the dispute between nevada rancher kleven bundy -- >> everybody that works hard deserves a chance to get ahead. that is what congress should be working on. ♪ obama speaking in the pittsburgh area as the white house is focusing on jobs, the economy, and training skilled workers. this is a week before the president travels to asia. jobs, the economy, and global trade will likely dominate the conversation. a live view of the entrance of the white house. the president meets with insurance executives to talk about the affordable care act.

the administration is looking at another round of sanctions against russia. this, as secretary of state foreignets with ministers on the issues in ukraine. with callsg to begin and comments on a government job training program. another 600 million dollars being allocated yesterday. do you think they were? we are dividing our phone lines between republicans, democrats, and independents. partso want to hear from and unemployed. that number is (202) 585-3883. at can send in a tweet @cspanwj. morning.sday the start of the holy weekend for christians around the weekend, culminating with easter around -- on sunday.

rescue effort as hundreds are missing and presumed dead as the ferry off the coast of south korea. is the headline from the pittsburgh post-gazette. the president is traveling to a community college in allegheny county, discussing a job training model. the president held out the job training programs at the community college as a national model. he joined vice president biden to promote the need to match the needs of the economy. it brought a rare sight of air force one and air force two parked next to each other at the international airport. the president described taking a little road trip. refocusing $600 million in federal funds to focus on community college programs. [video clip] >> i am taking two significant actions that do not require

congress. [applause] first, we have asked more community college is to do what you have done in allegheny county. localar out what skills employers are looking for and partner with them to help decide the curriculum and prepare students for those jobs. progression from community college programs to industry recognized credentials and credit towards a college degree. i am now sing that we are going to award nearly $500 million to those -- i am announcing that we are going to award nearly $500 million to those institutions that are doing the best. comments with $600 million in additional federal taxpayer dollars to pay for the program. the question is -- do they work? our phone lines are open. democrats, (202) 585-3880.

republicans, (202) 585-3881. and we have a line for independence as well. caller: i think this program will work like all of his other programs -- pretty much a failure if he is running it. talkingning they are about how he is going to divert from the moneyt they were supposed to use to revitalize some of the neighborhood houses to his union buddies so they can get their thanement at a wage higher what they make. it is typical obama. host: what you think the role of the federal government should be? caller: they should leave it up to the schools, the private sector. host: thank you for the call. bobby, petersburg, virginia. caller: good morning.

no, they do not work. nothing seems to be working. , with retired vet honorable discharge, have a degree from the university, and i have not had an interview with anyone that is considered veterans affairs or anyone else. these programs do not work. host: jeffrey, gary, indiana. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i think the programs are set to make slaves. it does not teach you how to create wealth. it teaches you how to work for someone else. host: the appearance by the president designed to highlight a firefighter million dollar grant program for community

colleges efforts to focus on job training. the president described a related plan to target an additional 100 million dollars for competitive grants to encourage apprentice ship -- programs. ship he also said the vice president has the task of addressing the effectiveness of these programs. these programs will focus on funds already in the federal budget pipeline. they do not depend on any new action by congress. the toledo from " blade." caller: my comment is that i am 74 years old. i spent many years as a supervisor in manufacturing. comes to job training, it depends on what the job training is. not everybody is going to be a nuclear physicist or a brain surgeon.

there are people that need jobs, that are maybe 50 years old, that maybe need some special training, but when we send all our jobs overseas to be done by such, it isand the not fair to the workforce. if you want to have a job training program, you have to have the jobs for these people to walk out of school and go into. -- i talked to a fellow yesterday helping me on my steps. he was a very intelligent guy. he has a college degree. jobs he hasof the had, he never ever needed the degree for. he was hired because he had the degree. host: donald, thank you for the call. view, montana, next. frank is on the phone.

caller: i had out of the air force in 1963. i bummed around for a couple of month and decided to find work. was i did not have something i could use in the civilian life. corps to the job service and checked out what they had for training. jfk put in the manpower training map. i went to school for a year. i was a major appliance service technician the rest of my life. i am retired. i had to retire. i wore myself out. that is what you need -- that training to go directly into a job. c.o.t. school a

to upgrade my rating as a technician in industrial i was goingand through a divorce, but it helped me on troubleshooting. host: thank you for the call, ,rank, from butte montana. the president announced another $600 million to try to train those for the jobs in the 21st century. do these job-training programs work? some other stories we want to share with you -- this is from the "l.a. times." john kerry arriving in geneva for talks going on at this hour. three militants killed in attack

on ukraine-based. the ukraine national guard forces killed three and wounded 13. they detained to 63 armed militants that attacked their unit. the armed gang attacked the unit late yesterday, number at about 300 grade they were allegedly led by russian agents. the ukraine's acting interior minister said that after they threw molotov cocktails into the unit and opened fire at soldiers on the ground, the national guard opened fire and warned them they would shoot to kill. you can read more details on what happened at latimes.com. joining us from portland, oregon. good morning.

i was in a program at portland community college which led me to a 25 career in -- 25 year career in technology. these programs are essential in getting these jobs back here in the united states. host: what kind of skills did you get? information technology. host: franklin, thank you for the call. nashville, tennessee. i do not believe the jobs programs are working because there are no jobs to be filled after you finish them. that has been my experience. we do not seem to be interested in hiring workers over 50, no matter what skills they have. dakotaandy, hogan, south . i think the job programs work if they are not negative and approach it with a positive

attitude. i became a registered nurse at the age of 47. i have had good jobs ever since. host: you are looking at a live iew of the entrance of the white house. he is meeting with insurance executives after traveling. way for the administration to draw attention to their efforts. a phone call took place between the president and the house republican leader, eric cantor. writes about it. hours after the president sharply criticized house earlierans for stalling this year. the president was trying to wish eric cantor a happy passover. the wednesday phone call was disclosed when cantor said this. the president called me after he issued a partisan statement that

attacked me and my fellow republicans. he has notyears, learned how to effectively work with congress to get things done. earlier in the day, the president issued a statement in which he said the senate did pass a conference of -- a bill.hensive immigration unfortunately, republicans have failed to take actions. not cantor said the talk to sit well with him or other republicans. white house officials insist the call was to wish eric cantor a happy passover. the issue of immigration reform just happened to come up. you can read more on politico.com. the speaker of the house, john boehner issuing this web video. [video clip] times are tough for hard-working people and republicans are working to turn things around. now, there are roughly

10.5 million americans looking for work. 4 million job openings remain unfilled. experts attribute this to a skills gap. every year, taxpayers spend $18 billion on jobs training problems. only a fraction of workers receive the training necessary to get a job. drawings --, our our job training system has not been upgraded. it is time to close the gap, empower students and workers, provide them with opportunities to get ahead. that is why, as part of a larger jobs plan, we have passed the skills act, which will give workers the skills they need when they need it. to learn more about how republicans are helping close speaker.gov/jobs. that response to the president's comments in pittsburgh.

you're looking at a live view of the capitol this morning. you will see some scaffolding go up around it. it is part of a two-year $60 million product. capital is cast iron in the work will be done, including the installation of scaffolding and repairing some of the ornaments, as well as painting. you can go to "the washington for all of the extensive work that will be done over the next two years. you can see the live look at the u.s. capitol. government jobs training programs -- to they work? caller: good morning. i am really flabbergasted. my fellow american

people always so negative about everything? everything is no, no, no, it does not work. it does work. i am a proud austrian-american. socialistin a democratic government. the program does work for anybody that does not go to college -- not everybody can, perhaps. especially in the united states. there are the programs. in high schools, already, you are entered into job programs and that is how you learned the trade from ground up. you get the experience. it does work. employer, it the is always the employer's discretion to hire the people that he or she wants. implement these job programs, they will work. listen to the people that have been through there. before,leman that was

that went through there, the lady who became a nurse. and go's sake, wake up to these job-training. the jobs are there. you have to be willing to work. have a good day. there is this headline -- as the president unveils the jobs grant, traveling with joe jobs rows push for new graham has been made more urgent according to senior administration officials. there is this point on our twitter page. my community college hires were trained on technology that was a least five years behind private practice technology. all of this is tied into the extension of unemployment benefits. the house gop plan would eliminate and streamlined 30 plus separate federally funded

workforce programs. details from the speaker of the house and it would allow the government to consolidate different programs and streamlined administration workforce programs. gabby, the biloxi, mississippi. looking forou are something negative, you will find it. i am a product of the neighborhood you score. i am now licensed in social work. product of the cedar program. he is certified wastewater treatment. it works. america, get ready. it works. host: do you think these job-training programs work? that is what we are asking. the white house sent out this tweet, related to the president's visit to the pittsburgh area. 87% of apprentices have jobs with a starting wage of more

than $50,000. the average wage is $51,522. hashtag is #actonjobs. caller: i have been unemployed since 2001. i am on disability. i would like to become a businessman. need to be employed in america. peoplein the city and are unemployed. they need things to do so they will not hang on the corner and be mischievous and get in trouble. host: thank you for the call.

speaker boehner with this tweet. if the president wants to act on jobs and deal with skills training, he can help us get the skills act to his desk. this is part of the republicans plan that we highlighted a moment ago. catherine, good morning. caller: i called because i cannot understand why middle and lower income republicans would not be for a jobs training do theyand also, why support lower taxes for the richest americans and big business? i have come to the conclusion, they are hoping to hit the jackpot, hoping to become one of the 1%, hoping to become one in a million millions winner of big money. i call these lottery republicans. thank you. host: thank you, catherine.

if you are part-time, or unemployed, the number is (202) 585-3883. from you as we discussed the government job-training programs and whether or not you think they work. the president's foreign policy and domestic agenda is the subject of this piece. obama to standoff with moscow to him as plans at home and abroad. and russia'srisis newly combative stance has scrambled the world map around which president obama has faced -- shaped his foreign-policy doctrine and stand to alter the arc of his presidency. it has created political complications from u.s. makers who are pressing him to be more confrontational with vladimir putin.

could beanctions imposed on russia if the planned that do not show sign moscow intends to de-escalate tensions. we will get more coming up later in this half-hour. kay is joining us from california. independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. the jobst regarding training program -- i think it is a wonderful program to start with. i support anything that is going to get americans back to work. i think this will. i have not read the bill and i whether these to are loans that more student loans that we are going to be taking out or how it is going to that wouldnything

get americans back to work, i am all for it. i am an older american. i am in my 50's. i took advantage of a couple of programs. programthe manpower ack in high schools and i got . for electronics and that gave me work for a wild. all of the -- for a while. went overseas. it was a temporary fix for my situation. i paid student loans back on that. host: how much were they? then, i took out a student loan, keep in mind, this was back when you could get a beautiful home for $28,000.

my student loan was only $4000 at the time. minimum wage at the time was right around two dollars and something. is going onto what now, which i graduated and got a skills, got another diploma in computer support technology. impossible tot get work. programse any of these government funded or in the private sector? caller: the government came in on the last part of the most recent. it was a nine-month program, or 10 month program. host: thank you for the call. you mentioned overseas.

and that is the subject of this story this morning. the president is traveling to asia next week. the president's bid to focus attention on asia has failed to meet the lofty expectations he in a grandears ago pronouncement that the new emphasis would become a pillar of his foreign-policy. it has resulted in a loss of conference -- confidence among some u.s. allies about the administration's commitment at a time of escalating regional tensions. between japan and south korea are at one of the lowest points since world war ii and china has provoked both with aggressive actions at sea despite a personal plea from -- to beijing from vice president biden. economist" is talking about the republican party. isay's jack kemp revival

selected. theailed to win republican nomination. hawkish, cold warrior, he would pull up the drawbridge on foreign policy favored by rand paul. the bleeding heart conservative argued against cuts in social programs. republicans should pay heed. too many boast of that america is a majority center right country, only to turn around and enthuses out the low term midterm elections. republican state governments seem drawn to policies that shrink the electorate. at can read details online theeconomist.com. jobs training

programs -- do they work? ashburn, virginia, greg. good morning. caller: good morning. the programs work. i did a lot of volunteer time to get some experience in the very beginning. it paid off very well for me. host: thank you for the call. gene says we are over lawyered and over-taught. not over-dr..a, -doctored. next, robert, kansas city, kansas. welcome to the program. caller: i came up during the era of a lot of the job-training

programs put a lot of people to work. when i was 16 years old, i used to have to get up at 3:00 in the -- 10g to ride 25 miles miles and pick up several students all over the two western, electric, we all worked, the important thing -- work ethic. you do not get something for nothing. today, -- i graduated from after a scholarship and was trained as a teacher. i did not take a teaching job at the time. the requirements change. to take a test. you have to go back to school. the problem with our jobs is the system and jobs do not mesh. training. more

i do drafting. all of those jobs have gone overseas because they except lower wages. lower wages.t we do not have a connection between the jobs that are here and government training people actual economyhe requires. host: other headlines this morning. the front page of "the new york times" is focusing on the ferry wreck in south korea. it is a photograph in the front "new york times." the serious immersed in the water -- the very is the immersed in the water and several hundreds are presumed dead.

about half have started paying premiums. the other half have not begun to start paying premiums. that is one key number that critics of the affordable care act will be looking at. arthur, chesapeake, virginia. welcome to the conversation. caller: thank you for taking my call. the job program works. it gives people a chance to figure out how to do skills they would not always know and people that called in and said they thatnot work are the ones don't need work. ont: you can contact us c-span or send us a tweet.

hunger in america -- inside "usa today" being described as a silent crisis lurking for 49 million americans. americans are food insecure. people who sometimes eat less, go hungry, or eat a less nutritious meal because they cannot afford to. one mother says the saddest thing is when her oldest son would say "mommy, you can eat my food a." storyn read more on this on usatoday.com. [video clip] >> we are launching a competition for american apprenticeship grants. these are awards that will expand the kinds of apprenticeships that help young people and experienced workers get on a path towards advancement, better jobs, better

pay, a trajectory upwards in their careers. are ways to link americans to our jobs in i.t. and health care. they let you earn while you learn. sometimes, it is possible for them to create college credits on the job. right now, nearly nine out of 10 , folks who are in apprenticeships, they get hired when they are finished. it makes sense, right? you get an apprenticeship, you are learning, you're there on the job, people see you are serious about working. 10, once they get an apprenticeship, they get hired. the averages just over 51,400 dollars.

the administration talking about $600 million total. -- total, to help job-training programs. this is inside the washington times, unveiling this jobs program. republicans have other plans to deal with the skills gap. ofwill be back with more your calls in a moment. a program that we are doing tonight, moderated by former nbc and cbs correspondent, taking place at the national press club. two supreme court justices reflecting on their time in the supreme court. appointed bya ronald reagan and a justice ginsburg, appointed by president bill clinton. you can watch the discussion on first amendment and freedom rights on c-span television and c-span radio and the web at c-span.org.

it is 6:00 eastern and 3:00 western. caller: it makes me sad to hear president obama say that when he knows it is not true. it is a same -- a shame he did not leave a phone number and address so people can gobble up those jobs. the jobs did not go overseas because americans developed amnesia and forgot how to work. they know how to work. they wanted more profits and more profits is cheap labor and cheap labor was overseas and that is where they outsource our jobs to. an election is coming up in the number one issue is going to be jobs. he doesn't have any jobs to give us and he has not created any jobs. gone on to create the illusion of jobs. i am training you. far behind to they be if i am training you? that will get them through the election.

get your reaction. this is the headline from the new york times. obama looks for a midterm advantage in the jobs training immigration.ell on i thank you for the call. tim, greensboro, north carolina. independent line. respond in ated to nonpolitical manner. i am familiar with the community college of allegheny county. i worked there for a number of years. the spain what did you do? ofler: i was the dean continuing education and i was very much involved in the the jobs training

programs. , indeed, do work. the model is simple. we went to employers and ask trainers, if they were to some people themselves, and we were to train some people, what -- who would they be more inclined to hire. he said they would be more inclined to hire the people they trained. we took on the task of identifying people who were certainworking at positions and we took some of those persons and trained them, since they already knew how to do the job. we trained them how to teach.

it did not take long to do that. many of them became the instructors thawho taught new job.e who t how to do the host: how long did the training take? few weeks,much as a sometimes as little as three weeks. sometimes as much as a year. host: thank you. we're going to move on. we appreciate the call. this, from dana, who says many companies are doing this type of program. at can send in your tweet @cspanwj. we will take you to the campus of virginia tech and how the

drone program works and how technology is changing. of a studentample that used a drone to take a 15 second selfie. it starts with a floating a dozen or so feet away and then the drone takes off, flying higher and further from the city until the men and their dogs are a dot on the horizon. an interesting video we wanted to share with you. if you want to see more of how are working, there is a website you can go to. tomorrow morning, we will spend much more on drones and how the technology works. let's go back to your calls. us from is joining

pittsburgh. how long have you been out of work? caller: one year. host: what did you do before? approvals foround gun checks. trainingt would a jobs program mean for you if you were about to embark on that? caller: it would mean a lot. there are job-training programs here and nobody wants the jobs. these kids are lazy. at 5:30 everyup morning to go to work. -- i young kids think that don't know if the culture is different or they do not want to work for seven something an hour. the unemployment rate is six point seven percent across the nation. the labor department will admit many are underemployed, who have dropped off because their -- unemployment

benefits have expired. the job growth, including the professional and business 60,000s, added about jobs. the health care field, 19,000 jobs. lso 19,000on, a jobs. steve, you are unemployed? caller: i am on the dean's list at the university of mexico. i am about to graduate. i will be 51 years old and graduating with a history degree next year. i have been unemployed 10 years. i run a dj business. untila loan officer up the great recession. some call it the depression. goes down andmy comes back up, you can call it a recession. when it goes down and stays flat, it is a depression.

you can call it what you like. the lady saying this generation resent that remark. my son and his friends went out looking for jobs. one of them got a job. one is going to graduate and has joined the marines. my friend said he joined the marines yesterday. that is all we have for him. a brilliant young man, all he can do is join the marines. , iil you guys with the money am talking about democrats, too, start hiring people, nothing is going to change. republicans are refusing to hire because they want the economy bad so they can get that nasty black man out of the white house. they do not have the wherewithal to actually employ anyone.

you read the job number. i have 58,000 people in my town. it is a small town. do not even total 58,000 new jobs. we are talking about printer 40 million americans with at least 25 million of us that would like a good job. i do not consider working in a convenience store or making $10 an hour were you cannot have savings -- that is not a job. a job is something that pays your bills or provide you a little savings so you have security for the future. host: i'm going to leave it there. thank you so much. jimmy olsen says job-training did not work in obama's case. you can share your thoughts on facebook.com/cspan. unfortunately, current policymakers are intent on creating prosperity overseas through disasters trade deals. attention torn our

the situation in ukraine. here's a portion of an interview from cbs news. [video clip] russia takes these kinds of steps that are designed to destabilize ukraine and violate their sovereignty, they are are going to be consequences. you have seen the russian economy weaker, capital fleeing out of russia. host: he made his comments yesterday with our cbs white house correspondent. is andrew live kramer. the headline is ukraine push against rebels grinding to a halt. and you for being with us on this thursday. you for being with us on this thursday.

what will they do on the situation on ukraine? what have you been seeing from your vantage point? what i have seen over the weekend, the russian -- -- inssian militants have ukraine, particularly the region north of donetsk. the first real evidence of an [indiscernible] humiliating yesterday when armored cars were sent to the town and they surrender their guns and [indiscernible]

host: we did hear from russian president putin who said that russian troops were involved in a situation in crimea. we're getting conflicting reports from russian officials on what role, if any, they are playing in eastern ukraine. we hear from the administration that as many as 40,000 russian troops are situated along the border and many of those are infiltrating without russian insignia are trying to -- some of this unrest in eastern ukraine. what are you seeing? soldiers see a lot of in this town wearing uniforms without insignia. an orange and black ribbon, which is the symbol of the soviet union victory in world war ii and now a resurgent russian idea. it seems that most of them are who have obtained

rifles out of the armory at the local police station or some other source. it is also clear that some of them are very professional and armed with weapons you would not find, like rocket propelled grenade launchers, radios, and the program dave -- and they behave quite professionally. they are saying these are russian soldiers or russian trained soldiers. there is still some mystery around this. it is quite clear this is a well organized and well armed operation. we heard from the nato secretary gentle, beefing up nato forces in the region. do you think that will have an impact on the situation where you are? guest: no, i do not. nato will most likely not come here. this is an issue that will be decided between the crimean's and the russians.

we are talking to andrew kramer. the other story today, negotiations going on in geneva, switzerland. the white house said it is prepared for another round of sanctions if these negotiations fall through. cnn, expectations were low in terms of resolution to the situation. sanctions round of are put in place, what is next? think another round of sanctions would be unfortunate for the russians. depending on what form they take, they would discourage foreign investment in russia and that might hamper the ability of russian companies to access international capital. what they might do here is unclear. what may have caused them is te clear.

the increasing military presence in eastern ukraine on the square of this town. -- they hadoldiers captured military vehicles and appeared quite professional. there was little doubt that this was a russian operation. if there was any, there was a russian flag flying over these vehicles. it might be used as justification for sanctions. whether it will affect things here, it is difficult to say. i think the goal is to have [indiscernible] local economy. if this can be attained in talks

in geneva, i expect that people , and possible russian backers, would be ready to de-escalate the situation. host: one final point on the economic situation in russia. a headline -- the russian economy work in -- worsens, even before sanctions hit. putin already spent money on the olympics before crimea. all of this will be a drain to the russian economy. the question is, with the sanctions and the additional cost, how long can they russian -- how long can the russian economy sustain this? it is lifted by a tremendous flow of oil and gas revenues. the problem had been they were trying to diversify out qaeda

oil and gas. would depend on foreign investment and interest rates for businesses inside russia. these goals were locked in with an economy with sanctions and [indiscernible] i think that is the real problem. they're looking at flat growth or no growth. part, they failed to diversify in the last several years, when there was an energy price that was high, but not rising. kramer, joining us from ukraine. his story appears as the rebels push at the moment grinds to a halt. thank you very much for being with us. we appreciate it. guest: thank you for having me on. we apologize for the

slight delay and the sometimes interruption. he was talking on a cell phone in eastern ukraine. ed outas tweet earlier today. we're going to take a short break. when we come back, we will turn our attention to medicare payments and how much doctors have been getting. the story broke last week. been followings this. delbaum, hisel man book "the road to global prosperity." watching and listening to c-span's ""washington journal." we are back in two moment. -- in a moment. ♪

in a few short months, the capitol visitor center will be completed. work of this congress will be described to future generations. visitors will view and in the directory -- an introductory film. i said solutions to problems cannot be found in a pool of bitterness. the framers expected the floor a place ofto be passionate debate, where competing ideas and philosophy where manycrucible ideas can be blended together to forge a strong nation. also be a should place of stability. mutual respect. a place where statesmanship and not just elect gordo politics --

ectorialoriel -- el politics take place. eight years ago, i broke with tradition and gave my inaugural speech from this microphone in the well of the house. did so because my legislative home is here, on this floor. so is my heart. 's chairin the speaker is an honor i will always cherish. this is the stowed upon us by the citizens of this country. one by one, as they go into the voting booth, and elect us with their sacred ballot. it is the honor of raising our

hands and taking an oath as the member of this house of representatives and to sit on one of these benches. on january 4, i will be privileged to rejoin you on these benches. >> find more highlights from 35 years of house for coverage on our facebook page. by america'sed cable companies and brought to you today as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. >> "washington journal" continues." thank you for being with us on c-span. guest: thank you and good morning. want to follow-up on your reporting in recent days, showing how much doctors have been getting in medicare

payments. how did you get this data? how difficult was it to get it released and what did you learn? is very interesting. i have to credit my colleagues at dow jones and the wall street journal. they fought the good fight to release this data. the american medical association had spent decades blocking the release of this data. bey argued it would misinterpreted, there are privacy concerns for physicians. recently, a federal judge ruled that the public right to know eighed --. out-w they decided to release the data to the public overall.

forne that wanted to search the information, we were finally given, after decades, a view into individual physician payments. it is amazing. it is the first time we have been able to see how individual doctors practice under medicare. here are some of the findings you wrote about. the headline -- a sliver of medicare doctors get a big share of the payouts. about 880,000 doctors and other providers to take medicare accounted for nearly a quarter of the roughly 77 to themdollar paid out under the federal program. guest: it shows you how concentrated the physician payments are. it is why federal regulators, the enforcement part of the regulators is so interested in

combing through those payments to make sure that there is no overbilling or inappropriate billing. it is fascinating. it gives you a window into one of the most expensive specialties. oncology, ophthalmology -- ophthalmologists because they use expensive drugs to treat patients ended up getting some of the highest payments. host: why is that? you,: what the data shows basically, is what the payments from medicare are to the doctor. that perform in office procedures, or they might give chemotherapy drugs, for example, or special eye drugs. they have to buy the drugs and they bill medicare. some of those large numbers are really the costs of the drugs,

which are very expensive. i want to share the statement from the american medical association and its president. association medical is committed to transparency and the availability of information for patients to make informed decisions about their medical care. we believe that the broad data cms has significant shortcomings regarding the accuracy and value of the medical services rendered by physicians. withoutg the data context will likely lead to inaccuracies, misinterpretations, false conclusions and other unintended consequences. they went on to say thoughtful observers concluded long ago that payments or cost were not the only metric to evaluate medicare -- medical care. while the, value and outcomes are critical yardsticks for patients. the information released by cms will not allow patient or payers to draw meaningful conclusions

about the value or quality of care. finally, they are disappointed that the centers for medicaid services did not include reasonable safeguards that would help the public understand the limitations of this data. that is the statement from the ama. your thoughts? have somehink they legitimate concerns about this data. i would argue it is the beginning of a conversation. without the data, you have no idea what questions to ask, you have no idea about the practice patterns of individual physicians. i think it is a fair question to ask why this orthopedic surgeon mriso many more scans or than his colleagues. i think that is the value of this data. it does not tell you everything all at once. it does not give you a clean ranking of physicians, it does not tell you that much about quality. it is a starting point. writingdrew pollack

about the i doctors saying that their profits are smaller than what the numbers look like. explain, if you could. guest: guest: one of the things that physicians are due, and it's true, is that they represent revenues. they don't at all take into account overhead, the cost of doing business, whether it is buying drugs, having sophisticated equipment. but that is true generally of any business. the revenue is not a prophet figure. we didn't -- profit figure. we didn't suggest that that is what the physicians were taking home in salaries or profits. these are the medicare payments to these physicians or in some cases the medical groups. there is some concern about the

quality of the data, but we found generally, especially according to optimal just -- ophthalmologists, is that it uncovered other issues. all of these questions, you know, come to light from this data, and certainly it is a starting point, but it is a fair point u.s. physicians have -- to have physicians have their medicare -- this is government money, what is paid to them, and follow up on what that means. host: for our radio audience, i want to share with them as well that most of these ophthalmologists based in florida, texas, california, new york. look at these numbers -- $1 billion for eye drugs, $929 million for cataract surgery, over $700 for eye exams. reed abelson, do you want to go through those numbers and

explain? guest: sure. i think it makes sense -- one of the things to think about, again, in terms of ophthalmology , is because of the aging process, nearly everyone is going to need an ophthalmologist in some fashion. common, surgery is very and medicare is paying a lot to dose physicians to cataracts. the fact that the drugs are treatments for very serious eye disease is something that the data actually illustrates. similarly, you have lots of folks who are having trouble with their eyes and the eye exam is another big expense. again, having a dialogue on how ar -- are we spending too much money on drugs? are we not spending enough? host: as you sift through these

numbers, patient information included by cms? .uest: not at all obviously, cms is very concerned about patient travesty -- patient privacy. that is a big drawback with the data. you can't follow the patient so you don't know exactly the pattern of practice for the individual patient or even a group of patients. there is no patient data. that is a clear limitation and it is hard to generalize about what physicians may be doing. ist: reed abelson health-care industry reporter, she writes for "the new york times," and she joins us today from new york city. we have a line set aside for those of you who are medicare patients. host: let's go to john, joining us from savanna, georgia. caller: good morning.

i believe that the docs are being paid more than they should be. i took my mother to the orthopedic doctor because her knee was bothering her. -- she alsoill, and needed a knee brace -- we got the bill, and something came in for the knee brace and they charged me $200 for the knee brace. i think that is outrageous. comment, please. guest: i think it is hard to know on an individual case, and i would also caution that sometimes what the physician charges isn't what the position is paid cash isn't what the physician is paid. but that is exactly why we need this kind of data, we need this conversation. there are pockets within the medicare program where it seems that even for a specific kind of procedure, or kind of equipment, or, for example, a brace, the

prices don't make sense. that is the kind of dialogue that this data should actually spark. i certainly appreciate your concern on that. host: your colleagues over at "the wall street journal" have broken down what they call doctors pay. much of this, reed abelson, you have alluded to. about 7500 providers taking in an average of $224,000. the ophthalmology, leading the list of the number of providers, amount paid out is tree hundred $27,000. -- $327,000. this data is available online on "the wall street journal" website. decatur, illinois. caller: good morning, c-span. andd prescription coverage with the aca, i was ticked off that plan in the state of illinois and was even the option of the medicare advantage plan, but the medicare advantage plan

does not have a supplement. i pay 20% of my costs before my supplement was paying for it. medicare through social security and medicare advantage. law going to be change where i can get a supplement for medicare vantage? that is my question. guest: thank you. i'm afraid i don't know. i'm a little surprised you are still paying the 20%. obviously, different medicare .dvantage plans vary without knowing a little bit more about the specific lands, i don't know. i think the concern generally , the supplements supplemental policies, is that there is a sense that this encourages doctors and other providers to do a lot of procedures and tests and prescriptions because the beneficiaries are so insulated

from any of the costs. but i don't know what the plans are and i know that is the subject of significant debate. obviously, the copayments can be incredible it difficult for people. i think that his detention and the debate going on. host: one natural conclusion is that as you follow the money there may be some unique allergy here are some paperwork that is -- some illegality here or some paperwork that is giving more money than they are receiving. is there corruption here? office of inspector general, the regulator for hhs and medicare, did a report looking at the top doctors receiving the highest payments from medicare and did conclude that there was some vulnerability. they identified some overpayments. it is hard to know whether these are billing mistakes or actual fraud, although there are probably some cases of fraud. i think that this is an area that we need to really focus on.

say,egulators, as i outside of medicare have identified this as a vulnerability. i think it is a fair question. host: one of those doctors, and southlmologist from florida, close connection to senator bob menendez of the senate foreign relations committee. did you follow that part of the story? guest: yes, my colleagues did, and again, it is an interesting example of how complicated and tangled some of the relationships can be. it is very difficult sometimes to know what is simple, very efficient operation, high volumes of patients, needing drugs, and something else. you may or may not be able to answer this question but let me pose it, from one of our viewers who send this tweet. host: any insights?

guest: not really. i don't think we really can tell about wages per se from this data. i also would say that most doctors take a mix of medicare and non-medicare nati -- patients. that is the other caveat about this data. this gives us a guns of how doctors treat medicare patients, but they treat other patients as well. host: we are looking at this information from the center for medicare and medicaid services, cms looking at doctors and medicare reimbursements. reed abelson is joining us from new york. she has been following the story and her work is available online at nytimes.com. barbara in missouri, good morning. caller: good morning. my question is why particularly medicare doctors -- how does that compare to other doctors?

is the point of the study to be critical of the medicare program and possibly lead to the ending of it? doesn't it also reflects that there probably are not enough doctors taking medicare patients? thank you. guesthost: thank you for the ca. guest: thank you. you raised a lot of important issues. i don't think this was intended necessarily to be critical of the medicare program. the reason we have the state is the private insurers, quite frankly, and the doctors themselves are reluctant to share this information publicly. a lot of the insurers view the payments that they make to doctors as proprietary information that they are not willing to share. a little that the medicare take a, again, who often mix of patience, medicare and non-medicare, are the ones in the spotlight because this is government money and the government has the ability to make this public. i don't think we know right now

octorse medicare d differ particularly from doctors who don't take medicare or the ones who take only a few medicare beneficiaries. the other caveat is that this doesn't include doctors who are treating patients under the .edicare advantage plans i don't think this is meant to be critical of medicare. i think this is just information . but it does raise questions about how medicare decides to pay doctors, i think that is one of the questions that is going to continue to be asked in the coming years. host: one of our viewers makes this point. host: we do have a line set aside for those of you who are medicare recipients will stop jane is one of those in cincinnati. good morning. caller: good morning. my name is jane and i am in

cincinnati and i have had at 4 on my brain and one on my face and each one of them cost over $3000. the doctor found a spot on my brain and he still doesn't know what is wrong with my brain or anything else. forve an appointment today him to come in and tell me the results of the last m.r.i. from last saturday. host: jane, what is the price tag, i should say -- caller: ok, i am a medicare advantage plan person. how much has it cost me, you mean? guesthost: or medicare? caller: yeah, it is cost medicare over $3000 for each one of them -- host: how many have you had? caller: 4, uh-huh. he can't tell me

what is wrong with my brain. it's got me scared out of my mind. host: well, good luck to you. i hope the diagnosis is a positive 1 -- caller: i'm wondering if it is because of my medicare advantage plan. you know, i'm wondering if i should get off of medicare and just go to a doctor. i don't know what is going on. it is my head, my brain, and it has come scared out of my mind. host: well, good luck to you. reed abelson, any insights? guest: i'm afraid i don't have any. that is one of the things that the data isn't good at, really trying to understand what is happening in an individual case. in this case, the doctor may be doing everything he or she can to find out what is wrong. ,nder medicare advantage depending on whether the doctor

is paid by the plan, there may not be any incentive for the doctor to, you know, do fewer or .ore scans it depends on how the doctor is paid. it is very hard to know, and it may be that you need to work with both the plan and the dr. to try to figure out what is going on. host: in her case, and an estimated $1200 for those -- and000 for those 4 m.r.i.s, that doesn't include the price of the equipment and the rental of office space for the doctor, and the overall number in this case, correct? guest: yes. host: let's go to tony, joining us from louisiana, also a medicare recipient. caller: hello, good morning, and reed, i appreciate you looking at these numbers.

it is something we did in the state of louisiana about 16 years ago. when i was sorting through the information that you have, i noticed some of the same patterns, but i also discovered that a lot of these are assigned to groups, medicare assigns them to groups of physicians, providers that work in networks that may have clinics regionally. you may be looking at hundreds staffsitions and their in particular regions and medicare only gives you one tax id and each provider would have a little suffix on the and but that is hard to squeeze out. i do want to tell you a little inside information from the private insurance companies that you said they wouldn't give you.

a lot of times when we would go out to contract, we would offer .55% of medicare reimbursement so that tells you that those physicians who also accept medicare were being enticed by the private insurance companies .ith an additional 55% we used medicare reimbursement as a base, and would give quite a bit more of a premium to that these providers -- to get these providers into our networks. some of them were so highly specialized that the more difficult cases were funneled to these particular providers, and the work that they did was so specific and expensive that you might see these types of reimbursements for them. host: thank you, toni.

appreciate a call from louisiana. we will get a response. guest: well, thank you. a couple of the things you noted were very important. it is absolutely correct that sometimes a physician is billing for group. we found that with the pathologists, where they had very high numbers and said, wait a minute, it is a whole group. . think one has to be careful even if it isn't a specific specialty like a lab person or pathologist, it can be dispersed and is doing all the billing for this person is doing all the billing for a specific medical practice. that is an important and cautionary note. you are right about, certainly, the private insurers often pay more than medicare. it depends on where it is in the country. you are also very right about looking at the very narrow

specialists and saying that that might be a case in itself. the other area that the data doesn't shed any light on is the physicians who don't accept medicare, and the question of whether they are charging a much more than the medicare rates to their patients. i think all of these are really interesting questions, and we are just going to have to tease through the data to see exactly what we find. host: we welcome our listeners on c-span radio. our conversation with reed abelson, a health-care reporter for "the new york times." she began her career in philadelphia covering business issues. also reporter for "forbes" and "fortune." she is a graduate of bryn mawr college. one of our viewers has this

tweet. host: reed abelson, do you have an answer? if theyest: well, i think try. these are negotiated prices -- i think they tried to print these are negotiated prices. lobbyinga lot of involved by the companies specialized -- companies or specialties, and the ama has a role in determining how much doctors get paid, and that is sometimes an oblique process where it is very hard to tell why, for example, specialists might make some much more than a primary care physician. i think there's no question that there is a lot of credits who are the -- a lot of critics who argue that medicare should be doing a better job at trying to keep down prices.

i think that is a really fair concern. caller comes to us from new mexico. james is on the phone. good morning. jim, you with us? one more time for james in new mexico. move on to steve in selma, north carolina. caller: really do appreciate the work you are doing on this. things have changed so much with doctors. if you go in a doctors office now, i've noticed that if you tell them you're on medicare, oh, boy, they give you a look like the scourge of death. and the thing that some of these doctors may complain about what they get paid, i go to a cardiologist, and the only way i get to see my doctor on the visit is to ask him specifically . most of the time if you go to a p.a.ar doctor, you see a

pa is't know what they'rir getting paid but i'm sure they're charged you for a full doctor visit. and that doesn't seem quite to be right. i know things are changing. that,bout your comment on and i will go, i know you have other callers. --octor with eye infection she said yes, you do have an infection. let me call the eye doctor. very nice man, got me straightened out. i stayed filling the application and seeing her for her to tell me i need to go to another doctor and she charged me $325 for 45 minutes. i went to the eye doctor, great guy. dave me something for my grandchild.

and his was less. -- i didn'tw i know until i cut my statement for medicare that you could protest it, and i did. host: steve, appreciate the call. we will get a response. guest: i think you make an excellent point about variation in pricing. that, again,ings this data is meant to have patient, everyone thinking about, is what are you paying for? why am i paying so much here and not so much year? -- so much here and not so much here? another thing you allude to, the billing and whether you are being built for the doctor's visit or pa or whether it is appropriate. obviously, you want this system to be efficient, and if you don't necessarily need to see a

doctor, sometimes that's ok. you certainly don't want to be .illed inappropriately and i think you are right about -- that is a very interesting contrast that you experienced, and i think that is something that, again, there's not a lot of transparency. people don't know. if you had for whatever reason not lifted your bill, you wouldn't have known, and that is something that, quite frankly, the medical profession is going to have to increasingly deal with. they may complain about how little they are paid but there has to be much more transparency about what they are charging. host: back to your piece on nytimes.com. "a sliver of medicare doctors get a picture of the payouts. -- get a big share of the payouts." "an unprecedented look at the

practice of medicine in the country, shedding fresh light on the treatments that physicians provide every day, and the ability to compare doctors and humans in a way they have never had until now." if you want to get more information on your specific doctor, can you do that through this information? guest: yes, again, with some caveats. it is only going to be medicare patients. if the doctor doesn't see more than 11 patients, the data may not be in there. but you can look up your dio octor. what you may not see is if your dr. tends to refer you out for prescriptions and scans. but what you can see is, gee, i wonder if the doctor is an orthopedic surgeon, does his ctor do-- does this dro hip surgery? if you see that 90% of the cases

are hip surgery but i really need elbow surgery, you might want to have a discussion with a doctor or think about whether there might be a resurgent -- might be a better surgeon for you. that is the kind of information that i think is really helpful. host: lois is joining us from texas. caller: hi, thank you for taking the call. i think c-span needs to get maybe a counter reporter. i think a lot of people listening to ms. abelson and looking in all the data from the government -- i don't think it is a true reflection of the costs, for tempe, for an , to spend withon specialty nurses and the expensive drugs. i know you mentioned that earlier. it is pretty much one-sided for the specialty -- not host host: but, lois, we should point

out that reed abelson pointed out that these are just raw numbers but i want you to stay on the line. do you work for a doctor? caller: no, i don't work for a doctor but i was a laboratorian four years. now i am a medical surgical salesman. but the idea is that i have a good idea of what things cost from the lab perspective and what things cost in terms of equipment to provide that physician opportunity to take care and handle the oncology patient, the cancer patient. and i just mentioned oncology only because basic equipment that they need before they even give a drug to anyone could be anywhere from $10,000 to $20,000. but i just thought it would be best if c-span would have maybe a counter person to approach the

also,ians' side, and everybody knows that the physicians have a big lobbying group, just like the pharmaceutical it will have a big lobbying group. i know a lot of medicare patients -- i am not a medicare recipient yet. i am only 64. we do notears that have -- when i say "we," the average voter, you may have one congressional person who represents the average person or 2 senatorial representatives that represent the state. host: lois, thanks for the call. we are short on time but i appreciate you making a point and we will get a response from new york, reed abelson. guest: thank you. i understand your concern here, but i will say one thing that is important to realize. datahis -- what this allows you to do is benchmark specialties.

i completely understand your concern that is it really fair to look at an ophthalmologist and oncologist in the same breath as an internal medicine doctor if those doctors have so much more expensive equipment or are buying more sense of drugs. but i think what this allows you to do is say, wow, look at the oncologists and see the payments for the same number of patients, or see how the practice varies. this dr. postsurgery on almost every patient -- this doctor does a surgery on a most every patient may be multiple times. this doctor doesn't. i completely understand your concern that this is raw data, that a commitments interpreted, but i really do think that it is -- that it can be misinterpreted, but i do think that it is a useful starting point and that is what i would argue here. it is also important to look at life specialties and understand that there is tremendous variation in cost as well as

quality. host: this tweet guest: well, i think that depends on what is going on. i'm not sure that is always the case. sometimes if there is another primary insurance -- but i think it varies and i don't know that there is a consistent rule. i'm afraid i just don't know. host: another viewer saying guest: again, i don't know that the data will have a clean answer on that, but again, there is no question that this will lead people to say gee, why are we spending this much for a drug? --, why are these doctors even though the recommendation is not to do this, why are they doing so much of that? inexplicable,just

why did this droctor bill so much? all of that is going to be at least partly revealed by the data. host: we have about a minute or 2 left. our last calls from tor -- georgia. medicare recipient. caller: my question is why don't they list the prices? i will give you an example -- i went to my doctor and i had to have certain drugs, and the drug prices -- [indiscernible] when he wrote the prescription come he didn't tell me that the drugs cost this much. he said here it is, you go to the pharmacy, they will tell you a price host up host. host: reed abelson. guest: i think that is really important question and i think

that is going to change and should change. doctors sometimes feel uncomfortable talking to patients about cost. i think sometimes they don't know how but they don't know what insurance plan you might have or how that insurance plans might pay. they may just not know the price . but those conversations are going to have to happen much more frequently and i think that is information that patients want to know up front rather than after they pay the bill. host: reed abelson, with the information now released from cms for 2012, will this be an annual call by cms? will we get more information at this time next year for 2013? guest: as you know, predicting what the government does is always a tricky business, but i certainly hope so and i think that is the intention. abelson, health-care reporter for "the new york times," thank you for being with us on c-span. guest: thank you, it was a pleasure. host: this is what the book

looks like. michael mandelbaum, "the road to global prosperity." professor at johns hopkins university, he will be joining us in just a moment for a full hour to talk about the global economy and the role of the u.s., europe, and asian countries. later, a washington correspondent for "the las vegas sun" on in particular the standoff in nevada. first, check on the other news this morning, and with that, nancy calo standing by in the c-span radio studios. good morning. >> good morning, steve. an update on the missing malaysian airliner. investigators have ruled out a nearby oil slick as originating from the jet. data fromontinues of the robotic summary that completed its first. once of the ocean floor. the first 2 missions were cut short by technical problems. secretary of state john kerry has begun talks in geneva with

his counterparts from ukraine, russia, and the european union, in an effort to defuse tensions over ukraine. the purpose of the session is to bring ukraine and russia to the same table with the united states and european union participating in hopes of fostering a dialogue on political and security issues. president vladimir putin of onsia, speaking earlier russian television, condemned western sanctions imposed on a group of russians and that they saying were aimed at people close to him. the "financial times" adds that president putin, appearing with saying that they talk to each other as one ex-spy to another. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio.

signatures ofreal this boom is how quickly it has moved, and there is some good about that but there is also some bad. we were 10 years into this boom before regulators and the companies themselves started really asking tough questions. what exactly is going on with air emissions? what is the cumulative impact? is it healthy? what about all this water we're using? is the sum of the wastewater causing earthquakes? these are really important questions, and one of the big mistakes made is that we were so far into the boom before we started asking questions. the good news is that when you start looking at these, there are answers out there, there are ways to do this better and right. russell gold on the good news and bad of frac king.

c-span2 coverage begins saturday at 1:00 p.m. eastern and online at booktv.org. writes about a little-known episode in the history of slavery. slavery andl enemy: war in virginia, 1772-1832." and bing west. >> "washington journal" continues. host: our next guest is the author of "the road to global prosperity," michael mandelbaum, also a professor at johns hopkins university. thank you for being with us. guest: pleasure to be with you. host: one of the quotes that summarizes the thesis, you write

makes sense. not always the reality. guest: not always reality, and particularly difficult for the global economy. stability is provided by government but there is no world government, but there is a world economy. who provides the framework for the global economy? the answer is we do. the united states does. this is one of the great services -- indeed, i would say the greatest service that the united states provides to the world. for a variety of reasons, but the fact is that, for example, the american navy patrols the sea lanes over which most trade passes. without the american navy the trade would be more difficult. the united states is crucial for the smooth function of the global economy. host: as you look at the ongoing

tensions in ukraine in particular, eastern ukraine, front page of "the new york times" says that russia has a very serious economic issues in particular. there are lots of costs associated, including infrastructure and crimea's on economic problems that are only compounded throughout russia. guest: well, crimea, ukraine, and what really is russian aggression towards ukraine is an interesting and important test of one of the basic propositions of the book, which is that in the 21st century, global economics is much more important than ever, especially for global politics and security. the russian economy is vulnerable to actions by other countries such as the united states and the countries of western europe. should we -- that is, the --ntries of the west mobilize and impose sanctions on

russia, that would make it difficult for mr. putin to continue his policies towards ukraine. whether we will have political will to do that, we don't know. but we now live in a world where we have economic tools to deal with the kinds of policies that putin is carrying out, which were really not available in the past, and the reason is the enormous importance of the global economy, even to a country such as russia. host: you spent a fair amount of time discussing the 20th century. seven years since the end of world war ii and 25 years since the end of the cold war. "people and a way, is then great lesson of the second half of the 20th century, and that was learned most profoundly in western europe. the countries of western europe fought each other in terrible and bloody ways in the first

half of the century, and the second half of the century, they began cooperating, now through the auspices of the european union. and they are doing much better now, not every country in the world, unfortunately, is as peaceful and commercially minded as the countries of western europe are. the westernt in european category, and unfortunately, neither is china. but both russia and china are affected by the example of western europe and by the rising importance of economics and especially global economics. that is a hopeful sign for the future, because it does make likely.r far less it does not abolish war completely. nothing is going to do that. but because the global economy, the subject of this book, is so important, war has become comparatively less important. host: with one big question and 2 so-called rogue nations, north korea and iran, you say this.

host: north korea and iran. guest: those are the 2 most aggressive countries in the world, the 2 most dangerous countries because they are seeking nuclear weapons, and if they get them, they could make a lot of mischief and do a lot of damage. north korea is an economic basket case kept alive by chinese shipments of fuel and food, and really isn't that all responsive to economic sanctions. but iran has responded to economic sanctions. the islamic republic, the clerical dictatorship in iran, relies on the sale of its oil to keep itself in power. the west has managed to reduce to some extent the sale of oil and rick nash i put pressure on the iranian government and ring it to the -- and put pressure on

the iranian government and bring it to the bargaining table could whether that will work, we don't know, but it doesn't show what is the premise of this book, and that is the power, the political power, not just economic power, of the global economy. host: i want you to respond to comments made earlier by hank paulson. but you say week thelier this former treasury secretary hank paulson, speaking here in washington, discussed china's economic earth, now at about 7.4%. here is his assessment. [video clip] >> the big picture is this -- this is a country that has a compass an extraordinary amount over the last 30 years, and they have done it with an economic model that has run out of steam,

in my judgment. it just plain isn't sustainable and so you can get a bunch of economists and sit around a room and talk about they got a do this and that, and when you talk about what they need to do it in terms of reforming the labor market, removing immigration , all of the various social reforms, government reforms, economic reforms, in unleash the potential of the private sector, to rein in the state owned enterprises, to reform the financial system, a $9 trillion economy to change the model is a difficult place to do. news iso me, the good the leaders understand it.

it is not like talking to u.s. politicians, who sometimes act like the problem doesn't exist. when you talk to them they are very pragmatic. host: the comments of former treasury secretary henry paulson. he served in the bush administration. his comments at csis on tuesday and the entire event is available on cspan.org. michael mandelbaum, your reaction? guest: i agree with secretary paulson. china does need to change its economic model to sustain high growth. but -- this is an important theme of my discussion of china in the book -- in order to change its economic model, it is going to have to make political changes, important political changes, and changes that, if they are made, will make china maybe not a full-fledged western democraticbut more . it is in china's economic interest to become more

democratic politically. host: but there was a report released ash available on the -- available on the cnbc website -- that china will surpass the united states as the number one global economy. has four timesa as many people as the united states so china could happen economy bigger than that of the united states but still have people with about one quarter of the per capita income of china. and the lyrical pressure in china -- political pressure in china is all in the direction of boosting per capita income of the chinese people, making them better off. i think that is going to drive the chinese leaders against their will probably to implement for democratizing reforms the sake of sustained economic growth. host: our guest is the author of more than a dozen books. he is a professor at johns hopkins university. his latest book is titled "washington journa -- his latest book is titled

"the road to global prosperity." host: our first caller is joining us from flushing, new york. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i don't buy this argument that economic prosperity or global decrease the likelihood of war. an example is what is going on in russia. don't forget, china is increasing double digits at the same time militarization of china is also going. to,goal of china is trade-wise, subjugate taiwan, or by force they will bring it back. take africa. in africa, there is no global trade.

africa is a proxy zone for foreign countries -- host: thanks for the call. guest: well, it is true that war has not been abolished forever, cannot be abolished forever, and will not be abolished forever. but increasing economic independen -- interdependence create disincentives for war in all countries, including russia and china. china has claimed that taiwan is part of its territory ever since the founding of the people's republic in 1949. and yet it is not for many years launched military initiatives to capture or recapture taiwan. similarly, russia clearly has government, but let's wait to see how this whole situation between russia and ukraine plays out. we're just at the early stages, and we have not yet seen russia in korea economic costs -- we

have not yet seen russia incur economic costs, as it may. let's wait and see. host: this question from one of our viewers. in my well, as i note chapter on global finance in "the road to global prosperity," the global financial system is the achilles' heel of the global economy. it is a vulnerable to huge shocks, like the one we saw in the fall 2008, the near meltdown of the american financial system , which had wide repercussions around the world. unfortunately, that is built into the nature of finance in a free market economy. in a free-market economy, there is a tendency towards bubbles, which can then burst into enormous economic harm.

it is important to regulate finance, and in the wake of the great near meltdown in 2008, we have had a live financial legislation with the aim of curbing the kinds of problems that we saw in 2008 and thereafter. will they do the job? that we don't know. we have to hope so. one of the themes of "the road to global prosperity" is that although globalization will continue and make everyone more prosperous, he will be a bumpy a bumpy ride.l be there will be shocks and setbacks and some of them will come from the financial system. we just have to hope that they are not too frequent and not too severe. host: one of our viewers following up on the comments from hank paulson true, andl, that is

it's as was of real unhappiness -- a was a source of real unhappiness that the people who created the problem or the first to be rescued. but if the financial system had collapsed, everyone, not just the banks, would've been worse off, and the way to keep the financial system from collapsing was to prop up the major banks. so the perpetrators in a way. rewarded, butt the alternative would have been worse economic damage for all of us. that is why we have to hope that the new financial regulations will help mitigate and in the best of all worlds prevent such o thatial meltdowns s we don't have to go to the rescue of the banks again. host: let me go to your chapter on economic bubbles and thanks. -- banks.

guest: well, banks are institutions that loan out lots of money and keep some money back in order to pay off the loans and debts that they have, the debts coming from deposits. but they don't have all the money on hand that they owe. moneyrybody who deposits into bank wants it back immediately, the bank is in terrible trouble. this is what is known as a fractional reserve system. in good times, normal times, it helps the economy flourish. but when people get nervous about the soundness of the bank, it can destroy the bank and if the bank collapses, other banks with which it is connected can also collapse and that can do terrible damage to the economic of then the country, and country is big enough, the united states is, in the world.

that is why i say banks and the financial system are the achilles' heel of the global economy, and why they need to be regulated and need to be protected. who: one of our viewers sends many tweets critical of wall street and the banks says this. guest: well, i don't think it was the stock market per se that caused the housing market to crash. it was the housing bubble. people bid up the price of homes and this was aided by the new unconjugated and not well understood financial instruments , and then the bubble burst and we all got in trouble. we got in trouble and it hurt all of us because the financial system, with the banks at the center, as i say in "the road to global prosperity," the equivalent for the economy of the heart in a person.

the financial crisis was the equivalent of a heart attack. a heart attack is enormous damage to any individual who suffers one, and it is not surprising that the financial crisis of 2008 did enormous damage to our economy. , the bubble inve the financial system rather than the stock market that caused the problem. but again, we have to hope that regulations can diminish the frequency and the severity of financial crises. no reform will ever eliminate them. however, in order to eliminate them completely, we have to do away with a free-market financial system, and that would make us all poor. so we have made a kind of bargain -- in order for the prosperity that free-market economics delivers, we have to accept some shocks, and those will come again in the future. host: we are talking with michael mandelbaum, the author of "the road to global prosperity," a professor at johns hopkins university, a graduate of yale, also studied

at kings college in cambridge university in england, and harvard university, where he earned his phd. delaware, democrats line. good morning. caller: it starts with our so-called free trade global policy. we provide all kinds of incentives to corporations to invest all over the world. we provide loan guarantees for them. but we do not provide incentives for people to create unions for collective bargaining all over the world. these countries cannot form a middle class as we have here. we have a middle class that can purchase goods from other countries. these other countries we are trading with should not provide consent -- do not provide incentives for people to form unions. they prohibit them, in fact. they cannot globalize unions and they cannot purchase our goods. host: thank you. we will get a response. guest: globalization, global

trade, like all economic activity, creates winners and losers. trade, countries as a whole are winners, but some people do lose, and there is no this flowering of globalization in the last 20 years, which has done so much to bring prosperity to so many, has exacted a penalty on some people, especially american workers of a particular kind. after all, globalization is practically -- has practically doubled the global labor pool, and that means the returns to labor have diminished on a per capita basis, and the returns to capital have increased. that is a serious social, economic, and financial problem for the united states. on thes real pressure middle class, especially on hannity skilled and middle especiallykers -- on highly skilled and middle skilled workers.

i make the case that the solution to this problem is not to shut down trade, which does americans, butto rather, to compensate with the appropriate domestic programs to supplement the income and increase the economic security of those who are the losers from globalization. matt we have 2 tweets from smith. guest: well, of course, bank officials are not immune to the law. there are laws governing banking. fraud is illegal, stealing money is illegal. but making that economic judgments -- making bad economic isgments that don't pay off not illegal and shouldn't be because there is no certainty about economic decisions. businesses go out of business all the time because they can't keep up with their competitors.

that is the nature of a free-market economy. free-market economy creates losers as well as winners. the country as a whole is a winner from our free-market system, but some people lose out. meanshey lose out by fair , that is the way things work. if they violate the rules, of course they ought to be prosecuted. host: our next bank joins us from naperville, illinois. roger, independent line. caller: hello, mr. mandelbaum. my question regards africa. i know you're talking about china. africa, where you have over 70% of the continent publishing under 30 -- content population under 30, and the revolution of youth and technology. what is your opinion in terms of how that will affect the global economy in that part of the , and your opinion, just

like it happened in china 25 years ago? i feel that in africa there is great opportunity, but the governance, corruption, and how does that- disturb it, in your opinion? host: thank you. guest: well, thanks. the question -- thanks for the question could in the future, the performance of the emerging will beountries extremely important for the performance of the global economy as a whole and for prosperity here at home in the united states, and for that reason, i devote an entire chapter to the major emerging market economies, the so-called ric's -- brazil, russia, india, and china. i do not say anything in that chapter about africa because africa'seven -- economic growth is beginning and starting at a very low level.

for most of its history, africa has really not mattered for the global economy. countries have been supported economically for some of the reasons you cited. but in recent years, the news has been better. african countries have started to grow. if that continues, africa will play a larger role in the global economy, i hope that africa is successful enough so that in the next edition of "the road to global prosperity" i will include it in my chapter on the emerging market countries. host: that is chapter 4 on the book "the road to global " by my guest, michael mandelbaum. guest: well, in fact, i would disagree with that premise. many people have benefited from globalization. in order to see the benefits of globalization, all you have to do is go to walmart, where

people can buy consumer goods at very low prices because they are made in china, where wages are low. anybody who buys anything at walmart is benefiting from globalization. but there is no doubt that there are losers as well, and one of the chief tasks in the united states is figuring out how to compensate the losers, people who work hard, play by the rules, and lose out through no fault of their own. in fact, as i argued in "the road to global prosperity," in the wealthy, advanced industrial democracies, the major political issues now and for the foreseeable future will revolve around how to compensate the losers from globalization, how to deal with the gains and losses from dissipation in the global economy -- participation in the global economy. host: this is from sue. she lives in new jersey. guest: very od questions.

i think americans have mixed feelings about china's economic growth. we are pleased that the chinese have managed to lift hundreds of millions of people out of the poverty. many of us appreciate the growth it has brought to us. on the other hand, there is a certain concern about a country that is not a democracy becoming economically and politically and militarily more powerful. many people who watched china for a living wonder whether the chinese will use their increasing wealth to the benefit of their own people and to make the whole region prosperous or whether some of that will be devoted to trying to enhance their power at the expense of others. we simply do not know.

the future of china and the future afford policy whose those who were -- is the most important question of all. caller: good morning. there is a woman who named britain -- brazil, russia, china as sources of plutocrats. that? russia included in --re do they the rumor is they are suffering economically. why would they be listed as a source of plutocrats? i will think the answer off the air. guest: very good question. why should russia be included in

bric's? almost all growth has come from the sale of oil and gas. they have done nothing but dig it out of the ground and ship it abroad like currency. they do not make anything the rest of the world wants. russia has enormous economic potential. it is failing to realize because of its bad government. has offered a rising standard of living based on the rising price of oil. over the long term, for them to and on a broad basis contribute to the global economy in ways other than supplying energy, there have to be serious economic reforms. the russians have to build an institution that adopt policies that are necessary for sustained economic growth. thear, this is one of points of discussion of russia

-- that as long as mr. putin is in power, that will never happen. he has proven himself to be a menace to his neighbors. he is also a threat to the long-term economic health of russia and the wealth of the russian people. to hopeanother reason for change in regime. host: another few are said to cannot have free trade with a communist to cater -- dictator. guest: you cannot have free trade with a communist orthodox economic system. we did not change -- trade with the former soviet union or maoist china. sia has abandoned its communist economic system. they no longer proceed according to central planning. they do have a rough and rather crude market system.

the same is true for china. since 1979, they have made an enormous transition to a much wider use of market mechanisms. that is the reason we can trade with china and that is the reason for their rapid economic growth over the last three decades. the experience of china is the best advertisement in history for the benefits of free market economics. those are the basis for globalization. host: good morning from chico, california. caller: good morning. a couple of short questions. minutes" about60 all of these cities that china has built all over their country.

for the most part, their empty. -- they are empty. i do not know what they're going to do with them. it is a mystery to me. guest: there is a school of thought that holds that they have built too much housing. there is a real estate bubble similar to the one that we experienced that burst in 2008. if that is true, it is bad news for china. one recent is they have sustained economic growth through investment, rather than consumption. all of the consumption that they generate -- to a point, that is a good thing. they cannot sustain the growth rate through investment. they have to have more consumption, which is good for the people. that raises the standard of living.

in my discussion of china, i make this point and argue that the way to make the transition from an overemphasis on investment to an adequate emphasis on consumption is through political change. political reform. as china becomes more democratic, it is likely to make the shift from investment to consumption. the threat ofs, the housing bubble will probably receive. -- recede. host: let me share with you this headline. the new fed chair delivered a speech. the headline, she is up beat, but cautious. in her first speech as the federal reserve chair, tenet yellen said that the economic recovery will be nearly complete within two years.

she cautioned that the economy needs a central bank's support. she projects the unemployment rate will bottom out and inflation will pick up to the end of 2016. this is the first time in nearly a decade that the economy is running close to full steam. here is more from the speech yesterday. the entire event is on our website. [video clip] >> as the recovery proceeds and healing occurs, we will need to tighten monetary policy to avoid overshooting our target. we are very focused on that. this is a judgment call. call.d to make this in every expansion, overshooting the goal, we have learned through past episodes and recoveries that it can be very costly to revert. that is something we do not want

to happen, so we will remain focused on removing accommodation when the time has come. i feel very confident that we have the tolls to do that and also the commitment and will. 2%making in our objective of longer run inflation -- transparentto be and give the public a way to hold us accountable. host: they often call that fed speak. she is referring to the quantitative easing program. facebook said been undertaken since ben bernanke was chair. talk about what she was saying. guest: she was assuring the listeners that the fed was not going to allow serious inflation to occur in the united tapes -- states.

the quantitative using would be inflationary. it has not been so far because the american economy has been running below full capacity. what she was saying is do not worry about us. we will not let inflation take hold. that is important for americans. inflation can be a serious economic problem, as we have seen. it is also important for the global economy. if the united states generates inflation, that has to spread around the world and damaged the global economy. it hurts savers and investors everywhere. united states is still china's growth notwithstanding, the most important economy in the world. the united states is more important for the global health of the world economy in the health of any other single economy. host: the next colors from

lincoln, massachusetts. atem is on the republican line. good morning. one more time? caller: good morning. i have a question. i was born in africa and i came here when i was young. i really love to live in this country. but the economy is great -- they talk about so many jobs out apply for when you go a job, you hope that they will call you to you can support your family. i was born in africa and it was different. home --r side is my i fight for this country. when it comes to the economy, there is no 50-50.

it is difficult for us to get a job. from 2007 until now -- host: thank you for sharing your story with us. guest: we did have unusually high unemployment. part of that has to do with the condition of the economy. part of that is structural. there are some jobs that have left and are not coming back. blame the loss of jobs on globalization's, especially on china. they can be a scapegoat. omistsomists -- econ believe it is the advancement of tech knowledge he that has done away with jobs. we have answering machines and the internet. globalization and trade with low income countries have hurt some people.

that means two things. we need to develop social programs to help those people. all of us have to raise our hand. we have to acquire more, newer and better, skills, so as to be employable. that is true not just of blue-collar workers, but white-collar workers as well. white-collar jobs are increasingly in jeopardy. surfaces can be digitized and done overseas. when it is done overseas, the people here lose their jobs. it is increasingly people doing white-collar jobs and sometimes very skilled jobs. jobs and people can view the more soup -- do them more cheaply overseas. challenge that is presented to the united states. it is one of the themes of our

book. are talking about the global economy. is called "the prosperity."l one of the questions you pose is -- is the world stable enough for trade? as we noted at the outset, for any economy to flourish, there has to be a stable political framework. local and national levels, this is enforced by the government. there is no rule to enforce the global economy. that has fallen to the united states. the future of the global economy and prosperity depends on the future of american foreign policy. it has upon whether the american people will be willing to put

pport the kinds of foreign and military policies that keep the peace and make globalization possible. thew blocks from here, congress will be debating american foreign-policy and defense budget over the next several years. there is this pressure on defense spending. also, because americans have the disillusioned with experience of military operations in iraq and afghanistan. as that debate proceeds, as it will and should -- we should bear in mind that what we are debating is not just what the united states will do for the world or howl protected willest -- how it but howits interests,

we will provide the security framework within which investment can flourish. have benefited the united states over the past few decades and before that as well. host: another question on banks and the global crisis -- willrequent and how severe the global financial crisis turn out to be? book, thei say in the free economic system is prone to financial shocks. there is no getting around that. shocks are in the dna of free-market financial systems because of the tendency to form bubbles. there have been bubbles in the past and there will be bubbles in the future. they will do economic damage. the job of public policy, as i

note, is to structure regulations so that inevitable bubbles are as infrequent and mild as possible. we have done a lot since the meltdown of the fall of 2008. what we have done will do the job. it will make our financial system more stable than it was. we will not know for sure. host: how closely do you follow wall street? guest: as closely as the average small investor. host: one of these equity investors told cnbc that he expects a 20% correction. are we seeing a bubble right now on wall street? the market was up yesterday based on the news of the fed chairman. what can we expect ahead? follow the not market closely enough to give short-term predictions with any confidence.

the book is not about the short term, but the medium and long-term. in the long term, i am bullish on america. i am bullish on the american economy and the stock market. that reflects in different ways. in the overall american economy and the overall global economy. i believe we will do well in the short term, but i have no better idea than anyone else. host: ojai, california, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. we talked about bailing out the banks. i do think that we need to have a strong control because we are so tied into the global economy. but, i think it is demoralizing peoplecerning that no went to jail for what happened

with the banks. they pay these giant fines. the fact that nobody went to jail is a concern. does that concern you that in the future, heads of banks will operate with impunity? host: michael? guest: the heads of banks will seek to maximize their profit. it is the job of the government to make sure there is a regulatory structure. that will make sure that this does not lead to a collapse that we saw in 2008. if the be concerned banks had all made out like bandits after the financial crisis. i would be concerned if they had suffered no damage at all. that is not what happened.

they suffered real losses. some went out of business. that is important because it is a cautionary lesson for the future. theout memory, strong in financial system, people will be more prudent. memories fade and prudent evaportaates. that is one reason we have crises every so often. whatever the rights and wrongs of criminal activities in the financial crisis -- there is no doubt that the financial system as a whole suffered serious losses. serious financial losses and serious losses of status. keep losses will help access within bounds. host: we have this point -- a bachelors degree is equivalent

to what a high school diploma used to be. those are the people who have been hit hardest. and thego back to 2002 bric's -- another question is, how effectively do countries cope with political obstacles? we touched on this earlier. guest: my view is that the brics are enormously important for economic future. we have great interest in their growing rapidly. or not they grow as rapidly as they have the potential to do will depend on sow well each of them cope with a particular political future that, in the past, was an asset for economic growth. it now has become an obstacle. that feature very some unease countries. for brazil, it is populism.

subsidies to businesses and generous benefits to individuals. , it is dependence on the sale of energy, which helps to block the reforms it needs for sustained long-term growth. in india, the political future that was an asset is democracy. with theat in action general election. that is crucial. without democracy, there would not be a united india. necessary though it is, it is also dysfunctional. dysfunctional in ways that has prevented them from acquiring the two things that they need for broad-based growth. industriale-scale sector that employs low skilled people. infrastructure that

would enable the country to make use of those industries. wide and good infrastructure is a key for china's economic success. india needs more. futurena, the political that was an asset and is now an obstacle is the authoritarian political system. china has to liberalize. they need to do more to protect property right. they have to permit innovation and have a more responsive government to deal with corruption and collusion. this could lead to widespread political instability and administer a setback to grow. we should keep an eye on the brics.

they are important. what is most important for their future is power. host: two comments. thanks for bigger now than ever. they took profits for years and they'll doubt of losses. this is a moral hazard. paul sent us an e-mail. he makes this point. i see a world being overpopulated in global resou rces being fought over. more carbon is pumped into the atmosphere, bringing damaging weather systems and more demand on carbon resources. sorry for the gloomy prediction. guest: let me respond briefly. our banking system has become more concentrated since the financial crisis. partly as a result of the

failure of a number of financial institutions. that is a problem that makes it more prone to disaster when there is a bubble that bursts. that is one issue to keep an eye on. as for climate change, i discussed that briefly. there is a lot of uncertainty here. the worst case is very bad indeed. we have to hope that the worst is not happen. if it does, we can cope with it throughout at tatian. -- adaptation. what i do say is that the prospect for global cooperation, to reduce greenhouse gases, is not very great. we will have to rely -- not on preventing global warming, but on adapting to the consequences. host: the book is published by

simon & schuster. you can send in your tweets or follow us. michelle from michigan, independent line. caller: thank you for c-span. i watch you every day. about theo talk financial crisis and the banks. if my memory serves me correct way, it seems to me that the politicians are trying to look for votes or whatever. peoplenance low-income for housing and people with bad credit. these went belly-up. it seems to me that that was the real problem. host: thank you. guest: no doubt that there were

a lot of bad loans. ninja lonas -- loans. or assets.nd no job that was a subject of debate. there is no doubt it did not help. there were a lot of bad loans and loans that should not have been made. they came crashing down and gave us a financial crisis in 2008. one has to hope that the housing market has adjusted and the loans that are now being made our state for. -- are safer. host: jonathan from georgia, good morning. caller: saying god for the bliss of ignorance. talking about bubbles and

busting and policymaking -- tripled inarket value from 1992 to 1998. it hit 9000 in 1998 and started going to a much-needed, healthy correction. what did the federal reserve do? started three inflating -- re -inflating. with in a year, they repealed the glass-steagall act, the greatest act of deregulation. this brought down the taxpayers -- we can see the ability to regulate the derivatives market. lobby survivest and was able to pick up the pieces and a handful of other things to survive this crash.

host: we will get a response. guest: i think what we learned from that comment is that banks are not particularly popular. they come by that honestly in some ways. bad behaviorot of in the financial system that contributed to the crash in 2008. bankers are also necessary. capitalem for getting -- people who can use it profitably, is necessary. it is also prone to instability. that instability is the faustian bargain that we make in having a free-market system. the financial system that we have gives enormous benefits. it is subject to instability. that is why we rely on the government to minimize them. the book is called "the

road to global prosperity." this is your 14th book. we appreciate you being with us. guest: thank you for having me on. host: we will take a short break and we will have a conversation demirjian to talk about this ranch dispute and the roles of land management. first, a check on the other news. nancy, good morning. >> jobless numbers in this hour show the number of people seeking unemployment benefits last week rose by 2000 to a seasonally adjusted 300-4000. fellverage of applications by over 4700 to 312,000. they were nearer prerecession

levels despite the increase. an update on the sinking of the south korean aerie -- ferry. weather conditions are hampering the search for 287 missing passengers, many high school students. more than 500 divers are taking part in the efforts, as well as 169 boats and airplanes. a crew member says it was 30 minutes before the evacuation order was given. bridge officers tried to right the listing ship. the passengers were told to put on life jackets and stay put. officials say that the captain now faces a criminal investigation amid unconfirmed reports that he was one of the first to jump to safety from the stricken vessel. more news on ukraine -- four u.s. senators are visiting moldova to offer financial

support and political support. this as vladimir putin is urging ukraine two a blockade of their separatist province. john mccain and others visited moldova today to lend support to the former soviet republic. region, located on the border, has hosted rest and troops. there have been fears that they could use it as a launching site to invade ukraine. those are some of the latest headlines. some of the duke administrators were not lawyers and gave the kids that legal advice. that was, essentially, do not tell your parents. do not get lawyers. cooperate with the police and this will go away. that gave duke -- they thought they have legal exposure because of that. beyond that, there was a desire to make this go away.

to protect the brand and make sure that, once it was decided they were innocent, the last thing they wanted was to litigate about what happened. the easiest course of action was to pay them this money and have them sign a nondisclosure agreements, which explains why they are not talking to anybody. they settled. it is not clear why duke felt the need to pay these kids. people get wrongly convicted all the time. that defendaces those kinds of people and try to reverse the judgments. examples of people wrongly confvicted -- people spend 18 years in prison

and get a payment as a result. these kids spend, an hour or two -- no time in jail. they get $20 million. alum looksr and do at the look cross scandal of 2006. sunday night at 8:00. over 35 years, c-span brings public affairs event from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings, and conferences, and offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house, all as a service of public industry. we're c-span, created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago and brought to of a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook, and follow us on twitter. journal"ngton continues. host: welcome to a washington

correspondent for the las vegas sun. we want to talk about this gentleman, cliven bundy, and his ranch in nevada. guest: guest: he is the new most famous person from the state. he is a 68-year-old rancher. grazing his cattle in an area that the government wants him to stop. the family has been doing this since the 1870's. -- the federaln government has no jurisdiction to tell him to stop. this all resolved in the last week in an armed standoff. they tried to forcibly remove his cattle. then, a bunch of militia members

came in and he stood down. is, legally,on what will happen? the federal government does not want to get into a firefight. for 20s been going on years. will he, won't he? maybe the cattle will be taken away. host: this is a reference to the bureau of land management. he moved west of the mississippi. in nevada, 80% of the land is under federal concert -- control. 87%, depending on who you talk to. the population is very concentrated. there is a barrier that is very urbanized.

most of the state is federal land. your subject to federal regulations. so you'll probably be frustrated. 99% of ranchers obey laws. you do not go so far as calling in friends. they will take a stand against the government and say there is no legitimacy here. that is the situation that we have seen in the last few weeks. where do you go from here? they will either take an example or what will happen from here on out? host: in excess of 80% of nevada -- management island in charge of 40 million acres of land. 50% of the land in 11 western states, including alaska. that: about 157 million of

involves grazing or ranchers. . in leasing permanence and allotments and having these decisions they have to make about letting cattle graze. you pay usage fees on federal lands. that is a major piece of what they do. host: this is just one of many photographs. people have gathered outside of the ranch in support of cliven bundy. it is also a political issue for here he read. -- harry reid. a numberere have been of theories raised about why this is happening now. there are a few parts. land and he was just confirmed a structure of blm.

that led to more speculation of bundy supporters and conservative media. reid is trying to clear the land so he can build solar plants. they have been launched and dead for over a year now. there are theories about why these guys -- they see some kind of a federal government doing a favor to rofit off of a solar power plant deal. when you piece the timeline together, it does not hold water. it shows you how politically charged the atmosphere is. everybody is looking for a finger to point. it is a get down to it, very mundane and boring case. of course, the decision goes back to the mid-90's.

it has gone on for so long. --are in a situation where at the highest levels of federal government, you see why this is happening. host: there is a lot on the web. you write, from the las vegas sun, this proves a conspiracy theory. the land that was identified for the solar plant is 90 miles west of las vegas, in another part of the state not close to this ranch. guest: it is about 200 miles away. the site in question is a project. , but theyney came in pulled out in 2013. this is the tip of nevada. is trying to bundy graze on its in clark county, but the northeastern tip.

we're talking about a serious separation. they cannot go quite that far. host: bottom line, what is the next step? guest: that is a good question. you have these issues come up every time you deal with a public land. every state in the west is dealing with major issues about trying to regulate territory more because of this potential endangered species. you're probably going to have more regulations on federal land. the ranchers are not happy about this or advocating the starateg. sympathetic to the opposition. this is too much and we cannot make money. our territory for grazing shrunk.

a point. they have these days, when we talk about legislation, if you want to get rid of the ownership per economic development, you need to do conservation. direct transaction that does not involve the rancher. as you go through these q&z periods, they are getting boxed out. if anyone takes this example -- he did get the government to step down. a few days ago, and this is not over. host: the recipient of a paul are just as ahip, graduate of harvard who began her career with the chicago tribune and the associated press. now she is a correspondent for

the las vegas sun. we will get your calls and comments. send us a tweet if you would like, or you can send us an e-mail. florida, good morning. caller: hi. isn't this the taxpayer's money that buys this land? when it is not in use, why can't it be used for the people who help us feed people? i don't understand that. i'd like an answer. thinkmore too, i cannot of the other part of the question i would like to ask. that is mainly what i would like to ask. who purchased the land are taxpayers. host: thank you.

guest: how can i get this without -- and it talk about whose l is, you have to go back to the 1800s. people try to offload this land. you could homesteaded for free. of the 20thning century, we decided that we had to do something. area oftalking about an the west that is -- i am not originally from the west, but it is a lot of vegetation. bushy plants that these animals can feed off of. you bring up the point that it is our land as taxpayers. that is the case and there are a lot of times when people are able to use these plans for a

lot of functions. everything from camping and recreation and off-road inc., to hiking and grazing. when you deal with the situations with public land, it is more closely regulated. it varies. it is not uniform. that brings up another thing. regulation that we ask the to graze.o pay a fee everyone is supposed to pay attention to that. as taxpayers, we have a right to public lands, but in another sense, you could argue that there are rules for when you take your cattle to certain places. you have to pay for that right and he is not. other ranchers are.

it is a very murky thing. most taxpayers are not ranchers. if you want to walk around that land, that is a lot easier to do. host: this has been going on for 21 years? guest: his family pay for permits and leases. in 1993, there was a change to the regulations based on the regulations adopted to protect habitats. that was around the time that last.sue came up in the -- west. out andlast lease ran he said he did not want to pay this anymore. he said i do not like the fact that you're making the regulations more restrictive. the government has the right to

do that. he said he would not pay it anymore. this is been going since then. host: i want to go back to this. it is fascinating to look at nevada alone. guest: all that orange. host: at what point did we start buying up this land? guest: the government did own the west back in the day. t has been changing ever sent -- since the late 1800's. there has been an open policy for decades, then they decided to buy up some of the federal land and regulated more tightly. it became more conservation minded. i cannot give you a certain date as to when parts belonged to whom --

this is been the way of life in nevada for a long time. it is been an issue with ranchers and miners and people who want to develop geothermal energy sources. it comes up every time you talk thet changing in some way authority of who is in charge or the ownership. that does change all the time, but it is never easy. host: our guest is the washington reporter for the las vegas sun. joe is the next caller from covington, georgia. caller: how are you? i just want to ask -- telephone little bit about stable development. cities.t is 40 as for street services all coming out of the epa. around 1992 --

i got into clean air. we have these guys with machines who -- o2.are not seeing c we got in touch with them. it does not mean antying. -- anything. their sustainability of public lands, energy sources. i'm sure they all dovetail together. host: this is one of the photographs for the ranch we are focusing on. bundy'snear cliven ranch. is the government taking a different avenue of approach? guest: there has been criticism. they started gearing up last year, giving him final notices.

in laterted moving in march and early april. the bureau of land management created a first amendment zone. that made everyone quite angry. you cannot protest in one area. law enforcement members come in. there were not any shots fired. there were physical altercations. then, the roundups started. how can you go for a harder approach? the heart approach only brought in a hodgepodge of militia members. they have this standoff out of control. what do you do? do try to sweet talk people who do not want to recognize the

federal government? do you go in with bigger guns and potentially kill people? or do you let it go? i do not think there is an answer yet. host: we have been looking at some of the photographs, many courtesy of the associated press. kevin is joining us from woodbridge, virginia. caller: my question is -- you go back to the 1800s. in the united states of america, this land was taken for the native americans. my next question is -- the government owns land. the american people cannot go on. how is it that the government can decide what land we can go on and not? guest: that is getting into a whole other level of security and clearance issues. this is not a clean history in this country.

who took what from whom or what war was thought with neighboring countries ? this is been the history of much of the world, unfortunately. when we get to things like area 51, which is always a fun topic -- now we're getting into areas that have nothing to do with the bureau of land management. this is like a whole other level of policy, security planning, and things like that. host: let me show you the headline from politico. tore telling the sheriffs disarm the bureau of land management. they say they are overstepping their bounds. guest: he has criticism for everybody. he accuses them of playing political games. he says they are overstepping their bounds. he refuses to acknowledge the

jurisdiction of the federal government in this area. he now criticizes the county because he says that they should have come in and intervened. the county sheriff says this is a federal issue. i willis saying recognize the authority of the state of nevada and the constitution of the state, but not the federal government. the state of nevada recognizes the federal government. the constitution recognizes the federal government. it is not clear -- i do not believe that bundy is in a position where he will start to say ok, we will sit down and play nice and shake hands. that makes it that much more collocated. host: senator rand paul is also timing and. s, he sayshington time that the bureau of land management has used bully techniques. guest: they did come in with

armed law enforcement officials. you could say that for sure. you could also say what are they going to do? they try to make a deal to take away our cattle and sell them. popualls are incredibly lar. they have a very strong libertarian streak. biggest ground swells of support -- it does not surprise me that they are jumping in. host: let me share with you this e-mail from mike in colorado. he says there is a long-term squatter who refuses to pay his rent despite losing all court disputes. guest: before we got to the standoff from last week, the

federal government already said that he owes over $1 million at maxis and obligations. he will also have to pay for the cost of this stand off. cost a prettyly penny to have that transpire. host: our next caller is nancy from ohio. welcome. caller: how are you? it was my understanding that mr. crowddid not invite the or forces with guns. he was not happy to have them there. am i wrong in thinking that i heard the federal government has euthanized some tortoises that live in that area? or was that just a rumor? host: thank you. guest: i do not know anything

about euthanize tortoises. i do know that this did not start out with the supporters coming in. and his large family hunkered down at his ranch at the beginning of the month. that was where this began. in nevada, they talk to a number of people who said that they heard the news and got in their trucks and drove from idaho -- we saw one person from new hampshire. the support, i do not know whether bundy called for it himself, but it has not been refused. staving off the federal government, which is what he wanted. it may be a happy two incidents, but that is where we stand. there were a few hundred people who came. they are still there.

this is not done and the protests are still happening. host: it has become a gathering spot. guest: that is basically -- ?ho knew that it has become a huge national focal point. that means that the frustration with the federal government over these regulatory issues runs pretty deep, even when you are not a rancher yourself. that raises the question of what is next? even if nobody does, what will happen with the federal government asserting its authority? caller: i would like to make a comment on the endangered species. this is been used for many years to control land and people.

seems they could have a win-win situation. they have made decisions that the land is more important than the people. there could be a win-win situation -- i don't know why everything has escalated. this man and others have lost their property. help them raise tortoises. that would be great. work together. this is a bureaucracy run amok. i have seen it for years. it is a national tragedy and i would love to hear what you have to say. host: thank you for the call. guest: you've raised a very important point. the threat of endangered species is a major role. like it or not, the law says that if you declare an endangered beasties -- species, that becomes a crime.

the 1990's, it was a question of the tortoise being an endangered species. the west is dealing with that right now. the department of interior had to make a judgment call on whether to lift the ban. if it does, it shuts down the state. why doesn't the government favor the land over the people? they tied the lands to the species. if people want to retain an authority, the freedom to run as abilityt, they have the to not let their livelihood jeopardize these species, based on the mitigation of that habitat destruction. that is paramount. we're having this come up right now, as the same players are involved right now in trying to create a way to make sure that

these lands were these cattle is not -- the quality stays to a level where it will not be regulated. that involves a whole host of reasons. thehe end of the day, endangered species issue is a major crunch point. if you live in these areas, it is the worst thing that can happen. you play government -- follow the government. host: have you talked to senator reid? guest: not since he left for d.c. i have talked to his staff. things.tainly about frustrated with the

bundy situation and the fact that he has been -- targeted as being the force behind all of this. they think is ludicrous. they use stronger language who they think is behind it as well reid say a fewd days ago that he did not think this was over. this will not be resolved easily in bunkers built, nevada, and not just in congress. it will be a combination of tamping down what is exploding globally and also figuring out federally what can be done that will actually achieve the ends they want to achieve. said, this may be blown up on a scale which we have not seen in an extremely long time, if ever, but these sentiments exist every time he tried to designate a new piece of conservation land or wilderness or dealing with any a j