things -- and just creating a bigger problem. and that's it. have a nice day. you did a great job. all of my feelings about this is, the american people have to get back to the survival oncencts we want had -- we had back in the world war. wars.r military fight our in the suits should keep their mouth shut about it. host: excellent call. from the washington times, the situation continues to unfold western iraq. ground troops.s. as the islamic state closes on baghdad. from new york city, democrat line.

caller: i'm with the people that think we should not be involved in another war in the middle east. troops for us to send in when we have the iraqis saying that unless we send our people in to die for them, they are going to put their weapons down and not fight. we do not belong being the police of the world. if these people don't want to stand up and protect their own selves in that area of the world, we should not be doing it for them. host: thanks for the call. harold from illinois. good morning. caller: good morning. i think we should reinstitute the draft. thatd it very strange people like romney had all of those young men and women in his family, and not a single one of them has served in uniform. why is it always the poorest

people in this country to have less to gain are always one to sacrifice? why were they watching those tanks move in on that city, and they were dropping extensive ordinance on jeeps? it doesn't make sense. something is wrong. host: thanks for the call. laverne joins us from texas. democrats line. caller: i do not think we need to put any ground troops in. our nationnt treasure, both in monetary means and in blood to protect this feckless group of people who will throw down their arms and run away from what they perceive as an enemy. they've had the best training, the best equipment, and the best that this country has offered them. they have done nothing. i also wanted to say, i agree with those who called in this morning, that those people who

want to run for office want to beat the drums of war. should be their children's feet going to an induction station to be sworn in for service to this country. as far as romney, with all of thefirmness, hiding behind bail of his religious obligations. no. they need to go. host: laverne, thanks for the call. continue the conversation on our facebook page. a lot of people weighing in on the issue. should u.s. ground troops returned to iraq? the problem is, this is not our war. if this is another reason why we were there, then let's hear it. the director of the democratic senate campaign committee. last week we heard from the republican side, senator jerry

moran. one of the questions -- when will we know which party has control of the data state senate? [video clip] there is a possibility that we know who was in the majority after they have been sworn in. everyone else would scratch their head, but for political jump a new -- junkies, it could ruin christmas. next, is the director of the senate majority pack. easternk, riera 7:00 time, we'll live from 6:00 to 7:00 with the michigan governor's debate. the last call on the issues of ground troop in iraq. democrats line. caller: good morning. i agree with the other gentleman. it just seems like every time it is time for us to enjoy our

holidays, they manufacture something. to listen tot us the fact that more troops are committing suicide than are surviving, because of all the sayerent chores, and they send more people in so that we can get them here and not take care of them. i think they are crazy. i'm really sick of them writing our holidays. thank you. -- ruining our holidays. debates inthan 50 advance of the november elections. coming up this afternoon, debates from some of the most closely watched house and senate races. we will live with the second of three iowa senate debates. candidate isn being challenged. the issue of gun control came up. [video clip]

>> i have never met michael bloomberg. [laughter] what these ads are based upon, other than a fear that i'm going to bring balanced, common sense to trying to come up with reasonable solutions to reducing gun violence. like i have, working with a republican from pennsylvania named tim murphy. we have held lots of hearings this year on the connection between our failure to direct the needs of mental illness in this country. through those bipartisan hearings, we learned that the largest mental health treatment facility in the united states is the los angeles county jail. we know that we have to do more. , when the- and yet senator was asked on this question about what we can do, -- she was asked about her and that she ran in the primary. where she was shooting a pistol into the camera and saying let me take aim at obamacare. it came out right before the

tragic shooting in santa barbara. she was asked if she regretted it. she called it an unfortunate accident. i don't think it was an accident to the victims and their family. >> senator? >> that is a tragedy, and i have stated that already. you have stated that you will work for mental health reform, but we have actually done that here in the state of iowa. working towards a better system. easier access for the most vulnerable in our population to receive care. they can walk into many places now and discover where they can go for treatment. whether you are in a world area, whether you are living in a populated area. we want to make sure that there is easy access for those that suffer from mental illness, and you receive the care that they need. i will always be a strong supporter of the second amendment. libertiesmotto -- our we prize, our rights we will maintain.

host: the iowa senate debate last night and tonight. the michigan governor's debate at six clock eastern, three clock for those of you on the west coast. we like to thank local broadcasters for allowing c-span to carry their coverage of these debates for a local and national audience. tomorrow evening, kentucky educational tv has the first and only scheduled debate in the kentucky u.s. senate race, too close to call. senator mcconnell was first elected in 1984, seeking another term. being challenged with a democrat allison grimes. that's tomorrow evening. check out our debate schedules online anytime at www.c-span.org . darren samuelsohn follows politics for politico. good morning. guest: good morning. host: i want to point you to a story in the new york times. you had this story in august. the campaign is finite even on

the web. why? where people are going. especially the 18-year-old to 30-year-old segment that people are trying to capture the attention of. people watch television on their iphones and tablets. through hulu and other live television. and pains know if they are trying to reach this specific subset of voters, people who are turning from live television and going to other forms, this is where they go. the campaigns are buying up the space through google and hulu, through youtube. you name it. they are going to espn.com and finding voters where their screens aren't. obviously, tv ads are some that we talk about relentless lead. here we have an example where campaigns are changing to deal where the modern having is right now. host: they report in the new york times, premium sites -- those 18 to 34-year-old voters

digitale to, advertising is maturing in the same way that television advertising matured in the 70's and 80's. guest: we see studies that show online digital advertising is outpacing radio. it is on his way to passing newspapers and direct mail and telemarketing. it will be several hundred million dollars in spending in the 2014 cycle. it will be huge by 2016, if you think about it in the presidential campaign. compare that to 2010, where we weren't even ipads or a lot of the technology we have today. it is taking off. is a whole cottage industry of firms in washington and around the country specializing in digital advertising. host: it's only been 18 years that we went from candidates back in 1996 -- bill clinton and bob dole posting speeches on their respective websites. now we have seen the explosion of social media.

what do we expect in 2016, based on what we saw two years ago? guest: technology changes so fast. things will advance at such a rapid rate. you hear more campaigns that are capable of knowing what voters they want to target, and specific locations. and hitting them up with targeted ads. whether it's on an issue about choice for women voters, or an issue like environmental issues with a certain segment of voters. they are getting up more finely micro-targeting at voters. it is going to be a relentless micromanaging of strategies going forward. i think as we look at the technology itself, you point out, the campaign websites that people were looking at back in the 90's to where we are today. youuch of what you see when go to online website now is driven towards fundraising and donating money. they really hit you up and ask you to donate every single time

that you open up a campaign website. they are focusing their efforts as well on raising money. host: let me point your attention to the minnesota post. how social media is changing political campaigns in minnesota, beginning with this question -- did you know that their governor writes for buzz feed? he wrote an article -- 26 reasons to love minnesota on buzzfeed.com. guest: they are using online tools to sound hip and try to attack clicks and eyeballs. people are using the facebook pages to get out the vote. facebook put out a study in the last two days, talking about how republicans and democrats use facebook differently, with respect to how they try and connect with voters. republicans like to tout endorsements, democrats are more likely to tout when they are going to be somewhere, where they're going to be, trying to get out and mobilize. they use technology in different ways. host: from huffington post, this

question -- where you spend your time on social media says a lot about your local beliefs? guest: facebook is for an older subset of voters. certainly, my nephews and nieces are not even on facebook these days. you think about people who are 18, 19, 20 years old -- host: where are they? guest: they are on instagram, snapshot, going other places besides facebook. twitter is somewhere that has a younger subset. they are on to the next great thing. host: we are learning about emojis. guest: it's a way that people can communicate. a smiley face is the most popular one. but play with the bottom of your iphone screen, and you will see five or six screens that allow

you to say nothing you want with a symbol. host: our phone lines are up. our guest is darren samuelsohn from politico. i want to share with our audience, something you posted online at alito.com. .- politico.com [video clip] >> it is time to listen to me and other americans who are hurting. obamacare is not the answer. >> in our hands we hold the power to build, to fight, to reach out. >> the government owes the people, by the people, for the people. >> that is how it is supposed to be. you deserve a governor that will put you the people first. >> i was shocked that my health care was canceled. >> kay hagan just doesn't get it. >> rick scott slashed a billion

million from the schools. rick scott, too shady from the sunshine state. >> in 2008, i fell in love. his online profile made them seem so perfect. i trusted him. >> on micros and dale, and this think about it. i grew up castrating hogs on an iowa farm. when i get to washington, i know how to cut pork. cut wasteful spending, repeal obama care. let's make him squeal. of the year. >> if you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. >> call congressman peters and tell him obamacare isn't working. >> i would roll up an eight story parking garage, just one more. i tell myself. just one more. i see life that way, and it's how i will governmen texas.

the top 10 viral ads so far. darren samuelsohn, how to do come up with this list? we looked at clicks and views on facebook and youtube to get an aggregation of what the top 40 viral videos was. that was a clip of the top 10. basically, you are looking at how many people are landing on the sides and watching them. the ad from greg abbott is on facebook. it has something like 150,000 views. is somewhere the people go to view these videos. that one is number one. third,eal add came in around 550,000 views, primarily on youtube. able go to these sites because they read about the stories in newspapers online. the clicks drive themselves toward it. some of those ads were paid for. markets for prosperity had seven

of the top 20 ads, they came from koch brothers political arm. they drove that traffic using dollars to get people to go to those sites. host: a related story at politico.com, greg norman -- orman, you get a sense of the outside money in advertising were seeing in these races. what is different about those the same canned music, the same or similar voiceover announcer. they are all different. guest: people are taking all sorts of strategies to go after the american public. you have been seeing kitchen table adds with voters talking directly to candidates issues. you've also seen the oddball. you saw the candidate in montana taking a rifle and shooting at the drone. that is something were he is trying to connect with a segment of voters. he gets the credit for shooting

at something with a cap and trade bill that spawned the whole gun firing apparatus. we have seen several ads were candidates pull out guns and take aim at obamacare. we found wasings interesting is you get a viral video, and it doesn't necessarily equal campaign success. that adleman who ran from montana, did not win in the primary. i don't even think he came in in the top three. the same thing with a very viral ad it was making fun of john boehner using a pun on how long he has been in office in a.c.l. cialisercial -- a commercial. that person didn't even come close. they may make you more popular, but not necessarily when you an election. squeal add, she went to first place after that ad ran. they were able to raise quite a bit of money off that ad, and then they put it on television. that certainly change the

dynamic in that race. she is now the nominee and utterly -- in a very tight race. host: the poll has are up slightly, two to three percentage points. if you live in north carolina or here in northern virginia, the ads for some of the house raises -- name a state where you have a competitive government race, where you see ad after ad. what would make if you were want to watch that ad and to not the others? guest: something about humor and the edge they take. it kind of cuts to the bone. i think biographical messages are sending you hear over and over. those are things you try and do to get more viewers. one thing to think about with viral videos -- it is impossible to know for sure that some thing is going to go viral. you hear that over and over from the people who make these commercials. they are asked by campaigns to make me a viral video. but that is easier said than done. you can dig a but sometimes it falls flat. there was another ad of a parent

looking at the television screen , contrasting that with mark pryor from arkansas. talks over the television, and does something on a copy of the new york times. he got a lot of media buzz, but it didn't really take off online. you continue chance, and if you are an incumbent, you are less likely to take a chance. it's something that challenges do when they are pushing the envelope a little bit. compared to an elected senator or congressman, who is less likely to do something out of the box, try something more biographical or speaking straight to the camera. is no holds ads barred, we see that from both sides. i aske is.t: i asked you about emoj he says he worked in our and a

minimum wage job, how many groceries could you afford? sosays you can afford makeups of coffee back in 1968, manyf you are today -- so cups of coffee back in 1968, but fewer today. this is one example to try and stand out. guest: absolutely. facebook and twitter are things the campaigns are religiously going to. polarization -- cross polymerization. you have digital directors on staff. sometimes they are the first hires. someone whose job it is specifically to make that social media site shine. make it come through and connect with voters. a lot of sitting members of commerce tell me that the way televisionip past

and go to wrigley to voters and connect with them in a way -- directly to voters and connect with them in a way that they couldn't before. they use social media to connect and talk to them in the language the voters want to hear. someone told me this is allowed connect.eally he hearkened back to his dad, and his dad's campaign. he connect with voters in a way he couldn't do when he had this technology. whether it be through google hangouts, away from members to get their constituency watching. to facebook has a very similar kind of thing. host: do companies like facebook or twitter give advice to campaigns? guest: twitter just came out with its very first election guidebook. a 150 page pdf you can download that shows numbers of congress how to get out the vote.

how to get the message out. tell people where they are. it tells them how to tweet. facebook is a team here in washington to connect with members of commerce on a routine basis. pretty much all the major technology companies -- pandora has representatives in washington. trying to help these members of congress, people who are running for office, figure out ways to get their message out through advertising. trying to connect on issues or in the campaign as well. social andopic -- digital media in the campaign in 2014. darren samuelsohn from politico is with us. dan is with us from florida. caller: good morning. , i know quite a few younger people from 18 years old to 25 years old to use social media all the time. ,hey are disconnected apathetic, not aware of the political process. in fact, i see very little legitimate political debate.

it seems we have focused entirely on advertisements that are intended to change people's views. but don't really contain any information to make a reasonable choice. where are the people on social media and in government who are trying to get our young people more involved in the political process? and more aware of what the information they really need to make a risible choice? -- a reasonable choice. ? guest: if you look at the way candidates are using social media, they are including links to their platform positions or an article they think is interesting. obvious the, with twitter, and so few characters to actually have a debate, you can't really get into it. but you certainly see with social media, a way to try and connect and drive the

conversation to people's websites, to peoples -- when there is an article that agrees with someone, that's something they are happy to circulate. during a debate, i will give you a great example. we saw this in virginia a couple of days ago. both of them using social media back-and-forth with the fact sheets and prepared statements and links to videos where they get their surrogates to talk about why one candidate did better than the other. you certainly see ways to try and connect. we try to pack in short burst of information as well. twitter is not very well suited for a long-winded conversation, i think people's attention spans are shorter. this is a way to engage in short pieces of information. host: the other part of the equation -- do these young people vote? guest: we will find out. they come out and presidential elections more frequently than

we see in midterms. there is a term of this drop-off. that is what campaigns are using right now -- technology for, trying to reach out to those voters through whatever websites they are trafficking two. the new york times once out -- points out once that space has been purchased and bought out during the baseball playoffs, over and over again, campaign ads are coming at you. whether you're watching the game on television, read about it on espn.com. that is where the campaigns are going. they are trying to get that message out. whether it leads to young people voting, that is another question. host: the headline on this, in the new york times, it states finite, even on the web. facebook and twitter have lobbyists? guest: yes, they do. they have teams in washington. facebook's team until recently was led by a senior georgia be

bush white house official. office ins a nice downtown d.c. their job is to not only watch the policies that affect them, but also to engage with members of congress. to instruct them on the best ways to use twitter. becomeomething that has part of the equation. google is well has a washington office, right on the road from where we are right now. teams of democrats and republicans whosoever tithing -- who sell advertising directed towards one side of the party or the other. if you think about google ads during a campaign, people pay for the ads. they pay for that ad to be front and center if you google their name and. . to privately place that ad on the website. host: this morning, cq weekly is

letting -- writing about google. the office headed here in washington headed by former republican congress woman from new york. kathleen is from dayton, ohio. democrat line. caller: thanks. the previous caller really took -- said a lot of my points in regards to a legitimate debate. adjudications of cultivate ation superficial way to discuss or not discuss the real issues? for instance, you can go online now and actually look at candidates. i was looking in mcconnell's voting record. nay on all sorts of issues that would affect not the americans, but

public in general. do you think these types of can medications just add to that communications-- just add to that superficiality? i've been looking at numbers in terms of potential innocent people who are been killed by u.s. airstrikes in syria and iraq. you can't find those numbers. if you guys could do a show on that third. host: thanks for the question. guest: it's an effort to see whether this is worth it. consultants will tell you that it is worth it. this is where the voters are. that is where they are going with this advertising. with their messaging. with the staffing that they are putting in place. there is a question of how much effort to they put into this compared with everything else that they have traditionally done? whether it be tell vision adds

-- television ads, whether they don't get seen her miss the target here in washington. i'mng in washington, d.c., seeing ads for a virginia senate race that i have no control over. this is a way they can target specifically to voters in a way that the ads are sold. they can specifically focus on voters in virginia, or voters in north carolina, voters in florida. interms of actually engaging the discussion, obviously, technology has helped quite a bit. getle can go online to legislative courses of action, find out where members of congress voted. find out all sorts of it information on where they stand on issues. technology has helped. host: we welcome listeners on c-span radio, heard coast-to-coast on channel 120, streamed on the web at www.c-span.org. our guest is darren samuelsohn

from politico. talking about social media and campaigns. he talked about money. let's put that a prospective, and what we buy potentially see in twice 16. --2016. a 1800.5% increase from 2010. with the midterm and presidential election in state, it could be up to $1 billion. guest: amazing, if you think about it compared from 2007 to where we are today. television is on track for $6.4 billion. that was a study put out a couple of months ago. it referencing a story that we wrote about the direction the digital advertising is going. it is the new place. it is the new big thing and campaigns. you just see it more and more. it is interesting. a lot of the tv advertising firms that watch -- that make

the ads that every one watchs, they are not getting into the digital campaigns and put in a resource in their own hands. it is widely to call the guts of the campaign. it's what drives elections. the people behind the scenes that put a campaign together, reporting on this stuff, it's what you get to see. it is fascinating. host: a tweet. twitter is not well-suited for a long-winded conversation. he says asked endorsement of twitter ever. guest: [laughter] it is certainly something you see bursts of debate back-and-forth. on my twitter stream, for example, i can only check in every so often. there are a lot of things that get missed. it's a debate that happens, and you have to really know where to go. i look at people, go into an office of a member of congress and ava tweetdeck on their screen with nine columns that are buzzing in a constant stream

of information. it looks like you are looking at us patient counsel. it is a lot of information. a lot of it kind of goes out into the atmosphere and no one ever sees it. when someone of note tweet something or retweet something, it does maybe stick around a little longer. host: we hope that you will @cspanwj.guest david from north carolina, independent line. llerer: that one ca asked where the parents are you want to get their children more involved in voting. i'm for bringing it down to 15 years old and getting them involved earlier. it becomes secondhand. bitnts will have a little of time to guide their children through the process. second, you all are talking about search engines and how to get through and communicate.

i would like to see timelines of passed legislation, at least on the facebook page of congress and the senate. they don't have anything their facebook page. host: thank you, david. guest: facebook is the place you would expect to see a timeline of legislative information. debatelegislative reaches a crescendo on the hill, maybe that is when more traditional media outlets will , unbiasedn objective look on how legislation got from point a to point b. obviously you have something like thomas, the congressional resource for looking at legislation. there are sites that allow you to monitor legislation as it moves through the process. obviously, a lot less legislation moving to the process here in the last congress and maybe previously. there are resources to do that. host: back to your earlier

point. it started out with myspace, now to facebook. now you are saying facebook and twitter, younger people are gravitating away from these two sites? anyone under ask 18, maybe not a voter, but if you talk to people who are in high school right now -- it is amazing. they are not using the social media sites. they are using things i don't even want to endorse or try name here on television. it is hard to keep up with. and look and download at what apps are available on her phone, there are countless amounts are now. i still use facebook and twitter. it is something i have become much more part of my daily routine as a journalist. i think most journalists do use it. it's amazing how many reporters are on twitter. sometimes the conversation is just among reporters. obviously, reporters are the ones that are often driving the conversation. the rest of the country often wants to hear we have the say,

as people who are keeping tabs on things. i think you definitely see the media on social media. i think facebook is something no doubt that my generation has become connected to. another get is going anywhere. host: working people follow you on twitter? guest: @dsamuelsohn . caller: i'm a snowboard. -- snow bird. i live in michigan, and in florida. i understand there's a thing known as cyber bullying, telling lies about other people. understand now why we always elect the worst of the worst.

people who make up lies and stuff about other people just to get something for themselves. if you had a 13-year-old grandchild, and you found that they were telling lies about other people, wouldn't you give them a timeout? shouldn't we give all of these politicians and political pundits at timeout? host: how old are you? caller: 75 years old. host: are you on facebook? i'm not. my wife does things on the computer, but we don't do anything other than that. we do have flush toilets. [laughter] other than that, we are not that modern. host: donald, you made our morning. thank you. caller: have a good day. cyber bullying is something that you see, whether it be teenagers or preteens.

social media is something that people need to definitely keep if you areeye on dealing with minors. , political debates get heated. people feel free to say things on the internet they wouldn't necessarily say to your face. eyes something we keep an on. if you watch the comments, sometimes things get a drop or even much further. you just take it with a grain of salt. what you were saying in the comments below an article, yes come in no doubt, things can get beyond with a need to go. host: anthony is next, independent line. it morning. caller: good morning. , thank just like to say you for bring up the subject. the use of social media in campaign 2014.

it's a projection of where we have to go in humanity, the ability of humanity and individuals to correct what is on the record. that ison i say that is what the nfl contract an mba billion, that's because of the super bowl, where the ads are increasingly going up for shorter amounts of seconds. is everyoneaying needs to learn how to connect. everyone needs to learn how to be securely connected. most importantly, if you have far in political action, as as a political arena for 30 years, and you are having difficulty trying to reach people, you need to go. host: thanks for the call. guest: it brings up a lot of

interesting points. i'm thinking about some members of congress are still not on twitter. there are a handful that are waiting out. but if you look at the amount of members of congress that are on twitter, four and 37 of them have twitter handles. -- 437 of them have twitter handles. some of them routinely tweet day in and day out, others pop in once or twice. it is something that different generations of congress are struggling to come to grips with some of the older members of congress. a 90 plus year house member actually posted a selfie on facebook. members of congress are catching up and using this in new ways. host: let me ask you about the story from omaha, nebraska, looking at how campaigns are using social media. how to campaigns fight misinformation on the web? guest: by putting out more

information. you definitely get fact checked over and over again from one party or the other, trying to call out the other side for missing something. that is maybe the way to do it with the media. they try and hit you in a specific place. i visa, there are fact check websites that will follow a major debate or campaign advertising. the washington post is a great example. they do a great job with fact checking. debates,e presidential some of the congressional ico dos, we at polit fact checks. we try and hone in on exactly what it is, unravel some of the spin. sometimes the truth is elusive, and you have to recognize there is three or four different elements to a story that ultimately prove what is true or what is not true.

there is a world of information out there. i can only imagine for a voter it can be a bit overwhelming. host: let me have you respond to this. social media is constantly evolving and changing the way messaging happens. instagram is an important plan for the watch. twitter comment this morning that says there is a lot of hate on these social media websites. guest: a lot of hate. it is something i can only imagine for a voter how difficult it must be to try and sift through that if they are looking for information to decide on a candidate one way or another. if you were to probe a little deeper, look at what is on obvioussometimes, even the block somebody if they are sending a message to you the you don't want to see. but it is just a part of the process. that, people who know they're not necessarily being held accountable. if they are not having a conversation with someone face-to-face, social media can

become an opportunity for people to say things that can get quite nasty. host: does that amaze you how people can get so hateful in comments on twitter and facebook? guest: nothing really amazes me too much. once in a while, i am surprised that someone will e-mail or comment on the story i've written. and it does kind of surprised me some of the things that people will say. there is a place for where those messages go in my inbox. host: darren samuelsohn of politico, we look for you online at politico.com. social media and the impact on the campaign 2014. thanks for being with us. guest: extra having me. host: we continue this conversation with the role of women in campaigning. later, we talk about nuclear materials and stockpiles potentially in the hands of terrorist organizations. how do we prevent that? and other countries

take precautions? we want to bring your attention to the debate from friday evening in the wisconsin governor's race. andissue of the abortion the message violence came up between scott walker and mary burke. this is one of more than 100 debates we cover in the midterm elections. we begin with governor walker, followed by mary burke's comments. given's about three minutes. [video clip] >> reasonable people can disagree. i am pro-life, but i can only imagine how difficult it is for someone going through that really difficult decision to determine whether they're going to end a pregnancy or not. that is why in the state, i supported legislation that would increase safety to provide more information to a woman considering her options. that specific bill leaves the final decision to a woman and her doctor. per the specific request you made, that issue has been resolved. that was decided by the united states supreme court more than 40 years ago. that is something that doesn't have bearing on this debate.

the larger issue about seeking to protect the health and safety of ever wisconsin citizen does. up toelieve it should be a woman, according to her religious beliefs, and in consultation with her family and her doctors to make that decision on her own. when governor walker talks about making these decisions, and passing this legislation that stands in the way of women being able to make their own health care choices, making politicians in madison and the deciders on this is ridiculous. frankly, to talk about safety at the same time you have cuts in resulted in have the closures of five clinics in the state of wisconsin that provided needed health care, such as cancer screening, birth control, and family planning services. invasiveh mandating procedures that are against a woman's right to choose. i think this is absolutely wrong, i think it should be women who were able to make these choices for themselves. >> rebuttal?

>> in terms of funding, we just moved it. the winnebago county health to permit. we just moved it from one area to another. we have added funding. we talked about it right on the stage and elsewhere. we increased funding for the university of wisconsin cardinal cancer center to help that only at uw, but at facilities across the state. we added $50 million to help victims of child abuse. we've done issues to help. we have added to that in this last budget. >> thank you. >> governor walker i think is trying to have it both ways. he talks about health and safety, as if it is pretty reasonable. but his position as anything but reasonable. he believes that even in extreme cases of rape and and zest, and that is not a woman's choice, and it's politicians that are deciding that for them. that is wrong. taking that decision away from women is out of every do as governor. host: the wisconsin governor

debate, more than 100 debates are covered here on c-span. you can check out the schedule on www.c-span.org. we are focusing on women voters. christine matthews is a partner at burning glass consulting. ellen moran is a principle of the do's square group, and former executive director of emily's list. i want to begin by showing you an ad that emily's list put together, focusing on the issue of abortion. [video clip] >> i do like anybody getting in between me and my patient, so i was outraged when i found out scott walker quietly signed a law trying to restrict doctors from performing abortions. scott walker wants to make all abortions illegal. even in cases of rape and incest. this is one of the toughest decisions of woman has to make. it is not up to politicians like scott walker. scott walker needs to get out of my patience private lives come

out of my examining room, and just leave women alone. host: how is this issue, the issue of abortion, resonating in state races? guest: women's health certainly is an issue that is becoming increasingly important. we see it in wisconsin, we have governor walker on the defensive. we have access to women's health care broadly percolating up in the states. a real point of contrast between democratic candidates and republicans. host: christine? guest: abortion and birth control of the semantic, to the exclusion of everything else in democratic state races. we are talking to a lot of women, they are saying enough with this. they are tired of hearing this single issue, abortion, birth control ads. host: this is from scott walker, and he looks directly into the camera and is talking about the issue of abortion. that debate and these ads are

available on our website at www.c-span.org. [video clip] >> hi, i'm scott walker. i'm pro-life. but there is no doubt in my mind that the decision of whether or not to end a pregnancy is an agonizing one. that is why i support legislation to increase safety, and to provide more information for a woman considering her options. the bill leaves the final decision to a woman and her doctor. reasonable people can disagree on this issue. our priority is to protect the health and safety of all wisconsin citizens. , dizzyhristine matthews thread the needle? guest: he deals with it effectively. he says this is my personal position, we may disagree. reasonable people can. this is a very effective ad given his position. he didn'think that if have trouble on this issue, he wouldn't be responding in this way.

this is a very unpopular law that he has signed. want theis, women do most personal and agonizing decisions to remain with themselves, their families, and their doctors. the fact that he response to this ad in this way shows that his campaign sees trouble here for him. look at the numbers. a record number of women running for office, 161 candidates for u.s. house rep is evidence, nine running for senate. nine running for governor. have we changed our approach of how women are viewing these candidates? guest: i think the more women running, the better. win,shows that women can't we can't put women in office if they don't run. we would all agree that one of the most important things from the get-go is to get more women running.

it is a great development that more women are running. host: what's the biggest challenge in trying to recruit women candidates? guest: the political process has gotten very polarized. candidate, have to make decisions about how they are going to balance the jobs they have. whether they're going to enter the political fray. but women also tend to want to be asked to run. at emily's list, and anyone recruiting candidates knows you have to actually go out there and identify the women who have an interest in public service and asked them to run. host: christine matthews? guest: there are been studies that show there's a difference in ambition. men see themselves as political candidates, women less so. men think they are ready to go. women feel like their

qualifications have to be up to hear before they run. in fact, they do need to be asked. there is a difference in terms of looking at themselves as political candidates. host: at to question, we remember that comment in the 1984 debate, in which she said she thought george h w bush was patronizing her, and she didn't need to be educated on foreign policy and military issues. tomorrow night, there will be a debate between senator mitch mcconnell, who is running with allison grimes in the kentucky senate race. have you thinking is to deal with his younger female candidate? guest: that is an interesting race. we have a man in his 70's running against a woman in her 30's. he has to tread pretty carefully, and i suspect he will. he is surrounded by powerful women. his wife is very powerful. i think he will do just fine. it is interesting. the polls in that state show he is actually very competitive with women. she may be leading by one or two points with women, but he is

excellent doing very well. -- actually doing very well. as long as he addresses are respectfully, i think you will have no problems. host: we will have live coverage of that debate tomorrow evening an eta clock eastern here on c-span. -- heould you prepare prepare? uphill battle is that he is that he has been in washington for such a long time. people in kentucky are a little weary. partisanthe entrenched politics of washington, and know that he has been at the helm for the gop on the senate side, thriving -- driving a do-nothing congress. she is a brescia for a there -- a breath of fresh air, and river since change. host: how should she prepare? guest: i think she's to stay with economic issues and

culturally connect with the kentucky voters. i absolutely predict she will hold her own against mitch mcconnell. and really show the kentucky voters that she is a viable alternative. in will really create a fresh start. guest: just one quick point. if i were mitch mcconnell, i would also be mentioning this. he was one of the original cosponsors of the violence against women act in the early 90's. i think he has things he will be able talk about that will be very effective for him with women. host: the women's vote is not a monolithic group. how do you go after it? guest: right now we are seeing particularly among unmarried women, which is a big cohort, and one the democrats have a really important connection with ,- there are kitchen cabinet i'm sorry, kitchen table

bread-and-butter issues that women are concerned about. there women who are struggling. any who are head of household. they are seeing prices rise. they are struggling to put food on the table. or gas in the car. blockedans have increases in the minimal age. -- minimum wage. they have made it difficult to , i'm sorry, made it difficult to ensure that women have the same cost for health care. candidates have a lot to talk to women about, particularly these unmarried women. , andake an economic appeal really show they understand what their lives are like, and really make a connection. i think that is a real point of empathy that democratic candidates can connect with women on. host: we hope you join in on the conversations.

republicans, call (202) 585-3881 , democrats, call (202) 585-3880 . join us on twitter @cspanwj. republican line. caller: good morning. i have a question that i don't think has been asked before. concerning a woman's right to choose. continually, some people seem to equate that with the health issue. i don't understand. host: christine matthews. --st: well [laughter] let's have ellen take that first. guest: the right to choose and decisions about pregnancy are certainly within the health care framework. -- when women become

with a they are faced whole and oddly of health care issues. reprint of health is front and center in that. that includes contraception and the right to choose. those are decisions that involve both access and choice. most women believe, and the numbers -- the data is overwhelming on this. those most personal health care decisions are reserved for a woman and her family, and her doctor. hear thehy i think you broader framework of women's health, when we are talking about choice. see how a number of issues are playing out in a couple of key races, including new hampshire. jeanne shaheen is in a battle against scott brown.

here's one of the ads. [video clip] i approvenne shaheen, this message. >> on issues important where is scott brown's record? look at color to photographs of developing fetuses. scott brown wants to tell women how to make this decision. antichoice groups in massachusetts endorsed scott brown, and women there voted him out. scott brown, not for an answer. host: on the air in new hampshire, christine matthews. your response? guest: i agree with ellen. i think when we care a lot about economic issues. but all we see is added after ad on the abortion issue. is very reasonable on that issue, but it is the playbook that democrats keep using, which is to continue to hammer on this one single issue. are hearing from women

in all of these competitive senate states is enough about this. we want to hear about how we can find jobs. how things can be more affordable. our health care and premiums will be more affordable. st. petersburg, florida. republican line. caller: good morning. about the abortion deal. day.e make decisions every grown-ups, i can understand children. but so many women are having abortions. and i think they are using this as a form of birth control. and to have control over other people. if i decide that i want to do something that's possibly going to get me in trouble, do i expect the democrats to pay for my decision? host: thanks.

who would like to take that? guest: what we are talking about here is reserving this choice to be tween a woman and her doctor. really, there is no role for government here. we've seen on the other side, an agenda that nd so i respectfully disagree. host: democrats line from ohio. good morning. caller: good morning. now i need to talk to ms. matthews. ms. matthews i'm going to be 84 and i was born during the time when men told women whether or not they couldn't vote. i don't believe in abortion for myself, but why in the world are we going back to that time? tell me, just tell me why that

the men in washington are so -- it's like i'm living back in 1931. tell me. talk to me about it. host: before we get her response. are you married? caller: i was married 61 years. host: did your husband tell you how to vote? caller: no, but he didn't believe in birth control. i had no control of my body. i had six children. every time the doctor told me not to have another one. so finally when the twins came sa sharian he said, no, lady you can't do this again. my husband didn't care a bit because he was born in the time when women were under a man's heel. now they're back again. et's get a response. how did you stay married for 61 years?

caller: well, you know, when you have six children and you have a man telling you what to do, what . u've got to do, just tell me host: stay on the line and we'll have christine matthews respond. if you want to follow up, feel free to do so, grace. guest: i love your name. my 14-year-old daughter's name is grace. i feel for you. i hear what you're saying. i feel for the expression not feeling like you're able to make your own decisions and not being in control. i don't think that's where we're headed. i think reasonable people have differences of opinion on the issue of abortion. i wish we could move on to talk about some of these other issues, i really do. i think -- here's what most women are saying. we do a lot of focus groups in these states. they're saying abortion is basically a legal right. the supreme court made a decision on that. and so they say, let's move on.

let's start talking about some of these other issues. i think it does a disservice to women voters out there who are so interested in starting their own businesses or trying to make ends meet working two jobs, that sort of thing. these are really the issues i think we need to talk about. host: grace, do you still want to respond? caller: i still don't know why men in washington -- republican men are still so adamant against women. i cannot understand for the life of me why the women in the united states just simply let the men tell them what to do even though -- it's like they can't make up their own mind. the men of washington want to tell women what to do. we're going backwards. we're not going forward in the united states, we're going backwards. i'm not interested in what she has to say because it's just like we're going backwards and i

don't like it. i do not understand why women keep voting and letting their husbands tell them what to do. if a woman votes for not the right to choose, then her husband is telling her what to do or she's not listening to him because we women have a right. thank you. host: bottom line if your woman in your situation today, married what advice would you give her? caller: make up her own mind and not let a politician in women tell her what to do. i'm speaking to thousands of women that their husbands tell them what to do because it's their duty to do it. thank you. host: thank you, grace from ohio. did you want to respond? guest: i was actually going to say something about the scott brown or i'm sorry the jeanne shaheen ad. --ber one, i think it may be

it is certainly an important voting issue in new hampshire that scott brown took that vote ultrasounds in the choice context. but moreover, i heard the word massachusetts i think three or four times in that ad. i think another thing that senator shaheen is really trying to hammer home is that scott brown has been rejected by the women voters of massachusetts but he is also not from new hampshire and so he's an import, think -- l and so i st: you may agree based on your re-- guest: i actually liked grace. i mean, i loved what she was expressing. she's in her 80's. she has every right to feel strongly about these issues.

i do want to say though there is no man telling me what to do. my husband would sort of be the first one to admit that. and also here's an important point, there are just as many women who feel strongly on the abortion issue in terms of pro-life. 's not just men who -- who's saying they feel strongly about this. there are plenty of women who are supportive on a pro-life as well. i don't think it should be framed as men telling women what to do. host: let's go to bill from virginia beach, virginia, republican line. caller: good morning. i'm 65 years old. i was in the ninth grade when j.f.k. was assassinated. he was one of my favorite presidents because not only did he lower taxes for the american people, he also saved this

ountry from nuclear war. my comments for today's economic s is american women are very concerned about themselves and their children with adequate health care. many families since the women are head of households, they're also concerned about the cost of health care. my biggest concern is that the monthly premiums for health insurance are just going up. they're eating up or paychecks and it will be a choice between whether or not we go to the grocery store or whether we pay premiums for our health insurance. the law does not deal with the cost to help with insurance one iota. i will vote for any women who can tackle this problem and help the american people and help her

fellow mothers and other ladies in this country to help with the health care because i think it's going to ruin us. host: bill from virginia beach. ellen moran. guest: the fact is under the affordable care act, the rate of increases in the cost of health care has actually slowed down. and so that's some early indications that the affordable care act is actually working and we're actually seeing many women voters. again, many of the unmarried women and other women voters who have benefited from the affordable care act, it's actually turned into a positive voting issue for them because they see it working. there's no question, health care costs are a key concern for women and voters in general. the rate of increase of food and

gas and how'sing -- housing, all of those things are putting a tremendous pressure on voters. that is why you also see the democrats talk about raising the minimum wage, making college for affordable so better access to better jobs. opening the door for opportunity for people. those issues are becoming front and center on the democratic side as well. host: we hope you've been watching some of the debates we've been bringing to our audience. wednesday evening, a florida debate. if you have a teenage daughter, they're probably watching say yes to a dress. this is a play on that reality show. >> budget is a big deal for me now that i've graduated from college. rick scott has no oida -- but

mom has other ideas. > i like the charlie cyst -- crist. it's expensive but outdated. don't forget the charlie crist comes with additional cost. there's over $2 billion in million in debt and 15% tuition incretion. >> we cannot let her walk out of the voting booth like that. >> mom, this is my decision and i see a better future with rick scott. >> sometimes it's hard to let go of old style but it all worked out in the end because brittany said yes to rick sot. host: ellen moran. guest: i don't see the effectiveness in this ad. i think it does a disservice to women voters.

clearly, they're trying to breakthrough the clutter but comparing this to choosing a ress makes it a frivolous. host: christine matthews guest: it is generated from women in their early 20's. i have to give them credit for heir creative -- creativity. they are working to reach women that the cookie cutter ads are not reaching. i think we need to look at the sequel ads they did, they're called shark tank. there are two or three ads that are well done. i don't know if you're familiar with the show shark tank but they have some democratic ideas on student loans and health care and the panel on shark tank says no, you failed. they're great ads. to good for them for stepping up and being creative and doing something. i think credit to them.

host: on the democrats line from south carolina, kelly, good morning. caller: good morning. yes, the thing is we have on the republican side all these pro-life people. they say they're pro-life but they don't care about health care for the mother who's pregnant, ok? they don't care about the baby once the baby is born. they don't care if that child has no health care, too bad. i mean they need to make enough money to pay for their own health care. i mean, i don't know how they can say they're pro-life. and i don't know how anybody can be anti-abortion and anti-health care for everyone. i just don't understand it. host: thanks for the crawl. est: i wanted to address bill's comment on the affordable care act. and i agree with you, bill. what we're hearing from women, we are tracking independent

women in senate battleground states and what they are saying is policies that they've liked have been canceled. they are now having to pay higher premiums which is not affordable for them so they are saying basically obamacare has promised an affordable st. louis and it is anything but affordable. i agree, it's a voting issue but it's actually one of the things that is making women very, very angry and one of the things that is actually helping the epublican candidates because they don't want it to be the level of being mandatory, they don't want the premiums up and they don't want to be kicked off the insurance plans that they ant to keep. guest: again after a rocky start last year with the website, i think we have seen the success stories of the affordable care act. again there was a poll out

earlier this week showing that this is actually becoming a positive for some groups of women, in particularly unmarried women. host: our viewers and list ners seem to love grace. the caller grace needs to be on the national stage for women. guest: grace, i mean, she has every right to feel strongly about all those issues. host: at 84 guest: happy birthday, grace. host: let's go to steve joining us from connecticut, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i want to talk about the particularly women in the . publican party can i -- i think it's a matter of getting -- some of the women, , i likean and democrats

elizabeth horn. . really like susan collins both of you ladies if you're going to put on your strategist hat because this vote is really swinging towards the democrats, what's the number one thing is it all economics? host: thank you. we'll get a response. guest: each race has its own dynamics and its own whether if it's an open seat or an incumbent. each race is different. every state is different. but right now what we se what you take a look at the polling and the election over all, we are seeing that the economic the bread and butter issues are coming to the front. we are seeing women voters very concerned about sustaining this

recovery and strengthenthing the recovery because again middle class voters are under incredible pressures right now. we're still coming out a tough recession and, yes, i think economics are still very front and center. host: he is campaigning for dollars but he has no campaign rallies scheduled except in a handful of states. why? guest: this is a tough election. historically in the end of the midterms and the second term of the president it's always a tough election. he remains extremely popular with our base voters and he is doing everything he can to help the democratic candidates so that we can hold on to the senate host: across the country he's now accord together gallup 39% approval rating. guest: we've had a really tough year and voters are anxious. and i think -- i fully expect

that the president's approval will begin to bounce back as we continue to get more good economic news, and we are getting good economic news. unemployment is now below 7% for the first time in years and we're seeing job growth for four years plus running. so i do think we are going to see his approvals rebound. but there's no question that voters are anxious and there is some measure of disappointment but as you see these races play out, there are a lot of close submit -- senate races out there. e fact that we're playing in republican territories and republicans have not been able to fully capitalize on this and the senate remains extremely close i think shows the co- heernsy of the democratic message. host: but if you look at ebola which continues to be in the

headlines, the secret service situation and the changing of the leadership there, the continued uncertainty and the beheadings of at least two americans, the situation in syria and turkey and iraq, is there an underlying uncertainty about the future that ties all of these issues together as well as economic issue sns guest: incredibly. i think i mentioned we're tracking independent women in these battleground states. we are picking up this incredible sense of unease, of worry and it has to do with isil. it has to do with our national security, terrorism. it has to do with ebola. it has to do with the virus that is affecting the children enterovirus 68 i think is maybe what it's called. women are very you unsit -- very unsettled and very unhappy and they haven't liked the way president obama has handled the isil situation. the white house break-in of the

intruder into the white house has made them very secure. if we can't even protect the white house, how can we protect our borders against terrorism. people again are very unhappy with the president. his approval rating is usually about in the 30's in most of these states and it has to do with the committee not rebounding. there's not the jobs that the women are seeing, the jobless rate has fallen but a lot of people have put themselves out of searching for jobs out of the job market. there's a lot of unhappiness with president obama and the leadership and a lot of disturbing -- host: ellen moran is the rincipal of the -- what's yu background? guest: my background is in democratic politics. i grew up in massachusetts and i spent many years on the road and here in d.c. i also had an opportunity to work abroad in indonesia for

their elections sometime ago. now i do consulting work after spending three years in administration. host: christine matthews with burning demrass consulting which is what? guest: we just started this firm a year ago. i have two female partners. it's the first time on the republican side where all women staff basically focus on women voters. we're having a really interesting and good election women voters. on i focus on policy and politics. host: let's get back to tone call. ron in florida, democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning, steve. i'm watching you on tv. i'm a 55-year-old male that believes that the white male has

been in congress for way too long. i believe that women should be paid the same as a man. i believe if a woman has a preexisting condition that a man a vasectomy is a preexisting condition and one that takes viagra is a preexisting condition. and i would not think of telling my wife that i love dearly to do anything with her body at all. i don't believe that and i believe women make better decisions than males, and that they should be in the congress as an equal or greater number. an i'd like to know what ellen and christine think about this because i think they both have good heads on their shoulders and have been giving great answers all morning long. host: hey, ron, do you know grace? guest: grace needs to meet you.

caller: no, but i just went to a friend's 60th wedding anniversary so, yes, i enjoy people that enjoy life for a long time together. so thank you for -- host: thank you, ron. we will get a response, christine matthews guest: who can argue with that? i mean, ron, we're in complete agreement. i appreciate you calling in. i think it's very nice to hear men express that kind of opinion and i agree. i do think we need more women in congress and i think that's something ellen and i both can agree on completely. you know, women see things differently than men. it only benefits when there's diversity in opinions. thanks for calling in. guest: yes, thank you, ron. that is what emily's list is all about is putting more democratic women in congress but to advance those women candidates and i, too, appreciate your comments. and i would also say you brought

up a really important issue, you know, that is part of the women's health framework that needs to be discussed in this election because many of the blocking s have voted or making it so that women have to actually pay more in the health care context. and that is something that angers women and it's another economic burden that they don't need and so we need to get more democrats in there to clear the path for women's health. host: according to the center for american women in politics, 161 female candidates running for the house, nine for the submit and nine running for governor. dean in huntington beach alifornia republican line.

caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: my dement is that many discussed es being issues -- ocusing on we'll call it a failure of this administration has not been recognizing a need for jobs and these other issues become secondary to employment. host: thanks for the call. guest: you know trks dean, i appreciate you calling in and i know as a former political science professor you're paying attention. i honestly see the president out there every day making the case for jobs. you know, sometimes it's hard to breakthrough as you say these other issues but the president has presided over an economic

recovery. let's remember how brutal the economic crisis of 2008 and 2009 was. he -- through the recovery act. a lot of people had the helping hand they needed and that piece of legislation pulled us back from the brink. he has made important investments in research and development and trying to help the stuff we make here, sell it abroad. we tried to bolster exports and we've seen some success in that area, manufacturing jobs. the unemployment numbers just don't lie. we are in a much better situation after four years of private sector growth than we were in -- a few years ago. host: inside the war of the war

of the female vote. one question he poses is how do you drive up the female vote in either party? guest: the reason we're hearing about so much of these issues is the democrats need to do one thing, they need to motivate single women to turn out to vote. they need to drive up the margin so that these issues are largely directed at a narrow slice of the election, which is unmarried women. republicans here's the thing the story that's really not told which is republicans in general are winning over married women. in almost all of these battleground races they're winning white single women and mayor wid men. the democrats need to talk about issues that will appeal to unmarried single women so they can drive up their margins on this. right now the democrats really aren't where they need to be with these single women. a poll ster did a baddle ground

poll in the senate states and they found a margin for single women was 22 points. if you keep in mind, president obama won single mom by 38 points. this is why we're seeing in colorado more than half of udall's ude all -- television budget has been on birth control. he's running a campaign entirely about abortion and birth control. >> host: the headline from politico.com. are you familiar with this republican-based organization in guest: yes. and that's the millionaire in california, the wine guy, yes. so i've seen the da. host: let's go to tommy in akron, ohio. good morning, democrats line.

caller: good morning. my comment is about the female republican senators and i'll give you an example. the equal pay for equal work bill, i didn't see one female senator from the republican side get up and endorse this. they tried to say that they had a better idea but you never heard the plan. are these senator who have a lot -- onstituents neem ail female, what do they tell their constituents when they go back home. guest: the senator from nebraska got up and addressed this very issue with an alternative legislation. first of all, the equal pay act of 1963 took care of this. it made it illegal to pay women differently. this is one of those issues where i have to say it was introduced in a way that benefits democrats politically.

there is not a republican that you could talk to that says they are against equal pay. it is very possible to be for equal pay and not be for that particular legislation that the democrats are proposing. these things exist independently. i would paraphrase dean, it's a red hering to act like republicans aren't for equal pay but they are. guest: yes, even so, republicans will say they're for equal pay but this is an issue when you explain what the bill does and even when president obama first came in, the very first bill he signed was the lillie led better act. these are huge concerns. we need to make safe for women to ask for raises and to find out what their mail counterparts are making and these are -- it's

not just about reproductive freedoms. a lot of these campaigns are discussing these issues and the economic place that these women are facing. unmarried women are a huge opportunity for democrats. they need a break. they need a better minimum wage. they need more flexible scheduling at their jobs and more affordable access to edcailings. host: there are 99 female members of congressional in both the house and the senate. 16 democratic senators are female, four republican senators, 60 democratic members are female in the u.s. house, 19 republicans. why the disparity between the two parties? guest: i think one of the things that has historically been true is republican women have had a harder time getting through our prime airies. that's something that needs to get better. more democratic women run.

more democratic women win. and we need an -- i know that we're working on it but we're not where we need to be in terms of recruiting republican women candidates, but also getting them through the prime airies because historically they've had a more difficult time getting through the prime airies. host: we know a woman would be the next senator from west virginia. in a race like that with natalie tenant against the representative, what are the dynamics between two female candidates? sni different than between two male candidates? guest: i think parties trump voters -- candidates. i think in this situation maybe this will be the new normal where we have two women running against each other and it's just two candidates. you see it in states that have two women representing them in

the senate or in a few of the places have you've had two women senators and a woman governor that women down ticket also fair better. i wonder you're in public opinion research. i think that sort of helps pave the way, break that glass ceiling for women candidates in that state. and i'm glad that you're working to try to get more women on the republican side to run and get through their prime airs. host: we'll go to louisiana next. continuey is on the phone on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. glad to see your panel there and talking about women in government. we've had a woman in government in louisiana for decades and the other night in a debate at dillard university she had the nerve to quote the bogs while she was supporting not only she didn't want us to

have car seats, child restraints. that was too much government intervention. but we know as republican women we need to keep government out of our business but we also need to save the lives of women. we need to save the lives of we need people that are on board with that. let's discuss business and economics. we had grace a moment ago. she also stated while she was on the air, she wasn't even interested in anything that your other panelists had to say. and i have to tell you, c-span that's been happening a lot on your democratic party line. we watched that. they've got their own agenda. they call and that's the end of it. but to get women in politics, grace has got a point. we've got to get over the

apathy. we don't know when they quit. he was 80 years old. we have our periods -- if we ever wanted to save our country, this is the election to do it. if we can't get good conservative women to go vote, we will get more of the same. i'm so happy to hear the male callers saying that they appreciate some of the things that are coming out that would positively affect women. that shows where their hearts and minds are, but we need to know where everybody is in the booth and it's not the policy of abortion, it's not those things that have been thrust upon us, we need to go back to the conservative fundamentals that built this country and we have a chance to turn it around. host: thank you very much for your call and your many

comments. we'll get a response. christine matthews. guest: i do think that the more people are paying attention, the better. i think that women need to run and women need to vote. it hurts when all of us hear negative ads and that's when they tell us it turns them off. i would encourage any woman to say even though the process is difficult and i don't like to watch it, please don't tune out. please don't available to vote. host: i want to follow up on two comments. this is also a piece available online at national journal.com. why women are the democrats last best help to salvage the senate? is that the democratic strategy?

guest: well, the democratic agenda and particularly the economic proposals, raising the minimum wage, creating equal pay -- all of as well as ese issues are very much resonating with women, particularly unmarried women and yet we are seeing some evidence that came out earlier this week i would also say on the women candidate side that democratic women had a chance to prevail in places like kentucky and even in west virginia

there's a lot i'm leaving out here, but that, yes, they're very much still part of the pick up equation -- i'm sorry georgia where you've got michele nunn. many of the women democrats who have been incumbents, jeanne shaheen and kay hague han are still holding their own and are expected to win. whether you're talking about women candidates or women voters, they factor in the democratic strategy. >> emema graduate of wheaton college. christine matthews is graduate of georgetown university. we'll go to eric. good morning caller: good morning. there's all kind of stuff here that y'all have been talking about i think you're jumping it a lot of the conclusions without support to back it up. i think there's been some deliberate omission of some data. r example, all the stuff you

talked about is between the woman and a doctor. no one exists without artificial insem nation. let me tell my story. let me give my grace story. when i was growing i made a bad choice and he got my girlfriend pregnant and she aborted without telling me. as a kid i remember seeing pictures of aborted fetuses. this is not a woman's choice. don't smile at me. this is not a woman's choice. this is mevered murder. you're killing babies. the assumption that a woman because they're going to congress is going to act better than men, they're also as cruel and compassionate as windchill. you have not mentioned the male in any of your discussions. if someone does not want to listen to the other side like grace -- by the way no one

forced that woman to stay with herman for 60 years. the assumption that she's a that. i'm not for you want to talk about going to the past. host: what is your recommendation? caller: my recommendation is all lives are sacred. no one needs to kill me. from the dumpsters from the babies to the animal shelters nfment my city there's a thousand animals a month that are killed. host: we will get a response. christine matthews. guest: the issue of abortion is so difficult and so heart-wrenching on every level. there's just no dispute about that. i hear your story. i think again the reason we've been focusing on women is because this particular segment is on women and women voters. i don't think anyone was trying

to exclude women from the equation. host: let me follow up on the other point. we talked about abortion in our country in our deck -- for decades. it is a woman's decision but should a man have a role in that decision? guest: hopefully in the best of circumstances they do. eric, i'm sorry for your experience. it's a sad story. when it ow, again, comes right down to it, the choice has to be with the woman. and again hopefully she has a supportive partner, husband, boyfriend where those are the best of circumstances in when you have that situation. but again, the thing that i i'd lso go to on eric's story is part of this dialog also is

around access to contraception so that you're not in this situation. and the republicans have blocked and have this agenda of blocking access for women. the new battleground has been under the affordable care act, but they have really made a big push and that has hurt women and i think women are responding to that as well. host: our talking about one caller driving a program. grace is lighting up the twitter pages as well. from carolyn who has this to stay, grace stayed with her husband because there was no lillie led better law. do you want to respond? guest: i can't speak for grace. we don't know anything about her circumstances so i don't really think we can say what her -- host: guest: here's the thing about that, this is what women are

telling us in focus groups, absolutely men and women need to earn an equal amount. women need to earn more. that did not equal at this ponet. that when you look at lillie led better, these are receipto active. this is what happens after the discrimination has happened. this is not going to fix the actual wage discrimination. i mean that is -- what women are saying to us if focus groups well these things happen after the fact. the discrimination has already happened. we need employers and women to basically in a private sector work that out. i mean and going after somebody when there's been discrimination is after the fact. so employers are not going to do this on their own. guest: but they don't. we see wage discrimination. we see women making .70 on the

man's dollar. it's even worse for minority women. unless you have something in place to incentivize, yes, many of these laws are retroactive but businesses and employers have a choice to make and when they know that there is the possibility of recourse, it will make a better choice. guest: the thing that's ironic about this situation is if you're using that .70 on the dollar figure, most of these democratic senators are playing their female colleagues less than women. in their own offices the women are earning less. again, i think there are solutions. not every one of them originates in washington. host: olivia is on the phone in on the democrats line. good morning caller: good morning. steve, let me make a point. i want to say this.

i am an african an woman i am not 84 but i am 67. i live in birmingham, alabama. i have filed a discrimination suit because of equal pay. i was working for a company. i'm not going to name the company. i found out i was training men to be general managers. i was training guys under me and i had been there longer than either one of these persons, i found out that they was making ore than me. it was disclosed between a conversation. i went to the manager they denied it. i took it to the eeoc and i won the case. what i will say this, what i don't like about republican woman, i am a win, we shouldn't even be having this conversation in 2014.

why are we not talking about men's issues? also, we've got all of these men that are making these laws, that's what's so troubling to me. host: olivia thanks very much for the call. we'll get a response. guest: olivia good for you. glad that you took action when you saw injustice. if we elect more democratic candidates we'll pass some laws to help people like you in that situation. host: next is a caller from virginia. mike on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning, ladies. i'm a man. i want to participate because i hink it is good for society. those nominated for this campaign should do their best for improving our society and they've -- the senate

as reached host: so mikele, why you are -- michael your question is what? guest: caller: they have to help the women to make them out of these situations, as i see it going ow in our community. guest: i'm not sure i fully understood the question. i think i heard we needed more women candidates to help promote women's issues. guest: i awould agree with that. host: from michigan, ellen is on the phone, good morning, independent line. caller: good morning. just a couple of points real

quick. abortion in my opinion is absolutely murder. i am not a republican. i agree with what republicans maybe 30% of the time. agree with democrats never. the economic that obama inherited from bush came from the 2006 election of democrats that took over congress. and last but not least, i don't think democrats understand all this. -- if they would take a pencil and a paper and a calculator how these figures are supposed to pport $50 an hour they would see there would be no businesses because the next profit margins are so tiny, they can't afford to spend more. have a good day. host: more comments rather than

a comment. ellen moran. guest: ellen, i love your name but i got to take issue with the blaming the democrats and congress in 2006 for spending the fact is the deficit. when george w. bush got into office, we had a surplus and we also had 9/11 attacks. but when we went in to iraq and afghanistan, those wars were off budget. and so president bush never made the tough choices that needed to be made get the deficit under control and so you're right that president obama inherited a terrible financial crisis. but that was not at the result of democratic spending. host: our last is a republican from kentucky, lawrence, good morning, welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. i sit here and i listen first off i'm an insurance agent.

i'm 63 years old and the first are i hear is that women paying more on everything else and they're discriminated on their health insurance. i sell life insurance, i sell medical insurance, i self long term care. i guarantee every woman that i talk to she is a whole lot cheaper on her premium than a man. men don't live as more don't live as long as women so they pay more life insurance. i'm sorry she think that's is a joke but numbers are numbers. you can sit there and you can say how we discriminate against pure on their insurance is nube.

guest: i was raised by a single oman guest: she told me -- i heard a conversation with a friend of hers. is was about 63 or something everything else. women was really going full forward. mom said any time a woman makes herself equal to a man she has downgraded herself. she has said as a working woman raising three kids, she said she's got on buses when she was younger and men, dirty from working all day long, would get up and give her seat.

all of a sudden, she gets on a bus and the men are sitting there and the men are thinking, my god, you done took my job, i'm not giving you my seat. host: ok, lawrence. you've put a few issues on the table. we'll give our guests a chance to respond. thank you. guest: you mow, i think i'm going to go with the part where we talked about the single women working because there are some women out there doing extraordinary things. your mom was extraordinary. she helped to raise you and your sisters. it's hard because things are expensive. the jobs aren't there now. and i think there's some women in a situation now that your mom were in that really need better jobs, more affordable health care. better access and it's very, very difficult.

host: we'll give you the last word. guest: well, lawrence, i think christine and i are in agreement that women are out there doing extraordinary things and when thereok at the agendas of is definitely one party out give looking give women a women a fair shake in the health care setting. and certainly economically i think that's how i would sum things up host: final question for both of you. what are the odds that we will see a female candidate either at the top of the or the bottom of the ticket on the republican side in 2016? guest: i would love to see that i don't know who's in the . peline

that guest: i can't predict. guest: on the democratic side i think we're going to see a woman run for president. host: thank you both for being with us. we appreciate it. host: thank you. host: we are going to take a short break and when we come back we are going to turn our attention to iran. we will have a guest from princeton university. but first, a look at the morning rograms, all of which can be heard on c-span radio. >> subjects include the ebola virus, same-sex marriage, the fight against isis and the midterm election and you can hear rebroadcast of the program on c-span radio. -- susan ns at noon rice and former secretaries of state henry kissinger and james baker. general martin democracy, chairman of the joint chiefs of

staff and also housing and urban development secretary, and congressman mike rogers, chairman of the house intelligence committee. also on the program, director of the national institute of allergy and infectious diseases. guests on the program include general ted olsen who helped lead the legal team that challenged virginia's gay marriage began. also on the program. .

ises if you are the primary person that uses the phone, you can ask that the phone be cut off. or if you're a government entity or a law enforcement agency in order to cut that phone off, you have to get a court order to do so. >> it's bad behavior where those who are fraudulent try to trick the public to get information

from the public. for example, a social security number or tax information and this is a growing problem in america, particularly among senior citizens. >> republican representative joe barton from texas. morgan griffith of virginia and leonard lance from in generanewn the "the communicators" on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. >> joining us is zee amia, the co-author "unmaking the bomb" and the director of princeton's project on peace and security in south asia. thank you for being with us. >> thank you, steve. >> i am going to begin by talking about iran, an upcoming deadline, november 24th for an agreement between the u.s. and the european union. what is the status of that? and how concerned are you about this deal falling through?

>> the iranian government and the united states and the other countries negotiating with it were known as the p5 plus 1. >> that's the united states and the other great powers plus germany are trying to find a final settlement to the iranian nuclear dispute and those talks have been going on off and on for 10 years now. and i think that there is great concern that as we get closer and closer to the deadline that political pressures on both sides are pushing against the deal rather than towards the deal. there is pressure in the united states for more sanctions and the use of more force against iran and in iran, itself, there are hard liners that don't want to see the government reach an agreement with the west over its nuclear program because they don't want to see a final raprashmon between the west and

the u.s. there is a lot in the west and iran pushing against the deal. but there are good signs in the sense that with the obama administration and with the rhouhani administration, we have governments in washington and iran who at least are trying hard to reach an agreement. and i think that the ball is very much in the air. but there are spoilers on both sides that we need to worry about. >> if we could, let's take a step back because in the 1970s, we had close relations really from the '50s through the '70 did, with the shah before he was deposed during the carter administration. how did iran begin its nuclear program? what's the -- what are its earliest beginnings? >> tiran's nuclear program has fascinating history. it's a history that people

should pay great attention to because it offers a way of thinking about where we have come in the nuclear age and where we might be going unless governments and people around the world pay more attention to the dangers of nuclear programs of the day. so in the 1950s, as you mentioned a did, the united states launched an atoms for peace program as part of the cold war competition with the soviet union. the idea was that by promising to share american nuclear science and technology for peaceful purposes with countries around the world, the united states could recruit them western side of the cold war against the soviet union. the idea was that american atoms were for peaceful purposes. iran and pakistan joined in to this effort. the united states trained doesn'tists from these countries

and created a scientific community in iran and other countries that wanted to develop and build nuclear energy in their countries. so because of the u.s.-iranian alliance under the shah, as you mentioned, the united states in the 1970s was encouraging iran to build a large number of nuclear power plants which they hoped iran would buy from the united states and also to develop uranian enrichment capacity to make the fuel for those power plants and actually to acquire the entire spectrum of nuclear capabilities and it was no secret at the time that the shah had ambitions for a nuclear weapons program for iran. but at that time, the idea of telling what -- selling nuclear reactors to iran and cementing the alliance with iran was more important than anything else. the coming of the iran-iraq war where iraq used chemical weapons against iran and the west and

other countries after the iranian revolution stood either out of the struggle or actually supported iraq meant that many in iran thought that we should try and get a nuclear weapon to defend ourselves because no one else will come to our defense. >> our topic, nuclear weapons -- >> the iranian government. >> i'm sorry. please go ahead. >> yes. so there was a discussion in iran about whether iran should acquire nuclear weapons to defend itself because no one else in the international community was coming to defends iran after iraq invaded iran at the beginning of the iranian-iraq war. the promise of the united nations seemed to disappear when iraq invaded iran. so there were people in iran who thought, well, if nuclear weapons are the bet detevents, perhaps we should get one. the leader of the reinian revolution said absolutely not, that we would not go down this path. so en though iraq used chemical

weapons against iran and some in iran said, can we at least use chemical weapons back? he said no, you won't and we won't have a nuclear weapons program. what seems to have happened was there was a thought of going down that road. it wasn't institutionalized in the sense of a concrete policy decision being made in tehran that we need to get nuclear weapons am what there seems to have been is some kind of research and development about what would be involved in having nuclear weapons capability. so by the early 2000s, we saw a situation where it was revealed for the first time that iran had been secretly developing some kinds of nuclear capabilities including the capability to enrich uranian, which is one of the key steps to making nuclear weapons usable material what to do about the program. fast forward 10 years, and we are still having those negotiations about what to do about the future of iran's

nuclear program to make sure it is for peaceful purposes and not redirected to weapons purposes. >> that's our topic. we are focusing on nuclear weapons, nuclear materials, securing that technology. our phone lines are open 202 is the area code. 5853881 fors republicans and 202-585-3880 for democrats. tim is joining us this morning from willston, north carolina, independent line. good morning, term. caller: good morning. yes. good morning. we are not going to have fossil fuel forever. a lot of countries need nuclear energy. now, i think iran have, you know, the right to have that. >> how do you respond to that, dr. mian? >> guest: this is an argument that iran makes and similarly, the united states, you know, has 100 nuclear power plants. and yet the united states is also an exporter of oil.

i think that what we need to think about is that there are actually only 30 countries in the world which have any reliance on nuclear power to make electricity. >> means that the vast majority of countries in the world have chosen to not develop nuclear power. for a variety of reasons, costs, environment concerns, issues about where would you actual put a power plant because of the risk of accidents and after the accident in fukushima, we just saw how devastating and expen expensive the consequences of one single nuclear reactor can be. so, i think the issue is for people in these countries to think about what kind of decisions they want about the future. and balance issues of cost and environmental safety and who decides about nuclear energy in, in their injuries. the question we need to focus on when it comes to iran and other countries now is this issue that

nuclear power programp programs to make electricity also give countries the capacity to make materials that could be used to make nuclear weapons. it is a big concern about nuclear proliferation and what our book tries to do is to try and connect the concerns about the ability of countries to make nuclear weapons materials and the danger that poses in terms of nuclear arms races between countries like pakistan and india where current trees use nuclear power to develop nuclear weapons capability which is one sus spiings people have about iran. the elephant in the room. the fact that as a consequence of the cold war, the united states and russia and other countries with nuclear weapons have vast numbers of actually existing nuclear weapons, 16,000 in the world. gu we have material in the world to make 10 times that mean nuclear weapons.

we need to deal with all of these problems in the same time. our book tries to offer a way of thinking about how to deal with the challenge of nuclear weapons and nuclear materials and nuclear energy in a way that will address issues in the united states and russia, arms races between pakistan and india and other countries and the threat of proliferation from countries like iran all together by focusing on the ability to make nuclear weapons materials and the programs and capabilities and technologies that make those materials possible. >> the book is titled "unmaking the bomb: a firstile material approach and non-proliferation." our guest is zia mian. with the co-author, you write the future of civil i can't believe nuclear power is uncertain opposed to concerns about safety, cost, radioactive waste disposal and proliferation, expanded reliance could mitigate global climate change." and you also write, quote,

banning nuclear weapons will not end the threat if countries to hold stocks of fisile materials and use them on civilian programs on making the bomb requires eliminating those materials that make weapons possible." beaverton, oregon. abdas is on the democrats line with dr. zia mian. >> i am so glad to see dr. zia speaking of the history of how the nuclear plan developed in iran and, also, short but precise. the question is really here that the people in israel are making the mountain out of no, you know, where they carry over 200 nuclear plans. unfortunately, the press -- the press, you know, any of the spokesperson of the israeli governme government. host: what about israel's nuclear capacity, dr. mian guest: israel is the only country in the middle east that

is actually making nuclear wi weapons material today. the nuclear reactor that it use to see make plutonium, one of the two materials that can be used for making nuclear weapons is now the oldest operating continuously running nuclear reactor that makes nuclear weapons material in the world. it's now been running for 50 years. so israel does have a large stock pile of plutonium that it can use to make nuclear weapons. we don't know exactly how much of that has been made into weapons. estimates of the order of about 100 or 100-plus weapons and if we are going to make progress in peace in the middle east in the long run, then i think that at some stage, we are going to have to deal with the idea that no country in the middle east should have nuclear weapons just like the international community believes that no country should have nuclear weapons at all. after all, most countries in the world are signatories to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty

that says that countries that dot have nuclear weapons promise to make them and those who do promise to give them up. the goal of the whole international community of the world, as president obama said, that is free of nuclear weapons and if we are going to focus on the middle east, then israel has to be part of that discussion at some stage. >> in your chapter "reducing the dangers" you provide a couple of recommendations including the following: one, military and civilian fisile stock piles need to be capped and reduced. no. 2, regulation of these materials should be approached as if preparing for complete nuclear disarmament. again, details available in the book on, "unmaking the bomb." rosalind joining us from wilmington, delaware. >> i can't believe i have come in the middle of this. i am jewish by background. i have red the quran. i have read the new testament. okay? even the buddhist bible. anyh anyhow, i basically have been a

pessimist most of my life but i have been calling in for probably two decades now. i am 73. saying to my congressman, iran probably needs nuclear weapons to defend itself. they are sitting on the second largest oil reserve in the world from what i know. maybe i am wrong. but you have a lot of oil. okay. don't think all jews are against iran. i am pro-israel because i have experienced prejudice firsthand when i was young. as i said, i am 73. and so for that reason, i am pro-israel. all right? but i was even against the iraq war. i smelled oil in iraq. i am retired social studies teacher. i have a master's in geography. look at oil when you look at all of this. host: thanks for the call from delaware. dr. mian? guest: there is no doubt that

oil has been an important element in the politics around the middle east for a very long time. but the war between iraq andrage in the 1980s and iran's nuclear policies since then and now the interest in saudi arabia in developing nuclear energy and in some of the other gulf states in developing nuclear energy is more complicated than just the issue of oil and certainly, the united states and other countries have an interest in making sure that the supply of oil for the international economy continues at reasonable prices as do the people in governments of thepool middle east countries. after their, their economies depend upon this. but there is this issue that is parallel to this. and that is about how countries choose to think about defending themselves and whether they need to have the capability to develop nuclear weapons as part of that or whether we can rely on the international community

holding up the bargain that was made with the creation of the united nations which was that we have an international organization whose mandate begins with the fact that its goal is to reduce the threat of war in the world. i think that the caller is right to talk about, you know, the importance of oil in these kinds of things in geo politics. but there are other things that play, also, and one is the fact that countries make decisions about how to defend themselves and try and seek technologies for that purpose to make sure countries have a form of international security that they can rely on. >> zia mian joining us from principleton previously at yale university and affiliated with the union of concerned scientists is co-authosh of a new book "unmaking the bomb." roger from dayton, ohio, thank you for waiting. good morning, calling on the republican line. caller: okay. i am a crain in dayton, ohio.

and i got a high respect for, you know, both parties, and, you know, sarah palin, she is a republican in alaska. i think she would make a pretty good candidate against mrs. reagan. i mean hillary clinton. you know what i am saying? she has been trying to get everything here straight down. but i think when they went over to -- when they go over there and start fooling with russia, now, russia has one of the biggest and the nuclearest bombs they have got in the world. and russia people is good. england people. they are the best people you can ever meet and they are nice people and decent people and kind people. and southern people is good people. host: roger, thanks for the call. he brought up russia's nuclear capacity. can you touch on that, dr. mian? guest: one of the things we talk about is during the cold

war, the super power competition between the sglufrnings and the soviet union was on a scale that, you know, people have forgotten in the sense that at the peak of the cold war, there were 60,000 nuclear weaponswas people have forgotten in the sense that at the peak of the cold war, there were 60,000 nuclear weapons we have come a long way in reducing that stock pile much nuclear weapons today where now, just over 16,000 nuclear weapons in the world. but of those 16,000, 15,000 are held by the united states and russia, together. and the rest of the world, other 7 countries that have nuclear weapons have about 1,000 nuclear weapons between them is we have this vast legacy of nuclear weapons, thousands suready to use within minutes on the united states side and the russian side and on top of these thousands of nuclear weapons they have ready to use, they have thousands more

in reserve. they have the components of thousands more yet in storage. and they have material to make many thousands more weapons left over from the cold war stock piles. if we are going to address the nuclear danger that the world faces in a systematic way, we need to start with a vast majority of the problem lies. >> that's in the legacy stock piles and policies of the united states and russia and that means that they have to cooperate dove did he have sto . even during the cold war, when it looked like things were really bad and there was the danger of nuclear war, even president reagan, who had been willing to go to great lengths to confront the soviet union realized the need for cooperation and negotiation be and reaching arms control agreements with the soviet union and people will remember that he went and had a famous meeting in iceland with gorbachev and the two agreed the goal should be the elimination of nuclear

weapons and they began the process of a series of nuclear treaties to reduce the number of nuclear weapons. we made a lot of progress because of that vision and that commitment, but we still have so much more work to do that think despite all of the things we see going on ukraine and and the other tensions the united states and russia and the west and russia just like in the cold war, we have to realize the nuclear danger is so much greater than any other crisis that humanity as a whole might face that that has to be something that takes priority and we have to have the process of dialogue and cooperation and reaching agreements to reduce the number of nuclear weapons and the stock piles and materials that make new orleans weapons possible by both the united states and russia as a matter of urgency . >> you book begins with this photograph including albert einstein, a key researcher involved in the development of america's nuclear program and you write quote the manhattan project was the first successful production of fisile materials in sufficient quantity for a

nuclear weapon. seven decades later, these technologies are within a reach of a growing number of states with modest scientific and industrial capacity ". let's go to steve joining us from camera. good morning. caller: good morning. i had a question about event. situate won't go to a plane of he have a level of understanding with the world. things will get better. how much is that going to be understood on a basis. host: we will get a response. >> guest: i am not sure i understand the process. with the media. host: it was indeed guest: i think we have to begin with the fact that if people know the scale of the problems

that we deal with, if anything, then they have the basis to make their decisions about what kind of world they want for themselves and their families and their children and neighbors, their communities and their countries and in that process, reach a collective decision about the fact that the world really shouldn't live with this great nuclear shadow hanging over itself into the indefinite future. one of the things we talk about in the book is that as early as 1944, a year before the first atomic bomb was built and before the first atomic bombs were used on hiroshima and nagasaki. scientists worried about the danger of a nuclear arms race and more countries would want nuclear weapons once they saw they were possible and that there would be what they called a perpetual danger to humankind. so here we are, 70 years later, and it looks like, you know, that warning about a perpetual danger to humankind may be on the verge of coming true because

we see that in the united states, in russia, china and the other countries with nuclear weapons, there is pressure from inside the nuclear weapons complex in all of these countries to prepare the next generation of nuclear weapons, of nuclear missiles, of nuclear bombers and submarines in the united states alone. the plan is to spend $1 trillion. >> that's $1 trillion over the next 30 years do build newark submarines, bombers, armed cruise missiles, intercontinental ballistic missiles and extend the lifetime of the bombs and missiles we have into the future. so that means we face the danger of having nuclear weapons for 50 more years if not a longer. there are similar efforts underway in the other nuclear weapons states. it's only if the media and acts visits and academics and the process by which societies learn

and make decisions about how they want to live that it's once we engage with these kinds of problems that we can begin to make progress. there is really no other way for countries to make decisions about matters of such grave importance. >> we have just a few minutes left. a "yes" or "no" on this question from one of our viewers saying: did most of the scientists who designed the nuclear capacity have remorse? and you have a photograph of four of those scientists in your book. >> it's hard to really that most of them had a sense of remorse very many of the most prominent scientists involved in the manhattan project and the early development of nuclear science and engineering at the end of the war set up organizations including einstein, the emergency committeei of the economic scientists. based in princeton. they sent out a call to scientists around the world saying we need to educate the people of the good the damingers of nuclear weapons and the need to get rid of them.

so enough scientists had enough remorse that they felt the need to try to do something about it. >> mike is joining us flu houston texas. democrats line with zia mian, the co-author of unmaking the bomb. good morning, mike. >> good morning. it seems to me that when i compare the first and second halves of the 20th century that, you know, nuclear weapons are really, you know, can't be considered anything other than a weapon of peace and provided that you meet the necessary conditions of a be certain perception between whichever powers are in the balance here. host: mike, thanks for the call. wet get a response. caller: it's been argued for quite some time by supporters of nuclear weapons that nuclear weapons are a detererrant and they prevent wars. and yet the fact of the matter is, most countries of the world,

there are about 190 countries in the world, but only nine of them have nuclear weapons. >> means all of the other countries in the world have decided that trying to get nuclear weapons is a way to prevent their country having wars is not appropriate or necessary or possible. so, i think the question is not that there is some law of political science that says countries with nuclear weapons don't have wars. we know that countries with nuclear weapons have wars. and sometimes, as we have seen in the case of the united states and vietnam, soviet union and afghanistan and so on, current trees with nuclear weapons lose wars against countries without nuclear weapons so all of that much more complicated than the nuclear weapons being a detevents. >> from upland, california, eric, good morning, welcome to the conversation. equal caller: yes. thank you. i have a question for the good doctor. i will be very quick.

the united states is the only country to use the atomic bomb twice and, also, the united states tells other countries what this can and vrnt have. so my question. do you think the united states should take the lead in disarming nuclear armament here before she tells other countries they can't have any? it was in january, 1946. resolution 1.1 calls for the ab olition of nuclear weapons if

the kennedy did famously in 1961. president reagan in meeting m k mikel gorbachev and obama in his practicing speech connected these two things the caller mentioned, the united states's moral responsibility as president obama called it because of the use of nuclear weapons to lead the way to a world without nuclear weapons. so there is a tension between wanting the elimination of nuclear weapons as something that the whole world should do and what the united states does with its own nuclear weapons. i think that's a question that should be the center of a debate in the united states about why is there this tension between these contra diction between what we want for the whole world and what we are willing to do about our own nuclear weapons

host: president john f kennedy's speech is part of c-span's video library e herb from hood river, oregon, good morning. caller: all of this change in 1979 would be iranian revolution. the islamic republic of iran nuclear drive, drive to obtain nuclear weapons and ballistic weapons to deliver them is a real danger. if you think that the muslim world is in turmoil today, imagine what would happen if iran presents nuclear weapons. host: we will get a response. >> guest: i absolutely agree that iran should not possess nuclear weapons a nuclear-armed iran would cause instability in the middle east in the same way

it has caused instability in other areas of the world. some countries like saudi arabia, for example, there have been prominent voices saying if iran acquires nuclear reps weapons, saudi arabia should. we would see the possibility of more and more countries trying to balance a nuclear-armed iran by acquiring a nuclear weapons capability of their own. >> leads to more crisis, more instability and the threat of nuclear war. we have seen exactly this denialamic play out in south asia where india developed nuclear weapons and pakistan said, we need to have nuclear weapons and ever since the two weapons have had nuclear weapons, we have seen one crisis after another and have actually fought wars with each other after acquiring nuclear weapons and even today, the two countries are shelling each other across their border when dooningzs of civilians being killed and thousands of people having to flee their homes because of the level of this

artillery bombardment across the border. so what we have seen is that nuclear weapons do bring instability and they create crisis and nuclear armed crisis and the threat of nuclear war and the international community should try and is trying very hard to find a way to limit and constrain iran's nuclear program so that it won't have the capacity to nuclear weapons and iran is willing to negotiate cooperatively with the west tortdz that goal and the question is: what should we be doing to try to make that dialogue and those negotiations successful rather than try and use the nuclear program in iran as a way to beat the islamic republic over the head and beat them into submission over a variety of other things the west has shaz with iran about. >> that deadline is november 24th. the book is called "unmaking the bomb. dr. zia mian from princeton university joining us on this sunday. appreciate your time today.

>>. >> we will continue the conversation as we do every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern time, 4:00 o'clock for those of you on the west coast. we will continue to look at politics tomorrow with mat kibbe with the tea party and its impact on the 2014 campaign and dale ho, the voting rights project director for the american civil liberties and elise villebeck from "the hill." ...