -- i came up here to see if we could get some hamburgers because we never had lunch, and there was nobody here. nobody was in the bar drowning his or her sorrows. the place had emptied out. there might have been a couple of guys sleeping in chairs who were always sleeping in chairs. but largely, the place was gone,

and it was because of this incredible story we had to deal with. withd a week of dealing the story from this building. this was a special -- we were on the 12 floor on that side of the building, and we could see the parade and the procession. it was a very stunning thing. the point i wanted to make was a few months later, i realized -- and i had not thought about this until just lately -- a few months later, i realized that we never went back to our habit of going out on fridays for a bloody mary. and that is a stupid thing. there's no reason to break up a good habit, but we did. i have often wondered about it. it was unspoken. nobody ever said anything about it.

>> columnist jack germ on -- germond >> more advocacy issues and preparing for the legislative session with andy roth. recent development in the u.s. and global oil industry issues, and president obama's approving of the keystone pipeline. span, we'reere on c- asking you who do you think master presents the future of your political party? look at portions of video from established and up-and-coming political figures.