features matthew cooper of "newsweek." you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter and by phone. "washington journal" is next.

>> good morning and welcome to the "washington journal." we want to hear from federal workers as well. send us a tweet or go to facebook or email us. >> we'll begin this morning with peter baker's piece on the front page of the "new york times," his news analysis that the confidence ebbs at a steady drip. two overseas wars president obama set out to restore society's faith in public institutions. six years later, americans seem more dubious than ever that it really does. he goes on to point to the

cdc. heading into the last election that will directly influence his presidency, michelle obama remains near lowest approval ratings with handling of matters called into question by many voters. only solace is that congress is held in even lower regard. above that, peter baker reporting that now public esteem for the long respected centers for disease control has plummeted with the arrival of ebola on more than shores. new poll found that only 37% of americans thought the centers were doing a good job, down from 60% last year. in fact, of nine agencies tests, seven that were judged highly by a majority of americans last year have now fallen below 50%. only one, the fbi, was rated

well by a majority and that by just 51%. so, we're turning to all of you this morning. what is your confidence level in the federal government? again, republicans, democrats and independents different lines. federal workers, what do you think? we'll get to your thoughts here in just a minute. begin calling in now. one new government role established by this administration is that of ebola coordinator and that is ron klain, also called the ebola czar. joining us, tb steven dennis, white house correspondent. what is on tap for ron klain's first day on the job? gives we will get to see him

t there will be pictures taken with the president this afternoon there will be a 3:00 meeting in the oval office where presumably we'll get a better sense of what exactly ron klain is going to be doing. something that the white house has had a little bit of a difficult time sort of explaining exactly what ron klain's powers will be. he's sort of being talked about as implementer of the government strategy, coordinating the various agencies, but as far as what his actual powers are, what he can order or not order and even basics like how much he will be paid and how long he will stick around are all up in the air at this point. >> host: will he be the face of the ebola response? >> guest: looks like that

is to be determined. the press secretary was asked about it and would not commit to him being on camera to answer questions to back with his role. that he would have more of a behind the scenes role. you know, doing this coordination. i think there is a nervousness or at least it comes across as nervousness by the white house that given that ron klain does not have an extensive medical background, he's more of a topnotch washington lawyer, the kind of person that vetted supreme court justice is and chief of staff for vice presidents. that he could be tripped up by a question about the medical part of this crisis. so, you know, they're not sending him up to capitol hill for a hearing on

wednesday that chairman of the friend committee will have on friday. they are going to be pretty careful early on making sure he's brought up to speed and doesn't trip things up because you know, this is -- in some ways, an important pr move for the white house. i think they resisted the idea of having an ebola czar for many months, really, and now that they have one, they don't want to have some kind of a p.r. nightmare if he were to go before the press and answer a question wrong before he's brought up to speed. >> host: who does he report to? chief of staff or the president himself? >> guest: he reports to the homeland security investor and susan rice, the national security investigator. he don't report directly to the president but it's a pretty small set of offices over there in the west wing. i'm pretty sure he would be able to get the president's

ear if he felt he needed it. the other question of course is you know, people wonder how long is he going to be in this job and the administration has said maybe five or six months. their idea is that this this crisis will be over by then and then the question is what does ron klain do then? return to the private sector? i think there is a decent chance he ends up in the administration somewhere else. he's been a guy rumored for every job from chief of staff on down, as somebody with a huge resume and this could in some ways be a tryout for any number of jobs down the road. >> so this possibility of him becoming chief of staff has been put out there. you have a story that the white house touts ebola czar ron klain's ties to congress. would that help any future post as well? >> guest: yeah. i think one of the things

that the white house had a hard time with this ebola crisis, they have a number of nervous democrats on capitol hill running for re-election and who have been considering the white house or not just the white house but the response of the cdc director to be a little bit tone deaf and hurting them politically and ron klain is the kind of person that at least knows senate democrats very well, has worked for them in the past, has good relationships over there. he's somebody that could tap into their concerns, react to them quickly and be more of a, somebody who is a little more in tune with what congress is hearing and wanting. and that could be helpful down the line if he's ever appointed to something that needs confirmation or trying to push the president's agenda. in the past, he worked to

get supreme court justices confirmed, et cetera. that could be the kind of role he's tapped for again. >> host: okay. thank you. steven dennis talking about the role this new so called ebola czar is going to play in our government in combating ebola in this country, trying to control the outbreak of it or the infection of ebola. part of our question this morning. your confidence level in the federal government, not just with ebola but the strategy to fight isis, the other foreign policy challenges, domestic issues. we go to joel in tennessee, independent, hi. good morning. you're on the air. >> caller: good morning. thanks for c-span. i have confidence in the government that they're going to take care of the

corporations and make sure that this ebola stuff does not affect the banker's bottom line at all and i have all the confidence in the world that they're going to lose against isis because we're wasting our time there. so it's really sad that, you know, that the most welfare that is being paid in the united states is going to the 1% and but they all crab about people like me that are living on social security, that i'm stealing the money. it's really sad. it's too bad. thanks. >> host: okay. we go to jim in michigan, democrat, hi, what is your confidence level in the federal government? >> caller: good morning. yeah, well i have a lot of

confidence in barack obama and i think your topic today is perfect example of how the media is trying to run down the government. everywhere you turn, you hear about the confidence level and how much people don't like barack obama. i like him. and you know, i think it is all -- like i have to agree with the first caller. he's right on. it's all about the corporations. they're trying to run down the government so they can take it over. >> host: okay. on your point, peter baker's piece this morning in the "new york times" reports this, that the broader trend of people not having confidence in the federal government preseeds mr. obama and extends beyond politics but has not improved as the president once hoped. in the heyday of the new obama presidency, public confidence in virtually every major institution of american life has fallen including organized

religion, military, supreme court, newspapers, congress, television, police, presidency, medical system, criminal justice system and small businesses. the only institution that gallup tested that showed slight improvement were banks. organized labor, big business and health maintenance organizations. even so, all four of them had the confidence of just roughly a quarter of the population or less. so this trend in a low level of confidence in our federal government began before president obama took office. so we're checking in with you all this morning. what is your confidence level. let me go to jim in maryland. or richie. good morning to you. >> caller: good morning. >> host: go ahead, richie. >> caller: i've got high level of confidence in our government to do things that

can be done. the ebola crisis. nigeria solved it. we will solve it. that is not the issue. the issue is the setup by the libertarians, by the tea party, by the republicans to tear down any confidence in the government because then they win. our government can do many, many things. they do it reasonably well if we have a bipartisannest and people buying in and we're losing that and that is of great concern to me. >> host: okay. ralphful iowa, democrat. good morning. >> caller: talk about lack of confidence, i have to say that for a country that only participates in election, we'll have one coming up, less than 50% of the people will vote, had the country paid attention during the bush administration to what was going on in iraq and in the middle east, i don't think we would have gotten

into that idiot tic war and i don't think that bush should have been re-elected so part of the blame for the lack of confidence in government is people don't pay attention. they don't read newspapers, they don't read books. they don't look up the candidates. they watch 30 second commercials and then they decide on a 30 second commercial or they watch one news outlet like fox all day long. so part of the dysfunction is the american people are not paying attention. >> host: all right, ralph. got your point. harris in michigan, democratic caller. go ahead. >> caller: i have to say i agree with everything that last person just spoke. but you know, as democrats, we got to get out in our midterm elections and vote and get these republicans out. then you know, they're not

working for the american people. thank you. >> host: okay. republicans, you have to call in. getting a lot of democratic callers. call in now. we'll get that voice in as well. financial times this morning, first caller mentioned that he had confidence that the federal government will do everything it can for the 1%. here's the financial times. debate is raging on whether or not the feds quantitative easing is increasing inequality in the country. case for the prosecution is loud and diverse. in the u.s., critics are on the political right. mitt romney, 2012 republican candidate blames qe for the rise in u.s. inequality because it held down interest rates and caused the stock market to rise. interest rates where some m'm class americans are depending on that for their savings are getting hurt by qe but the stock market was

allowed to rise and those that invest are getting wealthier according to this piece. that's one federal agency. you've also got other federal agencies. here's an example of the treasuries effort to combat isis. the business day section of the "new york times" this morning. following the isis money. david colmes, in the center here, during a team meeting, he is known inside the white house as it is administration financial batman. this is what he is trying to do. penetrate the vast and opaque finances of the islamic state, the terrorist group capable of producing 50,000 barrels of oil a day. the clock on the wall several times for him. treasuries, global enforcer tries to track the shipments from syrian and iraqi oil wells along routes across

the border into turkey. there the oil can be sold on the black market for as much as $60 a barrel. a deep discount from the standard rate but still a wind fall for the terrorist group. david could you when over at the treasury department in charge of tracking down and trying to stop isis from financial gain. janice in plymouth, michigan, a republican. what is your confidence level in the federal government? >> caller: it's kind of low now. >> host: explain. >> caller: i was a life long democrat. i'm going to be 70 this year and i voted straight democrat all my voting life and when barack obama ran in 2008, i researched him and i didn't just go to the righting wing wacko websites. i went to reliable sources

and i saw a danger in him and it continues to this day and i know that people who love him really love him. people who hate him really hate him. i do not hate him. he has some good qualities. however, i think he has been a very poor leader for our country and this is permeated throughout all aspects of society so that our lack in government confidence comes from the top. the fish rots from the head down. unfortunate but that's where we are and i just hope and pray that our country recovers and we go forward and strive as we used to. thank you very much and thank you so much for c-span. it is the reason i pay my cable bill. >> host: all right. tyrone, democrat, you're on. >> caller: yes. good morning. we have a situation here,

we're talking about confidence in government where people have lost their homes, have lost their way, they have no way of being able to talk power to government because the lobbyist is up there walking through the offices setting policy. we have a supreme court that puts all that money into these campaigns and therefore you understand that people don't have no way of talking to their leadership. leaders are now not talking to the people. they're talking directly to the lobbyists and the supreme court has made it so the campaigns are not talking about your issues. how could you vote against your issues as american people and then talk about confidence? they're afraid. they're not, it's not a lack of confidence. it's fear. they're going to lose your home and any day you're going to lose your health

insurance and yet we talk about how bad the president is? it's not the president. you have no power. america was a country of power. and the people has no power. so that is where the confidence level go. it's fear. >> host: all right. tyrone. we're going to keep getting your thoughts about the confidence level in the federal government. continue to dial in. phone numbers on your screen. also i want to tell you about a story on many pages this morning. this on the front page of the "washington post," ben bradlee died last night. born in 1921 and died in 2014. robert caser with the piece, benjamin bradlee guided the posttransformation into one of the world's leading newspaper it is died october 21 at his home in wash of natural causes.

he was 93. he was the most celebrated newspaper editor of his era. most compelling story of his tenure the one of the greatest consequence was watergate, a political scandaled touched off by the post reporting that ended in the only resignation of a president in u.s. history. postcirculation nearly doubled while mr. bradlee was in charge of the newspaper. as did the size of its newsroom staff and he gave the paper ambition. lengthy article this morning about ben bradlee and his leadership of the post, his personality there, tributes from the white house to the newsroom. see him here about catherine graham reacting to the supreme court ruling that upheld the post right to print stories based on the pentagon papers. that in the "washington post" this morning. you also have this. catherine graham, executive

editor to ben bradlee were upbeat in june, 1971 when the post was endorsed by the supreme court. "washington post" tweeting out pictures of ben bradlee this morning. we have begin with this one. great ben bradlee moment as told by him in his memoir, click on that link and you've got ben bradlee died at 93. led the post as it transformed beyond a small local newspaper and the "washington post" with this. ben bradlee embodied a much more confident time in american journalism and also 12 great ben bradlee moments. those are some of the tweets this morning put out by the "washington post." "washington post" also noting this in one of their piece this is morning, that many in the post newsroom have been reflected on bradlee's legacy for the past couple weeks, particularly after his wife

revealed that bradlee's health was declining and he entered home hospice care after years of suffering from dementia. i'll show you that part of the interview. >> he does know who i am, yes. we actually have called in hospice care this week. and you know, it's interesting because i thought oh well this is going to be not so hard because ben is going to be, you know, he'll gradually lose his memory and he'll ask me to repeat things and it will just be ... but it has been the most horrible experience i've ever had. up until recently, he's still at home. ile still have him sleeping in the bed with me and i will until the end.

but a certain peace has come over me and it's a feeling of certainty because what i thought was going to be horrible, the care taking part of it has really become something almost sacred about it. >> sally quinn, the wife of the late ben bradlee in a recent q and a interview if you missed it, go to our web site. bradlee dying of natural causes. hey tiger. this piece which he vinted at the "washington post" and many copied him. he said things like that writes martha sheryl. he was unabashed, uninhibited. benjamin bradlee was the -- enjoyed being improper one.

style section. "washington post" if you're interested in reading. reporter, he writes that the sing the trait that made ben bradlee so great, he writes in that suppose was his swagger. this from the "washington post" as well. his lasting legacy may be watergate but ben bradlee brought a new sensibility to feature pieces and that began with the style section. senator chuck schumer tweeting out the world has lost a giant. our thoughts and prayers are with his family. also, president obama had this to say, issuing this statement on the death of ben bradlee. >> it was more than a profession, it was a public good vital to our democracy. he transformed. "washington post" into one of the country's finest newspapers and with him at the helm, a growing army of reportses exposed watergate and told stories that needed to be told, helped us understand our world and one

another a little bit better. the standard he set for honest, objective, meticulous reporting encouraged so many others to enter the profession and why last year i was proud to honor ben with the presidential medal of freedom. president obama on the death of benjamin bradlee. what is your confidence level in the federal government? tommy, in tennessee, go ahead. >> caller: yes, miss get a, i have no confidence in this government. led by weak minded men and my hope and prayer that our sisters in christ will take over in january and make things right. i would rather be under the authority of a strong good heart the woman than a weak minded man. >> steve in alexandria, what is your confidence level?

>> caller: zero confidence in this government based on what they're doing in ukraine and across the middle east, everything they've done from 1913 on. i encourage all the c-span listeners to tell all the brain dead zombies to look into the federal reserve and see why our country is completely collapses and then you'll see -- if you follow the money, you'll see the problem. >> you believe it's a federal reserve -- that it's a federal reserve fault for our current economic situation? >> caller: yes, as a matter of fact i do. every dollar i earn puts me deeper in debt. so with the 0% i want rate policy, and now they're going to go to a negative interest rate policy, you end up earning nothing and then because they're printing so much, you have

to have more to get less. if you look at what is called shrink flation, packages getting smaller again and the bubbling bigger than it has ever been and when this bubble crashes, it will be worse than it has ever been. if you look at the food stamp roles, you'll see the soup lines have been replaced with plastic cards. people that don't work actually eat better than i do. >> host: you may be be interested in this piece then. u.s. regulators approve eased mortgage lending rulings. federal regulators working on repairing the mortgage market thought it was sound policy to have borrowers make sizable down payments. tuesday, they completed the overhaul but left out any requirement for borrowers to make a down payment. aimed to strengthen the market for bonds backed with

mortgages and other loan. market not back on its feet but the regulators said the new rules could set the stage for more lending. a couple of perhaps down, it says the regulators left out the down payment requirement after a firestorm of criticism. they asserted that such a measure could restrain the flow of housing credit. particularly to borrowers that would have to stay for many years to afford a down payment. some are disappointed with the new rules. contend that overtime the exclusion could once again allow banks to take risks in the financial system evading the pain. from the "new york times" this morning. about thest by the federal housing finance agency to approve new rules. expectd that today the comptroller of the currency, the federal reserve, the sec will all sign off on this. opinion section of the "wall street journal" is what

happened in vegas. director mel was recently in vegas for the mortgage bankers annual conference. this is what he told them at live appearance at sin city told a crowd of bankers to increase access for credit worthy but lower wealth borrowers, working with fannie and freddy to develop guidelines for mortgages with loan to value ratios between 95 and the 7%. if an investor wants too put his own money at risk, he's welcome to call it sensible and responsible. they go on to say unlike most of the players around the poker table, mr. what is playing with other people's money, talking about mortgages guaranteed by the same thanks already had to stage a rescue of fannie and freddy that eventually added up to $188 billion. by the way, we're going to talk to the president and

ceo of the mortgage bank eras shun here on the wash a wash this friday. talking about the new lending regulations and the housing industry in this country. ray, texas, democratic caller. hello. >> caller: hello. i'm so thankful for c-span. we watch you every morning. you know, a lot of your callers have, they've really hit the point but the one thing i would say about -- and by the way, i'm absolutely completely i've lost all confidence in our government. but i believe that this all starts with our lobbying. you know, it's no longer lobbying for the people. it's lobbying to put the money or to slit the pockets of all the people who are, who have been voted to be put into office.

congressman, senator, whoever. it all starts with our lobbying and how we might try to reform that. i've tried to think of every way that we could do this. you know, we have to still allow the people to lobby the government, right? that's a first amendment, you know, everybody should be able to do that. at the same time, all these people on k street are just destroying what that was supposed to be meant for. i believe that the founders would have never gone for this if they knew how upside down this has become. so what about a lobbying combine? where all the lobbyists have to go through a combine, that way we take the money out of the congressman pocket and goes for the government, put that money toward what it was supposed to be for. >> host: what about earmarking? in the past, when earmarks were allowed, a senator

could get something in legislation that would earmark money, this is going to go to my home state and for this. this is a project that may create jobs or whatever it is. should they bring that back? you could go and see what each senator or each member of congress wanted. >> caller: well, no. i don't believe so. because and the reason why is they wouldn't do earmarks and keep them relevant to the piece of legislation that was being passed at the time. it might could be for a bridge that was going to be on a piece of legislation for a power line in a totally different state. i believe that if you're going to pass legislation, it should all be relevant, transparent and my fear is that if we ever brought earmarking back it would

serve to crumb everything again i think they should not allow them any more. >> on that point, louisiana senator incumbent democrat mary landrieu first elected in 1996 battling the red tide it says. on the campaign trail, she has been toning down her ties to president obama and playing up herren influence in washington. arguing that as chair woman. senate energy and natural resources commit too, she has been able to deliver funding to the state. it's about clout and delivering to the state of louisiana she said. that strategy says worked in the past in a state with high poverty rate and depen debs to maintain mississippi river levees and provide aid but her critics say that deliver the goods politicking no longer sways voters. she's in the wrong state at the wrong time.

says state senator jack donohue backing mr. cassidy and goes on to vote some louisiana citizen saying that doesn't sway them any more that bringing the bacon home is not a valid argument. let's go to lewis in virginia, a republican. your confidence level in the federal government? >> caller: it's very low but i blame the media, mostly. they're dishonest, they don't tell the whole story. they pick and choose what they want to put in papers or on the news. they make villains -- they take villains and try to make them heroes, like mr. bradlee and this is what has been going on. senator corzine, is he in jail yet? this was a senator and a governor. we elect senator booker who was a mayor of a corrupt city. we see mr. nagin in new orleans who couldn't

walk and chew gum at the same time re-elected and he was corrupt all along. we see the city of detroit that is totally destroyed and yet the people out here, we can't pay our mortgages off because we've got a fannie and freddie mac out there that is still charging us hazard insurance after 5, 6 years of paying a mortgage when they were suppposed to release it and the congress in 2010 passing laws saying oh, well, if you bought a house between 2001 and 2009, you have to pay hazard insurance forever. and it's corrupt. it's designed to keep the working people working on the little wheel, you know? >> host: okay. all right. arkansas, independent caller, myron, go ahead with your thoughts. we're listening.

>> caller: here's what i got to say. i'm trying to stay fairly positive about the government. i'd say 70%. if it was 50%, i'd be neutral, wouldn't i? but any way, it's all due to the economy, right? the federal reserve controls our money supply and stuff but also it's tied in with the imf, the international monetary fund and the world bank. here's the best statement i can tell you. harry s. true man. are we still on? >> yeah, we're listening. you're still on. >> caller: harry s. truman when he became president asked how is the economy going, mr. president, he says well i tell you what, i need a one handed economist he said because they tell me on the left hand if this and this and this happens, the

economy is going to heck in a hand basket but on the right hand, if this and this and this happens, it's going to go right through the roof, sky high. he says that's why i need me a one handed economist. >> host: all right. front page of the "washington times" has story about tom colonel burn's last waste book. only way to stop waistful spending is shining a light on it, even if it is in your own state. senator tom colbert who will release the last waste book on wednesday inside the "washington post," let's go through a look at federal spending that tom coburn highlights over the last five years. total waistful spending. $25 billion. top item, tens of billions employees on paid administrative leave

collecting paychecks deemed too dangerous or disruptive for the work place. front page of the "washington post" yesterday with a preview of the waste bobbing that will be released by senator tom coburn. go through the years. 2013, et cetera. you can go through the years in his waste book that he will release today about waste in the federal government. the federal government is our focus here this morning with all of you. what is your confidence level. let me go to tom in florida. independent. hi, tom. >> caller: hi, greta. you have a great show going on. a crack of hope. people are waking up. i agree with virtually everything everyone said so far. what i want to do is give everyone the guy called and said it's the federal reserve. that is kind of where the problem started. split the government in half, look at the political branches, those that we elect and the permanent

branches, brac race mainly, military and intelligence and law enforcement. now, let me take it up. kennedy assassination, cia involvement with virtually all the major players of the kennedy assassination and other assassinations, martin and robert and malcolm x and then watergate same thing. all the water game burglars, cia. howard hunt. particularly sat on his death bed, it was a plot conducted by the cia. then iran contra where they got caught. congress said don't send any money to the contras? what are they doing from the white house? we have a president who elected who has alzheimer's and we have a vice president, a former cia director saying i'm out of the loop. the political branches, the elected branches didn't impeach, didn't

investigate,en didn't push it. then let it go. and then we got the bombing in oklahoma city, first thing that happened after the bombing is the fbi rushes in and takes all it is surveillance cameras from all around the neighborhood and the building itself and then we have 9/11. 9/11 for anyone that looks at it in any kind of open minded serious way has to see that like the warren commission, the 9/11 commission was a cover up and there's way, way too many questions that need to be asked about how the four planes defeated our well whole military air defense system. >> host: okay. tom. we move on to democratic caller in georgia. go ahead. >> caller: my confidence level is very high. i'm a 63-year-old black man. my first time voting was for jimmy carter.

and ever since that time, every time a democrat is elected, the republicans spend all of their time trying to show howen incompetence and corrupt the government is. only a good cost when republicans are in power and at this time, they are destroying this country with their on satin fence in instructing the president and the government. >> host: okay. all right. from the "washington times," the majority of midterm voters are over the obama care flap. more than half of voters say they're tired of hearing congressional candidates talk about obama care and wish they would move on while just 4 in 10 want the discussion to continue. this according to a new poll by the kaiser family foundation that said less than one in 10 voters, 8% think that. affordable care act is the most important issue guiding

their vote. that's from the "washington times" this morning. they also have this side story on popular obama sidelined during midterm elections. he's been doing fundraisers behind the scenes instead, trying to get democrats out to vote. you may have heard his comments in recently radio interview that he did with al sharpton. this isn't about my feelings being hurt, mr. obama said. these are forecasts that are strong allies and supporters of me and i tell them you do what you need to do to win and the bottom line is these are all folks that vote with me. they have supported my aggin da in congress and each time he insist it is agenda is on the ballot, others gleefully remind voters of his comments. he's limited to speaking to a narrow section of the democratic base only in reliable blue states. we'll get your thoughts on

your confidence level in the federal government and how it works. this is the opinion page of u.s.a. today. despite outcry over the government collecting your phone data, it's still doing it and the u.s.a. today saying the government is still collecting and storing telephone call reports of tens of millions of americans that have done nothing wrong. proposal to leave the data with phone companies help without a new law and a deeply divided congress has failed to produce one. the opposing view this morning written by senator dan coasts, republican from indiana. he says don't take away an anti-terror tool that the government has. he writes the senate intelligence committee has a better idea in response to public skepticism. our panel improved the act to enshrine safeguards in law for the first time including my proposal to

establish independent inspector general at the national security agency. so, a little bit about that government agency, the national security agency. what is your confidence level in the federal government. mike? springfield, virginia. independent. go ahead. >> i'm from west africa. and my confidence in this government and all the government is declining very much. -- social media. ebola disease. this ebola started in 1917 -- now dead and gone. so, it's a situation that

cdc trying to -- that's why they manufactured this disease and it's killing people for nothing. >> host: okay. all right. on ebola, front page of u.s.a. today, government announced yesterday that they will now have any travelers from african countries inflicted with ebola go through one of the five airports that have enhanced screening. already suppposed to screen the 4% of the average 150 people per day arriving from the three countries. but it will now all have to go through one of those five airports. some lawmakers still pressed for stricter restrictions. here's a quote. in addition to requiring all travelers to fly through, i continue to call on the administration to suspend all visas from countries. representative mccall from texas. chairman. house homeland security committee. the ebola battle from the

"wall street journal," americans are jittery over possible exposure. ebola worries shut down schools, postpone u.n. speeches and run away anxiety is like crying wolf. we told you at the top, ron klain, the so-called ebola czar starts his job today. he'll have meetings with the president. the press will be allowed to take pictures. after that meeting takes place, he'll meet with other cabinet secretaries as well. preston in nebraska, democrat, what is your confidence level? >> caller: about the same as it has always been, about 50/50, it never changes because -- but the problem right now, seems like we got a lot of people inside of the government that are totally against the government and so they're inside of the government totally to make the government look bad. they're in the government

and they're also collecting a government check. it just doesn't make any sense for the people that are working for the government to be anti-government. >> host: okay. marie, independent, hi. >> caller: hi. good morning. yes, i'm very positive about the government. you know, i love this country and i'm native american so i know about you know, my ancestors had a lot of slings and arrows pointed their way and we've had a rough time these past few centuries, you know and shuffled off on to reservations in horrible areas with no prospects of decent employment. that's why it is only 40% of natives actually live on reservations because they can't get work on reservation areas, you know, a lot of them won't leave because it is their land and they don't want to give that

small piece of land they still have up to anyone else. also, i feel as though lobbyists and public relations people have ruined the country with all this negative talk constantly about the government h also, i think that the government has just done so much to help everyone thin country. i don't think a lot of our whites understand how their people, their ancestors were just plain given land that belong to native people that was cultivated and had structures on it. they just gave hundreds of acres to people to push them westward in this country and despite everything that's been thrown the way of minorities in this country,

the government in the 11th hour comes through to help the people. >> host: all right. victor, independent, hi. >> caller: hello. how are you today? i'm speaking for the first time and i think i have very little confidence in the federal government, domestically and also in foreign policy. foreign policy is a total failure. i never saw any president executing foreign policy in such a poor way. our president is a good man. he makes a lot of speeches. and he does very little. >> president obama in a "new york times" editorial board critical of democrats running this election cycle

and steering clear of the president, they write that few voters know that the 2009 stimulus bill contributed heavily to the nation's economic recovery staying, saving and creating 2.5 million. not a word of it is spoken on the campaign trail where little credit it given to the white house. similarly, the affordable care act, one of the most far reaching and beneficial to be passed gets little respect even among the democratic candidates. none support the republy can position of repeal, most talk about the need to fix it as if it were a wreck alongside the road. they end saying this. they run the risk of alienating important constituency that's prefer a party with a spine, especially black voters that remain very supportive of mr. obama. democrats send a message to voters that the unending republican criticism of the

president is legitimate. still time for democrats to say so. they note in this editorial, the "new york times," that president obama remains highly unpopular amorning white voters. we'll talk about the white vote in our last hour of the "washington journal" with matthew who yet the cover piece important news week magazine. let's go to mike in michigan, independent. hi, mike. >> caller: hi. i don't have really any confidence left in our federal government and i believe they're collecting the data on us because some day we're going to have to turn on them because it's kind of like an us and them thing so everybody save up your food and bullets. bye. >> i'll get one last call in. i want to let you know about the republican governor debates. took place last night. headline in the "new york times." debate for florida governor takes on a hostile edge.

you can watch i want tonight on c-span 2 at 8:00 p.m. eastern time. we are going to be airing that debate that took place last night in florida. a lot of folks watching that after so-called fan gait where the two candidates met and the governor there refused to come on the stage because of the former government charlie crist wanted a fan by his feet. tune in for that more than 100 debates for control of congress thin state. robert, democrat in louisiana. go ahead. >> caller: how are you doing this morning. this is hilarious. i call in all the time and all these know, calling in and talking about the government is so bad and they're getting government checks and they just down on obama like he's a devil or something but he can't do nothing without government as long as congress is

involved in the government because they got everything to say about everything and they are definitely saying no and the news meets ya is the one pushing the issue about own numbers are down. his numbers are not down. they want everybody to think that his numbers are down. mr. obama is doing a great job and i'm so glad that he's president. showing america the true colors of america. it's a racist country and all we have and always going to be a racist country. thank you. >> host: all right. up next. we talk with sheila krumholz. we look at the money raised and the big spenders in the election and laider, daniel garza will be here to take a look at issues important to latino voters. last night, jeanne shaheen was asked if she approved of

the job president obama is doing. we begin with her response followed by a rebuttal from former senator scott brown. >> in some ways i approve and some things i don't approve. [laughter] >> we don't have that check on the spot. >> like most questions that we deal with as policy makers, there are not simple answers, yes or no. >> well, let me put it this way. you have said that you're the candidate for the citizens of new hampshire, scott brown often says that you vote with president obama 99% of the time. because obama's approvallal ratings are at all time low in new hampshire, 38 to 40%, how does your voting record jive with serving the citizens of new hampshire? >> now, i work for new hampshire. and scott brown talks a lot about one survey and 99% of the time that i voted with the president but the

numbers i'm proudest of are the 259 people are now working at the berlin prison because i was able to get the prison open after it sat empty for two years. it's the 1,200 people being foreclosed on that our office worked with to keep in their homes, 12 9,000 veterans that can now get care close to home because of the legislation that senator adrot and i got into the veterans reform bill. what we need is a senator that will work from new hampshire and make sure we address the concerns we hear from our constituents, willing to work with democrats, republicans and independents, anybody in washington that can help us get the job done for this state. >> senator brown, 45 seconds. >> she just described me. because i was the most bipartisan senator in the united states senate. every survey that has come out has senator shaheen as being one of the most

partisan senators. she voted with the president the 9% of the time. what does that mean for people in new hampshire? she was the deciding vote for obama care. voted against every ability for us to keep our doctors that people trust and love. as a result, deductible are going up and costs are going up. care and coverage is going down. she also voted to put in place a system where you know, we have more and more gridlock by voting with her party over 99% of the time. that is part of the problem now. we need to have an toned that gridlock. >> host: last night new hampshire senate debate. part of the campaign 2014 coverage here on c-span. go do our web site. cspan.org for more. joining us now, sheila krumholz, executive director for the senator for responsive politics to talk about money. what 2014 midterm election

cycle in perspective, how much money raised and spent compared to previous years? >> guest: we crunched the numbers and posted this morning a new report based on the numbers reported so far. we can confidencely project this will be a $4 billion election cycle. nearly a billion of that will come from outside organizations, outside groups, independently spending on behalf of or against candidates. that really is i think it is theme of this cycle. the activity of these outside groups. they make up the largest and growing, fastest growing portion of all of the money. >> host: how does that come payne pair to the last non-presidential election cycle, 2010? >> guest: in 2010, it is total cost was $3.6 billion. so, we're well ahead of that in our projections and our projections are conservative. we'll update as new reports

come in so we can be sure to be as accurate as possible. $3.6 billion also spent in the 2012 congressional elections excluding all the spending on presidential. when you look at all the spending combined, $6.3 billion in 2012. that is to be expected. >> host: who is raising the most money? >> guest: based on our projections and what we expect over the next couple of weeks, it looks like the conservative candidates, gop are likely to spend more. conservative candidates and conservative outside groups are likely to spend more than democratic and liberal groups but not by a lot. estimating that team red will outspend team blue $1. the billion to $1.7 billion so it is close. >> host: that could be enough of an edge when you

look at the key senate races. >> guest: precisely. many people say it doesn't seem like a lot of money that is coming in from the outside groups. [please stand by]

decision i by individuals and there have been major large donations in the $150,000 range. so it is a different cycle. a -- hard to compare to it 2010

when the rules had changed. >> so in the mccutchen decision, is that why we are eeing what we are seeing here? guest: the money coming in money that came in in the spring, that's limited amounts to the candidates and parties individually. again, it's important to remember that what changed is an individual donor no longer has an aggregate cap. it used to be that an dividual could only give $123,000-$200,000 to party candidates combined but now you many ve that much to --

individuals. and committees have formed vacuum up as many donations for lots of beneficiaries and state party candidates and even county or lots of different kinds of party committees so any wealthy individual can come to a fund raidser and write a $150,000 check and sprinkle it over a number of or potentially dozens of committees. so it's a more efficient way for the parties to raise money and rejuvenate them in the face of all this outside spending that was being done by independent or reportedly independent groups. but it remains to be seen. the hard money raised through j.f.c.'s really is not the story that -- pore persianly

the big money is coming in through these outside groups. host: we're talking to sheila krumholz the -- talking about the spending and fundraising, the center for responsive politics says the money this morning is going to be reached $4 million. how much money has been with a little less than two weeks out how much money will be spent? >> we do have the totals. at unopen secrets.org our source is wide, rich, deep and dense so there's a lot there. i don't have the overall spending just because it's changing kind of by the minute. we update our website eight times a day for the amount coming in through outside spending groups. we will be coming out with an update to today's press release next week where we will be going in deep with some -- with an update to the prediction as well as the breakdown of where

the money is being spent by candidates stand parties. host: and a lot of money being spent in the remaining days of campaign 2014. we want to get your thoughts on money in this election cycle and campaign finance reform. democrats, independents and republicans have their own line. before i get to calls, let's remind folks about the different mention of packs, super packs etc. super packs can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money. who and what are we talking about here? >> super pac's were empowered by the citizens of united decision the decision following that was created by individuals, cooperations, unions to be able to give unlimited sums. it can come from any source, but it must be disclosed.

here's been confusion of super pac's compared to other groups. they stand by the need for effective and meaningful disclosure, so we can count on disclosure of contributions and expenditures and super pac's so we know who is giving to them. when they are reporting the individual source, the problem is super pac's like other outside groups can also report less meaningful information about their donor. so if say priorities ssa is saying they got -- this is an example from the 2012 cycle. say they got money from the non-profit who does not disclose then we don't really know the original source and likewise if american crossroads on the conservative side getting money from another

non-profit we only know the middle man. we won't know the original source of money which is so critical for vortse as they are absorbing this barrage of ads on these tv's especially with states that have competitive senate races so they can trait credibility of the messenger and then decide whether or not to embrace the message. >> so super pac's can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money. regular political action committees raise money via contributions capped at $5,000 per election. then 501 c 4 groups can shield their donors identities but can't have politics as their primary purpose, and here are the numbers from open secrets

.gov you can see super pac's toing the list followed by c e social welfare 501 groups. raymond, thank you for holding. caller: yes, i don't have any problem with the money because rules are the same on both sides but the problem siff the democrats have so much problems with their messaging. for example, how difficult is to it just say to the voters, do you want more shutdown? and tea party obstruction? or do you want cooperation? and working together solve the apron? why can't they just send a message for obama care, do you

want to repair obama care or repeal obama carry. we know they cannot refreal appeal obama care but the republicans have vote 55 times repeal a law that cannot repeal host: so he started off saying i don't have a problem with money t money because the rules fly both sides. >> i think on a vacuum or on its own there's a valid point saying it doesn't matter how uch money is in politics but conservatives say we should be the most invested in politics. but i think what people are most concerned about are the implications of all the spending. if candidates have to raise on average in the last cycle we calculated $1.5 million for a winning house seat and over $11 another seat so

they are on the hamster wheel dialing for dollars all the time instead of tpwhg washington doing what we elected them to do and therefore they are not understanding the issues. so i think we also are concerned that so much of the money is secret. a growing portion of it. $100 billion so far this cycle out of that more than half billion dollars that has been spent all told by outside groups, over $100 million is coming from dark money. non-disclosing organizations. and so again, i am most worried about -- and as it transcends if organization we can not do our jobs to explain where the money is coming from effect lively if we don't know the original source of those donations. host: hi, david. caller: i would just like to --

i am inclined to agree with the other fellow about the money going to both sides. but my thing is simply this. now, in an off-year election, i think the poisoned mentality of white america is put on display. now, i would make some recommendations as to some good viewing. the moviementsville and if you need to do a little reading, what's wrong with "kansas"? the question is not so much as to what is wrong with the overall general population. that population that votes against its own interests. i think it's primarily white america and their notion of pleasantville. and wanting to go back to where it used to be. that is causing all of the future problemsor even the past

problems going forward. host: all right. david. let's go to james. crest view, florida, republican. question about money and politics. james? are you with us? i have the wrong line. let me go to james. florida. you're on the air. caller: good morning, ladies. i say let it flow. the truth is the truth. you know, the amount of money -- the race with eric canter just proved it. i am a republican, and i did like canter, but he outspent his opponent and he lost. so the amount of money is not the case. it's the fact of what the politics that they are pushing are. host: sheila krumholz? guest: well, i think eric canter learned too late that while he provided a linchpin

service for his party as a magnificent fundraiser, raking in the cash, particularly from wall street and other interests, he was superb at that. it can't come at the expense of making that connection with the voters, and that, too, is something that politicians if they are on the phones across the street from capitol hill fundraising, they have quotas that they have to meet in order to be able to be financially viable then they are not out back in the district or back in the states reaching out the voters understanding their concerns. they are instead spending their folks th the wealthier who may not even be their constituents just so that they can make their quotas for the party, be able to support their colleagues in the case of eric cantor or be able to be sflible their efforts for re-election. so i think it's not without

cost, and we should just be clear-eyed about what the rapid increase of the cost of elections in america is doing to the political process, because i think there's a number of facets that are concerning. host: here is abc news with this headline. feet 2014 top donors. they start with the piece. the overwhelming number of americans who will vote won't have contributed to a penny of their campaigns but a handful of people will have given more. of the $6 billion that contributed to campaigns they came from about $31,500 individual donors according to the foundation, and that trend will continue in this cycle. >> yes. the sunlight foundation did an excellent review of our data where we track each individual donor of who giving itemized contributions of more than $200 so we can aggregate how much

each person is giving and what we see is less than one half of 1% of americans are fueling the majority of the campaigns. so he's are elite influential interests who many have economic concerns before the federal government and when they are making contributions, there is an implicit i.o.u. so we need to know to whom our new congress will be beholden when they are seated? january. host: here's a piece in september -- the senate blocks campaign finance amendment. what would this amendment have done? >> i'm sorry. we do not lobby on campaign finance reform. but there are other organizations that kind of good government's fear that that are to concerned about helping

repeal or reduce the effects of the citizens of the citizens united decision. so our advocacy is limited to transparency. host: it reported the citizens rejected that would allow regulate o -- campaign finance reform. he stayed proposed amendment would restrict the most important piece. free speech protects core political -- hard to imagine what would be more radical than congress passing a constitutional amendment to overturn a dozen supreme court decisions that have protected individual rights. free speech would be -- curtained. host: democratic caller, hi felix. caller: hello sheala and c-span america. how are y'all on this beautiful day? guest: great. thanks.

caller: i'm a disabled vietnam veteran. first of all, god speed to those who protect and serve in our military. 'm here from the 82nd airborne special ops. as to the topic at a hand what we need endhue is enact the fair dock rin and someone makes a claim and that person should have the equal ability to respond. the last issue here is we got us a race down here with senator hagen and tillis running against each other something that's north list tillis is on the board that's called fascism. y'all have a great day. host: anything you want to add? guest: well, i think the notion of if fairness doctrine reminds

me of the campaign that used to be popular for free air time for candidates so they didn't have to spend so much time raising money in order get their message out. and that reminds me that really at the crux of this whole debate has always been this tension that and some would say healthy tension between the notion that the first amendment everyone nors and right to free speech but then we have in the interest the government has an interest in protecting the system of corruption or appearance of corruption that could produce christian criticism and a think. so i think that although the two sides on the money and politics debate are often there's a lot of have it treal and they seem so far apart, we all care about having a healthy, strong democracy and

money is not in and of itself evil. lots of donors, especially those giving smaller amounts no, one would presume those to be corrupting of the system. so i think there is a balance and we're all somewhere on the spectrum, and we need to engage in this debate about whatare the appropriate rules to have govern finance, because i right now i they things are headed with this secrecy this brings us back to 40 years to the washington scandal. host: caller, good morning. caller: let me start by saying i'm not being -- or afraid of other countries, but i've never heard it asked whether there's anything preventing the governments of china, reason, rush ty give to these super secret glupes influence american policies.

guest: an excellent point. we have no way of knowing where the money is coming from and that includes whether it's coming from foreign sources. and we have evidence that there is an interest or wherewithal and willing nesby foreign governments and corporations to play in the american political system, because that's happened before in the 1990's there was a scandal involving starting with end inebriation donors and you may recall the lipo group and there were lots and lots of sources of funds, and it was a bipartisan scandal on both sides but starting with donors to the democratic to the d.n.c. that were later revealed to be foreign. now, we have no way to know at least in those days we had disclosure of the money to the parties so you could going dig. >> host: what about the irs? do they not see where the

majority of the smun coming from? >> well many would say election-oriented, they are providing their -- some of their top donors but no full list of donors. and that is not publicly disclosed. the irs i think is not the best place to be governing the system. he irs mostly is mandated with protecting the privacy of our tax information and here they are having to kind of play anage junct role in this. host: and the f.c.c., they don't see who these donors are as well? guest: no. these groups do not disclose their donors to the federal election commission and in many cases they are not even disclosing the spending because they are arguing because it's an issued a it may identify a

donor but they are not saying vote for or vote against or they are not running the add in the windows right before the primary and the general. host: is it illegal to accept donations from foreign citizens or foreign governments? etc.? guest: yes. the money used on political activities may not be sourced from foreign sources however, there are no controls. there's no disclosure. so we have no way of knowing. host: independent call center caller: hi. good morning. hi. i think that america is a great country. constantly learning about its processes. right now i think the country stands at the crossroad of being democratic country or autocratic country. they say that money, i mean

that absolute power corrupts. i hope that absolute money corrupts absolutely. host: ok jersey girl on twitter says what's the purpose of all the money being sent in 09% of the races are not even competitive. 1i9 simply to buy post race access? guest: most realize they can never stop fundraising. there's never enough as long as ed a oney potential vicious -- vicious ad could come by and they have to have money to deal with those 11th-hour attacks. host: you said they also have quotas. they have to meet them.

who sets them? guest: well the money ability on blaffle of the party much more so on seniority which used to be the way committee chairpersonmanship ps and party leaderships were handed out. so now i think given the pressure to raise funds and particularly following the citizens united decision, it's not surprising that the parties are much more focused on elevating the candidates with the ability with kind of the midas touch or tenalt raise money note just for their own campaign but for their fellow colleagues. host: the sea of tranquility says what do they spend it on? how effective is this spending? is it used to keeping a job, keeping a committee chairmanship or getting a leadership slot? guest: well absolutely and leadership pac's have proliferated as well.

that's evidence of the members raising as much money as they can in order in that case dole out tchoips their fellow colleagues in order buy their support. when they are kind of setting the stage for a jump to higher office or a leadership post. but the money is absolutely at the corps of the leadership system now in congress. and i'm going to show our viewers this article. mid october that the speaker of the house john boehner was going to report record fundraising this election cycle -- bringing boehner's total fundraising to more than $ million other the course of the current two-year campaign cycle and nearly doubling what he raised ahead

of the 2010 midterm elections. on the democratic side "the washington post" notes the fundraising figures for nancy pelosi but pelosi had raised $82 million for the two-year cycle as of august 31st. >> they do not have competitive races they are simply using their tenalt rake in the cast in order bolst terfourns of their party and their party's candidates and yes the most expensive raised in the house is john boehner's race in ohio for which he has no competition. so there is money that is being aggressively raised to either take or defend these competitive senate seats. but there are lots of other races where the money is being raised to build a war chest for the party or candidate but without a real need. host: what are some of the

biggest senate races? guest: the top senate race is in -- in terms of outside spending, really is a good occasion of where the competitionis. north carolina senate. outside spending this morning has topped $62 million. hat's in addition to the $23.9 million raised by the candidates. so the outside spending is far in excess of what the candidates they must vs. raised. i think that's a good indication of not where the competition is but how far the action has been removed from the candidates where logically it should be and toward these outside parties. of course they have to raise more money because they have to spend more in order to run the same ad. they do not get lowest unit rate when buying political ads. so colorado second with $69.9

million and arkansas of course mark pryor trying to defend his seat there. alaska senate $32.7 million. kyi of course with mcconnell vs. grimes is a fierce battle with $28.9 million and in each of these cases the candidates are raising about on par with what the outside groups are spending. so this is where the battle for the senate is taking place. host: and all this information on open secrets.org. let's go to harvey independent, hi harvey, go ahead. caller: yes. i'm going to give you my question first and then off couple comments. and the question is, does money buy free speech? which we already have. or does actually money and campaign fundraising actually buy influence?

host: ok harvey i'm going to leave it there. sheila? guest: that is the crux of the matter and essence of the debate is, is money speech? and in the buckley versus -- decision the supreme court said yes, money is speech and that's provided the underpinning for our campaign finance system for years and but now that the money has ballooned and in the hands of only a few elite donors, there is again great concern about whether or not that is logical and true. and of course in some ways the answer is yes to both that smunspeefment if i give a donation, i amex pressing my views about a candidate or party but also money particularly as it is being distributed now is -- with it coming from just a few very wealthy individuals and

organizations relative to all americans who could be giving, it does represent influence. the majority of the individuals that we track in our data at open secrets.org are individuals who are kind of the titans of industry that have important economic interests before the federal government and their arguments are greasing the skids for their agenda. host: sheila krumholz their website open secrets.org. thank you for your time. guest: thank you. host: daniel garza the executive director of libre initiative will be here next look at important issues for latino voters then continueing with matthew cooper of "newsweek." we will look at his cover story of the white vote in 2014. we'll be right back.

>> with the 2014 election less than two weeks away. our coverage continues. the new york 11th district debate between michael grimm and dominic recya jr. also on c-span 2. with governor rick scott and former governor charlie crist. then it's the illinois 10th district debate with representative brad snyder and former senator bob told. then -- bob dold. hen the new york 18th district house debate with then the illinois 13th district house debate then the i've 4th district debate between representatives steven king and im mowrer. more than 100 debates for the control of congress.

c-span's 2015 student cam competition is underway. create a five-seven-minute documentary entitled the three branches and you. they need to include c-span programming and be submitted by january of 2015. grab a camera and get started today. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we want to welcome daniel garza to our table the executive director to the libre initiative. what is your group? >> a non-partisan organization hat primarily advances the freems to latino voters. our agenda is very much about free markets.

stopping centralization of power to washington, d.c. and the capital of wall street but it focuses on the latino community, because we felt for a long time the conversation was dominated by the left and we felt that look, i think the virtues of the free market have to be advanced in the latino community as much as they are in the non-latino community. and not many people were doing that. so we thought to your knowledge launch our organization -- host: you say we, who is behind it? guest: so i served in the bush administration in the white house and served with a lot of folks that were very talented. they think had vast exass if i who i felt we could leverage their talents and voice jose who recently ran a senate campaign and louis castillo who worked on the hill as well.

michael ba rarea a former spanish chamber of commerce president and the team that got together. we helped to launch it. host: how is it funded? guest: we have about 400 different donors. we have now expanded that donor base. another 200-300 folks that are now also supporting the organization. host: there has been some criticism that your group takes money from the koch brothers. have you received money from them? if so, how much? and how much do you have? >> we don't discuss donors for various reasons. irs targeting, and it distracts from the message but it is knowledge that we have accepted money from different organizations and we do have aligned beliefs

with the koch brothers. the idea is we ezzpows and advance very much our own in the sense that what the organization discusses, you know, what we, will leadership at the libre initiative feels we need to be talking about. all issues we feel are latino issues and so we advance those issues. that means education and economics and everything having to do that impacts the daily lives of latinos. host: so what are the issues with the economy, etc.? >> well, we are confident that the latino community has a lot of potential and vast capacities to generate wealth and prosperity within the communities and look to themselves to be self-reliant and look for the virtues of responsibility and hard work.

that's what has made america strong. we feel that there needs to be a growth in the private sector so we can generate new opportunities and prosperity for every family -- and not always look to government for the answer to every social issue under the sun. it's a new sustainable approach that we create more and more programs for more people and ore and more entitlement programs. the spending trajectory we're on is not a positive one for the future of our children. so if we could again focus more on our capacities we could do much better. the latino community is interdent with the rest of the -- host: what do you say to latino groups, people, communities who say we need the federal government because we're at a

disadvantage to give us that leg up or help us advance? we need education grants and these sort of things in order to get ahead. guest: i think everybody agrees the vast majority would agree that children by their very nature are dent. some senior citizens, some folks who are disabled. some folks who have hate rough patch are dependant. as a society we are to take care of those that are truly needy. able, -- those that are we should provide jobs they can get back on their feet and thrive. i don't think any mother says i can't wait until my child grows up and gets on welfare. they want their children to be successful. they have as operations and dreams for their children. not the dreams of some

politician or a bureaucrat. they want those opportunities for their children. what we don't swant policy that -- at the end of the day we just want a thriving latino community but of course we take care of those who are truly needy and it has to serve a direct purpose and success should not be based on how many people enroll in these types of programs but how many folks are we successfully getting out of these kinds of programs? host: we want to hear from the latino community during this conversation. the fourth line for our latino voters. we also have our republican and democratic and independent lines. mr. garza, what's your election strategy this midterm? guest: well, we want to make

sure there's a different conversation that's occurring across the land in the latino community. and that is one that has a focus on the economy, on creating job opportunities. by the way poll after poll indicates that's the number one priority for the latino community, the opportunities being created for themselves, their families and their children. so we want to make sure economic freedom is a main focus in our political discussion, the political die lofplgt in the latino communities that's what we are currently doing. at a full-time staff and we do a lot of media both in the spanish language and english. i think it's important to note that 307 of the latino community speaks only spanish, 33%, 1340eur, speak bilingual and 33% also speak just english. so we don't want to see the spanish language folks to the left.

we will obviously engage both in spanish and english language and we do that through ad buys and through the community and programs we feel empower people and grassroots developments and mobileization where we are canvassing. we have made largely over 4 million phone calls on topics and advise d visited homes with 3,000 vol neers eight states. host: so you are a 501 c 4? >> we are a 501 c 3 and 501 c 4. so we deal in education and policies. host: call center caller: don't listen to this guy. nobody listen to this guy. i lived in guatemala as a child and i can tell you what the free market means to this man.

it means no social security, no medicare. no wages. when i was in gwaut mall maula there was a witch and everybody else. it was poverty psychiatric within mud homes and brats and several families living together. that is what you are really talking about. host: let's get a response. guest: well obviously she is attributing her own stereotypes and notion to what conservatives are. we just want to make sure we have sustainable programs that are going to be helpful to people. the social security spram something we paid into that i think people need. people depend on those kinds of programs. we want to strengthen those kinds of programs and make sure they are going to be effect i and that there will be almost no government place. so we want to put systems in place to that will serve these programs? host: are you for minimum wage?

guest: i think there's a place for a certain minimum wage but e aneal folks need jobs and to going gain experience and that the market should set those wages. and make sure that people are cutting their teeth with the kinds of skills and what's going to position them better in the market. nobody stays at the minimum wage. they move up but do it through experience and gaining access through their first job so we want to make sure the minimum wages set are not hindering opportunities for the latino community and causing more people to not have a job than to gain a job. so sometimes i think in that area government can interfere too much and when you have central planners what should be a salary sometimes that offers more of a conscience dwones folks than actually benefitting people so we want to be careful

about central planners deciding for the free market what's best for us. host: mario, a democrat you're on the air. caller: i'm an independent conservative. and i've heard this gentleman speak on tv a few times, and i think it's very interesting. in manhattan off lot of dominican plans and they are just waiting for someone with a conservative mess taj hear and respond. long island we had 4,000 kids come through the border and they snuck them in the school system and no one is talking about it. people are coming to america and going on welfare and check comes in and they send it home. 34 people want to go on welfare but a lot of people are very entrepreneurial and not getting the conservative message so the woman calling in earlier

shooting this guy down who are so many democrats and liberals is we need them to come here to work not go on welfare. so i think that's an important thing to happen season for home the be autonomous. the definition of an adult is to be autonomous and you don't have to depend on anybody, but people are coming here and immediately going on welfare from just about every part of the world. i don't know why, but, so i like this -- my question to this gentleman is what are they doing to get more and more people to understand these conservative principles? i know i see the man's website but it seems they are not getting their message out enough and a lot of my friends are dominican and all of them work for themselves and are just waiting for something to happen on the get the ball

rolling. home -- yes? ok guest: obviously, we would like to get our message to more places and there's been a tremendous response from latinos to our organization. host: a response in money? guest: no that, people -- our message resonates. people that have heard only the message from the left for far too long. i'm talking about from the unions, progressive latino organizations, non-profits themselves, hispanic celebrities. to a certain extent univision and telemisunderstand dough that tilts left according to up 1 -- according to 8-1. so a lot of money to their credit democratic party has

poured into minority outreach feel like the conservatives have almost steed minorities to the left and i think now they are paying a heavy price for that political politically. i think the light has come on now because democratic numbers in the latino vote. but look, i never heard these principles when i was growing up, and it's something i agreed with very much about the free market. look, the free market didn't create poverty or inequality. it inherited these things. it inharted scarce to the best of my recollection want, corruption. free market america actually made these things better. they made an a better environment. t improved human life. longevity, i should safe. it improvs talents lives of the poor and brings them up from that position of scarcety. more capitalism.

less government power. less power to the bureaucrat. the way we see it is as power centralized in washington, d.c. around as the power of government and control of government grows, there's a proportion nat diminishment to the power of the individual. so we are growing our businesses but can't when the government taxes too much and that mess dudget get to the community. host: how much are you spending on the effort to get out that message? guest: which message? host: to on the election cycle to get message out to the zphuents guest: $2 million which is a drop in the bucket compared to other latino organizations but our message resonates and is getting out there because we're probably only organization talk about these kinds of issues with the community. so it speaks large. host: let's look at an ad where

you focused on a demeament arizona. >> [video clip] they say the economy is getting better but for who? groceries are more expensive, family income is down and what do we get from representative anne kirk pat rick? empty promises. she said she puts interest first but her support for obama care has families spending more. start work for us. stop work against us. host: and you're weag in than to race specifically against a candidate. guest: well, listening to the left you would think that everything is lollipops with the economy and daily lives of the latino communities. the latino community is hurting. it's hurting because we have a 2% g.d.p. growth for the last six years average. we have the lowest labor

participation rates since the 1970's. our unemployment rate is two points higher than rest of america. and we're very entrepreneurial. the problem with us is we're very young. 27 years of age median age on an average of 37 years of age. and a lot of us are at the entry level position now trying to get our startups going in businesses. we have 3 million businesses that we own as latinos. so when government again taxing and regulating too much that hinders our ability to create and expand our business soss we wanted to express that angst with the worry that's going on in the latino community. host: we're going roirks independent caller from st. louis. caller: good morning. mr. garza, you're very refreshing, but i must say i lived in the washington, d.c.

area throughout the 1980's and regan era and there were a lot of communities around there and there was a very large underground economy, and everyone seemed to not be bothered on the right as far as conservatives go. about this issue about immigration. it just wasn't a big deal. and it seemed like there were a lot of people that couldn't speak english. >> and i was told about people were having restaurants in their homes. and you could go and give them $4 or a few dollars and eat all you wanted. host: let's take your point imp grants? guest: we believe the status quo is not -- there are many

folks living in the shadows and we want to get to the business of assimilating these folks into our economy. we are very much for immigration reform that's going to contribute to the growth of our economy. when you have people like gentleman was talking about who are living in the shadows who are living extra legally outside the bounds of legality, that's not good for america or our economy. i understand people will retort that this -- that they violated the laufment but the way we look at it is continuing the status quo is not improving anything. host: so are you for a path 2003 citizenship? guest: if that's what is there but we are understanding the republicans are looking more for visa reform than a path to citizenship while the democrats are seeking a-foot citizenship. we take pragmatic propose.

if what's on the stable a path to citizenship we will take that because it -- market forces can hire who they need hire to make a profit. if at the end of the day what's on the table is visa reform, legalization and the certainty that people will not be deported band preserved with their family unit, we support that too because it legalizes the relationship between the employer and employee. host: democratic call e. hi there. caller: good morning. i have a comment regarding you keep talking about we need to get educated. we need, you know, inform ourselves of what's going on in the world in politics, whatever. but when it comes right down it, these -- we want elected officials that are going to look at our causes, however, it doesn't matter.

it doesn't really matter, because when you get to the voting polls, there's where the decisions are made. so you can put millions and billions into the campaigns, whatever, but when you get to the voting booths, that's where it's going to count, because they can rig up the machines and your vote doesn't count. host: mr. garza anyway? what do you have to say? guest: well, it is about education and making sure our company is -- that they are fully informed before they pull that lever. there's messages that there's inaction on issues like immigration but that's not true. there's been a lot of activity and action on the hill in trying to promote visa reform from the government side. john boehner, paul ryan, morris rogers mccarthy, they have all made overtures to try and get immigration reform done. on the other side what's been interesting is there's been a

unique circumstance that's been occurring that i think proves suspected of us have on the conservative side. many have come out against amnesty. in fact, have aired commercials attacking republicans for having supported amnesty in the past such as mitch mcconnell. this is where it's in the political interest now attack amnesty. so what i've always suspect asked if 70% of latinos would be voting republican i would bet hard none democratics -- the democrats would not be for a path to citizenship. and the senators who asked president obama to delay on executive action proved that. but yet you still have republicans who have come forward and wanted to reconcile their differences with the democrats on true immigration

reform. looks, at the end of the day, the democratic party doesn't get to define what immigration reform is and they need come together and get it done. the left doesn't tell you that full story. sometimes ewan vangesd telemundo don't tell you the full story. >> host: republican, john, go ahead. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. a few comments and questions. what i find so insulting is that the democrats play this identity politics. so they identify african-americans, latino as though it's demeaning to their citizenship. i mean, we're americans. so consequently it's extremely divisive and the news media

creates problems by you know, these cable channels. it's astonishing the way they operate. host: ok. we'll take your point, john. daniel garza? >> guest: there's a lotto it. let me preface it by saying this -- there are massive, social impacts that are occurring disproportionately than on other communities. so that's what no child left behind did. it desegregated the information about what were the grades that each one of the social groups were getting and it turned out latinos were suffering a lot mainly because latinos in many areas like california and texas, in agriculture areas were coming in and out. my parents were farm workers so i went to summer school and night school. achese high school dropout in

the 10th grade because we worked so much. got a g.e.d., went to college -- i et involved in hink we experience a different aspect in our social groups and we have different traits. and i don't think there's anything wrong with taking pride in your latino culture or black culture or whatever. but at the end of the day the caller is absolutely right. we are all americans and fighting for a strong, prosperous america where we can all have an equal opportunity to succeed. where our children get a quality education and access to marketplace. a marketplace that is vibrant and growing. so our intent is good but we

n't want a censor to our progress. host: on twitter it says how did you raise money? d koch brothers approach you early? stpwhel it's the see this, concerns me the website reported koch brothers groups gave your group $3.8 million from two of its different groups. guest: so the group freedom partners that they are referring to, we are associated with them and we align with the principles and ideas of other organizations like afp, americans for prosperity. citizens for veterans of america. i don't have any -- i don't apologize for advancing the principles of economic freedom to have free market to try to

advance more prosperity to the latino community through the free market. that is what made america strong and prosperous. and we will continue to do that. and the association with mr. charles koch and mr. david koch. i fully embrace it. i align with their values and what they are trying to do. they are successful americans who created 70,000 high-paying jobs in their own company and then of course indirectly provide lot of jobs to other americans and contractors through their association. so i don't know what her objections are about the koch brothers, but we are proud associate with freedom partners. >> how much do you get in donations from the latino community or latino done centers guest: it's substantial. i don't have the exact numbers so i can't share them with you. host: my land burke says does

it help when -- referring to epublicans refers to "self-deportation"? guest: to. that you're going hike in life so difficult for folks that they are going to want to leave on their if we are going to resolve the agreeable,as to be compassionate programs. 70% of latino americans agree we have to have a strong border. we are a sovereign nation. the status quo is not providing adequate resources to strengthen the border. my own son has been stopped by the border patrol and ask for his id. i understand that is the reality of the border. reform to thele law.

the 1986 act absorbed 3 million folks who were here illegally. it did not accommodate for future folks. there is a quota or a number placed on it be says. sas.n view says it is a restrictive policy. expand illegal immigration to fix illegal immigration. expand legal immigration. independent. caller: i grew up in a mixed neighborhood. my godmother was hispanic.

just for that, i would like to say, when i hear these liberal elected officials come up and say these people will come in and do the jobs americans won't do, it offends me to no end. it irritates me because it's demeaning. peoplees the latino think of that? do they not see that as the grading -- degrading and demeaning? the hardest working people i had on any of my crews were latino. absolutely. america was built on waves of a foreign immigrants. they came seeking opportunity. absorbed these waves of immigrants.

these immigrants generated new wealth because they were hard-working and industrious. today come as those -- today, those immigrants are no different. this is ano prove amazing resource for us. that a lot of americans don't want to do. americans want their kids to glove off to college and find professional jobs and things. a lot of the immigrants who will take these entry-level jobs -- that's one part of the immigrant class. there another immigrant class that covers high skilled jobs. jobs in stem. they are very hard-working and very industrious.

host: when did you decide you were not going to do that kind of work? guest: i knew that very early on. 16-year-old who did not finish high school, had no prospects. working in farms. 16 years later, i'm working at the white house for the president of the united states. that is a reflection of this amazing country. you can go from being a high -- il dropout, farmworker fully respect the work farmworkers give us. it is backbreaking, hard, honorable work. it is tough and it pays little. annew early on i wanted opportunity to get out of the field and into something when i could have more of an impact. ged and was able to pay

for my own education and go out and work as a police officer. to work for the city council. i went to work for the administration, department of interior, the white house. it's a testament to the country. the second chance somebody can get. host: ashburn, virginia. independent and latino voter. caller: i'm so excited about finally hearing from -- the message equal to what i believe. whether it's spanish-speaking tv thatdon't have any choice will express the message you are giving today. side --o find out your

your website or facebook or something we can share this information with our friends. what he has -- that sentiment he has expressed as the sentiment we have. who is talking about these things in the latino community? who believes in our talents and our skills? my parents went as far as the fourth grade, yet they achieved great things here in america. the market system needs to be preserved to create these opportunities. they are on twitter. are you on facebook as well? guest: we are. host: beverly in new york. democrat. caller: i want to commend your guest for the cup which meant he

has acquired. he hasthe accomplishment acquired. i want to address the dome and 10 minutes ago who said that people coming from other countries immediately come over here and get on welfare. that is absolutely not true. i worked for welfare for 26 years. you come and you have to be sponsored. that is what we check. you cannot come over here from another country and immediately get on welfare. guest: that is true. people come here seeking opportunity. i know people have differences about what immigration reform should be. here't want to make a case about the folks that say they come here and they broke the law. back in the 1920's, we passed prohibitedition that

the production and distribution and consumption of alcohol. millions of americans violated federal law in the production, distribution and consumption of alcohol. were they bad people? no. it was a bad law. some of them were bad people. these are folks who come here to work hard and be industrious and seek opportunity. they have violated federal law. are they bad people? no. some of them are. it's a bad law. it's a law that is not working. a lot of them come here seeking opportunity to work hard. host: and cannot get on welfare. guest: exactly. unless their children are born they are citizens of the united states and we will take care of them. host: alfonso in georgia. to c-span foryou

this opportunity. i live in new york. i do almost the same -- i participate in the community. read -- the and i today, they don't call em cubans, they call them cuban-americans. themselves.ivide the most important thing to me

-- we are americans. we need to start calling ourselves latin americans. we need to involve directly and the people come from south america, the first thing they think is to buy a house and a car. to me, the american dream is to learn the language first and when you does you can decide what you are going to do in america. guest: i love america. we are so diverse. even in the latino committee, there is so much diversity. latinas care about the education of their children and advancement in the workplace. our spokesperson works to reach out to women and we have to be talking to them with the right

messenger. we care about taxes and regulations and licensing and develop it. we have to have business experts talking to the business committee. the young care about inequality and issues of college tuition rates and these things. you have to have an expert to talk to them about those issues. the faith community, they care about church growth, religious issues. you need people of faith engaging people of faith. we can do better outreach. the messenger is sometimes just age.mportant as the messeng years. i've been here 52 i had my own business. -- likelot of friends

the delman from georgia -- galvan from georgia -- gentleman from georgia said, we are all americans. you are an american citizen, your american. i go to greece once in a while. i'm still american. this is my country. this is what you guys have to teach our people so they can be more impactful in our society. just like when we go to black society, we are all americans. ironies ofof the immigrants that come from latin america is that they fled countries that were totalitarian where there was a lot of power that was centralized in the government.

it choked opportunity. they came to america because it was a country of opportunity where they could be free to work and prosper and raise their families and believe in who they wanted to believe in. they come here and a lot of folks want to impose those same things from their country of origin. the collectivist agendas. americans and we should embrace american values. a free people, a free country, a free market. government will usurp those individual freedoms. we want latinos to become a vanguard for that freedom. host: you said you are for immigration reform. this is a piece in the new york times yesterday. why house republicans can ignore latinas for now. fewe districts have very

hispanic voters in their districts to make an impact. different for a presidential election in 2016 where they will need the hispanic voters in order to win the white house. guest: the whole premise is absurd. that is crazy talk. republicans need latinos and latinas need republicans. , tell me had a saying what you give your attention to and i will tell you who you are. people understand that. you are ignoring the latino community, you will not be rewarded. those who do not engage with latinos, whether it's a 3% or 68% likepulation

in colorado, disengaging the latino committee has consequences. people like chris christie understand that. -- there isshows another vote saying there's a 20 point gap. this is a state obama 180% of the latino vote. won 80% of the latino vote. , they're getting good results from the latino vote. abbott is crushing wendy davis. when you engage the lib go to

reinitiative.com. we talk with matthew cooper of newsweek. his recent cover story on the white vote. >> it is 9:15 a.m. eastern time. u.s. consumer prices rose slightly in september with the overall increase held back by a third straight monthly decline in gasoline prices. prices rose 0.1% in september after having fallen a bit in august. core prices which exclude volatile food and energy also rose to 0.1% after no gain in august. 1.7% asprices are up our core prices -- as our core prices.

the central bank is keeping interest rates at record lows to boost the economy. with that announcement comes another that\ on social securit. allions of americans will get one point 7% increase in their monthly payments next year. the 30 or in a row the increase will be less than 2%. the annual cost-of-living adjustment affects payments for more than 70 million social security recipients, disabled veterans and federal retirees. the government announcing an increase today. the increase is based on belowion, which is well historical averages so far this year. an update on ebola. johnson & johnson says it will a vaccine that could protect people from a strain of the ebola virus. it has committed up to $200 million to a program being developed by its janssen

pharmaceutical companies and danish biotech firm. >> with the 2014 elections less than two-wee weeks away, our coverage continues. the new york 11th district andte between michael grimm domenic recchia junior. crist.ott and charlie the illinois 10th district debate with brad schneider and bob told. followed at 9:00 by the 18th district debate with sean patrick maloney and nan hayworth . rodney davis and ann callis. thursday night, the iowa fourth district debate between stephen mowrer.d jim

"washington journal" continues. host: we are back for a spotlight on magazine series. this week, we are focusing on the cover story of newsweek. their october 3 edition, the white vote. matthew cooper joins us now to talk about his recent cover story. why focus on the white vote? guest: it's an important vote. the piece focuses mostly on what the pollsters called noncollege whites. not gone toave college. that is a demographic that is really shifting away from democrats. side ofhorn in the democrats. it's changing the composition of the republican party. fascinating and these

midterms because so many of the seats up for grabs are in states that have a lot of working-class white voters. arkansas, louisiana, north carolina, south dakota. it seemed timely to me. host: will these noncollege whites have an impact on this election cycle? guest: they surely will. one indication is that they tend to be a bigger percentage of the electorate during midterms than general elections. minority turnout is kind of lower. they become a larger percentage. they can really make a difference and they have really moved away from the democrats. one way of looking at it is a virginia that is out of reach and presidential races. host: the senate race as well. rockefeller -- open seat.

it will go to a republican. guest: that is one prominent indication you see it elsewhere in the polling. this is an issue i've wanted to focus on. the noncollege whites vote for president obama in 2012 and 2008? guest: he lost by about 833 point margin. -- a 33 point margin. .e got pummeled with white men he really got pummeled their. that thateresting is well-known growth in the minority voter has really made a 2,fference so that in 201

mitt romney got a larger percentage of the white vote than ronald reagan. he lost because of the minority voters. host: look at the exit polls for 2012. broken down by gender and race. mitt romney getting 62% of the white man vote. the larger percentage of minority voters overwhelmingly going for president barack obama in 2012. does the white vote have clout anymore? guest: it is certainly declining. there is still a huge percentage of the public. as much as time has been focused rightly on the growth in the latino vote, this is a huge block. new york times this morning. their editorial sing president

obama remains highly unpopular with white voters. why? guest: a couple of things. it's worth noting that this is a trend that has been going on for a long time. there has been alienation from the democratic party. prominent in issues that have helped cement his base of minority voters. when you look at the things he has become known for besides obamacare, you see things like the heavy regulation of the coal industry and gay marriage, immigration reform. these are not always popular among working-class whites. that has made it harder. host: inside the magazine, white out. white men are disgruntled and both parties are trained to loot

them -- woo them. guest: part of it is with the nine college whites, its top in this economy. with the noncollege whites come it's tough in this economy. part of it is the unique of whitents men. .hite male paranoia they are much less optimistic than other groups. the minority poor have greater optimism about their own personal future that these people do. host: we are talking with matthew cooper of newsweek. his cover story, "the white vote ." we go to bill in alabama.

democratic caller. caller: good morning. ironicit extremely regarding the right-wing , especially among politicians, they reject evolution. yet, they endorse social pulltion by telling people yourself up by your bootstraps. climate of survival of the fittest. that is highly ironic. rejecting it on a biological level but endorsing it at the social level. host: have you always been a democrat? caller: i was an independent prior to the 2000 election. in the 2000 election when george bush tried to create what he

thought was a democratic policy of having a committee select the and cheney ended up choosing himself. ton i saw that, i switched the democratic level and i have remained a democrat ever since. host: what do you do for a living? caller: i'm a retired professor. host: of the educated white vote. .ending toward democrats guest: definitely. if you look at the philadelphia suburbs, historically republican. they have become much more democratic, much more affluent. thishas been a big part of coalition of the ascendant. john in go next to

pennsylvania. independent caller. caller: the question you just vote about why the white is abandoning obama, from the get-go, go down a list of 30 things from not doing anything tout the war criminals geithner and summers to bowing turn toisrael at every waffling on numerous things. i'm a white independent. i used to be a democrat. basically useless. host: did you vote for him in 2008? caller: the first time around. party --his by two-party monopoly.

the perception among white working-class voters -- obviously not all of them. the president's policies don't affect them. that is hurting the democrats. the still negative perception of obamacare has been very hard on democrats. it is perhaps not as bad as it might have been a year ago. now that more people are getting health insurance. there's an overwhelmingly negative perception of it. that is hurting democrats. this idea that obama has not done anything. that is very hurtful host. host: democrats are shunning the

president at their own peril. not talking about the benefits of obamacare, not talking about the stimulus package. that is going to hurt them with the black vote in the midterm election cycle. i think that might be a good point. of transparent when you voted for the vast majority of the president's policies and then you disown them and emphasize the smallest of differences. on the other hand, democrats are going to do what they can to prevail on these close races. nervous andats are working-class white men used to go with the democratic party like hot dogs and mustard. now, not so much. why? guest: it's a whole bunch of

things. some of it is cultural issues. i open the piece with an anecdote from 1970 when there was an anti-war demonstration in lower manhattan that was broken up by construction workers. it became quite violent. that was one a signal moment in which you saw white working-class voters feeling alienated from a big constituency in the democratic party, finding conservatives more attractive. ,he idea of the reagan democrat blue-collar voters supporting republicans. some of it is cultural issues. days, perhaps things like same-sex marriage. a lot of it is the economics, the perception that policies are benefiting the poor and not the

middle class and not them. those kinds of resentments cymer. simmer. host: fred in new york. republican. caller: good morning. in this minority country is the white taxpaying christian male. orare either racist chauvinist or whatever you want to call it. every minority that is being taken care of we have to support. not an entirely unknown sentiment. the counterargument would be that there are many government programs that deserve the middle

the middle class like the home mortgage direction -- home mortgage deduction. things like social security and medicare for the elderly. there is a counterargument that government does intervene on behalf of the groups the caller talked about. host: maryland. independent. i used to vote democrat. now i'm independent most of the time. the democrats have no spine. they're running away from good things they have done. this will come back to haunt them. host: democrats want to see a party member with a spine. guest: this is one of the greatest issues of the race this

year. mayor sayingnta minority voters in georgia were michelleo acknowledge nunn was not going to support president obama and they were prepared to sit that out. spine istion of whether full throated democrats are going to be sad and stay home or whether this is going to prove to be smart politics. races doch key senate you think the white vote could make a difference? guest: poor white states like louisiana and arkansas and west virginia.

some in the south. also in the midwest. kansas, whichnd have become competitive races for democrats. all up for it. host: the financial times had this piece yesterday. these are senate seats in the old confederate south. in louisiana, purple because each party holds one senate seat. for to come in north carolina, on?nsas -- what's going guest: you have a long process. saidn johnson famously that we have lost the south for a generation. perhaps it's been two generations.

it has been leaning republican and conservative for a long time. some of these cultural issues have not played as well for democrats like same-sex marriage and such. some of the southern states will to ratify or have same-sex marriage until it becomes a national event. there.e a lot of issues you see some of these numbers come in states where obama gets 9% of the white working-class vote. host: we are talking with matthew cooper about his cover story in the october 3 edition of newsweek. the white vote in this midterm election cycle. protections for what -- where it will matter in future elections as well. let's go to philip in pennsylvania. democratic caller. caller: hello.

just wanted to ask, do you think in the future races the college educated portion of the distinction will be removed because of the rise in college attendance by my generation? the education portion will be removed and replaced by prosperity or the likeliness of having a good future. guest: i think that is a good question. be whethern will it's just income that determines that vote or whether the particular set of experiences one has in college can inform voting as well. it's the right kind of question. maine.tanley in independent. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span.

the main thing for me is the irs has to be replaced. the one person that can do that is ben carlson, who would be able to help out with the health problems in the country. he is an old black man. looking ahead to 2016, if ben carson or another republican is on the ticket versus hillary clinton, what happens with the white vote? guest: it's hard to see white would not keep trending the same way. hillary clinton did better with these kind of voters against barack obama. there was a saying among hillary apporters, you can tell hillary voter by her shoes. if she had the worn shoes of a

waitress or schoolteacher, that meant they were working-class and they were more likely to support her. i think it's likely to trend that way. i think the republicans will have to face these tax reform questions. so hard to get even modest tax reforms. minnetonka beach, minnesota. republican. caller: you stole my thunder. i was just going to say we already know the democrats games and how they play them. old whitell those people to vote for the old white lady that's going to run for your party. host: do democrats need hillary clinton? guest: not entirely sure of the caller's point.

clinton is going to be the leader. she was that way in 2007 as well and she was not the nominee. you never know. host: carl in south carolina. independent. guest: i have to laugh when people talk about dr. carson. he's just making money. hillary will do good in everything. i don't think america is going to sit back and watch people take down a white lady. i think congress will turn around. it was just obama. can try to pass the same laws. we just don't want to make

obama. they don't want to see the black guy do good. it's tough for everybody. host: is there racism here? hard: i think it would be to say there is no racism ever. these trends have gone on for a while. they hurt john kerry and al gore. if al gore had been able to carry clinton's state of arkansas, there would not have been a need for a florida recount. caller: good morning. i wanted to make a comment that , they sayhat voted most of the majority of black people voted for obama. that thent to say reason why is because you can't just follow the color.

abouty he talked consolidating or bringing together the united states -- that is not what we had with bush. he was a separate test. ist.e was a separat against just minorities white people or anything like that. if you are white and you have been voting for white people for years and you have a message and you are good and you want to bring people together, you are going to get our vote no matter who you are. we didn't vote for jesse jackson. it's a bit more than blacks against whites and whites against blacks. ism inis still race america. supportbviously, the

barack obama got was not just some kind of racial loyalty. the extended throughout the country. he was the first president since -- that's an win accomplishment that transcends race. host: what about the impact of unions and declining membership and unions? what impact has that had on the democratic party? guest: it seems to have had a big impact. if working-class whites are in a union, they're much more likely to vote democratic. they formed the union because they were democratic of the first place. that theequally true constant political education that unions have for their -- it goes from a third

of the country in the 1930's to single digits. that makes a difference. host: we are talking two matthew cooper about his cover piece. "the white vote or co-talking specifically about noncollege whites. -- "the white vote." the financial times this morning had this piece we showed you about the shifting southern states. know what's going on in virginia, north carolina and georgia.

guest: absolutely. , virginia wasup never a competitive state. now, it's the most purple of states. it's very competitive. you see an influx of these kind of workers, they tend to lean more obama. that is quick to make a big difference. it has helped a composition of colorado, western states. host: surely in new hampshire. republican. caller: thank you for c-span. i want to shout out for ray to the man who called from massachusetts who wanted ben carson for president. i'm with him. here, i'm veryt

concerned with the way the government feels about corporations. i don't care how much a man makes if he owns a corporation. worked with the corporations instead of being envious of the money they make, it would be so much more people.eous for our they would have jobs that would cut out this welfare problem we have. the government probably would have more money to work with than they ever expected. jobs that are out there are low-paying. they can't have a middle-class life like their parents had. ceos withorporation huge salaries and huge profits.

caller: everybody can't be equal. when i was seven years old, my father was killed in the battle of the bulge. my family was no longer equal with the middle class. it happens. pull yourself together and work. i live on next to nothing. i am so far below the poverty .evel, but i have food to eat i'm 77 years old and i'm going strong. host: what about this notion? where is the middle class right now? they are more spread out. there is a well-known feeling, about the costy

of college and medical care and everything else. i think she raises a good point about wanting to have the policies that spur economic growth. the big political issue coming up -- if congress can never get anything done is how do you do that. do you have subsidies like the import bank? or various tax advantages for moving overseas? or do you pull back on the regulations? how you help companies is going to be an issue. host: jen in florida. democrat. theer: my question is about -- mortgage rates are down. oil was down last week. the dow is up this morning. unemployment rates are down.

saving $4000 a year thanks to the health care situation. if the person in the white house is running again and his republican, don't you think they will get reelected with these numbers? guest: this is one of the paradoxes. -- the numbers have dropped out from under him. the expansion of the affordable care act has led to more people getting coverage, such as you said. after a summer of wild stories from the war in ukraine to the sudden surge of isis, the civil ,nrest in ferguson, missouri

all of those things have made it tough for the president. -- carolol and florida in florida appeared republican. reasons theof the educated -- i'm educated, but i'm conservative. at least, i'm not socially conservative, but i am --servative in terms of fiscally, when it comes to money. the government squanders way too much. my daughter who went to undergrad and graduated from columbia's liberal because that is what they teach you at these schools. columbia andfrom is liberal. i think president obama has been one of the -- he is so divisive.

it's always about him. said oneee what he even thethen he -- liberal media is giving fed up with all the times he contradicts himself. ludicrous that againstre discriminated when we have a black president and attorney general 20% of our federal workplace is black. federal40% of all --kers who are entitlement some of them don't do anything. white and waylow below hispanic. carol touched on a lot of

things. including my alma mater, columbia. african-americans in the united states are not monolithic. experiencesset of that shape their political views. i don't think it makes sense to discount them because of a particular election or anything. i think it would be shortsighted. new mexico. independent. caller: i'm a 70-year-old white male. i have lived through eisenhower, nixon, ford, reagan and h w bush. none of these republicans could be nominated by the present republican party.

policies without political labels, the last true democrat was richard nixon and the last republican was bill clinton. the republicans have drifted to a authoritarian party. they appealed directly to the economic inequality that we have been experiencing in this country. it appeals to that belief of the white class. don is right about the transformation of the parties. i don't know about dictatorial. certainly both parties are different than they were. 1980 when ronald reagan was elected, you had a slew of conservative democrats. republicans. the parties have become much

more bifurcated since then. host: what about the white female vote? the fault lines are complex between married white women come a single white women. of see in many states a lot ads supporting legal abortion and addressing this hobby lobby case. what employers can decide for their employees. there are some differences. host: debra in mississippi. republican. caller: the reason i called is single.-- i'm

we are under assault out here out obama letting criminals and trying to reduce sentences. they're running over and killing people on the street. we don't have no protection. a single white female, all we have is our god. -- all we have is our gun. it's very important to me to have my gun right now. thugs.t on, you can't defend yourselves up north where democrats are running those cities. i feel sorry for those poor people. host: if you look at the 2012 exit polls by gender and marital running foried men

mitt romney in that election. married women, 46% voted for president obama. guest: right. that remains a big difference. it will be interesting to see whether hillary is able to expand that. illinois.in independent caller. to discussm calling the movement of our manufacturing overseas. manufacturing used to be 20% of our economy. it has now fallen to 10% of our economy. that is why there is no competition and labor rates are so low. there is no competition for labor.

one day, an enterprising will win in a landslide and we have to bring those jobs back. the people who have $3 trillion in banks overseas have a keen related with their overseas operations will have to bring that money back to the u.s. to enjoy the benefits of it in the u.s. guest: i think there is a political dimension to that, too. there is much more pressure on republicans to reassess their free-trade stance. with their more affluent base are seeing more favorability towards free-trade. host: as we wrap up here and we look at your cover story, what

will you be watching for on election night when it comes to the white vote? guest: whether democrats -- whether republicans will be able to break through with hispanic votes. those will be two issues that affect these midterms. host: what does it mean going forward for the next election cycle? sense, i a more cosmic think it's good for the body politic when both parties compete for each group. onen't think it's good that ethnic group or one demographic group totally migrates to one party. it's better when there is a robust competition because you are more likely to see ideas to americans.

i hope that competition becomes more even among all groups. the cover story for the october 3 edition, matthew cooper's story, "the white vote ." that does it for today's "washington drill." we will be back tomorrow for more of your calls, comments and thoughts. -- today's "washington journal." [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] ♪ the health and human services department announces this morning the findings have a report on youth homelessness.

cyndi lauper will be joined by department officials and former homeless youth at noon. we will have live coverage of that. the top democrat on the house energy and commerce committee is retiring at the end of this session. henry waxman is going to discuss global health challenges at georgetown university law school . live coverage of that starts at 2:20 eastern. -- she's on the court. appeals she will be speaking at the heritage foundation. >> with the 2014 election less than two weeks away, our campaign coverage continues.

c-span campaign 2014, more than 100 debates for the control of congress. night it had sure u.s. senate debate took place between democratic incumbent senator jeanne shaheen and challenger former senator scott brown. she approves of the job president obama is doing. here's a look at that exchange. >> in some ways, i proven some things i don't approve. so, you