data. >> he knows of the consumer is better off after the creation of his agency. are consumers saying that? are they feeling the consumer protection bureau? do they know it exists? >> i do not think there is as much knowledge about the bureau as they would like. it's certainly recovered a lot of money. those people have seen refunds. it is still not in the public consciousness, the idea that this bureau fully, it is going to take time. you can see that in the complaints.

the complaints are going in. they are probably not getting the volume of complaints you would think if everyone was aware that this agency existed. >> this agency works for you. listening to him talking about people making a complaint, they will get money back for them. is it a case-by-case basis? >> they do what they can. they are not your lawyer or advocate. if you file a complaint with them, they forward that to the bank. that can give an extra layer of pressure to resolve the complaint. there are thousands of people

that are taking advantage of the opportunity. it may not be something that the public is broadly aware of. >> what about the congress view of this new agency? >> you see continuing opposition. it will change the bill that will change this from single to a five-member board. it probably will not go anywhere this year. they might have a chance of advancing. >> what is next for the consumer financial protection bureau? >> they're working on some of these areas like student lending and auto lending. there are areas that caused the crisis in areas they were required to hit by the dodd frank law. now they are working their way down to some of the other areas. and also trying to fend off attempts from congress to constrict the funding.

>> thank you very much for being on "newsmakers." ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> on the next washington journal reid wilson looks at that wendy 14 agenda for legislators. after that jayne o'donnell talks about the affordability of plans of the health care law federal exchanges than discussion of a plan designed to provide heating assistance to households. mark wolf joins us. we will also take your comments by phone, twitter, and facebook.

and tomorrow a discussion about politics with steve phillips. supports democratic candidates. he spoke at the city club in cleveland. here is a preview of his remarks. >> 64% of the population is white. of that 41% are progressive. that means the progressive part is 26%. you add that to the 29% who are youle of color, it gives the new majority in america. been testedd has and proven twice at the national level. what does this mean for u.s. politics going forward?

us a mapta has given oft shows the future politics is in the south and the southwest. the new battleground states are the old slaveholding states and the southwest, the land that used to be known as mexico. will throw atrs i you. 19 and 24. voters of color is the threshold by which a white can win an election. all three of the democrats who won the elections lost the white vote but were able to prevail because of this coalition. colorado had 19% of its voters of color. this is where the picture comes

25% ofcus there are states that will soon have 19% voters of color. south andin the southwest. arizona, georgia, and texas are the new battleground states. one of the most important races davis'sountry will be run for governor. if the democrats take texas it will cut the legs off the conservative political machine and make it nearly impossible for a republican to win the white house for the next 20 years. lostia, barack obama will only six percentage points without even contesting the race. this presents the best opportunity. these states have 351 electoral votes. 303 congressional states.

these states have the power to president and secure control of the congress the hands that once picked cotton and lettuce can now pick presidents, senators, and governors. more of stevech phillips tomorrow morning at 10 .m. eastern here on c-span. >> when you go behind the scenes therehotographer you are to not really repeat anything you hear. is unusual because we are let into meetings that are sensitive. i was there when president obama at the samely, and

time the hurricane had just come up the east coast, and he was on a secure phone talking to the fema or are and trying to organize it at the same time he was trying to run a campaign. fema director and trying to organize it at the same time he was trying to run a campaign. he was having a serious conversation about what was going on the ground and how he wanted things to take place, and on the other side of the wall people are banging four more years. a unique time anytime you are behind the scenes with the president. >> doug mills, tonight at 8:00 on q&a. york democratic senator kiersten angela brand. she talked about setting a conference on social media posted by the brookings institution.

this is about 40 minutes. >> good morning, everyone. i hope everyone is feeling bright and cheery this morning. it is sunny and a reasonable temperature again. i am the codirector of the center for children and families here at brookings. we have invited a group of experts from around the country to join us today for the first annual summit on social mobility in the united states. it was organized by my colleague richard reeves. we are delighted to have so many wonderful experts here to talk about this issue all day. if we are going to put social mobility on the agenda in the united states and figure out what to do about it, we need help from people in public life. it is a tremendous honor to have someone with us today to begin

to help us address these questions. senator gillibrand was first assigned by the governor after hillary clinton left her post. she was elected on her own in 2010 for a six-year term. she has worked on all kinds of issues. i have read her biography and there are so many there that i cannot begin to list them all. i think she is best known for her advocacy of ending sexual assault in the military. some people have referred to her as the next hillary clinton. harry reid, very uncharacteristically, once referred to her as the hottest member of the democratic caucus. i can't imagine senator reid saying that but evidently he

did. as the mother of two young children and one of only 20 women in the senate, she is especially focused on the needs of women and families. she believes the women's movement has stalled out and wants to see at least half of all senate seats and half of all governorships be women in the future. i want to endorse that goal. i would also add that i would like to see a woman president of the united states before i die. maybe it will be you, senator. it is with great pleasure that we welcome you to brookings. i think i speak for all of us when i say we are looking

forward to your remarks. [applause] >> thank you for your leadership and proposing today's forum. it will be a very interesting conversation. i want to thank the brookings institute for bringing us all together to talk about a topic that is vital to the future of this country and talk about some fresh ideas to get more children and working families the opportunity they need to achieve their full potential. last week marked the 50th anniversary of president lyndon johnson's declaration of an all- out war against poverty ushering in a new era of commitment to security and opportunity for every single american. no matter the circumstances they were born into or whatever life dealt you. the senate and the house had a

chance to do one simple act to live up to that promise by extending a lifeline to 1.3 million jobless americans. 1.3 million americans, who through no fault of their own, who want to work, who need to work, and are diligently looking for work. they were denied this lifeline, this basic lifeline that keep them afloat. for no reason but politics, democrats and republicans may well have honest disagreements on the best way to grow our economy and create jobs for americans that are ready to and willing to work. we should be able to agree on a core principle. we should stand by those who are struggling and never leave anyone out in the cold. all too often this is exactly what happens in washington for reasons most would find

inexcusable. it is the same old political game being played with food stamps. the house of representatives would like to cut $40 billion over 10 years. they would have us all believe that they are cutting ways to cut fraud, abuse, end free rides on the taxpayers' dime, but the reality is when you are cutting food stamps, you are just taking food off the table of families in this country. taking food out of the mouths of hungry children. taking food away from seniors who are on fixed incomes. for veterans who gave their lives for this country and everything for this country who are at a time of need. that is who you are taking food away from. it makes me angry because all we hear from the other side is that

those on government assistance are somehow scamming the system or are lazy. i have never met a lazy child who is hungry. i have never met one man or woman who is on unemployment benefits or who needs food stamps who wants to be there. they don't want to be there. they would prefer to be working, providing for their children, feeding their children. i have never met a mother whose children are well fed who was on food stamps.

on top of these economic hardships, a lot of these families -- it is a loss of confidence and dignity. that is all the motivation they need to work as hard as they can to find a new job and to regain that stability that their family needs. that is what the 1.3 million americans are fighting for -- a job. an opportunity to work. this assistance is meant for them as their safety net. when politicians attack those receiving government assistance, they are not attacking the nameless and the faceless, they are attacking our kids, our seniors, our veterans who have given so much. it is not who we are as americans. we are all in this together and we have to create the federal policies that reflect those core values. i know we will hear a lot of politicians finding a new sense of compassion over the weeks and months ahead. when you look at their policies, they fall short of those words. we see policies that trade off

cutting food assistance to families that need it to protect billions of dollars of profits to companies that do not need those profits. if you look at the policies, there is not a parent in america who does not know that early childhood education is the difference between their child reaching their full potential and not. you will see policies that are designed to cut medicaid. what is medicaid? it is access to health care for those who need it most. simply put, these are not the priorities of a nation that has a moral obligation to those who need help. these are the policies of the nation that does what we can to support americans who have fallen on hard times. children and families who are hurting and hungry need more than a slogan, so we should at

least agree on this. let's do more than just find the right way to talk about it. let's actually look at democrats and republicans for policies that focus on our families and protect those who are struggling to make ends meet. i have traveled around my state of new york and the stories of struggle have not stopped. parents are working their hardest to get by and provide for their kids but the reality is that things seem to be working against them. for all those that have been lifted up since lbj took poverty head on, the fact is inequality has come to record levels. affordability is slipping away. seniors are working longer hours for less money. contrary to the basic american values that we have reported work in this country, the real

value of workers' wages is on the decline. families are having a tough time as a result. all along the american dream has not changed. we still all as americans dream of getting an education, providing for our families, raising our kids, paying for college, and making sure we have money for retirement. the rules of earning the american dream have changed. the skills and tools that all but guaranteed our parents and our grandparents were placed in the middle class will not cut it today. the world has changed and our economy has changed. most importantly, the american family and the face of the american workforce has changed. that is where i see the greatest potential for reviving a middle- class, and opportunity for all those fighting to make it there.

the new faces of our workforce over the last decade are now women. women are increasingly the new family breadwinners. women are the primary wage earners for a growing share of homes. in 1960, only 11% of families had the mother being relied on for her wages to provide for the kids. today, that is 40%. 40% of wage earners in america are mothers who are the primary wage earners to provide for their kids. 40% of the families with children under 18 rely only on the mother to pay the bills, make those tough choices at the kitchen table, and feed their kids. you wouldn't know that by looking at american workplace policies today. they are stuck in the past. congress and state capitals across the country simply have failed to keep pace with the new economy and the modern american

workplace. the key to creating a growing economy and the key to an american middle class is women. without a doubt, if given a fair shot, women will be the ones who ignite this economy and lead america to the revival of the middle class. that is what i want to focus on. it is called the american opportunity agenda. it is a set of five basic principles that will modernize the american workplace that empower women and families and give them the chance to earn their way and get ahead into the economy. achieve their full potential and reflect the values of our nation. first, to build our american middle class relies on keeping everyone that want to be in the workplace in the workplace earning a paycheck. this is a situation that many in this room have faced. for anyone that has ever had a

new baby or a sick family member a dying mother or father that need care, you know what that feeling is like when you have to make a choice between providing for your family and staying in the workplace or caring for your loved one at home. choosing between your loved one and your career is a choice that no person should have to make. this is a choice that is happening every single day and more often than not, it is the woman who will choose to leave the workforce to care for that family member. when they do they will earn less income, they will miss out on raises and promotions, they will lose out on retirement benefits. this can leave women behind.

it risks their future success and risks the stability of their own family. it can also hurt businesses. today's lack of paid family medical leave keep some of our most highly skilled, best trained, hardest workers out of the workforce. democrats and republicans should be able to agree. the strongest asset is our people. we should change our policies to reflect that and give working parents a fair shot. the family and medical leave act we have today basically provides for unpaid leave. job-protected leave for serious health events. only about half of our workforce actually qualifies for that and many more, given that opportunity, cannot afford to take the time off. congress can and should do much more to support these workers and strengthen our economy by expanding paid family medical leave. under my bill, we would create a

self-funded paid medical leave program. it does not add one dime to the deficit. based on successful state models, it works by establishing an independent trust fund supported by both the employee and the employer. contributions of a small amount in their wages. it is an earned benefit that would make paid leave available to every working american no matter how big your company is. a small business or big business, whether you're full- time or part-time. the cost is about the cost of a cup of coffee per week. when a young parent needs to care for their newborn it should not come down to outdated policies that lets her boss decide how much time she could take off, how much time it will take her to get back on her feet with that decision perhaps affecting the fate of her career. would anyone of us need time to care for a dying family member, we should not have to sacrifice our job and future to do what we think is right. the family medical leave act has

bipartisan support so there is no reason why democrats and republicans cannot come together and support it. let me give you one real-life example. for those who desperately want to reduce the roles of those on government assistance, this is a great way to do it. i have an employee. she was a single mom working as a waitress. she was working 40 hours a week earning over $2 an hour plus tips. she was able to bring home $700 a week or about $24,000 a year. that is a few thousand dollars above the poverty line. when she got pregnant, she had no health care benefits from her employer so she enrolled in medicaid. when she was about to have her baby, she knew she cannot afford the hospital bills so she had to quit her job.

because she was able to be on medicaid, that covered her hospital expenses. because her employer gave her no vacation or sick days and no paid leave, she was not able to have her time with her infant at home so she had to quit her job. she enrolled in food stamps. this is a woman who was working full-time basically on the edge of poverty and could not provide for her kids. if she had paid family medical leave in that job she could've stayed at her job, had the time she needed, and had the benefits that would've protected her and her family. we also have to work on things as simple as raising the minimum wage. when we are talking about low- wage workers, most people do not understand not only the prevalence of minimum-wage workers but also how hard-hit they are. did you know that out of all our minimum-wage earners, 64% of them are women? if you're working 40 hours a week on minimum wage, you earning -- you earning $15,000 a year. we are saying as a country that has always said we reward work and if you work hard you will make it to the middle class, that is not true. if you are working 40 hours a week and on minimum wage, you

are basically earning over $200 a week. imagine what it is like to live with that here in d.c. i have an example for you. she works at union station. she has been working as a janitor for 20 years there. she never had a sick day or vacation day. she has no benefits. to work at the same job for 20 years and still be earning $8.75 an hour with no benefits does not sound right. she is about to retire. she does not know how she will because earning so little, she was able to save very little. hard-working people like her are not looking for a handout. they want to work hard every day and provide for their family and have some hope that they too can

be able to see the american dream. under the bill we are working on in the senate it would give her a raise to get $10.10 an hour. she is one step closer to getting out of poverty and moving into the middle class. raising the minimum wage would help 33 million americans, 17 million women, many women with children just like her. millions of mothers immediately would be able to do more to support their families and put that money right back into the economy. raising the minimum wage is also good for business. an increase would raise our gdp over the course of three years but also those increase earnings which means increased spending on household goods, food, clothing. with that added activity to our economy, we can create up to

140,000 new jobs. the next issue that i feel very passionate about that i think would make a big difference for working moms is understanding the need for affordable childcare. more women are going back to work sooner after having a child creating a much greater demand for affordable childcare. the cost of childcare is about $6,700 a year. just about the same amount an you can't afford child care, the choice you're left with is leave your job and to stay at home and care for your children. if you think about the numbers again, let's say the average between an infant and a child is $10,000 a year. you earn $15,000 a year.

care? you afford child it does not start until your 5.ld is you have no options, there is no affordable options. imagine what you do as a single mom. women,the earn ergs are a lot of them are single women. do? you look for a mother perhaps. if your informal caregiver is sick? work.ss you will probably get fired if you have no sick days. you won't be promoted. you lose out on every bitter of economic potential and economic have becauseou there is no affordable day care option. we dos important, universal pre-k. children have the chance of early child chood education they able to reach their