and safety concerns. mccown, a is brigham safety administered -- a safety official for the bush and administration. later, efforts to fight fraud. host: good morning. senior obama officials are expected to brief congressional leaders today on syria come this is over 100 members of congress have sent a letter to the president saying i need congressional approval. reportedly, u.n. inspectors currently in this area are set to leave by saturday morning. meanwhile, internationally, british prime minister david cameron expecting a vote at parliament to authorize military action in zero, but concerns from his labor -- but concerns

from the labour party have for supposed moment of the vote. while britain and france and turkey are on board with largelyl action there, countries that are siding with the u.s. are calling for more diplomacy. that reported in the papers as well. we want to ask about the role of the international community on potential actions in syria and what purpose they serve. if you want to give your thoughts on the international on onety's role in syria of our social media outlets, you can do so on twitter, @cspanwj. you can always send us an e-mail -- journal@cspan.org.

guardian" from "the newspaper this morning from the united kingdom. "threat of commons revolt forces allies to delay syria missile strike" is the headline. "whitehall sources indicate that the u.s., which had planned to launch the strikes by the weekend, may be prepared to revive a backup plan to delay strikes until tuesday when the president is due to set out for the g 20 summit in russia. in an effort to build support for punitive strikes, the u.s. and u.k. will publish a joint summary of the intelligence which they say points toward the assad regime's response ability for the poison gas attack of august 21 in eastern damascus that killed over 1000 people." that is from "the guardian." picks up agton post"

little bit on the international support for this effort, starting with david cameron require theoes not backing of parliament to join what probably would be a limited military operation. some powers opposed to previous military operations in the middle east, such as germany, appear to be lining up in favor. jordan, a traditional ally, openly oppose military strikes. the jordanian information minister said his government a diplomatic solution to the syrian crisis'and to declare that 'jordan will not be a launching pad for any attacks into syria.'" times" -- " more

answers needed on syria" is their editorial. "the white house seemed ready to ignore the one because russia and china had repeatedly thwarted efforts to hold mr. assad to account. despite diplomatic frustrations, the security council should be the first venue for dealing with this matter, since chemical weapons use is a war crime and and under international treaties. backing,road military -- without broad international backing, a military strike by the united states, france, and britain and turkey could well give mr. assad propaganda advantage." 3f you want to give us a call, phone lines available. host: you can also make your thoughts known on our twitter

and oncspanwj, facebook as well. first call from north dakota on our independent line. caller: good morning. how are you doing this morning? no, i definitely don't think we should go into syria. we got to stop all this warmongering going on. it is destroying our country, and that the same time, we are it, leading to the nose at the gas pumps, grocery stores changing prices all over. i am unemployed right now and i need a meal at a and i go to the grocery store every day and i see all this. most people go once a week or every two weeks. they don't see how bad they are .eing stolen from i think we need to focus on the problems of this country. another thing -- further,ore you go any talk about the international reaction you have seen to this. caller: the international

reaction i've seen so far? i haven't seen other than the same guys that were supporting iraq and afghanistan, the same bunch of cronies that all benefit through their military- industrial complex perpetual war machine. that is all i see, just profits. that's it. line, goodrats' morning. caller: when president reagan said bring the wall down, that is a big mistake, because the wall has never been brought down. china is still communist, they have been our enemy. they have had is at war for the past eight years and to fight another one is not good for america. i'm a blue-collar person, black american man. king off of twitter

speaks to the role of the international community. host: a couple of thoughts from facebook this morning. you can make your thoughts on nwj, and if you want to post on our facebook page you can do so as well. "middle east countries have been fighting for centuries. we cannot solve their disputes but we can try to help them negotiate a truce. other than that, all we could do still more people on that's certainly not the answer." rick is from nashville, tennessee, and he is on our independent line. caller: good morning. thanks, c-span. what i believe is we should stay out of these foreign affairs because the only reason we are doing is for oil, and we are not a nation that should be trying to democratize the whole world.

this goes back to abraham's days in the bible, isaac, they will always be fighting. have a great day. adds this is all she morning, the international role of our partners when it comes to potential action. you saw the headline from "the guardian" this money about the by the primevote minister in parliament, and what it means for international reaction. waine of "the daily telegraph" serves as the new york correspondent. could you tell us what was supposed to happen in parliament when it came to syria and about this delay we have been reading about? guest: what was supposed to

happen today was a fairly straightforward vote, in which woulderon's government get from parliament and approach to the action in syria. members of parliament recalled from their summer vacation have arrived back in london saying, well, hold on here, we have not seen enough intelligence, conclusions from inspectors, and we want to before we authorize anything like this. the brakeson has had supplied to his plan so far as action with barack obama. have one votell today, voting on the principle of british report for some sort of humanitarian intervention -- british support for some sort of humanitarian invention. he will have to have a second vote now after the conclusions of the u.n. inspectors are in and more intelligence is made public, in which british lawmakers will authorize are not authorized military action. what is expected from this first vote on the principle of support? what is expected from members of

parliament as far as support is concerned? guest: early on it was expected that the government would fairly comfortably when. -- win. since yesterday afternoon, it has become clear that there is bigger opposition than previously anticipated, and dozens of members of parliament, from david cameron's own conservative party, have made clear that they are not happy with a kind of rush to military action. and and milligram, the leader of the opposition labor party, -- liband, the leader of the opposition labor party, who had been signaling that he would support the government, says that he wants to root -- wait for the results of the inspections. what we will see is a lot of speeches talking about concerns that the intelligence isn't strong enough, that written is rushing into another conflict in the middle east, just like in the u.s. win, but it is going to be a lot tighter. host: could david cameron act

apart from parliament? uldst: he trigger a bigger constitutional row. it would cause dozens of memb py and opposition parties to essentially demands of -- essentially demand his resignation. i expect a vote of no confidence in him in parliament, which at this stage is far beyond what he can manage. he is having trouble enough marshaling his members of parliament as it is. if you tried anything like that he would be toast. host: as far as the united nations are concerned, there are reports that they're supposed to be out of syria by saturday morning. on this islatest that banking known, the yuan inspector general -- ban-ki u.n. inspector

general, will be meeting on sunday. it seems like the establishment has been persuaded to get these inspectors out a day early, perhaps, some people are saying, so that the path can be cleared for western intervention. nevertheless, the inspectors have been given time to look into these attacks. when barack obama and david , it seems, eager to rush and even quicker. reports fromre "the guardian" and maybe yours about intelligence in the united states and the u.k. as well. guest: they are expecting to see some declassified intention -- intelligence about a chemical attack by the assad regime. there have been reports that the american intelligence isn't as strong as some of been led to

believe. we are going to have to wait to see how much of a clear-cut picture it is. swaine, what is important for viewers watching, especially from the international community? what are people -- what should people be kept aware of? guest: i think the important thing that has come out of the last 12 hours, both in the u.s. and the u.k., is that after iraq and afghanistan, commerce and the bridge parliament want to put the brakes on this. nash and the british parliament want to put the brakes on this. they want to have it -- congress and the british parliament want to put a brace on this. they want to see more evidence. it shows you how in the last 10 years things have changed. conservatives in britain and here, john boehner demanding more evidence.

there was more residents to rush into a military intervention then there was. ce to rush into a military intervention then there was. host: mr. swaine, thanks for your time. guest: thank you. host: you heard jon swaine reference the letter john boehner sent to the president asking for clarification. "he even as the united states grapples with the scale of human suffering, we are confronted with cut up letting potential scenarios. our response host: he goes on to ask a series of questions. there is another letter from members of congress asking for more consultation from congress

about this issue. the international community is where we are turning our attention to this morning. you heard jon swaine talk about some of the reaction in the united kingdom. we want to get your thoughts on that and the role the international community might play in this. host: twitter and facebook available to you as well. a question off of facebook says, "there is no role the international community could thoseat would bring back who lost their life. sending cruise missiles there would just cause more loss of life and just may start world war iii." going back to the phones, robert from charleston, south carolina, republican line. thanks for holding on. caller: good morning, sir. how are you? host: fine, go ahead. caller: i'm disappointed to an

extent in the international community for not really coming together. this isn't in just about two countries fighting each other. this is about a leader using very unnecessary, heinous types of attacks on civilian people, children, women. i just believe -- i'm not saying we should go to war right out the gate, but at some point we have got to put a stop to it before it happens again, or before those types of weapons get into, i guess he if you want terroristqaeda or hands, or used against any other country or us. i feel we should come together a little bit more instead of worrying about the so-called afghanistan-saudi arabia and war that has been going on forever. that is one of the reasons we out of power, because

of his years ago using weapons on his own people. we need to come together more, whether you are communist china, and look at the situation and come to a real honest feeling that this is not correct. host: jamaica, new york, democrats' line. caller: this is edith. i don't think that we should rush to anything before we have some concrete evidence from the people who are now in syria looking into the matter. nothing should happen before so that it sunday, can be reviewed. i am a veteran, a vietnam-era veteran. i don't think we should jump into anybody's war anytime soon. the united states is stretched. we owe everything to china. china is not going to get into close --

anger and we have always been close to and they work with us, that is fine -- england we have always been close to and they work with us and that is fine. but we need more power than just american power. ourselvesen spreading so thin and so few jobs here in america -- we need to look out for americans today. host: how much role should the .n. lay inhould the u this? caller: i think they should have some say, but not total. it has got to be many, many countries saying yes, we're going to do something. i don't believe in his cruise missile thing, because the missiles will hit innocent people. it is like we are going into killing people trying to kill people who are killing people. it's just killing more people. barry, independent line. caller: yes, hello.

you are on, sir. go ahead. caller: i agree with the british, saying there is no rush -- the british commons saying there is no rush and we need more evidence. even a murder trial in our own countries and decided in three isn't decided in three days. we shouldn't go to war because of fox news and cnn. of our constitution and the war powers act says that only congress can declare war. we have no rush, like the last caller said. there is no emergency. we can take the time to do it properly, as the british are doing. merits discussion, debate, evidence. day pressust a 3-

release campaign. i think it would be political suicide for the president if he rushes into another war without congress behind him. host: here is of the work -- a viewer off twitter this money. host: the president of the united states appearing on pbs last night in an interview, talking about what might happen concerning syria, not only what was found as far as information and evidence come up and talking about the international consequences in the u.s. consulting its allies on this matter. here is what he had to say. [video clip] not yet made a decision, but the international norm against the use of chemical weapons needs to be kept in place. , or hardlyutes anybody disputes, that chemical weapons were used on a large scale in syria against civilian

populations. we have looked at all the evidence, and we do not believe the opposition possessed nuclear weapons -- chemical weapons of that sort. , givenot believe that the delivery systems, using rockets, that the opposition could have carried out these attacks. we have concluded that the syria thesernment in fact carry out, and if that is so, there need to be international consequences. we are consulting with our allies, we are consulting with the international community. i have no interest in any kind of open-ended conflict in syria, but we do have to make sure that when countries break international norms on weapons like chemical weapons that could threaten us, they are held accountable. there is a reason why there is an international norm against chemical weapons. there is a reason why consistently the rules of war have suggested that the use of

chemical weapons violates geneva protocols. they are different, and we want to make sure that they are not loose in a way that could ultimately affect our security. times"rom "the new york this morning, more on the british reaction and its consequences. without. could react british support, but the obama administration has sought consensus and britain is america's closest ally. another few days may make no difference to what is been advertised as a short, sharp punishment for these of chemical weapons, not an effort to oust mr. assad. u.n.hnical motion from the says that united nations process must be followed to ensure action on legitimacy for any such action, and that the secretary-general should ensure a briefing to the united nations security council immediately upon completion of the team's initial mission" -- this is the team in syria. " mr. cameron's pullback came as

britain moved to introduce a security council resolution that would otherwise military action in syria, a move that russia quickly signaled it would block several times." go ahead. caller: this is the same old war, democrat wmd lies we have heard. ever since vietnam, democrat lies. they always get us into war and then say, "oh, it's not our fault, we didn't know, we're just stupid." obama is a stupid. that guy is probably one of the dumbest presidents in the history of america, and maybe the whole planet. he has got no intelligence whatsoever -- host: as far as the international reaction to this, which is kind of our focus this morning? caller: well, they are all going to go after syria, a small country. they have a person in their you don't like. obama is not going to get rid of him. he will lob a few missiles act

like bill clinton. clinton's an idiot, too. host: terrance, democrat line. caller: this is terrance. military.pported our i just think that as it relates to syria, if the united states andmerica is police, -- a is telling its own own, the united states and serves as a protective interest for the syrian people. they're basically being killed by chemical weapons. should we have a serious problem with that if that is proven? i think there should be some collaborative efforts in the middle east together, all the

intelligence. i think that our other allies should basically stay with the other collaborative effort, because who knows, they might have something -- [indiscernible] to support them again. i truly believe in the negotiations to resolve that matter. at the same time, as it relates a war beinga war, watched by the united states of america, i am always concerned with american loss of lives, on american soil, but i don't think that is a superpower that we should stand by and just watch people being killed and slaughtered by the thousands. host: on twitter this morning

next, chisholm, minnesota, independent line. caller: i would like to comment. iam a vietnam-era vet, and remember what happened during the vietnam. i skipped czechoslovakia and i served in the u.s. army and so on and so forth. the international reaction, as i have been watching it closely -- ve the gun again and we jumped the gun in bolivia, we jumped the gun in egypt, -- we jumped the the gunibya, we jumped in egypt, the arab spring. what do we have? a mess. we need to spend more time in the diplomatic circle, and china, whether we like it or not -- but talking never hurt anybody.

i don't think shooting 10, 20 tomahawk missiles into syria -- we are not going to help anybody. and as the caller before me said, why do we ask those hundreds of thousands of people that are leaving syria because they are afraid? again, we're just going to hurt innocent people, and diplomacy should work. that is my bottom line. guns -- that is in the past. please put all that stuff together, try to work together, send the missions, sort of like the dayton accord was. take all those guys and put them on the plane and put them in a room and say, talk. host: james, republican line. caller: good morning. i understand the consensus for . approval,for u.n

but i think we are way beyond this. think the last superpower, to witness such atrocities, i think that's what action has to be -- that swift action has to be small countries to actually comply with international law. for a leader of a country to actually go to that kind level loss, totarian actually act out in that way against his own people, demands some type of response. a quick, hard response. that is all i have to say. host: james on twitter says host: again, if you want to reach out to us on twitter, @cspanwj. facebook, facebook.com/cspan. always send us an e-mail,

too, journal@cspan.org. reuters this morning saying that "senior administration officials will brief leaders today, with congressional aides saying that complains by lawmakers that they have not been consulted on possible military action. be withfing will leaders of the senate and house of representatives and the chairman and making numbers of national security committees. president obama has a legal obligation to consult with congress before sending u.s. forces into harm's way." the house intelligence chairman, mike rogers, who sent a letter on tuesday "asking him to consult formally with congress. have notnversations entail discussions of potential plans and actions being contemplated by your rogers said,on,'

according to a copy of the letter obtained by reuters." arlene is next, michigan, democrats' line. caller: i take issue with the gentleman, and i used the word loosely, who was on a few calls back and said that it was the democrats that got us into war after war after war. i would suggest that he check his history books. vietnamot get into through a democratic president. we got there through mr. eisenhower. mr. reagan got us into a few battles we did not need to be into. bushes got us involved in battles we do not need to be involved in. and this gentleman is calling our president stupid? for congressugh and the supreme court to make derogatory remarks about the president of the united states, it is something else for a citizen who does not know what he's talking about has the audacity to call the president of the united states stupid. he is still the president and he still deserve the respect of that office. host: so, caller, this president

has to deal with syria. what do you think of what he's doing so far and what do you think of the role of the international community? caller: personally, i think he is doing exactly what he needs to do, waiting to get the information he needs. he has done that the last five years. congress has sat on their butts and done nothing. it ever makes anybody think -- whatever makes anybody think that congress will pass what he proposes, they are on hallucinatory drugs because congress is not. they have done nothing but struck everything down the pipeline since he was -- obstruct everything down the pipeline since he was elected, including the first day he was elected. host: charles, independent line. caller: hi, my name is charles. you know, i believe that the international community can come up with something to at least help these women and children and create a safe haven for them, a place of refuge.

i believe that war is not necessary. we can still have time to didrmine whether or not who what they did and when they did it and why they did it. those things are going to pan out anyways. the main concern i have is for the families that are in harms way. we need to as the international community protect them and come up with a plan and a solution to protect them. war is not the answer. sending guns and bombs and causing more havoc and destruction is not the answer. it is not the answer for america, it is not the answer for any nation. we should come up with a piece -- a peaceable, diplomatic option and get assad involved in this option, make him understand that we will not tolerate innocent people being gassed and

being hurt. but we want to create a solution to help those people so they can be out of harms way. host: charles from mesa, arizona. many of the papers have this headline about the fort hood , receivingdal hasan the death sentence yesterday. "he is on a shortlist list of killers who face execution by the military, something that has not happened for more than 50 years. killed their teen and injured 31 in a shooting rampage in november 2000 and, received the sentence wednesday after less than two hours of deliberation. the punishment follows last week's conviction on 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder. the death sentence, which has not been carried out by the military since 1961, gave solace to some of families who lost loved ones."

the appeals process could take up to several years. john from quincy, illinois, republican line. hurry to get in there with poison gas. a few years ago and israel launched those phosphorus bombs and killed kids come everybody was completely quiet. our congress, the neocon warmongers come everyone was quiet as church mice. that, went ahead and did but overhear they want a big war started. doesn'tys he care who started it. the american taxpayer brought people in there to provocative or that war. to comee begging assad and help them. he was so stretched tried to protect his own people, and we, the american taxpayer, were shooting at those just to get this dancing started. thank you. host: up next, rogers, arkansas, democrats' line. caller: yes, i lived in the

middle east for 25 years, and i cannot understand why we get involved with all of their problems. hello?re -- host: go ahead, you are on. caller: sorry, i am a rattling on. i lived in the middle east for 25 years, and i cannot understand why we want to get involved into all their problems . also, i hate the media to use all these little children to do their thing with their news, ok? one other thing -- host: before we go too far, how about the international community's role? caller: no -- yes, sir. no, we should not get involved with this. look at iraq, look at egypt, look at libya. host: charles, up next, from lebanon, tennessee, independent line. good morning, you are on.

caller: all right. just to kind of voice my opinion for this, we have no business being over there. we have never had any business over there. if you are going to strike on you are supposed to propose an imminent or immediate threat to international interests. frankly, they are not. justhe president seems absolutely hell-bent on overriding the congress, the senate, the judiciary system to get his needs. soon't know if he is just pro-islam he cannot stand anybody being against islam, but that doesn't seem to be is leaning -- that does seem to be his leaning. host: on twitter the atlanta journal- constitution" has a story on yesterday's rally in washington,

d.c., the 50th anniversary of the march on washington. president obama who told thousands who gathered on the national mall on wednesday that while following racial barriers represent great strides towards martin luther king's dream, economic inequality remains the nation's 'great unfinished business.' the president spoke from the abraham lincoln memorial, where king delivered his 'i have a dream'speech have a century earlier. he was joined by former presidents jimmy carter and bill clinton as well as civil rights pioneers." here he talks about being masters of our own fate. [video clip] >> the march on washington teaches us that we are masters of our fate. but it also teaches us that the promise of this nation will only be kept when we work together.

we have to reignite the embers feeling,y and fellow the coalition of conscience that found expression in this place 50 years ago. i believe that spirit is there, that truth force inside each of us. i see it when a white mother recognizes her own daughter in the face of a poor black child. i see it when the black youth things of his own grandfather and the dignified step -- in the dignified steps of an elderly white man. it is there when the nativeborn recognizing that striving spirit when thew immigrant, interracial couple connects the pain of a gay couple who are discriminated against and understands it as their own. ,hat's where courage comes from

when we turn not from each other or on each other but toward one another and we find that we do not walk alone. that's where courage comes from. "the wall street journal" has a story taking a look at one of 2 possible nominees to the federal reserve after ben bernanke steps down. janet yellen -- the thrust of the story this morning -- that she is playing down chances for the top job. en has indicated to some associates that she sees itself as the underdog and is uncomfortable with the contentious public spectacle this has become come open to her -- who have spoken to her. mr. obama will announce his choice for the job sometime after congress returns on september 9. the white house has not been is getting -- not been vetting ms. yellen. it was unclear wednesday whether

officials have been vetting mr. summers. 'the president has not made a decision on who you will nominate.'" richard, you are on our independent line. go ahead. caller: i don't think we have any role in syria, just like we did not have any role in vietnam. iraq.n't have any role in weapons of mass destruction were fake. we later found out that the agents that were found there were manufactured and processed and shipped over from the u.s. i'm sure we will find out -- find that out in syria as well. it is a disconcerting fact that we continue to involve ourselves in these foreign affairs that have nothing to do with anything other than the continuation of the military-industrial complex. that is what we have been watching out for this full-time. thank you. host: julia from dayton, ohio, democrats' line. caller: good morning.

listening to president obama's speech for just that minute, i get goosebumps as it was an amazing speech. i wanted to make a comment, with everybody calling in about syria . i understand everybody's hesitation. i'm sure we have been shot in especiallyny times, with iraq and vietnam. but we have to realize syria is its own beast, and we do as america stand on a global stage. we participate in a global economy, global exports, humanitarian needs around the world. we also participate as a member we signed., and documents as part of the geneva convention to uphold international law and not allow chemical weapons to be used and genocide against people. that is exactly what happened. i think it is amazing that people are saying we don't need a jump to action. the only people who are talking about jumping to action at this point is the media.

they are reporting news that hasn't happened yet. because what obama has said very plainly is he is getting all of his options on the table and he is going to see where the u.n. inspections lead, and we are going to react within multilateral u.n. resolution. we don't even know at this point what his decision is. until we get there, let's not assume. let's not assume we are going to war thursday, let's not assume we are going to be firing bombs not syria on sunday, let's assume that congress isn't going to be a part of this. right now we are in the early stages. he is a smart man, he has made smart decisions, and he understands the international community and where we fit in. i think that is a good thing. unfortunately, because of these atrocities, there is going to have to be action taken, because international laws were broken, and we have said we need to stand up for those lost.

-- laws. host: off of twitter host: "the wall street journal" has a write up looking at damascus right now. "much of the daily life appeared normal on wednesday. waterspouts at full force, road crews were at work. -- governmentls officials told the public that bread and other food supplies were ample, and warned that price doubters and war profiteers that they would be punished. -- poundyrian t weakened again. worries spread of an impending attack. although most streets emptied by senate because of a heightened feeling of security am of cafés in the upper -- and the upscale

andhborhood where mr. assad his family reside were packed. leaving the city isn't an option for many residents. many living here have come seeking refuge from fighting in the suburbs, and can't afford to leave, or site new restrictions on syrians fleeing to lebanon." our last call this morning taking a look at the international community's role on any action in syria. bridgeport, connecticut, independent line. caller: hello. my name is robert. i'm calling because i don't think we have to go to war in syria, because it will kill more innocent people. why kill more? i would like for them to think and send -- [indiscernible] thank you, have a good morning. host: that is robert, and that

will be the last call we take on this topic. when we come back, former senator byron dorgan joins us to talk not only about syria but cybersecurity, the focus of a new book is written, a work of fiction, but it deals with those issues as well. on, a decision still pending from the white house on what to do about the keystone pipeline. a former official for pipeline safety will give his perspective on what construction of the pipeline would do on the economy and other issues trade we will take up those topics as "washington journal" continues after this. >> one of the most fun times i ever had was it was 2006 and it looked like democrats were really going to take over the house, and it was looking pretty

bad for republicans. vice president cheney's office called and wanted to know if rothenberg and i could have breakfast with him. we went over to his residence and had breakfast with him. i met him before, but i didn't know him. first of all, it was unbelievable how much he knew about individual -- he had been to these districts over the years as one of the republican leaders in the house, this and that. basically, he was asking us, how bad is this? yeah, it'sing, pretty bad. but that is fun when you get to you that and talk to caucuses on both sides and you get a glance of the inside and the players. >> with more than 30 years as a political analyst, charlie cook has uncovered the trance while tracking every congressional race since 1984. see the rest of this "q&a" interview sunday at 8:00 on c- span. in our original series "first

ladies," we have looked at the public and private lives of the women who have served as first lady wearing the nation's first 112 years. as we move into the modern era, we will feature the ladies in their own words. >> the duty of human rights will be one of the foundation stones on which we would build in the world and atmosphere in which peace could grow. i don't think it has ever completely belonged to one person. it belongs to the people of america. is first lady should preserve the traditions and enhance it and leave something of herself there. 2 features first ladies from the beginning of the 20th century to the president. -- to the present. september 9 at 9:00 eastern on c-span. "washington journal" continues. host: our guest formerly served in the house and the senate as a

representative north dakota. byron dorgan joins us to talk about modern-day issues and a book of his that came out recently, "gridlock." senator dorgan, welcome. guest: thank you very much. nice to be with you again. host: we will talk about the book in a little bit, but i want to get your thoughts on syria, particularly the role the president should have with congress at this point. guest: well, first, let me say, having gone through afghanistan and iraq, having sat through many, many, many top-secret classified briefings about the evidence or the purported evidence at that point that persuaded our country to go into iraq and afghanistan, i think that with respect to syria and chemical weapons, it is very important that the evidence be clear, that there not be questions about evidence here. i really hope that we are able to get the reports and those reports are public from the united nations team in there.

so we understand the exact same thing and then make a decision. and i worry very much -- i understand that if chemical weapons were used, and it appears to me that the evidence suggests that -- if they were used, we should take some action younst syria, but i tell what, it is so much easier to get involved in the middle east, get involved in these issues, then it is to extract yourself. i want us to be very, very careful, very thoughtful. i also think it would be very important for us to do this with england, france, and other allies as well. host: does the president need a formal yes from congress on the section? -- on this action? guest: he doesn't need that formal yes, but he would be wise in my judgment to go to congress and consult. i'm sure he has already consulted with the leaders of congress about what the options might be. host: i know you can you share what you have learned previously, but how much information -- you cannot share

what you have learned previously, but how much information is divulged to them in terms of its scope and nature? guest: in top-secret briefings you get a lot of information. the question is, especially coming on the heels of the issue with iraq, how valid is the information? frankly, i believe i was told face to face in top-secret those whothings that told me the information new to be untrue. i discover that much, much later -- in some cases come a years later. everybody has a pretty bad taste in their mouth about intelligence being manipulated for a specific purpose. i think it is very important that we have evidence that is not questionable evidence, not manipulated evidence, but that tells us what happened. if chemical weapons were used against civilian populations, that is, in my judgment, something that the rest of the world should judge to be completely, totally unacceptable, always shouldtable, and syria pay a price for that.

i don't think that should include actions that would move this country into the middle of the civil war in syria. we need to be very, very careful about whatever action we take not connecting us in the longer term here to things that we should not be involved in. tell what is your extremes you about making the case to the mac and people about these kinds of actions -- what is your experience tell you about making the case to the market people about these kinds of actions? guest: it is important that the merrick and people understand what kinds of actions are being taken in their name. my expectation and hope would be that it would be a one-time action that would punish the syrian government for using chemical weapons, if the evidence is conclusive. my hope is -- i expect this president would vote to the mac and people and explain -- the american people and explain here it is what we have to do and why we have to do it. host: our guest is joining us to talk about issues not only in the modern-day but issues found in a new book of his. if you want to ask a question,

here is your chance to do so. if you want to send us an e- mail, you can send us at tweet,@cspan.org, and a @cspanwj. your new book, work of fiction, cowritten by you and david talking about a lot of issues including cyber security issues. guest: it does. this is my fourth book. the first two i myself, the second two i co-authored, and are novels. this novel -- the plot loosely is about iranian intelligence acquiring from the russians a computer virus that they then drug addled hacker in

amsterdam to used to shutdown the american electric power grid , which some call "the glass jar ." i'm quoting american industry. in this new digital age, we have all these wonders of the internet. thes unbelievable, opportunities we have in the digital age, but it also brings with it new threats to our country. think of a threat that someone would shut down the electric power across this country in a significant way just the second. all of a sudden it goes dark, and it is dark friday, we are a month, or months -- dark a day, a week, a month, or months. shutdown of "the new york times" website, the hacking of the associated press account, sending out tweets suggesting that there has been explosions

of the white house, those kinds of things are going on all the time now. think about the larger point of an electric power grid system being shut down. that is a very serious problem for this country. host: how has congress been on this issue? like: well, congress, everybody else, is struggling with this new digital age and new opportunities in the digital age and new threats. andress is holding hearings funding arrangement opportunities for agencies to work very hard to provide protection. as you know, these threats exist every day against big banks in the country, big corporations fending off attacks. some of it is about stealing information, some of it is about just causing massive problems by annihilating information. some of it is to threaten our country by shutdown essential services. the house passed legislation -- i don't believe the senate did -- but one of the concerns from both sides is about sharing information, not just government, but from private industry, somewhat reluctant to share information

concerning cyber security efforts. guest: part of it is because this is all new to us. is not as if we have been grappling with this for a decade or two or three. this digital age has come upon us quickly, and the new threats that come with it are foreign and it new to many of us. commerce is struggling and so, too, are federal agencies is the private sector, making sure they protect their information and assistance against those who want to do harm to our country. best what are the practices the government should employee as far as going forward and protecting the electric grid? guest: as far as the electric grid, which is what this book is about, we wake up in the morning and we don't even open our eyes and reflect a switch and it provides power in our room -- and we flick a switch and it provides power in our room. perhaps it is electric alarm clock, and then the light and the coffee maker and the toaster, and we get in the car

and we turn the key. energy is such a profound role in our life every day and we don't think much about it until it is gone. distribution, the water delivery system, transportation systems, and more. role, it seems to me, is to provide resources necessary to provide the protection we need to protect the services. host: serving the state of both dakota, our guest served in the senate from 1992 to 2011 and the house from 1981 to 19 89. what you do now? guest: when you say that, it went by like that and it makes me sound like gabby hayes in those old westerns. i left voluntarily. it is hard to become a u.s. senator. it was the great privilege of my life, but i wanted to do other things as well, so after 30 years i decided not to seek reelection. i'm doing a lot of things that i'm teaching at a university, i'm writing books to mime doing

consulting, i'm on boards of directors, i started a nonprofit organization called center for native american youth to reach out and provide help to indian youth on indian reservations across this country, which, of all people left behind in this country, the children are the first americans in -- children's of the first americans are living in third world conditions. so i'm working on all of those issues, and i'm senior fellow at the bipartisan policy center, think tank. so i meant plenty busy but really enjoying my life. --t: and policy advice for do you lobby? but it iso not lobby, a premier law firm and i do a lot of business consulting third. -- business consulting. host: in what sectors? guest: energy and other sectors

as well. i have an mba and a profound interest in business issues. longtime leader in commerce on energy issues as well. energy, technology, i was on the ways and means committee in the house. host: first call is from arkansas, independent line. this is jim for byron dorgan. good morning. jim, go ahead. before weime for jim move on. caller: hello? host: you are on, sir. derek, florida. republican line. caller: good morning. i just wanted to ask the senator newt was familiar with gingrich's book "one second after," which was really quite a terrifying novel concerning

electromagnetic pulse weapons. guest: only generally familiar with it, familiar with the title and that it was written. it was referenced, our book, by "the new york times was quote -- by "the new york times" about a week ago. host: what other issues are you interested in, caller? caller: i was wondering about the implications of that component, in terms of cyber warfare and the protection of the great. one of the comments i would like to make -- not comments, but do you -- i'm sorry, i am a mind blanking here. host: why do we let the senator respond to the issue of electromagnetic pulses? guest: not something unfamiliar a lot about. i'm familiar with the book that newt gingrich was involved in. there are new threats to our country that we have to be very cognizant of. that is one. my notion is that the most night

-- most likely threat we need to be concerned about in the immediate future is the electric power grid system, because that is under some threat and could cost some very serious problems. it would wreck our economy if our power grid system was down for any length of time. the national science foundation agoy about five years demonstrates that. host: g caller: i'd like to go back to syria and ask what about they did yesterday. they're running for cover. they've been pushing for greater action and now it's time for action they've backed away and sort of left our president standing there olding the bag by himself. >> well, as i indicated, i think it's much better if we take action with our allies,

joining us in that action, and i understand your point about great britain and france. however, i think what i've learned from the english is that they want to wait for the united nations evidence to be available. i don't see a problem waiting some days until the evidence is available to the united nations, the report is available. i've been involved in these briefings in which information was given us that turned out not to be true at all. all of us understand that. we now understand what was happening leading up to iraq. i don't want to end up in a circumstance in syria that would be very unfortunate for this country in the short and intermediate term and especially the long term. i don't have a problem waiting a few days for the evidence. i hope very much that the british and the french and others would join us in terms of whatever we decide to do if the evidence is conclusive that

we need to take action against the country who used chemical weapon against their own people. dr. oz: hello. thanks for c-span. this is the only avenue that people can use. welcome mr. dorgen. i do say this i had a general question about the -- i know you were a senator you're not there any more but the gridlock in washington. can you give me a real answer or what do you think we can do to break the gridlock? if there's absolutely nothing going on. and i don't see any end to republicans and democrats not coming to agreement on several thing that is they used to come up with agreements on, like the farm bill. this stuff is just a nightmare. i'll wait for your answer. >> thank you.

this grid lock is so frustrating. now i'm on the outside looking t in. it hasn't always been this way the american people have the capability of breaking this gridlock. it takes an election or two but the lubeication of democracy is compromise. if two people feel very strongly about things on different sides they need to come together to find compromise. and these days especially there's some notion in politics by constituent groups and others that if you compromise you have failed to stand up for your principles. you've caved in. that's not true at all. compromise is a lubeication of getting things done. and the american people have to say to those politician whose brag, i will never compromise on everything, well you're out of here i want to send people to congress who are people of good will who are smart and interested in getting things done and willing to compromise in order to move the ball forward for this country. so i wish there was a magic bullet to fix all this but

there's no. the american people can fix it in the election process by saying i want to select people who are smart and willing to work with others to find the best solution. let's get the best of what both parties have to offer than the worst of each. >> so that thought, the house speaker says there's a whale of a fight coming when it comes to president obama and the debt ceiling. >> i like john boehner. i'm of a different party but i've known john for a long time. the speaker as good guy. but the president and the secretary of the treasury are dead right on this issue. what they're saying is we don't intend to negotiate on the question of whether the country pays its bills. what are they thinking? this is not negotiable. this is money that we've committed on behalf of the country and we have to pay the bills. now, going forward on other issues, yeah, we should fight very hard for the things we believe in. but we can't decide we're going to ruin the country's credit rate big not paying the bills. i know some will disagree with

that but i think that's a nonstarter. >> how do you compromise on this issue then? >> i don't think you do. what you do is increase the debt ceiling and then reach agreement on the other thing that is will begin reducing. and the debt is coming down. the individual yearly deficits are coming down for a lot of reasons. but there's a lot left to do to find some additional revenue, cut some spending and do the thing that is set the country on the right course. there's a lot to do there. but i don't think you do that by deciding we as a country are not going to pay our bills. you can't do that. >> last week the house speaker saying when the congress comes back there will be legislation that will avoid a shutdown of government. >> shutting down the government is foolish in my judgment. we've been through all of this before. just threatening to not increase the debt ceiling, to pay for that which has already been expended in most cases hurts the economy. it's a great way to talk down economy by saying you know

what? we won't pay our bills. what a thoughtless thing to do in my judgment. do we have other big issues that we have to resolve? yes, we should fight about that. let's be aggressive and reach a sensible thoughtful compromise. but it is thoughtless, not thoughtful to not about not paying our bills. >> this is richard. >> good morning. first, i want to thank the senator for coming on the program. it's wonderful to have the opportunity to talk to someone with his great experience. i'd like to say three things very quickly. first of all, thank god someone is working on the native american situation. a majority of youth on the list today do not have basic clean water to drink. so thank god you're working on that. that's the first thing i want to say. the second thing i want to say is about this grid lock in washington. we have to admit the truth of the matter. the republicans have taken what is tant amount to a blood oath

to bring obama down if the heavens fall. he has as much chance of working with them as a wounded willed beast has with negotiating with the private hungry lions. they simply do not care if they destroy this country if they destroy him. we have to admit that and deal with that reality. and the third thing is what do you think about the fact that our good conservative friends are so steeped in hatred these day that is they refuse to participate in any way whatsoever with the events on the mall yesterday? not one elected republican or official participated in that. they were so scared of their base because they know their base opposes everything and everyone that was on that mall yesterday? >> well, you said a lot. i think you called to get it all off his chest but let me just take the first portion of what you describe and say when i was in the congress i worked on indian issues because they were the first americans and

they've been given a pretty bad deal by this country. we have so many broken promises, so many broken treaties. and so i want to do something that i felt would give back and improve the lives and save lives of indian children. and so i'm doing that with an organization called the center for native american youth. it is a separately funded program at the aspen institute, a really terrific place for it to be. and i'm doing youth summits on indian reservations and other things. so he's right. our country has a lot to make up for with respect to what is happening on indian policy. >> up next, jim from our independent line. >> good morning. mr. dorgen, i wanted to appreciate the book that you wrote. i believe the american society needs to hear about this power grid that we have and how vulnerable we are. and just imagine if we do not have power, we do not have refrigeration, we do not have

our stores to pump gas, we do not have a number of things that will lay down like dominos in effect that will actually bring so much havoc if this takes place that the american people are missing it by a mile. and if they stop and really look at things how they would lay out it would destry this whole yoits that we are living in. >> well, let me just tell a couple of short stories. number one, an organization about three months ago hacked into the associated press twitter account and tweeted that there were explosives at the white house that morning. president obama had been injured. in two nunts stock market dropped 143 points. it turns out it was a hacking organization from syria that did it, i think the same one that claimed credit yesterday for the "new york times." that's one. that's a nuisance but it has consequences when you affect the stock market.

another one. one of the world's largest oil companies, in saudi arabia, they come to work one morning and on 35,000 -- it's a big company -- 35,000 television screens and sets, all of the information on those sets have been anile late bid the computer virus and in its place on display was an image of a burning american flag. well, all the folks from our country, germany and others, rushed to saudi arabia to find out who did this, what kind of protection didn't exist to allow them in. these things are in that case they were going to anile late data, in other cases they were going to steal data. in my book -- in our book, there's the question of not stealing data but shutting down an essential service in the country. i can't emphasize enough how devastating it would be. it would wreck the american economy if today somehow we

were able to see somebody shut down our basic electric power grid and it remained down for days, weeks, months, wreck the economy. so it's -- and cause death and harm to the american people. we need to be very concerned about these issues. the book is a thriller. the book is a genre that entertains people. but it is also a wakeup call to a very real problem that we face in this digital age. >> the book is called gridlock. senator dorg an wrote it along with david hagberg. >> david's a terrific writer. this is my fourth book. i've not written fiction bmb. these two a book -- i've learned a lot from david. he is in florida and he and i have spent a lot of time together writing two books that i think are terrific books. and i think people will enjoy this book that the book that preceded this was called

blowout also about energy but a different thriller. this is gridlock. >> the outgoing homeland security secretary in a speech that she made to colleagues spoke about the issue of cyber security and talked about her concerns. here is what she had to say. >> our country will, for example, at some point face a major cyber event that will have a serious effect on our lives, economy, and the everyday functioning of our society. while we have built systems protections and a framework to identify attacks and intrusions, share information with the private sector and across the government, and develop plans and capabilities to mitigate the damage, more must be done and must be done quickly. >> two questions. she speaks of a certainty but then she adds more must be done. in your mind what's the more? >> janet has done a really leave -- good job.

and leon panetta said the next harbor may very well be a cyber attack. so both of them i think have sent us a wakeup call as well. more needs to be done. i think what she's saying is we've done the best we can but we need to continue to be vigilant. we need to fund the kind of research that's necessary to provide protective devices so that we don't fall prey or fall victim to the hackers and the bad people, the rural nations and terrorist who want to do damage to our country. >> phil from r line. >> good morning. i have a question. when you were senator in 2008 and it was admitted building was in free fall when it fell on 9/11, why didn't you and the rest of congress launch an immediate investigation into the implication of this evidence that explosives were used to destroy it? and i'll take my answer off the amplete >> i didn't understand what

build sng >> world trade center building seven was in freefall for 100 feet when it fell on 9/11. and as a senator why didn't you and the rest of congress launch an immediate investigation into the implication of this evidence that explosives were used to destroy it? after all, these wars are in the name of 9/11. and i think it's time that we rethink 9/11, rethink 9/11.org. thank you. >> you should know this is part of an organized effort that we've encountered. but go ahead. >> i'm unaware and not familiar with the allegation he just gave us. you know, the question of should we revisit and better understand anything that happened in our past? of course. especially 9/11? it was a catastrophic event in the history of this country but i'm unfamiliar with what he is describing. >> your thoughts on edward snowden information what he has put out, what it's done as far as national security is

concerned. >> i have two thoughts. number one, i don't think edward snowden is a here ovement i think his actions and some of the information from his actions have helped those who want to do harm to our country. number two, i think the very discussion we're having in this country now probably partly as a result of that disclosure is a discussion the american people should always have with their government. what on earth are you doing? we need to understand what you're doing. government, you are a creature of ours. and we need to understand exactly what you're doing. so i'm kind of two minds here. i think this is an important discussion to have. but i really regret what he did and the way he did it. >> were you privy to the kind of information as far as the programs that we've heard about as a member of congress? >> i was nopt on the intelligence committee in the senate. but i was generally understanding of a number of

the programs we had. but not in the detail that we've should more oversight be done? >> no question. congress never does enough oversight and that's certainly now the case with respect to -- we know to be the case with respect to the intelligence area. i know they will probably say well we do great oversight. the fact is we need much greater oversight and what is now being discussed publicly demonstrates that. >> now, that affects private companies especially those involved in the data collection side of it. how do you protect their concerns? >> protect their concerns? >> they gather. >> well, that's a whole different subject. you know, it is interesting data mining as it were someone's data mining, all the data about pedro all day today. because the internet has changed our lives and it's given people information about not just where we shop, not what grocery store we go to but

how many pounds of butter we buy. they have all that information that's data mined. that's a whole different set of issues. and i think we kind of move to that point of discussion and back away a little bit. but there's going got to be a longer discussion about privacy and what kind of information we want and about whom and how and who has the information, how are they protecting it. >> here's bruce from chicago, illinois. >> good morning, sir. i just listened and i listened to a lot of tv and i was just listening to you and you come out and say well we have to compromise. two sentences later, sir, you say we can't compromise on that. and it seems like all the compromise is supposed to come from the other side and that the side that's taken a position, their thing is a no compromise. but boy oh boy if it's my idea you'd better be compromising. it was two sentences later you said you can't compromise.

>> i think it's thoughtless to decide whether you should pay your bills or not. is that something we would have an internal discussion by ourselves and our own lives? let's decide should we pay our bills or shouldn't we? the answer is yes. the answer should be yes for the country as well. it's thoughtless to say that we shouldn't pay our bills. so yes you're right in fact it's clever that you caught that. i did say that with respect to shutting down the government by deciding we want to increase the debt ceiling to pay the bills, you're unwilling to compromise you know what? this makes no sense to take a position we should not pay our bills. but generally speaking, on the wide range of policies, i would hope that both political parties would compromise. i don't believe there should be just one party asked to compromise. let's have both parties bring the best of what each has to offer to the able and try to accept the best of both. >> let me ask you about the current makeup like mike lee

and ted cruz a has the dynamic because of those additions? >> it's like putting a drop of colored dye in a glass of water. it's just one drop. but every molecule in the glass changes. because in the senate, much of what you do requires unanimous consent not the vote itself but to get to the vote. and the most powerful words in the senate have always been two. i object. i object. and it used to be that people who felt very strongly about things on different sides would say, let's sit down and see if we can resolve this. it's not the case these days, unfortunately. >> thomas from maryland democrat's line. . goomorning. my question is about syria and and ct that the u.s. israel and jordan were training mercenaries who went into syria

the same week that this chemical attack happened. there's been plenty reports on the internet where the assad government has caught rebels creating chemical weapons, they've got materials from saudi arabia. why would president assad who is highly educated invite the inspectors in and then launch a chemical attack the same day that the inspectors are in damascus? point two. what's happening in the north slaughtered 400 kurdish people, syrian kurdish in the north. there's been no reports of that in the u.s. media. >> thanks caller we'll let our guest respond. >> well, my own view is i think

mr. assad is a bad guy. i think his government has done some terrible i think the opposition to his government is not a monolith. we've got iranians in there, we've got al qaeda as part of the opposition. so this is not simple. this is very complicated with respect to iraq. very complicated. and it's why i say if in fact chemical weapons were used to kill people innocent civilians in the country, then i understand that we have to respond, respond to punish in some way. but i think it's very important that we not respond in a way that draws us into a civil war in syria. you know, it's so easy to get in and so hard to get out. let's learn some lessons here. and i also hope that we'll get the united nation's report soon. i also hope that france, england and other allies should join us, because they should

have the same interests that we should have. if a leader uses chemical weapons against their own people, that requires the line that requires some punishment. >> john from new hampshire. service you for your and mr. dorg an for your service. and it's so slightful to see an ex y still working, political person that's smart. of good will and productive. i have some questions on photovoltaics. i'm involved quite deeply. i'm a student of sei solar international. i'm very much concerned with the grid. vulrable. he northeast also, a couple of is happening

legislativewise to make it possible all around the country but particularly in the northeast with the various states with the utilities to allow photo volume takes and wind and distributed generation and also i remember that there was some activity amay still be with the companies like general and ic and the microsoft all of them to have control on the grid of distributed generation and so forth. d the last question i had is there was a senator from i think maryland barlet i think it was who is a scientists also

who was in this for the longest time. and i wondered if he is still involved in it and how many are still involved and how valuable is the photo volt takes? >> i think it's valuable. i'm somebody that in the energy space thinks that we have the capability of doing a lot of new things. in transportation, for example, i'm of hydrogen fuel but i'm a big fan of renewables, wind energy, solar energy, where the wind blows, the sun shines, let's grab energy and put it on the wire and move it. talking about distributed generation, there's going to be more of that. but that doesn't eliminate the need to still have a backbone by which you move energy from where it's produced to where it's needed. often the sun shines and wind below zero where people don't live so much so you have to move it to the load centers. and we need a modern elictric

grid system. we built an interstate highway for cars a long time ago now but we have never really built the interstate transmission electric grid system. it would cost a fair amount of money to do it but we have to do it. we need that backbone no matter how much generation. >> now that you're out talk about what you've seen with the affordable care act not only in its rollout but delays and concerns about its rollout itself. how would you grade the working out of the affordable care act? >> you know, i voted for it as you know. i'm glad i did. to those who say this is a disaster, it's awful, you know, i say what's your plan? just three words. what's your plan? i never hear what's your plan? you know, health care costs consume such a large part of our g.d.p. much more than anyone else in the world by far, not even close. and you don't get results that mirror that. sot.

and i think the administration has done a good job under difficult circumstances. they've had a fair number of governors, they've had a lot of others. they got many in congress to obstruct every step of the way it's hard to implement new programs like this. and yet through it all, even with all the obstruction i think they're doing a pretty good job. i really think five years from now in the rear view mirror, most people will see that this is a good thing to have done. preexisting conditions, to say to companies you can't decide not to insure people becangof c. kids on the hins plan to age of 26. you can go through a whole list of things. i think five years from now it will be implemented and seen as a contribution to the country. >> do you think people have been educated well about the elements of the plan? >> no. i think more could be done. it could be done in a better way. but it is ae wh the legislation was passed the opponents never stopped fighting and they voted i think

35 or 40 times in the house to repeal it. but it's not going to be repealed. it's going to be implemented and five years from now people will look back and think this made a contribution to the n t from oklahoma. >> kir, good morning, gentlemen. foremost i'd like to say the best solution here is that we out the entire 545 mob and that includes the ones i like like tom coburn and james inhoff. you sir have the ah dassty to preach about health care when your wife is in fact a lobbyist for the american council on insurers. that takes some guts. but the thing i really want to talk about is syria. syria, the problem with syria is and why we're not doing anything in syria is because we're broke. our country is broke. and your solution? run up more debt. you talk about paying our debt. you're running up more debt.

you're wanting to extend the credit card to a group of people who are basically like drunk teenagers running around doing whatever you want with no oversight whatsoever. except each other. and watching each other doesn't count. you have to remember and you need to be reminded that you are serving at our leisure. it is not the other way around. we're not your pezzents. we're not your ser ofs. we elected you. >> i'm not serving at your leisure because i retired from the senate two years ago. sorry to tell you that. you should put some sugar in your coffee. gled your blood sugar up feel better. this is a great country we've privileged to be here. do we have problems? we sure do. but let's not blame it all on one side. let's ask both sides to start working together for a change to fix what's wrong. my wife isn't a lobbyist for the health insurance industry. my wife works in life insurance and she as professional and i'm

proud of her work. you've made a few mistakes but you have every right to feel very strongly about these issues. i would say this to you. if your position is that the bills that we've ran up in this country as an american government in many cases benefiting the american people, if your position is we shouldn't pay them, we should just declare that this country will not pay its bills, you in my judgment pave a path for this country that is a vastly different path than i want america to be on. i want us to pay our bills, i want us also to put together a fiscal policy that we can be proud of that says here is what america needs, here's how we're going to work together to provide it. but i also want us to make certain that we're not mortgaging our children's future. but we're going to get there only by compromise. you referenced your two senators. tom and jim. i've worked with both of thefment i like both of thefment they're both republicans. i got along with both of them and worked with both of them. i would like to see all members

of congress decide that we respect each other and we're going to sit down and work all day and find the best that both have to offer. that's what i hope would happen. >> we'll take one more call. connecticut democrat's line. >> senator, i've always admired you. that last republican caller was an example of the blind leading the blind. we have a major blackout here in new york in 2007 i believe. the grid was in need of reconstruction. the bush administration did very, very little. obama upgraded and repaired the grid in the stimulus package. regarding the 9/11 conspiracy, i believe bush or israel caused 9/11. i believe they had the intelligence they knew it was coming and they let it happen. and any intelligence coming from israel regarding syria should be scrutinized very, very carefully. >> that's why i've always liked c-span. i was elected to congress 32

years ago and when brian and all the dedicated people here created this from infancy, it was great to allow the american people to call in and weigh in and say, i'm here. here's how i feel. what a great tribute to c-span to be able to do that all these many years. i hope this continues for 30 and 50 years more. >> one more tweet. >> i eeb courage people to get involved in politics. it doesn't look very good from the outside. the way to address that is to get involved and make it work. there's -- i was a very young man who got involved in politics at age 26 and it's been a great privilege of my life. some think i've done a great job, some think not. but get involved and thicountry

future. become a part of something bigger than yourself. i think being involved in american politics is very important at this point because it's not working well? let's change it and make it work exceptionally well for the future. >> is there anything you learned about politics now that you're out of it? >> you know something? the fellow from oklahoma, a good guy, perfectly entitled to his poifpblet i kid i had him a little. he all 535 out. the men and women that i worked with are some of the most talented creative interesting good people, good americans that i know, republicans, democrat, conservative, liberals. i wish everybody could be on the floor of the house and senate and get to know them. the system isn't working at this point but it's not the capitalists filled with bad people. they're creative good people who love their country. my hope for them is that we can find a way to make this system

work better. >> not only a served in the senate and the house but also an author of several books including the latest, grid lock. thank you. >> thanks. good to be with you. >>up on the program we are going to talk about the keystone exl pipeline the decision expected on this sometime this year. but we'll talk about that its concerns and especially from the perspective of the supporter of it will join us next. later on in the program years, attempts to defraud the federal student aid program saw an increase. you'll hear from the inspector general of the education department to learn how student aid works and the impact it has on other students. first we get an update from c-span radio. >> another result of the situation in syria. big investors are in a wait and see mode as a result of the escalation in that country's civil war and also worried the

federal reserve will end its stimulus program too soon. also on economic news today labor department will release the weekly unemployment claims and the commerce department will release the second quarter growth domestic product. fast food workers who say they should be earning much more than the minimum wage are taking to the street throughout the country today to protest what they say are unfair wages. right now many fast food workers make $7.25 an hour. that amounts to $15,000 a year for a full-time worker. they want $15 an hour or $31,000 a year. and finally, san bernardino, california's biggest credit tor, the public employees retirement system, says it will continue to work with the city despite objections over a judge granting that city bankruptcy protection yesterday. retirement system officials are concerned that san bernardino might try to dig itself out of debt by cutting the money promised to the public pension

system. the city of san bernardino facing a $46 million deficit. some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> we picture june cleever with a vacuum cleaner or in a kitchen frying bacon for breakfast in her perls. that image does obscure one of the most important trends especially for women in the 19 50s with which was that american women's labor force participation increased in the 1950s. american women workers not only did not go home after world war ii but they increasingly entered the labor market across the 1950s. a decade that was so powerfuly associate with women's domes citiesty. >> a history on the women in the workplace. just part of the three days of american history tv this labor day weekend on c-span 3.

"washington journal" continues. >> we're joined now by the former acting administrator for the pipeline and has does material safety administration and also a member of the united transportation advisers served as the principle and managing director. thank you. >> absolutely. glad to be with you this morning. >> first couple things. your work as a pipeline safety person. talk about the administration you work for and what you're responsible for. >> so i served under both terms of the george w. bush administration. was actually appointed by the transportation secretary norman mineta. as you may know, mr. mineta is a democrat served in the republican administration and r authoring and then congress passed a reorganization act that led to the creation of this agency. and this agency at the u.s. d.o.t. oversees a million daily shipments of has does materials by all modes of transportation, air, land, truck, sea, vessel.

and even pipeline. >> so your current work with united transportation advisers, what is that? >> a consulting firm. i'm a lawyer, have a law practice and consulting practice. so we talk infrastructure projects, we talk transportation projects to both public and private sector clients. >> so one of y clients key stone xl? not. >> anybody supporting nosir. >> so as far as key stone xl is concerned, the position that you are taking through the advisers or anyone else, where do you stand on it or if it should be built? >> i've been monitoring this for several years. when i was at the d.o.t. the original keystone was proposed. what a lot of people don't understand is there's already an existing keystone pipeline and the president has already approved the southern half last fall. so we already have a keystone that goes down to oklahoma now and we're about to have the second part that goes down to

houston. and the fact is a new state-of-the-art pipeline, something that is needed and clearly in the u.s. national interest so i'm a supporter. >> the concern is over the extense that we've been talking about would run through montana, dakotas, nebraska some concerns being environmental in nature. >> the current pipeline runs through nebraska and over the al qaeda fer. that's the -- ah quafer. it's intepided to pick up crude. so it will carry up to 25% u.s. crude. >> what's the relevancey of having this extension as well as the existing pipeline? >> so is the existing pipeline does about 600,000 barrels a day. this extension will bring that capacity over 1 million a day. it's important because right w oil is transport bid rail, by truck, it's transported by means other than pipeline. if you look at my former agency and when you look at has matt

trancetation it's all relatively safe but there's a reason that pipelines have been the go-to source for transporting energy products over the last 50 years. they have an edge. >> what's the edge? >> the edge is in spill volumes and rates. if you look at it, pipelines 5 something% safe and effective at delivering the product and they do it least expensive and less impact and to people. >> the international energy ray sosheation took a look at pipelines and what goes through them. they at least analyzed it and said sthay found the risk of a rail spill is six times as high as the risk of a pipeline spill. pipelines spill more when they rupture. they looked at data from the department of transportation. they to the idea that if a pipeline ruptrd more that goes out. >> yes and no. i think that depends.

keep in mind, too, that trains transport a lot more than just oil. and so so far. but if you look at actual train incident rates or wrecks involving trains, it's significantly higher than pipelines. and so when you look at the overall transportation safety record, pipelines are close to 400 times safer. and remember too that pipelines are the only oneway transportation system. so every other transportation system requires a round trip. you actually have to double that mileage if you're going to do apple to apple comparison. >> what's the protocol for fixing it? >> when a pipeline does break or an issue comes up, the pipeline is shut down and as soon as the control room removes the power to the pipeline in essence through pumps then the oil stops moving or the natural gas or anything else. at that point there's a spill response plan in place that government regulations require and it's cleaned up. >> so as far as pipelines are concerned, what's the width? does it vary?

because if one ruptors and certain width, more would go out depending on how wide. >> that's absolutely true and also what type whether it's liquid or gaseous. and with the 2.6 million miles that we have in our country those vary anywhere from four inches up to 36, some are even 48 inches. >> our guest to talk about the pipeline and concerns about it. you can ask him questions about it if you wish. you can call us. the numbers are on the bottom f your screen. if you want, send us a tweet. do you expect a decision on this by the administration by the end of the year? >> i would hope so. i'm an institutionalist. from being a government

regulator it's all about the facts, and the policy should be based on the facts not the politics. but keep in mind that this decision has been pending for over four years. the first pipeline was approved in much less time. frankly world war ii ended in less time. so my concern at this point as somebody that believes in the process is believing that the process is being strung out now too far and i would hope there would be one before the end of the year. >> our first call is tomorrow tom from pennsylvania republican line. >> the first issue i want to bring up is this bogus story is guy put out briefly about the question of incident rates. the issue is not incidents, it's when a pipeline breaks, the mess is much bigger. but the main reason i called is i want to know what is the guarantee of benefit to the

american public after having aken all the risks of building this pipeline? and the situation is similar to this mess with the gas fracking. we take all the risks and the people in the top 1% get all the benefit by selling the oil worldwide and in the meantime our energy costs keep sky rocketing. >> so what i heard there is energy costs. if you look at energy costs -- and that's a great question. the fact is the more supply that you can bring to market it's a supply and demand. and energy costs have been sky rocketing because we continue to rely on importing 10 million barrel as day of crude oil from unstable overseas areas in the middle east. and if we can stop that and reduce that dependence by having more north american production, that will be a stabilizing factsor and will actually help offset any price

increases as a result of the events going on. that's why oil rose to a two-year high and $110 just 24 hours ago based on syria. >> the president talked about key stone in light of oil production and extent itself. >> i put forward in the past an all the above energy strategy but our energy strategy must be about more than just producing more oil. and by the way, it's certainly got to be about more than just building one pipeline. i know there's been, for example, a lot of controversy surrounding the proposal to build a pipeline, the keystone pipeline that would carry oil from canadian tar sands down to refineries in the gulf. and the state department is going through the final stages of evaluating the proposal. that's how it's always been done. but i do want to be clear. allowing the key stone pipeline to be built requires a finding

that doing so would be in our nation's interest. and our national interest will be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution. the net effect of the pipeline's impact -- the net effect of the pipeline's impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project is allowed to go forward. it's relevant. >> well first of all, the president's own department of energy that looks at future projections shows that by 2040 we are still going to be heavily dependent upon fossil fuels. in fact, the iea study shows that by 2040 renewables will still constitute about 10% of the energy requirement that is we have. so with that in mind, the question isn't if this is going

to market. the question is how do we get it there in the safest way possible? because canada will produce this oil. so it will get to market. and i would much rather have it in a brand new state-of-the-art pipeline than traveling a barge down the mississippi, tanker cars, or trucks. >> there's a story that was first report bid the hill newspaper saying that the e he on would likely be uld -- >> that's actedly not a new storyifment that came out a couple years ago and was investigated. and my understanding is there were no conflicts found. what you're starting to see is a recycling of a lot of events. keep in mind that executive order that was put in place that governs this entire process was put in place to expedite cross-border transportation facilities. instead of expediting it, this

is now taking longer again, we could have built the empire state building five times by now, we completed world war ii in less time. so at some point you start to say, we've had four studies. we've had this, we've had that. at some point the question is has this policy really been high jacked or are we still on path? > eric from our democrat's line. >> we have environmental studies. we've also had practical xperience with spills. i don't know where o you're getting your safety record from, the 99.999%. if one of these pipelines breaks carrying tar sand, like we've already had happen, we can't clean up crude very well.

we have hardly anyway at all of leaning up the tar sand spill. >> ok. well, first of all, the safety rating is based on this. we transport and move around the country by pipeline 31 million -- think about that for a second -- 31 million barrels of oil or refined product each and every day. and we did that yesterday. nothing happened. we did that the day before nothing happened. so when you get to that rating, when you consider it's over 13 billion barrels a year that get moved around the spill rate is actually pretty good and it's better than any other mode of transportation. so that's my point. is these products are not an optional supply. they're not something we can live without. if we have to have them and we're going to move them and as the former regulator there is a robust set of regulations and laws in place and a very aggressive enforcement posture by the federal government and the state government. so the question isn't if but

the question is if we have to have these products how do we make sure they're transported as safely as possible? >> new york up next. joe on the republican line. santa go to gary, barbara, california. democrat's line. one more time. i think we're having trouble. let's try james from iowa. >> i think your guest has bragged on himself enough. there's a human factor in putting oil on trains that is not present in a pipeline. and as much as that oil contributes to more employees for my company as a consumer we need to build a power grid in this country. and rail is not ideal way to do

that. if i don't follow the rules, if i don't do the right thing on that train, you're going to derail that oil and spill it all over. with a pipeline, at least if it's built to codes and standards you take the human factor out of it. there's some but not as much as on a rail. i think people need to take that in conversation that we need cheap energy. >> that's a really good point. one of the things about pipelines is that they're out of sight, out of mind. i think most of the viewers listening to today, if i wouldn't have said there were 2.6 million miles of pipeline they wouldn't know that. they're generally buried under ground. and in areas where it does go through an urban area or does go through an environmentally sensitive area there are additional regulation that is deal with the plines in those areas. one of the key components is now the number one leading

cause of pipeline incidents when they do happen is by third-party excavation damage. so pipelines is a mode that really limit it is interaction between people and the product being shipped. thanks for commenting. >> democrat's line. the problem i have with this pipeline, i don't have any problem with it being built or anything. but i think there should be some kind of a guarantee that that oil stays here. it stays in america. it's not going all the way across our country and going somewhere else to get on the world market. and the reason we have high oil prices is because of our last president. number one, when he took office, oil was -- i was paying like $1.25 a gallon of gas. since he took office, it's not

went under $3 a gallon here in florida ever in the last 8 ears of bush and the last 5 of obama. so we can thank the republicans for our high gas prices. >> what i heard there your question there is you know looking at this oil and how it's going to be used. there has been some debate recently and the environmental opponents of keystone have tried to paint a picture that this oil is going to be exported. if you think about it, we import again 10 million barrels of oil every day from unstable places around the world. when you look at the fact that the canadian crude we get is already discounted at $30 to $40 a barrel it makes more sense to keep that here in the u.s. and what it doesn't make sense to do is to ship this oil down a 2,000 mile pipeline, pay

the tariff on that, then put it on to a tanker in houston at facilities that don't exist and then send it through the panama canal back up the west coast to the u.s. and then hope to send it to china. that's unrealistic. >> jobs, concerned about jobs being created. e of the quotes that he made lfillment center >> the president parses his words carefully but he's already approved the pipeline. he already approved the southern half. so he has already approved a pipeline going from canada to houston, texas. the issue is adding a little bit of capacity to it. number two, if you talk to the teamsters, you talk to the union officials they say look these are construction jobs. we don't view them as temporary jobs because our livelihood depends on going from

construction project to can construction project. moreover it's the impact of having that production come through the u.s. i've talked to counties in nebraska that are along the original keystone line. they've been lowering taxes because of the tax revenue that's flown in. that indirectly stimulates the economy. and frankly, when the oil comes to the u.s. and it goes to houston and is refined in a u.s. factory with u.s. labor force, that does add to the economy. so that's like saying we shouldn't build a bridge or we shouldn't middle the mixing bowl at 395 because there are no permanent jobs created. there's not in that all construction jobs are temporary. but you have to look beyond that. >> laura from michigan. >> i tuned in about 5 minutes ago so i don't know whether you have discussed this or not. but in michigan we have a problem with a company embridge. three years ago, they had an oil leak and it's still has not

been cleaned up and there's a controversy now about cleaning it up. it happens to be the same type of oil that you want to ship. now, you're going to ship canadian oil through the united states. why doesn't canada ship that oil through its country? also, i have another question. and that is in the event this oil does get through to the refinery in texas, when it's refined, that oil does not come to the united states. that oil goes on the general market. so this monkey business about saying, oh, well, the united states will get that oil is not true. and i really resent people in the oil industry trying to pull the wool over our ice. thank you very much c-span for allowing us to have these type of programs and us to call about our displeasure with

what's happening. thank you very much. have a nice day. >> well first i think as we talked about earlier if you look at the economic side of it, the oil we get from canada -- and by the way, canada is our number one importer of oil and that oil does stay in the united states and it is refined in the united states and it is used in the united states. in fact, the u.s. actually exports some refined product back into canada, that is true. but the vast majority of all the oil that we get from canada stays right here. and so you know, i just haven't really seen that come to fruition. i understand the concerns but the oil and the products that it makes generally is staying here. >> so oil that comes to houston like she says doesn't go elsewhere, it stays within the united states? >> it stays in the u.s. and that's been another issue raised because if you think about it, there aren't that many places around the world that can refine a heavier crude. and this crude though is no heavier than what we get from

california, it's no heavier than the oil from mexico or some of the heavier crude from saudi and it's actually lighter than the oil from venezuela. so it has to be refined in the u.s. because there are very few place that is have that capability. and second from a price modeling concept it is kept in the u.s. in fact, all the oil that is refined there generally makes its way up the whole u.s. east coast and right here in washington, d.c. is where we use the products made from that oifment >> patrick from new york. >> good morning. thanks for c-span. and thank you for a wonderful program yesterday. people are complaining about the price of oil going up. why is it that we have such a surplus? and there's still the prices keep going up and they keep complaining that we need oil from the middle east, that we have so much surplus here in the united states. there's nothing wrong with getting the oil from canada so

we can help here. but it would also help to give the people the right information. one person complains that we have a surplus again, but safety is very important. so we appreciate that we get the truth. and if it helps the people and helps the price go down that would be mostly appreciated. >> he's raised a very good point. just a few years ago we thought we were pretty much out of fossil fuel. what we have learned through advances in technology is not only do we have a lot of crude oil that we're finding in the u.s., that canada is finding, that i think once mexico changes its government-run oil company from mexico they're going to find they have a lot more. and we have more natural gas in this country than saudi arabia has oil. and so as we find that we have more production capability, the difficulty is bringing that production capability on line. and there's a balance between producing that oil and making sure that we are good stewards

of the environment. but by the same token if you look under president obama, drilling on federal lands has fallen to a new low. we are producing more but the world is also using more oil. and that's why i think it's critical when you talk to policy makers who believe that we may not be independent per se but we can sure lessen our dependence on overseas oil if we can bring domestic capability on line. and that's the current struggle. >> here's a message. says, why build a new one? guest: there is already the pipeline in canada that can put send ita supertanker and to china. the keystone build is over- subscribed. they are up to capacity when it gets built.

i am not sure where he has gotten that info. i have not seen parkland's under-subscribed at all. security and stability maintained? guest: that is a good point. the pipeline is monitored from the ground and air. all pipelines are monitored from a 24-hour facility. there is technology deployed along the line at certain locations monitored for safety. these have to do with the department of homeland security. it is considered critical infrastructure that needs to be protected. the lines are flown over constantly and monitored from satellites as well. rupture,there is a what is the federal government 's responsibility? guest: the responsibility lies with the operator first and

foremost. there is a trust fund in the billions of dollars to advance monies for cleanup that the operator has to replenish. there are response plans in place. the operator has to follow those. there are assets that have to be deployed quickly. set of a mature regulations and oversight. from tom is up next washington, d.c., on the independent line for brigham mccown. to c-span for yesterday. has resulted in a sharp drop in the price of natural gas as noted. i want to make sure the audience knows that has given american manufacturing a substantial cost advantage over competitors, so much so that a lot of foreign companies are looking to come here to do their manufacturing

to take the vantage of natural gas. kind ofty question is esoteric about smart pegging. it sounds silly but is the means by which pipelines are inspected inside the park plan. i am sure your guest knows all about it. i wonder if he can explain. that is a very insightful comment on natural gas. i should have raised it to the previous caller talked about comprises. when natural gas production went up by 25% in the u.s., the price dropped by 50%. it is not necessarily a linear tit for tat but can be an exponential drop. we can ensure against a wide price fluctuations when there are crises a run the world. pegs, pipeline technology

advanced dramatically in the last 20 years. so has safety. been one ofg has the reasons incidents are down close to 60%. host: explain what that is. is an in-line inspection tool. it is a device placed inside the pipeline and run down the pipeline. there are many different types. there are cleaning pegs that are foam scrapers. the technology uses variations in the magnetic field or sonogram technology to literally produce an image of the pipeline just like getting an mri or cat scan. that tells us a lot about the health of the pipeline, how it is doing, if it has been damaged, if it has a corot's an issue -- a corrosion issue or anything else, and on.

it helps to find incidents before they happen. host: what materials are used in the parkland? .uest: mostly steel with natural gas, they may be pvc and plastic. the lifetime depends on how they are operated. the ones in the southeast have been in place since the early 1940's. host: the keystone pipeline is steel or pvc? guest: it is high tensile steel. it is rated x70. stands for how many pounds of pressure it can take. it is a state of the art line. this steel is above and beyond what is required to run the park land. that is one of the added safety margins the operator has agreed to do. janet from massachusetts, republican line. caller: the keystone pipeline

along with every other park plan is a national security issue. we're currently in armed fromnt -- armed conflicts syria to afghanistan. that is a huge area. we are held captive by price spikes in the north sea oil price because we are not energy independent paid because of the jones art, we cannot move an energy product from texas to the east coast. the east coast is getting huge amounts of natural gas and oil from hostile areas. california has geographic issues. it is having a tough time getting energy from alaska or canada. pipelines and we need a rational policy for approving if theys, particularly

are in the same footprint as pre-existing power or road easements. they should not be tied up with a series of environmental evaluations when the soil has already been affected by an interstate or something like that. this is a national security issue. the middle east is about to blow up. they are going to come and try to annihilate us. the easiest way to do is to cut off our energy supplies. the price.pike host: the thing building the xl pipeline will change our dependence significantly? -- do you think building the xl pipeline will change our dependence significantly? caller: i think it will show a change of policy. currently the transportation bill that did not get through

the senate has sections that prohibited the easing of environmental evaluations for other pipelines. i think the key thing to the park plan approval is it will , thea change of the wind change of policy. guest:anet, thank you. one of her points rings true. but for the fact that this causes an international border, there would be no international study. you and i could go out and build a brand new pipeline from south dakota to houston and there is no government environmental study. the only government action is because of the international border crossing. the keystone pipeline has become a symbol not of pipeline safety. this issue has little to do with safety. it is disagreement over energy policy and whether we should

continue to utilize fossil fuel products for the concentrated on renewables only. my thought and roll is as a former regulator and a guy that served in the military for close to 26 years and has been to iraq and kuwait, i do not want to go back. to the extent that we can lessen our dependence on oil from unfairly regions and places, i think we are a lot better off. she hit it on the head. a country is only as secure as its energy supply. build a clarify, if you pipeline in the united states you are not required to conduct an environmental study? guest: you are not required to seek or obtain a presidential permit. unless it passes through public lands, there is no environmental study required. you may have to get a permit from the army corps of engineers if it passes through a watershed. but you do not even conduct a

nipa analysis, the national environmental policy act which controls the process which was signed into law by president nixon. mccownur guest, brigham of the pipeline and hazardous materials safety administration. good morning. you are on. caller: one thing off of the the pipeline going to the gulf, it is hard to believe he is looking at the camera and say we will not sure to receive. it goes to the gulf because they do want to shift it overseas. i am not against fossil fuels because i know we need them. but we are taking the risk when we ship it from canada to the gulf.

be problem is that will [indiscernible] the gulf.om canada to if they want to keep it here, why not build a refinery up north so the pipeline does not cross our offers --aquifers? the big problem with a lot of people is they know the oil will be shipped overseas. i have one more thing to add on fracking. i like it. i think it is clean energy. if it were not for the democrats, if republicans have their way, they would start shipping gas overseas. they like to have it on the world market. as soon as that starts happening, prices will rise. host: thank you. a prohibitions

and lot against the u.s. exporting any crude. on keystone xl, my personal view is when you start mixing u.s. and canadian crew, it becomes a blended product. it is no longer canadian crude. i doubt the legality of exporting its oil, number one. no. two, even if you could, it does not make sense. there is a reason it has to go to houston. , thee along time ago decision was made to place most of the refineries along the u.s. gulf coast. that is where they are. people would love to get a new refinery permitted in the midwest or some place else. it has not happened for a number of years. i do not think it will ever happen given the government red tape. they are where they are. that is why the new pipeline is needed, because we have a new supply of oil and you have to get it from point a to b. it is that simple.

host: the next call is john from ohio on the independent line. caller: a lot of people do not theystand that in 1999, enacted enact. shortly thereafter, everything .pike, gas and oil people in the room were the lobbyists, because of iran -- enron. they saw the huge profits could be made. to get prices back down, you have to remove that. when it comes to the keystone pipeline, it has already been -- i hate to say it -- it has been televised on tv. there have been numerous other things i have seen. it has been earmarked to china.

you. thank we will leave it there. guest: i think that is so unlikely. if you look at the transportation system and how ocean vessels would have to move the oil, it does not make sense to do that. opportunity to buy the oil, we do. the transcanada ceo's have none of this oil will be exported. saide transcanada ceo has none of this will will be exported. we need the oil. exports everyn in day. this oil is being offered cheaper, it would make no sense to export it. host: there is a section of the keystone pipeline that already taexist. if this is approved, how long will it take to build it? guest: it will take about two years. or 600 miles to the east and then drops south ending

city, nebraska. part of it goes to the east to the refineries in illinois canadian crude oil is being refined in illinois and supports gasoline and diesel production in the midwest. then it goes down to oklahoma. fall duringama last ood inection cycle st cushing, oklahoma, and approved it. he approved cushing to netterland. there is a keystone pipeline. it has been approved. it is nearing completion. i think the first or second quarter of 2014, it will be in operation. expect a do not timeline as far as an answer on whether the extension will be

built anytime soon? guest: i do not. it should be coming along. when i was in the administration, we did an environmental impact study or statement. we have to have a timeline because you have to keep on schedule. the average timeline is two to three years. we are at 4.5. with brigham mccown pipeline and hazardous materials safety administration, thank you for your time. coming up, there are organized efforts to cheat the government out of student aid money. these are organized efforts also known as fraud rings. inspectoruest is the general for the education department. he will meet kathleen tighe after this update from c-span radio. >> the number of americans seeking unemployment benefits remains near the lowest level in more than five years last week,

the government says that companies are cutting fewer jobs. the labor department says weekly applications for benefits fell 6000 to a seasonally adjusted 331,000. employers have added an average since,000 jobs a month january. the economy grew at 2.5% annual rate from april to june. that is much faster than previously estimated. the steeper vision larsen because u.s. companies exported more goods and imports declined. the commerce department says the second quarter growth was sharply higher than the initial 1.7% rate reported last month. ahead of our discussion on student aid fraud, the federal government consumer of the office says more than 33 million workers qualified to have their student loans forgiven because they work in schools and hospitals in military and police uniforms.

the consumer financial protection bureau says the system is overly complicated and confusing. some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> there are several types of bullying. their favorite is racial bullying. they love it. the reason is the left's philosophy is based almost solely and completely of this point on the idea that they stand up for victimized groups. everything they do is to stand up on behalf of some victimized minority. if you are a minority, they are standing up for you. that means if we oppose their policies, the logic is we hate blacks, gays, jews, and women. that is the philosophy that they trot out. >> on sunday, he will take your calls and comments for three hours starting at noon eastern. congressman john lewis will be the october test.

g --uest. the book club returns in september with "this town." and engaged on our facebook page and on twitter. continues. journal" ast: kathleen tighe serves the inspector general for the education department. why does the education department need an inspector general? guest: inspector generals were created in 1978 for all departments and agencies. providehere to independent oversight of the department and make sure the money is being spent appropriately. we work to promote the economy and efficiency of the department operations. we're also the responsible for

detecting and preventing fraud, waste, and abuse, and other criminal activity in the operations. of yearsecent report takes a look at student aid abuse froaud. guest: there are all types of student aid fraud. you can have an individual recipient making misrepresentations on the application for federal aid. you can have schools that pretend to have fake students trying to get student aid money. the area we have highlighted recently in a report is the so- called fraud rings. they are loosely affiliated groups of individuals who conspire together to defraud the the federalf student aid program specifically. target low-- they

cost schools that have open enrollment. it means you just have to be a high school graduate and do not need to meet any of the criteria to apply. they basically apply for enrollment. they give in, which is easy. they apply for federal assistance. the usually misrepresent how much income they have and misrepresent that they were high-school graduates. then they receive federal student aid. they receive the federal student aid, how much goes to the school and how much goes to the person trying to defraud program? guest: they target low-cost institutions like a community college with an online program. the community college may charge $600 a semester. if you represent on your

application that you have zero income, you get the maximum pell grant. that is something over $5,500 now. the school will take the money when it comes from the department of education to the school. the school takes its tuition and fees. it dispenses the rest to the student who is supposed to be using it for educational purposes. is problem with fraud rings these so-called students are not students at all. they take the money and use it for their own personal devices and never go to a class or do anything. host: if the money walks away with a student does this, what is the potential of being reclaimed by the education department? guest: it is not very good at all. that is why we work these cases. for criminal investigations, we have brought some of these

doctors to justice and have gotten some money back for the -- some of these bad actors to justice and have gotten some money back for the education department. host: if you want to ask questions, we have divided the lines by political parties. if you are a student aid recipient in want to weigh in on this and tell your perspective, on this line.o so you can always send us a tweet or an e-mail. according to your department and the recent report, the increase of this activity, 82% from 2009 to 2012. expand on that.

analysis.did an it has been hard to tell the scope of the fraud problem. ourselves andive the department some kind of idea what they were looking at. we did a statistical analysis. we looked at all of the federal student aid recipients for a three-year period. we then look at trends from our cases. we saw common characteristics among the cases. we figured out about 85,000 of all this to an aid recipients for that three years, to the tune of about eight and a $74 million received -- $$874 million received, have the potential to be suspicious. then we did additional analysis to refine the criteria of what makes a fraud case. we came up with an estimate for the three years of probable fraud loss for the department

and to the taxpayers of about $187 million. the: when you investigate individual or the rings, how much have they collected? tell a couple of stories. guest: our typical money we get back is somewhere between $200,000.600000 dollars. $600,000.0 and the pell grant is not much money. the rings try to get as many people as they can. onre was one ring operating an on-line community college program. the u.s. attorney's office in phoenix prosecuted every member of the fraud ring, all 64 members. we got back about $550,000.

host: that was just through investigation. i saw in the report that these activities occurred for people in prison. guest: in june, we had a criminal action in the case involving -- against a ringleader who had organized a group of inmates in prison to do this. they operate on the outside. if you are in in may, you are not eligible for federal student aid. -- if you are and in may, you are not eligible for federal student aid. they had a ring leader outside of prison. host: the first call is from baltimore, maryland, on the republican line. this is a bill. you are on with the inspector general. caller: i wanted to make a quick comment. i am a student in medical school. i took out quite a bit of student aid to pay for my education. i wanted to know if the federal government has investigated

whether they feel like this has been a good investment long term. can she talk about the consolidation program? she mentioned military retain it as well as working in a public center. i am working towards debt forgiveness and wanted to hear her thoughts on that. guest: we have not investigated per se whether the benefits of the student loan program outweigh -- i think it has been seen as being instrumental in allowing students to get a good inste education. i think questions on consolidation and deferment, there is a huge amount of information on the department's lookte that you ought to at for purposes of loan consolidation. there are a lot of programs to benefit students and their loans. host: betty from georgia on the

democrats' line. caller: i called to make a comment. one about the repayment of student loans. i tried to repay my student loans in full last year when i got my income tax back. they did not accept that full payment because it was over $500. i think they need to make the system more user-friendly to pay back the loans. guest elaborate more about forgiveness of the student loans? i think issues related to the process for paying back a generally thine are a lot of options available. caller suggest the contact -- within the department

of education, the organization in the department that handles the federal student aid is the office of federal student aid. they have designated an honest ombudsman who helps with issues related to deferment and payment and all options available as a borrower. armstrong urge you to -- i would strongly urge you to contact the omsbudsman. host: how much information has to come out to apply? do you have to put down a social security number customer talk about how university suspicions are aroused and whether they have a role. guest: they do have a role. the information you need to perpetrate a fraud is a valid name, social security, and date of birth.

with that, you will get for thed a pin number online component. all student aid applications are on line. the department does check to make sure the social and name add up, so you do need that. the ringleaders will use their use their own. they cannot use it. it is in their interest to maximize their return. that is to get other people participating. they will give friends, colleagues, occasionally they will bring in disadvantaged people from the streets and are their names and social security numbers. it is extremely unfortunate. thatingleader will use information to apply and apply for student aid.

that money will go back to the person whose name and social that belongs to, and in the ringleader and that person split the money. host: when someone clicks the check, they don't have to go face-to-face with university from the remainder of the pell grant money. guest: they do not. they comes electronically to the student, or alleged student. host: we have the federal student aid website. can something be done there to help give more information to make sure this doesn't happen? guest: there are a number of byngs that can be done both the department and by universities, which you have mentioned. reportartment, we did a a couple of years ago that made a number of recommendations to the department of how they can fix this problem. this past award year or past school year, the department has implemented a process where they keep an eye out through their students who will

apply for student aid at one school, drop out immediately, then move onto another school. so they will flag or red flag thee activities and require schools to verify the identity of the students. , which we think is a good thing. time will tell whether that is a good fix. you mention also the schools themselves. ,hey can and do in some cases can keep an eye out for this kind of activity. what you often see is by the nature of it, because the one ringleader is essentially doing all the work, if you get a lot of applications coming in through one e-mail address, well, isn't that suspicious? we do have a number of schools who do their own monitoring and do bring us referrals. host: wade is up next for our guest kathleen tighe. caller: hello. how are you doing? i am wondering about the numbers

-- you're talking about student loans, right? guest: yes. caller: what is the number of those on the student loans and then the amount that gets to fraud it from the government? and then, what is the numbers of the government paying people to investigate it? how come they can't solve the problem? guest: well, those are all good points. i do think we are trying to help the problem both by doing our investigations and also by the fact we went through and try to make recommendations to the department on how to do things better. the department itself is taking actions on a number of fronts. the one area that the department is reallyched yet

something not altogether in their hands because it requires is, is ity change necessary in an online environment for working adult to get the same amount of money in student loan money and pell grant for the cost of their attendance at school as does a student attending a brick-and- mortar institution, where you are there in a dorm and paying room and board? we have made a number of recommendations over the years for that to be relook that. and that has not yet been tackled because what you would find an example i gave you where the community colleges $600 and the difference in that gets kicked back to our fraud ringleader is there would not be as much money going back to the ringleader. host: how much teeth does the department have? guest: the number of our investigations? back in 2005 when we really commenced this kind of work, we

had about 16 investigations opened. to date, we have opened about 127 cases. we have had a total of about 345 criminal convictions to date. host: do you work solely by yourselves or our other agencies involved? guest: we often work with the fbi, sometimes they get involved . usually, they are our cases. host: texas, next, independent line. think whenever there is money available, there's always going to be fraud. i think it is important to be aware of. but as a single mother, and my oldest son is now in his second university, if it were not for the scholarship sent telegrams he is receiving, it would be virtually impossible -- scholarships and pell grants

he is receiving, it would be virtually impossible for him. fraud, andemper the we try to avoid the situations, i also think it is very to thent that we remain fact there are those who would not have the opportunity for quality education without that assistance from the government. yes, i would agree with you. that is really the interest of my office, ultimately, to make sure that the money is going for the students who needed for an to studentsd not who are not students at all, but really want that money for their own personal purposes and have no intention of trying to achieve an education. host: if you are student aid, we want your thoughts.

the thing that clued you into this phenomenon in the first place? it started -- well, we had referrals initially. the reason we go back to 2005 is that there were statutory changes at that time that made -- studentsams able and online programs able to get federal student aid money. prior to that time, they were not eligible. that led to really a significant growth in online programs, both programs that are purely online, that there is no brick-and- mortar component to the school, but also many, many -- i think the bulk of public four-year institution's have online or some online capacity. host: if an institution doesn't have brick-and-mortar to happen -- have this happen, does profit, nonprofit university, doesn't matter? guest: it does not matter.

the criteria we see more often than not that it be low-cost. that is why you see in recent years community colleges have in a big way gone to online programs. it helps them succeed financially and helps them broaden the base of students to whom they can serve -- can serve and they try to maintain themselves as low-cost institutions. host: jennifer, independent line. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i just had a comment. i am a graduate from an online school. one of the things they did to deter any fraud was identification application where you would send your birth certificate and your social security card via scan or fax. in doing the student aid, -- aid loans, i had to link with the irs to verify my

income. i wonder of all colleges or universities have that policy were you actually run as a social -- run the social security numbers to link it up with the irs to verify if they are working, if they have no income, or low income, and then ?et the income number there may be another name for it. with that deter a lot of fraud? guest: yes, i'm very happy to onlineu are -- your school has that requirement. i would say that is probably the exception rather than the rule, unfortunately. it is one of the areas we strongly feel the department needs to take stronger actions to require schools to do exactly , whichur school has done i think is great. i think that would help deter a lot of fraud. host: maryland, troy, democrat line. , in your am calling

investigations, have you looked at schools where they are not accepting transfer credits because of accreditations? i completed almost 30% of my college credits from, i guess, a national region, and one college would not accept it because they were regional accreditation. also, have you looked into where their converting their college -- the credits per hour to a quarter system instead of a semester system so they can get more money back from the government? i have seen that before. guest: you raise some interesting questions. we have not directly look at the issue you raised, but we did do a series of reviews a few years ago that looked at accrediting agencies, or bodies, who operate throughout the country, just to

see how they were managing the issue of a credit hour and how it is they were able to figure -- to makend of work sure there is some equity amongst different schools in terms of what those programs offer. and i think the ability to sort of transfer credits is bound up in what they ought to be looking at. but we haven't interacted look at that issue. host: illinois, republican line. caller: yes, i was just how many of these fraud cases originate overseas because it is done online instead of a person happened to show up at an office and apply, that this cannot be stemmed as a worldwide thing more than just in the united states? guest: that is a very interesting question. date a lot seen to

of foreign students are using to dos. online programs these kinds of fraud rings. and i think we would be concerned about that, but i will tell you that because the online programs operate really throughout the united states, that we can get ringleaders -- ringleaders may -- you may have a school here in washington, d.c., and you can have these fraud ringleaders operate from honest anywhere in the united states. universities seen do it as well, according to a report. a school in san diego agreed to pay more than $687,000 to settle claims. can you expand on that? that was an interesting case and typical of the kind of cases we see. there are schools themselves that operate fraudulently

disorder pretend there are students, to fabricate students, and try to get student aid money. there are a number of schools, particularly in the for-profit area come a rely very heavily on federal student aid as their major source of revenue. so it is in their interest to maximize the number of students. host: annapolis, maryland, independent line. , i was hi wondering, because the process regarding you guys try to look more for ringleaders and stuff, i'm just a regular person trying to go to school. my husband is in the military, so we move around a lot. and because of the fact that i have so many schools on my transcript and i have had so many drops, and not only am i a student, i am a working full- time mother, it makes it a lot harder for me. i am wondering, why can't the

schools just look at my know, ipt and see, you might have dropped courses in the past, but i still go to classes and i have maintained getting credits since then. so how come i'm still being denied financial aid? you are clearly raising an interesting issue because your pattern of how you have had of moving around, having to start the school then drop and you do a few credits and leave, it can give the same patterns we see in fraud rings. but i think your situation -- you ought to be talking at whatever school you would like to go to. i would strongly urge you to talk to the guidance counselor or financial aid department or whoever at that school and sort of explain your situation. i believe they would be happy to work with you to make sure that know,t the proper, you

they ought to be able to look at your transcript and other things to be able to see you're really a legitimate student. host: what is the punishment if someone is found guilty? guest: we have seen a variety. the most significant jail time we have seen for a ringleader is 11 years. generally, it ranges from a couple of years to five or six years. a lot depends not only on the amount of money and it also depends on their prior criminal history and things like that. host: restitution involved? guest: yes. we have received back in total from both criminal fines and penalties, restitution administrative recovery in savings, we have probably received back something about $23 million, $24 million. >> host: pennsylvania, democrat line. caller: i was wondering if you

could comment about sallie mae service corporation and their fraudulent behavior. receivedolved after i -- host: are you there? caller: yes, hi. ok. listeninghave to stop to the television and go ahead with your question or comment. caller: sallie mae service incorporation, i was involved with and received my doctorate and it was never-ending. it has finally been resolved, but i was wondering if you could comment on that. thank you. guest: i can't really comment on fraud cases. i know we have had some past looking at sallie mae, but i'm not in a position right now to comment. host: if you saw an 82% traynor uprising in three years, is the trend continuing upward? what happens as far as your

department's capability if you see those trends still rising? does it increase the amount of investigation you do? guest: i would say probably does increase our investigation. somean to go back and at point and look at the trends. we did it at three years, i think we look at fiscal year 20,009-2011. now that we have made a number of recommendations for the department, the department is taking actions in many respects, it seems to make sense to give them time to see how that works through. but at some point, it would make sense for us, i think, to go back and say, hey, have the fixes they put in and the fact we have been trying to highlight this pro, the fact we have actually engaged in training of financial aid administrators, has that helped alleviate the problem? i would sure like to see the downward trend, because my staff is dwindling a bit and we can't afford to work as many cases as we do right now. host: staffed when when because

-- guest: sequestration has hit us like any federal agency. now i haveeople, 259. something just under 90 criminal investigators. we cover a lot of territory. there are 6000 institutions of higher education. there are 13,000 school districts. we have been mainly talking about higher education, but money flows from the department to all the pre-k through 12 down in the states. ist: kathleen tighe inspector general for the education department, talking about student aid fraud. we hear from pat, louisville, kentucky, democrat line. caller: good morning. college andis in this is his senior year.

i'm going to cosign for his loan. i concern is everything is done online and all of my info is going to be put online. is there any problems with this being used for fraud in different ways that all my information will be online? guest: well, the online is -- is, iprocess think, regionally secure. there are things in place. once the information is in the system, i think, you know, it would seem fairly secure. the problems that we see in our cases is really the problem is that false information gets put in the system the first place. if you're putting incorrect information in the system, once it is in the system, it should be fine. host: phony name? guest: you have to have a

legitimate name and address, but what they do is usually falsify whether they were has go graduates. we often find the ringleaders and the ring members to be not high school graduates, so they falsify that. the usually falsify income. host: what about records? the previous caller said, some type of requirement. guest: yes, that is one of our first and foremost recommendations is that there be to check identity. it sounds like her school was right on and what they were doing. way,lso mentioned, by the and issue the department is trying to do, which is can you, if you represent what your income is on the free application for student aid, should that not be matched with what you also report to the irs? they are trying -- the department has rolled out a program as of a couple of years

ago where they asked for volunteers. it is to do that. you can literally pull in from your filed income tax return your adjusted gross income and put that into the free application for student aid. the problem we see with that is the fraud rings aren't going to volunteer to do that. so we don't see it as a good way of catching fraud. but is it help -- it does help to her mistakes. host: phoenix, arizona, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. behavioring about the studentshools who take because they're eligible for financial aid, yet don't do anything to help them be successful. university academic

advisor. aid student has financial and they find they're in the wrong course or are having trouble with the course, in order to preserve that money, they can get an incomplete from the professor and complete that course within the timeframe of their getting a degree. theychools know this, yet do not do this. guest: it is a problem we have sort of seen throughout. we have had some audit work done , particularly in the online , and havet highlighted some schools who don't a very good job of figuring out sort of when students withdraw to the point at the pointow --

of student withdraws, depending on where their is in the semester, money should be coming back -- to penning on where that is in the semester, money should be coming back. a lot of schools, it is in their interest to pretend like that didn't happen. so we look at those issues periodically. host: one conviction set the ringleader had to serve 180 days in county jail, five years probation, pay more than $83,000 in restitution. guest: i remember that case. that was an interesting adjunct. we have some creative judges. i thought that was an interesting add-on to your desk when the state with from the website because you can't be trusted even get on it. i thought that was very, very interesting thing the judge did. host: joyce, mesa, arizona,

democrat line. veteran. am a [indiscernible] ineeded training computers. school in indiana -- at the time, i was living there. in the meantime, i was taking care of my mom who had alzheimer's so i could not afford it. i went to the school and told her my situation and that i was a 100% disabled veteran. i needed the schools information. [indiscernible] said, i have to talk to your counselor. this went on for a long time. va, had trouble with the

and i think they are at fault and a lot of this. schools use veterans who don't know that you can't start school and after the counselor told me to just go on and start because the va will pay, but they're just late paying their bills, so don't worry about it. i can't afford this. guest: we have seen some problems in some schools who go after the veteran population in the online environment. aside from the fraudulent aspects of what that might to,il, i think they need obviously, be working with them more to make them succeed. host: washington, independent line. caller: i can't really speak to the departmental fraud and stuff going on today, but i can speak

to my own personal experience. back in the 1980s, i was in schoolnia and i went to that i was talked into going to because my house had burned down , i'm homeless on the street, and the school was completely fraudulent. they didn't teach me anything that they said they were going to teach me. --y just collected or $2500 they're $2500, and he spent years china collect this money from me. i refuse to pay it at first. now i definitely refuse to pay that i've been disabled since 1999. for 20 something years now, they have been trying to collect this. so, theyee years or pawn it off on another collection agency. so i have to go through all the paperwork again. i have sent in the paperwork for

disability i don't even know how many times, every few years. it never goes to the right department. they never get the stuff. the whole system is so complicated and the whole collection process is so complicated, i just don't even see how you could get any money. they have spent more than their $2500 to begin with trying to collect the $2500. some audit're doing work on a private collection agencies and the whole sort of process for how all this works. i think the caller should certainly contact the fsa. i think they could probably step in to help sort through some of the issues he is expensing. fraudbesides student aid itself, the wider umbrella, what else you investigate under your department? guest: that is probably the biggest thing, but not the only thing in the higher education

area. some of the other big areas we see recently in the sort of what we call the state and local area would involve -- we're seen sort of an upsurge in fraud related because theyhools aren't under the regulatory umbrella of the regular school systems. leads to sort of problems. this last week in pennsylvania, we had a case that saw major indictment of the pennsylvania cyber charter school, the founder of that school. it was the largest in the nation. but he had been siphoning off, allegedly, many from the school and using it for his own personal purposes. so that has been a big area for us. another area we have seen is sort of the afterschool tutoring programs that are funded by federal money. we have had a series of cases in our last report to congress --

we do a report twice a year. in our last report, we highlighted seven cases that dealt with the so-called supplemental education services. it has become a big area. what happens is, they come in and get paid by the headcount of the students, so there will falsify the headcount and pretend there are students there who aren't. host: billy, maryland, democrat line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a question about, what are the types of professionals that are on your staff? i also have a question, in the president's comments during his tour on college affordability, he talked about not releasing financial aid funds until the students had actually passed the courses were taking and were enrolled in the new courses. how would a system like that work? guest: as far as the

professionals on our staff, i have a staff of auditors, criminal investigators. i have data analysts, attorneys, and i have i.t. personnel and also some management services and support personnel. those are the kind of professions that i deal with and -- thosef all of the across government. i cannot speak specifically to the president's remarks, but i think one of the issues we have seen problems with, and we have a report we're looking at this issue right now that maybe as early as next month or perhaps ofoctober is the process when funds are disbursed by schools. do they all have to be disbursed up front? which is typically what happens. or can they not be disbursed at other times during the semester? that would also deter fraud rings. is joe, live call,

washington, d.c. caller: thank you to c-span. i think even the moderator had a suggestion and the experience i just had with getting a home loan for probably the amount of money that is comparable to sudeten, i had to submit sworn statement, allow the lender to view my social security and iraq, etc., and i was just wondering if there is any statute that prevents the staff from requiring sworn statements, doing