for our february 3 edition of "washington journal." i hope you have a great monday. >> on this monday, the u.s. house will be gaveling in at noon eastern for general speeches before turning to legislative is this at 2:00 p.m. bills on the calendar include one that would allow colleges to give veterans in state tuition verse -- regard us of where they live. in the senate, a comes in at 2:00 eastern.

it will consider the five-year farm bill that passed in the house last week. a vote to move the bill forward is expected at 5:00 eastern today. you can watch the house live on c-span. the senate will be on c-span2. join us for america's look at russia. bush andr george w. menstruation officials will take place -- part of this event. you can see that live at 12:30 eastern. it will be on c-span2. later, more state of the state speeches. that will be live at 1:30 eastern on c-span3. david jolly will take part of a special election debate. the special election is to fill the seat for the late congressman bill young. over 40 years in congress. watch that debate live.

that will be on c-span3. a look at tonight's first lady's program. wreck.s in a car i wrote about it extensively in my book. the whole time i was in hospital, not injured, i had a cut on my leg and a broken ankle , i was praying that the other person in the car would be ok. the other person in the car was one of my best friends. i did not know. i did not recognize that at the site of the crash. and over prayed over for him to be ok and he wasn't, i thought, nobody listened. god was not listening. my prayer was not answered. i went through a very long time of not believing and not believing that prayers could be

answered. and a lot a long time of growing up to come back to faith. at 9:00 bush, tonight eastern on c-span and c-span3, also on c-span radio and c-span.org. watch our recent interview with her in dallas at 10:30. a facebook question related to tonight's program. should first lady lady's work outside the white house? #cspanchateet us at to leave your comment. #cspancha tweet us at t to leave your comment. this is from last month's world economic forum. it is attended by world leaders

and politicians. it is about an hour.

>> good morning. i think we will start. almost as much expertise out there as there is on the panel. i want you to know, there is a job for retired that the scenario -- deputy secretary generals. we're going to start, before i introduce the panelists, our first questions to them, with a presentation, a short one. it is an extraordinary factual virtual-reality access to syria. >> hello. down to try our project syria after you have

seen the panel so you can be put on scene with people there. i'm going to show you material because i think visuals help. films because the communication -- they communicate better. >> this is a day of a peaceful rally that -- quickly. there are a number of videos from that day.

extraordinary material. i think we would all agree that it should be seen, but as you see, and has only had 138 views on youtube. day, extraordinary day out there. 527 views. this is a conversation that is not being heard. it needs to get louder. i know people in this room are interested and concerned about this issue. peopleal is to get more involved. this is aut -- neighborhood, the refugees are not able to go back. it is crucial we consider how to help them. >> thank you. we have an extraordinary group of people out here. if anyone can tell us why the efforts to meet the humanitarian

needs of the people of syria are not succeeding, it is this group of individuals. minister, the high commissioner for refugees, a coordinator of all u.n. and other international assistance to syria. a young syrian living in lebanon, doing a huge amount in the camps for syrians in exile. the head of the international committee of the red cross. i hope we are going to have a very frank discussion of why we are not able to do a better job to overcome this terrible peopleon, which so many are describing as the worst crisis of its kind at this century.

worse than since cambodia, some say. increasing ine people denied food or medical assistance. as many lives at risk as there has been from the violence itself. it reminds some of us that the democratic republic of the congo when a defendant in civil war. i am going to start with you, foreign minister. turkey is on the edge of this. expect hugely frustrated at times. why can we do more? >> that is a very important question. this is the worst of the second world war. in all of the world wars in the middle east, there were less --.alties, even 67

-- we have this one simple answer, simple but important. ispite the fact that this the biggest humanitarian tragedy in the last three years, there was no single resolution regarding humanitarian situation on the ground. there is no single binding resolution for division who created this and binding for all of the conscious. committee didnal not do the necessary job. here.day, i came in my statement, i started my to --.nt referring lastly we were together with antonio and a neighboring county's minister.

a baby who was born one day their, herrrived at noor.s she doesn't know what her future will be. in the hospital, her leg was amputated. a 16-year-old or 17-year-old girl. most luckiesthe to be frank. turkey, other countries, jordan, lebanon, they have a safe haven. we have 200,000 in camps. cities, in almost all cities of turkey. was with us there. we are doing our best for these refugees. we spent 2.5 billion u.s.

dollars. we will do more. regardless of their ethnic or religious backgrounds, not important. we will do more. we have 16 or 17 camps. the camp we went to had 15,000 refugees. at least they have everything, meals, safe haven, medicine. babies were born in these refugee camps, who do not know when they will go home. category, they are not as lucky as the refugees. they don't know where to stay. they don't know when they will be attacked. there is no channel for us to reach them. we established another policy last year to send food and medicine inside syria.

around 300 million u.s. dollars sending convoys. at least there was security to reach them. , 2.5d 7 million idp's million refugees. -- we needn for them a resolution. the worst group is those who are in neighborhoods where regime is implementing starvation strategy. victim of escape. the purpose of the regime is to kill them because of their absence of food and medicine. i'm sure you saw the pictures, photo evidences endorsed by investigators.

55,000 photo evidence we have now. 11,000 people were killed by starvation strategies. this is middle age mentality. despite of this, i said weterday, several times, were begging for one resolution. there was no resolution. there was only one presidential statement. -- they are doing an excellent job. we are grateful to antonio for being with us. political -- without the political binding decision or will lose -- resolution, they cannot do much.

we need a binding resolution for all of the parties, regard less. without that, all good will not be helping much because the tragedy is to huge to help from business. >> i am going to jump to the end of the line. peter, you run the international committee of the red cross, which does not need a security council resolution. i suspect you are as frustrated as the minister. why can we not reach these idp's? why can we not do more for those who fled? say, i do believe the

ramification of lack of consensus in the international ,ommunity for a clear humanitarian activity in syria is the ramification in which we all operate and which is the main political reason behind the lack of access of the humanitarian actors. besiegedree that the areas are the worst off in terms of assistance. , from within syria, to negotiate access. circle or inicious a downward spiral where poor security, restrictions by the government and the lack of acceptance on some of the armed groups create a climate in which it is almost impossible to get into the siege areas. d areas.ge

sometimes it comes as bureaucratic obstacles to go into. mes when wet co have filled in 30 requests and we have green lights to go in, we are stopped at roadblocks and convoys have to return. this is the reality. moment, it is difficult because we do not have access to make objective assessments, we don't have assistancering according to objective assessments in those places that need it most. we do not have access to the .ore mandate of icrc we are not in the prisons or the dissension -- the detention centers in syria, despite the fact that the syrian president has promised me more than a year ago that we would have access according to our rules as we

apply them in more than more than -- in more than 80 countries around the world. promises and no implementation of those promises on the ground. factors with which we are confronted. the problems around certain specific issues, we are able to do a great water and sanitation program in syria reaching all syrians. reasonable to do a food distribution program, despite all of the obstacles. at the present moment, we do not have any agreement in the dynamic of the actors on the forces,nd the armed with regard to medical

assistance to the syrian's. this is a time bomb that preoccupies us most. wal problemdemic for us. region time bomb for the because viruses do not stop at borders. health issues do not stop at borders. these are some of the elements of restrictions with which we are confronted. we will continue. i have been in damascus a week ago. we will continue to try the best where to negotiate spaces a little bit something can trickle in. it is terribly difficult. minimalcertain standards that we have achieved in many other conflicts of the world. focal points with chains of command on both sides of military operations which would

allow us to get in contact with the respective persons in charge of population and territories. we do not have it in syria. it is a much more complicated way in mounting an operation. memo we will come back. thank you. i just want to add something. as someone who were members ,osnia and rolando -- rwanda i am deeply frustrated. in 2014, we have all of this information and media, we all want to keep the people of syria first, and you have this political side by the international community, which is having -- it is dragging down our work.

despite all of the data and information, the huge numbers, people cannot grapple with them. all of these millions represent children, women, men. ,ou have got these differences particularly on the security council, but across the international community that is making action almost impossible. citizen, i find it impossible that we are in january 2014 and this is the position that we are in. decent, dedicated people. as good arying to do job as they can. what do you feel?

>> we have been working for two years with syrian refugees in lebanon. syrians of only three participating. not waiting in a rwo-month queue outside unhc door. i am not in my grave. i am not morning a family member. i am not in prison or a refugee can't. my stomach is full after 200 days of besieged general camps. if we do not collectively act upon this, and yes we can. there will be no syrian to sit in my place. the syrians who were expected to be sitting in my place will be suffocating, suffering from social problems or striving to

achieve the minimum basic needs like a loaf of bread. it was not an easy decision for me to sit here. the question of the panel, what more can the community due to respond to the syrian humanitarian crisis, i felt as though the committee -- the community has done enough, as if they have exhausted all of their options and they are working alone without local actors. i think the answer is no. a lot is expected. the question is what can we do. what can we start doing and how can we do a better. it is a good opportunity for all of us to think ahead. so far, just hearing three of the speakers, i am here to give hope to this panel. we are all part of the problem. maybe we should be forward-looking instead of -- this is why i will be brief in presenting a problem.

the first point i want to is the importance of peace. the importance of stopping the shelling and opening safe passageways. this is something i can highlight. i am not in a position where i can be something -- do something very influential, but others are. there is no un security council resolution. what are we doing? aren't we supposed to be lobbying for one? aren't we supposed to be forming some sort of civil society, lobbying for it? the solution would be to create a lobby group. we will not be able to lobby the government straightaway, but we can lobby the un security council to do something.

how many more field assessments should be done? how many times will a syrian amalie answer the same restaurants from 10 or 20 or 100 ngos before they receive support? my second point -- the field we're supposent, to be getting field updates and they have been doing that, but we should ask ourselves is it an issue of visibility or credibility. have been repeating the same field assessments and wasting money and time and the dignity of the refugees repeating it.

many others have been -- now after 40 years of not being able to act. local initiatives have been able to act in the light of the revolution. we should not be -- we should be because a the table vulnerability target group has changed. we should be deciding what the vulnerability criteria is. we know what we want. do we want to keep repeating the mistakes of development? we should be determining our own need. for bringing the grassroots initiative is very simple. solution is to create a platform in which grassroots and international donors will be in touch without a thousand intermediaries.

we should start creating a network of grass were -- grassroot actors. we need to create better ways of doing field assessments and implementing them. thank you. [applause] >> i think you have touched a chord. want to saynow you something about the camps in countries and how we can support that. field officer in unhcr, we would run away from the security council resolutions. the security council was always

to political and unlocked. we operated under international law, basic mandates. toyou think it is right defer to the security council and all of this? they will not- if act as humanitarians, act on our own? >> i think each one of us should be able to do, in coordination, everything that we can do on the ground. it is important to end of the line at the international community has failed in my opinion. they tried to bring peace to syria. -- create a package of

confidence building measures. possible. third, it has failed and showing receiving and are more than 3 million people. we have an honorable minister of turkey, to honorable ministers of jordan. 900,000 as of today, resistance syrian refugees. the conflict is spilling over into lebanon. it is not a question of the enormous economic and social, demographic and pack. it is the huge security impact. we know how fragile the political situation is.

if one looks at the situation in lebanon and compares it to the rest of the world, it would mean for germany to receive >> china would receive refugees. and we look at jordan, jordan will spend the cost of the refugee presence. spent $2.5 billion. , theding to the world bank international committee has not been showing enough support for these countries. they need not only the refugees themselves, the countries themselves and their problems.

this is no longer a problem, it is a developed problem. it is unacceptable. some are being pushed back from other borders. they should be able to find safety with no problems. it is necessary for all of our borders to be open. a mission.sary for visa should be more opportunities for syrians around the world. there should be financial show thebut also refugee company -- problem is not just a responsibility.

the majority will be there. the others will be able to share the burden. [applause] it were an issue of mandates. i wish there were an overarching mandate for humanitarian mandates. i wish this trumped the political. i go to negotiate with the syrian government, they have my mandate in front of me. it says the sovereignty of the state. to get to those people who are northerny suffering in syria across the border from overy, to roll the convoys .

the overarching humanitarian mandate will allow us to do what is absolutely necessary. it is not there. part of trying to create that was to protect. even that, is almost impossible to implement. not without the agreement of the countries. is squarely about putting human rights in the just as theat we united nations does. which that a reality in the countries where we work. it is constraining. we need to move to a position and humanhumanitarian rights dimension is the overarching dimension that could take thewe action required. we are not there. >> let me have one follow-up to that. start thinking of questions and comments.

i expected that answer. case, it has so many of the right words and concepts in it, it is an empty the syrianper that government feels it can ignore. what is the message we should send today? there is some ambivalence about modeling the political with allowing people to divert into the humanitarian. the political is going to take time. the humanitarian is now. people are dying literally as we meet. is anything we can do to make those negotiators ensure that even if they don't yet make quick progress on the political, they don't leave their talks until they have got unequivocal

agreement that there will be a security council resolution and that the international community will support it? > >> there is one ambiguous message. putting the people front and center, we know the war has its own logic. they all think they can win. access, making sure that we are able to go wherever is inh regardless of who control of that area. there are security issues. we have worked in somalia and afghanistan. i make this point all the time. humanitarian work is working in unsecure environments. let study is security as an excuse. the message is we are able to go

wherever we wish and we determine the issues around a security. we can get to those people who need our help. that is the most important thing. and i just say one other thing? it is hard for us to get the message right. we have not been able to. we have to pay tribute to those humanitarian workers. let me talk about inside syria. we talked about what is outside syria. we have people working day and day out. we are feeding 3.5 million people. 10 million people need to get -- get clean drinking water. people are vaccinated against polio. we know it is not enough.

we have been able to do that. yes it is right to criticize us. please do not forget that what we -- what we have artie done. >> there is an appeal i would like to make. thingis always a comp lex to get -- complex thing you to get consensus on. there should be a way to bring together the key stakeholders. those countries are directly involved. it will not be easy, the political solution. confidenceagree on building measures. to make sure that those confidence building measures would be unlamented. have ad not be enough to

resolution. it is important that those key stoic -- stakeholders in this conflict know they will not be able to come together under political pressure. >> it is really important that we don't just say the security council. to't have the method implement it, you have nothing. we are still not there yet. updon't have backing it anything clear in that resolution as to what the sanctions would be if it does not happen. is that the resolution on its own, it is what comes with it? it is a must to start. i am very frustrated. meetings like this, we make this appeal, not as a

neighboring country suffering because of these issues but just as ordinary human beings. there was a special security council meeting that we called for on humanitarian refugees. nothing has happened. why? this is political. in the last general assembly, i met with all of my colleagues. weapons washemical on the agenda will. i begged them to forget your differences and put one paragraph in this resolution on humanitarian issues. the statement came which is not binding. .here is no

the second important issue here is global awareness. in geneva, we called it global of awareness. the public opinion makers, this isy in the world, an important criteria and it is public opinion. such a global awareness was not like what happened in bosnia or rwanda. politico a matter of -- politics of state. businessmenesenting and human rights associations, we should start a campaign of global -- global awareness. i am telling you i am ready to do more in the name of turkey.

us. more pressure on more pressure is needed today. want serious, it is a mess. we did not see any strong global response. seeing all these pictures. for seeing an issue, they want humanitarian access everywhere. the problem is the regime. what is the regime hiding behind? dying.y is state is for human beings. [applause]

no human being living in a country. pressureo create more on all international governments .ho are claiming to be >> i am keen to get people in. quick. you, really >> i agree about the limitations of the international framework. there is one issue which makes this conflict specific in comparison with many others. this is the unwillingness and difficulty to negotiate --ctical arrangements and pending. we do not find these at this

moment because -- despite the needs. it is particularly bad. thought a lot about access. i would like to add that for me, the coral it to access his presence. we have asked for two years to be able to be present in all parts of syria within the offices and with our own international personnel. we have achieved one agreement. communityh a local and grassroots organizations can at least contribute something. we have not received any other agreements. you will put a question to to throw you off what you want to say. this is important that is been said.

500 people bothered to watch it. we have heard from people appear. public opinionve behind them to push the security council to act. people need to be really angry about what is going on. used to bee way we angry about darfur for or bosnia. i still have a little green armband that says never again going back to darfur four. there is no sense of outrage in the world today about syria. is for young people everywhere. had we get them to respond? >> i have not seen a single person who is not outraged about what is happening in syria. people can only do so much. i was enraged two years ago. i started a grassroots initiative. i am not in a position of power to do a big change. -- enraged.ranged

we should be doing something about this and we should do more effort. we should put our hands into doing something. we should look at this issue as a long-term issue. it is very important to look at this as now. what we can do now. we should also be forward-looking. it is the empowerment of education. it is not too soon. soon to start this. -- this is a form for businessmen. there is an excellent opportunity. there is a lot of opportunity to start developmental projects are amazings. there talent inside the tents and people who can do amazing things in potential. i want to keep exercising this point is ownership. ownership of

grassroots organization. ownership of the locals. this is something i would keep emphasizing. you guys need to syrians as much as they need you. honestly, this is certain to look a lot like a christmas wish list. we all need to know what should or should not be happening. we all know what the obstacles are. i was looking forward to this panel as a source of hope. cindy can be done. feel free to -- something can be done. feel free to contact me. we have to report back to them when they. monitored by us. the beneficiaries should be monitoring. i tell somebody, i

hear it everywhere. billions of dollars are being donated to syria. where is it going? the fielde do with assessment? halfway we put our hands into each other's hands and turn just people into continuing emergency relief. let us look into the future. how can this aid be used to empower the people to be their own voices? >> lots of questions. i have worked in afghanistan and somalia. what we're are seeing now is the outbreak of polio in a country which has not seen pulley for 18

years. .- polio for 18 years it is a catastrophe that we are seeing. this is a public health disaster . are reasons about. the spread ofg infectious disease. typhoid, now polio. which regime covered up for a long time. it was facilitated by the government. it was brought to light and still, we are still only talking about cases. there may be as many as 200 and 50. this is a global threat.

it requires a global response. it requires more than vaccination. -- saferes saved water water. it requires a massive nutritional response. cases have been confirmed through the assistance unit. that is 35 to 40%. they're not been vaccinated. my point is there are massive humanitarian needs now that is required or it is only going to get worse. i will stop there. you are looking to come

across the aisle. >> i think we recognize the syrian government is not dumb. they know the difference between a presidential statement and a security council resolution. the real question is how do we yet the sick -- security council resolution? a resolution but enforcement is meaningless. had we get the resolution? we have a window of opportunity between now. he cares about his reputation. it ruined his party. had we make that happen? why not every week at the security council stand up and say russia, why are you preventing this resolution? we know who the problem is. and your you colleagues speak out and name

.ussia day in and day out it is put the blame where it lies. i am us.. -- i am us.. syrian. think the human case of syria is going to snowball as long as the political stalemate is there. i think of the possibility that it is used as a trojan horse. a crisis it is getting much larger. symptoms ofeing fatigue in the international tomunity, what are we going

face with a number of refugees is larger and when the money that we have collected and gathered so far are becoming diminished by the day. i think we need to break the impasse through the humanitarian case as a trojan horse. otherwise, we will be here again and again and again. people do not want to see a of little resolution. it is not going to lead to sustainability of any humanitarian response. i am from lebanon. i agree with what has been mentioned. i want to get in politics.

colleagues that they are quitting their jobs and private companies. they're working for international organizations. grant money is going to salaries. all of our volunteers can do that work for humanitarian sake. why do we need to spend 40% on salaries? [applause] hello. activist.t believe in empowering the syrian people. i want to raise three points.

we mention them. empowering the syrian initiative and working on the ground. .f they have low-cost they have lower costs. the have much more effective this. they work faster. also, you are empowering a refugee who is helping another refugee. you are putting a circle of people helping each other and getting bound together. losing your dignity is not getting a meal per day. empowering the people who are in syria and doing the human rights work. and a lot of people from the red cross who have been killed or

shut down or they have been imprisoned doing their work, their humanitarian work. we to give them support. there in the field. they are doing something and they need to see somebody is supporting them. the third thing i want to stress is it is not just a food basket, it is education. i got a scholarship from a foundation. i am at the american university of beirut. it has opened a lot of doors for me. think education for the young syrians who do not have universities, it is very important. i call for all the people have the power to get serious to like lebanon or empowerr turkey, please

them. who wasd have somebody a refugee and now he is part of the solution. thank you so much. >> this is a very rich discussion. i have a comet many will sympathize with his come over the internet. are the syrian women at the geneva peace talks? this is an issue that women care hugely about. i think is one of those issues whye they can't understand the boys with toys and guns and those managing political protests cannot allow some simple humanity to come into this. lives ofd save the women and children who are

caught up in a conflict that is not of their making. we've got five minutes to go. we have to sum up at the end. we should not stop in this call today. there are many of us who are devoted to doing whatever it takes to mobilize public opinion , whatever it takes to force the security council to act. i would to touch on that in closing. if we can be that very quick in responding to what we have heard from the floor. >> i want to refer to the basic value of humanitarian issues, dignity, dignity, dignity. i know families when they escaped who lost everything. caps, we haveur two issues. realized we needed to

establish long-term crisis schools. 30,000 high school students are getting educations in camps. we have a preschool for handicapped children. refugees and we hired teachers among the refugees. they are teaching and getting money and getting salaries and they are teaching syrian children. second, at the beginning we were meals pretty.ays cook in their own house.

80 --ery individual, clean water is everywhere. they buy and they cook for themselves. i'm not giving these examples just to raise my country. to treattant thing is them as your guest. they can survive themselves. of those who are in cities 500,000, hospitals are free of charge. when they show that they are a it is a great, threat, polio. if we were given a chance to go inside, hundreds of turkish doctors will go and solve the

problem. , we cannot go. this is the problem. even sometimes our citizens are saying we have a need to carry an id so we can get free of charge health. needed is how to help. people who are living in these neighborhoods, this is a crime against humanity. if we do not raise now, it will be too late tomorrow. >> thank you. we are right out of time. we are all involved in a empowerment of

women and to have a greater role for local gm owes. -- gmos. what i can tell you is that my in six or seven years, more than doubled its activity. tripled the activity that is done with us i local ngos. all human agencies are doing the same. we are doing a huge effort to go on a line that is pointed. >> with respect to education, that is what the whole campaign is about. it is about syria's children and let's not use -- lose a generation of them. finally, it is naïve to think it is just about russia. i would be braiding -- be braiding a different country every week.

>> there is one question and comment. -- steadyrted development, it is called your security their security. polio, chemical weapons, huge issue for everybody. i wish hunger was contagious. this is all i am going to say. -- the last known i want to say is we have to look for the long-term. i will be answering my e-mails. these get in touch. whenever i feel a lack of hope, it is a good idea for me to take the phone and talk to someone inside syria. it is always a good idea for me to go in the camps and meet one of the women who is just asking me, please, just take my son to school. thank you very much.

>> the red cross has lost the largest amount of volunteer since we have statistics on losing volunteers. the core protection of our volunteers is at the very forefront of our work each and every day. phenomenon of a disintegrating health system, which i consider one of the most critical aspects of the present humanitarian crisis in syria. >> thank you. what can we take out of this? first, there are no heroes. we have to do a much better job with public opinion. this,eople are exposed to they are appalled.

it is not coming through. it has become a narrative of violence, conflict, no apparent heroes. the fact that it is a story of heroicy syrians doing things to try to say their nation, their family, their future. has somehowure gotten lost. we need to restore that. we cannot take notes from governments. the russians are the obvious targets. they have the hate disgracefully . they keep on playing politics. we have got to challenge them on that, starting this week. we cannot take no. we have to press until we get it. if we do not, we have to find ways around it.

at various times, it has failed the world. --u were a, your mandate is to theur mandate general assembly. the man who wrote it would confirm that. there have been moments when the has had to beil challenged by the general assembly. we may arrive at that moment with this. just suggest the following -- many want to see something come out of this. we have a volunteer for the recipients of e-mails. anyone who wants to help us, please e-mail her. we will work out how we can get it to the right places. there are a lot of people in this room committed to doing something.

let's not make this another talk of fallen. -- talk-a-thon. determinedt of here to call the bluff of the politicians and the diplomats, break the deadlock, lift the siege of syria. thank you very much. [applause] turning now to look at capitol hill, both chambers will be in. the houses gaveling in in about an hour. 2:00 eastern for general speeches. 5:00 back in for legislative business. to suspension bills on the agenda today. to would require colleges give veterans in-state tuition, regardless of their place of residence. later this week, we could see a bill that eases federal restrictions on hunters and fishermen. on the other side of the

capital, the senate returns at 2:00, working on the five-year to limit debate. expected around 5:30 p.m. eastern. a vote on final passage could be held tomorrow. you can watch the house live on c-span and the senate live on c-span2. later today, america's relationship with russia. security threats to the winter officials fromer the george w. bush administration. we'll have that live at 12:30 eastern on c-span2. our first lady series continues tonight with a look at laura bush. that will be underway live at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. page out our facebook where we have a question posted for you. should first lady's work outside of the white house? one person says no, she should not. i would call it double-dip

initiates paid outside of her white house duties. let's not forget hillary clinton and health care. tott writes if she chooses work for someone willing to pay her, go for. fund ork tax payers to subsidize it. you can participate at facebook.com/cspan or send us a tweet. >> i was in a car wreck that i wrote about extensively in my book. the whole time i was in the , i was praying that the other person in the car would be ok. wasother person in the car one of my best friends. i did not know. i did not recognize that at the site of the crash. overnk because i prayed and over and over for him to be ok and then he wasn't, i

thought, well nobody listened. god was not listening. my prayer was not answered. timet through a very long of not believing and not believing that prayers could be answered. it took me a long time and a lot of growing up to come back to faith. >> laura bush, tonight at 9:00 eastern on c-span and c-span3, also on c-span radio and c-span.org. watch our recent interview with her in dallas at 10:30. a look at house republican ideas at immigration legislation. this is from today's washington journal. host: we are joined at the desk by fawn johnson to dive deeper into the migration principles released by the house republicans last week.

before we get into the details, why is this document important in the larger push for immigration reform on capitol hill? guest: it is a huge shift from the house republicans over the last several years. john boehner, he has frustrated me and others for several years in refusing to tip his hand in any way as to whether he is interested in doing anything on immigration. this is a major shift in terms of -- if you are speaker boehner, for members of the house it looks like it is a tough one for them. it is a real minefield for them. this signifies a huge shift in their willingness to deal with what i think is the toughest issue that any politician deals with. host: here is the one-page document. pieces of thatl different

draft. first what was surprising to you? there was no surprise. in part because anybody who has been paying attention to the things that people who are involved in drafting and have been saying, it is included in this draft. it to start off with strong border security. republicans say that a lot. it is something we should do. it makes sense that would start with that. i did not see anything that talked about electronic verification of people who are being hired. that is a big deal in enforcement. a verification

system, but it does not spell out the details. there are some hard-core conservatives in the house who want all employers to be required to check verification of their new hires. that is a real issue for some employers, especially in agriculture. it is a give-and-take issue. if you come up with a way for there to be people here with legal status, then you can do electronic verification. they were very careful with their wording on that. making sure that they are leaving all the doors open for sensitive deals. host: how wide is the gap between this and the senate bill that we saw. the senate bill was

massive. i think you could take half of the senate bill and thrown away and it would be fine. it was part of the reason that it became as big as it did. they were trying to buy votes. it is a draft. it is a draft of principles. the senate bill has a clear path to citizenship. it is 13 years for 8 million people. 11 or 12there are million here now. this does not provide a clear path for anybody. it does suggest that certain people, and we don't know how , millions ofalify to not fear have being deported. they could become citizens, but it is not a guarantee.

that has caused some trouble for democrats. they don't want to see an underclass. this is a hard topic to deal with because the matter what you do, there are strange numbers of statuses. it starts with border security, then interior enforcement. that it has a visa tracking system and employment verification. there are legal immigration reforms. it talks about youth and individuals living outside the rule of law. they have talked about step-by-step approach to tackling this issue. is that the order in which they want to tackle this? it is in order in terms of how they would debated. it is also how they want the legislation and plummeted. it is going to pass at once.

they want a trigger. none of the legalization that they are asking for the undocumented population would go up in effect until they meet certain enforcement triggers. there are certain things they have to do first. that is a real important piece. the only trouble is there is no way to address each of those topics individually. verify is a perfect example. it requires give-and-take. when you change one aspect of the wall -- law, it affects everything else. you have to think about it as a giant rubik's cube. we have this piece, but this piece over here. if they can put on the floor, it will happen in stages. it'll happen relatively weekly.

host: phone lines are open if you have questions. fawn johnson is an image patient reform expert. republicans call at (202) 737-0001. democrats can call at (202) 737-0002. independents can call at (202) 628-0205. and if you are outside the united states you can call at (202) 628-0184. here is your story from last week. that one of the biggest issues with this release is that it gave room for republicans to be able to youuss immigration reform. bring up marco rubio. he is a perfect example. by the teaot slammed

party last year. he supported the senate bill. i talked to tea party people that say they will never trust a marco rubio again. he violated some tenet of what they believe. i talked to him a couple of days came out.s he was purposely willing to talk and say we did fix this. i wanted to do it one way. i wanted to do things piece by piece. i realized that was not possible. the house will also realize that as well. this is an important issue and we really need to do it right. passed insenate bill june of last year, he went underground. the next time he emerged to is talking about poverty and

inequality and economic issues. he was far away from immigration. -- any prizes it for participation in the senate bill. host: the principles that were released by the republicans last week flatly reject going to conference with the senate on their bill. guest: that dynamic is interesting. if the senate passes this big bill, they turn to the house and say we have something, now you do something. not just immigration, it has been everything. the rank-and-file members of the are why would we take some and you have done when we have our own process and our own issues to deal with?

what you are starting to see is taking 10 steps and we are not there yet. if the house can pass something that has all the elements that would make a comprehensive policy. then they have something they can talk to the senate about. i don't have to go to conference. there are members of the senate who sponsored that bill would be happy to go in rejigger some of the things they agreed to. congress -- conference says we will not take that bill and work it out. it does not mean they can't negotiate. members were asked about this on the sunday shows. paul ryan was asked on this week. >> here is the issue. we're not trust the president to

enforce the law. if you look at the standards they put out, it is security first. we have to secure the border. we need a verification system and a visa tracking program. those need to be individually verified before the rest of the law can occur. it is a security force, non-amnesty approach. then want to see us get into conference with the senate and compromise to about law. we won't let that happen. where itot an issue has some deadline behind it. this is a here are our standards and this is our approach. this is what we are willing to do. we will still debate in our caucus about that. we don't think we can allow this border to be overrun.

amnesty, that is a good approach. can you put some thing on the president's desk that he can sign? >> i don't know the answer to that. that is clearly in doubt. are going on if they to secure the border. it if the we might be able to get somewhere. ryan talking paul about the principles. he talked about the timing issue. is a: i feel like that point that i have heard over and over again. can it happen this year? any to talk about it this year. -- they need to talk about this year. they need to do something about

immigration before the next presidential election. they need to talk about it now because any people see it used to the issue. most rank-and-file members are not good with it. they need to get into the details about how they can talk about it in a way that makes them feel comfortable. if you look at paul ryan, he is an advocate of something copper hence of. force -- first. these are all true of the entire republican caucus. in au can talk about it way that can get policy done, everyone will feel more comfortable. the republicans are very afraid of this issue. there are people who've lost their seats on this issue in primaries. they are waiting into difficult waters here. in the long great

term, they do not want to see any victims coming out. they might actually get something done. you never know. canquestion of whether they get something this year is very premature. we will host: we start with bob from ohio on our line for republicans. caller: we have been through it before, and they are going to fix it. what i am worried about is they are going to pat themselves on and in about 6 years or 10 we will be right back at it again. -- whym saying is fix it, do anything if they aren't quite

to fix it and we will back here in 6 years? i mean, get serious, you know? i think something should be done but if they are just going to have themselves on the back and ,"y, "hey, we did a great job where are we at? host: fawn johnson? guest: i hate to say it but i couldn't agree more with this caller. one of the things i have heard that makes me a little nervous when i hear members of congress talk about this issue is that they want to fix it once and for all. . just don't see that happening the kinds of things they're talking about would make a huge defense in the country but they are not -- huge difference in the country. tomatter how much you try

shut down the border, the advocates of people who come in whatnot, you will still have an issue with immigration. a good analogy, perhaps one fraught with peril, is with the president's health-care law. the id on that was to cover .verybody -- the idea on that was to cover everybody. there are lots of people not covered. --sn't fix the problem? doesn't fix the problem? no. same thing with immigration. it is a solution for some people but not for everybody. some of the things they're talking about, like the entry exit visa system, checking people when they leave the country, that has been on the table for a long time. it has happened -- it hasn't happened in part because it is a lot of money.

the caller is right. whether that kind of skepticism is going to sink the bill, i don't know. host: brought up securing the borders several times. vivienne on twitter asks guest: say that question again. host: do we know how many illegal aliens come across the border every year that are not secured? statistics on people coming across the border are really hard to verify, because the way that we know them is by the ones who are actually apprehended. it is a little strange could i ask or don't have the figures on the top of my head. at certain points it has been roughly 400,000 a year. my think my understanding is that it has dropped in recent years because of the economy.

the other thing to remember is that from the current undocumented population we have, 40% of them are here because they came in legally, which means they had some sort of visa , like a tourist visa or something. often it means you just stay longer than you were supposed to. about peoplelking who come in over the border illegally, that is not all of them who wind up being here without their papers. ursa on our line for democrats. you are on with fawn johnson of "national journal." caller: thank you for taking my call. to me it says nothing for the american people. it brings in tens of thousands of more immigrants a year. in this economy, why do we need to bring in more low skilled and high skilled workers when americans need jobs?

25 million, $25 billion -- who is going to pay for that? host: ursa, you are talking about the senate bill? caller: to me, lobbyists, they write these bills. ryan's congress district. when i called them -- to me it seems like they don't even know what is in these bills. bill, the senate bill, cost $25 billion. taxpayers, we are the ones who have to pay for that. that the illegal immigrants have to pay, a lot of them get waivers. to me it seems like they have to pay back taxes and like, when your guest says there's only 8 million -- i don't know how many -- it is more like 50 million illegal immigrants. she said she didn't know how many came across the border.

the real amount is between 30 million and 50 million illegals. host: fawn johnson, he won a jump in here? -- you want to jump in here? guest: here is what we know about the population. -- caller is right about the the pew research center is done research on this. to 12 billion here in some sort of undocumented status. the congressional budget office looked at the senate bill, which is nice because we have actual legislative language, so we can parse it out, and says that under the senate bill, 8 million of the 11-12,000,000 who are here would be eligible to have some sort of citizenship, would be eligible to make it through earned citizenship path that they said forward. when it comes to the house, we don't really know because all we have is a one-page draft of

principle where there is a lot of squishy language. there has been some research -- someone who works for spencer abraham, a senator, is an expert in immigration and did a study about a month ago when he was looking at, ok, if we take the parameters that some of the members of congress are talking about, he estimates that anywhere between 4.5 million and 6.5 million would be eligible for some sort of citizenship under the construct the republicans are dealing with. this would mean -- host: potential house approach? we have some numbers we are showing on that. guest: he is a researcher and spends a lot of time looking at this. it is an interesting study because we have very little to go on. let's say that you -- i met you cameke this --

here illegally when you were a teenager working at a restaurant and you have been here at 10, 15 years, working at restaurants -- a place that has a lot of undocumented immigrants. things that house republicans are talking about, you could come forward and receive some sort of stamp that legally, i work here can get a drivers license, travel outside the country." that is huge for somebody who has been here a while on undocumented status. let's say you meet a nice girl, she is a citizen, you get married. under the current law, you could get a green card if she sponsors you within a 6 funds. there is no limit, nothing that stops you from -- stop that from happening. this is the kind of thing that house republicans are talking about, basically saying that we will remove the ability for you to be deported. you don't have to be afraid and don't have to be exploited and

you can work legally and our employers don't have to worry about getting fined by employing you. but we are not going to give you anything special. you have to get your citizenship through whatever paths there are. you can do it through a spouse. if you have children, a lot of people have been here long enough that they have to is -- they have a u.s. citizen children and the children as soon as they are 21 can sponsor you. or you can have your employer sponsor you. host: how long can they wait before taking one of those patents? -- paths? guest: i think -- host: details need to be worked out. guest: they can be here indefinitely just under this stamp that says i'm here, i can work. there are some people who find that to be a little upsetting, but when i talk to undocumented immigrants from that is really all they want. get aea of being able to drivers license or not having to

worry about being pulled over if you are driving without a license is amazing to them. a few tweets on our twitter page. guest: i mean, those are both very good points. one of the things i've been really fascinated with and talking to republicans in congress is they say they don't trust the president to enforce the law, but that they are very quick to say "we don't trust any president to enforce immigration laws." enforcing immigration law is really hard. it costs a lot of money and takes a lot of effort. it is not unlike the war on drugs were they just keep coming and you just keep battling them. it is a difficult thing to do

and there are political forces that some ofther the laws on immigration not be enforced. it is a dynamic that extends beyond president obama, it extends beyond the entire irradiation. -- the entire history of the issue. republicans are trying to come up with a way that the president is trying to enforce the laws. down the line, one of the things -- i hear this more from republicans than democrats, but they want a system less waste on family and more based on merit -- less based on family and more days on merit. under the current law if you have a citizen child or spouse, you can sponsor them for a green card and there is no limit to that. that is more than half of the green cards given under the current system. any other kinds of green cards that come through the employment-based system, there is a hard cap on them, meaning

that once you hit a certain limit you can go farther. there was movement afoot and it is very touchy and difficult to do, but there is a movement afoot to try to shift that a little bit more so that it is less family-based and more merit-based grid but you can expect a lot of backlash from democrats and african-americans on that one. also democrats are reacting to the document released by house republicans. he was congressman zoe lofgren -- here is commerce and zoe lofgren out of california. host: releasing her statement and comments on twitter. ,im is waiting in prescott arizona, on our line for independents. caller: good morning, and it is prescott, arkansas. thank you for taking my call. i'm against legalization or a path to citizenship. i know for a fact -- i have

worked in factories my whole life, and i know for a fact that these people that get these good being -- good paying jobs of these factories, when immigration calls, they send the illegals home for a weekend in the, can have a different name. -- for a week and then they come differenthey have a name. our economy so bad at this time that we cannot afford to give these jobs to people who are breaking our laws. i do feel sorry for these people. somehow i wish that we could moretheir country financially so that they won't have to come into the united states illegally all the time. aid frome foreign countries that hate us and want to kill us and give to these poor people that are suffering so badly that they have to leave their homes and families.

but i definitely leave that it is wrong to the the lawbreakers come in and take jobs from us who need them so, so very badly -- guest: well, let me ask you, you say you work in factories or whole life. do you know -- are there jobs -- are those jobs that your american friends would do? caller: excuse me? guest: are those jobs that your american friends would do, the factory jobs you are describing? caller: that we would do? in this part of the country we would do just about any job. there's just not a lot of work here. we just desperately needed jobs. and i don't understand how these employers are getting away with doing this. host: fawn johnson? guest: i mean, the caller makes a very good point, and this is something that i feel like the republicans in the house have a notty good argument for

doing anything involving legalization when the economy is as it is. one thing that the business community has proposed for years is to have a fluctuating number of immigrants that could come in to do work based on the economy. it is a great idea. the only problem is that it is difficult to figure out how to put it together so that it doesn't have winners and losers. the kind of anakin is you need would be forward thinking and not backward thinking. -- the kind you would need would be forward thinking and not backward thinking. youidea should be that shouldn't be allowing a bunch of people from other countries to come in and take jobs when the employment rate is -- the

unemployment rate is too high. this is something that might be coming down the road. at this point when you are hearing house republicans say is that they are not really talking so much about the future flow of immigrants, so the people who would be coming in under some kind of work visa -- they realize the economy is still recovering there are still jobs that employers say they cannot find american workers to do. i believe them. i also believe the caller -- that some of those jobs to be filled by americans, but i've talked to some of these people, industry,ly in the ag and they need that immigrant labor whether it is legal or illegal. it is a real basic problem. -- a real dicey problem. host:. steve king -- here is steve king, republican from iowa.

host: how much pushback is john boehner going to get from inside his party caucus? guest: that is the $10 million question. steve king is very clear on his point of view. he could well be right. but we just don't know, which is one of the reasons why this particular next six months is so interesting. he does not believe what republican strategists say, that you need the hispanic vote for the republican party to survive. he believes that any hispanics that are out there are probably going to vote democrat in a matter what your -- going to vote democrat no matter what. he thinks you are flouting the base, like our caller from arkansas, we said that we don't want to see this happen. is thing about steve king

that it is not entirely clear how many people actually believe him and the hard-core conservative -- the republican study committee, about 70 members. a lot of these guys spend time thinking about things other than immigration. they're looking at government spending, very hard-core in terms of the debt ceiling. they have not delved in on immigration like steve king as. -- has. how many people are going to follow in his footsteps and vote against anything because they think it will only lead to amnesty? there could be 20, there could be 70. one of the places i will be spending my time focusing on the next couple of weeks is that i will see which members of congress have not -- what members of congress who have not been outspoken on immigration will say going forward. it could be a minority of people who are very upset but in the end it lose, or could be half the caucus. we just don't know. host: dorothy is waiting in

jasper, texas, on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, you are on with fawn johnson. caller: yes, hi. decemberxico back in kind of take this whole issue off the table by signing an oil that will allow international exploration of their waters? host: dorothy, how does that take issue off the table? explain what you mean a little bit more. caller: it is the first time in years that mexico is considered allowing the u.s. and other buy oils do -- to from them. we are geared up for it year in southeast texas. it just occurs to me that this -- this is aate to

little late. this is all about votes. this is 2014. this is going to be the last , we ever see it again, i'm sure of it, because of mexico, what they did in december last year. host: fawn johnson, all about votes? guest: that's possible. i confess i'm not entirely sure what the caller is talking about because i'm not an energy reporter. certainly if mexico was able to help its economy in some ways, that might mean that fewer people are coming across the .order whether it is about votes, it yeah, i do agree with that, because there was a large contingent of hispanics and that voting block is owing -- only going to get bigger and they would like to see their undocumented friends and relatives have some form of legal status. ring filegoes to bo

clerk's question on twitter. guest: never say never but i find i am right more often when i say no than yes. this is such a difficult issue. i commend the house republicans g into it because it is fraught with peril and --y have nothing but praise nothing but grief waiting in their path. if the house republicans are able to come up with a package that democrats can deal with, something like zoe lofgren et youalifornia, whose twe read earlier, can sign off on, and it is tha -- and if a majority of house republicans go along with it, that is huge momentum and it will be hard not to keep that going.

it will put a lot of pressure on the senate. it is possible we could see something happen. it is a lot more likely they will stumble on one of the little topics that they're talking about and spent a lot of time talking about it and then we will come back next year. gary says on twitter in glenvid is waiting cove, new york, on our line for republicans. good morning. caller: yes, good morning. thanks for taking my call. i have a couple of observations and maybe a question. immigration has touched so much of everything from the economy to john stewart motions to votes to how people jobs toconomy to emotions to votes to help people keep their seats. this will not work out well when people think in those lines, because it is not going to help

immigrants, it is not going to help the economy. a lot of immigrants that are in low-paying jobs or eligible for food stamps, they also scam the system. the taxpayers pick that up. there are legitimate people who don't make enough money. but if you are working off the books, you can say you make no money. if you are a dishwasher, that is basically what happened is basically what can happen. i have seen it happen. i think there's a lot of people, too, who come across the airports and get a visa and stay longer than their visa and we have people to take those people to make sure that they either get another stint or that they leave. this is an something medically wrong -- this isn't something politically wrong in my observation. this is however country works -- this is how every country works. they have customs and you have to adhere to the laws. -- you have to adhere to the

laws when you visit another country. the people crossing the border are doing it for many different reasons -- for drug smuggling, sex trade, possibly terrorist cells. we don't know. host: all right, fawn johnson. guest: let's be clear on a couple of things. -- his the caller observation that this is affecting everything is, i mean, it is very clear it is why it is so tough. anybody who is in the country without papers is not eligible for footsteps or medicare or any other kinds of things you see. the one place where there are some taxpayer dollars going towards illegal immigrants would be in emergency rooms, and hospitals, because folks can't get turned away. but it is true that if you're here in undocumented status, if you are a legal immigrant, you are low-income, there are some benefits to qualify for. not all of them, but some. the other thing i want to make clear is that as much as we

would like to say that there is a solid entry system when it comes to the visas, there is not. it is almost egregious that this hasn't happened. this is a recommendation from the 9/11 commission, the people who have the visas leave the country are stamped undocumented . that is not happening now and it is not that hard to document someone comes into the country with a visa. it is something that needs to be done and there are a lot of different ways you can do it in ports of entry imports of exit. it just hasn't happened. the thing i find interesting about that is that there is a lot of simple stuff that we deal with when it comes to people coming in and out of the country that hasn't been published -- that hasn't been accomplished. the american people don't know it is not all been fixed like that, even things you think would be. we have been talking about

congressional reaction. i want to talk about reaction from the white house to this plan by house republicans. they came out after the president's restatement after the state of the union -- -- brief statement after the state of the union -- guest: deliberately brief. said we want to give people a path to citizenship -- i can't remember if he said "guaranteed" or not. he wanted republicans to talk about it and he said that they get angry and stop, and in this instance he has been very encouraging. it is something he has said he has wanted to do from the beginning of his administration. but this is one of those issues that, unlike health care, you can't do without republicans. i think he is happy to see them

talking. and by request for members of his own party, the more he waits in and applauds, the harder it is for publicans to do their work because a lot of their constituents, quite correctly, really hate president obama -- a lot of their constituents, quite frankly, really hate president obama. it is a tough issue for the president. he has to be very careful. host: also, talking about a video chat on friday, he made the statement that the devil is in the details. guest: right. meaning that they will look through and make sure that there is nothing that is put into this kind of legislation that would hamper their goal, which is to take this vast loss of undocumented people that have done nothing other than be here without papers and be there some sort of legal status. one thing i find inch thing about this is that this is the same dynamic that took place in 1986 when president reagan

signed legislation to give amnesty to 3 million undocumented immigrants. that was around almost five years, basically since the beginning of is an administration grid they spent a lot of time going back and forth with advocates to make sure there was nothing that could stop a certain number of them from getting amnesty. the same dynamic is playing out here. wes is waiting on our line for republicans. good morning. caller: to me, this whole immigration issue oil down to 2 issues come cheap labor and cheap folks. there are 4 issues that are important. .he first is jobs the second is that adding millions of people to the workforce is going to exacerbate unemployment and going to further worsen the wage stagnation, the president has talked about this, and yet he wants to add millions of people to the labor force. another issue is not being addressed is the technology

issues. anybody, at least around here, who has been to the grocery store has seen that we are now having these automated checkout lines and things, and i think that -- i read a couple books on this -- we are actually in the cusp overhaul robotics revolution in automation, and it is happening throughout the -- excuse me, i'm sorry, little nervous -- this is going to illuminate jobs. -- eliminate jobs. if it happens, we are going to create a massive unemployment problem 10 or 15 years down the road could what we really should be doing is thinking smart and saying, look, we are going to have this revolution in technology and we really need to only bring in people who can fit the future paradigm of the economy, not millions of people who will be able to find employment. let fawnm going to

johnson jump in and give her a chance to respond in the segment. guest: the problems of our country laid out before us by our caller. they are very solid points that he makes. we going to watch as through this is the conversation with thet happens economy and the labor force. there are a lot of service sector and kind of labor type jobs, manual labor, construction, hospitality , and agriculture, that need migrant labor, essentially. that is what they are saying. i agree with them. we know that there is a big boom in technology, a lot of change going on, which means there are a lot of people who have lost their jobs. we are trying to insert an

immigration system that affects the economy but also affects other aspects of our lives. the conversation is useful. i think the republicans are doing a very good job of keeping implement aspects in the back of everyone -- keeping the implement aspects in the back of everyone's mind when they talk about the number of people they are trying to bring in. and the people who are already here, they are ready have jobs, so some of the stuff the caller is talking about is a little down the road, but certainly on everyone's mine who is paying attention. host: fawn johnson of "national >> the house gavels in in just a few minutes. 2:00 for general speeches. on theension bills are agenda today. one would require colleges to give veterans in-state tuition, regardless of their place of residence. the senate returns at 2:00,

working on the five-year farm bill. you can watch the house live on c-span. the senate is live on c-span2. janet yellen was sworn in as a new chair of the federal reserve. she is the first woman to hold the post. she was sworn in at the federal reserve building in washington dc. a reporter before the swearing-in took place about some of the short and long-term challenges facing the new chair. we will watch some of this before the house gavels in. hour or so. we will get to the issue of the federal reserve. janet yellen is being sworn in today. she is the first woman to head the federal reserve. but it's happening this morning. i want to turn to the washington journal who has been covering the federal reserve. good morning. guest: good morning.

host: when is this happening? guest: the swearing in ceremony is at 9:00 a.m. of thethe members federal reserve board will be doing the swearing in. he has the longest tenure we are told. that is happening. you have a story in the wall street journal on the .ecision to try her agenda explain to us what you're talking about in the early agenda? looking at one of the biggest challenges on her plate as she takes over. she is trying to understand why the unemployment rate is falling as fast as it is. it was 6.7% in december.

we get another jobs report on friday and it could fall farther. it is not falling for the right reasons. people are struggling to understand if it is a healthy labor market, there are suspicions that things are going on that the labor market is not as healthy as 6.7% unemployment suggests. toy will eventually start raise short-term interest rates. labor market is getting better and they wait too long, you could have excessive inflation or financial bubbles. if they misread the situation and think things are not that rates, youhey raise can snuff out a recovery before

it has taken hold. host: she is expected to give comments about short-term or long-term outlooks for her job at the fed? guest: i don't believe so. i think the first time we will see what she has to say as the leader of the fed is going to be february 11. she will give testimony before the house financial services committee. this is a semiannual testimony that the fed general always gives. this is the first time that we know she will be publicly speaking. she will be grilled by members of congress. she was the number two at the federal reserve. how is that position being filled? guest: the president has

nominated stanley fischer. he is the former hud central banker for israel. he is the former number two person at the ins. experience inf central banking and international crisis management. the administration was very keen to have that on hand in case we had another international situation with the european crisis. they have been seeing a lot of turmoil in emerging markets. he is still awaiting a confirmation hearing date from the senate banking committee. host: last question, what is ben bernanke going to do now that he is out of the federal reserve? guest: he has not said exactly what he is going to do. we know that he is planning to

stay around washington for the time being and write a book. beyond that, we are still waiting to hear. victoria mcgrane is a wall street journal reporter. on theeciate you coming washington journal this morning. you can read her story in the washington journal >> and we take you live now to the florida house as members get ready to gavel in. -- to the floor of the house as members get ready to gavel in. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker.