later, american legion director talks about the veterans claims backlog and the budget reduction and how it affects members of [indiscernible] host: in international news, following a surprise call from president obama to vladimir putin, the united states and russia will hold talks on how to diffuse the crisis in ukraine. here at home, general motors 8000 vehicles to its recall for faulty ignition switches. and yesterday new jersey governor chris christie held his first press conference in nearly three months to discuss the findings of an internal review that absolves him of responsibility in the lane closures on the george

washington bridge. that is the story we are going to start off with. we take you to christie's comments yesterday and reports on the bridge gate scandal that has taken a toll on his presidential prospects, we are asking whether he can turn the moveon that incident and on. our phone lines are open. >> can call -- republicans -- -- democrats can call -- republicans -- a special lineup for new jersey residents. that number is -- you can also catch up with us on our favorites -- on your favorite social media pages to get up -- media pages. morning tod saturday you. we wanted to start off by

showing you some headlines. i will show you some papers from new jersey. here's the front page of the star-ledger today. below that -- other new jersey papers, "the record close quote reports -- record" reports -- we will take you to the front page of "the new york times" this morning. and then some of the papers here in washington. "the capitol hill newspaper" is also doing a story. and from "the hill" here on capitol hill -- out -- talking

about chris christie's press conference from yesterday. to start off we want to bring in ledger -- "the stars the star-ledger." state reporter there. we want to start with a press conference. this was chris christie's first press conference and 76 days. why did he decide to hold a press conference? it clear he was not going to talk to any of us until the report was done. he said i don't care what you think you are entitled to, you are entitled to the answers when i get them. about thedy to talk report and how it exonerated him. some of the news coming out at the top of that press

was the resignation of david samson. who is he? guest: he is the top official on the jersey side. he is a former state attorney general. it is the head of a prominent law firm. will we have learned throughout this controversy on the bridge wasdal is that his firm involved with some contractors that were doing business with the port authorities. samson, who found himself in the middle of this controversy, for a couple of .ifferent reasons because of his role as chairman -- and there were times in the many e-mails and documents

released over the last couple of months that there were references to his so-called esch to him so-called retaliating on behalf of new jersey. -- to him so-called retaliating on behalf of new jersey. christie accepted that resignation. christie made very clear to say that samson was not implicated in any way, that samsung doesn't .ecall was not part of this it just wasn't true. host: as we talk about this --ort, you wrote lead story wrote the lead story about a sex is view from -- tell me the story. when i asked the question about bridget kelly, keep in mind there has been criticism in

the tone of the report that asojected at bridget kelly s suite b. who is bridget kelly? guest: bridget kelly is the former deputy chief of staff for governor christie. because he said on january 9 that she had lied to or about having no goal involvement or knowledge about the lane closures. figure,been a central someone who has declined to participate in the federal inquiries into the matter. we you able to ask the governor about the tone of the report, some of the language you are asking just now? guest: i did.

it was interesting. he was very conversational and at times combative. when i asked about tones in the report and if he thought it was everything sher has brought upon the was one ofion, she his closest allies and advisers. i asked what to think about this? she made a comment about, that is where the facts lead and it is open to people to interpret them. there was no attempt to address the issue. this was a report commissioned by the governor's office. there's also a state and federal investigation ongoing. is that correct? guest: correct. we have not heard from paul fishman et al..

but we believe he is continuing , seeing if people there was any criminal activity involved with the lane realignment. the state legislature, controlled by democrats, has also created a panel to examine this. they have been poring over tens of thousands of pages of documents that they have subpoenaed from various people. the point of their investigation is to perhaps make reforms to make sure that something like this does not happen again. oft is more along the lines a civil case. host: before we let you go, we you able to talk to anybody yesterday and what they think this will mean down the road for potential chris christie presidential run?

guest: certainly chris christie orngs that people in iowa elsewhere -- the further you get -- anybody who might be a small part in whether they want to support him and his future political ambitions spoke science professor at mom fair who said there of staying power in terms of the report. of there was a stent -- there was a sense from the cochairwoman of the legislative panel investigating this matter that this was not going away and he cannot escape it. he would be reminding the public of but -- of what went on here. livio with the

statehouse reporter. we appreciate you getting up with us on "washington journal." can governor chris christie move past bridge gate? chance to see his press conference yesterday, we are looking for your thoughts and comments. willll start from -- we start with jayna from philadelphia on our line for republicans. i did see the briefing he gave yesterday. i thought it was very one-sided. i don't think he really explained why he spent a million dollars of the taxpayers money when the guy had no subpoena powers. think he is just trying to push this through on the people and not answering any questions. host: as a republican are you a supporter of chris christie or do you have a favorite for 2016?

was.: i host: diane is waiting from livingston new jersey on our line for democrats and special line for new jersey residents. caller: good morning. people outside in new jersey don't care. we do very much care. a we see how the political favorites, they point their friends and colleagues in these -- they appoint their friends and colleagues in these positions and later on they exonerate them. saying samson had nothing to do with it when we have a \n e-mail ash and e-mail clearly stating he health with the retaliation. the least of it is he hired these people that he now discredits and has thrown under

the bus. i would love to have more coverage on this. the only station that is giving us the tail coverage is msnbc. if anyone is interested in the nitty-gritty of this is -- of this investigation they can to win. him and rachel maddow are in this -- are on this. host, diana on our line for democrats. we are asking our viewers if chris christie can move past this so-called bridgegate scandal. that conversation is ongoing on our facebook page. lidia writes -- you can see the conversation continuing. one comment on our facebook page -- senator rand paul is a senator

who is seen as a potential contender for the 2016 presidential nomination of the republican party and a competitor in that race if chris christie were to run for that. susan livio from the star-ledger talked about what this press conference might mean down the road for a presidential run. here's chris christie who was asked that question by a reporter at a press conference yesterday. [video clip] is ie fact of the matter had nothing to do with it. supportedt has exactly what i said. i got the feeling it would be a very small --

it is simply not the way i would make a decision. is way i will make decisions what i think will be best for me if iy family, and secondly believe i have something unique and particular to offer that particular office at that particular time. of if the answer to those two questions is yes, then i will seek that office. to either of those questions is no, then i won't. if -- it's a fools errand. chris christie talking about that report came out on the internal investigation with the so-called bridgegate scandal. on our twitter page --

page -- r facebook the conversation happening on our twitter and facebook page. here with our collar as well, including neil from and which, connecticut -- from greenwich connecticut. i have been following this story pretty closely and one of the things that strikes me is the abuse of power from the port authority and the .mount of money apparently the use of the port authority police force as part of the whole bridgegate , the lack of and

reporting speaks for itself. i think there is much more to the story and obviously we are very struck by the use of the port authority police force in the matter. i don't think that has been truly investigated yet. i think there is a lot more to the story. it's still just at the beginning of the investigation. we will go to our republican line in tennessee. frances is waiting. thank you for calling "the washington journal." caller: i think this is a new jersey story that mostly people were inconvenienced than anyone else. able have been fired. i have been waiting for you all

to cover harry reid and his having to pay back money that he has given to his granddaughter. and the mayor of north carolina, charlotte, north carolina, i keep winning for you to cover that. i am waiting for the state senator in california to be covered. there have been plenty of scandals around the country. it seems like there is one story and one story only. that seems to be mr. christie in new jersey. host: thanks for the recommendations and suggestions. we are covering this this morning because of the report that came out this week that is making a whole lot of headlines, including the editorial pages. here's the wall street journal talking about christie.

here is a little bit more of chris christie when he was asked when he will be able to put this so-called bridgegate scandal he hired him. [video clip] >> i have no estimates on when this will be --

you that, as i think you have seen over the course of the last six or seven weeks, i'm back to work. i'm out there meeting with the public. i'm working with the legislature on important pieces of legislation that they are dealing with. i can control everything. -- i can't control everything. the judgment of one this will be left behind me is not purely to me. -- when this will be left behind he is not purely to me. what i can do is do my job. as it doesn't shake your confidence, you are arrogant. some people i trusted and relied upon let me down. let down thee people of the state of new jersey. of coarse that shakes your confidence.

what it resulted to do is get better. i have said any number of times for those who have covered the that i do notings have a perfect administration. there will be mistakes made by human beings. what matters is how you respond to those mistakes. i hope as we go forward we can rule -- we can -- hill here is how "the close quote newspaper described that rest conference -- "the republicans seemed at home, smirking from the press behind his podium. the presidential run --

frontrunner was largely silent with his head down. he conducted only necessary business of the head of the governor's association. -- politico notes he has impact we can schedule. he is to to speak at the republican jewish coalition this weekend in las vegas. following that he is going to the republican governors association. certainly plenty of events for the governor. jerome is up next. caller: good morning. christie has not been with

any integrity. electedwas about to be the new jersey local public article --lished an when he got in he confronted a local tv station. new jersey was overshadowed by the constant media coverage. we can only get local news, which is a commercial station. host: having a little trouble with your connection. we will go to liz waiting on our live for democrats also in new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. what the public saw yesterday was the governor attempting to resurrect his

combative style with the press. i don't think it is going to longmuch difference in the run. these investigations are not suppressed. they did get to the bottom of what happened with much of the sandy money. i don't think it's going to make my own state look too good, or the governor. it we have been paying a lot of money out for foolish things, like $1 million for this report to a private law firm that he picked. thepent 24 million so that governor could have a separate election or a replacement election that put cory booker in. you have 25 million out the window. extra 5purely spent an forion dollars of money

that commercial during the election where he sat with his family on the beach. the competitor didn't have the , put it at $5d million cheaper. in the last nine months or so we have thrown a 30 million dollars out the window. it did not need to be spent. the spending is also the subject of the editorial board of the new york times. the topic they brought up in they note -- l, let's go to our republican line, bill is waiting in georgia.

good morning, you are on "washington journal." governor christie is doing no more than the democratic party is doing. the man who investigated governor christie was a registered them the crack. -- was a registered democrat. how many democrats will have a republican investigated their stuff? everybody should be blamed for what has been done. thank you. in fromll calling georgia. roger wrightson on our twitter page --

if you have other headlines -- a few other headlines -- the lead story in today's "the new york times" --

"the washington post" gives a wrapup of that phone call. the white house description stated --

in related news --

that is the story in "the wall ."reet journal we wanted to talk about chris christie, the report that came out earlier this week. we will go to linda on our on ourdent -- go to lynn independent line in new york. caller: i wanted to point out something that the press never really picked up on. in one of christie's first responses to this whole issue, he said he has never seen -- never even heard of this. as a governor, i would expect that he would know every mayor in his state because he wants the whole state to succeed. it seems like as an executive he has failed that state. he even went to the presidency. he know?senators would how many governors wouldn't he know. that is really inappropriate management.

that is a failure of management. millions of dollars through mismanagement. i think people should try and wake up to that. it is going to be a fiscal conservative and you have to take it into account that this guy is wasting money in the millions. host: from twitter -- line.go to our republican thomas is waiting from granite falls, north carolina. thank you for calling. an old democrat trick. they did it with sarah palin and john mccain. they did it with herman cain, mitt romney. they tried to destroy someone. up the lady from new york is talking about him wasting money,

fromabout the president the united states -- the president of the united states? has people to cover up for him. host: richard is up next in florida on our line for democrats. governor soprano's attack on kelly as an adulterous political strategy. it's called "blame the underlings yuriko -- "blame the -- "blame theiko

underlings." i also wanted to point out weekly addresses are out from the white house and republicans on capitol hill. we will start from the weekly address from the white house. jill biden talked about the need to raise the minimum wage in the first weekly address he has been on. [video clip] the minimum wage will help people rise out-of-pocket you. it is good for business and helpful for the overall economy. up morew women make than half of workers who would benefit from increasing the minimum wage. a low minimum wage is reason why women in america make only $.77 on the dollar that every man makes. i raising the minimum wage we can close that gap by five percent, and it matters.

particularly moms raising families on middle wage. it's what the american people want to do. three out of four americans support raising the minimum wage. they know this is a right and fair thing to do. it's time for congress to get andnd the minimum wage congressman george miller of california. host: joe biden and his first weekly in aquatic address on the democratic -- weekly address. john boehner is expected to give republican address later this week. boehner did talk about this on the house this thursday.

we will play you a bit of that now. [video clip] house shares my deep concern over the backlog of benefit claims from the department of veterans affairs. this country has made promises that it is our duty to compete -- duty to keep -- reform will get far if it is carried out by managers who prove they are not up for the job. introduced hr 41, the ba management accountability act -- this gives that the a secretary the authority to fire and the mode officials who were not performing. done,en't getting a job you have to go. there is been no accountability. only half measures and slaps on

the wrist. this would be at any agency that has fallen down the job. this would be unacceptable. -- it is time we hold these people accountable and get in there. who can fix this backlog once and for all? we are going to be talking about some of the issues that he brings up later and today's show in the 9:00 hour. we will be joined by peter gayton to talk through some of these issues in the wake of the american legions washington week. yesterday the surprise announcement, the head of the house intelligence panel is retiring.

he is taking a job as a radio host. thatew york times notes mike rogers is in his seventh term and will join 19 democrats and 20 other republicans leaving the house before the congress next year. rogers,ement on mike speaker beta release some comments. he said about 10 minutes left, we are talking about chris christie. we are getting your responses to his press conference yesterday.

he the report on thursday that was released, we will go to our republicann line. aller: i believe if there was he by chris christie's name instead of and are the story would have been done a long time ago. i don't think christie has a very good chance to become the nominee because i don't think the press is going to let this die. the other comment is something the other caller alluded to. you have three democrats up there. harry reid, the senator from california, and the mayor of -- harry reid had to

pay back $31,000 from his campaign because he bought jewelry from his granddaughter and misidentified her on campaign documents. the guy in california was a gun control advocate. turns out he was mixed up with gun runners. mayor in was a charlotte to was taking bribes. all of those make chris christie's transgression, if they are -- if there are any, pale in comparison. we have aligned for new jersey residents. jay is waiting. good morning. people on both sides of

the fence listening this morning need to be aware of a couple of things. first of all, as far as bridgegate is concerned, if you hired an attorney to take care you can definitely look pretty but you are still a pig. the problem with that is tax money is being spent on these attorneys to basically make chris christie look like a good guy. you havetion to that, $500 million that is being spent who has -- brothers who handles all the oil and fracking. walton and also bill gates. him all of these multimillionaires -- all of these multimillionaires are sitting there trying to put this man into the presidency. he is incompetent to do so because he has shown he cannot tell the truth. he is dishonest as possible. people in north carolina and the

republicans around the country are going to find out about that very soon. this case will more than likely end up in the reports unless bridget caley -- unless bridget cause --s an identity and indemnity clause. host: j talking about what he thinks will happen in this case. the federal investigation and the state legislation led by democrats in the state house in new jersey. him we have five minutes -- we have about five minutes left. i want to run through a couple of more headlines. adding 824,000 u.s. cars to its technicians ignitionall -- switch recall ash

richard macgregor writes a surge in obamacare figures gives the president a belated boost, talking about the obamacare enrollment numbers ahead of of that march deadline. macgregor writes -- that deadline is going to be the

topic of several segments of our show on monday's "washigntongton journal." we will go to ron on our line for independents from pennsylvania. facts. i look at the the republican say this is some sort of democratic trick. you have to look at the facts. its -- they disrupted traffic on the busiest bridge in the country, possibly the world, and put millions of peoples of lives in jeopardy, costing billions of dollars. decided tobuddies pull it political pranks or , itever you want to call it

would have been charged with an act of terrorism. we all would be sitting down in gitmo. don't understand why the facts of this are coming out -- go to arlene in michigan on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: i was watching the clip you paid that she played for mr. boehner. i find it ironic that for five years congress has done absolutely nothing. no infrastructure bills, nothing on the table. if they arete was not doing their job they need to be gone. i say that applies to every .epublican in congress they have been doing nothing going on six years now and we still are where we were. no minimum wage pass, no extension on the unemployment. every republican thinks they

have a right to stick their nose in my personal feminine places. peachespractice what he -- what he preaches. let you go wee want to show you the headlines of front pages of papers out in washington. the search continues in that deadly mudslide. here is the debt -- here is "the daily herald." you can see workers coming through the debris on friday. dozens of more people can be buried in the debris left from the week old mudslide out there in washington. times" -- e the front page notes --

a moment of silence is set to take place at 10:30 a.m. this morning. up next we will take a look at the state of u.s. missile the fences with michaela dodge from the heritage foundation. missile defenses with michaela dodge from the heritage foundation. , our guest was chairman of the republican study committee. here is bit from that interview. can't pass enough bold ideas to get this economy back on track. the fact that we continue to fight for the american people, fight to get our economy back on track, that is why we are the majority in the house. if the senate is not going to address these problems, i think that is going to be one of the big issues in the senate races, just like in louisiana where we're going to have a race.

why support a leadership that re-freezes -- that refuses to bring good jobs bills to the bills wel of these have combined into this package are ideas that have been brought forth by our members. we need to continue to sharpen the focus to show people what we stand for while the president's agenda is playing out before our very eyes. millions of people are giving up on looking for work. >> are you supporting david bidder? david, i worked a lot with him in the state house. i worked with him here in congress. i think he will be a good strong leader and the kind of government that will continue to help move our state forward. i was surprised he got into the race because i think he will bring good strong bold we havetive leadership.

races in november. i'm glad he threw his hat in the ring. >> will personal discretion be a factor? >> he has addressed that before. he has been reelected since then. i think people are hungry for bold solutions. i think that is why people are so frustrated with president obama. they want somebody that is going to go out there and fight for solutions. journal"ngton continues. host: we will spend the next 45 minutes talking about u.s. and russia missile capabilities and defense policy. michaela dodge is with the heritage foundation. of how has russia's actions in crimea changed the playing field

for missile defense in europe? guest: we tend to think about russia as this changed country since the end of the cold war. it is transformed i demonstrated .cts of aggression in crimea we have to start thinking of russia as a potential adversary and adjust our missile defense and weapons policy. host: people may be wondering why we are assessing this or may be too quick to go into a cold are discussing this or may be too quick to a cold war mindset. a headline -- why are we talking missile

defense and nukes as well? talking missile defense because of guys like north korea and iran that are developing ballistic missile and weapons abilities. it is not the united states or republicans that have a cold war mindset, it is vladimir putin annexing crimea and organizing referendum for occupation. who has their cold war mindset? it's not the u.s.. russia's's talk about capabilities here. we are talking missile defense and what russia has on the other side. russia is building up its nuclear ballistic missiles. it has launched the most significant nuclear weapons and listed missile modernization since the end of the cold war.

-- and ballistic missile modernization since the end of the cold war. count as one even though they can carry even more nuclear warheads. and -- other capabilities for russia here? guest: the problem is russia is violating the arms obligations under the conventional use treaty of the u.s.. missiles have arranged to attack allies in europe. treaty it up under the and we are not violating our arms control obligations. in anpresident obama, appearance this weekend, talked about his assessment of russia. i want to play that and get your

response. here's what president obama had to say. [video clip] >> russia's actions are a problem. they don't pose the number one national security threats to the united states. i am much more concerned would come to our security with the prospect of a nuclear weapon isng off in manhattan, which part of the reason why the united states is showing its continued international andership and has organized ability to eliminate that threat and a consistent way. host: do you think the president has the priorities correct? we should not dismiss the danger of a nuclear weapon going off in u.s. territory. a russian threat is more immediate. it they are doing bad things right now. it is not as easy to detonate a nuclear weapon in manhattan as

it was for russia to annexed crimea. that is what we should be concerned about. if our responses week, vladimir -- he stated he wants to do those things. that is what we should be concerned about. if you want to join in the conversation, questions or comments for her, you can call -- can you give us a status update on missile defense in the united states and in europe as well? in the u.s. we have 30

ground-based missile interceptors that protect us from lesshes sophisticated missile threats, like north korea or potentially iran. host: these are missiles that shoot down other missiles? guest: they are kinetic warheads that are positioned into a path of the incoming adversary missiles. why sheer force of impact they destroy the incoming missile. the president has a european-based approach. construction sites are going on in romania and poland. there will be a little that they will be ballistic missile defense systems. -- have standard host: you used the term -- it is

a multistep row graham president obama announced. -- multistep program president obama announced. guest: it's a multistep andram when we deploy more more advanced capabilities to protect our european allies. host: it is a for phased row graham. fourar along are we -- phase program. how far along are we? guest: have three phases now. it is adaptive. saysbama administration the threat is not long-range, it -- that would be interceptors

capable of shooting down long-range missiles, potentially heading for the united states. the systems are under construction, both in poland and romania. deployed additional missile defense to the mediterranean. guest: another one of these systems? -- host: another one of the systems? sea-based, it is a system. the core of the system is very similar. enemyng down the ballistic missiles is the same. host: are these spread out all across the country or are they clustered in certain parts of the country? for the homeland defense, interceptors are in alaska and

california. for sea-based ballistic missile defense, those systems are on ships. the you can move the ship to where you see the threat. japan,re ships around around north korea. the point being we can move them, depending on where the threat is and where we think they will be most useful. host: we are talking with michaela dodge from the heritage foundation. she's a policy analyst on defense and strategic policy. we are here to talk u.s. missile defense systems. jackll call -- start with from rhode island. law -- seean see the the young lady is an expert on this issue. i know quite a bit on it myself read i thought i was equal on it -- myself.

i thought i was equal on it but she knows more. what we have to factor into -- concerning the russian people, is that they are a very proud people. mostwould start the awesome packed in the history of warfare when they launched the campaign in 1941. i don't think any other nation would have cornered that off. the german army was the best. and even captured ukraine the entire i -- captured ukraine. vladimir putin is very very popular and the russians wanted to do more. , ex kgb, iery shrewd believe he is going to operate slowly because in 1991 he said

the collapse of the soviet union was a debacle. this is what i want to throw out there, they withstood the most awesome attack. if the germans succeeded in that we would've had a cold war with them. i want to hear what you have to say about all of this. host: jack bringing up some of the history here and also saying that these defense systems should have been in sooner. you.: i do agree with currently we are lagging behind. potentially not only from russia, that has a sheer quantity of ballistic missiles, but potentially from north korea or iran. if our information is wrong we will be surprised and we will be vulnerable. with respect to russia, we are right -- you are right. we are not extremely competent

but they do have sheer numbers and endurance that his admirer bull in a way. bull -- admirer able in a way. putin is popular because people miss cold war times when everything was organized, when you had a steady job and didn't have to think that much independently. you could take the failures of the system and say it was a failure of idea and not a failure of your own choice. that is a theory of mass movements. is a veryght, it dangerous situation. is going to be very difficult to do anything about it. we are talking about the history of the military in russia and the united states.

not goingt history, so far back. jack was talking about world war ii. as a history of spending on the military from 1988 to 2012. you can see on the left side of that chart is the united states military spending. the far left barbie 1998 and the being 2012, when spending was up to $692 billion. red,ar right side, in the is russians spending from 1988, when it was up to $384 billion bid it dropped very quickly in the late 80's and early 90's. in 2012 it is up to $93.8 billion. helpful -- some helpful numbers from "the washington post." we were talking about missile interrupters. "what kind of debris is

debrised?" most of the burns off into the atmosphere. not really a concern. it's more of a concern for terminal phase intercepts, the last stage when a ballistic missile is really close to its target. if there is a weapon of mass destruction, you don't want it to go off on unintended. when it comes to intercept, debris is a concern for discrimination and tracking because there is a lot of stuff lying around that makes it more difficult to intercept. it's not really a concern from a safety concern. host: we talked about the u.s. missile defense system. how long does a system have if

one of these missiles is launched from russia? how much time does it take to get to the u.s.? how much time do military officials have to react? guest: the time is very short. for the longest flight, it's half an hour. so the window is when you have to track, make calculations and decide whether you will intercept it or not. it is very short. within 10-15 minutes. depending on how fast you decide and where you will intercept, you might get a second shot at the incoming missile. just in case the first shot fails. but you have a very short time line, which makes it very challenging. host: has that timeline trunk since cold war days? have missiles gotten faster? guest: it's about the same. waiting in st.

louis, missouri on our line for democrats. good morning. morning, everyone. ask, what sheo worth foreign policy is for the u.s. to ratchet up with the russians win, strategically, the europeans should be taking the lead along with nato to counter any soviet posturing, which is what i think they are doing now. i don't believe they have the economy or the long-term interests to create a conflict in europe.

why is the heritage foundation interested in ratcheting up tensions and talking about antimissile defense when what we are talking about here is the diplomatic solution? president obama seems to have the right twist on things. i am a democrat and support president obama. it seems to me that the , have as, along with us lot more economic clout and could do things together without ratcheting up talk of antimissile defenses. i do agree that europeans should be taking the lead. but we should be taking the lead with the u.s. the matter is too important for a nato alliance. some of the baltic states have

as much as 25% of russian speaking population. utin said he does not like nato on territories that were former parts of the warsaw pact. this regard to democratic choices of the people of the country. big ideas are too big to hide. seriously.take putin so far, our policy has been very good on russia. reactive tradey and has not been proactive. it has been blasted by vladimir putin. that could send exactly the wrong signal and embolden him to or actions onures the european theater. it's not the u.s. that is ratcheting up the aggression in russia with its anti-ballistic missile systems.

thatn't have a system would help us with russian ballistic missile threats. they have too many ballistic missiles. our missile defense systems are currently designed to address less sophisticated threats from countries like north korea or iran. they are not designed to address russia. that is a problem. with ballistic missiles, russia could hold our allies in europe or the u.s. hostage. that is what we don't want. we want freedom of action to stabilize things before they come more serious or spun out of control. because of miscalculations or projections of weakness or misinterpretations in putin's had. host: what would be the cost of deploying a missile defense

capable of covering 100% of any russia launches? would bech a system impossible. you will probably never have 100% success rate. even the most sophisticated, most advanced systems to not have 100% success rates. -- dold be looking at have a bullet stick missile defense system that gives you some sort of comprehensive protection against russian ballistic missiles, you would probably have to double up space-based missile defense systems, which would be more expensive. the cost of those systems would be far less than the damage an incoming ballistic missile would do. host: let's talk about the cost of missile defense in the u.s. in terms of its budget line in the 2015 budget. how much is the u.s. asked to spend on missile defense? aest: the president asked for

$.5 billion to be spent on missile defense. host: how did that compare with previous years? guest: it might be a slight increase in terms of plastic missile defense spending. 1.5% ofill less than the overall defense budget, which is less than four percent of gdp. if you think about the damage that an incoming missile could cost to the u.s. if it hit economic centers, the costs are very negligible. defense alsossile involved in some of the programs we talked about earlier in europe. how much are the european nations themselves spending on their own missile defense? guest: it depends nation by nation. the pols have launched a modernization program of their military. barry adjusted in buying air

defense and short-range ballistic missile defense. a lot of the cost associated construction of the sites and transport and political support, those are the costs that romania and poland carried. host: you have been at the heritage foundation for four years. she is here to take your calls and comments this morning as we talked about missile defense. we will go to tim, waiting in michigan on our line for republicans. good morning. caller: how are you doing come everybody? i just had a question -- i want to ask her about the possibility of star wars. killer satellites and space. i want to hear you expound on that. the star wars ballistic missiles program was what was

known as strategic defense initiative programs. it was a comprehensive program with space-based capabilities and ground-based capabilities. that is the type of capability that we need to address more robust ballistic threats. it is because of timelines involved and relative costs to ground-based interceptors. i do think come at the end of the day, if we are going to be serious about protecting the u.s. and its allies from a ballistic missile threat, from a comprehensive ballistic missile threat, we will have to go to .pace host: we want to get you to respond to sam's comment on our twitter page. he says, "there is no win when it comes to nukes."

win here?he u.s. guest: the wind is in that nuclear weapons are not used. those requirements of the deterrence might be different than requirements for war fighting. with war fighting, you might think, 200 nuclear weapons can destroy the world 40 times over. that is true. if your goal is to never get to the point where your adversary thinks he gets a benefit of using a nuclear weapon. that is why you need defenses and credible, nuclear posture and conventional posture. you need to figure out what your adversary values. caller: let's go to steve waiting out in new york on our line for independents. good morning. ♪ good morning. good morning.

isn't it early to be talking about rocket bombs? isn't that saber rattling? don't we need to find a way for putin to gracefully back down? khrushchev had to take the missiles out of cuba. he was seen by the russian leadership as weak and got fired. who would probably face the same would probably face the same thing. if russia compensated the square with an equal , giving partimea

of russia to ukraine and free gas and oil to the ukraine forever -- host: possible diplomatic solutions as opposed to provoking russia with this discussion. your thoughts? guest: so far, our policy has been very reactive. it has not been provoking at all. i don't think there is a graceful solution for mr. putin that he would consider graceful. russian -- crimea as with respect to nuclear weapons, late.lmost too we have not been paying attention to our nuclear weapons infrastructure since the end of the cold war. there has been very little thinking about those systems and our pressureust for the threats we face today. i'm not talking about russia, but about iran and north korea.

what is the nuclear dynamic in the nuclear age after the cold war? there's a tremendous intellectual gap. that is what we need to focus on also. host: what are the u.s. agencies that are responsible for maintaining missile defense and the u.s. nuclear arsenal? guest: it's the missile defense agency. host: that $8.5 billion we talked about? guest: yes. some of the ballistic missile defense programs are within the navy and the army. the navy ships are multipurpose. not only for missile defense -- they do other things, too. when it comes to nuclear weapons, nuclear warheads responsibility lies with the department of energy with the nuclear security administration. the air force and the navy are responsible for delivery systems

and intercontinental reach ballistic missiles. the navy for the strategic summering. summering. -- strategic submarine. are within the air force area response ability. for thethem are intelligence community. we use them to get our for them to' data have better pictures. host: let's go to stephen in new york on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. i want to know why anybody is listening to the heritage foundation anymore. they are owned by the defense operations. they supply misinformation that got us into iraq and killed

millions of people. all the heritage foundation wants is more alms, more war, more tension. arms, more war, more tension. guest: the majority of our americans.es from the majority of our funding the nations that are less than $50. we currently have over 600,000 members. we did not provide any information that would get us to iraq. our goal and defense policy is for the u.s. to be able to stabilizing presence and leadership that it has exercised since the end of the cold war. secondhe end of the worl world war. we know what happens when we disengage. we disengaged after the end of the first world war.

it led to the second world war. u.s. needs military tools and diplomatic tools to be able to choose our freedom of action and exercise leadership and to help to prevent conflict before they spin out of control. host: we will go to one more. steve is waiting in main on our line for republicans. good morning. to yourgood morning audience. why should american support actions that could plunge them into a potential conflict with russia? when the people pushing those actions are mostly the same abundance and media yes-men who have misled the public on the issue of building seven on 9/11 and have ignored the evidence -- hold off on the building seven calls today. hast possible that russia

advanced countermeasures that renders the west missile-defense useless -- renders the u.s. missile defense useless? guest: they are not built or designed to deal with russia's ballistic missile threats. they have very advanced systems. they have the course and countermeasures which are difficult for our current systems. we would have to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new comprehensive missile defense system in space to address russian ballistic missile threats. we should do it because we should not be vulnerable to russia. the: as we talk about different warheads that could be on these ballistic missiles, we talked about nuclear warheads. can you talk about the electromagnetic pulse somethinges? is that that is actually possible these days to put on a warhead? absolutely is possible.

able to stick missile is one of the best means of delivery detonatehe higher you the weapon, the larger area you impact with electromagnetic pulse. within that infected area, you would have no electricity, no communications. the majority of our systems would not work because we depend so much on electricity for our way of life. you can't turn on the light without electricity or go withdraw money from atms. that is ever more reason to be serious about listed missile-defense. we know that north korea has been provided with electromagnetic weapons which are nuclear warheads with electromagnetic pulse capabilities. we have to be able to defend ourselves because we don't know what guys and north korea or

iran or russia think. jay: let's go to waiting in wisconsin on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. question. a quick previous caller did mention about the heritage foundation and their track record and so forth, is and then more or less pandering to the paranoia of people that have always favored a knee-jerk reaction to these sorts of incidents? the solution is not building more weapons of mass destruction to protect our atm machines. that is ludicrous. i would be interested in her comments. guest: we are not talking about building more weapons of western traction -- weapons of mass

destruction. they have no nuclear components whatsoever. when it comes to u.s. nuclear posture, you want to posture yourself to deter an attack. requirements of deterrence might be different than requirements of war fighting. to nuclear weapons to fight a nuclear war in which nobody wins. it might take more nuclear weapons to deter your adversaries from attacking in the first place. since we have had nuclear weapons, that has been their mission. to protect the u.s. and allies from adversarial nuclear weapons attacks. we have to figure out what our adversaries think. we have to be postured to defend ourselves and postured to deny adversaries benefits of attacking us. host: i want to ask you a question that was posed by .eorge schultz

a piece in the washington post this week. ukraine gave us their nuclear weapons in 1994 partly in exchange for reassurance of its territorial integrity by the u.s., britain and russia. now, one of those reinsurers has taken rhyme you. what are the indications for proliferation? guest: the implications will be that countries that have or are trying to obtain nuclear weapons are going to feel more strongly about not giving up their nuclear weapons. again, that has very serious implications for our policy and posture and defenses. it is very unfortunate precedents. let's go to our line for

republicans. caller: good morning. that ourel ministration is hopelessly naïve putin.derestimating a man who photographs himself someone whois suffers from a napoleonic complex and doubts his masculinity. and sees himself as a conqueror. fighting with plastic button resets and calling global warming the greatest threat is not a deterrent to putin. -- i'mnching your fists

unclenching your fists is a sign of weakness to a predator. philosophytration's -- we are headed in the wrong direction. will ultimately allow iran to get nuclear weapons and the whole middle east will eventually get nuclear weapons. host: he brings up some of these other countries. can you give us your assessment of the capabilities of middle eastern nations and north korea? korea already has 6-8 nuclear warheads. we know that they are very closely cooperating with iran. toy go to north korea observe their nuclear weapons tests. iran is trying to achieve nuclear weapons capability. they are doubling systems that

would help them to achieve a nuclear weapons capability. they do not have a nuclear -- north korea has ballistic missiles that can reach hawaii and alaska. advancingrking on their ballistic missile program. the same with iran, who put a -- it made us step up our posture back in the 1960's. it was a satellite. it was not able to stick missile. technologies are very tricky. host: we have a few minutes left . we will go to robert waiting in massachusetts on our line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning.

i have a couple questions. back in the good old days, when i was in the military, missile defense was to protect our strategic missiles. i was wondering if that still remains true. i have seen that the navy has defense tog on laser shoot down incoming missiles. been developed to where it will be operational soon? weapons have not been modified. they're just sitting there. they are in need of maintenance. is that true? host: several questions there for you. currently, yes, the navy has the ploy the laser tests in the middle east. the laser systems are not capable enough yet.

they don't have the size that would fit on our platforms that we would be able to use them against longer medium-range ballistic missiles. technology doubles and we put our minds on it, we can do it. with respect or nuclear weapons, we have not been testing are nuclear weapons since 1992. program.in a stockpile we test them based on computer modeling from which we have data from the past test and we look and try to account for each factor. they are on the shelves. we are observing them very closely. even though come in the long run relywould not be able to on computer codes because nuclear weapons are incredibly

sophisticated and very difficult and finely tuned devices. we would have to be careful with how we would approach credibility of our nuclear deterrence in the future. host: you brought up the new start treaty. are they treaties in which the u.s. and russia observe each other's stockpiles and can actually assess what each other has in terms of numbers? is that happening ech? guest: there are definitions of what constitutes and accountable system. definitions,system the u.s. and russia exchange data. they also have inspections to go to the sites. -- theblem is, you start verification regime has degraded. it doesn't allow us to have a good insight into what russians are doing with respect to their

strategic modernization. not respect to us, we are modernizing. we are planning on doubling new platforms. we are not developing any nuclear weapons or warheads. there is not much to observe their. since the situation in ukraine and crimea, are those inspections continuing? guest: yes, they have continued. r in: let's go to victo texas on our line for democrats. -- you i don't want to should be ashamed for having this program. this is an insult to the intelligence -- to anybody. we are using nuclear deterrence. are you serious? out forebody is trying

fox or something. at four clockup in the morning. for clock in the th 4:00 in the morning. you don't make up something about nuclear war. to talk aboutant your credentials and how long you have been studying this issue? guest: i've been studying this issue for almost seven years now. it is incredibly important that we talk about this issue because if you ask nuclear deterrence that deterred war during the cold war and we were in much r, you want to adjust to new

environments. the world is not getting any safer just because we wanted to be. quite contrary. i'm not saying we should go back to the cold war with putin. we should think seriously about how to maintain peace. host: michaela dodges with the is with the heritage foundation. we appreciate you joining us this morning on the washington journal. guest: thank you. host: up next, we will talk .bout cyberattacks later, we will be talking about veterans issues with the executive director director of the american legion. we will be right back. ♪

>> when you look at the threats we face, when you look at things like improvised nuclear devices, we know that no one jurisdiction will ever have the capability to respond to that. we will have to bring resources from across the nation. in looking at the various threats, several which are based -- we look at all of the needs. we begin identifying critical capabilities and caps on that. part of this was to address the that by not only hoping jurisdiction by jurisdiction and as up to national capability, but actually driving some of the bigger risks and threats as an overall national response. part of this would remain i the 9/11 statute grant funding based upon the division between the

states. the other has to be competitive so that we can see in some areas of this country where maybe sponsorship by one state or one community to provide resources to one area versus each jurisdiction trying to build that capability. there is a lot of concerns about the distribution of funds. i know there's concern about our jurisdiction getting what we need. there's not a lot of trust out there. that also concerns me because in these types of large-scale events coming up we can agree upon a responsibility to work as a team, how's that going to work when a real disaster that exceeds that exceeds the jurisdiction's capability and requires all of our capabilities responding to these types of events? >> fema administrator craig fugate on his agency's 2015 budget request. from arizona, the

tucson festival of books. alan wiseman on saving the planet. followed by panels on the west-mexican border. startingay on c-span2 at noon. on american history tv, the origins of the cell phone with the motorola researcher who led the team that invented the first cell phone in 1973. sunday on c-span3. washington journal continues. host: john as the vice president of telik medications and rod at fraud at the national consumer league. they havee target -- gotten a lot of attention. you get a sense at how often these types of cyber breaches are actually occurring. guest: they happen practically everyday. have noted atey

least 4000 data breaches happening. at a rate of almost one per day. practically everybody has been a victim of a data breach. not everybody knows it. host: gore the ones that are causing these breaches? guest: there is a variety of ways that a breach can happen. it can be an employee taking a laptop that they weren't supposed to. the breaches we're are most concerned about our professional hackers. these are people who are most interested in financial gain. either through getting access to ordit cards or debit cards personal information so they can commit identity theft or other information that can quickly monetize for their own gain. host: if somebody gets your information, how does it get used? what is the process that these hackers go through to use it? guest: and the u.s., because we rely on an out of date magstripe technology on credit and debit

cards, it is fairly easy for hackers to take the information that they still from companies like target and region code that data on a counterfeit card. they take those new cards and go to a local store and buy some ndbags ands and had ba cells thasells that merchandise. if they have your social security number and date of birth and full name, that is the three major bits of information that somebody needs to go out and create a new account. they can do that by taking out new credit cards or taking out mortgages in your name and get money that way. host: what is the role the federal government has played in protecting consumers? guest: they have been charged hackers. going after

we think they can do more to prevent these breaches from happening in the first place. using things like standard settings, stronger security legislation, giving incentives to companies to invest the money they need to to protect all of the data they're collecting about consumers. we're talking about the recent high-profile breaches laces like target -- we would love to know how these breaches have affected your shopping habits. any concerns you have. had he been affected by these breaches? call (202)an 585-3880. republicans (202) 585-3881. .ndependents (202) 585-3882 outside the u.s. (202) 585-3883. let's take the target example. lots of folks calling in. what was the reaction from target after this breach

occurred? guest: target understood they had a serious problem on their hands. 40 million credit and debit card references were compromised. another 70 million records. they went into damage control mode, offering things like free credit monitoring to consumers. getting the word out and talking to banks and hopefully getting and reissuednceled to consumers. they understood they had a big problem on their hands. the question becomes, why do companies like target and others not spend the money they need to to prevent these data breaches in the first place? we understand that target receives notifications prior to this and they were not heeded. you end up with one of the largest data breaches in history. inon't think target is alone that. there are companies and other organizations across the country that are not spending enough time thinking about that.

giving more and more data to companies and organizations. it is incumbent on them to take care of that data. i don't give my money to a bank if there are too many bank robberies. consumers will stop giving their data to companies that they are not beingt it is taken care of. that has negative implications for the health of our entire economy. host: the head of target went on capitol hill this week along with the heads of some other companies that have been the targets of some of these recent data breaches. we want to play you the testimony of for the senate science and transportation committee, talking about how his company has reacted to these breaches. >> a response to the breach has been to support our guests and take action to protect them against cyber threats. we are taking it hard look at

security across our network. we don't know everything yet. we have initiated the following steps to better secure our data. we are enhancing our security systems. we are increasing key portions of our network. we are accelerating installation of additional malware tools. target this month, became the first retailer to join the financial services information sharing and analysis center. the center facilitates detection, prevention and response to cyber attacks and productivity. we are accelerating our $100 million investment in chip technology because we believe it's critical to enhance consumer protection. host: we're talking with john of the national consumers league about these recent attacks on companies and breaches of consumer debt up. we would love to know how they have changed your shopping habits. -- breaches of consumer data.

-- theion for you federal information sharing and analysis center. can you talk more about that? guest: there are a number of organizations out there that try to bring together businesses from the retail sector and financial services sector to identify and mitigate these threats. there are organizations that are run by corporations or government agencies. it's important that all of these companies talk together. there was no one single solution to this data breach issue. there needs to be a multilayered approach. that organization is just one that is doing a pretty good job on that. host: let's go to bob in washington on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i have worked in telecommunications most of my life. i know about the security problems and stuff like that.

i have worked as a security person for some of the major communications laces. .- places i'm concerned about the cloud. the personnel they have hired for these places -- how much background they have. there should be certain credentials people have that work in i.t. to know a certain amount of security. i know they are switching over leavere they want to people at terminals to handle all of the data in specific areas throughout the u.s. and everybody is vying for competition for these cloud deals on top of the major problems were talking about, thate corporations handle security cards and stuff like that. like visa and mastercard.

this is all headed in the direction where it needs to be regulated to the point where a meet up to certain specifications. per number of people or amount of traffic that they handle. i will listen for your thoughts eared guest: the caller brings up a good point. there are a number of bills pending in congress that would address exactly that issue. that we create data security standards. it depends on how many records you have to happen what credentials are necessary. -- what it a breach points to is the fact that in america, we don't have anyone cyber security standard legislation. i think that's one of the real reasons we are seeing some of these breaches. there's not enough attention

being paid at the corporate or government level. the target breach was a real wake-up call. we will see more interest on this issue on capitol hill. it seems to be one of the few bipartisan issues out there. we are hopeful that there will be change here in washington to halt better protect consumers from data breaches. host: which one of these many bills does the national consumers league support? guest: we haven't endorsed anyone in particular. it's important that consumers look at what we want to see and legislation. 46 states that have ofst some sort notification. consumers are notified to allow them to take steps to better protect themselves. regulation.tchwork there are different standards. we would like to see a strong national standard. host: and other things would like to see?

guest: things like giving the ftc the authority to make sure that they are the ones consumers can look to protect them. giving them rulemaking authority so they can make rules that keep up with technology and the ever evolving world of hackers. there are a few things we would like to see in cyber security legislation. host: now might be a good time to let people know who the national consumers league are. how are you guys funded? guest: it is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. one of the oldest protection organizations ash we have around since 1899. we are funded through a variety of grounds from individuals -- grants from ende individuals and corporations. host: peter, good morning. caller: good morning. , as we see is

technology get really advanced and we see the attacks building up, would we go to transactions in the supermarket and everything like that, we will see more biometric scanning and such things with smartphone technologies and whatnot. thumbprints and stuff like this. i'm wondering if the guest thinks that we might need a new federal agency that relies less on future technology and more on protecting identity scanning. as more of a firewall to protect against these new things. otherwise, the security protections will rely too heavy y on contractors if we don't have the oversight of a federal agency. had we expected to be that much more secure? when you rely on contractors come it's very difficult to have

oversight. some are not even operating inside the country or on behalf of the country. host: i just want to ask you, have you changed your shopping habits or use of credit cards in the wake of some of these high-profile incidents? caller: indeed. you are checking your online statements much more to make sure there are no extra charges. i know one time, i have gotten a from some random place in pakistan and i had to trace down and go through paypal and figure out -- they refunded the money. it was a random number generated attack. building.technology these new firewalls,. i'm wondering, is the situation

in place now going to do much good for that? the agencies that are primarily tasked with enforcing data security standards right now is the federal trade commission. unfortunately, the ftc's authority is being questioned in court. should they lose, we will lose the ability to protect information. the caller brings up a good point. when a breach happens or when fraud occurs, often times it's on the consumer to detect and dispute these charges. i know that many consumers check their bills regularly and look for these kinds of charges. many millions more don't. i think that is something that fraudsters count on. they can put up on these multi-age bills and -- multipage bills and they won't find them. muchould not put too

response ability of consumers to detect the impact of these breaches after they happen. we need somebody who will step in and make sure that companies are taking the steps they need to protect the data in the first place. host: a few tweaks on this topic. marie tweets -- "i don't like my purchases being tracked online." "do companies collect too much information?" guest: it's important to understand that as companies and other organizations are collecting more data, that there tohas more out protect. it's right to question how much data is being collected about them and whether that is really necessary. i think part of information security standards that you have seen it from organizations like mist and others involved talking about, do you really need to keep all this data? the greater the threat there is

that that the data will become rise. information collection is something we need to look at. host: let's go to roger in new york on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i wondered what kinds of things are being put into place, like you talked about the old technology with target and therefore it was while rubble. what kinds of things are in place to use for the cards to be better protected? -- therefore it was whil vulnerable. do they have any oversight or control over what happens there? i wondered if they had thumbprint technology or

something like that. the caller brings up a good point about the insecure nature of our current payment technology. swipe,ow, we rely on mag which is a decade old technology. the payment card industry is moving away from that old technology towards new technology. a chip-based technology. instead of having that magstripe , you'll have a chip on your card that makes it more secure and harder to counterfeit. there is currently debate going whether theyover should rely on the tohentication system or move -- they have been using in europe for years. it won't necessarily address all the fraud. in england, when they switched from magstripe to chip and pin, there was less of the counter fraud butfeit card

more internet fraud. there is a multilayer approach to this. agencies need to get serious about instituting standards and providing consumers with real protection against these thieves. host: can you talk about the incentive for companies themselves to be pushing for these sorts of things? here's a stat from usa today on the fallout on customer trips to target ever since this breach became known. the percentage of households that shop at target in january versus previous years. 10%in 2012, a drop-off of this past year. guest: that's a great stat. it points to the fact that when there are breaches, there are yeal impacts on the compan and consumer behavior. what are consumers most concerned about?

they talk about identity theft. target can'ts like protect the data we are giving , it has a real impact. it's a wake-up call to other businesses. if they are not protecting the data that they are collecting in an era when cyber thieves are are working overseas, they will see a real impact. consumers will not trust the companies. that on a larger economy will be very significant. the target example is great. it definitely points to the impact it's having on the larger economy. the role models echo some know how to protect their users. ogle, apple.

guest: the tech industry has taken a number of steps to protect consumers. using more encryption, for example. two big ways you can increase 30 .- there is no full proof way the retailers are looking closely at what they can do to mimic some of the steps to make the data they're collecting more secure. host: we would love to know how your shopping habits have changed in the wake of some of these stories that up amount. we will go to chuck in florida on our line for independents. the morning. caller: good morning, america. i have called in before on this issue. -- we will notr be able to solve this problem forl the necessity

advertising to know everything about us is ended. we need to stop this. there is a thing called a packet. wo computers can communicate without this packet. the bottom line is being hacked. it is not secure. we have been told over and over that we have no expectation of privacy on the internet. the whole purpose of aggregating all of us to use these digital devices in every aspect of our lives is nothing more than a shuttle of our information to adversaries. host: how do you shop? do you use credit cards or cash? caller: i use debit cards. i'm aware of the fact that i run the risk of my information being stolen at any given moment

because nobody is willing to secure these packets. host: the use of debit cards versus credit cards. is one safer than another? guest: it's important for consumers to understand that there are different protections when it comes to credit versus debit. when using a credit card, if there is a breach and fraud is committed on your part, you are not liable for that charge as long as you disputed. the credit card company will investigate and if they find a fraud, they will reimburse you. on a debit card for mother protections are not as great. if you lose money, you may get bankck, but only after the has completed its invest nation. the concern is, let's say you have a $100 fraud on your debit card and you go to take out money on the atm and it's not there. even though it's committed by fraud, you could get hit by an overdraft fee. we would like to see greater

consumer protections in the debit card world. chuck brought up a good point about information being collected today. there is information being collective from your smart phone, from bracelets that consumers where -- you take a walk outside your door these days and there will be information collected about you. the question becomes, are they protecting that data? -- we going into a world will see more and more collected. it's incumbent on the companies and organizations that collect that data to make sure it is safe and protected. host: a couple of stories on twitter. inrget lost my business december." "my wife and i both use credit

d debit cards at target around christmas." guest: if a bank detects fraud on your account, they will likely read issue a new card automatically. this is important for consumers to understand that there are costs involved with that. it costs the bank money to issue a new card. when you have a breach like what happened at target, their real costs to -- there are real costs to banks. those costs eventually filter down to you and me through fees and higher interest rates on loans. all of the costs that go into sustaining the bank's business. the watcher who sent in that is like millions of other consumers would have received new cards. there is a cost to that. if that debit card was linked to

automatic payment accounts, they have to go back and really get. that can be a pain. .ou can have missed payments the follow-up impacts that consumers are starting to see from the lack of security in the data world. host: john is here to take your questions and wants your comments on how you changed your shopping habits and the wake of some of these revelations. let's go to guy in tucson, arizona on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning.

the reason for my call is, i'm my credit card online because of these hackers. if they use these numbers, what little we have in the bank, they'll take. so we don't use it online. that's my reason. host: john breyault, how would you respond to guy's situation? guest: i don't think you're alone in this. i think that the fact that your wife may be on to something. you know, these cards can be hacked, and consumers should be aware of that. i think as consumers become more aware of that, you're going see more consumers like guy who are afraid to use their cards online, and that is a real impact on the greater economy. if consumers don't have confidence in the payment system in going online and shopping, then that will lead

to economic inactivity. i think that that has a real harm in the economy. this is why we think it's very important in that consumers, that government at all levels and companies take a real look at this level. y are consumers turning away from online commerce? we think it's afraid their information is not being used securely. guy, you're not alone. host: would you recommend a hard-wired internet connection over wireless, or are they both fallible? guest: well, i think there's no completely secure connection. certainly on wifi, it can be made more secure. we generally counsel consumers that if you're on an open wifi network, meaning one that isn't secured with a password or one you might access through a coffee shop, for example, or at a mcdonald's, think twice before you share personal information over that connection, such as logging on to your bank account or going

into a social media site where you have to provide credentials. because those connections have been eavesdropped on, and hackers have been known to do this. for example, in the t.j. maxx breach several years ago, the hackers were in an parking lot logging on to the open network there, and they use that had ability to launch one of the biggest breaches we have seen up until the target breach. host: jerry, good morning, on our line with republicans. you're on with john. turn down your tv and just go ahead with your comments. caller: ok. the statements i get from the credit card companies no longer have the cell phone number you can reach, whoever charged against your account. i've called the credit card companies, and they don't even have information as to who charged against the account.

they stop you, they investigate fraud, but it takes quite a while to get it off your account. i think there needs to be more regulations as the hackers have combruvene their knowledge. host: thanks for the call. your thoughts? guest: i think jerry has a point, in that oftentimes when you see these -- even when you detect potentially fraudulent charges on your credit card statement, the information that's on there may not be enough for a consumer to really know whether it's fraudulent or not. we've counseled consumers if you detect a fraud, your first call should be to your credit card or debit card company to dispute the charge, and then they are responsible for finding out if it is a valid charge or not. in the case of the caller, they aren't doing a good enough job on that, i think they need to be held to account. so consumers can reach out to their local state attorneys

general offices, for example, their local banking regulator, to raise this issue that these fraudulent charges are not being investigated and taken off their accounts fast enough. host: let's go to sharon waiting in between owe hills, california, on our line for democrats. good morning, sharon. caller: hi, good morning. this really was a big wake-up call for me, because i tape your show every day, and sometimes i watch it later on, but i was awake this morning. and i have been compromised, and i did shop in december one day. i bought a game for my grandson, because i had a gift card from there. and i got hit for about $3,500, and it's been a nightmare, on the phone almost every day, checking all the banks that they put on my credit card, and it's just -- it's getting to where my husband says don't you

do anything but stay on the phone? and i said, well, got to get it straightened out. host: sharon, stick on the line. i'm going let john respond, but then i want to hear about how your shopping habits have changed since. john breyault? guest: so, sharon, you're not alone. we take complaints at the national consumers league through our fraud.org website from consumers like you every day, who have lost thousands of dollars in scams like this. what your experience points to is that there are real costs involved not just in the money that you lost, but in the time and frustration it takes to you try and recover from this fraud. i think that's something that folks here in washington need to think more about. it's not just about the dollars, it's about the time and frustration that you have to spend dealing with this. host: sharon, what have you done since? how do you use your credit cards since that incident?

guest: normally we get a gift card every $2,000 that we spend, but we have since been -- i think our balance for this month was only $350 on our credit card versus $1,000, usually $1,000 or a little bit more. host: sharon, thanks for calling in and talking about your story. one of the things in the target situation, the c.f.o. of target said they offered free credit monitoring to people that had been affected by this hack. do you recommend these credit monitoring services? guest: well, i think the credit monitoring is something that you see companies offering after most any data breach makes news. essentially it's a nice thing to do. consumers should take advantage of it if it's offered. however, it shouldn't be seen as a panacea. free credit monitoring protects you against what we call new account fraud. this is where an identity thief may try and open a new line of

credit in your name. it does not protect you from existing account fraud, where someone who already has your credentials say a credit or bank or debit card number uses it to go out and buy a gucci hand bag at neiman marcus or somewhere else like that, using a counterfeit card. it's something that consumers should take advantage of. there have been some questions raised about whether or not these credit monitoring products are being used to try and upsell consumers at the end of these free periods. i think that that's a troubling business practice. but certainly i think if it's offered to you, it does provide some level of protection, and consumers should take advantage of it. host: "u.s. news" points out in a recent story on this subject, the target data theft victims become a credit agency gold mine, talking about the business that is up in those industries. guest: i think this points to another issue with the credit monitoring. certainly when you do get this

credit monitoring, usually it comes from one company. that means that your credit monitoring, your credit report is monitored for that one credit reporting agency. however, there are three major credit reporting agencies. so if someone tries to open an being in the your name and the creditor is only using one of the other two, the consumer might not even get the notification that they're trying to open an account in your name. suspect it's not the end-all, be-all when it comes to protecting consumers from fraud. as far as upselling consumers at the end of the day, like i said, i think that's a troubling business practice. and if these breaches happen more, i think you're going see more companies trying to market their credit monitoring to companies as a way to try and help them recover and recover some of the lost p.r. that they've experienced through these breaches. host: let's go to caroline, waiting in baltimore, maryland, our line for republicans. good morning, caroline. caller: good morning. i just want to say i had a

breach years ago, and from that time on i started just using cash and money orders to do 90% of my transactions, and that has sure helped a lot. host: how hard has that been for you to avoid using credit cards or debit cards? caller: very, very easy. i go to the a.t.m. i get out enough cash to cover my expenses. and then i use money orders to send to the companies. i go online to the various places that i might want to buy from, get their phone number, choose what i want, and i'll all them personally. host: john, is there any stats on how many people are taking that route that caroline has taken? guest: yeah, i'm not familiar with about how many people are turning away, but certainly i think that when consumers are

affected by breaches, it affects their willingness to go online and use some of the technologies that are out there. in caroline's case, you know, i think there are real costs actually to relying only on cash and money orders. so she has to go to an a.t.m., number one. there may be a fee involved with taking money out of the a.t.m. if it's not part of her bank. number two, she has to take that cash, essential a large amount, and go get a money order. so she's vulnerable at that point to theft on the street. she has to go to the expense of get being the money order from a 7-eleven or convenience store or bank or whoever, and then she has another expense of mailing that money order to the person she's trying to pay. all of those steps have costs and security vulnerabilities to caroline, even though she's not using a credit card or debit card f. more americans do what she's doing, i think we're going to see these costs mount and mount n. an era where we have easier payment mechanisms,

i think the fact that consumers are turning away from them because they're afraid their data is going to get hacked is just another reason to show that data security has to be job number one for financial services companies and elsewhere. host: as one of our previous callers pointed out, you also lose the perks of using your credit card. the previous caller was talking about a gift card get for every $2,000 spent. let's go to jim in wyoming on on our line for independents. jim, you're on with john breyault of the national consumers league. caller: yeah, john, why aren't ?he punishments more severe what are the punishments now for these fraudulent creeps? and why can't we get it broadcast more out in the media what these punishments are so maybe we can deter some of these fraudulent creeps from taking money that doesn't belong to them? >> well, i think the punishments that are available certainly should deter consumers. however, because so many of

these crooks are located overseas, it's very hard for them to get prosecuted in the first place. i think you see cases from time to time where the cyberthieves are extradited from eastern europe or russia or china or somewhere else. host: are there high-profile ones that viewers might know if you mention them? guest: i think the f.t.c. has broad 51 enforcement actions. i can't name one off the top of my head, but certainly i think the fact that we're seeing this explosion in data theft and data breach points to the fact that the thiber thieves -- the cyberthieves really don't believe there's a large possibility that they are going to be prosecuted. you know, high-profile ones in the t.j. maxx came, them eventually found the hackers who did that, but it takes months and years. you talk to people in the enforcement industry, they talk about the intense amount of work, the dozens, if not hundreds of staff they have to devote just to tracking down a

few cybercrooks. sergio garcia i don't think the deter he wants that are out there are keeping cybercrooks from engaging in fraud. i think we need to look at raising the penalties. host: well, i think the caller was asking about specifically what are some of the penalties? what r we talking about years in jail, just fines? what's the range here? guest: well, some of the people who have been prosecuted have certainly faced lengthy jail terms and thousands of dollars in fines. however, given the millions of dollars, and some would say even billions of dollars that are being lost by consumers on an annual basis, i don't think that those fines and those jail terms are detearing cyberthieves at all. host: let's go to care knee arlington, virginia, on our line for vrgs. good morning. you're on with john breyault. caller: hi. i have a couple of comments. first of all, it's very important people to understand that the hacking is a gold mine to the underworld. for example, a medical data sbreach upwards of $77 a name.

other sites may be like pennies a name. but, you know, the conversation about the microchips, concurrent to congress debating the chip cards. travelers from america going to europe are having a very rude awakening when they land in europe, because our strip cards now are no longer functioning or is acceptable as they are in europe, and people are ending up over in europe without, you know, cash and the ability to pay for what they need. the punitive aguard acomment reminded me of a personal situation where one of my sites , facebook pages, was compromised under a christian, and i could not -- i had lost any ability to enter my account. facebook was absolutely of no help. and i tracked the hacker to a restaurant in punitive aguard a, florida, which the restaurant is part of the starwood hotels family. the woman manager that i spoke

with could not understand why anybody would want credit card payments for their facility, because they basically take cash and walk-in. host: how did you track the hacker? caller: i'm persistent. i do paper trails. it made it a little bit easier for me to persist and try every avenue to track it down. and what i eventually found is the hacker was out of russia. now, this is where it gets interesting. i took the matter -- i have a background in journalism, so again, i'm a little bit of a terrier when it comes to looking things up and resolving them. i actually contacted security over at the starwood hotel, and i will tell thaw in my experience these hacks are going continue, because the security team, first of all, didn't understand all the data i brought in to them, every page that had been printed out and archived. but more so, i think that there is a solution that is not being addressed where most of these hacks and things are parts behalf we call intellectual

property. and as your guest will attest, many of the countries are part behalf we call the byrd convention. and i'm of the philosophy that if we start going under the management of the byrd convention and take these issues to the hague court instead of playing back-a-mole, that will probably get a quicker addressing of all these international hacks. host: ok, i'm going let john breyault jump in both on your situation that you talked about and your recommendation. guest: well, carrie brings up a good point about this underground hacking economy. i'm not surprised that she has -- that she has found $77 per name is the going price on these criminal black markets. you know, there are within hours of this breach being -- excuse me, within days of this breach happening at target, you started to see these dumps. they call them dumps of customer data appearing on these cybercrime forums, where they buy and sell lists of compromised credit card

companies. the price went up because at target they were claiming that there was 100% guarantee that those cards would not be declined at the point of sale. you even have hackers now who are offering 24/7 help lines on their black markets. so the people who want to be budding cyberthieves can get the help they need when they're having trouble. so this is a very sophisticated, very professional, very organized underground hacking economy. it runs just as any technologically savvy silicon valley firm would run. as you talked about tracking down the hackers -- host: something you'd recommend for consumers? guest: i recommend consumers make scommure pay attention. for example, if they suspect fraud, dispute those charges immediately. that's the best way they're going to protect themselves. i think carrie is certainly unique in the fact she was able to track down this hacker.

i think it's very difficult. i think the vast majority of consumers would not be able to do that. host: i want to talk about the difference between the attacks on places like target, neiman marcus, some of these places we talked about, and a public institution like the university of maryland, which also experienced one of these hacks recently, correct? >> guest: sure, yeah. the university of maryland had their account compromised bihacers who were able to make off with sensitive, personal information about students there. i think it points to the fact that this is not just a problem that affects companies, it affects government agencies who have experienced data breaches, it afix nonprofit snugse like universities. i think it's incumbent on any organization that collects a lot of information about consumers and holds a lot of data to think seriously about data security. you know, in the case of the university of maryland, i thought it was interesting that they were offering a different set of tools to students who better protect

them, based on the fact that, you know, what you can offer to minors versus what you can offer to adults. that shows that there's not a one size fits all response to these breaches. i think companies and organizations have to make decisions about how valuable that data is, what's the potential for harm, and how much data has actually been compromised to fashion their response to it. i think the bills that are pending in congress right now take a stab at that, at trying to help companies set standards to evaluate how serious these breaches are and what their response has to be to them. host: let's go to max een in florida on our line for democrats. maxine, good morning. caller: good morning. i guess i had been fortunate. i had two credit cards that were breached, but my fortunate that was the credit card ompany called me on the day on

both of those to alert me that my card had been breached. the reason is because one was in spain. when they called me, of course, i was home in wesley chapel. and they had about four charges on there. before the fifth charge was made, they declined that particular charge. and the other two charges i had was through a bank card that was in new jersey, where they went through two different companies to buy the same products. and when i inquired, how did they know that they were breached, they said it was based on my spending pattern, that they were able to determine that they may have been breached. host: john breyault, if you can talk about her situation. guest: sure, i think her situation is not unusual when it comes to these credit card breaches. one of the reasons that she got that call from her credit card company, notifying her of the breach, is that under federal

law, the credit card companies are responsible for fraudulent charges. they have to pay when a card is used fraudulently. and so they have a very large incentive to invest in strong anti-fraud measures. and i don't think that all companies feel that same pressure. i think one of the things we're looking at as an organization is how do we give companies the incentive they need to make data security priority number one. but it was interesting that she was talking about spending patterns, because one of the so-called innovation that is came out from the target breach, if you're thinking from a point of view of the hacker, they were starting to offer compromised cards based on zip code. they know that credit card companies look for unusual spending patterns. for example, a charge that happens in spain. wheny never traveled to spain before, -- when you've never traveled to spain before. however, if a hacker has a set of cards all in one zip code, for example, near where maxine lives, it would be less likely to be flagged so. these hackers are very

sophisticated. they are getting better every day. host: in the 30 seconds we have left, rock dots on twitter asks, bottom line, how many target-like breaches will there have to be before anything changes? guest: well, i think we've reached a tipping point. when the target breach affected as many as 110 million consumers, and i don't know about you, but i shop at target practically every week, and most people i know do as well, i think it's a real wake-up call. i think we're going to see change, but we think it's important that the inertia that's prevented things like a national data breach notification standard, like comprehensive cybersecurity legislation, that that inertia be broken through and that we get real change. it's a bipartisan issue, or at least it should be. so i think the chances of something happening are good. i don't know that it's going to happen this year, but certainly organizations like mine are going to be doing all we can to make sure that folks in congress and the federal government feel the heat from consumers that something needs to be honorable. host: john breyault's

organization is the national consumers league. you can follow it online, ncl et dorg, or on twitter @ tweet. we appreciate you coming on this morning. up next, we'll talk about veterans issues with peter gaytan, the executive director of the american legion. we'll be right back. >> it ran in a circle, and it got ejected, the driver instantly wanted to know where the phone was, because it got hit out of her hands. he said looking for her phone.

she was dead about 45 minutes before they cut her out. >> hello, i'm madeleine. i'm a 16-year-old and i'm ready to start driving. i'm very eager, yet i'm also very scared. many drivers today are focusing their attention on their cell phones rather than on the road. the statistics show that distract driving is incredibly dangerous and that cell phones just have no place behind the wheel. something needs to be done about this. >> we've announced the winners of this year's student cam video competition on what's the most important issue congress should address this year. watch the top 21 winning videos, starting tuesday, and every weekday throughout the month at 6:50 a.m. eastern on

c-span and see all the winning documentaries online at studentcam.org. >> c-span, for 35 years, bringing public affairs events washington and offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house all as a public service of private industry. we're c-span, created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago, and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in h.d., like us on facebook, and follow us on twitter. "washington journal" continues. host: and this past week, the american legion discussed its legislative priorities during its annual washington conference. we're joined now by american legion executive director, peter gaytan. mr. gaytan, according to projections i've seen, about 1.2 million members of the u.s. military are expected to be

discharged over the next four years or so. is the u.s. prepared to handle this influx of folks being discharged from the mill snear guest: well, i think to be prepared, we need to consider all the needs of our returning veterans. some are in different points in their lives. some are coming back and maybe want to go to school, take advantage of the g.i. bill, which was created by the american legion, and we're responsible for updating that bill as well. they may want to purchase a home, or all of them need to become employed. we as a nation are aware, but we need to meet their needs. they met our needs. they put the uniform on and said we're going to protect you, and now they're coming home. we as a grateful nation need to ensure those processes and programs are in place to take care of them. host: you had your washington conference this week, talking to members of congress. what were your highest priorities as you were talking to them? guest: we had several priorities, and our national commander mapped them out to our hundreds of legionnaire who is come to washington, d.c., to

provide that voice for america's veterans. they walked the halls of congress. they meet with their members of congress, and they tell them the needs of america's veterans and what we want to see the american government improve upon in terms of understanding what veterans need and n providing them with what they need. one major was the back log, the claims back log. host: the benefits back log. we actually played a clip earlier of john boehner talking about this on the house floor. guest: that's true. leadership and the v.a. and d.o.d. and the administration and congress all understand how important this is, and this is only one aspect of providing veterans benefits, and that's the backlog. if we want to focus on that, we can see that currently the v.a. backlog is about 35 ,000. that's not a number. that's not a stack. those are individual members who have worn the uniform in this country, 351 americans. we may talk about it in numbers or in claims or in files or in warning loads that are overwhelming our v.a. regional offices and the american legion

service officers that are nationwide providing assistance to veterans filing their claims. scommoip what do these claims consist of? what is an average claim for? guest: it's for an injury or illness that can be attributed to their service. so what the claims process does, what the american legion does, we open our doors for regional offices. we have hundreds of service officers that are accredited through the american legion who provide free service to veterans. i'm a service officer. you come into my office, and say, i jumped out of planes for 18 years, and my back is really killing me. does this allow me access to the v.a. healthcare system? is this injury that i'm dealing with in any life a result of service to my country? our service officers helped them develop a claim with exams, medical exams, military roffereds, affidavits from people they served with, to allow us to develop a claim that v.a., we can commit to the v.a., and the v.a. can consider and make a decision, is that injury service connected? if so, you'll gain access to the very healthcare system we

as a nation created to treat your unique needs. it's the department of veterans affairs. >> speaker john boehner talked about this, and it's the subject of his republican address this week. here's him on the house floor on thursday, also bringing up this very same subject. >> mr. speaker and my colleagues, i know that the house shares my deep concern over the back log of benefit claims at the department of veterans affairs. it's nothing short of a black eye for our government. this country has made promises that it's our duty to keep, and the house has acted to tackle this problem. even so, reform won't get very far if it's carried out by managers who have proven that they're not up to the job. so we recently introduced hr-403, is the v.a. management accountability act, and this measure gives the v.a. secretary the authority to fire and demote officials who aren't performing. the principle here is simple dwhashe you're not getting the job done, you got to go. at the v.a., it's been quite

the opposite. for all the incompetence that we've seen and all the lives that have been lost, the evidence shows there's been no accountability. only half measures and little slaps on the wrist. and an agency which has fallen down on the job, this would be at any age that has fallen down on the job, this would be unacceptable. but to have it happen in the healthcare system for america's veterans? i think it's shameful. the v.a. is failing our veterans and their families, and it's time we hold these people accountable and get people in there who can fix this backlog once and for all. host: peter gaytan of the american legion, what is your stance on the bill that speaker boehner was talking about that he was supporting, and how do you feel about secretary shinseki, the job he's doing at the v.a.? guest: the american legion supports the bill. we want to see more accountability at the v.a., but it's a shame that we as a nation have to legislation good management. the department of veterans affairs is the second largest

federal agency in the government, and their mission is a sacred mission, and that's to care for those who have borne to battle, and that's not just an agency create created by this nation. that's for every people because of those who have chose ton wear the uniform. we support the bill. it's a shame that it has to come to legislating good management, but the american legion looks at the v.a. as a partner. you know, it's one thing to point fingers and say somebody has to help the veterans. the legion is raising their hand saying we help the veterans. twheats we do every day. we're trying to become better partners and go out to the had he jonl officers. i spleaped what a service officer does. after the claim is developed, it's up to the v.a. staff person to go through that and make sure it's adjudicated, that a decision is made so f that veteran can receive the benefits they've earned. what we've done this past year, year and a half, actually, is our national staff has gone out to the regional officers where

legion service officers worked, and we try to make sure that that level of communication between our service officers, the american legion, and the v.a. employees and the regional offices is as smooth as possible, so veterans are not suffering and waiting f. we ensure the v.a. and other service organizations are working well at the regional office level, then that process that speaker boehner described, the veterans claims waiting so long, if we can improve that, at least through communication amount the regional offices, we're making one step in ensuring they receive their benefits. host: we're talking with the executive director of the american legion, here to take your calls and comments. the phone numbers are on the screen, if you'd like to join us in this last half-hour of today's "washington journal," as we talk with mr. gaytan. want to talk about budget, a time of budget and restraint and impacts on the military and on veterans issues. we saw one budget-cutting member, the one practice trimmed the cola increases for younger veterans get passed, and then get overturned.

what are some ways that you can describe that veterans and the military has been impacted by these budget reductions? >> they're affecting our readiness, the active-duty. and when we as a nation are relying more and more on our garden reserve to be deployed, to do the job next to the active duty for so long, we need to ensthure the funding is there, that the garden reserve and active duty can operate together to secure our freedoms. but more importantly, you mentioned the cola, the cola bill. in an attempt to decrease the federal budget, our national congress decided to reduce the cola increase, the yearly cost of living increase for our military retirees. their retirement funds would be reduced every year with that cola decrease. they were attempting to balance the budget of our nation on the backs of america's veterans by saying you've earned your retirement, but we're going to reduce the amount we're going to give you yearly in terms of cost of living increase to help balance the budget. if we as a nation are targeting

a tiny percentage of americans in this country to bear the burden of the huge federal debt we have, i think we're doing things wrong. the american legion made sure that our voice, the 2.4 million americans who wear the legion cap very proudly, their voice was heard in congress, and that was overturned. that fws back to every veterans day and every memorial day, you'll read an article that the american legion is decreasing in membership, that their relevancy is declining. i'm here to tell you it doesn't proof, and that's proof. because that cola legislation was overturned, this is as strong as it's been. host: i want to show the chart that shows funding levels for different parts. federal government, the red circles, mandatory spending, the largest one being social security, medicare, and medicaid also being in those mandatory spending. but it also has discretionary spending in the orange circles. defense spending is here, $652 billion last year. veteran spending, $140 billion.

two big circles here. are there places that the american legion would be ok to see some cuts in defense spending? >> i can answer that in a way that the american legion is working as close as ever with d.o.d. we've had meetings where we actually sat down at the pentagon with secretary hagel, a great friend of veterans. when he was senator, he listened to veterans' issues. he was very sandope transparent. he's carried that management style over to d.o.d. we've sat down with the chairman of the joint chiefs and sat down to put everything on the table, as he says, and discuss where the d.o.d. budget could be cut that won't affect readiness, won't affect military quality of life, and won't affect the security of this nation. the american legion is open to doing that. we welcome that opportunity, and we thank secretary hagel for doing that. host: what are some of the places you put forward? are there places you point out

as places to go back? >> decisions have not been made, but consideration is being given to things like reducing the quality of the benefit, the percentage of an actual military member or family savings by going, we're listening to that, we're discussing that. there are different areas to discussion, and we're in the first step. but that's the first stope a solution. host: the commissary issue is something that's got an lot of press in recent months about a billion dollar cut to the subsidies for commissaries around the country. you're not saying no to that cut is that we're saying. >> don't let the cut negative al fect the value of the benefit to our military families. can you imagine a wife whose husband has been deployed and she has two kids at home, and she knows she can count on her husband's paycheck going further because she has the benefit of the commissary. to have that benefit cut, she's going to have to cut somewhere else, and she's at home by herself raising her children while her husband is doing what we've asked him to do as a nation and go out and protect us.

host: do you think this is too much? is there a middle ground? guest: it's ball compromise, but a number has not been reached. the door is open to discuss these things, and we at the american legion are welcome to be at the table, and that's a reflection of the credibility of our organization as we approach our 100-year anniversary t. shows that the american legion has been part of the part of the fabric of this nation for almost 100 years, and we've always had the best interests of this country, specifically veterans, as a top priority. host: and that billion dollar cut part of the budget proposal. we'll get several folks waiting to talk to peter gaytan, executive director of the american legion. we'll start with james in rochester, michigan, on our line for democrats. james, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. my question is this, with less than 1% of our population serving and probably a complementary percentage there in congress, how do we get the remaining population to

understand the importance of this? what is the american legion doing to ensure that everybody's on the same page? guest: we're taking advantage of those 2.4 million legionnaires that i mentioned earlier who are passionate and dedicated about preserving the benefits -- preserving and securing the earned benefits of america's veterans, so providing that voice, do something like we're doing this morning, making this a national debate. it's not a veterans issue. it's not a military issue. veterans benefits is an american issue. we all as a nation have a responsibility to ensure that we make sure that the veterans receive the thanks of a grateful nation. that's to talk about this, for you to go to your local community, your members of congress and say this is important to me, and i vote for you. host: let's go to lou waiting in evansville, indiana, on our line for independents. lou, good morning. you're on the "washington journal." caller: good morning. i'm a vietnam let. i served in vietnam in 1972 and 1973, and my big concern -- i'm 61 years old now, and i'm involved with the v.a. quite a bit. they help me with treatment on my ptsd and things like that.

i had heart problems a few months ago, and this has really been a big thing. i was stationed in two different places in vietnam, and i was in the let zones of agent orange. the thing agree with john boehner about is some of the deadbeat people that work with the v.a. i've been involved with the v.a. since 1978. my situation in being treated for that is saying that basically the person that took care of me, all he wanted to do was just register me and not be concerned about my heart issues, and then i went and did the lab work. i sit there for 45 minutes, the guy tells the lady out front, tell me to go home. this kind of stuff is really unacceptable, because, you know, i have grand kids. i have three kids of my own, and i like to be around a little bit longer than two or three years, you know? to me, the agent orange stuff is nothing to mess around about. i don't know what the answer is. maybe set up a hot line where we have complained. i have filed a complaint. a lot of times these complaints are ignored, and an individual like that has a job, and he's a deadbeat.

host: how do you feel about secretary shin sect snow some groups have called for him to lose his job in the wake of some of these numbers about veterans benefits. caller: oh, i agree. i've been dealing with the v.a. since 1978. you know, the thing you called back, when i had an individual take care of my agent orange situation, the first thing i thought was 1978, because that was horrible back then. the veterans today, even my era of vietnam vet, we don't need that. now the younger guys, i've been to group therapy meetings with all different iraqis theaters, different guys and gals in different combat zones, and none of us need this. we're there to get help, get back on track, deal with our families, and the last thing we need is to get pushed aside and ignored. i think the group of people i'm around with, we're pretty aggressive, and my counselor says i need to be a spokesperson, and i said, well, i believe in the v.a., and the v.a. has done very well for me, but one or two people can make it bad for the rest of us. host: peter? guest: first, lou, thank you

very much for your service in vietnam. what you're doing is providing a voice. you're asking, how can we make this more relevant, address these snishese you taking the time out raised the visibility. issue. then we can address situations like what you've dealt with, where you're confronted with you're going there because you earned the benefit. but you're confronted with a staff that's less than compassionate about your service to this country and the benefits that they're supposed to be administering to you. what we need to do is provide the voice. when those things happen, you can rely on the american legion to address it. we need to address the situations just like we did in pittsburgh, exposure issues in a v.a. facility, the american legion is on top of it. we have staff members and volunteers who go to the v.a. hospitals to determine what's going on in those facilities. how well are veterans being treated. are there issues with access to treatment r. there issues like the thing you've experienced. the advice can be relaid

directly to the secretary, congress, and the administration, so we can address it. but your voice is the first step in ensuring that an organization is large and powerful as the american legion can articulate what you need. host: lou said he would support firing of secretary shinseki. the american legion hasn't gone that far yet, correct? guest: no, we've not said that. what we are concentrating on, not standing within the beltway and pointing fingers, but going out to those veterans, those direct regional offices and v.a. hospitals, because we can say as much as we want to in washington, d.c., about agency leadership, but there's a veteran waiting two days, three days for an appointment. there's a veteran who's driven halfway across the country because they live in rural areas and have to take an overnight trip to go to the v.a. hospital and being denied that access to the facility because they reschedule would his appointment. we can argue as much as we want to near washington, d.c., but when we do that, we have veterans who are waiting for their claims, 2 1/2 years for a claim. three weeks for access to v.a.

healthcare. three months for an appointment. we're failing to see the big picture here. we have to address leadership in washington, d.c., but let's do it together in a way that benefits those veterans who have earned the right to access v.a. healthcare, and that's going out to the facilities and seeing what's going on, understanding the decisions we need to make here that will decrease the level of wait time. host: jan offers some praise for the v.a. in a tweet, she says the v.a. is taking very good care of my elderly uncle who's in hospice now. let's go to bill waiting in shelby, ohio, on our line for democrats. bill, you're on with peter gaytan of the american legion. caller: yes. can you hear me? host: go ahead, bill. caller: ok, i've listened to boehner's statement about people needing to be fired, anybody that's been paying attention knows that it's the republicans that are cutting the budget everywhere. if somebody needs to be fired, it's baner and the republicans in the house. they're always talking about

personal responsibility, but they take no responsibility for the things that they do. i support medical care for veterans. the republicans start most of the wars. they use and abumes the service people. -- and abuse the service people. anyone that's been paying attention knows it's the republicans cutting the budget. host: who does the american legion see on capitol hill as the biggest road block here for some of the issues that you're pushing on the budget side? guest: we often see the entire government is the major road block for access. we talk about the history of our organization, and it doesn't matter which party or which individual sits in the oval office t. doesn't matter which party or which individuals are leading congress. we have been doing this for almost 100 years, and we do it in a manner whose voices we provide. there has to be compromise. we don't go after one party or

another. we don't target one another. we don't target leadership. we look at the process, and we have enough experience in this process of benefit delivery for veterans that we know how to get it done. we deal with the personalities no matter what party they represent, because we keep in mind the goal and the mission of the american legion, and that's to make sure our veterans are taken care of. host: some of the sharpest political battles on capitol hill in recent months came during the government shutdown. earlier this week, bernie sanders was on the floor of the senate talking about the importance of protecting veterans during the potential future government shutdown. here's a bit behalf he had to say. >> during the last government shutdown, the truth is that we were seven to 10 days away from a situation where veterans, disabled veterans, veterans who have pensions were not going to get their benefits. the comprehensive, bipartisan

legislation that received 56 votes here on the floor, unfortunately not the vote for my colleague from louisiana, but 56 votes, and we are working to get the 60 votes we need to overcome a republican point of order, and we are going to get those 60 votes, make sure that we do have advance appropriations. so that no disabled veteran will not get a check in the event of another government shutdown. my colleague from louisiana may not think that's an important issue. i don't know. i think it's an important issue, and i can tell that the reason that the legislation that i introduced has the support of the american legion, and by the way, 500 of them were here this morning at a very interesting hearing, has the support of the v.f.w., of the d.a.v., of the vietnam veterans of america, of iraq, afghanistan veterans of america

, of the gold star wives and mothers of america. virtually every veterans organization, because they understand that the veterans community has very serious problems that we have got to address. host: senator bernie sanders, an independent from vermont, talking on the house floor earlier this week. he talked in that speech on the floor about this comprehensive legislation that's awaiting action in the senate. can you tell us a little bit about that legislation and what it would do? guest: it's an omnibus bill, and it addresses dental care to improving access to improving the back log process. and what we've seen with chairman sanders is a lot of activity, a lot of focus on veterans issues. we agree with him. when you appointed out the issue of advanced appropriations for v.a., the american legion led that a few years ago to make sure that v.a. gets funded two years in advance to make sure that veterans are not suffering. what he mentioned about military retirees not receiving their pensions on time, that's

a major -- that's a real issue with real implications and real lives of real americans. we can't use that as a political football tos to around veterans' earned benefits and military retirees who have earned that benefit, and for the federal government, because they're incapable of balancing our budget, to put that burden on the shoulders of military retirees is wrong, and the legion is fighting that. we thank him for working that into his bill. host: let's go to south carolina on our line for republicans. mary, good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: good. go ahead. you're on with peter gaytan. caller: ok. i'm just calling because i'm the widow of a disabled veteran. he died recently. and as a result of his death, i'm having to stay in an assisted living facility, because i'm not able to stay alone. and my claim is one of the many, many, many claims that are backlogged. i want to know if there's anything i can do to help to

clear that backlog. guest: yes, ma'am. there's a lot you can do. one is what you've already today, provide a voice from your perspective. it's one thing for a suit to say we have a problem, but when the person direct al fect by the inabilities of our process to work properly is telling the real story, and i appreciate that. the next step is to contact your local american legion. let us know your situation, because we can help right away, because we have dedicated legionnaires who not only help you with your v.a. claim because of your husband, and by the way, thank you very much for his sacrifice, but we can help you with your immediate needs. we have different programs within our organization that are so strong because of the dedication of men and women who wear the cap and understand that they have a need to continue to serve. they wore the uniform and serve this had country. now they're wearing the cap of the american legion, and they're serving this country by helping you directly. to contact your local department of veterans affairs, but also contact your local american legion, or go to the

website, www.legion.org. host: this is the executive director of the american legion. you also served in the air force. where? guest: in delaware, had a great mission there. host: what was the mission? how long were include? guest: for five years active and five years reserve. in active duty, i worked on the c-5 i've onyx, but i realized id no mechanical skills, so i shifted over to the protocol and public affairs and honor guard, so i was able to work at the port mortuary, where dover air force base, you bring back the remains of all military individuals who perished overseas, the remains come through there. you've probably seen news stories of the president and the transfer cases being draped with flags being unloaded at dover. the process goes from there to processing and delivering the remains to the families so they can be put to rest. whip years were that? guest: that was in the 1990's. host: we're talking with peter

gaytan of the american legion. we've got about 10 minutes left with him. james is up from oklahoma on our line for independence. james, good morning. go ahead, james. caller: i drafted and volunteered for the infantry, and when i graduated, they said was in the job. and i also was an honor graduate in sniper school. and somehow i have this lawyer mentality, and when i started dealing with the v.a., i came own with this horrible disease that possibly you could get. , s called cro -- dermatitis

which affects the whole body. and let me tell you, if anything could put a person in a mental institution, it would be this disease. now it's in my lungs. they did a cat scan in 2012 of january and found out i had nodules in my lung, which is a nodule disease, but they never did recheck it. and recently i had to recheck, and they said i have nodules in my left lung and all the roblems are on my left lung. host: go ahead, james, i'm sorry. uhipe i discovered was the v.a. has the ability to go in

and eliminate records. they seem to do nothing. they actually committed some federal crimes in attacking me, and he refuses to give me back my records. i'm still having problems with this disease, and if it wasn't for a doctor, i would have been dead. and now they want to see me back on april 1 to determine whether i have cancer or not. and i was also able to discover that they had agent orange they used in korea. apparently i won a case where a representative of the v.a. was ot in the v.a., but one that

-- host: thanks for sharing your story with us. i want to give peter a chance to talk about some of the topics you bring up, specifically the idea of the v.a. deleting some records, something that you've heard of or looked into? guest: yeah, but look, the direct issue should be his need for care. i will address that, because if that exists, that's one of the reasons james is even calling in or having these problems with access to the v.a. the we're fighting this battle with you. we have a team of staff, legion volunteers, who go to v.a. hospitals to learn things like that. our system program, we go out to these facilities, and this is our 10th or 11th year. the issue is all the veteran service organizations receive calls from people like james who have earned their benefits and have specific issues with the department of veterans affairs, and that's what we need to try to understand. the lady who tweeted in about how great the v.a. is, it is

good in some areas, and what they're doing is improved considerably over the past 25 years. the i am annals that hollywood has portrayed of the v.a. healthcare system, where heroes are warehoused in old, incapable hospitals has changed dramatically. the american legion understands that. we promote that v.a. can provide quality healthcare. but we can't let people like james fall through the cracks. we need to understand what's going on, and are his issues based on the fact that v.a. is doing things like clearing records? we need to find that out. by doing that, we do that by going to the facilities and try to understand. we get phone calls and emails and letters from veterans just like james who are asking the american legion, i understand the v.a. is there, want to go, but i'm having some problems. that goes back to us working with the v.a. to get it done, not just pointing fingers, but improving that process, because it's v.a.'s responsibility, and it's america's responsibility to make sure james is taken care of.

host: you talk about some of these concerns with the v.a., folks falling through, veterans falling through the cracks. matt smith writes on twitter, i think americans overwhelmingly support giving veterans any and everything that they need. can the guest comment on where the disconnect is here? guest: the disconnect is in the process. nobody that i know of, that i've ever met in my years of doing this, has said let's not give veterans what they earned. everybody wants to. it's part of america. we are america because we have the strongest military in the world. and we need to make sure that we thank them, that we make sure what they have earned is taken care of. this isn't asking -- veterans have earned these benefits. they up haven't filled out a document and said i need some money. no. i put the uniform on. i answered your call. now i'm back. now it's your responsibility. i appreciate that he took the time to respond on twitter to that. that's what we need to do. having do that today is the direct result of us having this conversation. you providing the american legion and america's veterans the opportunity to sit here and explain to you it's a real issue, and it affects americans

right at home, like the last caller. it's what the american legion deals with every day. we know veterans need help, and we're there to help them. host: peter gaytan is the executive legion of the american legion. it's legion.org if you want to check it out. follow the american legion on twitter, @americanlegion. we appreciate you joining us on the "washington journal" this morning. guest: thank you. scommoip that's going to do it for today. hope you're having a great saturday. make sure to tune in to tomorrow's "washington journal," where we'll be joined atlanta emp of the council. tony carrk will join us from the center of american progress to discuss the affordable care act ahead of monday's deadline. sal reduce owe of tea party express will talk about the current state of the tea party. and finally, zalmay khalilzad

will join to us talk about the united nations' role when it comes to dealing with russia and the situation in ukraine. hope you have a great saturday. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national able satellite corp. 2014] >> today on c-span, the head of fema testified on his agency's $10 pillion budget request for 2015, including $7 billion for the disaster relief fund. then the i.r.s. commissioner responds to investigations into his agency's targeting of certain political groups. and later, marijuana legalization, its impact, and he role of states. next, fema administrator testifies before congress about

his agency's $10 billion budget request for 2015. that includes $7 billion for the disaster relief fund. from the house homeland security subcommittee on emergency preparedness, this is an hour and 45 minutes. >> we will come to order. the subcommittee is meeting today to receive testimony from administrator craig fugate on the president's fiscal year 2015 budget request for the federal emergency management agency. i now recognize myself for an opening statement. the house homeland security committee recently held a hearing on the president's fiscal year 2015 budget request for the department of homeland security at which time secretary johnson testified. this subcommittee will continue that oversight today with a

more in-depth review of the president's request for the federal emergency management agency, known as fema. the president's fiscal year 2015 budget request, $10.3 billion for programs and operations at fema. this is a 3% increase from fiscal year 2014 enact level. it's important in these difficult fiscal times that fema can fulfill its mission, while at the same time be a good steward of we need to ensure that our nation is prepared and equipped to prepare for, respond to and mitigate against disasters and assure that they are first responders and resources needed to continue to do their important work. i'm interested to hear how you plan -- for the third year in a row, the budget imposes some major changes within the state and lopr