join just to speak about the health-care law. "washington journal" is next. ♪ good morning. congress is headed back to work. on the agenda for congress in the days ahead is unemployment benefits, and number of the presence nominees, including janet yellen, to head the federal reserve. also, major developments in iraq over the weekend. secretary of state john kerry said sunday that united states is ready to help iraq as it fights al qaeda forces in the provinces. he added the systems won't include u.s. forces returning to iraq. we was been the first for five

minutes talking about iraq and what the u.s. forces role should be there. journal"o "washington this morning. it is monday, january 6. the numbers to color on your screen. -- the numbers to call are on your screen. secretary of state john kerry again making news traveling in jerusalem this weekend. he says there will be no american boots on the ground in iraq. that is the headline this

morning in the financial times. they write let's take a listen to what he had to say. >> this is a fight that belongs to the iraqis. that is exactly what the president and the world decided some time ago when we left iraq. we are not contemplating returning. we are not contemplating putting boots on the ground. this is their fight. we're going to help them in their fight. >> that was from over the weekend. secretary of state john kerry is traveling in jerusalem. with militants seizing the ,ities of rum and i and falluja that led to criticism.

our topic this morning is what the future u.s. role in iraq should be. our first call this morning comes from butner, north carolina. joe is on a line for democrats. joe, are you with us? caller: aren't we secretly trying to help the shiites in iraq? ?penly and secretly in syria? at the same time we are trying to impress people that we need to negotiate to keep the shiites from getting an atomic bomb. two-faced policy is going to backfire on us.

somebody needs to speak out against it now. from next call comes tennessee. nick is on a line for independents. caller: yes, i don't see what the problem is. our commander-in-chief said that decimated.en perhaps he ought to go over there and grovel like you did before the king of saudi arabia. he should say don't worry about it we have some old thing ghazi's we will not hold anybody responsible for. work andyour good maybe get the brotherhood over there to help you out and everything. after all, america is an embarrassing country and americans country -- and and arrogant country. try any investigations

against them. generalhave an attorney who had just pleaded the sentence of a co-conspirator with the blind shake in new york -- with the blind sheik in new york. have a good day. commentss of great coming in from facebook and twitter. let's go to facebook first. turning to twitter -- take a call from karl in brooklyn, new york. he is on our line for iraq veterans. i was in three different

tours for the marines. to meet people have died for nothing. thank you, have a wonderful day. james in malibu, california. on a line for independents. caller: we are in iraq for israel. lindsey graham and john mccain were wrong about the iraq surge. it failed. the strategy for israel worked out in the 80s is working really well. mccain is still pushing a neocon war agenda for israel. host: moving right along, this

"wall street journalngton pos circ next in sterling, virginia. lee is on the line, also an iraq veteran. caller: i am actually pretty had

with a heavy heart. a lot of marines killed in action and wounded in action. they served with honor and served with courage and they were committed to the mission. is time.t with a a lot of resources to the iraqi people. we are proud of that. we both know how much blood was shed for them. that thet is time iraqi people stand up for themselves and are able to -- if we never leave they will never be able to take care of themselves. we won'tt mean that have official troops on the ground, but we will provide resources and resources will be a little different. it won't be troops that we have been giving them all these

years. what do think the heads of resources should look like. ? caller: eight does not mean troops. eight could be covert ops, it continuedraining, training of the iraqi military, i was providing training on medical techniques, common medicine techniques. there have been a lot of different ways to do this. think it is time for us to close this chapter in the sense of troops on the ground as we move forward with another way of doing this. comments thatthey the sacrifice is often not, it to look at it.ay host: gary is on a line for

republicans. caller: i would like somebody call them and tell me what they thought the money did that george bush and cheney took from iraq. joe from lexington, kentucky is on our line for democrats. i don't think that we should involve ourselves again in iraq. beginningere from the we spent over $11 trillion on the slider was told to the american people about the reason why we went into iraq. bring thet we should rest of the troops out and we should stay out.

ware is a serious sunni and we shouldwin never consider going back in there. that is all i have to say. host: more on those bombing from the associated press is morning. new bombs at the capital of baghdad, killing 20 people. that is this morning in the associated press. next call comes from rutland, vermont. mike is on our line for republicans. my thought was in regards to iraq. our troops paid for that real estate.

i'm not calling for the return of ground troops by any means, but we owe the people our support. there is an analogy here to world war ii. our troops after world war ii states to this day, 50 years in europe. throughout europe during that time there were many factional forces as are in the middle east. it proved thatm the united states was a stabilizing force. i think we can be that way in iraq as well. as well as afghanistan. host: mike, what you think the u.s. future role in iraq should be?

should there be resources? what would you say? caller: i definitely think we should support them, not with ground troops but with technical and similarining regards to security. other want to give our technology to the iraqis, but we can help them out and succeeded in stabilizing that area. the united states is a stabilizing force and we need to continue that. that is what we have. -- as we have for the last hundred years. for: james on our line independents, also identified as an iraq veteran. caller: good morning. f fought in falluja and di. right now it should

not be the same thing, we should not have a politician with no military experience making decisions whether or not troops should or should not go back to iraq. that thegusting mission of falluja has fallen again. that would be like the japanese taking back iwo jima after world war ii and taking off like down. what do think we should be doing are after these bombings? caller: if we send troops back, that is where dust is what we get paid to do. if we do, we do. if we don't, that's fine.

i don't know if it would be a benefit. it has been long enough, they have been fighting between themselves for centuries now. they need to stand up and want to sustain themselves. could provide aerial support and intelligence support but not necessarily send troops back. you should be direct input from our generals, from our leadership in the military and not from politicians who have zero military experience. looking now at the "wall street journal host: next caller is michael in new york. think it is not our business to attack some country. it is government duty to

guarantee its people welfare. i don't know why the u.s. government thinks they can attack any country while its people are suffering from poverty. thank you. ahead this week, congress tackling a lot of legislative priorities. one of which could be the temporary extension of unemployment benefits. here to talk about what that is meredith shiner. is she is a staff writer for cq roll call. guest: you could see a procedural test as soon as today. democrats would need 60 votes in favor of legislation. i think it is fair to presume that you will get all 55 democrats to vote in favor of proceeding. pasthree month temporary that ended on december 28.

nevada.dean heller of this particularly interesting to note, given the level of unemployment in that state and how you can see that state-by- state situations might affect senators, regards the party. i think it is helpful when you see some republicans both the senate and house, even though this bill only last for three months and is not long, as anotherion saw it i senator, the short-term bill is not paid for with cuts elsewhere. i think that is going to be a top concern for many republicans. also saw senator lamar alexander yesterday. here's a for election this year. while he isn't opposed to the principle of unemployment benefits, he is opposed to the idea that the senate will just move on this bill are debating the best way to go forward, which i think is another line of concern you'll see from

republicans who are still little bit frustrated with the senate changes that happen before the new year. expect us to you play in the house that moves to iser the recess narco guest: possible you will find five republican votes, but it is no sure thing. once it would clear the senate, it is a very tough vote in the house without having those offsets. i think what you're hearing from house democrats is that they think this will play out like previous issues which were so politically toxic. republicans had to move forward. the house had to move on the violence against women's act. remember how long that took. it took a long time and there were 1.3 million americans who are already affected by this loss of medicines, with a

projected 3.6 million americans supposed to be affected by the end of 2014. meredith, what a rehearing from the administration with regard to this legislation? i think you're hearing from democrats that these sorts of issues are going to be at the core of the democrats message during the midterm elections. if republicans try to stall on this unemployment insurance, i think this will be the key three and of press conferences and press releases you hear from democrats as we head towards 2014. the minimum wage is another issue that is sensitive to this overall campaign package that i think democrats are putting together. meanwhile, the president has spent the last week and a half or so in hawaii. administration has not been really engaged, but obviously this is something they would like to see done and this is

something that the president could help with. if democrats are trying to champion this cause heading into the november elections because technically it is funny 14 now. one last question. looking ahead if there is not temporary fix, could we see more than just that one .3 million americans actually impacted by this? this is something that the department of labor and the president's council of economic advisers would show. i think it is something that the democrats have said in a ballot to extend the program. when the government gives money to people in the form of unemployment insurance, and the form of food stamps, that is not money that sits in a bank account, the summary that sits around, that is money that gets

immediately injected into the economy. we spent a federal dollar, the amount of economic production is created by that is much greater. said washat report has that if the government doesn't hand us money to those people are most in need, economic consequence is that they could be as great as greatest losing it reallybs because affects the demand curve for products and services in this country. been talking with meredith shiner. speaking of congress, not everyone hopeful that the legislature will be all that productive and 2014. washington post calls last year a legislative wasteland. among the lot enacted, it would be impossible to find significant new a congressman. thosevisions past heard

just modified existing laws. congress can even keep the lights on as a federal government partially shut down during a 16 day standoff. kind of a pessimistic report this morning. our topic today -- the future of role in iraq. comes from the bronx, new york. jack is on the line for republicans. jack, are you with us? host: if you don't mind turning your tv down we would love to talk to. caller: my opinion is america should not interfere in iraq. this government has made differences. host: goldsboro, north carolina is on the line.

hello, robert. i'm a disabled veteran of two wars. i view that the only way we can get that thing over in iraq is blow up a whole lot of these policy hawk desk jockey struck them down with a jock and let them go to it. host: comes from elkhart, indiana. i would like to say that they are still in iraq. there are four bases in iraq and -- ouris still there military is still there. --when people say that iraq is a lie.

there are four bases there. the whole talk is invalid. another big story making the news is morning in political headlines. sites this. that story breaking on " politico" this morning. honestly what i think, i think that our president needs to start worrying about the united states and not everybody else. he shouldn't be worried about taxing us to death and reducing

military benefits. ist i think you should do worry about how to get our economy back on track. he takes a trip and comes back get his wife wants to stay an extra couple of days. that means we as taxpayers have to now pay for two trips for them to come back home. in my mind, that is not common sense thinking. iraq isr troops over to not common sense thinking either. producing more jobs, that is common sense thinking. host: a couple more comments from twitter this morning. the can always tweak at is.

floridaort lauderdale, caller: on the line for republicans. .aller:good morning i think we have been fighting the wrong war in the middle east. posted a bulletin economics, why have we not been fighting the world thought? do these people even know themselves what they're fighting over? educatedr myself an intelligent person. withnot verbalize to you all of the information that should be out about these people , why are they fighting? i've heard things that the haves and shiites different descendents of mohammed. why can't we wage a war of thought to bring these people together and say -- what is the big deal here? was a president and others are brother and you are fighting over the sacral why zell happening? wire all the forums?

ums.here are all the form there is nothing out there about the war of thought. i'm really very puzzled by all of this. tall barton, west virginia. scotty's on the line. number one politicians have too much power for abuse and waste and fraud. $9 billion should have gone for payouts. it is still a big mess. i would agree with what the caller just in front of me said.

usee politicians, they will this to get reelected again. it is not bad. you keep orange lot in the trough and people will come to eat it. they're not looking for a job. they have had an opportunity to get out here, either make one or find one. as long as they're sitting on trying a big check they are not worried about it. politicians will use that to their advantage. that is all i have to say. host: another big issue facing congress is morning. the senate expected to vote monday on the confirmation of janet yellen. the december procedural vote suggested she will be confirmed with our partisan support. appropriations and on the forefront heard last month the bipartisan deal said that overall spending limits for domestic and defense program. nine must decide by january 15, should go to individual

departments and programs for the rest of the fiscal year? we will be watching the stories in congress is weak. tennessee.larksburg, 2003 and was there in the iraqi people are basically a good bunch of people except for the leaders, who are confused. we shouldn't send more soldiers over there and basically the only reason why there are soldiers over there now in the support element is because of the corporations that are over soldiers andrting sucking resources.

that is all let's say about that. host: host: our topic this morning, which is a future role of the u.s. in iraq the. allen is on the line for democrats. good morning, everyone. , it is

[indiscernible] i think from this topic i want the two faction have lived together for about a hundred years and were peaceful. once united states stepped into iraq, there became a conflict between different groups. they killed lots of people because of quarrels with each other. states.t fed the united if there's a difference you have to kill each other. that is what i got. question. john kerry said that we should not interfere in is not any of our business to interfere.

ask how it is possible that when the united states interfered in a minor and get benefit of it while he says that you are not interfering with the war. how could this be possible? thank you so much. host: renee in starkville mississippi on the independent line. states has united never stop interfering in iraqi affairs. has not cared -- about its behavior under the geneva convention. soldiers, al qaeda have taken over falluja. they conduct a workshop and --

toward tribes tribe you will in malaysia. they used united states. polls in gallup put into question which nation is most violent in the world today and it was united states where the mentality of people shows that russ from hollywood, florida is are aligned for independents. caller: i like in iraq to the mideast. like europe was in the second world war with nazi germany taking out the little nations i'm building a power base to take on the bigger nations such as russia and the united states. if we don't deal with this now

as we had to the second world war, we are going to have a strong middle east that is controlled by a not too tight germany government that is led by iran. said we need to deal with it. what we like to see united states do? england gave not to germany a passive pass when they wanted to intercede. england did that. we had to get involved with lending arms and munitions etc.. we had to get involved. we got involved with almost assistance until we had to attack ourselves. we have been attacked. the world trade center. it is not like it just hasn't started. if we don't take affirmative strong action, unfortunately, they will have a midi status of the like nazi germany. they will have weapons of mass destruction like nazi germany was building.

they're using the same procedures like suicide bombers. host: i next call comes from louisville, kentucky. mike is also a veteran. i want to let you know that i'm going to tell everyone, i'm not going to say one people, but on the roles of the veterans that are not on the rolls because you're so secret, you do not know who they are or what but they have information that is not credited to them. there are so secret that the cia, fbi does not report to them. rangers, special

forces, these are not members of them. it is a secret army unit that gets all the information. host: what to think the future u.s. role should be in iraq. that is our topic this morning. your thoughts on that. caller: they are in iraq right now. they have infiltrated the people and will be pulled back to united states government. that is how everything will be taken care of. host: in mechanicsburg, pennsylvania. caller: i think we should be in iraq. we need to be getting out of that situation. we need to do a journey from an early explorer. we made it through that eyes. and they did make it through. the ice is actually worse now.

that just a fraud to get more money from the taxpayers. thank you very much. >> what we tell those who gave their lives? our topic this morning is the future u.s. role in iraq and what should be. in spartanburg, south carolina. he was on the line for republicans. caller: if our president was doing what he was supposedly doing, he would have stayed in iraq until we got the job done. at a know why in the world he pulled troops out but we had an opportunity to do away with al qaeda. he was too interested in his reelection to do anything to help the iraqi people. thank you. morning'sline, this

"the new york times next call comes from mark who is in jamaica on the line for democrats. caller: i believe that we have a responsibility to fix the country. there was never a qaeda in iraq before when saddam was in power. like him or not, he kept that place in order. we now have al qaeda in syria. america has to respond because they broke the country.

not believe that we should have any boots on the ground, so not take but if we do care of the situation, it will be a more serious crisis for us. i don't think we have any choice but to take care of iraq like that, you know? host: how are you listing to c- span this morning if you're calling in from jamaica? caller: i have cable here. we have cable in jamaica. i'm on top of all of the news. we need to fix this problem. is going to be a bigger issue in the future and we need to stop going to these countries and getting ourselves involved. america's going into these countries and making enemies. the people are not even aware of what the american government is doing in our name.

we go to these other countries and get blindsided by things that we didn't know anything about. we need to stop getting involved in other countries and trying to do do regime change paper need to stop it. either american wants to be safe. we need to leave people alone. if you are in charge, what would you do now in a rocket when the status quo in the violence that is going on there at the moment? i'm able to keep all of these different factions together. sometimes, by brutal means. you have to understand the whole history of that area. things after world war ii were changed and lines were not addressed. were created based on the viability of the different areas.

in the control by persons, by the people who want to colonize that whole area. it was a dirt -- it is a very difficult situation. archive guys are vicious. i saw when some syrian truckers return to come through and they executed them because they didn't know the proper way to pray. they are supposed to have three pairs per day and they got the wrong information they were executed. these guys are vicious. we have no choice but to use our technology for superior technology with the drones and so on to take these guys out. we have no choice. next call comes from sandra. she is in massachusetts on a line for independents. caller: i heard my friend has hi. mythe service --

friend has been in the service for years. sergeant.ster he holds his arms open to the .oung boys he plays football together and everything. people lose their lives or lose aemselves and then come back hero, but god, support our troops, please. understand, some things have to be done. this is one of those jobs. host: detroit michigan, on a line for democrats. caller: i have a mixed feeling about the situation. first of all, was very much against going to war in iraq.

as to call c-span before we invaded. i felt that if we attack iraq we would bring death, destruction and chaos to the country. we would increase the number of people who want to harm us. it turned out to be even worse than i thought. leaders whowe had sent us into this world who had no knowledge or understanding of the culture. the general from jamaica said there is so much history here. the iraqis didn't ask us to come. we the united states made the decision to attack this country. ifin powell even said that we break it, we own it. so we have an obligation. to had leaders who have said are -- who have sent our young men and women into harm's way for whatever reason, you think we still don't really know but i do that we are a part of it.

we did to the iraqi people, all the people who have died and displaced. as you may know, here in the detroit metropolitan area, we have the largest amount of people from the middle east of any place in the united states. i have made an effort to talk to people to try to understand. this is way before we even went into iraq. part ofefore, that is a the country. even mubarak from egypt warned president bush that if we want -- that if we attacked iraq, -- we have some obligation because we are the ones that messed it up. thank you. host: last call for the segment comes from ryan in dickinson, north dakota. he is on the line for democrats. caller: thank you for hearing

me. we have barack obama. he is probably the greatest president we've have ever had since george washington. the man is a nobel peace prize winner. here in america we don't export anything anymore. we can make a decent tv the player. we need to stand with our leaders conceal we can do about having him help us get it into ar. host: that was a last call for the segment. by elisewill be joined the back to talk about health care.

>> all of you are such a vital part of that very conversation because in the coming years all of you will be building the businesses. you will be making the discoveries and drafting the laws and policies that will move our countries and our world forward for decades to come. starting january 13,

our original series returns with the five most recent first ladies from nancy reagan through michelle obama. monday at nine eastern, live on c-span and c-span three. also on c-span radio and c- .pan.org all as a public service of private industry could we are c- span, created by the cable tv industry 34 years ago and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. now you can watch us in hd. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we're joined now by janet ."d of "wall street journal

give us your idea on the biggest issues facing lawmakers. do democrats really want to spend most of this are focusing on economic issues that look at the inequality between rich and poor and measures like unemployment insurance and minimum wage to redress the imbalance. republicans want to keep the focus on the rollout of the dr. law. neither one of those seem destined to produce a lot of legislation. so keeping the government open agenda is the baseline of passing your basic fiscal bills that congress needs to keep the government running and from going into default. one of the biggest parodies in defense legislation? guest: one of the biggest parodies will be to put together a defense appropriations bill.

at the end of last year the budget deal restore some of the pentagon's cuts under sequestration, but the pentagon is now going to have to come forward with the budget plan. the relevant committees will have to go through that and also make some cuts, some more targeted cuts, but that will be a big focus, especially in january. thomases focus in 2014? janet, we spent a little time this morning talking about unemployment insurance. guest: democrats have introduced with the support of one republican a legislation to extend unemployment -- emergency unemployment benefits for three months.

these benefits actually laps at the end of december, but they have a bill that would restore them retroactively and restore them for three months. the bill needs to first pass a procedural hurdle that require 60 votes to invoke cloture. it is not clear whether the democrats if they get all 55 of the democrats and independents, than they need five more republicans and the only republicans who have publicly so far endorsed the bill is the cosponsor dean heller from nevada. there could be lots of republicans who might want to extend unemployment benefits, but their big complaint is that it is not 84. they think it should be adding to the deficit. once a vote is taken, it clears the cloture hurdle than it will be on the floor for a little while. host: harry reid was asked about this on cbs this weekend. let's take a listen to what he had to say. >> it would seem to me that five

republicans in the senate should agree with the republicans around the country. republicans around america want us to do something to extend these benefits. it is good for the economy. it is good for the country. everyone of these people as long-term unemployed, they get one of these checks, they spend the money. they don't put in the bank could help small business. that is why small business favors this. they wantn why something done about minimum wage. the notice good for the economy. background checks, 90% of americans want that. republican congress opposes it. ,xtending unemployment benefits 75% of americans want that done. republican congress opposes it. for us and it down ivan to the politics for this issue. guest: one thing we can't get away from him talking about 2014 is the midterm elections.

there'll be a midterm election in november. that cuts both ways. both parties will be angling for the various positions and playing to the bases, but some issues cut across that in the sense that if enough of the this, i thinkwant you can see them coming together to pass something like that because all the memories of the house are up for reelection in november. one third of the senate will be as well. all these issues will be fought in the context of the coming election. host: let's go to congressman peter king. janet we will get your take. for a brief. myself, speaking for i've always had a dollar is a dollar. but there has to be some compromise coming from the democrats. i don't want this permanent state of unemployment insurance.

there are people who are looking for work and need some help. i would like to find a way to get a compromise to extend it unemployment insurance for a brief time. but the democrats should make compromises as far some burdensome regulations because the ultimate answer is not unemployment insurance, the answer is more jobs. as a temporary. of time, i couldn't see the extension of unemployment benefits. restrictions are so that we don't have a permanent class of people on unemployment trends and it doesn't become an impediment to jobs and doesn't create a state of dependency. host: what is your take? can actually hear some windows of opportunity for compromise. he says if it is temporary, he is also talking about offsetting the cost. is onee to remember he of the most centrist republicans in the house. speaker boehner has said that he would entertain it if it included an offset and some kind of job creation component. i do think that the key is to look to

the republicans in states where unemployment is still high. it is no accident that dean heller is he only republican in the senate endorsing it. nevada has the highest of unemployment rate in the country. i think that is where proponents arehe bill in the senate looking. tennessee has a high rate. a strictlyust partisan issue. there is an economic component that varies state-by-state. host: the next call on a republican line is from maryland. my question is since more people are waking up to the scientific evidence proving that building seven was brought down in a controlled demolition on we're going to stick with the topic of the agenda for congress in 2014. we have a call from new jersey aaligned from democrats --

call from new jersey on our line for democrats. caller: i think we need to consider one very important thing and that is that 60 votes are needed every time a new issue comes up. there is an automatic acceptance. not only on the part of the press but even senator reed, that the filibuster is being acted on. i think this is an outrageous condition that we have to put up with in this country. it is one the reasons that congress is getting such low ratings. host: your response. guest: senator reed has been challenging missile presumption that everything needs 60 votes. with a great deal of controversy he engineered a rules change at the end of last year that reduced from 60 to 51 or simple majority the threshold needed to bring an executive branch nomination for cabinet officials and other appointees and

judicial nominations. that was a big break in that assumption. question was raised when senator reed was interviewed on tv yesterday whether he would think about dialing back the filibuster on legislation as well. he said well, i am not thinking about that now. but it sounds like he left open the possibility. brian want to ask you briefly about the nsa. what is next for congress? guest: i think on the national security arena, another issue is the fallout from the n s a leaks. senator paul is one of them who is deeply concerned that nsa is doing things that shouldn't be doing. that is american -- that is invading americans privacy. congress should know more about the process of how this

information is gathered. that the congress is going to let the courts do their thing before they step in and do anything drastic. theret necessarily think is a lot of agreement in congress on what to do. they tend to defer to the national security agencies when it comes to stuff like this. because it is something the courts are dealing with, they will wait and see how it plays out. guest: i agree with brian. with the courts offering such diversion views, everybody has somebody to root for in the courts, depending on what the point of view is. one thing about congress is if there is any excuse to not act on a hard thing like this they may take that excuse. next we will go to schaumburg, illinois. i want to talk about the proposed immigration reform. one of the things that concerns

me is that nobody talks about what it really means and what will be within that reform. everybody wants to focus on the illegal immigrant problem, which is a problem, but i would like to focus on what they think our immigration policy should the going forward. another thing that concerns me is the political media class does not like to link immigration with high unemployment and declining wages in america. they are definitely related. those problemsth of high unemployment and low wages, we do not need to flood the market with labor. we need to limit immigration. i would say we should only allow immigrants with a college degree to enter the united states. i think we have had too high a level of immigration. that is why we have the problems we have. talk about what is in the reform , ok? let's expand what is in this bill. average every situation where is nancy pelosi, let's pass a bill

to find that within it. guest: i think the caller expresses the frustration a lot of people feel. at the senate passed last spring, the immigration components.ny i think that a lot of it was discussed at the time. the idea that no one is talking about it is not exactly accurate. of differents components besides the path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. it involves a very strict regime of increased border security, visas for high-tech and more , i guest worker program for agricultural workers. the connection between immigration and on an ointment is hotly debated as an issue. i have to say that from the perspective of the high-tech visas and the guestworker visas, they are being sought i

employers because they say that there are not enough american workers to fill those jobs. budget deal brokered by patty murray and paul ryan, some of the big sticking points there have been jobs for military retirees of working age. ryan, i want to start with you. talk about what is ahead for -- what is ahead for legislation. one very controversial piece of the budget deal that was reached before christmas was the fact that retirees in the military, their cost-of-living -- itment will be shrunk will increase at a slower rate. that is very controversial. these groups spend a lot of time lobbying washington for benefits and i think that that is one piece of this budget he'll that you could see the congress this year go back and tweak a little bit.

i think they are going to get more pressure. the pentagon argues that it is a necessary reduction. that the people costs, as they call it, have risen tremendously. a lot of that is the retiring community getting health care and benefits. i do think it is quite possible that you could see these committees addressing that pretty quickly. either reducing that or maybe even going back to the way it was. >> what are you hearing? about theng controversial provision is that it does not kick in until 2013. they have -- 2015. they have 20 of time to look for alternatives. there was a big outcry about it. my guess is there is some way to change it. but i thought it was interesting about how hard it was to change any kind of entitlement, especially if you are just picking and choosing. there are only two industries or constituencies feeling the pain, the outcry is particularly loud.

thought theeveryone best way to cut the deficit was in a big way where everyone feels the pain. >> charles, republican line. caller: my question has more to do with logic, maybe. referring to harry reid's comments a little while ago about putting money into the and that increases everything, ok, if that is the logic, then why don't we simply just give everybody in the $10,000 -- we are borrowing it from china anyway -- and now when everyone has $10,000 the economy will be just great. i do not understand that logic at all. let me get a comment -- is it logical to do something like that? thank you. >> the logic of what harry reid was talking about is that it gives $10,000 to up or person,

they will spend it. $10,000 to a millionaire? they probably will not. that is the logic. i think a lot of economists agree that the money spent on unemployment benefits is not just to help the individual, but it is a stimulus to the economy. it's pirg, pennsylvania, charles is on the line for democrats. caller: good morning -- pittsburgh, pennsylvania, charles is on the line for democrats. the unemployed people who are not receiving checks at aren't theyecember, both republicans and democrats? , then why dos true the democrats have to give up beething for there to resolution in the unemployment issue? why can't republicans and democrats work together to help

the unemployed republicans as well as the unemployed democrats? i would say two things. number one, there is the philosophical difference between the parties over how you stimulate the economy. the republican view would be just giving a lot of unemployment benefits are a disincentive for some people to find work. far as democrats and republicans both being unemployed and seeking these benefits, i think that is true, and obviously i do not have the numbers, but my guess would be that the democratic constituencies have larger numbers of people in the unemployment pool who are seeking an extension of these benefits. i think that that is why the democrats are pushing for more and the republicans seem to be digging in their heels and want something in return.

guest: the biggest disagreement is how to run economic policy and how does this fit into the bigger debate about what you need to do to stimulate the economy? that is where we have a high level of gridlock between democrats and republicans. there is one piece where there might be some potential for compromise. talking about sanctions, there was a lot of energy behind that when we close out 2013. is that still the case in 2014? absolutely. certainly there could be hearings, legislation on iran and a push for sanctions. even as the obama administration seems to be making progress to get iranians to the table for some sort of deal that would curtail their nuclear ambitions.

clearly you have members of congress in both parties and there is a case where there is a bipartisan agreement that we need to keep the pressure on. you could see, still, some movement perhaps on tightening sanctions. this is all connected. i also think that next door to iran is afghanistan, an issue that congress will have to deal with this year. the obama administration plans to wind down the u.s. military presence by the end of 2014. it is still not clear what the lead behind the force would be, how many troops would stay there , i think you will see much more than you did this year some hearings in congress looking at the bigger picture in afghanistan. what did they accomplish there? what more needs to be done? how prepared is the afghan government to continue what is still a shooting war? a the line for independents.

-- on the line for independents. , banking the united states, the united states has been picking up american debt. -- whatlike to know does the debt ceiling do? february 12? february 16? do we need 60 votes to raise the debt ceiling? is only $10,000, let's see if they can get the country out of debt? if every person was given $5 billion with a federal agency paying the banks every five years, yes, we could all be doing better right now. not just the banks. and on obama's watch. , i am tired of the democrats looking out for the little guy.

we are all in this together. 365 days, they work 116 days? white men. [no audio] host: your take, janet? is talkingcaller about the upcoming debate on the debt limit. right now the treasury has the authority to issue bonds and borrow money to pay government bills up through february 7. that is the deadline that was set in the last budget agreement , officially when the debt ceiling gets reinstated. there are extraordinary measures that the treasury can make to continue borrowing so that the government does not default for another couple of weeks or months. after --ctually january is when congress will be taking a vote on providing appropriations for the government. after that they have to vote on legislation to raise the debt

limit to avoid default. forrepublicans often ask something in exchange. we will not raise the debt limit unless you do something to reduce spending. the democrats argue -- this is just paying the bills we have already incurred. it is just not clear yet how far the republicans are going to go in demanding any kind of concessions. the last couple of times they have tried they have not succeeded in getting the big deal they had in 2011. i think that everyone is kind of gun shy regarding the brinksmanship involved in that kind of negotiation. >> next we have stephen in oklahoma, on the line for republicans. >> thank you very much for taking my call. pert of all, $10,000 for a -- for a poor person? of course he will spend it, he is poor, he has no choice. second of all, if we enforce the laws on the books now, we would not have an illegal immigrant

problem. we do not enforce our laws. third, if this health care system is so good, why don't the congressmen and senators have the same health care that we are going to be stuck with? , all of usll americans out here are watching and it isment at work actually not at work. we are not going to take our government serious until they run the government like we run our households. we cannot spend more than we make. that is my point. until our government runs the government like we run our house, we are not going to take them serious. not you all, the government. take the government serious because they are not serious. that is my comment. i do thank you for taking my call. host: your take, brian? getting tocallers this widespread feeling in the country that washington is

broken and washington does not work. there is plenty of blame to go around. they blame congress, the white house, the executive branch. i do think that because it is an election year this year that we angst,e a lot of possibly a lot of energy at the polls. i do think that there is an even that washington is not working for the average americans, that they are engaging in partisan fights in the minds of many voters over little issues that do not move the ball very much. series called broken city we looked at all the different ways in which washington seems to have ground to a halt. is a real challenge. a real challenge for members of congress, who tend to focus on and on whatcts

their voters think of them, but do not always think of the bigger picture, which is that congress, last i saw, had an approval rating of nine percent, which is pretty awful, and historically low. you cannot talk about any of these issues, immigration, the economy, national security, without this broader context, which is that most americans think the government is failing them. i do not know that anyone in this town has a good answer on how to fix that. congress, set to get very little done this year, less last year, is that your take on big legislative movement? one ray of hope is that the whole year will probably be political posturing, but if you want to be -- if you want to see

thertisan working together, book fast, janet yellen will likely be approved today. approval of the appropriations will will be a very big deal, past likely with a bipartisan vote. there is a sense that sometime in january the conference committee will kick out a new farm bill that will revamp the way that agricultural subsidies work and save some money. that is where the pollyanna thing stops. but if you look quick think they will be doing some stuff this month. a little bit of a ray of sunshine there. mike, independent line, ohio. caller: what i have to say is more or less referring to the money with everyone is meeting. this is an example. you go to work every day. you are in a paycheck.

you cash the paycheck. you turn around, you go home, you put groceries in your refrigerator. and not on yours. clothing on your neighbors children, none on yours. you put gasoline in your neighbors car, but none in yours. host: do you have a question for us this morning? caller: this is the united states and us going with the , quit giving money out .o the countries overseas if you did that there would be more money here for the .nemployment norms god help the troops. thank you for having me on the line.

the callers referring to .oreign aid this is a long-running debate in american political history. i think it is often oversimplified. the united states, if you look at the percentage, we do not give that much money to foreign countries. billions, certainly, and it is significant, but i think that if we ended the foreign aid budget oforrow and just allowed all that money back into the economy, i do not think we would measurably solve our problems. i think it is also important to point out that much of the foreign aid that we do give out leads to dividends here domestically, whether it is through trade or things like a zero-sumis not game. if we stop funding our allies, stop helping to provide global security, we would probably have

deeper problems. again, i do not think that keeps trackgn aid of the problem. the united states, john kerry saying that they stand ready to help iraqi on the ground. from what we have heard, he has not said what the aid or the assistance would look like. can you give us your read on that? as far as conditions for 2014, the new crisis in the very wellt, it could be a rack, which seems to be descending fairly quickly in terms of its security situation and the onslaught of these out cato linked militants who are .eeking control

there were some drones, some missiles. john kerry is right, the american people will be quite wary, tuesday released, about getting involved again on the ground in iraq. but never say never. is right next-door to syria, which is in the middle of the civil war that no one, including john kerry, seems to know how to solve. both of those countries and what is going on there are related. al qaeda linked militants have been going back and forth us that border, wreaking havoc.

in syria,ment obviously, but then the iraqi government is our ally. them intively put power. it is a mess over there. host: frederick, south carolina, joining us on the line for democrats. caller: hello? host: go ahead. caller: the stock market is doing fine. slave wages and everything. them on the road, that is the prescription for everything. in the senate they are doing a good job.

doing a fine job. particularly the stock market, they are doing fine. fallujah, lindsey graham, the republican party, when they ,oted to have tax cuts extended they wanted to cut taxes from the military and they told the people in falluja to leave because they did not have the money to support the protection. they decided to stay there. lindsey graham, all the republicans, all of those people were dying in falluja. guest: the first part of the

callers question gets to this divide that we talked about , which is income inequality in this country. is a backdrop for a lot of the debates that take place in the congress. clearly, though it is a cliché, the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. there is data to support that. even though corporate profits are skyhigh, when it comes to the average american family i think it is getting harder and harder to make ends meet, let alone save money for college. our futures. wages have not kept pace with inflation. american buying power seems to have shrunk over the years. the democrats see that as a main issue that needs to be addressed in this country.

president obama, as he spoke , has is different philosophical approach to the republican party, which is that if we do the right things and unleashing the economic power of corporations in our technology sector, etc., that the rest will follow, the good jobs will follow. i think the democrats would say that that is simply not true, unless you give people the training, the ability to take some of these higher paid jobs, that that is what is going to happen. i think it is one of the reasons why a lot of americans believe that washington does not work. in many of their own lives they do not see their elected leaders as really helping them live the american dream, if you will. you aboutnt to ask health care, really briefly. what do you expect to see from republicans in congress? i thinkne thing that

has happened is a whole agenda of repealing a law is now above the board. republicans that see as much opportunity for them to focustical issue on, as they roll it out, highlighting the problems in taking a few more approaches to the legislation to fix problems, if only to highlight them in the first place. the house will be voting on a bill that requires disclosure of security breaches to take place. hhs says there have not been any. concerns the level of about a system that has already been kind of problematic. i think you will probably see republicans talking and doing a lot of oversight about the law, maybe a tiny bit of legislation, there will most part

not be major efforts to repeal the law at this point. host: oklahoma, republican line. good morning. they have been telling us all that they are so concerned about the people in south america and other places, but what about our troops? how would you like to have your son a or daughter come home in ?hat condition taking $75,000 out of their retirement pay? if they do that, the senate, the congress should have there's reduced. but what i am really calling about our the immigration -- about six months, eight months ago, i believe it was on cnn, there was a top hispanic leader and we keep being told -- and no one seems to want to put it out -- it is not 10 million to 12 million, they say that there are 50 million and they have to know how many there are when they

contact them for their rallies and all. one week later, i could not believe it. one of the top hispanic group ladies said that there were 55 million. now, can you imagine what that would do to our economy? plus we are not getting sweet little families, we are getting drug cartels, people that kill their own people galore. and when they say they will not get health care, that they will not get this, you talk to the hospitals. you talk to the people in the hospitals. talk to the people at the local grocery store. it has a very nice meat market in it. host: your take? guest: the estimates of how many illegal immigrants are in the united states are hard to be precise about. it is not surprising that you hear a lot of different numbers. there are a lot of them and they are not blowing up the markets, a lot of them are working in low-wage jobs, trying to wait --

trying to raise families. i think the caller is expressing a sentiment that is a why, in , as people feel that the country itself is not on track. that if we are willing to cut the budget and we cut the budget by trimming back benefits, it seems like skewed priorities. the caller was referring to the military benefit cut, the pension benefit cut that brian was talking about earlier, and i do think that that is probably going to be changed. host: michigan, democratic line. hello, how are you? thank you for taking my call. i wanted to make a comment -- i think that, just like the gentleman, cannot remember his ,ame, commented so many times our congressmen and leaders have forgotten their primary mission.

they are supposed to help the americans and not be up there bickering and using things as differentnd holding things as hostage, instead of helping our americans. it is just not right. they need to change. i also believe that we need to have the ability to hire and maintainingstead of offices, like they do. if they knew that they could lose their job in the workplace, they would not work against us so much. what is your take on that? a quick comment from each of you guys. this will be our last call for the segment. guest: one of the things that the boston globe, the washington bureau look that last year.

does congress not seem to answer to the problems that they want solved? there is the problem of redistricting in the states, which has locked in a lot of these incumbents so that they have a very easy time getting elected. the second part is the nominating process and the national parties, which tends to elevate some of the more extreme voices on the left and the right . i think that redistricting and the nomination process of the parties is something that political scientists have been talking about lately as to things that you could perhaps modify or change that might have some consequences in washington in terms of lessening the partisan divide. i will remind the caller that there is a way of hiring and firing politicians, which is elections. in some districts it is much harder to unseat an incumbent,

but that is the focus of whether you want to keep the politician in office or not. this hour, thank you guys for being with us this morning. coming up next, we will talk about the latest on the implementation of the affordable care act. we will later be joined by frank from the government accountability office. right now let's take an update on c-span radio. hourr more on a rack this -- four more on a rock this hour, the prime minister urged expelling militants from the city to avoid an all-out adult. remarks that may signal an imminent military move to retake the former insurgent stronghold. the message comes as dozens of families free full it -- flee from falluja. this, from germany, chancellor -- chancellor angela merkel has a cracked pelvis, resulting as

an -- the result of an injury in the swiss alps. she will have to cut back on her work schedule for the next three weeks or so, according to her spokesman. ron johnson of wisconsin is planning to sue the obama administration over the federal contributions that lawmakers and their staff get for health insurance. the office of personnel management said, last year, that the federal government would continue to help members of congress and staffers offset the cost of those plans, as the government does for other federal employees. givesay that that policy lawmakers and congressional aides special treatments unavailable to others. senator johnson says that he believes that the rule broke the law and that he thinks the lawsuit can rein in what he sees as a pattern of executive overreach from president obama. today at 2 p.m. eastern. you can watch it live on c-span

two and listen to the senate at 2:00 here on c-span radio. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. [video clip] was this.sage as mothers, we were concerned. as first ladies, we are committed. we pledge to do everything possible. however different we may appear, there is far more that unites us than divides us. we are here to find common ground so that we may help bring decency and respect to women and girls all over the world. of you are such a vital part of that very conversation. in the coming years, all of you will be building the businesses, you will be making the discoveries, drafting the laws and policies that will move our countries and our world forward

for decades to come. >> mondays, starting january 13, our original series, "first ladies," returns, with the five most recent first ladies. live on c-span radio and c- span.org. >> "washington journal," continues. host: welcome back. our next guest is elise viebeck, she covers health care. guest: thank you for having me. host: walk us through how this has been going on for the congress has said. guest: sure. the botched rollout of healthcare.gov did not help anything, but people have been having mixed experiences. some are going to the doctors office and they are fine, they are using their new coverage without issue, others are encountering problems when they

call their insurance companies. i think it will take several months for all of this to shake out and for people to understand how their plans work, first and foremost. there are different providers within the system who can adjust. there is a lot of shake up right now and no one really expected it to go perfectly in the first few weeks. about the administration's response to those mixed results? first, they are saying to call the insurance companies. in fact, many new people who have voted in the obamacare plan , they may have gotten a packet in the last few weeks from their insurance company that contains a lot of information. health insurance is complicated, there are people who are having to go to these companies with these providers to make sure they understand what is going on . the administration also set up a toll-free number to help people and theythose problems

have caseworkers to help people with personal issues. tell us what you will be watching in january. guest: people do not need to have paid for their coverage to begin. manyll be watching that. opponents of the affordable care act believe that we should not be counting the 2.1 million people on private plans as currently enrolled, because not many of them have paid their first premiums yet. we will be looking at that. down the line we have the march 31 deadline that ends the initial enrollment. . that will be the deadline for the obama administration. we will be watching how many people enrolled in those private stabler medicaid, how are those distressed pools going forward? we are talking about

health care this morning from -- with elise viebeck, from "the hill." -- numbers this morning talk us through what you are hearing from members of congress, particularly from republicans, who are obviously very focused on this law. house gop is already planning another obamacare related vote this week. they will be bringing up the latest security concerns that somehow healthcare.gov requires the administration to notify anyone who has personal data that is compromised because of the healthcare.gov security issues. the administration has strongly rebutted any assumption or healthcare.gov is making people's personal information vulnerable, but the republicans are going to try to draw attention to that this week and undercut the law as we start

the election season. republicans are working to make this law their main issue in order to protect their seats in the senate. piece from "the hill," talking about aca insurance spiking right now. guest: it is interesting, people were not able to use these claims until january 1 at the earliest. people often do not use health insurance on day one. you may not need to go to the doctor. health-care care providers told us on the hill that they expect things to begin starting this week. obviously there is a holiday lag that has gone away. people are back to work, back in their normal lives, getting their needs met at the beginning of the year. call comes from new jersey. henry is on the line for democrats. henry, are you with us? caller: yes, i am there.

host: go ahead, you are on with elise viebeck, of "the hill." caller: good morning, how are you? yes, i am. host: turn on your television, we will be happy to chat with you. -- turn down your television, we will be happy to chat with you. caller: let me tell you how happy i am to be part of obamacare. my wife and i were both laid off from a job the downsizes. she did not have no insurance for a while. i did not have none. cobra costs weighed $800 apiece. on october 1 we signed up and kept on every day with every hour our calls. i did not have much problem, ok? i wish people would go into the system and see how it works, ok? of how wellproof the obamacare works.

we were praying a few days ago that we did not get more from the regarded insurance. she got the payment slip, we did not have the card yet. everything was in the computer. at the drugstore they picked up the medicine. it costs seven dollars for the medicine. my wife and i, we are very happy with the health care. i wish that everyone would look into it and give it a fair shake. the way these people are talking about it is not fair. thank you. henry certainly has a success story. he and his wife are the kind of people that the administration was hoping to help. it is possible that that family is receiving a tax credit in order to make their coverage more affordable. in the state of new jersey we have seen a lot of people reporting positive experiences. it is important for viewers to

remember that this law affects every american in a completely different way. theof the reasons that backlash has been so negative is ist any negative story, it presumed the administration is going to have to immediately fight back like it is an attack on the law. there are people like henry, who are having success. west virginia, george, democratic line. caller: thank for c-span, we can get the news and the truth out. i do not think that this young lady is telling the real truth obamacare. do you belong in obamacare? guest: in obamacare? do you belong to obamacare? guest: i have employer-based health care. i know a lot about obamacare. do you have a question? get a: people cannot even telephone call in west virginia

to get the ok to get the treatment in the hospital or from the doctor. not only that, you are not going to get the 7 million people needed to make this thing work, for one thing. and then the emergency room is quadruple already with people going to the emergency room, using this here what you call it because they cannot it into obamacare, you put them into the medicare what you call it. it has almost tripled the people going to the emergency room. where are you saving money? you date -- spending more money because of these people that did not want to buy insurance. you people are now giving it to them for practically nothing. that is why they are happy for it. i have always had good insurance that i have paid for out of my pocket. not only that, i am also a veteran. as far as that goes. but this obamacare is going to self-destruct. the republicans do not have to do one thing to get rid of it, it will self-destruct itself,

mark my words. within the next year. obviously, there have been many, many problems with obama care for people across the country. peoples experience tends to be based on who they receive insurance, and what state they live in. for people in the state of west virginia they would have many problems, which does not surprise anyone in washington. that number that the administration was hoping for by the end of march, do you have any idea how on pace they are? >> we know the 2.1 million people signed up for rival plans under obamacare under federal and state exchanges. certainly, that was a major expansion based on what we saw in october and november, two very troubled months at the beginning of the enrollment. . i still think the administration has a lot of catching up to do to reach that benchmark.

in fact, we know that, the white house has since pushed back and said that 7 million was not their goal, even though we know it was their goal in some places , but it does not mean that the law cannot survive with fewer enrollees, but it will be a major reach for them to get there by the end of march. host: fairfax, virginia, on the line for democrats. i just wanted to say, obviously, there are a lot of problems with obamacare. she is right about that. everyone knew that that would happen. health care is very complicated. unfortunately, the insurance companies are alternately still really in power, although there are some steps, like pre- existing conditions, things like need ist what we single-payer. i am so tired of the republicans who, first of all, they do not even want to take a step away from the broken system that we had before.

you know, they just want to keep things the same. we have to move in some direction. young son who, when he was under two years old, had what was called baby asthma. it was very common and it usually just kind of goes away, but after he was diagnosed with that the insurance company sent me a letter saying they would no longer cover anything having to do with his entire respiratory system from that point on. that is the kind of crap that has been going on out here. we have got to understand that the health of human beings should not be a basis for someone to make a profit on. for many> --guest: progressive democrats, the law did not go far enough. that theseremember marketplaces are all about connecting uninsured americans with private health insurance.

not government run, but heavily regulated and it still remains in the hands of private insurers. there are many families out there today who are thankful for the affordable care act a cousin banned discrimination based on pre-existing conditions. for his son it was something as minor as baby asthma, and for others it could have been acne, sleep apnea. many people think that those issue should not have been discriminated on and the affordable care act no longer allows that to happen. delays haveost: been announced for various portions of the law. do you expect more of that? guest: yes. perhaps before the end of march as the administration seeks to reach as many potential thellees as possible, entire six-month enrollment. could be slightly delayed, that march 31 deadline could be pushed back. we will see larger adjustments to the law as well.

insurance companies will be receiving -- receiving more money to shore up the risk pool, and it is possible that people may see relief under the individual mandate because of problems with healthcare.gov and people who would have otherwise qualified for medicaid expansion but lived in states that were not supported. host: how is healthcare.gov working now? guest: it is working better, in fact. they performed the tech surge, the white house called it. i remember being here at c-span to talk about it, i had gone on that morning and it was clearly not working well that morning and it turned into an enormous firestorm for the white house. now it has turned the corner. a former microsoft executive is now heading up healthcare.gov. i think that the administration is very focused on making sure the website irks going forward,

because it was such a disaster. port st. lucie, florida, frank is on the line for republicans. caller: how are you? guest: good. caller: i was wondering, this is a tax that people have to pay to stay in the country, now. it used to be that you did not have to buy insurance to stay in the country, but now this is a tax that you have to pay to stay in this country or you will get fined. you do not have to pay health insurance -- you do not have to have insurance, but now you are forced to buy in. and it is not affordable. not correct the problem, i think they should start with the hospitals, doctors, and insurance companies to charge too much. thefor an aspirin to go to hospital? i went for a toothache and they said they could not help me, that they were not equipped.

they charged me $4700 and said they could not help me. >> the caller brings up an important point. anyone participating in the american health care system knows about this, it is price inflation. hospital, thee inflation, it will cost more than what it would at the local drugstore. hospitals are seen as charging enormously huge prices between them. if you compare hospitals in your places, aith other procedure may cost more at one place compared to three miles down the road. there is certainly a lot of support within the public to get more transparency about these prices so that people can make choices that are better for them. often when we need our health care needs met, we are not thinking about the price and many people wish that those prices were out there in the public. host: ohio, darlene is on the line for independents. caller: good morning, ladies. guest: hi. caller: a couple of questions.

they are easy. are we headed for universal health care? thend of all, why was various state insurance departments not involved in the process prior to the affordable health care? my third question is -- do you know anything about ohio's magi? i may be saying that wrong, so i will spell it. m a g i. a possibility that our politicians could be regulating hospital billing practices and letting us know how much we are charged for various services? take you so much. some people believe that obama care represents universal health care because, as the previous caller noted, everyone

is now required to pay insurance or face fines. there are a variety of extremes in getting that coverage, you might get it through medicaid or private insurance tax credits. it depends on how you define universal health care, but certainly it is a law that help -- attempts to achieve that in several ways. second, state insurance departments are heavily involved in regulating the insurance. some of them are working heavily with the federal government to implement this law. others have not been as involved. the magi issue in ohio is not one i am particularly aware of the cousin i -- i cover the federal government, but i would encourage her to reach out in ohio, they should be able to answer her question. these billing practices are the ones i was talking about earlier , desiring transparency, the obama administration has sought to increase that by covering reports from data on those prices.

host: we are speaking to elise viebeck, from "the hill." let's go to our democratic line. years ago i three was involved in a car accident. i thought i was set with my health care through work. before that i injured in a car accident has been injured again. health care in 2012, we put out almost $20,000 in health care between the co-pay and paying the insurance direct. i put out somewhere, not sure exactly, between 17,000 and $18,000. on the limited income that we income.t was 67% of our out of paid our savings the ira to supplement this year.

not -- in the process of getting on obamacare. insurance has changed drastically, slow down, stop. this could happen to anybody. you could be hit head-on with a car. life changes in a fraction of a second. you do not know what is going to happen tomorrow. thank you for your time. any american, any person can run into an unexpected health crisis, as the caller said, which is why many people feel that health insurance is so important, it prevents the kind of medical threat, but even if you have health insurance you are sometimes overloaded with terribly onerous out-of-pocket costs. you recently wrote a post

called "top five obamacare stories to watch." guest: we are watching enrollment numbers very carefully. they are going to suggest how successful it is likely to be in the future. we know the 2.1 million people signed up for health insurance plans through healthcare.gov in december. obviously the administration wants that number to be much higher by the end of march. we will be watching that. but what we really want to know is the age of the people signing up for the health-care exchanges, which the administration has not said they will not publish the data, but they certainly have not put it out yet. this is a concept of insurance that if you have enough young people do not subsidize the cost ityour sick or patients, will move altogether. if you do not have that, if it is only 60 people signing up, the administration could be in

trouble, so we will be watching it. there are many strategies in the pools that are not in good shape. it is not that all is lost if it is older or sicker people enrolled, but we will be watching as it will be a problem for the white house of that is the case. host: scarborough, maine, republican line. caller: good morning. guest: hi. you suspect, now, that everyone going to the hospital and to the doctor has insurance? i know that in the past people would go to the emergency room because that was their only outlet. that was our most expensive place for them to go. now that everyone has health insurance, instead of the hospital billing out 69 dollars for a band aid, it is now $.69. that may be the wrong number, but i think that got paid out to insurance companies who wound up

paying to the hospital that amount of money. someone had that much money. all ofsuspect that now that is going to drop? and the immigrants that are not undocumented people, they are going to end up in the emergency room. who pays that bill? thank you. great questions for emergency rooms and health care for the uninsured. they are the most expensive venue by far, barring certain surgical operations, emergency room's are very expensive. the caller is right, they looked at uncompensated care for the uninsured, particularly low income americans in underserved billionses, there are of dollars effectively donated to charity in the form of care for the uninsured. it is likely that health care prices in some areas could go down as a result, people having

insurance, it could be better for everyone overall. it is an interesting question, going forward. host: baltimore, maryland, michael is on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was just wondering, with the affordable care act, what about the new taxes that will be implemented along with it? who, primarily, will be affected? thank you. these are great questions. the affordable care act pays for itself with new taxes on health care industry. new taxes on providers. very few americans will be seeing these taxes, although there are a few that will hit people. many people point out that the individual mandate to buy insurance or pay a fine, if it is upheld as a tax, but

primarily the law pays for itself through a variety of taxes on the health-insurance industry, like medical device manufacturers. host: what is happening with the birth control mandate? from theuest: beginning that has been one of the most controversial portions, offering a range within health insurance plans. for celtic -- secular employer, that is not a big deal, many of them were already offering birth-control ranges. but for secular companies with religious owners, this has become highly controversial. there are certainly states that preach against this control, particularly the morning-after pill, which some people consider equal to abortion. picking up the mandate in the coming years, recently sony a soda mayor issued an injunction for a group of catholic nuns in ,enver, which made major news

as it had not been done before. even under the accommodation proposed by the white house, it was deemed that their religious liberty was still being infringed. wille is quite sure how it come down, but we are watching. host: from twitter this morning -- explain why it is so expensive. guest: so expensive? oh, boy. obviously provides a variety of tax credits to americans, expands medicaid, pays for major expansion of health care in the taxes onates through the insurance industry. it is one of the largest federal laws of its kind we have seen in decades. that may be why it is so expensive. host: independent line, raleigh, north carolina. caller: yes. my question is -- the that itration has said

is on the younger generation to sign up and pay for the healthier. if the healthier are allowed to stay on to their parents , itrance until they are 26 cuts them short, they will not be paying for it until after they get off their parents insurance. is the affordable care act supposed to be paid for? thank you. when you talk about younger, healthier people signing up for obamacare, we are not just talking about teenagers, we are talking about people in their late 20s, early , into their 20's on the affordable care act. many people out there, those are the people the administration hopes to sign up for the new exchanges. gary is on the line for democrats.

why is it, if you had a doctor, the wonder -- the one doing the service, and then you had the insurance company, the one handling the money and the paperwork, and the government involved, why do you need all of these people involved? especially the insurance companies. people went up three percent to five percent. plus, the irs is going to collect the money for the insurance companies and handle it. it seems to me like this is a fallback so that if the federal reserve bails, then they have another income on the people that saves income tax.

guest: interesting point. the affordable care act does regulate much of the industry. in washingtonted who know that at the result it would receive many more customers in exchange for the tax. the taxu mentioned breaks of the health-care website. you expect to see more guest: in the near future? guest:absolutely. the house gop will vote on a measure related to the security of the website requiring the administration to notify consumers it a to has been breached on the website, which has not happened yet that we know of. security of the website has been a major issue for many in congress. darrell issa has been focused on it very closely. i think americans are concerned about the security of many

retailers including health care. with breaches of snap tab and target in these different places, we can ask act to see more of these attacks which will turn more questions to the health-care website. what about those trying to defund it? guest: i think house republicans will be interested in keeping as much focus as possible on this. they feel this is an issue double-click the candidates to victory in 2014. certainly we can expect many more votes on the issue. host: don and michigan on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. taxes, and i about

own insurance agency in michigan. no taxes atre were the rates of the affordable care act. this is the biggest tax hike on the middle class in this country's history. with afamily of four silver plan, average age, about .118.84 per month just in taxes can you explain to the audience on how you said there is no care?for obama the caller is mistaken. there are taxes on individuals. primarily it is paid for are the health insurance industry. certainly many people will see their out-of-pocket cost rise. others will see them fall.

there is no way to argue there are no taxes in this law. host: cynthia on the line for democrats. .aller: hello i was calling to comment on another callers comment from west virginia. i have a 23-year-old son that ran into the hospital. he was able to get in. he actually signed up for the obamacare at the hospital, which he said was very nice. there were not any problems. a lot of what people say about obamacare has been factual because i experience it where there were not many problems. many people are having positive experiences and signing up in their local communities at agencies,on the male

public agencies and having a fine time. it kind of depends which state you live in. it sounds like this woman's son had a good experience. host: mark stone writes -- yes.: that is a very interesting question and very complicated for people's income who tends to vary. seasonal worker -- workers and part-time workers will find it difficult to navigate the issue of subsidies. the government will pay the full subsidy to the insurance company on your behalf if your current income makes you qualified for it. in the next tax year they will have to address and perhaps repay some of the subsidy. it will be very complicated and an issue that will come up next year when the first filing season happens after obamacare is implemented. from align -- a caller

ohio, and independent. diagnosed 18 months ago with: cancer. i am 55 years old and did not have insurance. by the end of last year i had racked up 300,000-$500,000 in medical bills. i have to have chemo every two weeks to stay alive. this new affordable care act has been a blessing to me and my family. i was wondering -- the caller may have answered this a long time ago, but nationwide health insurance seems like eventually it will have to go that way. it is so expensive to coverage -- coverage it on an individual basis. certainly something the progressive democrats are hoping for. that we will move more towards a single-payer system. it seems like the american public is wary of this.

after the affordable care act rollout the law remains very controversial. the majority purported they are still having bad experiences under the law. seems unlikely the public will tolerate a major overhaul of the health care system within years. move in that direction of the republican party not likely to let that happen. they are still intent on repealing that law. let's talk about cancellation notice -- notices. do you expect to see more of them? guest: it has created an enormous political fire for the white house over the past couple of months. many plants did not comply with regulations and had to be canceled. that also means they did not qualify for grandfathered status under the law. this became an issue for republicans, citing that

president obama promised several times for people to keep coverage if they liked it, and that turned out not to be true. theill see that echoed over next year. i think it is possible that employers will begin shifting some employees onto the new health-care exchanges over time. it is possible we will not see that movement for the next several years. there are cancellation notices in some people's future. many will say that is one reason we are happy that the marketplaces exist. host: jen on the line for republicans. caller: i am a word person. i have heard many people report that the pay will come from the government. the health-care care industry will pay extra taxes. andcentral pay person is me

you. it is taxpayers. reporter-span and your would do us a service if you spearheaded the idea that taxpayers pay all the bills. the government does not have any money come except what they take from us. you are leaving out the fact the health-care industry does not prime -- print money. feesonly take money for and services. the taxpayers are paying for the whole thing. no government agency, no industry except for they get it from us. i wish all the networks and reporters would tell the truth like it is. informedle who are ill will think the government is taking, great. we are the government. remember that to

individuals are taxed and that creates government revenue to do what they need to do but taxes on individuals are not the only type of taxes. industries are taxed, companies are taxed and that is major revenue streams. the caller is correct in some sense that people will see some higher taxes on the affordable care act, or at least higher prices but many come from higher taxes on companies. theaps people want to argue taxes are raising prices for consumers, which could be the case. is thencorrect to say it tax on individual people that is paying for the affordable care act. guest: another question on twitter -- currently that is not a

practice in american medicine. keep all are very upset about this. consumer -- consumers desire transparency when they use medical services. it is frankly in the service of the health-care industry and one way or another for them to keep that less public. the obama administration will move forward with a variety of initiatives that would allow the consumers to understand the pricing of the health-care. over the past year they published a report about the cost of hospitals using data mined from medicare. that shows based on the geographic area you could pay for times more or quite a bit less for the same medical service. perhaps congress will get in bald -- involved on that. i am a retired nurse.

i was formally elected to be president of the chicago nurses association and work day and -- worked 10 years for the visiting nurse association and a very familiar with the health-care problems of this country. thatieve it is imperative we have a reform so that more people have greater access to health care. if we look at the vital statistics in the health-care system, we are not the leaders of this world. that is unforgivable as we choose to use the technology for unrelated matters. behind president obama and michelle obama for their views about our health care needs in the health care system thato think the glitch happened with obama's proposal was not entirely accidental come a republicans have shown themselves to be thinly disguised, greedy people. that is interesting.

the caller raises the fact that health care outcomes in the united states are not as good as other countries. that is an important point. it is not discussed widely among the american public that in the united states your health care outcomes are not likely to be as good as they are in other countries, despite the fact that that we -- despite the fact that we pay more for our health care. that is something people want to see performed. host: howard in florida on the line for independents. caller: good morning. guest seems to be a great plan of the obamacare plan but it is simply a ponzi scheme that will not last. 6 million plus policies have been canceled, approximately 20 million will. so far i have heard 500,000 have

plan.ly paid for a that is a scheme that can last. obviously there will be a massive company bailout. the cure is worse than the problem. no amount of spin, lies, and deception will change that fact. it is only a matter of time before the whole thing crumbles. forget the spin. reality is a fraud. that is certainly a precise view of the affordable care act. for myself, i am a neutral reporter, and that is why i am here talking about the facts. others are not benefiting as much. the is where i -- we see

attention. that is why it remains unpopular in many parts of the public. for joining us. next up, we will discuss how the federal government collects revenue from oil and gas companies. first, getting an update from c- span radio. >> a woman who called herself jihad jane and help suspected terrorists overseas faces the possibility of life in prison at her sentencing this week in the u.s.. the federal judge must decide if the 50-year-old resented a real threat or was easy prey for extremists seeking followers with u.s. passports. she admits she plotted to kill a sweetest artist over a cartoon that offended muslims. she calls herself jihad jane in videos posted on youtube

returned it to ireland to assist in -- to surrender to the fbi. renting out the e-mail list for mrs. clinton's failed presidential 2008 campaign. the group used the list to send an e-mail from wesley clark, a clinton supporter, asking for donations. the group said it had its biggest online fundraising the day after renting the list. the group outlet knows ready for hillary is not technically coordinating with the campaign since hillary clinton has not yet decided whether she will run for president. a federal appeals -- appeals court in new orleans will decide whether to hear argument on a texas law that has led to the closing of many of abortion clinics in the united states. the judge for old in the judges favor in october. the higher court allowed texas to enforce the law while the decision is on appeal. those are some of the latest

headlines on c-span radio. thate focus on the issue you would expect in the tech industry. we want to make sure it is a national strategy and that american companies could keep introducing the greatest product in the world. we dominate in so many areas. we have a lot of foreign nationals. a global phenomenon. the u.s. is the world leader, and we want to keep it that way, which requires great innovation policy. it also requires a rational patent policy. you're not being sued all the time for ambiguous patents. lex gary schapiro tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. this is our weekly "your money"

segment. we're joined today by frank rusco. federalto us how much revenue comes from oil and gas drilling. guest: recently in the order of 10 billion per year. 15% of the revenue from oil and gas that is produced on federal lands and waters. it is collected in three pieces. first, a lease on federal lands or waters you have to first dig -- bid for that in a competitive auction. the bid is called a bonus bid, about 10% of the revenue did. after you start producing oil and gas, you will pay royalties that they respond well .5%-18%, depending on where it is, and that is about 87% of the revenue collect it.

the other three percent is collected in brent -- rent during the life of the lease. of interiornt manages federal lands and waters for production of oil and gas. regulations and legislation's to determine how determined. they have a lot of authority to change the terms. rusco.ur guest is frank if you would like to join the conversation, the number for democrats is (202) 737-0001. for republicans (202) 737-0002. (202) 628-0205 . a report.ut explain how that report came to be and what it found. guest: we have done a large body of work on the federal

management of oil and gas in large bodies of land and water. it has been going on for decades. it is a large amount of land and resources. the federal government has 260 acres of land it manages and 300% as much of minerals. the land that federal government manages are used for many purposes. grazing, farming, recreation and mineral extraction. there is mining and then there is oil and gas production. government manages all of that and has to manage the possible uses of the land for the public. they collect revenue for some of these things, in particular oil and gas. it is one of the largest nontax sources of revenue for the federal government so it is very important that it be done correctly. we have been evaluating that and

finding a number of problems with it. recently in 2011 we put it on a high risk list. divisions ones or that lease -- on that list when we think there is a high risk of mismanagement of the program, and there are a number of inc. that we found in this is a follow-up to that work. report roughly said companies made 70 billion in revenue. explain that to me. the revenues are not prophets. the revenues collected by companies for selling oil and gas produced on federal lands are the total gross revenues. then they have costs associated with producing oil and gas, and they pay on the gross revenue,

they pay royalties in addition to the bonus bids for the lease and the grant on the land. on average 15% over the past couple of years. host: jesse in maryland on the line for democrats. yes?r: i want to ask a question. why is the people -- why is the people losing their homes and drinking water --taminated tv,: if you turn down your we will have a better time hearing you. caller: why is people losing and contaminating well water.

guest: i think the caller is referring to shale formations. a large part of that is done on private land because that is where the resources are. they have the resources on federal lands. none of the things we have been looking at is the process through which the federal government regulates that. ony only regulate at largely federal lands. the states regulate things on state lands and there are rules apply to everyone but private landowners can determine some of their terms, how they choose to lease their land for oil and gas development. the next call from cambridge, ohio. good morning, c-span.

i had a question regarding leases. at the end of the bush administration a young man -- a young man went to one of your auctions and bid on a lease and one the bid -- won the bid. he did it as a method to protect the land from being drilled on. though he hadeven the money to pay the least, he had the money, got it from donations to pay the bid amount, he was prosecuted and put in prison. i realized that denied but heent revenue, 15%, could have maybe put a wind farm or something like that on their. you could still get the revenue from the energy produced from that.

could i get your comments on that, please? the agency i work for work.tes other department i am familiar with that case, but what we -- we have not done work on that specifically so i thatt know the details of case. and i know when the department of the interior puts up a lease for oil and gas development, it is intended for that are best. when your company is applying for lease, what must they do? -- thethe first thing first, the interior puts the lease up for bid.

guest: does that include the process cap don't if a small company wants a lease and are willing to pay for it, there are many small companies that win leases. ruth on the line for independents. by therevenue collected federal government, does any of that money go back to the state in which the federal land is about 50% ist: shared with the state. does a charge of oil and

gas companies for drilling cap ?ome drilling, deep water they have raised royalties in recent years and have changed the lease terms they are a. they haven't increased rent and change the terms from 10 years to shorter amounts of time to encourage the winners of leases to develop them faster. on sure is a different story. their have not -- not been many changes for many years. the department has not really evaluated comprehensively how it determines the public gets a fair return for oil and gas sold from public lands and waters. host: what is the current revenue rate you are looking at? is it different for onshore and offshore? guest: it is different for

onshore and offshore. set atalty rate is 12.5%. offshore the department of interior's regulations allows them to establish appropriate royalty rates, the spending on market conditions and profitability of oil and gas industry and have changed them in recent years. on sure they would have to undergo a regulatory rulemaking in order to allow themselves to change the world sees if they felt that was warranted. recommendation in the report. next caller on the line for democrats. caller: my question is why the attack so low on oil companies when they are making 70 billion dollars in profits and only --lecting 10 billions in tax 10 billion in taxes.

do the people in congress have any stocks and oil and gas and how much revenue do they take in? it does not make any sense that forwould go -- vote something if you have stocks this for theted people, high and low. guest: a couple of things. first, the 70 billion is gross revenue, not profit. the revenue the government collects from that. i want to make sure that is clear. in terms of how much is fair return for the public. we want them to do that in a process andgress -- do that in a way that will demonstrate they are following

transparent rules for determining what is a fair return. we do not determine what a fair return is. we are looking at the department of interior. we do not determine that. tumbling shoals, arkansas. chris on the line for independents. caller: i just want to ask this question here. i live in what you call a hilly, wooded natural gas industry. here is my question. but i knowigration they are not doing any drilling in this area because we are in a

section of the land that is owned by the army corps of engineers. my question is, there are land are benefiting from the royalties but not many drilling. is this a policy the federal government is not allowing because they own five acres in this one section? are they holding back or is there some issue where they can allow landowners to take benefit or what is the situation? because what i have noticed, it there is no age in benefiting land. i am curious about that instance. host: i am not familiar -- guest: i am not familiar with the specific instance you are talking about but there are many

properties were state and federal land overlap. there is a lot of development there, including development that because of the horizontal drilling nature, sometimes you will have a wells got past through state, private and federal lands all in one well. so this does occur. i do not know about the specific instance you are referring to. chicago illinois. though on the line for democrats. bill.-- caller: hello. i would like to make a comment about land. these youthful, the fracking is putting chemicals into the water table. does not stop at your property line. ruining the are

water table. i do not understand how this can go on like this. water is more important than oil and gas. inc. you. -- thank you. raisesi think the caller an important point. an important part of the regulation that the department of interior or states have to consider are the environmental effects of oil and gas development. that is part of what happens in the leasing process, that the risks to the environment have to be considered and have to be deemed to be acceptable risks in order for the development to occur. in terms of federal leases, that includes environmental impact, the statement in the environmentaimpact assessments prior to leasing land. i know there are a lot of now,es going on right private and state and federal

entities are studying the effects of oil and gas development on water and the potential risk associated with that. that is not something we have written extensively on. host: the caller very briefly mentioned fracking. is that allowed? guest: yes. it has been going on for decades and decades. it has recently become a dominant form of development because we have seen an expansion of oil and gas development into shale were nations, which are very tight. you can drill into those and go horizontally for a long distance and then fracture the formation five pumping water and sand into pressure that creates the fractures and then oil and gas will seep in through the fractures into the well and be brought up to the surface. it has become very prevalent. on the line for

republicans. caller: i am wondering about the that iof this ease understood was signed but not ratified yet by the senate, though i have heard senator say it will be ratified. what effect will that have on income for federal government? i am sorry, but that is beyond the scope of what i have looked at. i am not able to comment on that. thank you for taking my call. i think the feds are doing the right thing by not allowing the oil industry to export oil. i think we should get gas below five dollars per gallon before we start exporting. secondly, i think we have a comparative advantage as far as energy to bring back the

manufacturing sector and should continue to not allow them to export oil. thank you for taking my call. i do not think i have a comment there. thank you. caller: indiana. glenn on the line. how are you doing this i have worked in the oil and gas industry, and what i have found overseas is most have a state oil company. and we go overseas they have for production share contract in which major oil companies here get 15% of the companies over there get 85%. we have a cost recovery where we get the mining back first that we spent on drilling and developing the field. once we get the money back, we go to 85/15 split.

the resources belong to the people of the country, not the oil company. why can't we set up the system here where we have a state oil company in the state whatever? thank you. i think it is an important issue. the way you would determine whether or not you were getting a fair return for the public is to consider things like how much do other countries get for the resources? we dont to compare what and what they do. all countries are different and the united states is largely built and driven by your investment. so we have not had state companies like china and saudi state oilas far as companies. it is important to consider what

the alternatives are for private companies and other parts of the world when we are determining what the fair amount is to charge for our oil and gas. in addition, you have to consider the cost. cost of producing oil and gas has to be considered. you need to balance collect and thenue or the public for public resources with creating enough incentive so the private sector or will invest in oil and gas development. next in manchester, tennessee. dale on the line. caller: good morning. i would like to address is there is a difference tween the right but a private individual, what their return versus what the government and its. i am a big fan of the gao. thank you. little bit at a

that question of how you compare what the federal government receives for oil and gas versus private or state. we have been unable to find comprehensive data that would enable us to evaluate that in the way we can report on. ishink what we have found there a wide range of deals struck or private land owners andis a private interaction terms of the leases are often proprietary so we do not have a good insight into that. host: the -- next on the line is joe from virgin you. caller: the core of engineers established a flood control project called the east lynn lake. in addition to establishing the flood control project they

bought $57 million worth of property am approximately 26,000 ates because they have had first reaction with water control projects -- had an adverse reaction with water control projects where coal was involved. ,hey purchased this property and during the clinton administration, there were 35 words into the deal that stripped the corps of engineers the 26,000regulate acres of land. now that is currently getting ready to be leased to a cold company -- coal company. this is a public hunting project. land o'lakes is already contaminated with mining. have mercury in them.

there are a lot of issues already with this lake. coal mining is being done in and around and above it, and now the u.s. government will lease an additional 13,000 acres. you talked about the state as aning regulations example fracking or coal mining. in the state of west virginia, bypassed $2 billion worth of fines to the coal industry. u.s. epa uncontested were unable to get a check from industries for $20 billion. i would like to hear your comments and have a follow-up. i am not familiar with that specific case. i know they do oversee the leasing of land for coal development, and in the process, they are required to enforce

federal environmental laws. i do not know the specifics of the case you are talking about. is there anyway you could look into the specifics, the east land cold lake? the u.s. taxpayers paid 57 million dollars for this property so the core of engineers could and roll it in control mining around it. withinlows the mining 1300 vertical feet of this major and palm and. the u.s. court of engineers has put in writing that if they perceive as shown that -- proceed as shown, it could jeopardize the structural integrity and that has all been ignored. the funny thing is the final say goes to the government or state of west virginia who the number one contributor to the campaign is the coal industry.

again, i think it is beyond the scope of the work we have done on oil and gas. we have done work looking at the management of coal and there is a recent report that has just come out. i would refer you to that. the only other thing i would say is that it is possible but gao may end up looking at this or other cases but we do most of the work as a request from congress. that is where we generally get our work. i do not know anything about the specific case. when is the last time the gao looked at what it costs or drilling?a -- for they have onshore, changed the lease terms to determine how much revenue they collect.

it is important to determine why he would want to look at this eerie autoclave. changes in the market occur all the time. you see an increase of oil and natural gas prices and increases the profitability for increasing base. you see technological changes that has allowed companies to get all oil and gas in different ways. this is the way technology has moved in and change the market or oil and gas. changes, possibly you want to look at what you were collecting for oil and gas on federal lands to make sure it is keeping up with market changes and technological changes. host: the next call comes from bristol, tennessee. they see on the line for democrats. -- lacey. caller: i do not know very much about the oil and gas business at all, but i have noticed -- i

, is there oil and gas deposits in just about every state of the union? are oil and gas deposits in many states. buyer to the technology that has allowed economic reduction of shale oil and gas from these ordinations, prior to that, most of the u.s. oil of element and production had been in texas and oklahoma and a few western states, mexico, colorado, utah, and wyoming, as well as alaska. shale formations have oil contained oil and gas and were not economic to produce until recently. one of the leading oil-producing states now is north dakota. that was not the case prior to the shale becoming available.

host: dean writes -- guest: that is something the state of alaska did. they collect revenue from both their share of federal funds but have a lot of development from state lands. they put it in a fund. every year the residents get a check for some amount of money. north dakota has a fund that they put aside revenue for future use. that to use for future benefit. host: jerry on the line for independents. caller: hi.

i was wondering if you could comment on the collection of revenue for gas powered vehicles versus some type of more innovative type of transportation like energy or something like that? i was wondering if there is some sort of a lamination? oil andhe thing about gas versus other fuels, there are many taxes and tax benefits associated with different fuel types. it is a very complicated of how many different fuels are taxed or benefit from typesductions and other of tax instruments. it is a very complicated situation. lucrative, is more oil or natural gas cap g? early 2000, price

of oil and gas rose significantly come and this was an important part of change of market conditions. you see the price of plummeting of natural gas. the reason for that is how successful the industry has been in producing large amounts of gas and the fracturing technology. with the huge supply of natural gas, you have seen a big drop in price. somewhere around $16 to four dollars. hand has beener about $100 per barrel. oil is a little bit different than natural gas because it is an international global commodity. it is typically determined in the global market, not the united states. natural gas is less import and exports. it is more of a national market. the increase in production has

reduced the price of natural gas in the united states. host: next up is the line for democrats. good morning. thank you for taking my call. you said in the segmented week collect $10 billion in revenue. collecting $10 billion in revenue and then we get subsidies back to the oil companies and energy companies. how much more are we in a deficit? what are we actually collecting at the end of the day. ask you about a black liquor tax credit that apparently the coke brothers got $2 billion per year but the aca took it away and olympia snowe for credittwice that or subsidies for the oil companies. you cananted to know if

expand or tell us as much as you know about the black liquor tax credit that the oil companies get and how much do we actually get? at the end of the day, at the end of the year, are we in a deficit? -$5 billion because after subsidies they get that much? is a very good question. the amount of revenue that the government collects is not restricted to the 10 billion a gets through royalties, but, and rents. in addition, they take corporate taxes in the united states. on the profits they will pay the corporate profit tax. we have not done work to look at oil and gas industry records to see exactly how much revenue they do pay. in addition, you raise the issue of tax cut its.

the oil and gas industry do get tax credits, as do many industries. when the department of interior is considering how much to collect, they have to consider all of those issues. and how much is net is being collected and oil and gas. host: dana on the line for democrats. i know that economist here in san diego determined only 28% of the rooftops were solar. entire city would be energy independent. .e feel we could make biofuels it is a waste. -- is that such a rapid speed we could be energy independent yesterday.

why are we still dealing with these antiquated drilling and mining for fuel technologies when they have been improving so we really would like to for the you are doing rooftop solar. not solar farms, but solar from waste, not from food. we do not have to grow it you there. without mining or drilling or growing food am a we can be more independent. could you please respond to as you know, most of the decisions are made by the private sector and the public. of energyics production and use are really int drives how we use energy

the united states. call comes from pennsylvania. fred on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. i just wanted to follow-up on the lady from virginia wanting to know how much we met -- net at the end of the day. it is a well-known fact that exxon mobil pays zero in income taxes. at answer to the question is least zero and probably minas. -- minus. guest: that is not something we have looked at. sorry. you mentioned earlier about recommendations in the report. department of the interior to periodically evaluating what the fair return is. as i have said, technology changes, the price of energy changes, and they need to

consider this and those are important actors in determining the fair return to the public. onshorewant the resources, we want them to essentially catch up with offshore and to engage in rulemaking that would give them the flexibility to change the lease terms so they can be responsive to changes in the industry and technology and other factors that would influence a fair return. host: how often is a something that gao looks at? it has been placed on the high risk list, it is something we look at every gear. are many concerns, including environment faith the, revenue collection, equity collection. as well as encouraging the development of oil and gas so it produces economic an a fit for the country. next call is from david in

maine. on the line for independence. -- independents. i was calling to find out why the gasoline prices are based on brent crude overseas? guest: that is a very good question. i think the answer to what the price of gasoline is determined by what the cost of the last byrel of oil that companies because if you are meeting the market demand, the highest cost production, the last barrel is the one that determines the price. that comes from overseas still. host: neck call on the line for democrats. -- next call. ago my parents

d their land to the oil companies. they thought they were leasing it, but the oil company thought they had mineral rights. i washey got them, wondering why they were holding them like that and cannot reverse them and get them back to the people. the state of louisiana has 10 years and they have to get them back to whoever owns the property. the state of mississippi would never get them back. guest: i am sorry. i do not know anything about that. host: on the line for republicans, mike from houston, texas. caller: i wasn't fired to call based on the topic. theeems to me that

gentleman who called moments ago inside exxon mobil pays almost nothing in taxes am of the next call the gentleman makes should be the white house. he should call the white house and ask them why they have not reform the tax code. payou want companies to taxes in they are not paying taxes, reform the tax code. you have to call 1600 pennsylvania avenue for that. he has been in office for over five years now. there seems to be an inherent, reflective belief that political self interest is more noble than economic self interests for companies like exxon mobil and chevron and so want. why is it that these governments own the land. why don't they sell some of the land? theony's can be stewards of land just as people believe gore perceived that government is. or perceived that it is.

government has failed. government makes thomas as they never fulfill. i do not understand why we have no faith in big companies to do things well in america. we have none. we're always told they are evil and inherently hateful and wealthy. everything is wrong with a companies. i am hearing government downplay companies that have done rate things. every human being who calls your show should adapt oil. job.: i have a very great i work for the gao if may look of federal programs and agencies and try to make them perform better. that is a mission that i really believe in.

i think we are changing who owns public lands and that are questions that would have to be addressed by the congress. thomas on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. the guy from pennsylvania called a while ago inside exxon mobil paid zero taxes. report that the oil companies last year paid over $35 billion in federal taxes. they do not get any subsidies that other companies like general motors or any other companies get. thank you. many -- do not know how how much in taxes individual companies make or industries in general. i know that the tax code provides tax benefits for many industries and lots of

companies, including oil and gas companies. writes -- ted how much federal and is really necessary? guest: a fair amount of production of oil and gas is on federal lands and waters. there are big formations of oil on gas of development federal gas -- land and waters. to the extent they are valuable resources, i guess you could say they are important. host: another question from twitter -- no, i'm sorry, i don't have that information. how much talked about land we are talking about, and i know it is a very large number. thet: the surface area of

land that is regulated is 260 million acres. offshore for the outer continental shelf, the water area that is federalas 1.7 bill. it is a very large amount. in addition, the federal government has jurisdiction over mineral rights. it is a very large part of the country, especially in the western states. host: thank you for being with us this morning. guest: thank you. it has been a pleasure. host: we are going to go live to the csis, where they will be discussing 12 years in afghanistan, 10 years and nato. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014]