♪ good morning, tuesday, january 14, 2014. the house returns today at 10 a clock a.m. , ang the bills being debated continuing resolution that would give congress three more days to consider a spending plan and field last night. the senate will continue work on legislation for funding for long term unemployment benefits, a vote to extend us for a year is expected today. that is the topic we want to begin with viewers on "washington journal" today.

how many weeks do you think out of work americans should receive unemployment benefits? how long is too long for a person to receive that aid? our phone lines are open, democrat at (202) 585-3880. .epublicans, (202) 585-3881 independents, (202) 585-3882 . we have a special line for out of work americans, (202) 585-5883. catch up with us on social media, on twitter and facebook or e-mail us at journal@c-span.org. good tuesday morning as our viewers on "washington journal" no, anyone collecting unemployment benefits for more than 26 weeks lost those that if it's at the end of last month,

about 1.3 million people. more people are expected to hit that limit over the course of the coming year. the obama administration estimates by the end of 2014, 4 .9 million people will have been affected by the loss of those benefits. how long is too long for unemployment benefits? taking up today is legislation on this issue to extend the long-term unemployment, here is the story in "the washington times." the cost of that extension estimated to be about $17 billion, a year-long extension. republicans have countered they want a shorter extension and want the cost to be offset by cuts elsewhere in the budget. that appears today in "the washington times." delaying the jobless benefit vote until today. some background according to

"los angeles times" on unemployment benefits and where they came from and how long they last. the federals, government and states jointly provided up to 26 weeks of unemployment benefits paid from employer payroll taxes. -- to people who lose jobs. the idea days to the 1930's and is to help laid-off workers. half of americans collect unemployment insurance during some part of their lives or are married to someone who does. in june 2008 when the recession was young, the unemployment rate was 5.6%, congress approved a 13 week extension. as the recession deepened, congress passed other extensions, at its peak, the program offered up to 99 weeks of coverage, it has been scaled down ever since. history of unemployment benefits.

how long is too long for those benefits? democrats, (202) 585-3880. republicans, (202) 585-3881. .ndependents, (202) 585-3882 a special line for unemployed americans, (202) 585-5883. we are continuing the conversation on facebook and twitter. if you want to reach us that way if the phone lines are busy. trevor is waiting in seattle, washington, democrat on the line for unemployed americans. good morning. caller: good morning. host: how long is too long? is not apparently, it long enough. both sides make that argument. democrats want to extend it because they know there is no option for the long-term unemployed. what is funny is the argument against it that the republicans are making is that the unemployment benefits themselves are a crutch.

as such, people will not look for jobs as long as they're getting benefits. they blamepeople, the president for the unemployment rate being so high. excuse me. but the long-term unemployed, the percentage of unemployed past that point of employment benefits, or the one-year mark or the two-year mark, it is very high. the argument contradicts itself. both sides should want the same thing. host: trevor from seattle, washington. calling in on the line for on employed americans. bringing up the republican argument on the extension. here is a statement from john boehner last week in which he talks about some of the timing for employment benefits. regarding the senate vote that was getting ready to take place,

"far too many americans are still unemployed in obama's economy. weis a personal crisis cannot overlook. getting these people back on their feet starts with a strong safety net, six months of unemployment benefits that we continue to have in this country. the ultimate solution is more jobs." speaker john boehner's statement last week. times"ta from the "l.a. on unemployment in different states. before long-term benefits came to an end last month, does go states with high unappointed, offered and nevada had 73 weeks of benefits, california offered 63 weeks, most others to 63 weeks.eks virginia, vermont, new hampshire, and several other unemploymentow weeks. 40 weeks to 42

those extensions expired last month, they all dropped to 26 weeks or fewer. kelly, prescott, arizona, independent calling in. talking about unemployment benefits. wondering how long is too long for folks to receive this? how about we start -- they start asking people how long is too long? host: that is what we are asking viewers today, what do you think? should it be an individual decision? caller: yeah. ask them how long is too long, what would you do if you could. what are your skills, what are your talents, let's start asking people. there needs to be a census. that is just the beginning. anything like that to even avoid -- there is no reason for unemployment, it has gone on too long. host: kelly in arizona. george from virginia on our line for independents. good morning. caller: yeah.

i think a year would be long enough for anyone. i know this from experience. wheni was on unemployment i lost my job, i laid on it until i could not get another nickel. the same thing. when unemployment ran out, we both had a job within 40 days. everybody will do it. -- go to work when you can why should you go to work when you can get it for nothing? a came automatic, i did not have to do anything on my last extension, it came automatic. it is ridiculous. host: a year should be enough? caller: a year is more than enough. host: should it be cut down? two less than a year. caller: it should, really. a year would be sufficient to keep you afloat and get you a

new start if you need to retrain, that would be enough. host: thank you for calling. george calling in from virginia. fishinsam on twitter. "the safety net has become a panic. -- a hammock." would rather have congress do something about low wages." is happening on our twitter page, @cspanwj. conversations going on on facebook. glenn is in missouri on our line for independents. thank you for calling. caller: yes. speaker banner and the republicans, i want to find out what they would do if the unemployed in washington would come in there and demand work.

it seems like the only one who is doing anything is a government. thank you, i will take my answer on c-span. host: calling from missouri this morning. several pieces in the papers today as these load is happening in the senate later this afternoon. der ins alan blin alanall street -- here is blinder in "the wall street journal." notes unemployment benefits were cut off. linder, professor at princeton university and former vice chairman of the federal reserve. go to "the wall street journal" to read his piece.

waldorf, maryland, on the line for folks who are unemployed. how long is too long? caller: hello? the question you should be asking this morning is, as long as the democrats and the republicans continue to bring foreign products into this country and allow our country to be invaded by ford invaders that come in and take our jobs, as long as they allow these things to go on, that makes them responsible for people who don't have food on the tables. they have taken their jobs. how long will we allow foreign products to come in and allow invaders to come in. both the democrats and the republicans playing the american people. we need to get up and take our nation back. lee from waldorf, maryland. scott olson on facebook, "how yout three months, then

have to report for job search and menial labor." that is scott on facebook. david is waiting in north carolina on our line for independents. caller: good morning. my opponents are, first off, we are kind of enslaved to insurance companies. now we are mandated to have health insurance and audio insurance -- and auto insurance. we are enslaved to land taxes, which would be better if we turned our taxes over to trade taxes. even with foreign and domestic products coming in and out, it would be simpler. the third, when we do have said, wey like lee let the immigrants come here us, we cannot make no money.

it is a catch-22. host: on facebook, "six months is too long." " the only people who might take longer are people who do not want a job. there are plenty of jobs out there." jim, delaware, power line for republicans. caller: good morning. i read an article in "foreign policy." did this study, they said that people in the 18- 4-year-old age group, if they had a termite experience with being unemployed at that time -- if they had an experience with being unemployed

at that time in their life, they tend to be lifelong democrats. whether it is a vote buying scheme. is trying toation keep this group unemployed for democratic voters. the: some stats on unemployment rate, new numbers coming out last week. the number of unemployed persons 0,000 in december, the rate climbed to 6.7%. was down by 1.9 million and 1.2 percentage points. on the long-term unemployment number of long-term unemployed, those who have been jobless for 27 weeks or more is at 3.9 million, showing little changed. noted that these individuals accounted for 37.7% of the unemployed.

the number of long-term unemployed has declined over the course of last year. stats from the bls. gary, indiana, on our line for unemployed americans. a democrat as well. how long is too long? caller: people cannot get employed, they cut everything off, the government is doing the best they can. speaker boehner has got to realize people have got it hard. god bless the people, get it together. hold on. the reason the nation is in trouble. all around the world. god bless everybody, keep your head up. keep voting. god bless everybody, amen. is in clayton, north carolina on our line for independents. caller: good morning.

programistened to your and i have gotten a lot of insight on all this. six months is plenty of time. host: why is that? caller: as far as being unemployed and looking for a job. howquestion then becomes, long would you wait to look for a job or to get a job? host: why do you think six months is plenty of time? there are arguments for extending it to a year, why is six months planning? -- six months plenty? if i were out of a job, i could find work. there are plenty of places with jobs available, people are not presenting themselves to get the job. that,, the second part of

obviously, to keep this unemployment benefits going is just to buy votes. it becomes political. the american way. the american way is to go out and take care of themselves. host: ron from clayton, north carolina this morning. this subject, we have about half an hour to talk about it. plenty of comments on facebook and twitter. you can e-mail us, journal@c-span.org. michael is in bellevue, ohio on our line for democrats. good morning. we lost michael, randy in illinois, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. theuld like to say that

long-term -- i would have to say -- it is a good thing. i would like to see it go from six months to a year. in my situation, i did have a job, i did find a job, i was there for three months, i am a 61-year-old gentleman. they said that the older generation is having a harder time because of their age. when i was there for three months, the company had an option to give me insurance or let me go, they decided to let me go so they would not have to give me insurance. i believe in the long term insurance, i would say between one year and six months. that is my opinion on the long-term insurance. host: thank you for calling from illinois. i appreciate it. the question was posed by post-crescent newspaper in wisconsin. from appleton.

sufficient for unemployment benefits. a tough question and today's culture. i cannot even imagine what it must be like to try a after day to find work. i am not sure people can make it on implement -- make it on unemployment. provided the federal government aids the states, a year is not too long." that is out of wisconsin, they pose the same question to their readers. staying on the subject on the "washington journal" this

morning. turning to an update on the supreme court. a headline from reuters. supreme court turns a skeptical eye on obama's appointment power. the author of the story, supreme court correspondent is joining us by phone. take us through this debate that happened, the argument yesterday at the supreme court. remind us what this topic was about and what happened in the court yesterday. guest: this case is a challenge appointment that president obama made to the national labor relations board. the dispute is over whether he has the power to make these appointments. unlike normal appointments, these were not confirmed by the senate. theargument is over whether president could use his power under the appointment -- the recess appointment clause of the constitution. host: was a reaction of the

justices -- what was the reaction of the justices? guest: the administration is facing an uphill battle. justices from both sides of the ideological divide appeared skeptical of the administration's arguments. a lot of people who view the argument came out thinking the question was really how the court was going to rule against the administration, how broadly it would go, rather than whether or not the administration would win. host: you mention in your peace, justice breyer got to the question of whether or not it was the supreme court's position to get involved in appointment decisions. among there is a sense the justices that this is not the type of case they ideally would like to decide. they generally like to stay out of disputes between the branches

of government. in this case, they did not have much choice. they kind of stuck with it. host: some other news coming out of the supreme court yesterday. arizona officials were trying to revive a state law that banned most abortions after 20 weeks, what happened? in a: this was significant sense that the court decided not to hear this case. that means that an appeals court ruling that struck the law down remains intact. also, the court at this point is not going to wade into the devices issue of abortion directly. perhaps it will revisit its past presidents -- past presidents on -- past precedents. guest: what else is on the docket? tomorrow, the court is

hearing arguments on a free-speech case, related to abortion. a state law in massachusetts that sets up a buffer zone around clinics that provide abortion. fromprevents protesters encroaching too closely to the front door of the facility. being challenged by protesters who say it infringes their free-speech right. times's" "new york lead editorial wrote about this. the justices should uphold sensible buffer zones at clinics. if you want to read more on that, that is in "the new york times." any other cases coming up you are watching? we arethis time of year, getting to the point where the court is issuing decisions. one of the things i am looking at, but eventually some potentially soon --

some decisions as soon as today in cases argued in november and october. supreme court correspondent for reuters, we appreciate you joining us. have got about 20 minutes or less with our viewers this morning to answer the question of how long is too long for unemployment benefits. kelly is waiting to answer this question. in texas on our line for republicans. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say that in my isnion, per -- three months plenty of time. after a month, if you cannot find a job comparable, you have to maybe take two or three jobs. to makehave had to do ends meet. three months is plenty of time.

everyone i have ever known that has been on unemployment, they milk the system, you are supposed to look for work, you have to have seven contacts a week, they make random phone calls and say are you hiring, no, there is one contact. i feel like three months -- you can look at the facts. just watch, when someone's benefits are cut off, they usually find a job. while they have benefits, the majority of people will not find a job. anyway, i appreciate your platform. host: thank you for calling in this morning. writing and on twitter. as long as it takes to bring the jobs back to the u.s. the government just past $90 billion for war. a few other headlines. thehat subject of government passing new spending, here is a headline from "the wall street journal."

negotiators reach $1 trillion spending deal. negotiators on monday unveiled a $1.012 trillion bill. we will get more into that subject with our next guest, congressman scott rigell of virginia. he is on the budget committee, we will talk about that spending plan unveiled last night. what other headline to point out to you. this is leading several of the papers today. insurance sign-ups by age,

from healthng out and human services on that subject. here is the lead story in "the washington post." a monthly progress report was issued monday, offering a first glimpse into whether the health plans available under the affordable care act are becoming rovinces of the old and sick or are attracting young healthy people who had not previously considered -- considered insurance. host: here is how that breaks down with a chart on the front page of "the washington post." 9%.to 25- years old, several of the

papers today if you want to read more about those numbers and some of the analysis of the data that came out. 50 minutes to talk about how long is too long for unemployment benefits/ -- 15 minutes to talk about how long is too long for unemployment benefits. on the line for unemployed americans. caller: good morning. how are you? -- i am an engineer, i get my jobs, i worked periodically. one day, one month, one week. what happens, i have to collect unemployment in between jobs. if i was to go look for a job elsewhere, when i get called to go back out to my works to where i am trying to get my hours for my benefit and everything, i have to quit a job. i am not necessarily paying --

playing it. for people that are working in these kinds of situations where hold, it in a hiring may need to be extended longer than the average. or change the way it works. someone is working, quitting jobs and leaving jobs. host: in pennsylvania, thank you for the call. al is in pennsylvania as well on our line for democrats. yes.r: the senatet to jobs, immigration bill will not help american workers. 7 will not only legalize million or 8 million illegal immigrants who are holding jobs in the u.s., it will also double legal immigration, bringing in about one a million new people over the next 20 years. will they be able to find jobs

for them? many ofmember that these illegal immigrants got their jobs by presenting fake social security numbers. and lying on their i-9 forms. i would appreciate your comments. host: al from pennsylvania, talking about this issue and the senate vote that is expected to happen today, a procedural vote on that year-long extension for long-term unemployment. there is also some amendments to be taken up in that debate. happening in the senate. tom coburn, republican of oklahoma on twitter. fiscal 2011, millionaires bank $30 million in unemployment." his amendment ends that, he said. he offers a link explaining one of his amendments he has proposed on that. sheila is waiting in florida on

our line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. i think nine months is adequate. the reason i say that, over the last two years or three years, i have resided in several different states. i have encountered numerous people who are making a joke out of the extended unemployment benefits. many of them are working for cash jobs on the side. they are in no hurry as long as they can cry and get an extension on unemployment, that is what they are doing. as well as escalating social security, disability checks. ofis unbelievable the amount people doing this. thank you for letting me get my input. sheila from porto. george on twitter, republicans have parlayed the war on poverty into the war on the poor. weeks is a "99

perfect amount of time." we have got about 15 minutes left in the segment to talk about this subject. i want to point out a few other stories from yesterday. miller,man george democrat from california, announced his retirement yesterday. nancy pelosi put out a statement about her close ally and friend. she writes on his retirement, house, years in the george miller has been the model of a serious and successful legislator. as chairman of three committees and the majority and in the minority as well." she goes on to say "george incorporated the most current research and pass innovative bills with bipartisan support." nancy pelosi talking about her close friend george miller, who

announced his retirement plans yesterday. chuck schumer, a democrat from new york, wrote on his twitter page that he is "seeking a roommate." landlord and his current roommate when he is in washington, d.c., george miller. the story going back several years of george miller opening up his apartment on capitol hill to some democratic members of congress. other stories to point out. the obama administration fighting a push to add sanctions in iran. this from "the new york times." the u.s. and iran about to embark on a critical phase of talks, president obama waging action to prevent senate democrats from supporting strict

sanctions that could up and his diplomatic efforts. that is another story we will talk about with scott rigell, a republican from virginia and a member of the armed services committee. i want to show you a bit from yesterday's white house press conference in which press secretary jay carney was asked if the white house is concerned about sanctions legislation gaining support in congress that could override the president's need of front on new sanctions if congress puts forward new sanctions on iran. [video clip] that itmain of the view is important for congress to reserve action on new sanctions for the appropriate time, if that time arrives. we are not gaming this out in a way you described. our position is our position because we think it has merit. >> in the way i described it?

>> our position has merit, congress has been a partner in building this regime. advance should hold in action on further sanctions. pending progress or lack of the implementation of the joint plan or a resolution. host: jay carney at the white house yesterday. one other issue to point out, senate judiciary committees that do have a hearing on the nsa surveillance authority, the president's review group on e speakingce will b before the senate judiciary committee at 2:30 on c-span3. check out our webpage for scheduling information as well. getting back to the question of

how long is too long for unemployment benefits. we have been asking viewers. in washington on our line for republicans. caller: good morning. a great program, thank you for taking my call. i amwant to comment, self-employed. leave it to the president, who refers to the military as "my to do witho see what international relations. i have been self-employed my whole life, i am 54 years old. i benefited when i was 22 years old from unemployment for maybe remarks -- three months. my message is just get out and try to start a business. i started a window cleaning business that turned into 13 years, making no less than $55 an hour after three years. i pay for unemployment insurance. i am in line with the last

caller, you do not need more than six months. self-employed people pay for it but do not receive it. i do not want to receive it, but we do have to pay taxes. callerhould be, like a mentioned. program, afterce six months, you have to pay it back. keeps people to personal responsibility so it does not continue and become a pattern. you specially when it is delegated from the potomac. host: from washington state this morning. on the line for folks who are unemployed. independent. caller: [indiscernible] i was unemployed for the last 4 months.

i was offered a temporary job. up. messed my unemployment i have been -- six months is funny, if you cannot find a job, go live under a bridge. -y opinion is, if you - [indiscernible] pocket.ment, in your just like anything. ain't that kind -- host: we are losing you a little bit, wayne from new york on our line for democrats. morning.ng -- good turn your radio or your tv down and go ahead with your comment. caller: good morning.

being a construction worker, i am pretty well seasonal up here on the canadian border. i think a year would be sufficient. as how can you turn around and get $90 million to a canadian company to build for the obamacare and then turn around and cut our on implement? -- cut our unemployment? thank you. this from new york morning. some is from that part of the country and the new jersey area, more news about chris christie. here is the headline from "usa today." address.to deliver conveninglegislature a special panel to investigate the bridge closures, a new poll shows half of the state population does not believe christie has been fully truthful about what has been come to --

what has come to be known as "bridgegate." mondayessman said federal auditors are investigating whether christie improperly spent money. more news about chris christie, here is how the "asbury park press" put it. new documents show christie administration hiding details of the store and tv ads. if you want to read that online, app.com. on theore callers question of how long is too long for on employment benefits. teresa and tennessee for our line for republicans. i believe between three months and six months is plenty. after that time, an unemployment benefit turns into entitlement. people go from getting

unemployment, food stamps, welfare. after they go for 99 weeks of unemployment, they go right onto disability. i also believe that any able-bodied person should have to work for those benefits. nothing is free in this country and it should not be. they should have to go on the road picking up paper, cleaning up the highways, something. they should be made to do something for those benefits, not just sit around and collect a free check from us who are working. host: teresa and tennessee this morning. al writes in. months, theyf nine should end if you are not in training." the conversation happening on our twitter page. you can follow it at @cspanwj.

jackie in michigan on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: yes. i would like you to ask this question of a detroit policeman works 30 years or more, now their pensions are going to be cut to be 40% or 60%, what is going on? i don't get it. i hope people who collect forever -- i hope people who are unemployed collect forever. host: one other story from "the wall street journal." the chemical spill floats west, talking about the chemical spill west virginia in near trials done, states downstream of west virginia prepare for water contaminants' arrival. a map at the bottom of it. the chemical plume has made its way into the ohio river and is

headed west. pointing out the cities along the river where the plume is expected as of friday. it could get as far as louisville, kentucky. more on that with our later guest today, congressman nick rahal from west virginia, a democrat there. we have time for a few comments. long foris too unemployment benefits. on joy in pennsylvania -- andre in pennsylvania. caller: good morning, i appreciate your program. america is a diverse platform of different types of experiences. i have been out here, i am a professional. i have encountered many different aspects. having said that, when it comes to our government. they speak about entitlements.

thetlements are "we people." the government has no money of their own, all the money they utilize comes from our taxes. which means we are entitled. people, when they hit hard times, they should be entitled so they can get back on their feet. as has been spoken many times, i do not want to be unemployed, i do not believe those who want to work want to be unemployed. i was listening to your program earlier with one of the senators. what do you want to do? starve people to death? it is unbelievable, that is what i have to say. host: andre from pennsylvania. city, new jersey on our line for democrats. our last caller on this subject. caller: i have to take issue with some comments i have been hearing.

i am the unemployed person with a mortgage that wants to work. affected by the financial crisis. i have been interviewing and interviewing. they say there are 3 people for every 1 job. let me givehing -- you an example. the profession i was and, i am going through an agency. the lady told me we sent over our best candidates and they do not hire them. we do not know what these companies are looking for. it is hard. people need to have a little bit more compassion. this time, it seems a little different. i have been unemployed before. i found a job within a couple months or a couple weeks. this time is different. unemployment needs to be extended for as long as it takes.

different. i do not know what is going on and what is different about it, something is different. from jersey city, new jersey. if you want to watch the senate consideration of the bill on extending unemployment insurance , watch that1845 live on c-span2 at 10:00 a.m. debate happening later this afternoon. that will do it for the first segment of the "washington journal." at next, virginia republican congressman scott rigell. later, west virginia democratic nick rahall. answering questions from west virginia university students via our cspan bus. we will be right back. ♪

>> i think i had little antennas that went up and told me when somebody had their own agenda. and not ronnie. and then i would tell him. he would not always agree with me, i would tell him. it mostly worked out. reagan,t lady nancy watch on our website, c-span.org. or see it saturday at 7 p.m. eastern. our series continues live monday as we look at first lady barbara bush. 9 differentr so,

railroads terminated in chattanooga. i created quite an economic base. every railroad had a switching yard or a repair shop. a great terminal in the southeast. all that employment, all that money turning over by the workers. just provided economic stimulus to the growing city of chattanooga. still move railroads an amazing amount of tonnage through chattanooga. coal trains, train after train loaded with grain going to the seaports of the atlantic coast or go into power plants in georgia, etc. still a lot of commodities that

moved by rail. they had to come through chattanooga. weekend on booktv and american history tv, a look at the history and literary life of chattanooga, tennessee. saturday at noon on c-span2. sunday at 5:00 p.m. on c-span3. >> "washington journal" continues. congressmanican scott rigell joins us now, a member of the house armed services and budget committees. i want to start with your budget work with the federal government. looking at running out of money on midnight wednesday. the on the bus budget plan was unveiled last night, here is what "the wall street journal" had to say. talks have been shrouded in secrecy, leaving little time for lawmakers to scrutinize the details of the behemoth bill. do you expect the spending plan is going to run into trouble

this week? guest: good morning, thank you for having me back. i think it is going to pass, it should pass. imperfect as it is, it is unfortunate that the definition of success is now so low. this, as it is described, a behemoth bill, is the definition of success, that is unfortunate. there is so much in there. the fact that we cannot work through each individual appropriations bill, offer amendments, is not good. the alternative is worse. it is -- host: the alternative being another shutdown. guest:. perhaps -- perhaps. essentially, not funding the government, going through another harmful, coming right up to the precipice and perhaps going over it. that is not good for the

economy. i have been a strong advocate in the short time i have served in the institution in congress of regular order. putting our country first, passing our appropriations bills in the house, whether they come -- they take them up in the senate or not. this eclipse is what is best for with public and or democrat or fedpendents, people who are up with everybody. this is what we must do for our country. host: let's get you a subject you know a lot about, the defense spending. according to "the washington defense spending takes the biggest hit in this plan. to $n from $605.4 billion 572.6 billion. research and development, procurement, operations, and maintenance were cut most.

a congressional district with the highest concentration of men and women secondorm, virginia's congressional district. i am with these patriots often. we truly are asking them to do more with less. disappointed, beginning with our commander and chief and all who follow. we have disrupted the acquisition chain. not only through the total level of funding that you just theioned, but also through series of continuing resolutions that we were under. for perhaps listeners who may not be familiar with what that is, it is the continuing of the same level of funding for every the item from one year to next. things that should be funded are

not things that should be stopped continue to be funded. that is one of the benefits of this appropriations bill coming from. it gets us away from that. our senior military officials, both uniform and civilian, are able to properly allocate the funding. this is a positive thing, moving us away from cr's/ . sequestration plus continuing resolution, this was a toxic mix to our military. both on the acquisition side for equipment, redness -- readiness was harmed. it harmed morale. host: if you want to talk to scott ritual of virginia, our phone lines are open. democrats, (202) 585-3880. republicans, (202) 585-3881. independents, (202) 585-3882. if you are outside the u.s.,

(202) 585-5883. congressman, you bring up the troops. talk about the impact on military retirees, folks looking at reductions in pension benefits under that budget deal. what happened to that in this omnibus bill unveiled last night? guest: the ryan-mary agreement, i supported that. -- the r yan-murray agreement, i supported that. it has many attributes i liked. moving us off of continuing resolutions and other things. it included a serious reduction increasest of living %o our military retirees, a 1 reduction for those who are retired. it was caught up one day reach the age -- it was caught up when 62. reached the age of

i am open to the idea of looking at military compensation for this coming in to the military. ar those who served on promise, a commitment from the american people that their benefits would be tere, -- be right.it did not seem the good part of this bill that will pass, i believe, today, on the house floor. tomorrow, rather. for thoses that 1% who are medically retired and for those survivors, that has been restored. remainder, just a regular retiree, that veteran will experience that reduction. until congress takes action. that is a key priority of not

only me but other members of congress. many who do not serve on armed, to get that restored as well. effectly does not take until december 31 of 2015, 016.ntially january 1, 2 i am on a mission, democrats and republicans, to find an alternative reduction to offset that and restore that. host: talking to congressman scott ritual of virginia in the norfolk area. guest: virginia beach. host: a member of the budget committee and the armed services committee. here to take your calls, several folks wanting to talk to you. john in delaware, ohio on our line for democrats. you are on with congress and original -- with congressman rigell. please, bring our troops

home from afghanistan and stop spending money on those ungrateful afghans. spend the money here at home on americans who need it, like our veterans, like our unemployed. please. thank you. guest: thank you for calling in. a democratic line, i want you to know the issue you brought before us is not a partisan issue. i essentially agree with you. i offered an amendment to the national defense authorization act that would defund completely infrastructure spending in afghanistan. let that soak in. it passed with bipartisan support, it did not seem right to make that massive investment of over $1 billion there. i am not an isolationist.

of allring the totality the investment in that country and where it was headed, it is an ancient society, the tribal loyalties run so deep three. -- so deep there. to maket make sense that investment. we have made an extraordinary sacrifice of our american treasure, young people have given their life. over 2000 americans have given their life in afghanistan, many have been wounded. --y sacrifice is not a name their sacrifice is not in vain, but i believe we have to extricate ourselves from afghanistan. host: is that completely, at the end of 2014, what do you think should happen with negotiations regarding whether there be any forces in afghanistan at the end of this year? guest: it is a very difficult

problem. for the president on down, we are faced with tough choices there. , do believe that the troops the combat troops will be taken out. i am still an advocate for a full withdrawal. that we really do move in that direction of having all u.s. personnel out. love america just as much as me do not share that. that is all right. we have got to work through that. i want the president to stick to the agreement if not accelerate it. host: are there lessons to be learned from what is happening right now in iraq with u.s. troops out of the rock, and the gains al qaeda has made? are there any lessons to be applied to afghanistan after you strictly -- after u.s. troops leave? guest: 9/11 changed so much for

our country. our response was required. particularly with afghanistan, when that group of terrorists attacked us and then we ended up taking over an entire country, i know and i know this is dangerous thend, the discussion of wisdom of having gone into afghanistan, but i think this discussion needs to take place. the motivation was good for those that advocated that. the idea that if we are attacked by terrorists we go in and take over an entire country -- for example, if we are attacked from yemen, and some terrible attack occurred, doesn't it follow that we go into that country and --

does it follow that we go into that country and build roads and schools? this is how you bankrupt a republic. we need to be careful about it judicious. again, i point out i am not an isolationist. there is a place for american we are seeing,ut if you look through the these countries have deep, structural, called rogue forces coming together their. iraq,nnis and shiites in these tensions preceded our invasion, and they are certainly there now. host: debbie is in fort lauderdale, florida, on our line for republicans. caller: good morning.

there are three things i will say as a republican and i want you to hear me loud and clear. you have $2 trillion in tax you refuse seas that to bring over here. that is taxpayer money. secondly, you are blinded by the fact that walmart and every other fast food company is not paying for employees the benefits they need because we, the taxpayers, are paying for food stamps and medicaid because they will not pay them a living rage. crap andto stop this give people a living wage of $12 is not hurting business because cosco is giving their people $11 an hour and making a profit. trickle down economics to you guys play do not work.

seats, ilose 29 guarantee you, in the house, and you will not get the senate until you get back to mainstream republicans that need to work for the people, by the people. host: let's let the congressman jump in and respond. go ahead, congressman. debbie, the passion i hear in your voice, i respect it and i appreciate it, and i am hearing similar passion. not the advocacy that you laid out, but similar passion, and you directed it in a positive way, watching the show and calling in. the $2 trillion overseas, i agree. we ought to bring that back, and there is legislation out there and i am supporting creative ways to get the money to recirculate within the american economy. we are in agreement on that.

second, the benefits, i was listening as intently as i cut, and it was difficult to heard -- difficult to hear, but let me get to the third question, the living wage of $12. i think you are advocating a $12 minimum wage. right now it is $7.25. 2007. last adjusted in i am open at looking at that. in cash at a minimum, if you look at a cost of living at a minimum, if you look at the cost of living, there is something we can look at their. i am an entrepreneur. if we take your logic, let me respond as an entrepreneur. if we take $12, why don't we make it $20, or $25, for example? intrigues simply

standard of living -- you cannot simply increased standard of living just by mandating it. the way to raise the standard of living, which is a shared goal americans,, and all is to unleash the amazing productivity of the potential american entrepreneur. my region has 25,000 great- paying jobs that pay well over $7.25, well over $12. lettuce harvest the resources let usthe coast of -- harvest the resources off of the coast of virginia. the governor wanted. the only thing holding us back is the obama administration. that is a fact. i am with you on the quality of ite and the living wage, but

has to be done through productivity. host: congressman, you are on the armed services committee. whyof tranquility is asking can't we do a full audit of the department of defense -- isn't futureimportant step for allocations and getting spending under control? tasked to serve on, essentially, a task force weired by buck mckeon, and looked at that issue. there is a serious effort underway at the department of defense. we have had multiple hearings to get them to where they can produce an audit. they have multiple accounting systems that do not talk with one another. progress is being made, but it is just a massive effort. it has gotten better. it has gotten much better. one of the things that i can do and that i am doing serving on

armed services is continuing to hold senior defense officials accountable for this and moving us in that direction. it is a good question. host: a question on ongoing negotiations with iran over the nuclear program, and some members of congress pushing for additional sanctions, we played jay carney responding to a question. here is president obama in his own words over the weekend talking about sanctions -- he said your thoughts on the back and forth between the white house and the senate on sanctions?

issue,it is a serious and let's start with my core belief and conviction that it is truly and absolutely unacceptable for iran to have military-grade uranium and other materials needed to produce a nuclear weapon. this is a categorical imperative there. to your point, i support efforts being taken in the senate, and by the way, very much a bipartisan effort. it is my understanding they have 59 cosponsors now. as we know, there are only 60 required for passage, and i believe they will have the amount needed to override a veto . so, i understand where the administration is going with this, but i think the more -- the stricter interpretation, the essentially tougher path, john,

pressure onto put the regime. i think that is the only thing ultimately that they will respond to, and i hope it passes. kirk, anator mark republican from illinois co- authored legislation with senator menendez of new jersey and he said on the twitter -- his twitter page i urge the white house to publicly release the text of the implementation agreement with iran for all to review. page.as on his twitter it is a subject we will stay on top of here on "washington journal." albert lea,ting in minnesota, on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. there is something i would like to really address. warheads inave 5000

the united states -- nuclear warheads, and we are going after iran and all of these other countries that you do not want to have any type of nuclear ambitions, and what i would like to know is how are we going to ?ave a fair balance here how is the united states going to be running around all of these countries and saying we do not want any type of nuclear in their countries, yet we have them in our country? in the air force, and this was back in the 1960's, the else b-52s and everything -- and now i think the balance of power is a little unfair and we should deal with that. i am very concerned about our stance in the united states. it seems like we are a little bit power-happy.

i would really like our toiticians to address this where it seems like we could understand it a little more fairly. i really believe it is unfair. guest: thank you so much, marie. caller: thank you. inst: i am a businessman public service, and i deal with reality. that is very important. the fact is, nuclear weapons are here. of course, you mentioned our capability in the arsenal that we have. -- you mentioned our capability and the arsenal that we have. here is why i object so strongly to allowing iran from having a nuclear weapon. it derives from their stated view of leaders that have influence that country for many, many decades, and it is there

all right, over statements often directed at our friend and ally, israel, calling for the destruction of israel, and this is something that you never hear from the leadership of israel. the bias that they have in the leadership in iran, to talk like look, going to the heart of the matter, it is some of the zealots and the extremists -- the islamic extremists -- i mean, at their very core, in the extreme view, not all muslims, of course, but in their extreme view their highest value is seen in a sacrificial, suicide mission, giving their life for all law -- suicide mission, giving their

life for allah. death, it gives me concern. it is in america's national security interest, our security israel, thatjust we stand firm with israel and other allies from around the world in unison and full agreement that we must not allow iran to have a nuclear weapon. i just respectfully disagree with you on that one and i appreciate your call. host: i want to show a member of congress who is supportive of the white house and this ongoing negotiation with iran. we mentioned our several senators pushing additional sanctions in response to the ongoing efforts. here is congressman keith ellison, saying "diplomacy is toing off in the p5 plus one

reach a final deal to the nuclear program for six months starting january 20, and he links to a "new york times" story about those efforts. one comment on twitter, mr. rigell, how much longer can we afford to police the world while our kids and old people are starving and homeless? guest: well, john, i introduced an amendment before what was then known as operation odyssey libyas intervention in and outing the leadership there. we put 200 cruise missiles into that country, and hundreds of rockets, and just a massive amount of ordinance without congressional approval. to me, the president was acting outside of his constitutional

lane and bounds, and actually had bipartisan support for that and i voted for an amendment of dennis kucinich, who was then in congress, and we actually partnered together, dennis and i did, to try to stop that. i felt like we needed to exercise more strength there. to syria, i led an effort, a letter, calling upon the president to come before congress, and to not just get guidance, but actual literal authorization before engaging any military assets in an intervention in syria. the day he walked out to the rose garden and made that announcement that he was going to do that, i was stunned in a very positive way, and i was really pleased that he pivoted

their and i thought that was the right thing to do. we have seen some positive things take place there with respect to chemical weapons. host: and you think that was the direct result of pressure from yourself and other congressmen? than i woulds more go there, but it is fair to say and any objective assessment members, 20at 141 of whom were democrats, this had the full attention of the white house. conversations i have had with senior officials that are in the white house. they knew about it, and i think it was a most positive effort and i was delighted to see my democratic friends came along with me in this and i was encouraged by the outcome. pete in lowell, massachusetts, on our line for independents, you are on with scott rigell of virginia.

caller: good morning. ofppreciate the issue politics, but please do not stay more than one or two terms. guest: we can talk about that. caller: and please do not hold us hostage to the military benefits that our veterans should receive. we only get to every single veterans. please do not use that. as far as productivity and earning your wage, the productivity, if you look at it from economists, has gone uphill since before the depression up where it mid-1970's flatlined, and profits gone through the roof. we do not need a minimum wage, but a living wage. if somebody can work 40 hours,

and cannot survive, we need something. also, i have limited time -- the koch brothers, how come they are involved with think tanks to put more legislation on solar? host: let's have a congressman respond to the points you brought up already. guest: i do have a bias toward getting things done. i start with the assumption and the core belief that before anything else we are americans, and my democratic friends want a strong economy, strong schools, and so that has helped. we have been able to get some things done because of that, and, of course, a real bias toward action. soh respect to not staying long here, i am with you. i have a self imposed limit, i wish more congressmen did. host: you are running for your

third term? guest: that is correct. i have declined every federal benefit that i could and i returned a good portion of my salary back to the treasury just thisad by example and say is an all hands on deck moment in our country and everybody has to pull. embers of congress need to lead by example, and that is very ofortant to me -- members congress need to need by example, and that is very important to me. productivity -- we need to raise the standard of living. one example, the energy off the shore of virginia. we cannot get to it, and if we could, it would raise the leastrd of living of at 25,000 people in the hamptons region. it would reduce our dependence on foreign oil, which means we

could lessen our troop presence around the world. there are a lot of good ideas that we are advancing from the house republican congress and it languishes over there in the senate, and i would like to see more from president obama and senator harry reid to unleash the american entrepreneur. host: harley as a question on e- congressman, why is congress concentrating on healthcare.gov and the possible reaches when we know there have been breaches to 110 million americans through target stores? shouldn't congress investigate a reality instead of a possible occurrence? guest: it is a good question, and i try to come to work with where the facts lead me, not talking points that have been handed to me. to your point with what happened with target, which is a fine company, and they are reeling from this, it merits oversight

from congress, given the massive reach that took base there. it is also proper for us to provide oversight of the government side -- this is principally where the oversight must be directed. there are serious issues. we just passed a measure in the house last week that had bipartisan support that would strengthen that effort. so, i do not see it, carly, as an either/or. it is a bit of both. we need to focus on what we have core responsibility for, and that is the government websites. host: chris is up next in rockville, maryland, on our line for republicans. chris, good morning. you are on with congressman rigell. chris, are you there? guest: hi, chris. host: we are going to rob in chantilly, virginia. caller: good morning.

thank you for your service. guest: thank you, rob. caller: we need three more of you, and we need to take over the country. guest: maybe you are related. thank you. it? was i appreciate. host: donald. turned on your tv, and go ahead with your comment. i think donald stepped away from your phone there. congressman, i want to get your ok,ughts on robert gates' bo which has gotten a lot of attention. here's a column from "the wall ," where he writes do have duties, and do -- areat them as a burden,

tell all about it president still in office is not honorable. your thoughts. say he is ae first remarkable american and he served with distinction. i appreciate his service. i have not read the book yet. i have read some of the exerts. i think the principal issue here is not so much what he said as it is the issue of timing. should he have released so soon after his departure, and indeed, while president obama is in office? that is fair. that is a fair source of discussion. i think -- and i am not robert gates -- but i think what was -- i am notguy robert gates, but i think what

was guiding him in part was he talked about the theater on the house and the senate side, and having sat through some of those, i have to say i was a bit embarrassed about the theatrics or the lack of civility and mutual respect. they were always respectful to the members, but i felt some members would go too far in an antagonistic, theatrical approach to read, and that troubled me, and i think that bothered him. he did everything he could to serve our country in a difficult time. i appreciate his service. i look forward to reading the book because it will give me some insight to the innerworkings, and he brought up some things that are troubling. at the end of the day, and something even struggled with himself, what brought him to releasing the book was that he

thought the substance of what he was saying it was important enough for us to wrestle with here and across the country that it deserved to be put forth. host: some criticism on that, ,his from frank gaffney junior former secretary of defense under president reagan in "the washington times, those quote that if secretary gates had times," "the washington that if secretary gates had these concerns john, it is an,

important topic what he said in the release of his book, but that said, there is only so far i can go in trying to get into the mind of bob gates. what he said, and why he said it from what iis this know about him and how he has conducted himself and my interactions with him, he is a forthright, candid leader. his conscious is clear with respect to what he said and who he said it to. i am confident, based on what i know, that he looked from the , right inon down their eye, and let them know where he stood on these issues. i do not think there is a sense of saying something outside that he would not, perhaps, have the courage to say to someone directly. i think he would say it

directly. a few more moments left with congressman scott rigell. jamaal. caller: how are you doing, mr. rigell? guest: good morning. caller: i have a two-part question -- first, how do we get to this point with where our economy is right now, and i think it comes from the time when we had the surplus in the clinton years, and unfortunately, with 9/11, i think president bush took our armed forces in the wrong direction, and my question is does this coincide with the money that we spent and where our budget is right now? ok, well, jamaal, thank you for calling in. let me say right up front that

both parties have failed the american people as it relates to our budget. you mentioned the economy and the budget, and i think you know and would make the distinction between the two. principally, i think of the the economy as jobs and how we are isng overall, and our budget what is our check book look like, do we have more coming in than going out, and right now we have far more going out. bothn the context that parties have failed the american people here, i have not seen the discipline on the democratic side of the house -- a willingness to be straight up, candid, forthright, and lead with respect to spending. what has happened since i have come into office is we have a $600 billion tax increase at the fiscal cliff, and that was approved. the president signed that into law.

embedded in what i think is the unaffordable care act is another $1 trillion in tax revenue. office, wee been in have had a $1.6 trillion tax norease come through, reforms whatsoever on the principal driver of our deficit, which is mandatory spending. right now, discretionary spending, and with this agreement that is going to be passed, we are going to have spending that was actually less than what the president was spending in 2009 when he came into office. my point is discretionary spending is largely under control, and i am saying that as a fiscal conservative. we have really done the lift their. done, andns to be what few have the courage to do, and i am proud of congress for even engaging the topic, is mandatory spending. from the president on down -- and i had the opportunity to say

that to the president. we met at one point directly, and he said "scott, what is on your mind," and i said i am asking you to provide more leadership in this area. he went through what he had done, and i told him i appreciated that, but it was not enough and it really is not. i need for the president to lead, and for senator harry reid to stop denigrating everything we put out there and mocking it, and instead offer a definitive alternative because if we put our country first and make wise decisions we will meet our obligation to the next generation of americans. host: one more call, james is waiting in georgia on our line for republicans. caller: good morning. i only have a few questions. i'm a veteran. guest: thank you. maintainhy do we still trip -- troops in germany, japan, korea?

point number two, the graduated income tax -- why can it not the done away with, and go to the national retail fair tax that severaltz wrote about years ago that has congressional support, and take the power away from harry reid. i will get off of the year. guest: thank you, james, for serving. i respect it and appreciate it. i have been an advocate for reducing our presence in a responsible way in areas where i do not think we need such a strong military presence. i am in agreement on that, and i have made efforts in that area and we truly are aligned on that. with respect to your second question, the graduated income tax, to the extent that we have a tax system other than the fair tax, we will have a graduated tax, and i support that, then

those who make more have to pay a higher percentage. some do not, but i do. what i really think would be best, and what i am a strong advocate for is the fair tax. we are in agreement on that, james. i believe there are so many benefits to that and i encourage every american to understand it. it really would reduce the complexity of our tax system greatly. it is really unfortunate when an american, and i am one of those in this category -- when you really want to do the right thing, get your taxes right, and if prepare your taxes, and you have a business that is complicated, and you're not sure if you are doing it right because the code is so complex. 50 5000 pages. there is not a human being that can grasp it all. even when you call the irs, they this.ou do not rely on

the fair tax is something we need to move forward. host: that was the final segment. you brought up robert gates. he will be live on c-span two friday at 6:30 p.m.. congressman, we appreciate you joining us. guest: thank you, john. host: next we'll will be joined by democratic congressman nick rahall of west virginia, who --l be entering colors answering questions from callers and west virginia university's didn't, and then we will be taking callers on the question of how many doctors will be needed to implement the affordable care act. first, an update from c-span radio. victory is being claimed with whichal struck in geneva,

downe says brings hardliners and tramples on uranium enrichment rights. russia, meanwhile, has the night a visa to a journalist for the , sayingded radio free that he is undesirable. he said it represented a right of free speech. this is the first time russia not allowed aas journalist since the cold war. he is a former correspondent with "the financial times," and the author of three books on russia and the soviet union. he was told on christmas day that he had been banned from the country. secretary of state john kerry is headed to the vatican, but he is not expected to meet with pope francis.

he will meet with the papal diplomat to discuss the middle east. secretary john kerry is the first catholic secretary of state to have meetings in the vatican. bring hearings directly to you, offering gavel- to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house. we are c-span, created by the cable tv industry dirty five years ago and funded by your local cable -- 35 years ago and funded by your local cable and satellite provider. >> as the president for stated in march and reemphasized theday night, the goal of united states in afghanistan and pakistan is to disrupt, defeat l

lyda -- al qaeda. the effort to stabilize afghanistan is necessary to achieve this overarching goal. >> robert gates served two presidents as defense secretary from 2006-2011, and a cia director in the early 1990's. 2, a live eventan with robert gates talking about his book and his relationship with the white house. in a few weeks, look for "women's history for beginners" author bonnie morris. online for the rest of january, join our booktv bookclub discussion on mark levin's "the liberty amendment." "washington journal" continues. virginia democrat

nick rahall joins us. i want to start with a chemical spill that has impacted thousands of people in west virginia and downriver. today's headline, the first zone ok to flush. people are turning on their water again. what is the latest on the after -- effort to address the chemical spill? address thee i latest, let me begin by theending the state on response. the state that information together immediately after the spill was confirmed, and got the information to the feds and fema responded immediately with a disaster declaration. fema officials were in the state within 12 hours after that federal declaration after midnight, last thursday, i believe it was.

the government has set up an interagency task force. they are doing their job in a very effective way to make sure this is safe. the latest, and of course, all of our concern is for the health and safety of our people. that is paramount. the latest is there is a slow these of water to 300,000-some residents that have been effected. it is in a three-phase process. residents can go to the website and learn what phase they are in, and get a good idea of when their water will return to normal. the first phase affects the hospitals and nursing homes and vital facilities within the city of charleston itself, as i understand it, and then from there the water company announcement is public

information and how they will spread out the hopes of returning water as quickly as possible to all of the residence. they cannot do it all at once, the system would not be able to handle that, so doing it in a phased way is the best way to ensure that health and safety. that phased in map is on thatdesign" webpage -- phased in map is on "the gazette" webpage. "the new york times" has a for oversightalls in west virginia went unheeded." what will happen going forward to make sure this does not happen again? guest: i cannot say at this point when i'm satisfied or unsatisfied. i have met with chemical board

representatives in the state, three of them in charleston them and they have been there before. the bearstigated aspirin factory disaster that we had a couple of years ago, so they are familiar with our state process. they have done their initial interviews, and they will get down to more serious interviews in the weeks, months ahead. but, there are questions of properly reporting this by the company. there are questions about who spill.iscovered the there are reports saying that citizens, by smelling the were thetype odor first to discover the league. that is not the way it should be. it should be the proper authorities doing the proper inspections. of course, the question is, where they required to do those inspections?

shouldments or not, it be incumbent upon, whether it is local, state, or federal officials, to constantly monitor discharges into the water. the state has now taking inventory of these tanks and facilities close to rivers, such as this tank was, close to the river, and whether that should be allowed to continue in the future. there are a lot of unanswered questions and we need those addressed. host: it is too soon to say at this point whether new legislation is going to be needed here, or whether you will be proposing any? guest: exactly, way too soon. again, our first and most immediate concern is the health and safety of the people. number one. host: we are talking to a representative nick rahall. our phone lines are open.

if you are outside of the u.s., it is 202 5853, 8 three. our c-span bus is kicking off tour at12 conference west virginia. the bus will visit all 10 schools. over the next few minutes we will have 10 students participating with the congressman join us from the mountain layer student union. in charleston, west virginia, on our line for democrats. joyce, good morning. caller: hi, representative rahall. at 11:30 last night, i began, and i kept on until i got it all done because this has been an ordeal. the larger issue is for a long

the league ofto urban voters. we had a big study on water. we had someone from west virginia university down to talk about it. it is west virginia's greatest resource. too many people think that coal, oil, and gas is. we are systematically destroying our state and our water supply, which is really weakened. people know now and surely they should know, that it is water that is the most important resource and there is nothing wrong with regulations -- nothing. i just think that -- and i have told governor, and then in told the governor that in person, and i just wish that somehow we could protect our water supply and stop destroying

one of the most beautiful states in the country. host: congressman? , joyce, for you your call. first, larry, and you, john, -- , john,let me commend you and c-span for this bus tour. joyce, my heart goes out to you. you should not have to be doing this. this saying is all accidents are preventable, and that will probably prove to be the case in this ordeal. what has happened here highlights the fact that all of , for ourselves, our children, our grandchildren, we want and deserve to have clean water, clean air to breathe, a clean environment in which to work, and provide jobs for our people, and we can do both at the same

time. with regard to clean water, water is the most sacred, i believe, resource that we have. water is the source of everything we do in our daily lives, and unfortunately, too many are finding out now what it is to go without clean water. it is a tragedy. at the same time, want to provide jobs for our people, and that is the conundrum that we find ourselves in too many times in west virginia. you say that our state is systematically being destroyed by our industries that provide jobs for our people. i am not prepared to say that. i am prepared to say that we can strike this balance of providing clean water, clean air for our people, and providing jobs -- and providing jobs for our people. jobs are needed. we know what the industries are in west virginia that provide

numberobs, coal being one, and we can never turn our back on that industry, but at the same time we need to live and work together and we can do that. those that want to protect our environment -- all of us want to protect our environment. all of us are environmentalists in that regard, but there is a balance we need to strike here, and every one of us has a stake. every one of us are stakeholders providing this balance for our children and grandchildren. host: let's go to morgantown now, of west virginia university, janice is colleen -- morgantown and west virginia university. joining us is colleen. your question for the congressman. >> my question is about the affordable care act.

west virginia ranks among the top in obesity and cardiovascular degree -- disease. i'm wondering how you expect the affordable care act to impact our state? guest: i commend the governor for taking the initiative to expand medicaid as they have, and that is crucial. it is my hope that under the affordable care act, which i supported and i still support, although i do not call it the perfect law. i do feel there is room for improvement. we need to work together. throw out the political one- liners and throw out all of the political gains and get together across party lines and fix this law. west virginia, for the vast majority of our people, the affordable care act will be a big boon. it will work in the long term. the bestork for

interests of the vast majority of west virginians. you look at the fact that no longer can a west virginian be excluded from coverage because of a pre-existing condition, children can stay on their payroll until the age of 26, free services being provided for mammograms, co-pays are not .equired for a lot of visits if we can treat them early on, getting them in for these free visits, we do not have to treat them at a much more tremendous cost in the future to our system. the affordable care act is going to work in the long term. are there problems now? you bet there are problems, and i am disgusted and called for heads to roll because of the rollout of the affordable care act. it was disastrous asterisk, and perhaps there were misstatements

and their the way, heads need to roll. some of them have, since i made a statement in october, and perhaps more will before all is said and done. certainly, once we get through this troubled rollout, and social security had its problems in the very beginning as well -- once we get through this, i am very confident this law will work for the benefit of the majority of west virginians, who, most, do not even go to help exchanges to get their health care. health exchange problems are affecting a small minority of a small minority of those trying to get affordable care. host: along with our students, several people are calling in from west virginia to talk to you. where talking with congressman nick rahall, ranking member of the house infrastructure committee, and from the third district in west virginia. carl is calling in from berkeley

springs on our line for republicans. carl, good morning. you twoi want to ask questions -- what you think about the obama administration using the irs to silence the tea party, and the next one is the ethics committee in congress -- isn't that just for show? i mean, you were brought up before the ethics committee for a real estate transaction where you seen to make a couple of million dollars really quick. i would like to know, what do you think about all of this going on? first, you ought to show the facts on your letter statement. that was a gross this statement, and i will call it out right false. if you can prove differently, please come to me with the facts. of no such transaction or

no such investigation of myself by the ethics committee. maybe you have me concerned confused with somebody else. i do not know. -- maybe you have me confused with somebody else. i do not know. with regards to the first question, the irs versus the tea party, the iraq should not be scrutinizing any group for the irs should not be scrutinizing any group for political reasons. trigger unwanted special targeting by the irs. theyupreme court has ruled can do this. the irs should not be targeting any group for political purposes. host: back out to morgantown, west virginia, to west virginia university. about 30,000 students are involved -- enrolled at the

university, and one of them is samantha runyan. you are on with congressman rahall. your question. the kingstion is about cole highway. the king cole highway authority was established to promote the development of a modern highway in the southern counties of west virginia, which happens to be the poorest area of the state, and almost 14 years later, this project is still incomplete. connection the between infrastructure development and economic -- particularly given the connection between church development and economic growth, i am concerned why this has not been a priority, and what you plan to do to facilitate the completion? your: thank you for question, a very good question, and believe you me, the king cole highway is still a top priority. it is a top priority of mine and many who want to see that road

become a reality as a way to southp south virginia -- west virginia, to look beyond coal. i have gone to the head of the environmental protection agency, and i have pleaded with her and the white house to help us get the necessary permitting to allow this vital segment of the king cole highway in mingo county to be completed. i have worked with the coal company, with the economic , theopers in mingo county private sector that is ready to step up to the plate and help us get this project done, and it is down to the crucial stages now within the epa, and i am prepared to even go to the white house, to the president on this issue. you are right.

i am the top democrat on the transportation and infrastructure committee. i have gotten a lot of money for this highway over my years in the congress, whether democrats were in control, or whether republicans were in control. i worked across party aisles to secure funding for not only a king cole highway, the many other vital stretches of highway needed in southern west virginia. route 10, the danger segment of road between mann and logan, where school buses play chicken with tow trucks, i got the first 40,000 -- $40 million. then, senator byrd came along with additional money. process -- a a t tengo process. unfortunately, we do not have your marks today. republicans have made them illegal, therefore it is much more difficult, and with our

overall budget climate, it is much more difficult to procure more earmarked dollars, and i king when it isar fully scrutinized. the main blockage is those familiar words in west virginia that have come to stymie so much that we want to do, especially in the coal industry called the epa. that is where our roadblock is right now, but i am not giving up. i am not giving up on the epa. we are working with them, and you can asked any official in mingo county how hard i've been working on this. to the university of west virginia. brian. go and with your question. >> you said you supported a regulations.en

vote to theain your constituents? super-the vote affected fund sites. the situation we're facing now with this around us ordeal, the chemical spill, release two clean water act issues. jurisdictioner the of the transportation and infrastructure committee, where i am the ranking democrat. we will be following these investigations very closely. weer first, of course, ensure the health and safety of the people. the vote, which you referred to, which is not going anywhere in addressed superfund

sites, not the clean water. host: let's go to our line for democrats. sam is calling in from the fairmont, west virginia. you are on with nick rahall, congressman from the third district. caller: hello. i called your office. i am stuck here in pittsburgh. daysie tweeted me a few before that and your staff cannot do anything either? are they going to let us hang down here? my question is wide and they put us two days -- my question is why did they put us two days before down here?

h could you know what sam is talking about? guest: unfortunately, i do not. host: dan. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to take a step back for one moment and get the gentleman to comment on the unemployment extension question, and also, the living wage question. i feel -- i am not quite sure the words to use -- almost immoral for us to have a system in which someone can put 40 hours per week into our free- market system and not get a living wage for that, no matter what their job is. line.hould be the bottom i was hoping you would comment on that, and perhaps the possibility of a multi-year plan to increase it, and maybe we do not want the business models to survive that cannot support jobs

they cannot pay a living wage. thank you very much. guest: i understand your second question. what was the first question? host: he asked the question on unemployment benefits, and just so you know, it was a question that we were asking viewers, how long is too long to be on unemployment benefits. guest: let me say that not to extend unemployment benefits to americans that are out of work through no fault of their own is unconscionable. we should've included in the bipartisan budget passed in december. unfortunately, it was not included there in. we have not addressed it yet in the second session of the congress. i hope we can address that sooner rather than later. you need to extend those unemployment benefits, and, again, i say this because these people are out of work through no fault of their own, and are

seeking work. that is a requirement, that they obtainjob in order to unemployment benefits. as far as the timeframe, john, it is hard for me to put a timeframe on it because so many factors come into play -- the strength of the economy, the ability to find a job, and just the overall economic conditions. as far as the living wage, i totally agree on his assessment of people working and the living wage. have are 29 states that wages higher than the current federally required minimum wage. the minimum wage increase would improve our economic conditions in this country, it would improve our deficit situation, it would allow people to get good paying jobs and pay taxes goes back to reducing our deficit.

it means that people working for these minimum wages are going to put the money back into the economy. they will not pour it into some hedge fund what it on wall street somewhere -- or put it on wall street somewhere. they are going to put it back into the economy, buying food and water and bread and taking their families on a much-needed vacation. that is money back into our domestic economy and that is why i support a living wage and an increase in the minimum wage. host: back to west virginia university, founded in 1867, south of pittsburgh and morgantown. out there waiting is adam. you are on with congressman rahall. >> thanks for having me. i have a question about the coal industry and the economy. it is increasingly more obvious that the economy of west

virginia won't be able to depend on the unsustainable coal industry for much longer. what is being done to prepare west virginia for the future and what do you envision the coal industry will one day leave behind? guest: very good question, adam. i spoke in defense of our coal industry earlier and i speak in defense of it again. it is andeen an always will be the mainstay for our economy in west virginia. it provides a good paying jobs, it literally keeps the lights on in many of our counties. the revenues from coal production all-out -- allows the hiring of law-enforcement personnel, keep the lights on in the streets of these counties, literally puts bread on the table of summative families. -- of so many families. that is why we need the coal industry.

but we cannot put all of our eggs in the coal basket alone. i said this for many years. we need diverse vocation. we need to look at other industries, two. we have timber, we have agriculture, technology, tourism . tourism is the second-largest generator of revenues for our state coffers. these are other industries that we are promoting and we have in yourat strides and home county, fayette county, they have the system across many of the southern counties that are bringing in outside moneys and tourist dollars. the new river gorge in your home county and the preservation of that vital natural resource of hours goes back to i first years in congress wherein i passed legislation protecting the river

and build the largest system of federally protected rivers east of the mississippi. -- believee anchor you me -- that was the big draw for the boy scouts of america into southern west virginia. the national jamboree last summer, we saw what a from and is bruised for west virginia that was. -- what a tremendous boost for west virginia that was. jamboree inorldwide a few years and now it is a permanent home for the boy scouts of america. we have a lot going for us in southern west virginia besides coal and that is what we need to continue to build upon. i will continue to use my seniority in the congress, which does count, especially with the loss of senator byrd and rockefeller now. of 435 the top of 6 out in seniority in the congress. one means something for

possible home state and that is why i chose to stay where i am in the house of representatives to running for the in goodecause i cannot conscience give up that seniority and that ability to work across party aisles. i cannot give that up to be 100 out of 100 and another body. this is something i cannot stress enough. we need diversification in our economy host:. we talk about your defense of the coal industry. there are several groups out there that are hitting you on what they say is your support for carbon tax. the american energy alliance released a new ad last week about this. i wonder ask you about that. it was in the progress of budget you voted for last year. guest: if you read that progressive budget, there was no mention of her carbon tax tax.

what i voted for in that was theve budget revenues that would have been derived from incomes $230,000 and above in our country could the revenue would have been from the tax on the upper income. that is why i voted for the progress of the budget. i'm not for any carbon tax, make no mistake about it could i have a voted against a carbon tax is in the past, i've introduced legislation saying no carbon tax . out of 22 thousand-some votes in the congress, it is easy to find something that could be interpreted to be in a bill after the fact, such as what happened on this progressive budget vote. , makeot for a carbon tax no mistake about it. host: congressman rahall represents the third district of west virginia. we will go back to morgantown. you are on with congressman rahall. virginia, awest

sophomore chemistry and theater major could my question deals with the affordable care act. what if two percent of west virginia's sign up ash 43% of west virginians signed up for the formal correct -- accuse me, that is the goal, but only 70% between 18 and 35. what to meet onto convinced fellow west virginians to utilize resources of the affordable care act? guest: very good question, because the segment you referenced is going to be crucial to the full success of the affordable care act. many youngly, too people that perhaps our in good health today, god bless them for they in good health, but are taking a gamble by not signing up for the affordable care act. when one last good health is taken away, -- when one's good

health is taken away, got her to the repercussions, especially if .here is no insurance in place it is crucial that the young people recognize the long-term positive effects of the affordable care act and that they do sign up in larger numbers than what they have thus far, the numbers you referenced. this is going to help lower the premiums for everybody. granted, premiums are rising right now, but they would not be rising as fast or as high if or when not for the affordable care of and the prospect competition. competition usually means lower prices. young people have to recognize participate in the

goal. host: auburn, pennsylvania. diane is on our line for republicans. caller: good morning. i am looking to see -- i like to oathup that is with the keepers -- i'm speaking for myself, not on behalf of them -- with the chemical spill in west virginia. i saw that on the morning is, and what we do as a group of oath keepers is help other people out so that they have these things in place in the event of our crisis as you just went through down there. unfortunately, we did not have enough people on board in west virginia to step up at the time. i was on the phone with her emergency management a few times there, along with one of the individuals who lives in your .tate also, tankers of water, etc., whatever your needs were within the state. i wanted to say that i commend

you for standing up for the coal industry within west virginia, because i know that that is coming down -- the government is coming down hard on the industry . i commend you for standing on that. am a bit concerned, though, with a chemical spill into the headed.s, where that is there has been no talk as far as whether or not this is even cleanable. i know it is being diluted and some of the methane is being evaporated into the air, but where does that leave us environmentally in the other states now? host: congressman. guest: well, very good questions, because those are , andions i have as well that we needed to have answered during these upcoming investigations. if there are violations of far as laws as

polluting to the water were the air, the u.s. attorney for southern west virginia is on the case already, and he will prosecute those who may have violated federal law in this spill. but going forward, the chemical safety board is in the state, as i mentioned earlier, and we have to work with them and they made recommendations before and perhaps the recommendations were not followed through at the state level, but you have to use this particular spill, as tragic as it is, but we ought to use it as a step forward in recognizing what needs to be done, working, again, at all levels to ensure we find out what happened here and to ensure that it doesn't happen again. should, god for bid, something similar like this happen again in the future, we are doomed have a response we ought to have a response

plan in place. some say the chemical is toxic, some say it is not. we shouldn't be in this quandary over a substance going into the water that affects so many lives. we ought to have an inventory of all of these chemicals, what they're classified as. host: back to the student union on campus in morgantown. ryan is here to talk with congressman rahall. >> good morning, and thank you for taking the time to speak to us. i was really wondering if you wouldn't mind sharing your thoughts or reservations on using drones for commercial purposes. first well, let me go back to diane and thank her for the volunteer efforts to help

people in the situation in southern west virginia. your question, ryan, was using drones for domestic purposes. >> commercial purposes. guest: i'm sorry, for commercial purposes. i have serious questions about the use of drones, really period. when they are used to fight where we have reason to believe it would reduce the threat to our homeland, and where we have identified those who pose the threat, yes, go for it. and where it is used together, intelligence against such threats. using that permission, i guess, granted to go beyond and use it for other purposes, commercial and whatever, i have serious

questions. host: back to the subject of some debate, and will be underway at 10:00 in the senate on c-span2 for those who want to watch. writes in over e-mail know, state as we budgets are under tremendous pressure, and so was the federal budget, but states often have difficulty making those payments . questione, the big mark is is it paid for, and i can understand that, but certainly we have the money to pay for the extension of unemployment benefits, without putting undue pressures on the

states. i think this is a federal responsibility, and i would not slough it off to the states. host: back to morgantown. a student at west virginia congressman rahall. virginiaareas of west bordering maryland -- what will this do for our geographic income disparity in west virginia? guest: well, that is why we need ,o keep it at the federal level to have one state extend the benefits and another not, i don't think -- it is about building highways. give off back to the states because you have one highway going off a state line .nd falling off of a cliff

there needs to be federal responsibly, and i recognize the distrust of the federal government these days, especially with the rollout of the affordable care act. it diminishes any trust and faith in the federal government. it is not mean we have to throw federal government's responsibility stood there is still a role for the federal government, and i believe this is one central, to provide this uniformity and not allow one state to undercut another, therefore causing the cross-sta te lines friction. host: i want to talk about legislation you introduced last week with senator mention as manchin asator well. guest: on epa regulations, yes. that is a similar legislation to when i introduced in the last time was that passed in a bipartisan fashion out of the house of representatives having

gone through our transportation and infrastructure committee. rein in, ifort to you will, the epa. that we havereach seen by the epa that oftentimes is questionable on legal grounds , and they are running roughshod over our states. we are trying to give the states say, butnot the final a say -- and controlling what is controlled in the industry in our state. the epa does not take into account job repercussions, for example, of the revelations that the issue. they have no responsibility to do that. -- former epa even said that the former head of the epa even said that before congress. host: lisa jackson said this? guest: yes, in rough terms. i feel it should be a consideration of any federal agency when they are issuing

regulations -- what does it mean for jobs and how many jobs are going to be lost because of this particular relation -- particular regulation. this seeks not only to do that but to involve the states and their own destiny. host: a few more students. catherine is waiting on skype to talk to you. >> good morning. i come from a military family, with my father serving over 20 years in the air force. i know that you fought against budget cuts that would affect our veterans' military retirees. living benefits being severely affected from the current congressional budget deal, how do we ensure that veterans receive their deserved benefits? guest: i hope we can address that in a stand-alone measure to increase cost-of-living suggestions, military retirees, to make sure that they aren't

hampered by budget agreements reached in the congress. i think it is very important that we honor those who put our lives on the line for the country and thank you and your family for what you have done in service to our country. our veterans and those serving now across the world in defense , they are truly our heroes and they are responsible for so many of the freedoms we just take for granted on a daily basis and we ought to say thank you not on the special days in recognition of our veterans but each and every day of every year. i say thank you for your service. you are right, i truly believe least we can do from the federal level is to provide adequate health care, cost-of-living adjustments, jobs . that is why i have sponsored so many veterans preference provisions and transportation veteransgive returning

a job so that they can work and return to a normal life, in a land for which they fought so hard for. host: another student in morgantown, you are on with congress meant rahall. >> thank you for being with us today. i'm a student studying political science and international studies and gender studies. when considering that the chemical spill recently was by a coal processing plant in charleston, in addition to the ackent revelations of bl lung that harmed a lot of our miners, i would like to ask with you and congress would be able to do to protect the health and environment and lives of west virginians and, in addition to that, americans overall. guest: as you know, after the

ubb disaster we tried to get through the congress the miners health safety act, named after the late robert c byrd. host: for those who don't know, ubb -- guest: upper branch mine, disaster in our coalfields, subsidiary of 80 massie in my home county, raleigh county. i spent all that week with the word,es waiting for 24/seven, all night trying to find word of their loved ones. it turned out to be positive. as we all know now -- it turned out not to be positive, as we all know now. the mining company responsible at that time -- not today -- but at that time had been judged guilty of numerous violations, had a very unsafe work record. the federal investigations are ongoing and there have been some .onvictions

continues.igation but to get to the question, we -- i'mssed legislation sorry, we have not passed it but we have been trying to pass it, but unfortunately, the republicans in control of the house committees, first they wanted to wait until all the investigations were done before acting at the federal level. those investigations have concluded. we stopped not been able to get a strong health safety bill out of the house of representatives. we did make some thanks to the state, some progress. now providing a toll-free number for those who wish to report safety violations in an anonymous fashion. we have also made it a felony to alert the local miners of upcoming mining safety inspections so as to be prepared

, and they are also making -- we also making other efforts fit it is unfortunate that the levels are still too high in our coal mines and we've seen an increase in black lung in recent months and years because of those levels in our mines. i remember a close vote in the house of representatives many years back. levelsit to lower those of at the last second -- but at the last second votes were switched and we lost the vote. throughtried to lower legislation, unsuccessfully, unfortunately. host: one last student waiting for you in morgantown. we will go to franklin roberts, but before we do, a special thanks to devin copeland for preparing the students today and for comcast cable for sponsoring the bus visit.

franklin roberts, you are on with congress meant rahall. >> good to be here. , you in therahall past have supported the expansion of the fracking industry. guest: i'm sorry, what? host: fracking industry. guest: yes, fracking industry, shall desperate there have been increased arsenic levels in groundwater as well as in some people's homes, cap water with combustible -- cap water with combustible methane. it has been shown consistently that it breaks the quality of water, will you continue to support the fracking industry in west virginia and how would you justify that if you do? , what well, i'm not sure you may be referencing with regard to my support for the fracking industry, but the state legislature acted on this issue and when they passed the bill in

which all sides appear to come together -- environmental, , iustry, etc. -- and support thought that perhaps we had a good bill. but that is not resolve as of does not-- that resolve us of our federal oversight in this regard, and we need to be constant -- we need to maintain a constant vigil over this industry, to ensure that it is being done in the right way. any incident that may occur in the future is only going to hurt not only the people -- that is our number one concern, of course -- but the industry as .ell i've not seen any cases where they have been fighting with each other in west virginia. they are to work together to pass a conference of oversight includes proper

reporting and inspections and monitoring so that all sides can be comfortable and there will not be an accident happening. host: thank you for coming in and taking questions as we make the first stop on our c-span bus for the conference for. guest: thank you, john and i enjoyed it. thank you, students as well. host: up next, a viewer-proposed question that comedy doctors are needed to implement the affordable care act? first, an update from c-span radio. >> the associated press says that president obama is picking up the pace of the dots message and making the case that he can to people struggling in the up-and-down economy despite a divided congress. it comes 2 weeks before the state of the union address. the president meets with his cabinet to discuss measures that can help the middle class. cbs news correspondent mark kno

the tweets that it is first cabinet meeting of 2014. the last was just before the government shutdown. particular aren seeking an exception of new mortgage regulations and i've asked congress to protect them from punishment while they were to comply with 5000 pages of rules. many credit unions have indicated they would not be able to comply with regulations on time. the senior vice president for mortgage finance policy at the independent community bankers of america says that the regulations could have a chilling effect on landing -- lending. the regulations -- the rules are aimed at making the mortgage industries safer. a subcommittee meets this money to hear testimony on the new home mortgage rules mandated under the. frank financial law to testifying will be various representatives from homebuyers associations and groups representing lenders.

congressman shelley moore capito chairs the subcommittee. gregory meeks is the ranking democratic member. you can hear it live coverage on c-span radio or watch the hearing live on c-span3. those are the latest headlines on c-span radio. by 1895 or so, 9 different inlroads terminated chattanooga and that created quite an economic base. every railroad had a switching .ard or repair shop great terminal in the southeast. all of that employment, all of that money turning over by the provided the economic stimulus to the growing city of .hattanooga

even state railroads move an amazing amount of carnage -- even today railroads move an amazing amount of tonnage through chattanooga. train after train after train loaded with grain going to the seaports in the atlantic coast or power plants in georgia, etc. there are still a lot of commodities that moved by rail. due to the terrain they have to come through chattanooga. >> this weekend on booktv and american history tv, a look at the history and literary life of chattanooga, tennessee. saturday at noon on c-span2 and sunday at 5:00 p.m. on c-span3. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are joined by dr. atul grover, chief public policy officer at the association of american medical colleges. we have asked you to come back to answer a question posed by one of our viewers, and that is are there enough doctors to

fully implement the affordable care act. what can you tell us about the number of doctors it will take to actually implement the act? fewt: we need to train a thousand more physicians a year if we are to meet the needs of the population. that includes the acceleration of those needs to to the affordable care act, where we have people coming onto the insurance rolls five to 10 years before we originally thought they might. -- theger issues that we larger issues that we need to train more doctors to do with an ever-increasing aging population. 65 baby boomers are turning -- 10,000 turned 65 a day for 20 years, and they are driving the stress on the system, thinking about who uses medical services in this country. it is people over the age of 65. host: a graph that your people put out about the total shortage.

physicians, 46 thousand surgeons and specialists, and that takes into account physicians likely to retire. he put it at an estimated 250,000 -- you put it at an estimate of 250,000 could tell us how you came up with the numbers. guest: people will potentially -- falseections projections because of the assumptions you use. we have a delivery system that looks like the delivery system we have today. you can take that to say we have 'seat medical homes and aco and it changes the way people use character we did that in the 1990's when we look at hmos could we made assumptions that everybody would use kaiser group health or something similar and would never get sick and never get to see a doctor. that was a completely flawed assumption about the change that would happen and what we do now is look at physicians and nurse

,ractitioners and assistants the utilization of the health professionals and the services they provide intimate settings, and look at how that is changed by the changing insurance characteristics of the u.s., the changing demographics, which is , andy the largest driver also the ethnic and racial makeup of the population, the .ther social economic status health-care takes a long time to change. based on today's assistant, knowing what we know about the census bureau, what is likely to change in our population, what we need to do is take care of all americans. the: if you want to see data from the association of american medical colleges, the website is aamc.org. they have a chart on that website where it has in blue the

supply of doctors and physicians and then in red the demand that will be needed over the next 10 years or so. you can check that, again, at aamc.org. this is supply -- with the demand that we are going to have come more driven by an aging correlation than the millions of people who are expected to get new insurance -- by an aging population than the millions of people who are expected to get new insurance. over the long term, the expansion will accelerate the shortage of it. -- accelerate the shortage a bit. in the long run, it is that silver tsunami of baby boomers, all those people turning 65 for the next 20 years -- my mother and my boss and people i care about deeply who i want to make sure have access to physicians and other health care professionals. if we look at the lifecycle of an individual, and i'm lucky enough to have 2 wonderful,

healthy young children who barely go to the doctor, and they are essentially healthy and they see a primary care doctor, their pediatrician, on a regular basis. they have not had to go to a lot of specialists. even if they have a simple problem like an earache, i will lock them up to the clinic and have someone else look in their year -- i will lock them up to the clinic and have somebody else look in their ear. i amyou get to 40 or 50 -- discovering this myself -- other things happen. you have the onset of heart disease and diabetes and join issues and cardiac issues. we will have 18 million people alive who have had a cancer the coming few years, so that means not only seeing the primary care physician, but it means that many casess are in going to cure you know.

kids with leukemia have a 90% survival rate. this is a good thing, but we are victims that are on success and that those kids to want to have wonderful long life and we have to keep taking care of that -- those kids go onto a wonderful young lives and we have to keep taking care of them. the longer people live, but with more conditions. host: this is a viewer-suggested topic. if you want to suggest a topic for a future show on "washington /journal. cspan.org @cspanwj,so tweet us, #journaltopics. host: and we actually have a life of doctors and physicians. -- line for doctors and

physicians. as folks are calling and, i want to ask you, is the demand going to be greater for a certain type of doctor? guest: i think what you're going to see, and we saw this in massachusetts, is that early on you're going to have a huge influx of people trying to access primary care. that is the entry into the system and they are the ones who developed the relationship over ore and they figure out to, they can, keep you healthy but they diagnose problems that may need to be referred to another type of specialist. host: kim limitation of the health-care law -- the implementation of the health-care law. guest: people coming into the health-care system, they are not going to show up with a hospital in the first 2 weeks of january 2014. -- when you do have a chance

we saw this in massachusetts -- the problems that patients present with, they are things but youy can live with or i might not choose to live with. youru cannot walk across living room or your bathroom without getting short of breath -- because your heartfelt needs to be replaced -- those people go to a surgeon for the replacement of the heart valve. any specialty that cares mostly -- neurologists, neurosurgeons, vascular surgeons, oncologists, cancer surgeons -- those are the folks that are going to have a lot of pressure put on them as the baby boomer population starts seeking out more care. host: phone lines are open. joe was waiting first in hastings-on-hudson in a new york in our line for independents.

you are on with dr. grover. caller: yes, good morning. taking about this issue, we need more physician assistants, maybe nurse practitioners. i think that having more physicians from overseas is critical. to put this in context, who could come in and start seeing patients, the republic is -- republicans exasperate me. -- miltondman friedman said this for years -- we need to abolish the medical association and give freedom of choice. i am an independent, but if you go into the hospital -- i rarely consume medical resources. i was in the er for a small thing. you asked them, can i see enters practitioner -- can i see a nurse practitioner? doctor."have to see a what is the price? " i have no idea."

the republicans controlled congress for years and they did nothing. now there is a shortage. some people say, "well, the doctors in the philippines or china aren't as good as in the u.s.," but these people are affluent and in most parts of society, it is a choice between those positions or nobody. it is an interesting question. first, i would see this is not a partisan issue. whether you are republican or democrat, you want to see care from a physician and you want that physician to be there. to be there for my mom regardless of who she votes for. the issue of using foreign physicians in the u.s. is more competent. -- more complicated. he even if that physician is nother country, we have no way of ensuring that these standards, even the system in which their training, is comparable to ours, and those

physicians need to come in and have some level of training in residency programs, which all our physicians have to do after graduating from medical school. that is a leveling of the playing field. the real issues is that we don't ,ave enough residency positions training sessions, that all physicians have to go through, whether here or abroad, to train physicians that are going to be graduating from u.s. medical schools within the next several years. that is why congress, what they have failed to do is address a freeze on support for physician training that has been in place for 16 years. host: explain that. james writes in guest: that is just not correct. we don't limit the number of medical school applicants. in fact, the bottleneck we are facing is that the residency level.

go to undergrad and get my degree in science or, in my case, english, go to medical school and get an md. i still need to get training. if you do geriatrics, psychiatry, you have a slightly different length of time. everybody has to go through that training. the challenge is that back in 2006, we asked our medical schools to expand by 30% to prepare for the doctor shortage. they did that on their own, sometimes with state health and support. we have record numbers of applicants to medical school. young men and women entered medical school this past fall. 15.5, 16,000 it was that for about 20 years. there is no artificial limitation other than our capacity to get those folks a .ood education

the limitation has been imposed by the federal government. ince medicare was founded the 19 60's, where congress has said and multiple administrations have said is that teaching hospitals, what they do, training positions for the community, training other health professionals, running things like trauma centers and burn centers that you hope you never have to use, all those things are important to society and medicare beneficiaries, and medicare none -- medicare and other payers ought to pay for a share of those costs. back with a balanced budget act, congress said, you know what, we are done with sharing our costs for the training. ofyou think about the 30% growth in medical school enrollment, compare that to a less than one percent per year growth in the number of residency positions that all of those new md's need to go through, that is the real problem, and this has been

compounded by the administration suggesting a 10% cut in funding for graduate medical education for the last several years. how: do you have a sense of much would cost to increase the availability of those programs? guest: to have an extension of about 50% of the number of physicians we train, 4000 additional doctors being trained it would start to get us down the path where we could produce a how to we few more physicians and use nurse practitioners and other members of the team and do things more efficiently pay just to do that, in addition to supporting the additional services like trauma, burn centers, creating an environment where research can occur, it would cost less than $1 billion a year. if you think about that and the context of a $2 trillion, $3 trillion health-care system, and billion dollars is a lot of

money but it is an investment to make sure that people have access, not just medicare beneficiaries, but you and me and our kids and their parents. host: carol in kentucky on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. is that theern area i live in, 12 miles to the hospital or doctor. i have to travel at least 80 miles to get to a doctor -- not even a doctor, practitioner. but i do have a primary doctor. the concern i am calling about is all the primary doctors that areo have our aging here -- aging here and we don't have enough doctors in the southeastern part of this area. miles for travel 131 cancer treatments.

dialysis,kidney finally, closer. but people are really secure in the mountains and we're not getting the right care -- people are really sick here in the mountains and we're not getting the right here and right diagnostics. host: dr. grover, to answer the question, i will show a map from thatorkforce data book talks about active physicians per 100,000 numbers of the population. kentucky here is in that range activet 180-213 physicians per 100,000. you can see the darker areas with a more concentrated number of physicians. go ahead to a question. guest: if you look at that 3 per capita in kentucky, it is less than much of the rest of the country but it is also less than most of the developed world. it will think we have a lot of physicians here could no, we have great physicians and nurses

that are the best in the world, which is why people want to come here to train. but we have a fewer positions per capita than many western europe each and -- many western european nations and developed countries. on what thends population looks like. if carol in her communities sicker than the average american community, you might want the per capita number of doctors to be higher than the national and i look at massachusetts and new york and those maps and say, well, you have got to remember that a good number of those positions are in our teaching hospitals and medical schools and research centers. a full-time practicing doctor, they may be spending 50 to 60% of the time in a lab or classroom trying to teach other doctors to do research and cures. what carol also brings up is the this is going to be.

for you and i in washington or the suburbs, maybe we don't feel the shortage for a couple of years. but if you're in southeast bc or the mountains of kentucky or k or inner-city areas, those are communities that are already underserved. physicians have the ability to move and if physicians have multiple places to choose from and they're getting 30 job offers and it takes a month to get into see a urologist, even in boston, they are going to be much more likely to move to those areas since they already have shortage issues and it will be harder and harder to get our docs into rule areas and urban locations in some cases. host: we have our special line for doctors and physicians. molly is a nurse, calling in on our line for democrats. she is from hamilton, ohio. caller: yes, hello. and i'megistered nurse

currently in the nurse practitioner program. i work in the emergency department. i know that my organization, local facilities, are taking small steps to accommodate the influx of health care recipients that are expected. but i do feel that publicly, further education in terms of responsibilities and accountability for attending primary care physicians and seeking out preventative aasures, i know that this is cause for overcrowding and overuse of the emergency department. how could we get the message out there to the public? public education is always a big factor here. aamc things about treading a few more thousand workforce

positions a year, trying to make use of excellent colleagues and andteams, social workers pharmacist in a team sport, trying to figure out how we run our health care system efficiently. reallyg out what is necessary to be done, when should we be caring for people, what setting -- should be the er , outpatient center, hospital? i think a patient has a role to play in all of that. if we can educate patients around what is urgent or emergent ash i'm sure molly sees patients that come into the er occasionally that don't need to in the middle of the night and could have waited until next morning -- having a care management system is something we are trying around the country, but it is difficult to when you get sick and it is

not between on a clock at 5:00, it is scary. i am a physician and might get get sick and i'm still scared. keep peopleoing to out of emergency rooms and most people need to be there but there are things we can do. host: so to give respective shares are physicians more response abilities to free up doctors and physicians to do jobs that they are specifically trained for? guest: in most cases you need care directed by a physician at some level, but individual components, tasks, people should be competent. how do we measure whether somebody is competent and doing basic suturing? there is a tireless going on best there is a program going on to make sure we don't just do 4 years -- there is a program

going on to mature we don't just do 4 years in med school and residency -- how do we make sure that they are competent in these 25 areas and in trust you to do that independently? we can do the same approach looking at all the health professions. seeing patients in a clinic, having a clinical pharmacist ibedded in the clinic meant had somebody who is not only less expensive than me but better than me in helping to educate some of my asthmatic patients and how to use their medications and how that action plan, trying to teach my patients to have blood centers. i do think that we need to utilize everybody to the extent. we're just not going to have enough health professionals, period. host: this is a viewer-suggest a about-- what do we know the number of doctors needed to implement the affordable care act?

for those who don't know the aamc, explain your group, and also, what is your group in favor of the affordable care act? guest: we represent all 141 u.s. and the -- md-granting medical schools and we represent hospitals. center,on hospital george washington, university of maryland, johns hopkins, down to uva, and so forth. all of our places are heavily engaged in research and represent the faculty of 120,000 physicians and organizations. we provide 20% of all u.s. health care. we are embedded in the health care system in addition to training and doing research for the future. we disproportionately care for some segments of the population. we have all the level one trauma centers in the country. they are heavily focused in

these 300 or 400 systems and that means when a bomb goes off in boston or tornado goes through oklahoma, or an airplane crashes in san francisco, we tol take the patients stanford or san francisco general and we run those centers with the hope that we never need them. we also in favor of the affordable care act largely because even though we are six percent of hospitals, we do 40% of patient charity care, a third of the medicaid care. our institutions take care of the most underserved and vulnerable operations either because they are very sick and are transferred from hospital to our institutions where they have no means of resources and social support. we went into health care wanting people to get care and get better care and to stay well. for our organization, it was really an opportunity to say that we can ensure another 30

million people. we are happy to look at other options if they are presented to us. that was the option on the table and there aren't -- there are for sure things in there that we don't like. the aca had a posse of programs to address the physician shortage and we did not tackle the issue when we should have. we think it was a huge mistake. there have been mistakes implementing the law in a normal -- and in a normal commercial environment, you had a back-and-forth. you tweak the law, you tweak the implementation. that is not happening in a functional way these days. we have a line set up for doctors and physicians. gail, you are on with dr. grover. know, ii would like to have a medical degree and residency training i did overseas. i am an american citizen but i did this in brazil.

i never really worked in the field. my career followed a different my mother --ause i'm looking to get into clinical medicine and i'm looking to get into areas that are underserved. i would like to make some kind of contribution. that is fantastic at this is the kind of commitment we see from people in health care particular to this because they want to make a contribution, as gail was laying out for us. one of the challenges we have is that when people take time off from medicine -- and i did that , womenue another degree do that for family reasons, others do that for other reasons -- it is hard to get back and up to speed. several specialty groups are looking at how we do reentry into the profession and do some amount of retraining.

were done abroad and the training was done abroad and you would have to pass a series doable., which is very she sounds like a bright and motivated person. but some degree of training done in the west graduate medical education system, and it comes back to the cap that congress has had on residency training since 1997. until we can get those lifted, there's not much hope for people gail who want to go back into the system and take care of patient who really need her. several members of congress have introduced legislation to raise that cap. crowley, michael grimm of new york, senator bill nelson of florida, senator charles schumer and harry reid of new york and nevada

introduced last year. you can go to their websites to learn more about that. a piece of legislation i would imagine you are in favor of. we support that legislation as well is another house bill from congresswoman allyson schwartz and aaron schock of illinois. again, both bipartisan bills, both would expand training by just about 4000 -- 400,000 positions are you. half would go into primary care and the other half spread across other specialties of me. specialties of need. are about to face a burgeoning crisis in terms of access to medical care. we have about 100 cosponsors in the house and senate, people who think this is a good idea. i think that right now, actually, as we talk about -- we have 120,000 positions, in our

hospitals and met schools, and as we talk about the sustainable growth rate, the whole idea of white we are talking about the sgr, we don't want to cut the reimbursement because you want people to left access to beneficiaries. tothink it is a great time talk about this and not just how we reimburse physicians but how we take reimbursement. host: a question of on twitter. i think it is a concern both in terms of the number of providers is certainly going to affect the ability to bargain from an insurance standpoint. i think that the bigger concern is that there are some moral communities that just don't have access -- some rural communities that don't have access to surgeons, nurse practitioners, or pa.

we have had this perennial problem of how you get physicians, and not just and i don't think that is problem that is going to go away overnight. while we work on things like the national health service corps and payment programs to incentivize physicians to care for underserved communities, we need to be looking at what we can do for technology in terms of tele-health. i am monitoring my blood phonere on my ipod or my and i can print out graphs of that and they can help me manage my medications virtually. i think we need to do more and more to do that. there are some other models -- in addition to training more can we figure out how to get our cardiologists or oncologists to rural communities? i know we did this in nebraska, ohio, kentucky, where we sent

folks out into neighborhoods that are an hour and half away and have them go out for a week to ring access to patients. we have to get creative about this. host: dr. atul grover is the chief public policy officer at the aamc. >> that will do it for washington journal. we take you now live to the floor of the house. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., january 14, 2014. i hereby appoint the honorable chris stewart to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of represti