and craig woolsey. "washington journal" is next. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. host: good morning it is friday, april 18. president obama announced that more than 8 million people had signed up for the affordable well over the is white house's 7 million estimate. we will get to both of those stories. first, we will be spending most of today's washington journal talking about unmanned aerial vehicles, commonly referred to as drones. take you to one of six

federal aviation administration drone head sites to talk about current research. are asking our viewers to call in and tell us what you think about domestic drone use. you support or oppose it? give us a call and tell us why. if you are outside the u.s., you can catch up with us on social media pages on twitter, facebook or e-mail. a good friday morning to you. we will be keeping our phones yourthis morning as we get thoughts on this question. domestic drones. tell us why. ew the meantime, this p research project finding came

out. it notes that the legal and regulatory framework for operating nonmilitary drones is currently the subject of debate. part of the topic we are talking about today on the washington journal heard to help us discuss and get this topic going, we are bringing in brian fong of the washington post heard he is a technology writer there. start us off by talking about what the rules are for

commercial drone use. the faa is working on more clear rules about drones. that is set up a situation where it is actually legal for commercial drones to be used at low altitudes for minor purposes. in the industry say that the faa needs to more speedily develop clear rules that need to be applied to commercial drones in a wider setting. host: how is he faa going about his process yucca ? guest: it is not expected to

meet its official deadline, which is august of this year. maybe sometime after that. the hope is that by the end of this year, the faa will have some kind of formal rulemaking on small drones. host: in the meantime, what is the framework? guest: commercial drone use is not allowed. is an exception. if you're a private citizen there area drone, exceptions there. you can't use a drone for commercial purposes. the judge in the court today the faa's ban on commercial drones, saying that the attempt that the faa made to

go against this one commercial was unfounded, based like. cooper case wehe will be getting into. i want to ask our viewers to call and. domestic use of drones, do you oppose or support them? let's go to the phones. outhe line for independents of battle ground, washington. michael, you are on the "washington journal." talking about flying

it is wrong. it aggravates the whole planet, pretty much. we do whatever we want. when we go to our country and have people flying around monitoring cattle, it creates propaganda and paranoia. without specific reasons for why it is happening besides killing people in spying on american people, it creates nothing but constant drama for the whole planet. host: michael from battle ground, washington. what are some examples of a commercial use of a drone? great example that has come up consistently is in agriculture. there are wineries that use drones abroad to monitor the

soil quality or monitor the air quality, monitor when the grapes are ripe to be sprayed with pesticides and things like that. it allows farmers to be much more specific and targeted about how they produce their crops. in to ahis ties back computerized system where they to use data and analytics improve their crop yields, essentially. agriculture is one place where a lot of drone enthusiasts have focused their attention. toa letter that was sent members of congress earlier this month, there was joy being , allrs, barley growers signed onto this letter. agriculture is one big area where drone use can be used commercially. host: becky writes in on our facebook page.

we are asking our viewers for comments. let's go to don waiting in pennsylvania on our line for independents. caller: good morning. i want to mention the noise factor. i think we have too much stuff flying around in the air as it is. used by the police is kind of scary. just spying by anybody is scary. i will hang up now and listen to what you have to say. host: don in pennsylvania. guest: don, to your question,

that is a great criticism. during -- drones are noisy technology. we have to figure out how we will integrate them socially into the united states, beyond all the technical questions that we face. that goes as well for the liability question. moment now where we don't have clear rules or clear understandings or guidelines about how we should respond. part of that is technological. before we can actually put drones in the air, we need to develop better sense and avoid technologies. host: the sea of tranquility question, have these liability laws been rewritten? guest: not to my knowledge. that is something that still has to be done. host: let's go to mike waiting

in houston, texas, on our democratic line. i support the technology. i have a question for the guest. that there will be second amendment protection for citizen userivate of armed drones for self-defense? that is a great question. necessarily have a clear answer for that. i don't want to speculate about what the implications are. we are not quite there yet, but i will say is a very interesting possibility that i haven't heard about yet. that is something worth about for sure. host: domestic use of drones. commercial use is mostly what you talking about. we're going to be talking about

one specific drug test site later in today's show. right now we're asking about domestic use of drones. do you support it? go to bill in st. louis, missouri on our line for democrats. i am totally against drone use, domestic or military. what are your reasons why, bill? caller: i don't believe we should have drones flying in the air checking up on people. what is going to happen when china and russia start sending drones our way, or other countries? what we're doing in yemen and other countries with drones killing people, innocent people a lot of times, i think it is crazy. if you really want to see where drone technology is going, watch the movie oblivion. the domesticack to

use of drones and the rulemaking that is going on, talk a little bit about these test sites, these research and test sites they're having. there are six victor on the country. we will be featuring one of .hose later complain --e often conflate military use of drones with private use. there tot sites are evaluate some of the implications that drones have for life in the united states. when drones fail, what happens when they fall to the ground or crash into something? are places in nevada and north dakota, each of which is designed to do different tests.

one in nevada is going to be looking at air-traffic control and what drones will mean for air traffic controllers. decoders test site will be looking at data links that connect drones to the ground operators. they will be testing the security of that link. each of the six test sites will beerfoing a slightly different function, although all of them will be interested in looking at safety very closely. host: we talked about the nevada test sites. that was announced at the end of last year. the state of nevada has its test site up air. after that was announced, dean heller, a senator from nevada, was at a hearing featuring the faa administrator. he talked about what the specific drone site would mean for the state of nevada. there's a bit of what he had to say from that january hearing. [video clip] this makes perfect sense because we are, nevada is the

birthplace of and manned aircraft system industry in this country. we have scaled experience workforce and we have more militaryin nevada than all other 49 states combined. so i appreciate the administrator recognizing that in recognizing what nevada can contribute to this. it is also well-suited to take on this testing. some a projected that this could bring over $2 billion to a struggling economy in nevada and bring 12 to 15,000 good paying certainly is appreciated. however, in order for all this happened, we must do our work to make sure, as everyone has mentioned, that privacy and safety concerns are met. ,s drones are delivered hovering over the las vegas neighborhoods, we have received numerous concerns about that. heller from nevada.

irish eyes writes on the subject. good to julian waiting in canton, ohio. julian, waiting in canton, ohio. caller: this is just going to snowball. host: did you say you're concerned about police department usage e? can you talk about the law enforcement side? e? .c-span.or guest: there is lots of talk about the police application.

just surveying the scene to understand better what happened in the wake of an incident. there is definitely a lot of potential applications for law enforcement. then there are a lot of privacy implications a come along with that. we're going to have to see how the united states is going to balance those two things moving forward. these law enforcement agencies around the country are looking at the price of drones compared to hunting a person and a helicopter above the scene, correct? that's right. it is much more expensive to fly person in a helicopter. if a drone malfunctions, you place it. if a helicopter goes down it is a much bigger problem. bill, domestic use of

drones, do supported or opposed ? ? really grateful for c-span putting it out there with no being for or against anything. that is great. the thing that really alarms me is that they're giving a shortcut to terrorism. you can put a bomb or something one of these deals and do whatever you want to with it. it is something that should be outlawed. you know the nsa has already .ost a drone over in iran they have control over was going on. his proliferation of spine is just leading to more unrest. it is not a good for the country. thank you very much. is her first name drones

for unmanned aerial vehicle? what is the proper term should drone echo guest: the industry would prefer that everybody use unmanned aerial system. in common parlance everybody calls him drone. by now, most people using the term drone. that is probably the term we're sticking with for now. one thing i do want to add is that we have not talked about potential application for drones in shipping. is thinkingmazon about using drones to deliver isngs to the home, but there still quite a ways to go before amazon actually develops a workable drone technology. a differentgned delivery drones. at this point, what is more

interesting to me is the use of for delivering packages from one amazon facility to another. we arty have substantial technology for autopilots. to imagine ad company like ups or amazon using drones to ship large packages in between its own facilities. update. here's her story according to cbs news.

we're talking about those faa rules and regulations today on the washington journal as we are joined by ryan fong of the "washington post." joe waiting in maryland on our line for independence. joe, good morning. i just wanted to thank you guys for putting this issue out there. it is an issue i am very interested in. we can speculate all day on the negative uses that this technology could bring about. i know there's a lot of sensationalist journalism and covers of the issue. you can't compare to other technologies such as vehicles and whatnot.

when it was first introduced, we were hesitant to adopt the technology. as a person who is heavily involved with unmanned and manned solutions all over the world, one thing i would say is -- domestic use should be heavily regulated. this thomas a ban on arming the drones. to use it as far as border protection, law enforcement, crop, and everything else, is a great use that is the future of one of the upcoming future technologies. we really should utilize it, but heavily regulate. the technology needs to advance. you brought up earlier the parker case that is making its way through the court system. with a stunt drone pilot using estrone at the university of virginia. we're showing our viewers a bit of the video of some of his work down in charlottesville,

virginia. tell us more about this case. rafael parker was filming a commercial. the faa fined him $10,000. so far, this is been the only case where an individual has actually been slapped with a fine. the faa has also written strong letters to other people who have used funds for commercial purposes. this was a really important test case for the commercial drone onlytry, because, as the person who has been issued a fined for using commercial drones, the outcome of the case goes a long way toward setting a precedent for how the faa and others relate to the regulation. host: what is the status of the case? currently, most people believe that it is legal to use

drones for commercial purposes below a certain threshold, although the legal gray area there is still very hazy. the faa has appealed, so now the question is going to go back to the courts. guest: i think in practice it would be hard to implement because the airspace we are considering regulating his national airspace. the airspace above your home,

technically does not belong to the nationalgs to airspace authorities. their responsibility is to make sure that not only do the drones stay safe for consumers, but that they don't pose a danger to other aircraft and other things that are flying in the air. michael in westville, indiana. you support or oppose drone use? caller: i oppose it. one of the reasons i oppose it is that when congress as he shall not use drones against broad,tizens, foreign or you have to ask the question of why does congress need to address this. nsa is arty tapping my phone lines, and essays are doing all these things. when you start allowing the military and law enforcement uses drones, eventually they're

going to use it inappropriately. when, is that thing when he has all the power will eventually be corrupt. who is watching the people who are watching me in my backyard? most everything i do is completely benign, but eventually they will have a lot with this he can't smoke in your backyard and they use it drones. hey he is smoking his backyard, he must have tobacco, let's go get him. i'm all for a helicopter searching for that person. but drones are so easy and it is the cost effectiveness that i think will completely be abused. farid in south carolina on our line for democrats. caller: i'm kind of stuck between. more on domestic use.

people don't take responsibility. you put people in oversight committees. have personal responsibility. they just don't do it. therefore, in domestic use, i think it is a bad idea. not goingchnology is to go away. either we are going to have it or another country is going to have it. it is just a matter of who wants to have the upper hand. international use, for terrorist activities. it forably could use , or cleaningpplies

up with what is going on in different areas, but not drones. as we told you earlier, we're going to go to one of those research and tech sites at the faa designated. there are six run the country. we're going to take you to somenia tech, where we did joint testing earlier this month. we'll show you some video from that. we will be taking a live from that. another one of those sites is in new york. richard hanna, a republican congressman from new york, offered a guest editorial in his local paper about leaving that test site in griffith. he writes that through the thisboration of industry, region is one of the best in the country to test unmanned

aircraft systems. we are on the cutting edge of research in this new field and will work with the faa to develop standards. that is still an interesting question. the new york site, like all sites, is very interested in developing standards for safety, for risk assessment, and moving the faa towards guidance along those lines. guest: there were a number of different applicants to the faa. all were competing for the chance to run these tests sites. what is interesting about it is that the six that were chosen

will be able to virtually define the future of drone technology, just the virtue of being able to and developrones relationships with the government and the nurses that want to use the test sites for their own purposes. that is one of the interesting opportunities here. there's a tremendous opportunity here to help shape the future of drone technology. let's go to bobby waiting on the independent line in california. go to joel in jacksonville, florida on our line for republicans. joel, good morning. caller: i am totally for the use .f domestic drones i like the fact that the we're using them in the military. i think that is a new technology that we need to press forward

with. i think in the future it will prove to be a good idea. a lot of people are so afraid to i'dsomething new, but rather look forward to trying new things. i think that is where this will lead us to, a better country. let's go to romney wedding in west haven, connecticut on our line for independents. i think drones are good idea, working drones. as far as forest, land management, seacoast, in the construction industry, for laying out bridges, for the engineering, stuff like that. i think amazon delivery is more like a long-term advertisement. i don't think you're ever going to see that happen. that is kind of ridiculous. , getr as working drones

under bridges, over bridges, the footprint of new roads. the kind of thing, that is excellent. that is all technology. ronnie, in west haven. the faa is coming up with these what have they said about the timing of when we will see these regulations. the gao is not confident at all. this leaves some amount of trepidation when it comes to speedily integrating these drones. why thesereason industry groups are pressuring the faa to try and speed it up. some of them are calling for an interim set of rules that are short of a full rulemaking.

we called the secretary of transportation to develop standby rules on his own authority for drone use. fong.brian follow him on twitter at be ong.rscore fong -- at b_f now you want to bring on the phone chairman scott. we want to talk about what the privacy community thinks about the domestic use of drones. jeremy scott, good morning. first, explain what etiquette is for people have not heard of your group. group based in washington dc that focuses on private citizens and civil liberties institute.

what about this process of regulations that go guest: the first thing i said is that they should consider privacy in the first place. luckily, the eventually accepted the take on dealing with the privacy implications of drones. when they had a comment. with respect to the test sites, we suggested many recommendations, including test date operators. listing operators and public database that is easily accessible, requiring the disclosure of data collection, and subjecting them to independent audits to make sure that they comply with their .epresentation the faa administrator

talks about how he plans to address the privacy concerns at six different websites. we are going to play our viewers a little bit of what he had to say. it will come back to you to get your response. [video clip] will bee operators required to comply with federal, state and other laws protecting an individual's right to privacy. required too be have publicly available privacy policies, and a written plan for daily use and data retention. each site must conduct an annual review of privacy practices. the faa also continues to work with other u.s. government agencies to address privacy issues. this collaboration is detailed and comprehensive which highlights our multiagency approach to save integration of

unmanned systems. -- i wanted to know that the obligations.re its we must meet these obligations any thoughtful and careful manner that ensures safety and promote economic growth. is not static. it is important for users in the public to understand that unmanned operations will evolve over time. any new technology brings opportunities and challenges. howave demonstrated before we can successfully integrate innovative technologies over time. we saw this again and again during the last century of flight. i anticipate the same for unmanned systems. host: national security council at the electronic driver -- privacy information center. did those answers addressed the concerns that you guys rated -- raised?

>> no, they didn't. a baselineset requirement for privacy. what they did was put the onus on the test site. the test sites have to review their policy every year. they'ree public, but doing it themselves. there is no outside independent person or agency making sure that they actually comply with the privacy policies that they're setting for themselves. who do you think on capitol hill is approaching this from the white way from your guest: i'm not partisan. it does no good for anyone in terms of logging. -- this should be certain

ailments that protect i received. those things would include things like use limitations, no general surveillance, data oriented general limitations. there would need to be transparency requirements, so people see how drugs are being used, particularly with surveillance. host: what is next from a congressional perspective? are the hills that you talked about working the way to the committee in the house and senate? now, it is really hard to say, because it is really hard to get anything passed in congress these days. they've had some hearings last year, but out of this there's been a lot of rumor and -- a lot of movement. other states have passed for his bills for the use of drones.

>> i appreciate you getting up this -- droneor the research and test sites out there that was helped set up by the agency. viewers --ng our domestic use of drones, do those it or supported? thank you fo taking myank you for call. i think ronnie had all the points i wanted to make as far as using it for construction purposes. it would be a great thing to do to get up on top of certain areas without having to get up on top of them. , thet wanted to also add

is for search and rescue. i'm a member of a search and rescue team. we are really constrained on even talking about the use of drones. i'm curious to find out what was used out in the state of washington as a part of that ifponse to the mudslide and that would be a perfect application for it. there's a lot of resistance to using it. i appreciate having the opportunity to participate with c-span. states are starting to move on some of the state laws. here's a story from cbs justice week. and unmanned aircraft would be limited on louisiana our property if lawmakers agree to a of theat wants support

state senate judiciary committees on tuesday. the proposal would make it illegal to use drones to photograph people on private robbery without their permission, with exceptions including law enforcement. some of the state laws that are out there are happening on the same subject. nationalmap from council on state legislatures, aircraft.manned the states in yellow are those that have enacted legislation. in green are states that have introduced you aas legislation.

it notes that for three states issued 143 statements. the in csl website will help you find out more about what is happening in state legislatures. let's go to leah, waiting in sandy, utah on our line for democrats. i do see other could be a lot of abuse. way would be to put gps systems on the drones. the faa have too many things to do.

the commission would pull in on a quarterly basis the gps. if the police department has 20 every americans home for 24/7, and then sitting there buzzing or harassing or whatever , it is easy to see who is doing inappropriate behavior. barnett writes in on a twitter page. a joan is no different than a manned helicopter from that perspective. it ran a very cheap helicopter. you think he makes a point there? >> i think there's a lot of abuse out there. especially guess americans today. a gps system is needed. military calls and hard drive quarterly. reports.ps system

richard rodgers right that drones are no different than any other technology. let's go to and waiting in gates center campus. and, good morning. i am.: high, disappointed about these of drones. -- hello, i am disappointed about the use of drones. if there had been drones in kansas, i would have had a bomb in my living room. they had misidentified me and i was held under siege by a ar-15's for about two hours. the assumed i was dead.

this is totally ripe for abuse by law enforcement. they aren't careful enough. host: i'm confused, how a drone of change that situation? they couldn't get into the house because i had enough weapons to hold them off. that was my only sanctuary. we do give myself up. if you are injured by the police, you waive all your legal rights. actually, i want to correct something that mr. fong said. you actually own the air rights over your real estate when you own real estate. cap mineral rights on your property, you also own those. the air rights are yours. i think we need legislation to strictly eliminate some of these drone uses. i think we should be able to shoot drones out of the sky legally over our own property. i do see a valid use for them over the border, since we are

struggling to secure our border. for domestic spying use, we can't trust government anymore. we can't trust our local law enforcement. we can't trust our state law enforcement. that is dan from kansas. you might be interested in the ago. that ran a few days matt rosendale, a republican running for montana's open house seat

that's good to wane in richmond, virginia, on our independent line. caller: first of all, there are it in use but with the police. there in all the police department's. i know this for a fact. i am an american citizen. called the multijurisdictional aerial surveillance unit in virginia. it is art integrated with the police department. richmond police department, hanover police department. court next month. i was followed by a drone. they're not just drones are there manned and unmanned. they can follow you and follow you to the point where they can put strange lights in your vision and make you crash. the police are doing this.

there've been doing this since the early 90's. host: wayne from richmond virginia. the state law virginia was one of the first age to implement a state law restricting drone usage. it is hb 2012. a moratorium on the use of unmanned aircraft systems by state and local law enforcement and regulatory ntities -- it was enacted in -- on april 3 of last year. one of the first amassed master drone laws dealing with state-run loss on domestic drones. that's go to sheila waiting in

colton georgia on our democrat line. this is sheila and it is carrollton. thank you so much for being there. one thing i want to tell people pleased when you call in, the moment someone answers your phone, mute your tv set and don't even look at it or it it will mess you up. please be very respectful to the guest third round yelling and screaming does no good. ok, about the drones. , think it is a very good idea especially for agriculture. what people have to realize is that this is another technology. somebody is to have to make these drones, someone is going to have to not operate them, and you're going to have to have the education to be able to do this. operation,are

there's going to be less evil , the to go into the fields agriculture fields to find out what is going on. are you worried it is going to take away jobs, sheila? caller: it will take jobs away because right now there are people going out in the field. what was stated earlier in the ,rogram about other countries the way they use the drones like out when theynd ship spray or when the harvest is ready.

otherwise, people have to walk down 100 miles. those people are not going to be needed anymore. education, you've got to understand that -- math and science. i know it is a cliche and everything these days, but it is very important. sheila, what kind of work do you do? caller: i'm retired. it i was a baker and now sometimes cook. the minneapolis star tribune out of minnesota.

that feature story from sunday. sheila talked about her concern about jobs being lost due to drone technology. somebody that can answer some of those questions for us is michael's toscana, president and ceo of unmanned vehicle systems international. how are you, sir? i'm doing fine. basically, within the first of the year that national airspace is open, you're going to create over 70,000 new jobs. that will be an economic impact of about $14 billion. host: how did you come up with those numbers? caller: caller: we use a very

sophisticated technology. on a scale of being optimistic or conservative, those numbers >> a very conservative. i expect those numbers to go up higher. host: what kind of jobs are these? caller: the utilization of them and how you use them. on one chart we show their over 300 different uses you could have for unmanned aircraft systems. the: you're talking about projected impact on the united states. the 10 year projections, hundred 4000 jobs created. taxes are on the country coming in at 482 million from a .otential a -- uav industry for those who don't know your group, tell us about what it is. we are a nonprofit

organization for the advancement of off ground systems. any natural disaster that you hear about any search and rescue your looking for, whether it is firefighters, first responders, those are the type of missions. people think about this all the time. there are two things that an aircraft systems as well. it is very good at giving you situational awareness for information. because a person knows how to good -- how do their job better than anyone else. but the news is good information to make smart decisions. you list the top projected states uses by industry.

this report coming out in 2013. what is your -- what does your industry need from congress to have these economic impacts actually happen? all this is predicated in being able to find the legal airspace. once that term happens, this is what you will see. itt of those states find your bigger in aerospace and farming. decision agriculture's been to be one of this technology. the reason for that is that we have about 7.1 billion people in the world today. they asked me by the year 2050 -- 2020, which is only six years away. is the faa moving fast enough? you wrote that the current

regulatory void has left american entrepreneurs and others either sitting on the sidelines or operating in the absence of appropriate safety guidelines. caller: john, this is all about safety. it is one of these incidents were the first person you go to is the faa and ask how it happened very right in to regulate this. this is a strange time. this is an industry that wants to be regulated. they want to know how they can fly. this is a delicate time, because there are people out there who could do better job operating the systems. the question is, how safely. experience is about the same as we use for garage openers. whone has a bad intention are using the systems. this is a case where we have to make sure it is done correctly and right. that is the job of the faa. yes, we would like to see it

done sooner. one of the things we're highlighting was that there are some missions that you can do right now today that don't pose a safety risk, like farming, precision agriculture. the movie industry. there are places where you have dedicated areas or know the operational environment is such a you can do a risk assessment. most of the ones we're talking about right now are small. there'll be good to fly about 400 feet or so. mostly during the daylight only. there are things you can do to make sure it is done safely. let you go, ae question came in for you on twitter. can asked how my drones are needed to saturate the bandwidth? caller: frequency and spectrum

are going to be two of the primary issues that we have to deal with. the third is power. depending on how small they are, they can only fly for certain. time. there are still some technical challenges. most people understand that you can fly, drive or navigate. we are utilizing them. au vs i.org if you want to check out his group. i appreciate you joining us this morning on washington journal, sir. we have a few minutes use -- left. you can keep calling and because we will keep talking about drones for about the next hour and a half or so. is up next in columbus, ohio on our line for democrats. justin, good morning.

i am for drones. i think drones are a good way to move resources and be more economically viable. card an unmanned research we increaseem is our population. there are just more helicopters and planes and other vehicles that are going to eat it. so, here are these drones, we can limit the amount of research is being done for these vehicles. one of the story that came out earlier this week. that theid monday strong manufacturer tighten the airspace.

the tech giant said the drones will augment its effort to use giant helium balloons on the networking equipment to bring internet connectivity to remote laces. let's go to pete in massachusetts on the line for independents. caller: howdy. police,o problems with government, commercial, anyone using drones. i do have a question about -- almost 70.i am i have been clean and sober for 31 years. prior to that, i broke so many laws. they accuse me of what ever and now i just would not care. my question is -- i am old and wrinkled and a

nudist. i live on an acre of land that is blocked with trees, so the neighbors cannot see me. i cannot see anyone wanting to peep. younger, voluptuous whatever -- tomomeone were a peeping drone, would, -- there be laws about putting numbers on the planes that you could copy down and report? host: perhaps something we could ask one of our guests at virginia tech at the 10th lens laboratory -- kentlands laboratory. we will be going there next. later, we will discuss the history of commercial and

hobbyist drone use. first, on book to be an american history tv, we will feature the literary life of fort myers, florida as they continue their tour of american cities. here's the mayor describing how the city continues to grow after the recession. [video clip] >> fort myers is a high-quality small city. it offers a tremendous environment of fresh air -- it is a clean environment. we have beautiful curb appeal. there are millions of dollars of renovation and modernization. in the way of infrastructure and telecommunications and fiber it is a very attractive place for those who want a nice family environment and the place to have their business and to live their life. fort myers is a diversity. -- diverse city.

it is growing. in the decade ahead, we will exceed 100,000 as we continue on the road to urban infield and retirement of baby boomers, who are seeking out livable, walkable cities. fort myers has transitioned away from the great recession in a positive way. it has been slow and methodical. we are being driven by the recruitment of and promotion of the internet sector. together with expansion of medical. we expect that will be a driver in the economy to come. if i could paint a picture for the future, it would include multiple movements.

young people moving in to enjoy the high quality of life. the cityay that today, is the best it has been in history of its charter, 127 years ago. the best is yet to come. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we now go to virginia tech, where we are joined by jon who helped establish the unmanned research test site there. good morning and tell us about where you are sitting. guest: good morning. i am at the kentland on aimental air station, farm outside of blacksburg, virginia. beautiful, rural location. we have been fine for 6-7 years.

host: this is one of six designated faa sites. they are starting to come up with their regulations for unmanned aircraft systems. what is the focus of the work being conduct it --cannot did -- conducted there? guest: the research program has been very broad. control systems to the applications for unmanned aircraft and agricultural uses. as we move forward, it will be even boroader. we get the fundamental problems that allow us to integrate unmanned aircraft safely and responsibly. host: we talked about the competition for these tests sites. there are 25 proposals.

what sets the virginia tech site apart? guest: i think that the key thing is brain power. we have three universities that our team members, ranked in the top 50 of research universities. those are university of maryland, rutgers, and virginia tech. we have a number of team members who bring a variety of different strengths. and we have close relationships with some of the national research and development centers for federal labs. we think that relationship that we have and the ability to bring our researchers to work on the tough problems will allow us to address fundamental issues that exist and allow us to fly safely. host: the umbrella group.

the mid-atlantic aviation partnership. there's a possibility to do some future testing in new jersey. correct? guest: right. our intent is not to fly simply here. this is a small area. it is a working farm. we do not want to turn it into an airport. one thing we're looking at is where we will fly for the long run. we'ree a number of sites looking at in virginia and new jersey and maryland. will be able to do some of the fundamental experimentation required. host: we have a map of the different unmanned aircraft system sites. -- faa put this together a&m,a, north dakota, texas university of alaska --

how much coordination, how much work do you do together with these other sites? guest: quite a bit. aresix of us and the faa working together to figure out how we will make this work. we have some talent just ahead challenges ahead of us, not just the regulatory challenges, but funding for the short-term. we're trying to figure out how to best move forward. as we do that, i think we will find that, although we will compete with the other sites, the most important thing is collaborating with them. there is some scale we can gain. we can also ensure that we make the most efficient use of resources to work on this fundamental problems.

host: where does the funding come from for your program? are there federal dollars involved? guest: there is no federal funding at this point. we were able to gain some funding from the commonwealth of virginia to stand up the test site. new jersey and maryland are in the process of dating funding for the next fiscal year. we think we have a way ahead for the short-term. it willlonger-term, require some industry funding and some federal funding. we have a plan to do that. host: how much funding will you need to make this viable? we havell, so, crunched some numbers about what we need to do. it will be a couple million dollars per year per site. that is in order to make it

viable. you can question is, make this viable, but what do we need to do to make it -- to solve these technological and policy issues and get the data that we need to make data-driven decisions on when it is safe and how it is safe to integrate unmanned aircraft? host: we are talking with jon greene, the interim executive of the mid-atlantic aviation partnership. site is now operating in a farm outside of virginia tech in blacksburg, virginia. he is here to take your questions and we want to hear your thoughts as we discussed unmanned aerial vehicles. we will go to ray in new hampshire on the line for republicans. caller: thank you for taking my call.

we sell -- you call them drones, we say copters. helicopters or what have you. you can get ready to fly everything in the box, under $500. you can add your own camera to it. you can get accessories for it. you can have first person video. you can be monitoring what you -- see what you're doing while you're flying. they have somewhat limited range. havethese quad copters limited range for hobbyists. you cannot get that far out with them. most of them are remotely controlled. you have to be in controlled with your radio. this is becoming a lot cheaper now. gps autopilot systems --

$400, you can program a flight pattern for your airplane or remote control helicopter. and it really is taking off. all of this is being made in china. we are losing american jobs. but i think what a lot of people -- when they think of drones, they think of the military. with all of the drone strikes overseas and the military use, theme have a bad view of in that regard. i think when you take these drones for commercial use, like farmers or building inspectors --

i have seen these for people who want to inspect rooftops. they do not want to have to climb up. they can fly over and if they see something, then they get on the roof. the price of these are down so far that it will make it for building inspectors or people who -- the agar first, real estate. host: all right. ray in new hampshire -- what would you say to people who are skeptical or frightened of drone technology? we have heard of a few of those. well, i think it is ok to be skeptical. it is good to ask those questions. when we rolled out cell phones and facebook and twitter and gps capability -- we really did not think about the implications of that technology.

it has a significant privacy concern. that is one that people are concerned about. the other one is safety. but we are trying to do in the faa totes is help the find the regulations that will allow us to make use of some of those capabilities that the caller mentioned can save lives and time and money. to do that and a manner that is responsible, so we do not put people at risk or invade privacy. host: to be clear about these sites -- you are providing data, you're not involved in the regulatory writing? so i think we are all expecting that we will have some role in helping the faa in the rulemaking. our primary function is to provide data to the faa on some

of these issues, about what is required to fly safely. host: on twitter -- where are drones being made? who are the biggest companies investing in this technology? so, to date, the primary investors have been the defense industry. bigral atomics has been a manufacturer. there is a company in virginia, aurora, that is manufacturing unmanned aircraft. certainly, lockheed martin and boeing. there is a subsidiary of boeing. northrop grumman has been a big player. host: back to the phones. las cruces, new mexico on the line for democrats. good morning.

caller: greetings. thank you for taking my call. i am astonished that people cannot see the bad affect -- e ffects that will occur. all of the attractive uses of drones, like monitoring forest fires or finding people lost in the mountains, are very attractive. as on the technology is attractive. what is in store for the bad side or misuse of drones? i have a quick list. first, say goodbye to your american sense of freedom. you will have the psychology of a soviet citizen in a total surveillance society. when you expect that there are drones overhead and you cannot see them -- your psychology will change. ofwill be a deep formation

the american psyche. host: how would you respond? isst: well, what i would say that i do think we need to pay close attention to the unintended consequences. there are privacy concerns that we need to address. i would also say that i think there are methods to address these issues. example, a lawr was passed that allows police and first responders to use unmanned aircraft when necessary to save the life or in an emergency. they are not out there today in virginia collecting on individuals as they go about their day-to-day existence. i do think we need to look at it. as unmanned aircraft become

ubiquitous, there is a threat of that. that, in ao remember lot of cases, there are other ways to obtain the same and permission, other than using a n unmanned aircraft. if i want to spy on my next-door neighbor, what am i want to do is crawl up a tree and put a cam era up there, rather than flying a drone. that drone only fly for 20 minutes. then i have to land it. i have to control it. i do think it is worth investigating. i am not concerned that we will state in a soviet style in the future. host: you bring up the virginia state law that we mentioned in the last segment. here it is again. this is the summary.

state law passed last year places a moratorium on the use of unmanned aircraft systems by state and local law enforcement and regulatory entities until july 1, 2015, except in defined emergency situations. the moratorium does not apply to certain national guard functions or research and development. one of the research site is virginia tech. iss is where jon greene joining us live this morning. there is a view from the outside of the entrance into that lab space in blacksburg, outside of virginia tech university. let's go to christian in bowie, maryland. caller: thank you for taking my call. my question is about national

security. identify? able to we have people in the country -- [indiscernible] will they identify between their drones and our drones? host: you are talking about different government agencies? caller: no. we do not know if the drone is american or not. will they be able to identify those drones? to identifyable u.s. drones versus a possible foreign drone in the united states -- guest: one of the things that we are working on is the ability to track where all of these aircraft are. there is a new program called

avsb, i cannot remember what that stands for. what that will do is provide a transponder to tell you where each aircraft is. the faa would be able to tell what vehicle iswhere and if there is something not carrying a transponder or a transponder is not working. that would stick out like a sore thumb. there is good possibility we will be able to tell who is who in the zoo. host: that technology, who would have access to that? just the faa and the government? or could private citizens find out about that? guest: yes. services subscription that you can purchase. i think there is a time delay on

them, for obvious reasons. difficult for you to know where any single aircraft is at a given second. for example, where you want to shoot something down would be difficult. i do think that there are transcription services available, you can get feeds. for example, a number of pilots laptop that around a has the ability to show where other aircraft are that are carrying transponders. host: on twitter, another question about funding at virginia tech. how does for genentech received funding for its research? is it the dod, do you have military contract? guest: i do not believe we have

any military contracts at the moment. so, our research in the past has been funded by the national science foundation, the office of naval research -- outave had some contracts of naval air systems command. we do not have any right now. this is mostly grant research focused on fundamental patrol systems and services. host: you got into this were coming out of the navy. can you tell us how you got involved in this research? i did have a navy career. my last tour was a small research and development commu nity in virginia beach. i came here to virginia tech to help them develop their navy

research program. this opportunity came up and i was a big supporter. i have been a big supporter of the virginia center for autonomous systems. as a result of my interest, this opportunity came up and i said i would be happy to leave the effort. that is how i got involved. host: we have 15 or 20 minutes left with jon greene. he helped put together the proposal that was picked by the faa to be one of six unmanned system test sites. hone aso to guy on the p we show you video shots from the kentlands laboratory.

he is calling from california on the line for democrats. caller: i will make this as quick as possible. i have a three-part comment and a proposition. i am 100% against drones, whether federal, state, or local. i live in southern california. we feel like we're living in a police state. second, we need to look at the power plants on these platforms. we'll talk about local warming. we do not need to add any more fuel to the fire. third, we need to look at how organized crime may take a dvantage and abuse this technology, including terrorist organizations, who are in this country. host: any comments on any part

of that statement? well, let me start with the first one. use of unmanned aircraft by police forces. there are a number of cases where we want the police to have these capabilities. i can think of a number of cases in hostage situations where i would like to have the ability for unmanned aircraft to get in a building, and maybe fly around and locate -- maybe end up getting shot by the perpetrator, in this case. it does not put anyone's life and risk. i do agree, there needs to be a at how police forces

are allowed to use unmanned aircraft, just like there is a look at how they can use wiretapping. we need to pay attention to that. it is important in a democracy. there are ways that this could be very useful and saved lives. was note last caller the first to bring up concerns about this technology, the systems falling into the hands of terrorists. can you address that concern? guest: i do think that we need to pay attention to that as well. is, ast of the matter the previous caller mentioned, you can get one of these vehicles and expensively. you could potentially do some the various things. the larger vehicles will be expensive and they will be licensed, much like an aircraft is licensed. so, you know, i think if we are

worried about terrorists getting a hold of aircraft, we have taken measures in regard to that with respect to commercial aircraft -- there is nothing to keep iteris from buying a general aviation aircraft today. that could be used as an attack. i think we need to remember that these are tools. tools can be used in a positive manner or a negative manner. i would say that is true for a hammer and it is also true for a gun. it is also true for an unmanned aircraft. we need to look at the policy as we move forward and make sure we are getting it right. host: let's go to david in minnesota on the line for independents. caller: good morning. i appreciate you having this

topic on the air and i appreciate mr. greene as the expert on the topic. overall, the concern with the drones is that we are getting a little too fast on the technology. people are having problems catching up. this is something that people are looking at right now. i am looking at a drone over mr. shoulder and thinking i do not want that hovering over my house. my far larger concern is people. what happens on the highway when there is a neck that? -- an accident. gawkers. now i have a drone flying over city streets, what will people do? stop and start gawking. it will cause all kinds of problems. my real question right now is, how many drones, government, law

enforcement, or commercial are in use right now? thank you. host: is that a number you know offhand? guest: no. i don't know. i am certain that dod has thousands. dsere are hundreds in the han of researchers. then, if you start talking about the quad copter that you can buy at the hobby shop, again, there are many of them out there. more every day. that is a concern that we need to look at. tly, there is no regulation on the operation of unmanned aircraft as a hobby. you can fly up to 400 feet.

you should not be within a certain number of miles of the airport, but other than that, you're supposed to play responsibly and there is no regulation. it is something worth looking at over the next few years. what is the difference between a for a hobby and one that is form for commercial purposes? the rule is that a farmer can go out on his farm and fly a quad copter as a hobby. if you does the same flight profile and looks at his crops, that is not legal. we have some things to work out. host: talk a little bit about the global competition here. we are talking about the drone market. this map is from one of the brochures put out by your group

at virginia tech. countriesin red, the that are developing unmanned aerial systems. they have deployed them, in red. in orange, those who have prototyped systems. and in green, the countries who have systems in development. what is the competition in this market? well, it is pretty fierce and it is getting fiercer. the united states had a when these were only used for military purposes. as we are converting to commercial purposes, the restrictions we are facing from the faa and united states are allowing other countries to move further ahead of us. for example, there is a tremendous amount of crop

dusting in japan. the vast majority -- i think the number is 90%. so, that is an application. we ought to look at it today. there are ways we can do that safely today. if you think about it, there are tons. go ahead. host: here's a story from the wall street journal that talks about drones and regulations overseas. estrone stick flight over europe, regulators rush to catch up. this is from earlier this week. is trailing in the development of unmanned aircraft and its beginning an effort to avoid falling behind on commercial drones. the european union will spell out rules and could reach $27 billion per year.

i will let you finish your statement. guest: what i would say is there are a number of places where they are flying unmanned aircraft today for commercial uses. many of you who watched the olympics noticed during the ski acrobatic event -- there was the shadow of a drone used as a camera. this points out that there are ways to do this. we can limit it today and do it safely. we have to catch up in the regulatory aspects. host: on twitter, any new technology is a double-edged sword with great attention to.

brandon, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. a lot of what we're seeing today is concerns about privacy. my concern is about safety. these vehicles fly at 400 feet and i believe that i heard they weigh 55 pounds. if the battery or it runs out of fuel and falls out of the sky, how safe are we if it lands on her head or causes a crash while we are driving? host: jon greene? guest: well, that is my primary concern too. what i would say is, the safety of any tool depends on the weight is used. -- way it is used. it is important that we have trained and responsible operators using these tools as

we move forward. is other thing to recognize the spectrum of risk here. a small quad copter -- i do not think we have one here. that is a lot less risky than one of the vehicles behind me. we need to take a graduated approach to the way we operate. one of the things we are doing as we move forward is focusing on the ideas of low slow and small. we are going to be operating low, at slow speeds, with small aircraft. we will gain confidence in our procedures and train our folks to do things properly before moving forward. that is the kind of philosophy that the faa has about moving forward. you have the safest airspace in the world in the united states

todays. charter is to allow us to integrate unmanned aircraft systems and keep it as safe as it is today. host: talk about what this program has meant to the community in blacksburg. is there any extra safety precaution in place? --st: again, where we are starting out as a working farm. on the farmut here our university employees and students. we have a set of safety procedures that we put into lace -- place before we fly. we have an observer on site at all times. officer, issenior

in place and ready to say at any point that we need to land the aircraft. we have been very careful about the way we have done that. flying over a populated area is the way to start. and to gain confidence in the system themselves. if we have a failure and it falls on the sky, it falls down in damages corn, but not anybody. host: are there restrictions on flying over -- there was a train in the background of one of those pictures, going by as the drone was taking place. guest: right. the area that we are authorized to fly in this not go over those train tracks. we have a very small area here at the farm that we are able to fly in.

we have done unintentionally because we have only made it as far as it needs to be. as we move forward and gain confidence -- and maintain safety, we will fly over larger areas. eventually, we have all seen the amazon commercial -- that they want to deliver things to populated areas. that is where we're are headed, but it will take years. host: we have a few minutes left with jon greene of the mid-atlantic aviation partnership. he is the interim executive director there and is joining us live from the experimental aerial systems laboratory in a blacksburg, near virginia tech. jeff is on the phone from st. louis, missouri. on the line for independents. caller: good morning and thank you very much.

i have his back, but this is absolutely spooky. this is 1984. can you see the ios having their own fleet of drones? the government will have them. they will be buzzing around. they're going to take advantage of it. it will be intimidating and i will want a drone to protect my space. i know i will never be able to buy a drone that will protect me. this is big brother. host: can i ask you to respond to this tweet? what is the difference if police use binoculars, manned aircraft, or drone? caller: personally, a drone is more invest the -- invasive. a helicopter, fine. a drone, small drone -- they are inexpensive, they can

be more people can have them. they can be closer to your house. a helicopter cannot get that close. what can you attach to the strong? -- these drones? all kinds of things. it is truly spooky. host: let's go to georgia on the line for democrats. caller: good morning, sir. how are you? host: you are on with jon greene from virginia tech. caller: i have a commercial drivers license. i see the trait in the background. there is a state highway right there. the expressway goes right by virginia tech. what happens if one of your experiments get out of line?

it is dangerous. host: if you want to respond -- guest: it is potentially dangerous. so is flying an aircraft. what i would say is, where we're flying today is probably 15 miles from 460, which is the expressway that goes next virginia tech. there is literally no way that one of these vehicles would end up over there. up going offend the reservation. that is why we are starting out in unpopulated areas with land that is owned by virginia tech. this is only our own employees here. we notice going on and we can do it safely. as we move forward, we need the same reliability built into the systems that we have in general aviation aircraft today, may be

better. if you think about it, also right next to 460 is the blacksburg aircraft. aircraft are taking off there all day long and flying over 460. there is a risk. there is a risk that one of those aircraft could end up interfering with somebody on 460. what we do is we train our pilots that, in an emergency, you look for an area where you can land safely as possible. we will do the same thing with unmanned aircraft. we have emergency procedures. when there is a problem, they will go to those areas that are preprogrammed, where they can put down safely. host: before we let you go, you told us about your work with the faa. tell us what this industry needs from congress, from your perspective. know, the keyou

thing we need is the ability to make money out of drones. the rules are that you cannot operate an unmanned aircraft system for commercial purposes. ability,there is the with significant restrictions and with clear rules to operate safely in some applications. the things i withdraw our agriculture. we can do that quickly. we need those rules for how we can fly unmanned aircraft systems. that is the bottom line. greene, the interim director, we appreciate you joining us this morning from the laboratory down there near virginia tech. guest: thank you very much. host: up next, we talked more

about drone technology and the history of commercial drone use in the united states. first, former minnesota governor tim valenti -- pawlenty joined us. pawlenty preview of discussing cyber security in the u.s. [video clip] >> on the public policy side, we need a number of things. we need people to have security clearances. as problems arise, they can access information. inyour ceo is traveling singapore and something terrible happens and you have to respond in five minutes, it is good to have your coo or general counsel have a security clearance. two, we need better information sharing. if you think about the array of government agencies with useful

information about cyber threat -- sa, homeland security, cia, treasury, and more -- working with them without fear of legal liability is important. that kind of protection than the things you mentioned are important. the current laws need to be upgraded. they're not. congress needs to act and they are not. >> whether it is an award for good journalism, i do not want to make a judgment on that. service, forpublic possibly the greatest betrayal of our national secrets of all time, strikes me as quite bizarre. i do think there is a real danger of a media world passing itself -- patting itself on the back without understanding the consequences for the dangers

that we face. dangerousere is a disconnect there. as for the guardian newspaper a defiant individual gave the names of offices under jurisdiction and that would be in breach of the terrorism act. why would that not apply to a newspaper? >> this weekend, former british defense minister on edward snowden and privacy issues. saturday morning at 10:00 eastern. and on book tv, from texas, the san antonio book festival, including authors and panels on the stories that shaped san antonio. and the nsa, they brother, and democracy. saturday starting at 1:00 eastern on c-span2. and on american history tv, to her the christological -- tour

the cryptological museum. on c-span 3. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we head back to the virginia tech laboratory, where woolsey.ned by craig we have talked a lot about the future today. can you talk about the history of drones? was this borne out of hobbyists or military? where did this start? guest: there has been a confluence from both directions. the military has been using these systems for decades. the first uses were aerial targets, really. unmanned systems were used for reconnaissance early in the vietnam war.

some would say the earliest was who flew oney, mile down the potomac river before the wright brothers had their first flight. hobbyists have developed their own technology for decades as well. really, being very innovative with that. recently, the miniaturization of electronics made it possible to do more. my graduatearch, students use a lot of products developed by innovators and hobby markets. there is a confluence leading to progress. host: talk about the difference between unmanned systems and autonomous aircraft. we are using these terms interchangeably. explain the difference. for giving meou the opportunity to do that.

unmanned aircraft are vehicles that do not have human operators or passengers on board. they are not necessarily self-control. they may be robotically operated. says we are working on unmanned aircraft systems. every system will have a pilot in command. it is true that aircraft are capable of controlling their own flight. that is what we mean by autonomous. autonomous flight is self-controlled flight. an autonomous car is a self driving car. we are interested in advancing this technology at making it possible for vehicles to really control themselves. we are experienced with this with cruise control. thinkt these vehicles to well enough to behave safely. host: when we read stories about amazon package deliveries and

see video projections of drones delivering packages down streets, is that farther off than the work you are doing now? guest: i think it is. the grand vision -- there are a lot of problems to solve. is would be that jeff bezos going to fly a package from broadway -- there are a lot of technological problems to solve. there will have to be awnings and tree branches and traffic lights in the way. the aircraft will have to behave safely. it will have to synch well enough to mitigate hazards. i heard a caller from louisiana ask what happens when there is a failure? the vehicle needs to deal with that in a way that a human operator would. i think it is a little far off.

one of the problems that the faa is concerned about is the ability to see and avoid other aircraft. we have not solved by a. -- that yet. host: what sort of license to your pilots need? we saw one earlier. we are showing one now. what kind of license do they have to fly those vehicles? what do the other people do there? well, the pilot in command has taken the faa written exam. some are actual private pilot. they have also passed a medical exam. there are two medicals. in addition, there are personnel around to our scanning the airway for other aircraft. in the same sense that a driver scans the highway for other

drivers who may be misbehaving, we assume that all of the drivers are licensed and trained at some point. that does not mean they are all behaving properly. we always scan the roadway for other traffic hazards. the faa requires the same thing of pilots. whether general aviation or manned aircraft. the aircrafts that cannot do this and avoid attacks on its own. in addition to the pilot, who is flying the aircraft, there are other personnel to make sure that the plane is de-conflicted with other air traffic. host: we're talking with craig woolsey, director of the research center we have been featuring today. we're taking your calls and questions and comments for the next 40 minutes or so, as we continue to discuss drones.

professor, you talked about the miniaturization of the technology. here's a question for michael on twitter -- paranoia aside, is it true that nanotechnology can make drones small enough to become a " fly on the wall?" guest: i will not say no. there is definitely interest in pushing these things down. you can develop new capabilities. the smallest i know of is at harvard, the robo fly. it is an amazing vehicle. so yes, there is a move towards miniaturization. the applications are -- a lot of the work has been turned by the defense agency. they have their own applications of mind. we do not work at that jail in my lab. -- scale in my lab. host: we are seeing several

drones over your shoulders. can you talk about the drones in use at virginia tech? guest: absolutely. my group works with primarily fixed wing aircraft, which is what people think of when you talk about airplanes. i have a colleague who works with rotary aircraft, which is helicopters. and i have a colleague in plant pathology, and the college of agriculture. he uses fixed wing aircraft to study plants. these are used for a variety of research activities, focused on everything from plant pathology to bio security. in my case, i have aircraft that we used to study flight control. i have a colleague who is very interested in making these vehicles operate more effectively in difficult conditions. we use these to go out and demonstrate the controlled algorithms. guest: several folks are waiting

to ask you questions. we will start in ohio on the line for independents. good morning, linda. caller: good morning, professor. i wanted to talk about the failure of congress and the state to anticipate the legal infrastructure needed to protect citizens. my question is, this is way behind in technology. cell phones and everything else. what happens when the press gets a hold of them? what happens when private investigators decide to use them? what happens in a divorce situation where a husband or wife decides to stock their sp ouse? how long will it take to adjudicate? host: professor? guest: thank you, those are great questions.

i think that the legal construct will evolve in parallel with the technology. my fear is that our fears will present a technology that does have a lot of uses -- andable uses to society might be stunted on concerns that could be addressed through existing procedures. i think your points are well taken. they have come up when other technologies have evolved. the ability to have cell phones, for example. or what comes to mind is the face recognition. seehe same time, will we football stadiums for people who committed misdemeanors or something like that? these are legitimate concerns. that the have faith legal system will keep pace with the development of technology. maybe you have less faith.

my fear is that if we are to afraid of the potential misuse of technology, and there are some, we will avoid the technology altogether. --t: a question from twitter is there an educational program available that will teach you how to be a drone pilot? there are such programs. we do not have one here at virginia tech. we focus more on the engineering of systems. there are other universities in our consortium and around the country that are developing programs focused on training people to be unmanned operators. that is important. it is important that the operators of these vehicles are well trained and well versed in these regulations. i see the technology evolving in a way that you have relatively few, well certified operators, who provide services.

maybe everyone will have a drone and operate these things and create hazards. i think the reality will be closer to relatively few trained operators providing services to consumers and clients. host: let's go to fill in clearwater, florida. caller: good morning. great show. as a former land owner and farmer, if i saw one of these over my house, i would shoot it down. that is all there is to it. what do you think about that? i know americans will not put up with this. host: professor? guest: well, you are not the first person to suggest that. there is a congressional candidate in montana who says he would do the same thing in his campaign videos. that is dangerous. the vehicles that are in their,

they are there legitimately. sophisticatedy vehicles. if you shoot at one, it will not operate to where it is supposed to. it may pose a danger to people on the ground. the concern over -- i gather that your concern is that the reason the vehicle is there is to invade your privacy. that is a policy concern. jon,rmer colleague -- addressed that issue as well. host: we showed our viewers a poll that came out yesterday. of their study of technology and the next 50 years. at the public is largely unenthusiastic about these of nonmilitary drones in the country. 63% of americans who would be a change for the worse it personal commercial drones

are used. are those number surprising to you? guest: i think there is a good reason that those are the numbers that show up in the polls. we have unmanned operating systems in public view for years. -- providingity security for war fighters in afghanistan. them providing intelligence and surveillance -- at theaissance militaristic uses, the reasons why they were developed heard what we will not s. oft of my job and the job these unmanned aerial system test sites is to go out in a very controlled way and

demonstrate the potential commercial uses of these vehicles and uses by first responders and others that will help to sway opinion. i'm not surprised that is the prevailing opinion. host: matthew in louisiana on line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. in google earth live on google and it showed that they have a pilot program in california where they are watching everything that is being done on our streets. if you punch that up, it will show you the pilot program. i'm sure drones are some of the problem. as american citizens, do we really want to be watched 24 hours a day? the government is not our parents. e are other ther

privacy concerns besides this emerging grown technology? caller: right. it isre some of the distrf drones, but i was shocked when i read up on that. missouri on our live for republicans. good morning. hello. if thereting to know is any relation between the drone and the picture i am saying on television with the fellow from virginia tech -- between that and the old flying saucers back in the 1950's. i have seen this with my whole

family in jefferson county. these saucers flying up in the and making a weird noise lights flashing and everything and all of a sudden it took off. host: you think these old stories might be a government drone as opposed to some of these other explanations out there? i think it might be the start of something like that. airline pilots have all seen these. host: you talked the bit about the history of drones earlier. how long have these larger drones like the large helicopter behind you -- how long has that technology been around? technology specific behind me has been around for a

couple of decades. the 1990's is when they were introduced in japan. mr. green talked about how japan -- 90% is autonomous vehicles. the fellow in the pickup truck who drives from field to field and watch as the vehicle and sprays fertilizer or herbicide -- the technology has been around for a long time. passenger aircraft has been capable of this operation for a long time. the ability to do this is not new. what is new is the idea that you would have an unmanned aircraft system with no pilot or passengers on board. that is what is bringing up the policy concerns. host: staying on technology for a second. an e-mail from bill in pennsylvania. "if the drone loses power, a parachute is deployed for soft that is oneest:

thing they have looked at. there are others. with these aircraft, if you lose power, you may be able to recover the aircraft if -- in our operations, we are high enough and close enough to the airfield that we can still bring t in.ircraft and glid i there are ways to fix or recover the aircraft. in the case where that is just not possible, there are additional mitigations you can take to guarantee that the risk of injury or damage to property is minimum. bring out the aircraft in a way that will minimize the risk of collateral damage. host: one caller was concerned drones.ollution from what do they run on? the unmanned behind me is electric

powered. that is becoming more common as the motors get better and power batteries get better. we will see more of that use of the power system. and doesis it quiet not admit exhaust, it is also very reliable. the best engine pollution systems are historically very reliable. i think at one time 40% of the losses of unmanned aircraft, the propulsion performance problems. you are seeing move toward electric power. they don't have long endurance, but that is changing. het power you mentioned -- mentioned global warming and other concerns. some of the uses of these technologies are to address exactly those concerns. the ability to have an aircraft in the air for a day and a half,

ocean allows you scanning ofedented those problems. the vehicles are being used to address exactly that kind of problem. one of the issuesst: you brought up is replacing some of the current technologies that are out there like cropdusting planes with more precision use of drones. explain that effort. guest: in general, one of the reasons why doing cropdusting with an aircraft is appealing is it's a dangerous occupation. at one time, it was the most werhal occupation for manpo

in the united states. cropdusting is still an effective and efficient way to apply fertilizer or herbicide. it is very dangerous. automating that particular operation, there is tremendous potential for the vehicle. if you move to a smaller scale and vehicles capable of hovering in place and doing detailed imagery, you can start to address the problems we treat with herbicide. we are concerned about disease. it is expensive to do that and not environmentally sound. it would be better if you could find where the disease is starting to emerge and go and treat it right there. it will cost a lot less and result in higher yield and the less run off of these chemicals. host: sam waiting in blacksburg, virginia on our line for democrats. good morning. i was regina chosen to

have the test site -- why was virginia chosen to have the test site? guest: thank you very much. virginia tech has a well-established history of using unmanned air systems for these research purposes that i talked about. --the national airspace control of economist vehicles, many of them have chosen to work indoors for the problems of getting approval from the faa. it's an onerous process. we committed to doing that. working with the ffa in order to operate safely. having developed that relationship with the faa played virginiae in an virgini

tech's selection. we have accomplished partners in our program. a number of universities and commercial organizations that are cutting edge with the technology. the overall team is outstanding and virginia tech's history helped us to win the award. host: we are showing a video of one of your student pilots bringing in one of these smaller drones that was tested earlier this month. what kind of jobs are the student pilots and the researchers down there at your lab going to go into? host: the students are all pursuing aerospace engineering degrees. they're getting masters or doctorate in aerospace engineering. they're studying advanced mathematics. the kinds of jobs they will go

into might include working for companies like some of the smaller companies we mentioned earlier. boeing lockheed martin. service go into civil working at places like the faa or nasa. a number of them may go into academia and continue the fundamental research. host: ted on a republican line from florida. good morning. concernedm a little with the program. why haven't we discussed the technology that is already out usingthat i happen to be that makes the government itself on and flies the dgi platform? in one hour, the american public can go to any local hobby shop

and spend $1500 and be a drone and attach a go pro to it and videotape or do any surveillance they would like to do in a quicktime and easy fashion. with a drone that connects to satellites and is failproof. that is a great question. for privates citizens to go and buy or build and fly drones has been codified since at least 1981. john mentioned the advisory circular in 1981. as long as you keep it below 400 feet and below 55 pounds, you can go and fly. that is a great question. the technology is there. that brings up a point i would like to make.

i think about these policy issues at some. who can violate your privacy? let's play that game. the government is physically capable of violating her privacy. people are very sensitive to that right now after the snowden revelations. people are rightfully concerned about what the government can and can't do with these vehicles. david industry might be able to violate your privacy. a good example of that is someone mentioned google earlier. they had this idea that they were going to develop street view. we will add imagery to our maps of the environment and people walking around in the city and we can look at their street view and see where they are. there was a lot of outrage over that. people are in the pictures. we will blur the faces and license plates and they put up the website so if

you think your face is not poor enough, you can ask them to make it blurrier. they put in policies to address this. this is the third entity -- other private citizens. that is absolutely true and a legitimate concern. there are harassment laws on the books. people can do that. that concern has nothing to do with the commercial use of unmanned aerial systems, which is trying toaa address. hobby use is already there. they can put a camera on and go and fly legally. the wood is illegal is the kinds of things that will turn the tide of public opinion and allow us to make advances in service to civil society with commercial uses. "am i allowed to shoot down a drone over my property?" guest: you are not.

the faa controls the airspace. they have come out -- there was issuedy in colorado that a hunting license for drugs. the faa responded that it was a bad idea. you will create a serious safety hazard. legal to shoot down a drone that is operating over your property. tois perfectly in your right find out who is doing it and bring it to the attention of law enforcement and maybe a harassment case. host: we have 15 minutes left. let's go back to the phones. and tony is in newport, tennessee on our line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. i am behind technology. if it was not technology, the

united states would not be where it is today. callers rbr will bring. are youof your callers will bring. -- some of your callers are bewildering. -- hed the guy who said does not remember way back when there was a woman lying in the and they were looking for things that got confiscated and they took the wrong amount. and can cover the borders the seas and cover everything a lot better with drugs coming in

from other countries. about all i have to say. i'm behind technology. my friend was a teacher where you are. i back you guys 100%. you very much for your comments. i agree with you. there are a lot of compelling applications for the systems that people need to keep in mind while they are continuing to raise concerns that they have. ofre are lots of examples operations of manned aircraft that could be made safer if we automated them. i have colleagues in the will flywho routinely low and fast as they do radio surveys and things like that. of think of recent incidents

police helicopters, one recently in atlanta that crashed and killed a couple of occupants. -- it would bes a real tragedy if we don't enable first responders to have access to this kind of technology in the case of disasters. host: "how high can drones fly and collect atmospheric data?" guest: good question. drones fly up to 60,000 feet. we have high-altitude aircraft that can fly above 60,000 feet, above commercial traffic and can stay there for more than a day. -- theere is a concern weather is a concern. in blacksburg, the conditions of operations require that we fly in fair weather

conditions. plenty of visibility and low wind. host: mike waiting in arizona on line for republicans. caller: i had an opportunity to be a test engineer for missiles and space they were developing. they could do a figure eight and anda laser beam on a target fire from 10 clicks away to hit the target. it had the capability of making sweeps on areas of land miles for items that were not natural items like

tanks. at the time, it was developed for a scenario and the soviet union collapsed and so did our programs. we perfected hours somewhere was workingwhere it and the army had accepted it as an artillery spotter. that's my story. i see all the things about drones coming up. there is nothing particularly frightening about them. maybe the navigation gets off a bit, which we had problems with. arizonatesting it in and flights got lost approaching

tucson or mexico city. fortunately, there were no accidents. a new technology that we were helping. -- that we were developing. host: his experience on the military drone side. guest: that's a great comment. we as american taxpayers have been supporting the development of this technology for decades. it is very cable. the development to date has been for military purposes, so that is what we see in the news. the vehicles developed to serve military purposes. have an opportunity now to realize a benefit from all of that investment. a dividend, if you will, from the investment the department of defense has made. towe can only find a path

certification for commercial use. that is what these test sites are all about. itping the faa helped make possible for companies and service providers to make money using unmanned aerial systems in the national airspace and the united states to solve problems that desperately need to be solved. host: are the biggest challenges the regulatory side or the technology side? guest: regulatory. there are some technology hurdles. one of them is this requirement that the aircraft be able to see and avoid other aircraft. that is the one that the faa holds up as the major hurdle to clear. the reason the faa is in the position they are in is because there is such a clamor from the developers of the technology to allow them to adapt these technologies for useful

agricultureses like -- it happens in rural areas where there's not a lot of air traffic. that is one good reason. agriculture is a major driver of our economy. there is a tremendous benefit if we can increase the yield and crop security. there is a tremendous benefit to that. a sense of trust in the systems and develop technology as well. we will address concerns as they arise. i definitely see policy as the bigger challenge right now. those six faa unmanned aircraft system test sites around the country on the map. university of alaska and texas a&m and virginia tech, where we are bringing our viewers live this morning on a special show today of the

"washington journal." some video shot earlier this month of a drone test that happened at that virginia tech test side. let's go to nelson in tennessee on our line for democrats. you're on with the professor. caller: good morning. understand that we live in a rural area. it is an agricultural community. research has been done. it is very beneficial. done with theeen units and how cost effective and how many acres can be used and how widespread

will it be done per unit? i will hang up and listen. guest: that's a great question. you bald and it will become clear what is and is not cost effective. inan say that my colleagues -- our laboratory ollegeated on the c farm. they are very interested in advancing the technology. i have one colleague who is a who has a innovative ideas for how to use the systems. he is interested in plant seed and how it spreads. he uses a small unmanned aerial systems to collect plant pathogen spores, which are these

tiny spores that are released by diseased plants and carried up and bounced around in the atmosphere until they are deposited on another healthy plant. you use unmanned aerial systems to sample these things? they're very sparsely distributed and tiny. you have to sample huge volumes of air to get a statistically significant sample. the small unmanned very cool come in 20 minutes you can sample thousands of liters of air and develop a very good measurement of what you are looking for. if you can do this repeatedly, you may be able to find the source of the spores and identify the location more easily and quickly and mitigated. it.nd mitigate there is a lot of innovative thinking about how to use the systems in our culture. it is not just cropdusting. host: you talk about your colleagues down there. how did you get involved in this work? what is your specific research area?

guest: my background is in controlled theory. i develop mathematical models of vehicles and develop theories to help based on those models control themselves better. that is oftion interest to me and to my sponsors his vehicle control. we work with atmospheric flight and autonomous underwater vehicles. my interest is in making the systems behave more smartly and more effectively and more efficiently and more robustly. host: ed in north carolina on our life republicans -- our line for republicans. i just want to know how low these things are legally allowed to fly. i know you have some callers

call up and talk about shooting know that in't wouldn't do that if i did not know what it was. i think we've got enough corruption in our government -- and that is why people are concerned. we have an attorney general who refuses to enforce our laws. that is disturbing. that is where i have a problem with it. i love the idea of the technology and would love to see it go forward. there is general concerns about this. i want to know how low these things can apply. i can have an interest passing sign on my property. if i'm 1000 yards from anybody, i'm not allowed to do anything about it? guest: there are a couple of questions there. how high or low can these

aircraft fly? i'm required to keep the aircraft below 400 feet. the faa's concern is de-conflicting the operations of these vehicles with other aircraft. the nature of your question is more, do i own the airspace over my property? the answer is, no. the faa regulates that airspace. you don't have a right to build a tall tower that would with thely conflict air traffic without letting the faa know that. to can't watch your own uab several thousand feet because it might interfere with other air traffic. the faa is concerned about the airspace and they regulated from the ground up. there are people who think that we should look at minimum altitude limits for these things. is fairly advanced in the development of policy where

these vehicles. because of their advancement in the development of policy, they are seeing issues arise. they are seeing problems arise. it is not because they have more problems than we do. they are allowing more operations than we are because their policies more events. there was a recent incident where a young woman was hit by a multi-rotor vehicle that was there filming the triathlon. and itt to the hospital turned out the operator was not licensed. there is a licensing program in australia and the operator was operating illegally. they do have a minimum altitude of 30 meters. you need to get away from people if there is a problem. you need to be high enough that you have room to do that. if you are too low, the altitude arguments for

establishing minimums as well. the director of the virginia center for autonomous systems. you can check out more of his work and the virginia tech site vt.edu.nned. we appreciate you joining us on the washington journal. coming up next, we will open up our phone lines. we want to hear from our viewers. we continued to talk about your reaction to drones. whether you support domestic drug use or not trade or other news of the day. we will be right back. ♪ a loyale duke. i'm

duke alum. i did not do this to her duke. i did this to try to find out what happened. there is a tremendous amount of passion about the story to this day. all one has to do is go onto amazon and see that i have amassed only five one star 25 one star reviews. my last book was about goldman sachs. this is in another realm altogether. william d cohan looks at the ofke lacrosse scandal 2006. c-span brings public affairs events from washington directly to you computing you in the room

i congressional hearings, white house event, briefings and conferences. and offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house. created by the tv industry 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite providers. host: in our last 25 minutes, we are opening up our phone lines to our viewers. happy to continue taking your comments about drones, whether you support or oppose domestic use of drones or other news of through.hat we will go including this headline from the washington post on the front page. obama hails a million enrollees for health insurance. 8 million people have signed up for health insurance under the affordable care act, calling it be a success story that

democrats should be proud of in the face of republican attacks on the law. the final figure is well above the white house's initial target of 7 million sign-ups. he blasted republicans for continuing to press for its repeal, saying that they have erred in their predictions. here's a bit from obama's news conference yesterday in which he touted that 8 million number. [video clip] >> i don't think we should apologize or be defensive about it. right story to tell. but the other side is offering would strip away protections and thosom those families millions of people who had insurance before the law past but never knew that the insurance companies could drop them when they needed it or women who would get charged more

because they were women. i'm still puzzled why they make this their sole agenda item that comes to politics. it is curious. about istend to talk what the american people are interested in hearing. our plan to send people back to work. our plans for making sure our economy continues to innovate. our plans to make sure we are training people for the jobs that are out there right now and making better use of our community colleges. and linking them up with business and how we will continue to bring manufacturing back the way we have over the past several years. and how we're going to put more money into the pockets of ordinary people. spend allcans want to their time talking about repealing a law that is working, that is their business. what democrats should do is not be defensive, but we need to move on and focus on things that

are really important to the american people right now. host: if you want to see how that 8 million number was hit, here is a chart from the wall street journal showing sign-ups and how they went from october began. when enrollment that is october, november, december. most enrollments happening in january and february and shooting up in march. if you want to hear the republican response, that also in that washington post story. mitch mcconnell said in a statement yesterday that obama had glossed over the fact that many americans had been unable to keep their previous plan and they now are getting inferior coverage. noticeably absent from the president's remarks today was any mention of the millions of americans who were deceived about what obama care would mean for them and their families.

callous americans have unexpectedly been forced out of the plans they had and liked and are now shouldering hermetically higher premiums and can no longer use the doctors and hospitals to choose. it is long past time washington democrats work with us to remedy the mess they created and that means repealing the slaw and replacing it with real reforms that actually lower costs. the statement from mitch mcconnell. a tweet yesterday right after president obama's press "watching the president how how great obama care is. my constituents tell me differently. he still won't say who has paid." phones toning up our our viewers to continue to talk about some of these issues or the drone issue we've been talking about this morning. jack on our line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning.

i'm wondering about the drones and the contracts. the one from ohio, the -- shentative from ohio was talking about four dollars for gasoline. have sold at one dollar a gallon. that's what i'm wondering about. ist: your concern about government contracts for drug development? caller: yes. i'm concerned about everything or thehe contracts control of drones and

the price of gasoline. host: jack expressing concerns. miami, florida on our line for democrats. good morning. we are democrats and we are very happy with the ideas of our president with obama care. hate it.licans we are retired. and poorold people people -- the only thing they care is for the money for themselves. host: do you think it is a policy disagreement or a heat

issue? what do you think is driving this? democrats --e ideas come out. the numbers from the affordable care act. e's winning numbers. the washington post noting that the obama administration has a lot more work to do after this year's big push. the marketplaces are not even halfway to enrolling the 25 million or so customers that the cbo expects eventually will sign up. providey measures to financial stability to the marketplaces of phase out over the next few years. there were networks must not result in people liking timely access to basic care. even so, the news about obama care is good. washington post writes him a even if republicans can't quite bring themselves to admit it yet.

rosa in connecticut on our line for independents. good morning. caller: i want to add one comment to the drone conversation. recently about people being rescued, who were lost in the woods. runs with heat sensors on them. that is a good use for it. -- drones with heat sensors on them. that would be an excellent use of drones. host: other uses that you are concerned about or do you think those can be worked out in the regulatory efforts we've been talking about today? there is excellent use for drones. host: a comment on the drone question that we asked earlier from j martin who said, i will agree with the drone use and search for someone who is lost. no to any armed use by police or

government use. stop the use in military operations for combat and surveillance because they are currently overused, turning citizens of the world into haters of the united states. that conversation happening on our facebook page. an.ebook.com/csp david in michigan on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. i heard a comment earlier about calling theo was police at bay outside of her house. i have been protesting in one form or another our government for 40 years. when i started, there was a lot more socialism around before james watson. back when i used to protest, most of the people on the right

used to tell me america lov, loe it or leave it. buting has changed technology. do they want to love it or leave it? thank you. michigan.d in in foreign policy news, this headline from the wall street journal. putin defiant as ukraine packt reached. officials agreed to take steps to turn down the heat in the escorting stand up with pro-russian malicious, even as e putin shows no sign of backing down. yielding an agreement for separatists to demobilize -- he adopted

some of the language of the separatists and implied that has more of ae video stor historical claim to territories in eastern ukraine than its neighbor does." putinpeech that vladimir gave, the subject of several headlines. here's the front page of usa today. utin on quizzes p live tv. questions including whether russian spies on its citizens. here is bit of that exchange, courtesy of russia today. [video clip] all concluded that these programs are ineffective in stopping terrorism. that theyfound

unreasonably intrude on the private lives of ordinary citizens. are innocent of wrongdoing or criminal activity. i see little public discussion about russia's own involvement in the policies of surveillance. store oria intercept, analyze the communications of millions of individuals? that -- do you believe that simply increasing law enforcement can justify y's surveillance? i used to be working for an intelligence -- we are going to talk one professional language.

efforts areence strictly regulated by our law forcescial -- youpting phone calls permission a court's thatoc thaalk particular person. we don't have a mass system of interception. it cannot exist under our laws. the vlad and that ed show. libertarian mr. putin.

it would have been nice to be able to bounce the snowden-privacy dialogues operating russian dissident and xei,corruption blogger, ale who is under house arrest in moscow. 10 minutes left in our open thees segment here to and "washington journal." danny, good morning. caller: my comment is about the drones. has anybody thought about the drones getting into terrorist hands to deliver explosives to big games or something like that? if this technology moves forward, do you think drones should be registered with the government? is that one way to try to stop what you are talking about? caller: i don't think you can stop them. if they want to do it and inflicted something on people,

they will use that. host: let's go to kathy in texas on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. saic runs the drone row graham. bush's uncle.y -- the drone program. utah spy center. fost: are you in favor o some of these domestic uses of drones? sellr: isn't that how they urine tests? for people who drive planes and now it's for baggers at walmart. host: it will be used for other purposes. let's go to alexander in ohio on

our line for independents. good morning. caller: my concern is, why is nobody speaking about virginia 21 and how it pertains to the african americans? butthese people talking democrats and republicans. don't they understand that the republicans -- nobody is checking out the stuff. nobody is talking about that stuff. these things are very detrimental to the american society and the people. that's alexander in ohio. a few more headlines for you here. the lead story in the news journal out of delaware.

bideney general beau announcing his plans to run for governor in 2016. also on the subject of the biden family, front page story in today's washington times. biden not even close to a white house researcherss as reader say he will struggle to gain traction in the early primary and caucus states such as iowa. the vice president is put third and the democratic field in ohio, trailing mrs. clinton and elizabeth warren of massachusetts. for 63%nton is favored of likely iowa caucus goers. mr. biden came in third with 10%. let's go to david from georgia on our line for independents. good morning.

caller: good morning. a couple of things. cropdustingoing with drones, how are they going avoid the power lines that run parallel or across the fields? two, i forgot what else i was going to say -- host: you don't think the technology obstacles can be overcome? caller: i think they can. it will be a while before we can get to it. i keep track of all of the technology online. r drone with aar

a gps controller. as far as i know, they are not able to go around buildings and whatnot. host: let's go to bob in rhode island on our live for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. my question is, why are democrats so afraid of using the word affordable health care? they're letting the republicans run rampant with obama care this and obama care that. a lot of the things i hear seem to make a lot of sense with the affordable health care act. republicans just unwanted. republicans don't want poor people. they want to keep them poor and make them poorer.

i want your opinion on that. in ohio will go to ruth on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: i would like to say something good about ohio here. things in ohio aren't so good right now -- he wasn't elected. he was bought and paid for by the coke brothers. koch brothers. got ohio and cut everything he can cut when he uses trickery to get medicaid back. it took three weeks for the rep air. the supreme court had to come in and make the decision to get medicaid back to the seniors. i'm talking about another subject now. i would like to know if the

drones would have anything to do with looking for that plane. i have a gut feeling that it might be sitting in pakistan. host: the malaysian flight? caller: yes. i have a gut feeling that it might be sitting in pakistan. host: ruthie calling in from ohio. here's the front page from usa today's when he section. homeowners still bailing out. despite two years of rising prices, u.s. still has millions of homes left with unpaid mortgages. 9.1 million houses or 17% of all homes with mortgages were seriously underwater in the first quarter. that means the total loan amount was at least 25% higher than the y's estimated market

value. 700-6000.th 458,000.erdale with area, 343,000. let's go to jack in kentucky on our line for independents. 700-6000. with ,000.icago with 706 if a drone is flying, that's one thing [indiscernible] stephen inll go to

florida in that area we were just talking about. the miam-fort lauderdale area. good morning. caller: i wanted to make a comment on the drones. a good number of years -- i spent a good number of years optimizing them for agriculture. the ability to get out of the lab and actually deploy them. not drones at that time but from low flying aircraft up 3000 feet. i am retired now. the bottom line is, when you build drones, the first application -- it is a very important application -- is

agriculture. they carry optimized sensors. buildingto consider the drone one way rather than another. you have to go all the way back and look at this particular application before you even build drones. that is basically -- i don't know if this will make much .ense for most people it made to the guest you had on earlier. the fellow from virginia tech. host: thanks for calling in with your thoughts. we will go to pat in michigan on our line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. can thwashington journal is

one of my favorite shows. i would like to comment on the drones. i would like to make a suggestion to all of your viewers. library for aal book by george orwell entitled, "1984." drones are another tool for big brother to watch us and control us. satellites ando attract us through our phones and cable tvs. they track us through our computers. please, viewers -- the title of the book is "1984" by george orwell. host: we read you a few headlines about campaign issues -- here's a story related to

republicans. this from the new york times. votere discovers a useful outreach tool. a gun sweepstakes. the online gun sweepstakes has become one of the most useful campaign camping ou outreach. the concept -- take a group of supporterssible highly motivated around an issue and pique their interest with good marketing. want to have their zack moffett said this is just a more aggressive version of wings that campaigns are already doing. discovers useful voter outreach begun. the story in the "new york times." that is about all the time we have this morning.