system in which countries use it. as always, we will be taking your calls and you can join the conversation with facebook and twitter. "washington journal" is next. ♪ good morning. members of congress returning to washington this week. the number of cabinet onretaries set to testify capitol hill, secretary is on the senate foreign relations committee. on thursday jenny mccarthy takes questions from the house financial services subcommittee. it is march 23. the president departs for a weeklong trip later today that will begin in the netherlands and will include a visit to belgium and saudi arabia. then he will have his first meeting with pope francis as the pope welcomes him to the vatican.

we are going to begin with that question as the president meets with the pope to talk about a number of issues, including poverty, immigration, and climate change. you can join in on the conversation, the phone lines -- many of you weighing in on facebook.com. send us a tweet. good morning, let's begin with the front page of the new york times, which is focusing on community organizer barack obama, his early years in chicago. the headline is --

that is the front page of "the new york times." there's this headline from "the --l street journal here co. from "the wall street journal." david is not a more up of the washington post has a piece on the beating that took place -- piece inamura has a the washington post.

with that background he is joining us live on the phone from "the washington post." let's begin on the immigration issue because that is likely to be front and center when the president meets with pope francis on thursday. what can we expect? pope may have a more social agenda than previous leaders of the church probably had. the white house is kind of trying to capitalize on that or build a bridge there. the president recognizes some of -- thengs the pope did pope was talking about are things the white house was talking about. take a moret could humane approach to his immigration policies and deportation. this has been a big issue and a tough position for the white house. the president has been talking about the comprehensive

immigration reform and providing citizenship for these illegal immigrants. his administration has deported more people than any previous administration. pointrying to make the that republicans are enforcing the law. people wanted to go further. agenda with on the income inequality and other social issues the pope has been talking about as well. i think the president will use the opportunity to talk about that more in top publicly about it. -- and to talk publicly about it.

it was an hour-long session between the president and leaders. what do you think transpired? they made their case very strongly and very plainly to the president. that thet a surprise president had his senior -- the president told him we are going to take a deeper look at our policies, we are going to do a review. he didn't put a timetable or a scope on it but he promised them soon to a review to make the law more humane. he did not promise to vastly expand his deferral policy for deportation. we want you to press congress. maybe have a unified front and still get this more comprehensive legislation through. thisnly way to fix

long-term is legislatively. activists understood that they did not like that message because they thought the president -- certainly he has been doing a lot. i think him for that they say time is running out. -- they thank him for that but they say time is running out. are leaving families here. they say they will work with dhs on this review. i have talked to several of them. they don't necessarily have a great deal of hope it will be a dramatic shift. at is what they are looking for. athink you are looking another potential confrontation in another him -- and another couple of months. host: that topic is one of the items the president will focus on this week. hthe president previously met with pope and eight in 2009. our phone lines -- with pope

benedict in 2009. let me follow up with the reporting of carol lee. the president arrives in the netherlands tomorrow morning. as she points out in her piece, this week will give the president a chance to meet with european allies face to face in what she is describing as a fundamental reassessment of u.s. russian relations. can you reelect -- can you elaborate? they met at the white house to give a layout of the goal. it was an ambitious agenda. the situation with ukraine and russia will be the overriding storyline, especially in the first few days when the president is going to go to two different summits. one is a nuclear summits in the

netherlands and the next one is the european u.s. summit in belgium. i think the white house is saying the overriding goal is to andy u.s. allies in europe perhaps maybe put more pressure on russia with more economic sanctions. they are going to start off in the netherlands on the sidelines with the nuclear summit, something the president launched a couple of years back. it requires cooperation with russia. the president made clear they are going to start off with a separate meeting of what they is theling the g7, which seven largest economies without russia. they make the point to russia that they will be left out of these important conversations and more economic sanctions will be put on president put on -- president clinton to encrypt --

president putin to increase pressure. visitlso going to flanders field on the 100th anniversary of world war i. it is an interesting time to do that. statement to make a about the allies and major conflicts. a visual statement, as well. they're going to be doing a couple of other things. him they will talk -- they will talk about some of the conflicts going on. he will go to saudi arabia and talk about the middle east. numbing bring this back to your headline on "washington post.com -- on washingtonpos t.com. the piece begins by pointing out

-- " it look -- it will focus on the australia us -- on the israeli-palestinian peace process." guest: certainly the public statements are political but it puts the pressure on other world leaders. it will be interesting to see what kind of public statements they make together, independently of each other. the president, on other parts of the conference --you will have a huge media contingents traveling with the president. or they will certainly use the opportunity to talk to the pope

to talk about these difficult issues. and i'm sure they will bring that message forward when the president talks to his own media contingents. there's no question it will be a for anl moment african-american president visiting pope francis. i think there will be substantive issues talked about. the pope has talked about things similar to what the president has talked about. the president from his state of said raisingress the minimum wage and econometric -- and economic actions can help. he is on the white house feed for "the washington post." his work is online. we appreciate you being with us

this sunday morning. we are getting your comments on facebook and twitter. you can join in on facebook.com/cspan. --hael ahas this tweet "the national catholic reporter" has this piece on line -- "secretary of state john kerry went to the vatican earlier this year. according to officials it gives another taste of the president's upcoming visit." both sides describing that meeting on positive terms. you can get more fat online. brad is joining us from moran,

michigan. good morning to you. obama -- he has been humiliated by putin. obamacare is falling apart. his own party is running away from him. he doesn't make the laws, he has to enforce them. limitedonly a very amount of things he can do. the immigration, it's a thorny issue. these are meaningless don't thinkt i even the hispanics believe he has their best interest at heart. he's a politician and just trying to keep face. that is my opinion. host: joe has this on our facebook page --

robert is joining us from louisiana. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. [indiscernible] i would like to find out what the president talked to the floor about. maybe reducing the size of the church. i don't want to to stabilize the market. if they could sell the art they have they could get rid of some of this property they have been hoarding. maybe they can make this a better place. the italian churches are immensely willfully. they could do more personally. next from iowa, david is on the phone. as the president prepares to leave for europe, including thursday's meeting with pope

francis, good morning. caller: i just hope when president obama meets with pope francis, instead of worrying about immigration reform he might ask the president about where ourndate, catholic bishops are in lawsuits with the u.s. government. host: thank you for the call. jill lewis has this point -- "huffington post," a preview of this meeting on thursday -- "on tuesday, just a few days

meeting,e vatican the supreme court will hear arguments on the contraception debate that has sparked high controversy." focus onit is going to collaboration much more than conflict." thesupreme court heirs audio from those arguments and we will have them on friday on c-span radio. you can check it online any time areww.c-span.org. if you listening on c-span radio we welcome your calls and comments. 202-585-3880 for democrats. republicans.for @cspanwj.in us online

our next caller -- retired consulate general. i am still involved in consultant immigration law firms. if obama has been a consultative program to administer, watch for immigration reform. i don't think there was serious attention on the actual administration of the. we have 15 million people who have to leave the country and ?et in the queue to reapply how is that going to be done? i wish him well. frankly i think it is better to leave it as is. i don't see anyone getting immigration reform done. host: this morning in "the washington post," a related joins a an irish victim

panel on priest sexual abuse. our newsmakers program follows

washington journal at 7:00 eastern time -- at 10:00 eastern time. maureen is joining us from massachusetts. good morning. caller: i consider this a privilege and as american to speak. i think we should stop and be grateful for what we have and that our president and see what we can do to help instead of persecuting him. never mind he is black, he is a human being. and he is our president. the story this morning, the front page of "the new york times," the community organizer and his early work in chicago. a piece from "the washington post" --

next is tidus from hollywood, florida. in because calling --see the president being busy with the pope is a good thing. we need to be unified in america. have parties in our country that are supposed to be representing their district but at the same time you want to take away everything from the people in america. we send billions of dollars to foreign countries to support them and their problems.

here in america we are having more problems than anybody else. i think unifying with the president and the pope will be a good thing for america. going topeople are hate on it because of the fact like one group needs to stay on their side and another group needs to stay on their side. we all live in america, we are all americans. the call.ks for from the jump page of "the new york times" -- and from online, a group of saint-based environmental activists are encouraging thousands of americans to sign that petition we heard about a few minutes ago.

the online petition is designed e try to help progressive jett -- progressive evangelical organizations to ask the president to invite the pope to visit the national parks and monuments. ofmakes the religious case action on climate change. next caller -- caller: good morning. i think the pope and the president have a lot in common with the minimum wage and helping the poor. carnal -- the cardinal from boston put in a good word for the president. i would like to see the president invite the pope to new and come visit to where the most of the american catholics live. i wish him good luck. i think this is going to be a good event for the president and the pope. i hope they don't get snarky with each other. host: this from one of our

, thers, the conversation meeting with obama and pope francis will be on the state of the world, the wealth gap, poverty and social/economic issues. the primary focus will be on u.s.-russia relations and the situation in ukraine. the president will wrap up his visit in saudi arabia and will be back in washington later this week. a couple of stories related to rand paul. there's this from inside "the new york times close quote -- "the new york times you."

a related headline this morning, front page of "the new york times" -- it airs tonight at 9:35 eastern time. speech last wednesday at uc berkeley, here is a portion. [video clip] something new, your senator is in the middle of this. cia is illegally searching the computers of the senate intelligence committee. they are the ones who are supposed to be overseeing the cia. i don't know about you but that worries me. is spying on congress, who exactly can or will stop them? i look into the eyes of senators and i think i see real fear. maybe it is just my imagination

but i think i perceive fear of an intelligence community that is drunk with power, unrepentant, and am inclined to to relinquish power -- and uninclined to relinquish power. the of you have read dystopian nightmares, the dystopian novels. many of you are like me and say that could never happen in america. and yet if you have a cell phone you are under surveillance. last week a new revelation came out. the nsa uses an automated system. into millionsed of computers. they haven't even posed as a fake facebook server. you may have seen mark zuckerberg complaining to the president about this. you willve a computer, be under surveillance. who knows? they will not tell you. your government collected information from everyone of your phone calls.

that is what they arming tainting. -- are maintaining. your government stores your e-mail so they can access it without a warrant. the government claims a right to look at your every purchase online. government actually claims that none of your digital records are protected by the fourth amendment. they say they will protect them, that they say none of your records are protected by the fourth amendment. this is something we are going to fight in court erie if you own a cell phone you are under surveillance. i believe what you do on your cell phone is none of their dam business. the speech by rand paul, republican of kentucky and potential 2016 presidential candidates. he spoke with students at uc berkeley last week. you can watch that tonight at nine: 30 eastern time here on c-span.

you can listen to it on c-span radio. the meeting with pope francis on thursday as part of a weeklong trip to europe that includes the netherlands and belgium. one note about pope francis, and this is from the website -- saying it iser with reverence and admiration that -- "pope francis has inspired millions of americans with his pastoral manner and servant leadership." that from speaker john boehner and his invitation to invite the posts -- and his invitation for the pope to join a session of congress. the a list of the most influential leaders in the

world, pope francis was named bill clinton was ranked number five. the piece is available online. she is head of the -- our guest on newsmakers is the head up insurance and america's health insurance plans. our speculation is to whether or not the administration will receive the numbers it expects in order for the law to be sustainable. march 31 is the deadline to sign up. the president try to encourage young people to sign up online. here's a portion of our newsmakers interview. [video clip] would create a lower tier so people could gradually get into the program, so they could he part of the risk pool, so we don't pull the healthier people outside so the process can be working the way it was designed.

gradually,ng things just from human nature, it just makes more sense. >> wouldn't all the healthy people congregate in that lowest sphere? >> i don't think so. we are not seeing that right now by the bronze, silver, and gold. from that perspective you would expect a lot of people to buy bronze, and they have chosen silver. it is not as high a deductible. they're willing to pay a bit more per month. what i would do is give me people -- give people more choices. they'll like -- they like that. they are in control if they have more choices. met, those targets are not the young people that are so important to the implementation of the law, what's next? >> we have several options in

terms of trying to contain costs. this is an issue that relates to , as congress and states look at how the process is going, are they going to pass regulations to limit the use of our tools that would have a negative consequence for consumers? number two, without a doubt you have to look at that ms. -- that mix. at a number of healthy people have been held out of the pool. how do you price the pool? there have been some policy decisions that will help that. the question is is that enough help? we are trying to get a handle on that with our actuaries. we are continuing to look at it, looking at the data, trying to make sure that we can make things as affordable as possible. that is our objective and we have been working very hard to do it. president andhe ceo of america's health insurance plans. you can watch the newsmakers

following washington journal at 10:00 eastern time. what happened to the separation of church and state? another example of liberal hypocrisy. arizona.oining us from caller: good morning. glad that america is allowing what is going on in the world to be shared with others. remember it is not about me, it is not about you, it is about the others. it is about the others who need help. i am a retired military officer. i did not have health care coverage until i was 24. i went overseas in 2009.

i came back from i to relieve and i was in the atlanta airport . i was in one of their lounges and one individual saw me in uniform and started asking me about the president. -- saying he is not my president, is he yours? i am a member of the military. -- i said to him i hope i never live to see in we do not have a president. it is not about you, it is not about me, it is about the others. that is what they are doing. weekly, this piece -- time magazine has this piece --

and from "the new york times," what pakistan knew about bin laden -- "how can the u.s. fight extremism when we are unable to confront it where it really lives?" on hissident is focusing economy in his weekly address. here's a portion. [video clip] up half ofmen make our workforce and half of our college right to its. women are more the breadwinner than ever before. off --nomy has not cut not caught up to this new reality. a woman still earn $.77 for every dollar a man does and too many women face outdated workplace policies that holds them back. which, in turn, holds us back

and our entire economy. and woman deserves equal pay for equal work and paid leave that allows you to take a day off to take care of a sick child or parent. to act on these priorities. when women hold more lower wage jobs in america, congress needs to raise minimum wage. is in the year since i called on congress to raise minimum wage, six states have passed laws to raise fares. and cities counties, are working to raise the minimum wage as we speak. st. louis-based hide pizzerias are raising their minimum wage because it is good for business. i have signed an executive order requiring federal contractors to pay their employees at least $10.10 per hour. work hard forg to

every american, congress needs to join. going to rework the hard work of every american, congress needs to join the rest of the country and passed a bill that would lift the federal minimum wage to $10.10 per hour. this would not just raise wages for minimum wage workers, it wages for 20 million americans across the country. it will give businesses more customers with more money to spend. call up your member of congress and let them know that it is time to give america a race. is a portion of the weekly address by the president. ray snyder of michigan delivering the republican response -- this is what 80 looks like as gloria steinem turns 80.

the crania crisis has shifted the focus. we will get -- the president is looking at what carol lee is reporting, it a fundamental reassessment of u.s. relations. even in his be that even in his signature speech of the week -- even in his signature speech of the week -- he will discuss trans-atlantic relations and european security. john is joining us from pennsylvania. good morning to you. caller: hello. to say something completely different but when i just heard barack obama say that , saying what people on the left have been saying about the wage gap, if he meets with the pope

he can maybe do something about this lying that they do in order vote, over the female which is -- there are a lot of ,omen that don't fall for this they don't fall for this idea of and having this paternalistic governments take care of them. the $.70 to a dollar is a lie. what about the death gap? do youw how many have -- know how me thousands of men are maimed and killed at the workplace over the year so they can have a roof over their head? it is a meeting -- it is amazing the lack of gratitude women have for what we have accomplished. hundreds of thousands of men have died in the building of the infrastructure of this nation.

host: john from pennsylvania. meanwhile from our facebook page, there is this from elizabeth shackleford -- nic is joining us from tennessee. welcome to the conversation. caller: we have two separate religions. obama is for socialist theocracy whereas the pope is based on a christian base. wondering if the pope is going to ask him about abortion. hen he was a state senator didn't even vote two times against the act that allowed babies die if they survived an abortion. of af the commandments socialist theocracy is commitment to a higher moral authority. you have two different

religions. obama supporters buy into a religion and they discard their religion and public back ties. it is the same old same old. i want the pope to push them on abortion. he probably won't. if he does, the mainstream media won't cover it extensively. have a good day. host: thanks for the call. let me go back to this story , the list of the top 50 world's greatest leaders. pope francis tops the list. on thursday and includes a hollywood actress, a baseball superstar, a teenage advocate -- teenage education advocate, and a former american president. bill clinton ranked number five

on the list, selected for being a relentless and forceful activist in numerous causes. absent is the current president. barack obama was not excluded it he simply but did not make this year's list of 50 outstanding individuals who have demonstrated a rare leadership, leadership in multiple areas, or demonstrated a long history of leading. the white house did not respond to comments on the list. derek from maryland, good morning. guy from ♪ philadelphia or pennsylvani, i can't for member who was talking men are responsible for this. that guy is crazy. i am so glad the pope is meeting the president. as long as we continue to have

around like these phony christians who cherry pick everything they want, these people are outrageous. biggest and phoniest christians. they cherry pick the bible. why don't they all look at revelations where the talk about christ as ag jesus man with probably brass as a head of hair -- with polished brass as a head of hair. i suffered through more prejudice and bigotry that any white person in the first 20 years of my life. if it weren't for women we wouldn't be here. president and the pope

meeting over the years is not unusual. pope john paul ii came to the white house, meeting with jimmy carter. previousook at other meetings with past presidents, including one with president ronald reagan, in which the situation in the soviet union and the dissolution of the soviet union was front and center. thee is a photograph from 1980's. keith is joining us from indiana. caller: thanks for taking my call. can get thepe there is to realize more than just young black men in this country that need jobs. -- he needs to realize that she has a pen and a

-- that he has a pen and a phone. he needs to put his redline away and let people know he is going to do what he says he is going to do. when he isre that going to get jobs for people, that he is going to help all women,en and all young not just his chosen few. host: thank you for the call. that may go back to this essay from kathleen parker -- let me go back to this essay from kathleen parker.

ted is joining us from maryland. democrat line. [indiscernible] this program is starting to sound like a fox news.

the book calling in from virginia and alabama, it is craziness. we are one country and one people. stop the foolishness. host: thanks for listening. 90.1 fm for c-span radio. maxine is joining us from indianapolis. good morning. go ahead please. i want you to know that i love our president. our really too bad that nation is so harsh against him. .e is doing a good job it's a hard job. high holding his head while he has been criticized.

thanks for the call. on the republican line, craig is joining us from vermont. morning, thank you for taking my call. how can america ever be considered truly powerful when the failure to acknowledge the obvious going seven that was brought down in a controlled demolition in 9/11. host: that is a different topic. let me go back to the weekly addresses. deliver the republican response to the president's weekly's -- weekly address. here's what he had to say. [video clip] >> it is not government that creates jobs. small business owners are the engine of job creation. help up to government to create the environment where jobs can grow. my fellow republican governors and i are doing that.

state unemployment figures show 'low republican governors tax policies work. michigan tied for the largest jobless rate in the country. it is according to the most recently released numbers. republicans are balancing budgets by reforming education, pension, tax, and regulatory systems. more importantly we are putting policies and face to make our state engines of economic growth. first in the united states recovering from the great recession. we balance our budget three without accounting gimmicks, eliminated our 1.5 million dollars structural and gave michigan citizens the freedom to work on whether or not to join a union.

businesses have created more than a quarter million new jobs. there number seven in nation for personal income growth and we are once again leading the nation and manufacturing job growth. that should be a lesson for the nation. what is the problem, what are the facts? tot: rick snyder delivered your public in response to the president's weekly address. this is from one of our viewers -- ralph is joining us from carolina, good morning. i just want to comment about the man who called in about the president helping black men get jobs. wewe have a republican -- have a republican congress that will not pass a jobs bill. they don't want the poor black men or poor white men to get a job. that is why they are outsourcing , trying to keep

the president from passing a jobs bill. it is a shame, a downright disgrace what they are doing. nation,ooking at this how they are treating this man. i hope the president and the pope can come to us that come to some understanding to make this world a better place to live in. the president, who lease tonight for the netherlands -- who leaves tonight for the netherlands. he will take a weeklong trip through europe and visit the vatican. his first meeting with pope francis the second time president obama has met with the pope. in 2009 he met with pope benedict the 16th. she is the president and ceo of america's health insurance plans. among the issues we focused on,

the four-year anniversary of the signing of the affordable care act, and if she could change anything in the law what would she change? here is a preview. [video clip] tierwould create a lower so people could gradually get into the program so that they could be part of the risk pool so we don't pull the healthier people outside and so the process can work the way it was designed. we get the healthy and the sick. things gradually, just from human nature perspectives, it just makes more sense. >> wouldn't the healthy people congregate in that lowest tier? >> not necessarily. we are not seeing that right now in the ron's, silver, and gold. by that hypothesis you would expect a extraordinary amount of people to buy bronze and they , whichosen more silver is not as high a deductible. they are willing to lower their deductibles and pay a little bit more per month. give people more

choices. human nature suggests that people like that, they are in control of the have more choices. guest is the president and ceo of america's health insurance plans. we hope you tune in at 10:00 eastern time. time for one more call, barbara .rom virginia your take on the president meeting with pope francis. respond toant to some calls about the job problem. cartoon a great referring to paul ryan, what he said about the inner blacks not wanting to work. the cartoon shows him going into the inner-city and wondering who he was really referring to. it turns out he was referring to wall street and the financial district. i thought that was really funny.

never mind, thank you. parker, one of the essays leading the meeting with pope francis on thursday. topic the president will focus on this week is u.s. and europe and russian relations. david andelman will be joining us. later on, the internet. we will meet with gautham nagesh. we are back in a moment. >> the problem is that many of --se bacterial infections

they are becoming resistant to the most important antibiotics available now. examples,of the gonorrhea is another example. tb ine new strains of panama, which are absolutely persistent -- absolutely resistant to antibiotics. the other problem is there's not enough interest on the part of the pharmacy industry to develop antibiotics. the situation is slowly changing but i don't think we are there. what we need to make is a global to establish a great deal of collaboration between the developed world and developing world where many of these diseases are endemic. >> tonight at eight on c-span's "q&a."

>> the so-called millennial generation, who are having a lot of trouble getting started because they come of age and a cost of economy, -- of age in a hostile economy, they have no of getting thee benefits when they retire. there needs to be a rebalance of the social compact. it is a difficult challenge for this country politically because not only are social security and medicare half of our budget, they are by far the biggest thing we do, but it is -- the purest a statement in public policy is that as a country we are all in this together. these are programs that affect everybody. the old map of these programs do not work. >> paul taylor on the looming generational showdown. and in a few weeks, your chance to talk with military strategists and former defense

secretary bing west. live from noon to three eastern on "in-depth yuriko -- on "in death." also joined the new discussion -- >> "washington journal closed quote continues. host: joining us from new york is david andelman and max boot. thank you for being with us as we focus on the president's trip to europe and what to expect in the future with regard to russia and the ukraine. we appreciate you being with us. a macs, -- max i want to begin with you. you recently wrote the following --

can you explain you go -- can you explain? guest: i think the events of the past couple of weeks have been something you have not seen in europe since 1945, which is this redrawing of boundaries with one space seizing the territory of under theor minimalist cloak of legality, . i am afraid the message putin and others around the world, including places like beijing, will take around -- will take

away from this is aggression pays. things have changed in the past few days because for the first time president obama has put some serious sanctions on russia. we will see with the impact of that is. it is hurting the russian economy already. by and large i think there is a sense that putin is very much in control. he has been driving the agenda. he knows what he wants. confused.as been very they are afraid of provoking putin. putin is taking advantage of that. he knows that we fear him. question is how far is he going to push? is he going to be satisfied with having taken crimea or is he going to push into eastern ukraine, where you have tens of thousands of troops bordering -- troops on the border. i think we need to make clear to

him that aggression does not pay . i fear more parts of ukraine will be gone. david andelman is one of "usa today."ors to you write -- and then you say -- explain that point of view. guest: there are two things happening right now. in the ukraine there's going to be some kind of vote or presidential election. we have taken away 1.5 million voters now from the electro mix in ukraine. in ukraine. mix

what is happening in the west is even more interesting. we are -- certainly even in the post-world war ii era. what is happening right now is the united states is no longer in a position to lead. persuadel have to europe to follow the united states. the united states has been committed -- these kinds of dynamics are something that putin is gloating over at this point. host: let me ask you to react to the news of the day. this is the headline from "the washington post" --

below that -- max boot, your response? guest: this is a foregone conclusion. this is booming completed a conquest of crimea. but the conquest of crimea has gone so quickly and easily from his perspective that he may not want to stop there because really there are lots of russian ethnic and russian speaking people in the eastern part of ukraine where there is very little to stop the russian army from waltzing into there as quickly and easily as they walked into crimea. i think this is a very dangerous situation. it is not clear at this point what, if anything, nina can do -- nato can do. and inc. we need to address the situation before ukraine gets carved out anymore.

guest: i think phone has gotten what he wants for the moment. i think he is prepared to play the kind of waiting game that the west, particularly the united states companies to learn how to play. nations. we have to understand the dynamics involved here. i do not think of is prepared to risk the consequences of going into eastern ukraine, and i do not think that necessarily involves the involvement of nato. defensehas no real contract with the west in that respectful that it is not part of nato. crimea was vital to his nature of russian security on the southern play. that is stenciled to understand -- essential to understand. he needed crimea back. the simply is part of

consolidation of what he has there. i cannot see him making a major push into eastern ukraine. i think the ground goods even for putin would be too much for this very moment. guest: remember, a few weeks ago that boone was a i have no intention of annexing crime, and he went ahead and did it. and now he says knowing -- now i have no intention of entering eastern ukraine. putin is very pragmatic to be reacts to events. he saw a big loss of faced with his ally was toppling kim goodwin there was a revolution in this greets that the redwood because that is bluffing he was to see in moscow. and so he lashed out at reacted and seized crimea. that has gone very well. the russian people, by all accounts, are drunk with nationalism right now. his move to reclaim crimea, which they gave away in 1954 has in russia.y greeted he is waiting -- riding this

wave of popularity, and it is hard to predict. whether he will decide to go for it again. you need isnk relishing the disarray in the particularlynce, in the split between much of europe and the united states. i think that pushing energy eastern ukraine could have the opposite effect. i think it could unite western europe and the united states which has not been united for a very long time. that is not wins and game. as an game is first of all securing a southern flank in the black sea, particularly crimea, and then seeing what happens. let's see we can influence elections government even if not these elections, the next election style the path. putin is playing along game at this point. we need to understand that and we need to play the same kind of game. to his work ason the editor of the world policy journal, david andelman is the author of a book.

max boot, a senior fellow at the council of foreign relations is the author of a look invisible armies. there is this tweet -- guest: it would be ready sure knife and a child in the military service because my eldest is a 16-year-old girl. i think that is relevant in any case, no one is suggesting going to war with russia over the future of ukraine and crimea. there is a lot of things we do well short of war. president obama has started doing some of what needed to be done this week by enacting sanctions on 20 individuals, many of them high-ranking looking cronies, freezing their assets if they're in the united states, and also to cut off the from kremlin financiers

dollar-denominated trades which is going to have a major impact on this business. and there's more we can do under sanctions front of i think there are more individuals close to putin whose assets we can try to go after. as david suggested earlier, we need some cooperation from our allies. a lot of the rich courts have their money in london. france needs to do something two envision vision is assaulted is completing for the russian navy. -- the two amphibious assault ships it is completing for the russian navy. all of russians neighbors are including the, baltic shore in nato, but they are very concerned about this. they are very concerned about how aggressive putin is being an arb area concerned about the loss of credibility which we have seen accelerate this les

paul and president obama drake redline for wash your al-assad on the use of chemical weapons, and then he allowed bosch your al-assad to cross that redline with impunity. that is a worrisome trend which really worries our allies about what we will do two responses aggression. we do need to respond to read some of the ways we can do that in addition to the sanctions putting more u.s. and nato troops in the frontline states andbaltic poland in particular. and to make routing cuts in those events budgets, which was connected by before russian trip started taking over crimea. the size ofdegrees our on any to as few as 420,000, that is not nearly enough, and a lot of that was premised on the idea that the air out of land

wars was over. i do not think it wouldn't have gotten that message preheating the air of land wars is very much with us. we need to have sufficient forces to counter and deter the kind of representative -- right represented. david andelman, you want to respond. the russiannot see thearsaw pact worries in foreseeable future. along thes of force fringes of the great of a but i frankly think that is fostering. -- posturing. i think the actions are entirely correct in the nato allies. but we're missing one important point. we certainly do not have enough

pressure points, and we need to be consistent. fine, but look how they have worked in toronto, look how they work in south africa. a look -- it took years before they worked effectively. of 20ng bank accounts oligarchs in front of putin is not going to have an enormous effect immediately. most of them had either world money way out of sight in various activities around the world or are simply very happy and living the high life inside russia. that is not going to have a major impact. what is going to have a major impact is consistency. that is the one thing that has really been absent for all of this. not just immediate acts but also the next quite likely point. we cannot sadly tell our allies we're going to start launching cruise missiles at syria, and then when france says we will join in, and then say well we will back off and maybe this is the right time to launch cruise

missiles, we cannot do that in the future. we have to be consistent, we have to start now. vitally important, and unfortunately i fear that too much water has gone under the bridge obama to be able to repair that in this coming visit to europe. i was just going to say that i generally agree with what he david just about consistency but i differ with him and limit about the sanctions. it me be eager -- clear here, do not think the sentence are not to make food give up crimea. i do not think that is going to happen. but i think what it is vitally important would punish russia and its economy for the accurate russian that putin has just committed because we want to send a clear message to putin that there will be consequences if he goes in the further. and even more poorly devoted to send that message to the rest of the world. just think about china, which is

locked in territorial disputes with its neighbors. what is the leadership in beijing thinking right now? do they think that we can go out and sees these islands by force and no one will stop us yucca that is not the question we want -- impression we want to send. a devastating and russiang cost to the economy others will think twice. mr. boot just stole my thunder a little bit. what is to stop china from taking taiwan? they have seen the president stop -- set by, don't we have a pact with taiwan? if putin just grabbed crimea, what is to stop china from grabbing taiwan? host: we will start with david andelman. effectively has

grabs taiwan in the sense that for the immediate future it is going in their direction. there's more trade and exchanges between the taiwan and china, it is not in the position of hong kong at this point, it is a very much independent government that we recognize a guarantee, but nevertheless is moving in the right direction. this is not china's priority re arenow, taiwan -- the other issues in asia and this is a very delicate balance between ourica's egypt event and attempts to woo the europeans back to our side. winter wheat -- which are we going to be having as our priority? we need to set some clear priorities, and we have not done it up until this point. that is most unfortunate. guest: even though the situation between china and taiwan is not as fraught with tension as it has been in the past, there's an

awful lot of tension in east asia because china has been acting very aggressively, especially as it concerns these tiny little islands would are disputed sovereignty between china and the philippines, china and japan, china itself korea. haspeople's liberation army been out there acting very aggressively against neighboring states, such that the president of the philippines was recently warning that the situation there looks like a 1930 pause. -- 1930's. always --ancients obviously kno -- abe shinzo was worrying about war. demo wetried to do a could have actual shooting breaking out. this is something that we want to avoid at all cost. host: the former secretary of state has co-authored a piece in

today's washington post. how to answer putin -- she along with jim o'brien take iitep back during world war and churchill, how he used russia, and the cold war years -- view russia and the cold war years. what does this mean for ukraine's trade? under they do business without ports -- how do they do business without ports? guest: it is very difficult, but they're very closely tied into western europe. that is a good thing. i like the idea of ukraine drifting toward western europe, that is a more natural fit for them, if you will in the post-soviet era. it is a raging concept in that part of the world, we had a wonderful piece that was written for the couple of years ago by

the great granddaughter of nikita khrushchev. she's an american citizen now, and what she said was that left tobelieves -- if its own devices could become the most important country in that part of the world. partly because it is the breadbasket for that whole part of your. -- europe. that is what all of your eads off of -- all of europe feeds off of. toa stranger can tie itself them, that is were ukraine can have an important role in the future development of europe. that is a concern to russia, there is no doubt about that. the question is whether putin is really prepared to send in troops with all the consequences to try to cement that.

eastern ukraine is not the breadbasket, and the act of sending in troops would be to cut off western ukraine which is the vital part of ukraine in feeding europe and russia from any possible future links between them. i'm not quite sure that buddhist repair to risk that at this very moment. host: clearly the uprising that led to president yanukovych is , was his alliance not with western europe. do you agree with or disagree with his point that now that crimea is out of the picture in terms of where the country is going that this may be a good thing for europe and for ukraine, and potentially bad for russia? that is put in's concern, because when he saw yanukovych being toppled in kia, he thought

that was a major win for the was and a defeat for russia, which is why he acted as he did. i think the challenge now is whether europe and the united states, whether they can cement that relationship with ukraine because the situation there is very volatile. -- you remember that toember that they had an watch his relationship when russian oligarchs took over the country, and with to be careful of history repeating itself. job have not done a great of governing themselves, and the west is not done enough to solidify that relationship. this whole crisis started late last year when putin was able to iner ukraine $20 billion loan guarantees and the european union was not willing or able to ante up. arriving the belatedly imf allows them to relieve their

financial difficulties, but there are large questions about the country's future. with your, which is what most ukrainians want, but there are major divisions even within ukraine itself. what we need to do is try to promote responsible government towardo to offer a path eventual european union membership which i think is the way to ensure the long-term prosperity and stability of ukraine. only: the u.s. is still offering a billion dollars of loan guarantees, which seems to sum.nd of a nismall host: most of our guests joining us from new york -- both of our guest joining us from new york about their essays are it unavailable in journal@c-span.org -- "the new otherimes"among

-- both of our guests are joining us from new york and their essays are available on "the new york times" and other publications. when some of your guests get up and talk about leadership, that they would give us an example of what they would do instead of just saying well have leadership, they are not strong. looking back at george bushes did not makee anybody look stronger, and it made matters worse/ . when you talk about the red line not bashir al-assad, he did

cross the road line, he went and gave his chemicals up rate i do not know what they're talking about about the red line. if he says well i put the red line in if you put chemicals -- use chemicals, i will do some big companies that i will give my chemicals up. we'll go to dave and went for a response. leadership is a very important concept of something that i look a lot at particularly in the world policy journal. it is wisdom more than brute power. that is what really needs to be in the industry, wind of and industry -- wisdom and consistency. in terms of building a consensus around the use of our power. we do have an enormous am our around the world,

but we cannot in any case continue to be the world's policeman. that has finished in iraq, and iran. and we have to be consistent, and we have not been. we need to be wise, and we have not often been. unfortunately, it is too late to exercise that wants whatever hits the fan as if it's now. we cannot go back and say suddenly were going to be consistent and wise, paul was into the breach. no one follows us into the breach anymore. that is the principal problem right now, that is the problem that obama is going to praise when he goes to europe this week. correct -- i want to correct the callers mis that bashirg al-assad has given up his chemical weapons, he is only given up a small percentage. he has been dragging his feet, and basically been using that

accord to consolidate himself further into power by saying that the united states is de the rulergnize anss of syria. i do not think what is happening in syria anyway renounced to our critic -- rebounds to our credit. to have credibility and be wise in the us of our power. i disagree with him about how we are not world's policeman, i think somebody has to do it. if we do not do it, who will? if we do not step up as we had done for the last 50 or 60 years the world becomes a much more dangerous lays -- place. you have the law of the jungle instead of the rule of law, and that is what the cheryl assad and others would like to see. it is our duty that we have essentially performed that we since 1945.

we need to be back the march of dictators and creditors and stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons and stop terrorism, to deal with cross-border aggression. i think these are all monumental concerns for the entire world. if we do not show leadership, they are not going to be addressed. in last years, we are not showing enough leadership of a and so i think that countries like iran and syria and russia are getting the wrong signals. think thet of that, i world is becoming a more dangerous place. host: i want to jump in because we're short on time and i want to bring up a new point. this is from the washington post -- david and lynn -- andelman?

guest: there's no doubt about that. but again, we have had movers along the russian frontier in the baltics and poland in so long of a and russians protested about that. awould go back to that for moment that i agree almost wholeheartedly with what max has said. the policeman, perhaps, but we need to have the power to do it. that goes back to the question of preparedness and the fact that the russians can mobilize large forces on their front years. that also goes back to geopolitical issues and geography. russia does have a large in the army in its own territory which directly about onto ukrainian territory. the question is whether they are prepared to go that one extra step and step that one step over the border into ukraine.

that could be enormous and grabs more than food at this very moment is prepared to endure. i am not sure that that is the case. host: republican line, thank you for waiting. caller: good morning. would like to indicate one thing that has been missing in this conversation. this country is broke. next --ebt up into our in debt up to our necks. i want to know where this money is coming from. million 700,000 people are homeless, we need to build our bridges and cooled, and we have kids that need to go to college. to go to russia and get involved in the european problem. --hink that you guys need to excuse me for saying guys, i respect you, but you need to consider that we about wind

broke twice -- we about wind rope twice under our friend pushed. i would like to have you address that. host: a tweet -- max boot we will start with you. guest: first off, at nato does americanion with out leadership. have too large of a federal deficit and too much debt, but we also have a very productive economy. the united states is not going out of business anytime soon. but we have is covered of the past 50 years that when we show leadership, and we spend what we need to spend on defense to defend not only are -- our selves and our allies, the dividends from that have been

huge. we have a crease blood prost will -- peaceful and prosperous europe, and he is the biggest beneficiaries of our own security. we're the biggest beneficiaries of this international free system that we have overseen the world war ii. doing afford to keep that? of course. right now defense spending is only 13% of the federal budget. it is only 3.8% of our gross domestic product, and other words 3.8 cents on the dollar that we produce. those are historically low levels, and their projected to go down even more under the current events been the blueprint for the next day -- decade. those are historically low levels, we have not seen those since before world war ii. in the entire career of the cold war, we are spending an average of something like eight percent of our roast mustard water on defense. and now are spending less than four percent we can afford to

keep spending what we are spending on fence, that is what is not -- that is not what is bankrupting us. it is the medicare and medicaid programs and social security programs that are unsustainable on the current reduction -- projection. courting our -- cutting our defense rating to such extent that we only have two were greater than the entire u.s. army that are fully ready to deploy, that is not good for this country, that is not good for the world because it is spending a -- sending a ge ofrous messa weakness to our predators. host: earlier this month and commentary magazine, max boot wrote the following.

david andelman in usa today writes -- the assessment of both of our , you wantedandelman to respond? guest: max, what you said was absolutely right. a recipient of medicare myself at this point -- [laughter] --it goes back to the white of will -- point of will. do we have the will to be a

booth on the ground policeman type of leadership? i do not think we do. i do not think we have that type of will regardless of economics. he just is the question of whether we want to put our boys and our women in harms way? i think we do not want to do that anymore. we have had it with that. it is time for others to take the leadership, or at least to join more equally in that. that is something that obama is going to have to deal with when he goes to europe. i'm not sure that he is the mayity right now, and he have never had for the rest of his presidency to lead and move the western alliance along in that fashion. we have to be prepared to take other means to help willing understand that this will not work. --t: james makes this point patrick is joining us from pennsylvania. caller: i am astounded by the misinformation and the misuse of facts that are completely incorrect.

surrenderedgime has over 52% of the chemical weapons. hillary clinton who hit the nail on the head. there are information wars. when you hear the counsel for -- mitigations which is one $.3 trillion in western bank exposure in this region. can literally go on to a wonderful youtube channel called stolen clouds gathering and you can see a senior state department official negotiating the participation of a neo-nazi group in ukrainian government. plainly, they russian representative at the united nations that the nail on the head. thisid let's look at scenario, president obama is forced out of the white house by an angry mob into the arms of the in gradients.

all of a sudden cover the congress says we are going to just put in a new president. the russian government has had a relationship with ukrainian crimea for over 1000 years. have put a lot of issues of the table. we will get a response. you would like to take that? callers think the calling from deep and conspiratorial loblolly and -- lala land. he is throwing a lot of facts and figures out there somewhere which are accurate some of which are not. it is hard to know what to believe and respond. ofis throwing out a lot russian propaganda. fascism a large movement in russia itself cover that is clearly not the issue, this is just a smokescreen put out there by the russians. there are some gullible people

like the caller who swallowed the russian talking points and regards the -- regurgitate them on c-span. host: a tweet -- guest: i think one of the lessons is that we need to be ready for conflict that we do not expect because certainly on november 10, 2001 nobody imagined that we would be fighting in afghanistan of all places. no one imagined we would be flying line wars anywhere. after the gold where we downsize a military by 30%. were not ready to put words on the ground, were not ready for counterinsurgency. the actual challenges that we faced when those airplanes hit the pentagon and the world trade center, that made our job much more difficult, because in both iraq and afghanistan we were able to topple resisting

regimes. we do not have enough troops to go around, our army was way too small for the challenges that we confronted. now we're going to cut that army even more. one ofthat is ignoring the chief lessons, which is to be ready not because anybody was to fight a war expect to war, but it is to fight a war has traditionally been the best way to deter one and prevent one from from breaking out. as much as we dislike or, sometimes we are thrust into one anyway, and we want to win the early battles without suffering the huge cost that has occurred in so many conflicts. that is certainly one major lesson from iraq and afghanistan. is other best -- lesson to think about toppling the existing regime, and how do we andblish long-term peace security. that is something the bush administration completely thrilled to think about it.

unfortunately, i think the obama administration repeated the same mistake in libya, where they did not give enough thought to what would happen after gadhafi was toppled. issues that we need to think about any time we use military force. guest: even before military force. -- we have to understand the in game. we're are getting into another crisis situation with very little understand of how that is going to play out on the road. a veryct that putin has good idea of what is and game should be. i think we have no idea what the and i'-- and game would be, specially in iraq we pulled out all of a sudden. in get the same instead -- afghanistan.

something europeans may hold obamas the to the fire on, step, butt the next what is the endgame? welcome to the conversation, color from north carolina. caller: most of my questions or statements to mr. boot. putin haso be like handled this with kid gloves. ofdy say about the 95% people there and cremating wanted to stay with russia? iraq, afghanistan, we look at the price we pay, especially with our blood, and the disabilities, we just do not understand. we are not ready to commit ourselves to that kind of

sacrifice. host: max boot? to placee caller seems a lot of credence in the sham election that was taking coercion, andmed that is the same thing as believing that fidel castro was elected freely. other point of and nobody is suggesting getting a war with russia, but i think there is one lesson that we should have learned from dangerous decades like the 1930's, that we have to draw some clear red lines and stick to them, otherwise dictators will go too far.

if we do not make clear to boot that there to putin will be tremendous cost to him and his country for further aggression the danger is they will draw us into a war and the that kind of war we want to avoid. we need to make clear that we are rendered to defend ourselves and our eyes, and we will not be messed around with. if we do that, i think the prospects of keeping fees are much greater than if we appear confused --'t it, has a tent and confused. being in 1950le where we said that south korea was outside of our defensive perimeter to and that encourage troopssung to send his into south korea and created this horrible costly war that we might've been able to avoid. --t: another article

chris from alexandria, virginia. caller: i have two questions. i have not heard much to caution about it in the mainstream the bille first issue that was signed in 1984, that ukrainians covenant stage rigging up their nuclear weapons would have a security guarantee by the united kingdom, united states, and russia. i understand it does not carry the same weight as a treaty, but it seems to me my reasoning of kind of on the

hope for providing security to the ukrainians. an important point, and we will come to your follow, but let's begin with david andelman. guest: it certainly is an interesting concept. them have an accord with on that. they did give up their nuclear weapons, although it wasn't really their nuclear weapons, it was actually the soviet's nuclear weapons. it wasn't exactly their own. they did give them up and it was a security guarantee. no one has invaded ukraine. what happened was in crimea, russian to back what was its own. it was a rigged referendum, but even if it wasn't, at least three quarters of the population would have voted to go back to russia commit because they're

russians. they have always have -- always been. they decided they would turn that over to you great and they thought that was like turning over north texas to the neighboring state. it is still part of the united aids, so it was never any sense that it was going to be part of a separate country. now old son that has come and russia simply take back what was its own, what was ethically its own, and what was certainly demographically its own. back crimea, this was not an invasion of ukrainian territory except in the most arcane law cents. guest: i have to respectfully disagree. that they question invaded crimea

because they busted down the gates of the military bases. then invadedas kuwait he said that they were rocks 19 promise, but you're not allowed to read/write or national boundaries by a which is what putin is doing. that is very dangerous, and the caller put his finger on another reason why that is dangerous because what kind of message does this send about nuclear proliferation? ukraine gave a its nuclear weapons, and now it is being invaded. this waysia be acting if they still had their nuclear weapons? probably not. what kind of message does this send? is a biga message that mistake to give up your nukes because -- guest: i cannot imagine it would be called into play.

anything is possible, especially when you are in the hands of people as unpredictable as the grading government which max has quite rightly pointed out may be somewhat unpredictable and the end. that will remain to be seen. host: we're back to chris. caller: my follow-up, the petrodollar. putin has been vocal about it, especially before his invasion, or whatever you want to call it. implying thattly he was going to drop the petrodollar, stop using youtube export russian gas -- using it to export russian gas. the effects would be crashing the u.s. dollar, the state would be helping them along the way. what do you think about this threat? russia is not going to

jigger iuc different currencies because that would be against their infrastructure. what will be interesting to see played out is how russia decides to treat not only ukraine but western europe, and so on for its natural gas reserves, which is critical to the future development and future prosperity of not only western europe but ukraine as well. there is talk about her verse in the pipeline from slovakia into ukraine to pump some of the gas back into ukraine and so on. all of this remains on the table and very much an open question. that is about a question for the future, and i cannot see a rebalancing of the currencies which control this value. host: go ahead max.

guest: i was just going to say that we have a chance to use the oil up against russia. russia is basically a giant gas station run by an autograph. yes it is about to become the no one producer and boil in the world? the united states, thanks to the revolution. a tremendousto be exporter of oil and natural gas. we need to lift our regulations which forbid that from happening. something like 20 copies have applied for urban to export liquefied natural gas. it is a few years down the road, thing like this has the potential to change the complete geopolitics of the situation and take away russia's leverage over europe which is providing that natural gas.

we devote more natural gas and oil into the world market give and compressed the prices and but the kremlin in the pocketbook. we can decrease the dependence that europe has on russia for natural gas. that will be a game changer because that is the number one white that godin has of the western europeans. we need to change these outdated regulations would prevent liquefied natural gas and oil from being exported from the united states. we need to send a signal that we will use our oil weapon to defeat clinton's oil weapon. me complete with this piece -- based on that assessment, and what we have been discussing over the past hour, what do you think is next? i think again, russia's

walk softlytinue to and carry a big stick, and there is no doubt about that. the question is actually how they use and manipulate that stick. i think the united states does need to try to convince europe that we are a united front against russia that could have an important influence there. and think we need to play the same kind of waiting game that putin is trying to play. andeed to not be rescinded terms of our actions. host: max boot? is residingnk putin over what is essentially a country that has not been able to deliver the rule of law or prosperity for most of its citizens. it is kept afloat by oil prices, pressure ofe

revenue which is keeping putin and his cronies among the russian oligarchs that and happy, they are basically using the moonshine of nationalism to mobilize the population behind them and to prevent any threat to their role. so far that strategy has been pretty successful because godin has gotten huge public opinion numbers from annexing crimea, aich most russians was historical wrong. is going to get the wrong message from this. when he invaded jordan, we did little, and when he invaded crimea we have done a little more, but not much. i do not know what is to keep them from doing this again in the future. the baltic states have large russian minorities, or are much like our jacob and we do not know what is going to happen next. i respectfully disagree with

david that he is playing the waiting game. i think he is, like many predators in the past, trying to take advantage of our hesitation and indecision to drive forward on his agenda which is essentially to re-create the old russian empire and ring back some of this nationalist, and. d imperialist authority. that is very dangerous, because the state that used to be part of the soviet nuclear most of them no longer want to be part of this russian empire. what putin is doing is not only threatening to them but also to 1945tire post order. i think we need to make clear to him that there will be severe and serious consequences for what he is already done an even more serious and severe consequences if he goes any future -- further in the future. we need to mobilize our allies and a coalition to make clear to

putin that aggression will not stand. guest: the problem is that if we fail to do that, then the consequences are even more enormous. that is why am suggested that we not act precipitously in making any kind of growth that we can't this achieved on the ground. host: david anderman is the andor of a shattered peace, max boot is the author of invisible armies. a senior fellow on the council of poor relations, and also the editor of world policy journal, both joining us from new york on the sunday morning. thank you for being with us. guest: thank you. guest: thank you. . host: a tweet -- be one of the topics on the sunday morning program that you can listen to on c-span radio beginning at noon eastern

time, 9:00 a.m. for those of you on the west coast. when we come back, we're going to be joined by gautham nagesh from the wall street journal. what is next as to give up control of one aspect of the internet? what if anything has linked to that malaysia air flight three 370. of -- airlines flight back in a moment. ♪

>> shortly after world war ii, and a time of growing international tensions and increased espionage activity, the department of state became convinced that a military enforcement was needed to ure its armed forces around the world. particularly, the adverse affect of security of incident of misconduct. and adversehave effect on your duties, and these , illegallack mark money exchanges, reckless , and earlyinking

marriage. >> on real america, a training film promoting security posts. today, at 4:00 p.m. eastern, on c-span3. washington journal continues. host: we want to welcome gautham nagesh. thechnology reporter for wall street journal, thank you for being with us. guest: thank you. host: here's from the opinion page of the newspaper, and there's been a division of what you write for the news section and the opinion section, but i a on what hastion been happening with icann. let's take a step back and explain what is the internet and then what is happening with icann. guest: the internet is a network of what is happening with a set

of private companies all over the world, and then they are linked up with what we call ip addresses. these are the signposts for the internet, and the dns is like the phone book. the icann does is keep central phone book for the entire internet, and that is what allows any new user a year in america to type in www.c-span.org, and call up the server here in washington and find your website. there is no central internet, it is really thousands or millions of computers and servers all over the country. dnsip addresses and the system is what allows us to find exactly the content we're looking for. awful butof these companies, icann -- als phabet companies, icann.

guest: a multilateral stakeholder group. every person has a vote on the policy matters. they have a contract with the commerce department of the u.s.. in theory, that contract is renewed every three years from the commerce department and they have the authority to and the contract, not that anyone things that would happen. what is happening is that the commerce department is ending its role in the relationship with icann, turning it over to the broader international internet community. that is the crux of the story we're talking about. host: this is fundamental because since the internet became funded center of the last 20-30 years, this organization has is possible that has been responsible for this. thet: that is because internet was pioneered as a defense department project, and we lied on a computer scientist to lead a team at the university of southern california.

he managed the domain name system for the government. when he got away in 1998 they created a contract to manage these functions, icann. the u.s. is just one of over 100 countries that has a vote on what those policy decisions, and once they are made they are passed along to a company that is called verisign that manages the root directory of the internet which is the core central phone book directory. to that is in western virginia. host: is the u.s. losing out any control? what impact does this have on america and american technology, at any? guest: this is a matter of a little bit of debate and in practical terms, the defense department and icann say they a request refused to change.

and larger terms this is symbolic, because as we said the u.s. i needed the internet. it has always been the steward of the internet. formed byet is american valleys of the first amendment free speech, no censorship, and really trying to keep the flow of information as free and open as possible. not ever country views these issues in the same way. there are a lot of countries that think that they should have a stronger hand. many have banded if there is something that is offensive to a religious authority. there's this perception that our values prevail dominant. as becomes a more integrated part of life everywhere, these views are shifting. host: a colossal foreign-policy error, she says that it will have a long-term negative freedomsion for

around the world. is that a fair response? guest: i do not know if that is a fair response for icann itself. there's only one person at the national telecommunications and administration -- information ministries and that has information, mostar a clerical role. there is one copy of, and that a u.s.use icann is nonprofit, it is subject to u.s. law. we've seen in the past people challenge the decisions made by icann, people who wanted to run various top-level domains. they were able to win their a combination of u.s. and international law. we do not know how something like that would be handled as change down the road. host: there is a key meeting in singapore this week. >> that is correct.

host: there really going to kick off this effort, and invite everyone who is a stake in how the internet is managed, from the companies that own the back bone to the nonprofits that manage very other functions along with icann. has anmuch anyone who interest in internet governance is going to be a part of this process saying what they think the new oversight look like -- what the new oversight should look like. we have a sneak preview of another store that i want to ask you about. meeting with tech ceo to discuss governments of violence not related to -- government surveillance not related to icann. the timing of this meeting was very interesting, i think, because mark zuckerberg

publicly criticized the administration over some of regarding andres is a surveillance. these have created a large scandal in some countries, in terms of what they feel is u.s. overreach on the internet. weot of the most prominent, call them web providers, like google, they are america committee subject to american law. they have been publishing information about how many requests for information they get, but spite this a lot of this is unknown. this is creating economic pressure on u.s. businesses. the beating was viewed by many as a response by the white house to that post from mr. zuckerberg. i think the government is trying to reassure u.s. businesses that their implement them are forms are aimed to quell some of these concerns. most asn is viewed by

proof that they are spying on everyone on the internet. it is a concession that the u.s. is making to this criticism. host: this photograph of michelle obama in beijing. yesterday she spoke about the internet and internet freedom. >> it is so in portent for ideas to flow freely over the internet. that is how we discover the truth. if that is how we learn what is really happening in our communities, country, and world. that is how a decide which values and ideas we think are best. we can question and debate vigorously. we can listen to all sides of an argument and judge for ourselves. theusband and i are on receiving end of plenty of questioning from our media and citizens.

it is not always easy day. we would not trade it for anything in the world. countries arehat a stronger and more prosperous for the voices of all citizens can be heard. said, weband has respect the uniqueness of other cultures. when it comes to expressing freely and worshiping as you choose, we believe those are universal rights that are the birth rights of every person on this planet. in beijing.rst lady your assessment of what she had to say yesterday. she is beating a familiar drum. they are big on the idea that the internet should be free and open. things ining signs of turkey of them banning twitter and in not being accessible. in syria we have seen a total

internet blackout. even times unrest, of revolution, we see one of the first tools used by authoritarian regimes is to cut off communications. that used to be the phone system or the mail system. today, it is the internet. it is much more difficult. we still have people in turkey using twitter. work aroundhnical all of these blocking mechanisms. we saw that in the arab spring. when traditional forms of communication were no longer available, they became a vital forms of communication. let ordinary citizens have a platform? guest: i would have to be someone more close to the ground.

that is the narrative that has emerged. i don't know. i think there is a danger in withing online action solidarity to a cause. and it we saw some disappointment during the arab spring that the united states was not more engaged because some of the countries that were from the protesters, they interpreted the reaction they were getting from american social media users as a solidarity from the american government. in some cases we did not see the action that would have been expected. host: this is from didi fredericks. outight as well in -- source the internet, we have outsourced everything else. guest: whatever outcome of this process is, they're not going to let a government organization

take the role. the u.s. is not going to let the u.n. step in. the touchstone of this process is no government should be involved. the u.s. is getting out and everybody else needs to get out. the u.s. is talking that the internet should be free and open. we are doing all manner of things according to the report that make -- may contradict that stance publicly. this is pr in a way. as we focus on the internet, we are asking who owns it and how is it governed. our guest rights for the will -- wall street journal. randy is in virginia. caller: good morning. i just wanted to take this time to brag about my father who was the founding technology chair for them.

he is probably one of the few people who were in that room making the decision on approaching al gore and getting the funding. guest: i was unaware of that. host: we now go to seattle, washington. been 12 or 13 years since we have been going through this war. it seems like we are constantly in war. as far as talking about how -- i don't see them finding any terrorists. with the navy yard shooting and ,he sandy hook school shooting none of those things were interactive. at no listings were stopped. who are we really ready from? if we have pharmacies who put

drugs on the market on television commercials, they tell you the side effects are the might have migraine headaches or suicidal thoughts. that is very much off topic. this is from the wall street journal. he said the ukraine and crimea and the internet had something in common. vladimir putin would like to control them. guest: he was clearly referring to the notion that russia and china approached the internet governance very differently than the united states. they believe the government

should police things like spam or hate speech and they should have a hand in the content that is acceptable. we see that in china especially. there is a lot of censorship very to there is a very strong firewall in place. that american media sites are not accessible. way, that is definitely a point of view that the glutens not ins of the world are favor of an open internet. the people who will not be as clinically motivated. host: when the contract expires, what will change? guest: by then, they will figure out who will take the place of the commerce department. there will be a new sort of oversight structure to make sure doing its job in a

way that satisfies everybody that uses the internet. some reason something happens, it looks at the u.n. might try to get more involved. there is always the option of them to back out and renew the keep thewith icann and status quo. turn off ann turkey application like twitter? guest: i am not an expert in this. each country has its own network. it has to be physically wired. relies oness internet fiber-optic. there are access point. there is probably a national internet survived -- provider.

while we do perceive the internet is very open, in practical terms i handful of companies and maybe one or two regulators in every country to have the ability to access it and change it. child pornography is blocked in the united states in a way that other content is not. would concernat intelligence or terrorist value, we do see some information made available in the united states. host: will the price of getting a domain name go up? guest: that is a good question. i cannot say no. nothing should really change. whichssue the registry

administrators are the ones who sell. what is the infrastructure that can be owned? thet: we are talking about actual fiber-optic cable or copper that runs a minis the street in most cases. -- beneath the street in most cases. we're talking about industrial switches. we're talking about the physical locations. is backup and redundancy. it is a large-scale operation. some of the companies that own it.re very familiar with there are lesser-known companies who this is what they do. host: ronald is in a north carolina. caller: this is very interesting. i've been using the internet since it started.

now you have me afraid. i did not realize that anybody owned the internet. i have a website. couldpossible that this fall in the hands of people who could take away our freedom of religion. guest: the commerce department says they will not let that happen. the internet itself is a network of networks. it is not a physical thing. the infrastructure that you rely on to access the internet can be owned by people. the most immediate example is you have to pay a service provider like verizon or comcast. you have to lease a switch from them. there is a cable involved and they run the line into your home. your content is your own. nobody can own the idea of the .nternet it is an understanding between the whole world. host: this is from the weekly

standard. guest: there is a lot of truth there. ownlicymaking body does not the internet. they are not controlling the plumbing. ae way to make decisions is transparent process. there are a lot of countries involved. this is coming at the moment that it is in the wake of the

snowden disclosures. a broader of conversation about the internet governance. the debate that will take place singapore and south korea, these questions will be asked whether the u.s. vision of the internet where the it -- government is not much have -- does not have much of a hand is the way the rest of the world wants it to be. this debate came to a head in dubai in 2012. the u.s. was mabel -- able to resist. our position has weakened because of the disclosures. people who used to support us may be inclined not to. we do not know how the broader debate will play out. host: this is for -- from one of

our viewers. he says had a these changes relate to net neutrality question mark guest: it doesn't have much discernible impact. net neutrality is the idea that your internet service provider should be -- not be able to block. it should not favor its own services. currently there are no net neutrality rules. rules were passed that were challenged in court by verizon. there are no regulations at the moment. there are some nuances here. various companies may be interested in offering special services so you can buy video directly from them. at the moment, the two are not largely related. the sec will try again. we are waiting to see what that is going to look like.

a holoceneuest is reporter from the wall street journal. sheila is joining us from oklahoma. caller: thank you for taking my call. i just feel like the united a say on whathave is being done. when you think about china, and their allies, how could they not stop information from going out. that would be their desire. we should consider that. that should stop them from having information from taking over a country. do baking. to

-- banking. security is a concern. the commerce department made sure the stability would not be affected. the physical servers that house the central phonebook of the internet, those who have to be secure. they currently are. russia has an offensive capability. russia and georgia were engaged in a military conflict. the definitely attacked communications infrastructure of georgia. that is going to be a tool of warfare going forward. one of the things i wrote was that we don't know completely sa works.s --n

there are a lot of things the government does on the internet and it with cyber war that we do not know. that is why these reports keep coming out and surprising everyone. it is hard to project with the long-term future of internet governance and what the rules will mean. deal in specific. it is a good idea for the u.s. to be the stewards of the internet. we have a unique as edition. we have a constitution. entrepreneurs from other countries build their web companies here in part the cause of some of those protections. if there is any controversy over this move, it is the philosophy that it is better to have the u.s. in charge. host: if you're listening on the radio, and you're wondering what it stands for the internet corporation for assigned names and numbers.

internetcusing on the and who owns the internet. this is from one of our viewers. government. any is decentralized for a reason. caller had what i was going to talk about. the internet has been a great source of information and commerce and things like that. my main concern is since i use it more and more, the security point now is more apparent than ever. certain to rely on outfits for security for spam and other things. been something that has great since it started. the information you can get any fingertip. everybody would be aware with changes.

security is a big thing now. , how do theyng mixer security aspects are done? people take advantage of it. there are outfits out there that are smart. they can get the information. you see every day in the newspaper that people make money. is there going to be a point where we can really feel safe? these companies that offer , is that going to help more secure and make us feel better about using the internet? guest: i think this is a rising concern. if you talk to cyber security experts five or 10 years ago, they would save the internet is not a very secure technology. it was designed to be an open

technology so people could link into it. that is been very effective and successful. it is been hard to go back and take a technology that was designed to be open and build in some kind of security mechanism on top of that. that is what the tech industry has tried to do. it is fair to say that aspects of the internet are fairly secure. they are not foolproof, of course. the really big central servers that are crucial, these are extremely sophisticated in the mechanisms that they use. that should not be affected. itthe broader question, isn't. if you have something on the internet and somebody really

wants it, chances are they can get it. that includes the u.s. government. host: one of the questions that is will this be a unilateral body like the united nations that would control the internet. when do you expect the internet -- united nations to step then? is not under the purview of the u.n.. the government will not allow the u.n. to take a role. they're fairly explicit on that point. they don't want them to be involved. have is a separate move to a greater role in just managing the internet generally.

we have not seen those proposals be successful. it will try again later this year. rim is carried live on the bbc parliament channel. aaron is calling from england. go ahead with your question. internet isink the going to level off. if they are going to mess around relying companies are on a virtual private networking. move to rely on the internet.

people can exploit this. i would love to see china try and block vpn. if that ends up being a trend, can china or these other countries block the internet russia mark the color is correct. in china if you have the correct software programming, you can work around the firewall. american journalists have written about this at length. in it blocking in general can be circumvented right now. the internet is a very open structure by its root. the fact that makes it hard is is what makes it working around censorship.

it is a dual edged sword and it is designed that way on purpose. there is an idea of a balkanized internet. canadianitizens and citizens and other people who share our values on this subject, they're not going to accept an internet where they can't access information or the government is choosing a cable or minor or what websites they can go to. americans have asked -- expectations. they have had the internet for 15 years. there is no turning back. countries like russia and china might get more involved. you could see a splintered off type of internet where china had its own internet that was connected in quite the same way. that would be a solution for those countries i'm especially if they want to keep their citizens inward looking and

control the information they can by retreating i don't think that i would call it a retreat. it was planned from a very long time. the government has always said they would step from their role as an intermediary. that is what is happening. this is becoming a politically charged issue. there were questions of some republicans have expressed concern. we see support. senator rubio supports this process. it is a very nuanced issue. americans think this is problematic. we have expectations of the

government will not control what you can watch and read. leaveis a fear that if we , a vacuum will emerge and semi with different values will step then. we'll be watching this process very closely. when that starts to take place, we will see a lot of dialogue about it both here and elsewhere. we have seen some people weigh in. upton is holding a hearing on this in early april. we are seeing interest from a wide variety of stakeholders. the inter--- administration and house republicans will be to leading voices on this. we are discussing who owns the internet. thank you for answering a lot of questions and how this works. guest: thank you for having me. host: we will turn our attention

to interpol. you'll be surprised how many people travel with stolen passports. washington journal continues on this sunday morning. ♪ >> we have been bringing in public affairs events from washington for 35 years. we offer complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house. all as a public service of

private industry. we are c-span. created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago. hd on it like us on twitter. the federal trade commission has a dual job. we do that in a couple of different ways. civil lawis enforcement. we bring lawsuits against companies that engage in unfair or deceptive practices or unfair competition. research in policy and . for laws that we think are needed. is we are tell you interested in protecting consumers when it comes to the

ecosystem. whate interested in developers are engaging in. we ensure that american consumers are protected and there is a competitive landscape. >> the role of the federal trade commission, monday on the communicators. washington journal continues. to welcome an attorney in washington dc. director of aviation litigation in the reagan administration. initiated onation travelers with two stolen

passports. they are not linking these individuals to the disappearance of the airliner. we wanted to use that as a way to focus on interpol and how many passengers may be traveling on stolen passports. .his one headline can you blame? guest: it is a very difficult thing to explain. interpol has a database of the 40 million lost travel documents. the actually half of checks are made by three countries. why every country is not checking that database is quite frankly beyond me. host: what is interpol? poll: enter poll -- enter

thenter poll is international police organization. it is an organization that was founded in the early part of the 20th century. it became active after world war ii. it is not a police force per se. it is an organization to foster international cooperation among national police forces. it serves a number of functions in terms of intelligence, data gathering that, training, cooperation. .t is an international group 190 nations belong to it. the secondt is largest international membership next to the united nations. of lost these databases

travel documents that the information regarding to passports eventually came to light. it came to light after the incident. host: who controls the database? guest: the database is reported .y interpol they've got 14 different databases. it includes not only lost and stolen travel documents, it includes a firearms, sexual exploitation records, a broad range of information the law enforcement community wants. it is controlled by interpol. they ensure that it is properly administered. host: if i want to travel overseas on your passport in your reported stolen, i go to the airport check-in, is a red

flag ago one of the terminal? guest: in the united states, we checked approximately 250 million times in one year time frame. that same year, there were approximately 800 million checks. government, the u.s. as a member of enter poll actually uses the database at the point at which it makes the most sense. it is part of the routine process. in all likelihood, i would like to believe in all certainty that had anybody used a stolen or lost travel documents in connection with the flight originating in the united states that that would be identified and eight it would come up. there were something in the

order of 800 million checks. 60,000 hits were lost or stolen documents. are thee largest users states,tes -- united the united arab emirates. it is approximately half of the 800 million that are accounted for by three nations. that should not be the case. it simply indicates that of a , hundrednd 90 nations 67 art contribute data that just

doesn't make sense. host: the secretary-general had this to say about the stolen passports. i can tell you that our experience is that most of the passports that are used by people have been reported stolen are used by the true passport holder. there are 42 million passports in the database. that leaves so many travelers that could cause us harm. the world trade center bombing in 1993, one person entered the united states with a stolen passport and he masterminded the attack on the world trade center.

from our perspective, it is common sense, prudent to make sure the let no one you don't know crush your border. host: your assessment. guest: i think it is common sense what the secretary-general is saying. he indicated that approximately half of those 40 million are actually being used by the proper person, that is indicator half thought they lost their passport and found it but it was already reported in the database. the secretary-general is indicating correctly that those that remain are questionable. they are being improperly used. why countries are not using this on a regular basis, i have heard

various explanations, it doesn't make much sense irrespective of the malaysia airlines flight. what we are going to see in aree tragedies is there collateral matters that we become aware of in the investigation that are not rightly related to the actual sent or whatever it may turn out to be. we learn about an area where we can improve. we can improve on a global basis. our first caller is from texas. 9/11, i rumor hearing that bush was able to

out of bin laden family the united states. i am wondering why nobody has ever said anything about the family being here. guest: i think that is a fair question. is a function of post-9/11. a great deal changed about the world post-9/11. we became much more security centric. we became much more border centric. air travel changed dramatically for all of us. the developments we have seen in terms of the database, if you look at the interpol statistics, it is extraordinary to see its

growth from the time it was 2002ally put together in until 2014. there had already been 100 28 million checks of the database. be oneber is going to billion checks by the end of this year. issue,s of the bin laden the issue was thoroughly investigated in terms of their coming across borders in their travel. at caller can certainly look the various reports that were put out. that was thoroughly looked at in terms of how that occurred and why it occurred. host: you can join in on the conversation.

the me share this headline from the new york daily news. guest: right now, the issue has presented itself. it is expected that our lawmakers call for changes in this area. is one ofhumer several lawmakers that has indicated that countries should be penalized if they are not checking these databases. we speaking out of this, i would imagine that international organizations will. we will talk about what

international airlines should be doing. we are a traveling society. i think that is why there is such a fanatic interest in what is going on right now in terms of the amount of speculation regarding what occurred with the malaysian flight. we are an international world. i think we will see a change here. possibly over the coming months we will see a dramatic use of the they to base improving. lostll see the numbers of travel documents being reported. we will see increasing go into the database go up substantially. host: linda makes this point. why require them? our next caller is from houston.

caller: i have a question about stolen passports. we don't have that here. host: we have cecile join us. i have knowledge of the people getting together at one sitting. i want to know how well-connected is the system with an are poll and the rest of these organizations.

guest: that is a great question. --hink enter poll coordinates among nations. every country that is a member has a central bureau. for is the contact point enter poll. it is relatively easy for that law-enforcement organization to contact enter poll. interpol has an office in washington. all of the law-enforcement agencies and the major police departments are in contact and

part of the central bureau in terms of use. the amount of communication and coordination is very significant. interpol puts itself out there for national police departments in terms of information sharing and intelligence and in terms of assistance. they have a response that will hours toched in 24 help on forensics and fingerprints and dna. they have technical capabilities that they will put into play. they are an available organization. host: from the website, their mission is the world's largest police organization with 190 member countries.

if you get more information from logging on to its website. paul is calling from connecticut. caller: good morning. comment -- host: i think paul is calling on a cell phone. we are getting some feedback. i'm calling on the woman who mentioned bin laden. theas my understanding that 9/11 happen by 19 saudi who were middle-class citizens. not on the list and

enter poll would not have picked i think that is accurate in terms of the hijackers. the prior callers in three had to do with bin laden's family. there was a great deal of him media coverage about them traveling after 9/11. there is controversy regarding those issues. part of the caller's question in terms of whether they would have been on the list if they were traveling on lost aavel documents, it was function of the 9/11 of vents that the database came together. what we're looking at now is essentially post-9/11 developments in terms of the interpol database. host: dave is in the phone from

california. caller: good morning. i think the debt different reasoning eliminates all the possibilities except that the aisle -- malaysian airliner was hijacked. if there had been a mechanical failure, the copilot would've reported it to the air traffic controllers when he signed off. the plane had changed course and the tracking devices and transponder had been turned off several minutes earlier. this is getting a lot of attention. guest: it is. i think the comments about the flight going into pakistan or

suggesting it was in pakistan has been something that general mcinerney has been an advocate of in terms of believing that is what occurred. the otherve seen on news networks is a tidal wave of speculation. , youyou don't have facts really do find yourself engaging in speculation. the bits and pieces of evidence can lead to different theories. if we do find the cockpit and we find out what occurred, i think we will be left with speculation. host: steve is joining us from oregon. caller: thank you for taking my

call. i am wondering how much checking in a border crossing from mexico into california and texas. there are many thousands of cars basis in on such a rapid that not much checking is happening. guest: if anybody has ever gone i think theder caller is correct. we have different types of relationships there. each individual passport is not being checked. is going toot that change remains to be seen. i would suspect that as it relates to mexico and canada and we are not about to see every document being checked at every border crossing. host: this question is from one of our viewers.

the lost and stolen databases only one of 14 databases that enter poll maintains. -- interpol maintains. they focus on terrorism. intelligence. they provide information for police forces. they engage in trading activities on the forensics side. teamsave rapid response they will send out at the request of member nations. they are a very active organization. , they arethey are not not a police force. makingl see interpol arrests on television, but they

don't make arrests. they facilitate communication. they do issue bulletins. they have a series of other color-coded bulletins. their goal is to facilitate coordination and communication. they are very effective at that. we are talking about passports and interpol. roger is join us from houston. caller: good morning. i have a question for mark. host: go ahead. my issue was i am

adopted. not have access to our religion will birth certificates. there is a lot of difficult in getting a passport. can't properly identify residents, how can we keep track of people who are coming inbound? guest: that is a fair question. to the surface of the issues that we have domestically in terms of identity documents and establishing identity and tracing identity. that process can only be as

effective as the documents themselves. if documents are fraudulently issued, i don't think checking a database is going to tell us anything. the caller raises a good question. it really has to be addressed in a national basis in terms of internally versus and interpol basis. work with interpol the kgb or the cia? guest: they work with all national law-enforcement agencies. in terms of whether they work ,ith the kgb or the equivalent i don't know what the russians do. .ussia is a member of interpol malaysia is a member of interpol . certainly, the united states is

a member of interpol. dealing and so far as with international terrorism, the cia liaises with them. this goes back to nbc headline. what concerns would you have? to haveverybody's going a second thought about those issues. you need to ask if the country you are flying in out of checks the database. if people are flying on documents that are not lost or stolen. i think it will be greater attention shown to that. i think senator schumer's comments were joined at that. host: carol is calling from baltimore. guest: my knowledge of enter

is limited tool james bond movies. i always thought of it as a professional organization. my idea has changed. it seems to be a political statement when today's after the announced thatol they did not think it was an act of terrorism. guest: i think you raise a good point. i would disagree in terms of characteristics as a political organization. their constitution and bylaws specifically prohibit them from getting engaged in any activity

of four areas. one of those areas is clinical related issues. that does not believe -- mean that people will not run afoul of those prohibitions. toon't think it is fair suggest that comment is reflective of the fact that there are political organizations. certainly, i think the fact that we are dealing with 190 nations raises certain questions in terms of how willing those nations are to share information. we see that in the united nations. host: where does the money come from? guest: it comes from the member nations. they pay statutory charges. they are essentially dues.

in accordanceed with their ability to pay. host: sasha sent and a tweet earlier. i don't know how many americans on a passport. host: when you look at where the agency is going in the future, there will likely be changes. what would be your recommendations? guest: i think we do have to look at implementing a requirement at least in the contact -- context of this country they can be a forced -- and forced overseas. if you are a member of enter poll, -- interpol you should use the databases. one of the explanations that has been given is why the database

may not be accessed by even member nations is the cost associated with accessing it. apparently there is a charge. interpol has a network they can be accessed. they are able to give access right at the border. it is basically invisible and seamless. there are some comments that have been suggested that the cost of getting that front-line access is high. interpol has said it is not high. that is an issue that is going to be focused on. i think we will see change. i think will be change for the better. i think we'll see much wider use of that database. it may come in the form of some mandate.

host: we will conclude on that moment. ands an expert on interpol its role in overseeing travels. we appreciate you being on with us this morning. 7:00ll continue this at eastern time. our guests will be from the brookings attitude. economic downturn with public opinion polls that show little support for u.s. intervention in global hotspots. this is the fourth anniversary of the signing of the affordable care act. we will continue to scale back and close military bases. the pentagonns for

and its budget and national security. that is 7:00 a.m. eastern tomorrow. newsmakers is coming up next. thank you for being with us this sunday. have a great weekend. ♪ [no audio] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> worst debbie wasserman schultz of the national press club. atlowed by reince priebus the christian science monitor wreck this. >> karen ignagni joining us is the president and