is being used as a campaign issue. families usa executive director will be with us.

>> good morning. here's the front page of the "globe and mail." headline, simply, attacked. the murder of corporal nathan cirillo and the questions arising from the chaos is the sub headline to that that story. on to the montreal gazette. one shooter locks down the government is the headline.

attack reveals ottawa agencies lack of preparation. follow up stories in the montreal gazette. to the chronicle herald. also from canada, killer on parliament hill is the headline there. and most every u.s. newspaper leading with this story this morning. over to u.s.a. today, shaken after soldier gunned down. we'll be talking about this story this morning but also want to hear your thoughts on facilities here in the united states and whether you think they are secure enough. want to hear especially from government employees that spes line is 201-585-3883. first a bit from stephen harper's address yesterday when he said canada would not be intimidated by this attack.

>> this week's events are a grim reminder that canada is not immune to the types of terrorist attacks we have seen elsewhere around the world. we are also reminded that attacks on our security personnel and our institutions of government are by their very nature attacks on our country, on our values, on our society, on us canadians as a free and democratic people that embrace human dig any till for all. we will not be intimidated. canada will never be intimidated. in fact this will lead us to strengthen our resolve and redouble our efforts and those of our national security agencies to take all necessary steps to identify and counter threats and keep canada safe here at home as it will lead us to redouble our efforts to work with our allies around the world and fight against the terrorist organizations that brutalize those in other countries with the hope of

bringing their savagery to our shores. they will have no safe haven. >> that's the latest on the investigation this morning. we turn now to randall palmerrer, ottawa bureau chief. good morning to you. >> guest: good morning to you. >> host: describe the capital city that ottawa residents are waking up to this morning. can. >> caller: you know, i was looking at the scene from various vantage points and didn't feel the shock that everybody else was feeling as much, people talking about hundreds of people leaving the buildings when they were finally let out and heading south but things are back to normal to a certain extent. the parliament is going to open. house of commons is scheduled to open at 10:00. what we want to see is whether the sergeant-at-arms, kevin vickers who shot dead the

gunman, will be joining what they call the speaker's parade, a ceremonial thing where you solemnly go through the hall of the house of commons on the way to the chamber and kevin vickers will be hailed as a hero if he joins this parade as he normally does. >> for those unfamiliar with kevin vickers role on parliament hill. talk about the job of sergeant-at-arms. >> he's the head of security. overall head of security. former mountie, very impressive man. sits in the house of commons on the floor of the house of commons in sort of a ceremonial role but people will now be comforted to know he is there. he would have guarded the prime minister if he burst into the house of commons. the house was in exception when this shooting happened. >> a picture of him posted on twitter yesterday after

he had been hailed for taking down the shooter in that attack. at this point in the investigation, what do we know about the shooter and the motivation that the shooter had for this attack? >> we don't know motivation. michael zehaf-bibeau is the shooter. born michael joseph hall. changed his name to a north african name. libyan father and french canadian mother. he was in trouble with the law a number of times. a couple of years ago, he was in charge, checked with attempted bank robbery and uttering threats. he got one day in jail on top. 66 he had served. there's no firm indication, no indication from him as to his, whether islam was a motivating factor.

but the u.s. officials are pointing this out to us that he is someone with a islamic background. >> how call are canadian officials being in making connection in canada role against the effort? >> prime minister harper was clear and said we were not going to be deterred. the implication is particularly with the tack in quebec where a canadian soldier was run over by a man who did have linking or did have sympathies with isis. he had the isis symbol on his facebook page, harper said we're not going to be intimidated by this so the implication is there is an attempt at intimidation but of course we don't know. we don't know what mr. zehaf-bibeau's ultimate problem was. >> canada was on a heightened state of alert

after that monday attack, correct? >> guest: yes. well, not precisely. tuesday after the monday attack, police announced they had raised the level of alertness to medium nationally. that apparently happened last week before the attack. on parliament hill, the level was already at medium and, which to me was not very high. i mean, you can walk right up to the front door. parliament building with explosives and no one would stop you until you got to the front door and there's no big security at the front door. just a few guards checking your accreditation and from there, 100 feet to where the prime minister was. not like capitol hill and congress where first of all you have no chance of getting vehicles in. now they put the posts up here in parliament so the

vehicles can't get in as easily as before and on capitol hill, the capitol building, the congress is so much -- the how was representatives and the chamber are so much further in so even if somebody did burst through the doors of thing congress or the capital building, they wouldn't have the same ease of access to where congressmen were and you can, in the canadian system, the prime minister and his entire cabinet are all members of parliament. they're all in this. in this caucus meeting. and all very accessible. it's quite extraordinary. >> host: are there members of parliament calling for changes in ottawa in the wake of the incident? >> guest: yes, there are. i was hearing the mayor of ottawa saying we also don't want this to become a fortress and specifically

cited like washington. they don't -- i mean, parliament hill itself is open to rallies and tourists and you know, you don't want to shut that off. also interesting the prime minister's office right across the street from parliament hill is right on the sidewalk. you can -- you walk right by it. you can touch the building which you can't do with the white house. it's amazing open security. i reported in beirut in the 80s and where the u.s. embassy and the marine barracks that were blown up there and then i lived in bahrain and the u.s. embassy was set back half a mile from the parking lot so it's extraordinary for me to see this so close to the road. >> as you said, parliament expected to open at 10:00

today. what specific events are planned today or any changes that you heard about so far? >> guest: well they cancelled the testimony of the bank of canada president late last, late yesterday afternoon. i don't know yet the schedule. i would imagine they are going to have speeches from the prime minister and the leaders of the opposition parties to start with. the first part of course is the speakers parade. speaker came out and said we in tend to open as usual. just to show that democracy will continue. public is not allowed on the hill today. that is one change. but i just got on the hill 10 minutes ago, just to test the security and show my pass and that was fine. so, we are allowed in. those of us that are

journalists and acredded. >> randall palmer is the ottawa bureau chief for roadway terse. we appreciate your time. >> thank you. bye-bye. >> host: we're asking our viewers, are you con sender about safety at facilities here the united states? we're taking your calls and tweets and emails. a special line for government employees. and in answer to that question that we asked on facebook, several posts already sent. >> no, not concerned about facilities here in the ups. our government facilities are pretty secure. i'm worried about our schools is what seth writes in. let's go to sandra in greenville, north carolina on that line for government employees. sandra, good morning. >> caller: good morning, sir.

yes, i take stark opposition to your first tweet. i am absolutely concerned about safety. i think the tweeter's comment was partially correct. i used to work in the mail in area and a part time job as a contractor. my full time job was at another federal facility on a base. i felt pretty secure but now my role is in a hospital setting. we're wide open. wide open. sitting ducks. we have federal police on site but, and our police are wonderful, you know, they're all over the place, they're armed, they're very attentive, but you know, hospitals are wide open. they're not comes through secured, you know, access, necessarily. like if you go in some federal facility, you have to put your purse down, none of that. it is wide open. so i just kind of say a prayer every morning and just you know, hope all is

well. but i think it's a big misnomer that some federal facilities are tight layers and then hospital settings like what i'm in, i'm in a health care center, it's wide open aside from the police. >> how much communication do you get from officials there at the facility you work at in greenville, north carolina on the security front and was there anything yesterday in light of the attack in canada? >> caller: we get routine communication, particularly as, you know, maybe events come up or if there is bullet points that they want the staff to be aware of. obviously forecasts with ebola, we have seen some communications coming down on that but with regard to what happened in canada, we haven't seen anything, it would have to be something i would think that would, you know, a closer level breach

for us to get communication, but absolutely not. it is a great myth to think that because you're at a federal facility, you have all these layers of protection. >> our phone lines are open as we ask our viewers how concerned are you about the safety and security of federal facilities coming off the shooting yesterday in canada's capitol city. that question answered by several more folks on facebook. donnie writing in that any able bodied man can make national news if he chooses to. bob allen below that says not very much. right wing extremists are a small minority in his comment ant and we'll keep reading. more of those and your tweets as well. some" about what happened here on capitol hill in light of yesterday's shooting. this from roll call, one of the newspapers here on capitol hill. capitol police said they are

monitoring the shooting but did not take any significant steps to heighten security. a statement from the capitol police spokeswoman says it remains at post9 news level with know significant change. police continue to monitor and track the canadian event. later in today's show, we'll be joined by the former chief of the capitol police and a former senate sergeant-at-arms, terrence gainer to talk about security here in d.c are you concerned about the safety and security of federal facilities? we want to hear about the facilities that you work at as a government employee or facilities in your area. david in pennsylvania on our line for republicans. good morning. >> caller: hey. how are you? no federal facilities around my area, small town. i have a gun. i got it legally and i can

defend myself and my property. i'm not scared. i would say once again isn't it like kind of living in a or well novel. we look at the teleclean and the ministry of truth and love tells us that diversity is grand and we're fighting a perpetual endless war against terror, some monster like thing, terror but not fighting islam and demographically, we keep letting them in and they keep only a few million in canada, only a few million in america but we changed our entire way of life to cater to them but we're afraid to say who they are, like in a orweil novel and yet we're told that diversity is wonderful and then a couple of years ago, there was a threat at the parliament to cut off the head of the prime minister, you may remember that one a couple of years ago, but

it's just -- it's just interesting the way that we can't even say who the enemy is. we're not worried about swedes or worried about a mad chinese grandmother in wheelchair that's might shoot up a building. we know who the enemy is. all we have to do is stop letting them in to the west and we might survive. >> in terms of security issues here in washington, d.c., another incident last night at the white house. another man jumped the white house fence last night and was taken into custody after being bitten by a guard dog officials said after another fence jumper made it deep into the executive mansion. secret service agents and canine units apprehended the latest fence jumper. white house under lockdown for more than 90 minutes. the incident with the string. security issues according to the "washington post" at the white house that unsettled

officials and led to the resignation of julia pearson. on sent 19, a man scaled the fence and ran in through unlocked front door. we're taking your calls this morning about the safety and security of federal facilities. richard is up next, calling in from massachusetts on our line for independents. >> caller: good morning. security is pretty good but now my biggest concern is that we go over to these countries and we arm all these people to go against this government and what happens is then we bring other countries into it and this is what happens. they come back. they know they can't beat us or can't beat canada where their military, but like a friend of mine used to say, when you get in a fight, if you loss, a snack.

he gets the meal. a snack hurts more than the meal. we got to leave these people over there alone and i think we will be okay. >> richard, would you agree with thomas on our facebook page, bring our men and women home and we wouldn't have to worry about our safety? >> caller: i believe in that yes, i do, sir, because when you're meddling in other people's business and trying to change their ways, it isn't going to happen. they're going to be mad and they're going to come after us and until we straighten the act out over there, get out of there and bring everybody home and then if they do go after us, then go over there full force. >> that's richard in massachusetts. we played you stephen harper's comments yesterday. president barack obama making comments as well yesterday at a meeting he was holding specifically about ebola but responding to a question about the shooting at the canadian parly mint. here's what he had to say.

>> we don't yet have all the information about what motivated the shooting. we don't yet have all the information about whether this was part of a broader network or plan or whether this was an individual or a series of individuals that decided to take these actions but it emphasizes the degree to which we have to remain vigilant when it comes to dealing with these kinds of acts of senseless violence or terrorism and i pledged as always to make sure that our national security teams are coordinating very closely, given not only canada, one of our closest allies in the world but our neighbors and our friends. obviously there is a lot of interaction between canada and the us university where we have such a long border and it's -- you know, very important i think for us to recognize that when it comes

to dealing with terrorist activity that canada and the united states have to be entirely in sync. we have in the past. i'm confidence we will continue to be so in the future. >> here's a statement put out by speaker of the house john boehner. >> while we are still seeking answers to the motivation and intention on the attacks, prime minister harper and speaker sheer will continue to have friends and allies in the u.s. congress prepared to stand soldier to soldier with them and prepared to move forward in our aim to improve the quality of life and economics opportunities for both our countries. the world growing more complex and dangerous by the day but we will not be intimidated. our common cause and fight, dignity and freedom for all will always persevere, even during the darkest of times. that was the speaker of the

house yesterday. several members of congress also taking to twitter for their reactions yesterday. here's democrat keith ellison. our prayers are with the people of ottawa. first responder, law enforcement show great courage in running toward danger and bill shooter, very sad by what happened in canada. my prayers go out to everyone affected by this attack and democrat, thoughts and prayers to all affected. we stand with our friend and ally canada during this difficult time. a few of the many tweets from members of congress yesterday. here's one of those front pages from the hamilton specter. canada will never be the same. that paper also having a front page story on the canadian reservively that died. dreams of a full time military career. father of a 6-year-old boy,

boisterous, funny and kind. talking about corporal nathan cirillo. we're taking your calls in light of what happened. how concerned are you about the safety and security of federal facilities here in this country? richard is in carlsbad california. good morning. >> good morning. i visitedded our local federal course just to watch evened the local cops can't bring their guns in. they have lockers they have to lock them up. our facilities here are very safe. >> what facilities are you concerned about here? are there specific soft targets that you think the federal government should pay more attention to if it's knots the federal buildings themselves? >> well, we have at our local fbi place, we had a guy hop the fence and climb

on top of the roof and he was there for a few hours until they got him down. but it's just a mental health thing. i guess our mental health people are doing a great job because there seems to be waning, you know, nuts with guns. >> host: that's richard in arms ban, california. mental health also brought up by enraged apostate. is the canadian capital shooting really terrorism or other case of mentally ill not getting the treatment they need. here's a editorial. the editorial board noting that the shooting on parliament hill a reminder that the global war on terror remains global.

half harder not some far away struggle but part of a wash being waged on western streets. writing that maybe the secret service can draw lessons ... let's go to barry waiting in michigan in houghton lake. bare, good morning. >> caller: good morning. i'm more worried about the people here in america that are being oppressed with the minimum wage. >> host: what do you mean by that, barry? >> caller: you got people living from paycheck to paycheck ab all we're worried about are federal buildings. i think we need to worry a little bit more about the

people oppressed in this country and the statement by john boehner. i tell you, he could have been as easily talking about what happened in st. louis and some of these other shootings. i think there is more of a danger of that than from somebody from overseas. they will only be here by a few but these people are creating the problem here in this country by the millions. those are the people that i'm more worried about. sooner or later, the people in this country are going to stand up and fight back. that's what i'm worried about. >> host: talk about the situation in houghton lake, michigan. what do you see in your community? >> caller: actually, i'm just healing up from a second back surgery so i'm on disability. so you know, which is way below minimum wage. we've got a walmart here in this town that doesn't pay a

decent wage. i've got a daughter that works at a senior assisted living plagues place and her wages doesn't cover the expenses of having four kids. and again, it's all over the placement for years people don't pay overtime. we've got employers that do federal work that are suppposed to pay a prevailing wayne. they refuse to do that and nobody does nothing about it. people are actually oppressed in this town. >> host: you may want to stick around. we're talking about economic issues and how they play in the 2014 campaign and how it is played in recent debates as well. you may be interested in sticking around for that but let's stay on the subject of the the safety of federal facilities. a few tweets coming in. donna writing, yes, i am concerned about federal

facilities as well as schools and other facilities, tighter can security for all. steve writes i'm not as concerned about the safety of federal facilities as i am about lunatics with guns. talks about it for the next 15 minutes and then we'll be joined by a security ex p former sergeant-at-arms of the united states capitol and chief of the capitol police. now want to get your thoughts. c.j. is up next in louisiana. good morning. line for independents. >> caller: good morning. the guy from michigan needs to move to texas or florida instead of staying in that hell hole in detroit or michigan. there needs to be more and more security at the federal buildings. in fact, should be fences built around them to where people cannot get to them.

>> caller: go ahead. i think we lost c.j. mark is in michigan also. >> caller: good morning. >> host: go ahead. >> caller: i think the biggest concern about our federal buildings is we got to pay more attention to what is being shown on our main stream news media. this is what radical lieses these mentally ill people, making them feel that they're under attack by terrorists so they go out and act out. so we got to realize the largest terrorist threat we have is our main stream news media lying to us. and misleading us. >> host: what are the images you're specifically concerned about? -- i think mark hung up on us as well. special number for

government employees. especially like to hear from government employees on this question. here's a story from today's "new york times." fear takes over a usually peninsulas i had capital. on the streets of ottawa, normally bustling streets was transformed on wednesday as thousands of government workers were kept inside for hours while police swept the area fearful that shootings that morning were part of a larger plot. story going on to quote patrick snyder. said that he feared the shooting would change the capital's culture of openness. proud that you could walk up top canada's parliament buildings. i was always proud we didn't have the same kind of security as in dc, now it will be different. are you concerned about the safety and security of federal facilities and i want to hear about the

facilities near you or ones you may worn in. government employees especially. we'll go to herbert waiting in georgia on our line for democrats. herbert, good morning. >> caller: i think they need to put about 500 feet, 1,000 feet away, anybody so they cannot be around the federal facility. we can't play the blame game. i'm a black guy. you got do realize. the most terrorist in america has come from white americans. all the shootings in the schools. we don't call them terror. we call them the ill person. don't blame a bunch of people for doing something and call them islamic groups. that pointing the finger. we got hate crimes against jews but now ratist hate

crimes. from the death threats from jack johnson, jackie robinson. even this president. we need to stop this foolishness. >> host: you recommend banning guns within a distance from all federal buildings. do you think that will work or do you think the bad guys will abide by those bans? >> caller: yes, i think so because if we see anybody within 1,000 feet away, you got to remember if you got the right to tote a gun, somebody come on the scene, he don't know who is the bad guy or the good guy. you cannot have a gun within 1,000 feet of a federal building, we ain't got to worry about the good guy or the bad guy. woman said she seen the guy pull out the gun first. she says she seen him pull out the gun first and before he went in.

so if there wasn't a gun allowed, somebody would have put him in jail right there before he got into the parliament. >> herbert in georgia this morning. we go to stephen waiting in columbia, maryland on our line for independents. stephen all on that line for government employees as well. stephen, good morning. >> caller: hello? >> host: go ahead. >> caller: i want to comment on what everybody is talking about. everybody is being radical in the fact that we need all this extra security when the reality is that people are getting shot left and right all over this country. part of life. whether it is mental illness, retaliation for one thing or another. some of these people are talking about, may as well be a military lockdown and then where do all your rights and freedoms go? there is a certain amount of risk you have to take being at a federal building that is in her recent. that's why we have police,

military, safeguards. people are going to get through. that's all i got. >> host: what kind of federal building do you work al at? >> caller: i'm in the military. i work at camp lejeune, down there for five years. a little more secure than a lot of the federal buildings in d.c., et cetera because you have the entire base. i've also worked up in maryland. >> seen different amounts of security at different places i've been but at the end of the day, i mean, you can't just -- i mean think about the money it would cost to put fences around every federal building. that is insane. >> stephen, a matter of not being able to protect against every single threat or not overreacting to threats? >> caller: i think it's not overreacting to threats. because i mean, you know,

the guy in canada, i feel for his family but we have the tomb of the unknown soldier at arlington. somebody could walk in with a gun and the same thing could ham you know, military, people volunteer for community service down at camp lejeune, i may be out volunteering and get shot. i'm not scared of it. i'm just saying the possibilities are out there. are you not going to drive your car because you're scared you're going to get in an accident? no, you're a person, you're going to do things. you're going to go out to bars and drink some alcohol which may lead to you getting into a confrontation, but you're still going to do it. >> up next, we're tom you talk with sergeant-at-arms terrence gainer, former chief of the us capitol police about yesterday's shooting on parliament hill and what it could mean for security here and later a panel will join us to talk

about how that issue has played in the 2014 midterm election. first in illinois last night, candidates for incumbent seat held first debate. discussed the issue of assault weapons ban. here's a bit of that exchange. >> i support a ban on assault weapons. these are military weapons designed for one purpose, to kill other human beings in volume and we've seen them misused. i've been out hunting. i've shot ducks. if you need an ak477 to shoot a dear or a duck, you ought to stick to fishing. we can draw the line at certain weapons than should not be sold in america. i think assault weapons should be in that category and yes, i would vote to ban them. >> i'll do everything possible to reduce violence in this country. >> does that include banning

assault. >> question: weapons? >> i have been standing out on the corner to call attention to violence and i will do whatever i can to help reduce violence in this country. the problem with what you're talking about is our own government did a study and it came to the clowns that assault weapons are not used in those crimes and did not reduce violence. however, having said that, i'll do every i can. i want to tell you a personal story and why i support second amendment rights. 25 years ago, my sister-in-law was sitting in her family room and saw kids breaking into her home. she ran into her bedroom. kids broke in any way, dragged her out, sat her down in the livingroom, put a gun to her head and shot her. i listened in court as one kid was telling the story against the other kid about what happened. one of the most horrifying things i've ever herd and that reason i support the

second amendment thinking she may well be alive and been able to protect herself. >> that's a no. you do not support the ban on. >> it's a yes i would support it if there's evidence that it would reduce violence. so far the government said there is no such evidence. >> so you don't support a ban on assault weapons. are to repeat, i will absolutely support a ban if there is evidence that it would reduce violence. the evidence so far is it doesn't reduce violence. from the government, our own government. >> any response to that, senator? >> first, i'm sorry for the tragedy that you faced in your family, but second, 92% of americans believe that a universal background check to kook keep guns out of the hands of convicted felons and drug gangs and out of the hands of men team unstable people is it right thing to do. my opponent says it is not.

overwhelmingly -- yet my opponent will not bring himself to ban these weapons, yes, it may only save a few lives, but let's save those lives by banning assault weapons. >> host: and in the wake of yesterday's deadly shooting, we're joined by terrence gainer that served as sergeant-at-arms and chief of the u.s. capitol police. lots of facts need to come out but what do you think the attack on the canadian capital will mean on security here in washington, d.c.? >> guest: we constantly look at those things across the globe. i think we will want to have more information about the shooter and what happened and lessons learned and see if we need to make add justs on the hill. >> are these the kinds of threats that most worried you leading security on

capitol hill? >> they're one of the threats. the great thing on capitol hill, a great partnership, fbi, secret service or others to see if we can keep problems off the hill but as chief or sergeant of arms, you worry about a variety of things. iedes, and these lone gunman, the toughest for anyone to handle. >> yesterday before the shooting incident happened came out in the capitol hill newspaper, roll colonel, farmer top cop suggests the capitol complex is too open. you're the former top cop quoted there. what are your concerns? >> there has to be a great balance. citizens have a right to be in and among members and two or three million visitors each year. somehow, you have to strike the balance. i think the capitol police do a great job. a lot of time and energy put into physical barriers an cameras and screening but i

think there are still vulnerabilities and we can do measured approaches to that. >> you get into the article. one of those suggestions, possibly a fence around the united states capitol. >> it has to be global. as soon as you name a fence or re-routeing streets, people don't slow down and see the whole impact. we need to reduce the number of cars traveling on independence and constitution or in the district in general. >> for those not in d.c those are the two streets that are on the north side and south side of the capitol. >> yes and there are a lot of restrictions there, especially to truck traffic and the size of the vehicle, but we still have suvs and vehicling now as to the fence, if you picture around the larger four corners, for those out in america, about a block around the capitol. >> we're showing a map. >> you could put up a taste

full nineteens would allow people to be screened and get on to the campus. make it safer. not closing the capitol off. it's making the entrance different. >> is the white house fence jumping incident last night, another incident, reportedly with the attack in ottawa, the shooter there jumping the fence surrounding the parliament hill complex, change the thinking about how fences work in securing federal and these high profile stilts? >> we never thought one thing is the solution. any impediment you can give to slow people down an make it more difficult is a positive and i think especially with the secret service, not withstanding the fence jumper before last caused a lot of heartache, they've been successful over the years as they were yesterday in then responding to the fence jumpers. trying to keep the place open, whether it's it is capitol or the white house,

in a midst of a free society where people are intent on doing something is a tough task and usually falls on to the backs of the men and women in uniform, they are the last line of defense but we have an obligation to try to litigated all those things that could put them in harm's way. >> if our viewers want to talk with terrence gainer, former sergeant-at-arms. our phone lines are open. noted that you're the former senate sergeant-at-arms. served in that position for 7 years. can you talk about the role of the sergeant-at-arms in light of the canadian sergeant the arms possibly being the hero. >> god bless him. former member of the royal

canadian mounted police. it's the trending in the house and sunset, just a bit before 9/11, what the members of congress have done, the leadership have appointed sergeant of arms or deputy sergeant of arms, men or women that have a deep background in police or security or the military because of all those type of issues. now, in the sunset, it's a unique position because not only are you the chief law enforcement of the senate but the city manager. sergeant of arms office has 1,000 employees, they're responsible for such diverse thing as the parking lot and id cars, tv studios, printing, rules, barber shop, beauty shop. a combination between the chief of police and city manager. >> canadian sergeant of arms. picture of him posted to twitter. him with his weapon as the sergeant-at-arms of the u.s. capitol, did you carry a

weapon? >> not all the time. i had it close at hand in a locked come partment. i relead a lot on the capitol police. they are the first line of defense but as the chief law enforcement officer, i was armed when i thought it was appropriate. >> that map of the united states capitol. 2776 acre capitol complex. you are in charge in one way or the other for security for over 10 years. how concerned are you about the memorials and the outdoor areas that are are part of that complex? this incident yesterday in ottawa started at the war memorial near or on parliament hill. >> guest: it is part of the security but through the united states capitol police or working in conjunction with the park police or the metropolitan police department of washington or the metro transit police because we all have a little piece of the campus, i think we have a good security mechanism up there that

employs both stat tic police officers, mobile police officers, officers on bikes and a lot of technology in addition to a lot of barriers that we put up. >> time line of the events yesterday, this from today's "washington post" of what happened in ottawa, the canadian soldier was shot and killed while on ceremonial guard duty at the war memorial, the number one spot there. two, the suspected shooter from that incident jumped the fence around parliament hill and moved toward the main center about blocker building and then amid a flurry of gunfire, the intruder was shot and killed. we're joined by terrence gainer, former sergeant-at-arms and chief of the united states capitol police to take your questions and comments as we talk about security and what the incident in canada could mean. george is up first. new york on the line for republicans. george, good morning to you. >> caller: quick story.

i work with a guy who had a nervous breakdown. could no longer drive a truck. down to the federal building in buffalo, there he is. with a 45. my question is, private contractors on the safety and security. and should there be a concern about that? >> host: are they part of the security picture here in washington, d.c.? >> guest: not the security force or the buildings. in the capitol, no one can get into the capitol without going through screening except members of congress so there is a way to defend against that but concealed carry issue in a variety of states does compound the challenges of law enforcement about who is armed and who isn't. evening when the president

or head of state comes up to the capitol, the close liaison between the secret service or the statement department folks is important for us to know who is carrying a weapon and who is not. >> host: what are the rules about who can carry a weapon? >> guest: only united states capitol police officers can carry a weapon in the building. anybody else, no matter what their law enforcement authority is would have to have permission and be so marked by the u.s. capitol police that they're armed and as a rule, they would have an escort, so there would be no unarmed non-- or excuse me, no armed law enforcement officer in the capitol complex without a capitol police officer with them and that's good sense. same thing that happens if the capitol police officer goes into the white house complex or the fbi headquarters. everybody needs to know who is armed and what they're going to do when an emergency comes up. >> what happened if a tour

taste has a conceal and carry permit in home state, for guess about that comes to the capitol and comes up to a capitol police screening facility? >> they would not be permitted into the building and it would be a violation of a district law if they tried to enter the building armed. different rules on the cap tomorrow grounds. one of the things that the capitol community tries to do is give notice to before that so when go on to the web site or you get tickets, that is all pretty clear as to what is prohibited and when you enter the complex at various entrances, that is well marked but there have been incidents where people or even staff have brought a weapon in, doesn't appear to have any ill enat the present time but they forgot and appropriate action is taken and in most case, they've been place dollars under arrest. >> host: frank is in alexandra, virginia. good morning.

>> hi. hi. i would like to ask your guest what he things about installing a different kind of fence at the white house, a fence that would curve outward or maybe installing a bullet proof and bomb proof glass in front of the white house and if he thinks that would be ha drawback to that idea? >> host: proposals talked about in the wake of fence jumpers. >> guest: i can say in general it's the same questions we wrestle with in the capitol and i'm sure anybody involved in the security business is. from a security point of view, having those type of impediments makes it very secure but we have to balance it is look and the politics and the cost of it. there has to be a balance between how you secure a place and all the impact that has. >> can you talk about the history of fence proposals here on capitol hill around the capitol complex?

>> i've been talking about it for a long time. even back when i was chief and talked about it, there was appropriation language inserted that i shouldn't use the term fence or expend any funds to do that. so there is a reluctance and i get that as to why people don't want a fence around the greater capitol compound. they like the openness of it. they think it's remember any isn't of the original design but in this days and age when we continue to be at war so long an those trying to do something to us, there's a way to do that and do it tastefully. people in washington would recognize 7th and constitution, the gardens over there and the way you can put up you up shrubbery and fences and make it look nice. it can be taste full if it's done in a thoughtful way and people understand it would gave greater access to the united states capitol but yes, it would change the look of it.

evening what about the capitol was designed, i don't think anybody in visioned that constitution and independence would be the main thoroughfare that it is and not envisioned that we'd have people trying to attack and blow the place up. we have to reach a reasonable balance. long term planning, investment of money to ease car traffic, make more foot traffic, make it easier for people to commute without vehicles. we can do that. >> terrible gainer, chief of the capitol police, sergeant-at-arms. before that. served in the metropolitan police department here in washington, d.c. and before that director of the illinois state police. joining us to answer your questions, take your comments. ken in alabama on the line for independents. good morning. >> caller: good morning. >> host: go ahead. >> caller: yes, the questions i have to ask is basically simple.

because you have a whole world of basic gun owners you look at time gone back since the cave man. they have basically killed with sticks and stones since the beginning. the way i anticipate things to come, if you take away the human rights that our forefathers -- >> host: ken, are you there? i think we lost kenneth. a question from monty on our twitter page, in what way did the war on terror improve our security if you want to specifically talk about capitol hill? >> well, it caused congress to rethink what they were doing and they did dedicate a lot of money to both put in physical improvements and to expand the capitol police department so anybody who has been in the washington area will know how things have changed since 9/11 whether getting into a

airport or federal building or coming up to the capitol. the great news is the capitol is wide open. we do about 2.5 million visitors a year. 25,000 employees. legislative process not interrupted. so in balance, with the hard work of the capitol police officers and the other sister agency, i think they've done a pretty good job on security up there. >> a quote from a former colleague, bill living good. this from 2007 saying the further you get away from 9/11, the more the american public for gets what it meant. the furor in you get away, the harder it is to change security if it's needed. >> that's spot on. i worked for bill when i was the chief of the capitol police and with him when he was the house sergeant of arms and it's correct. the further away you get, the less of a threat it seems to be. incidents like in canada and the death of private cirillo draw attention again and

everybody says is there something we missed, what lessons can be learned? >> tom calls in from new york. you're on with terrence gainer. the former senate sergeant-at-arms. >> caller: i think it is funny that president obama is going to get a security fence around the white house and yet he refuses to give us a security fence for our borders. we got terrorists coming in here trying to get into the white house, trying to kill people in our country and yet he refuses to secure our borders. very, very bad. not a good idea. >> tom's comment from new york. do you have anything to say about that? >> guest: there is a fence around the white house already. they are two different related things. we are trying to do a lot of things on the border. the politics of that, i'll stay away. others decide the policy. i implement it and protect

it. >> what are you doing now that you lest your jock on capitol hill? >> i'm a security specialist working with clients to try to give advice to private sectors on security issues and work on the public, private partnership. >> in new york, patricia is up next on the line. good morning. >> caller: good morning. this is nothing to do with politics, actually. i just am curious why we never hear a follow up on what actually happens to these strange people that try to jump the fence. we hear about the incident when it actually happens but we never hear what happens to them. and my concern is that they mentioned on the news that the one last night, they had to take the dogs to the vet afterward because they were injured. i just think the whole thing is really ridiculous that

nothing seems much to happen to these people who view it the same way as somebody trying to climb the empire state building with climbing gear. it's a more security thing than just some big joke that somebody is trying to do. i'll take your comments off the air. >> host: terrence? >> guest: i think patricia has a good point about mental healths issues. most adept at dealing with people off medication or should be on medication or otherwise in need of mental assistance. that's the type of stream that the president and others get or that we had coming into members of congress. getting at that mental health care is very important. you'll hear chiefs talk about the nation about it is consequences in the failure in our mental health system. gets into the whole

connecting the dots so we'll do the forensic autopsy, psychological autopsy on the oh offender up there to find out what made that person tic, what we might have missed as we've done after each one of these shootings. really, a large part of what all of us in the security business are trying to do is the prevention aspect. in canada or when we had two officers murdered in the capitol or other things is the consequences. we on a day-to-day basis try to figure out how to prevents these things. >> host: and the mental health be issue, the two officers being killed. here's a picture of the lying in state of those two officers from july 24, 1998. after that incidents happened. how did that incident change security on capitol hill? >> guest: again, it was one of those dramatic contributors to that. congress allocated money to

increase the size of the department and it was increased further after 9/11. it added more officers which gave the capitol police a better opportunity to prevent such breeches at the doors. allowed the capitol police, the board, the architect of the capitol, to put more money into the technology or the area around the capitol, led to a greater link. [please stand by]

1.8 ilion people fill up the mall, there are ways to keep it open and secure people. one of the primary goals of the capitol police and the sergeant of arms over the house and the senate is to make sure that the legislative process can continue, so that is the center of what we try to do, and getting the public access to the elected officials, so there are ways to do that to make the theus more open and have screening areas further away from the skin of the capital. that would be an ideal goal, but again it requires some money, vision, and time when you expand the campus. think back to the white house how eventually over the years lafayette park and all of the buildings over there eventually purchased that an expanded their campus. colleges in almost every city continues to slowly expand their campuses. knocking down buildings necessarily but buying up property and changing the way people traverse in the way streets are. i think we can do more of that

around the capital, so combining parking that is off the campus, such as rfk stadium, getting great transportation of to the capital and into the city, do joint screening of vehicles while the federal agencies, we could make this a much more open city and not be duplicating the way we're spending money. host: in 2006 when you were leaving the united states capitol police, you said your goal as chief of police was to keep the place running and free from attack, and we is it is open today as it was when you left the capitol police department? guest: i think so. the men women of the capitol police under the leadership do a great job. asy have a tough, tough job duty officer's up at the white house, whether it is to use deadly force or not use deadly a barrierther to pop or not pop a barrier.

i think they do a good job. ohio, onda is up next, our line for republicans. caller: yes, thank you. . od morning good morning, america and god bless america. gunalking about the situation for the capitol and every thing else, i think they should all be armed anywhere that policemanl and every thing else of looking out for our capitol. guns, they are here in our homes to protect ourselves. they should be allowed, too, because the criminals are getting and have got guns anyways, whether you make them legal for them or not legal, they have got guns. . go none, they can. with a gun the right way to protect myself and my home, you know.

as far as this illness thing, every time somebody does a crime, they get off because they claim illness. i think that is going to come to a head, too. host: terrance kenner, do you want to weigh in on the gun debate? guest: let's touch on the mental illness because i think that is the elephant in the room. more has to be done with that, and not everybody who is charge with i get off. those who have mental problems should be treated as mental problems, but the goal of this is not to have everybody armed and get everybody into shootouts whether it is a private citizen or a police officer. the goal of the security is to prevent these things come and that is what i think every chief, every police officer that i know of around the nation, and i have been in for great agencies, is trying four. the last resort is chasing someone down at the last minute and tackling them, turning a dog on them, or shooting them. we do not want to do that, but

if push comes to shove, i think the men and women of the capitol police or the united states secret service or in pd or fbi, they are all prepared to do that if they have to, but it is a tough decision to make in those few second start our job is to make it easy. on ourrudy is up next line for democrats you are on with terrance gainer. caller: i do believe in having our guns, but we have problems here with welfare and everybody feels entitled. we have jobs and our community that nobody will do. it is a little bit of money, but they won't do it because they get it anyway. my approach is to make people have pride in their cells. emselves.i we need apprenticeships. the parent sometimes are not doing what is needed, so they need to get it from somewhere

else, and that is my approach. host: trudy, you may want to stick around for the last segment of the "washington journal." we are going to be talking about the economic issues and how they play in the 2014 midterm elections. diana is up next, winchester, ohio on our line for republicans. diane, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for having me on your show. i have a couple of comments. --, i have been around i also think mentioning an electric fence, and why not shock somebody who is trying to climb over the top? health is theal biggest issue for some of these people. years ago, they shut down all of the mental health institutes government help

from that, now most of them are in our jails. and that is an appropriate. i think that needs to be looked at again. my third is probably one of the most frightening things is about weapons on a street, and i really think our country has gone overboard in supporting the nra for having assault rifles rampant in our communities. i apologize, i have one more thing -- host: i would like to have mr. gainer get to some of your issues. aboutwith her issue assault weapons on the streets of u.s. cities. guest: i wish they were fewer assault weapons in our cities. , support the second amendment but i think high capacity assault weapons in our inner cities are inappropriate. again, she touches on the mental health issue. we have almost -- we can't talk

about that enough. i do think a lot has been -- more has been done over the last 20 years to try to address that, but it is still a problem. how a fence might look or what it might do again is a subject of debate. i think there are tasteful ways to do that, and we could have another show on how to architect that. capitol police officers here at high profile buildings and washington, d.c. trained on how to deal with somebody who may be in these situations, who may have had mental health issues? guest: they sure are. i think the capitol police and i know the secret service am a both agents in the uniform, are very much aware of the behavioral issues that might indicate someone is in stress, and if that is the situation -- hill,nstance, up on the undercover or plainclothes officers could call for assistance. they have to follow

up on e-mail threats or telephone threats are very adept at talking and interviewing them and working with the fbi if it is outside of the area or with the secret service trying to get the mental health they need. the capitol police has on staff on contract some wonderful, wonderful mental health professionals who not only help educate the capitol police officers but work with the agents when there is a threat from someone who is in need of help. not everybody needs to get locked up that is a threat or sends a tweet. some of them just need to get off the booze, off of medication, and get referred into the mental health system. we go a long way along with the secret service of try to do some of those things. host: bob is up next on our line for democrats in maryland. you are on with terrance gainer. caller: yes, it is funny that these people are getting into the white house and all that. all these guys, these secret not gunning are

them down, a year ago, that black woman from connecticut with a little child in the car. and shes murdered her, probably -- she might have done no more than made the wrong turn, and they all jumped out on her all armed, swinging guns at her. ift would be the response you get attacked like that by a gang of armed people? of course you are going to flee. then they murdered her. it is funny now you have got this guy running right into the white house and nothing. no shots, no nothing. it is almost like it is stage or something. host: terrance gainer, questions on when security officers use deadly force. police officers are trained to use force likely

to cause death in a variety of circumstances, but i want to emphasize -- that is the tough part. even after one of the incidents is that the caller was referring to, the shooting of mrs. kerry re, there was criticism that there was too much force used, then a month and a half ago when an intruder gets under the fence, there is chris of them that there is not enough deadly force used. lomais the challenging the of a plainclothes officer when they are confronted with one of those incidences. i have been a police officer in the military for these past 47 years who wants to shoot someone. preventionhe business. there are a lot of layers of security. in order to prevent that ultimate person on person, human on human confrontation, and some split second our officers have to decide what to do. now the threat up at the

capitol of the white house might be different than responding to a burglary in progress or a stolen auto because we are very sensitive to improvised explosive devices being carried by people. we have been paying attention to northern ireland, england, elsewhere to respond to those, so our policy on the capitol hill and how we address those things is very different, but there is litigation going on about all of that, and all of that will be hired out. , thenk our officers capitol police and the secret service are well-trained, well led, but ultimately they have got to make those decisions in a few seconds, and that is not an easy call. canadageant of arms at -- he did the right thing by everything we could see. he could make that easy determination, and thank god for him. host: arthur is up next, chesapeake, virginia on our line for democrats.

good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to make comments about assault weapons and the security around our capitals. i think assault weapons should civilians and whatnot. they do not need them. the security around our capitol i think everything should be done to guard the distance from the white house from civilians, and i will be glad when president obama's time is up because the right-wing extremists are determined to do everything they can do to destroy this man or kill him, and i think he has been the best president that this country has had in my lifetime. mr. gainer, arthur calling

for more physical space between the public and the white house, the united states capital. guest: i appreciate arthur's comments. it is contemplated that standoff is important in the security business, stand up for vehicle explosive devices or people carrying backpacks, but i want to emphasize -- we would not want to close down the capitol. we do not want to close it off to people. we wanted accessible to the public, to constituents getting to their elected officials, but getting the standoff and screening a bit further away than the skin of the capital i think is a lofty goal. people have to keep an open mind that means that it does not mean less access, it means different access. pages from the canadian paper survey, the niagara falls review come under attack is the headline there, scene of attack in ottawa after soldier killed. armed officere an

they're responding to the parliament hill attack. how much cost training with other countries, specifically canada, do the united states cap a police and some of the other protective forces here in d.c. actually have? guest: there is a lot, actually. they would visit us at the sergeant of arms office, and we talked about how we are doing things, how they were doing things, and i know the canadian officials have been down in the capital, so wee are in the midst of figuring that out. tond others have been israel, england, northern ireland, even jordan and iraq to try to get some sense of that, so that is very common for all of us to try to take a look at how the other person is doing and what lessons there are to be learned there, but each of us is yperating a different maiwa

that the government is run, so there are different restrictions . so far, the canadian approach has been moderate. they are slowing down. they will look and see what the cause of this was, and i am sure they will take a look at ways they should do some security different, as we will. more try to get in one call, david is in gary, indiana on our line for republicans. you were on with terrance gainer, the former sergeant of arms of the u.s. capitol. the canadians i recollect when i was little -- host host: david, you are going in and out. a question from sea of drink how would twitter -- you describe the communications between the different agencies involved in security? guest: i think the committee

case and is great. no one agency in the district of columbia could handle any of these events, so we are all partners. the federal any city agencies. there is also room for improvement, but at the command level and tactical level, there is great medication. there is always a challenge when things are unfolding quickly. the first information is situation, so i think the strategic communication is great, the tactical information exchange areproved well, and we working jointly, training jointly. there is a lot of interoperability, so we are in a good place, but there is always room for improvement. formererrance gainer, chief of the united states capitol police, we appreciate your time this morning. up next, we are joined by a panel of health care experts to talk about how that issue has played in the way 14 election, and later we open up the phones to you to ask what you want to hear from your congressional or

gubernatorial candidate when it comes to crating jobs and handling the economy. we will be right back. ♪ >> this weekend on the c-span networks, friday night starting at 8:00 eastern on c-span, our campaign 2014 debate coverage continues in primetime. on saturday night at 10:00, the women of color empowerment conference. sunday evening at 8:00 on "q&a," so maker and daughter of robert

f kennedy on her latest film "last days in vietnam." on themichio kaku latest in brain science. live coverage of the texas book festival in austin and sunday the coverage continues starting live in new. friday night at 8:00 on american history tv on c-span3, the union army and abraham lincoln's 1864 reelection, and saturday night it :00 on lectures in history, the modernization of businesses and households in the 20th century and its impact on society. sunday afternoon at 4:00, ronald reagan's 1964 a time for choosing speech. let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. call us at 202-626-3400 or e-mail us at comments@c-span.org. #comments.a tweet

join the conversation -- like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. elections014 midterm just a week and a half away, our campaign debate coverage continues. today is 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, live coverage of the new york 23rd district debate with congressman tom reed and martha robertson and live at 8:00, the i was fourth district debate between congressman steve king and jim mowrer. at 9:00, and a great call and even jenkins -- friday night, new hampshire senator debate between senator jeanne shaheen and former massachusetts senator scott brown. at 9:00, the only debate in the oregon senate race with jeff merkley and monica wehby. then the louisiana u.s. house debate's fifth district.

c-span campaign 2014, more than 100 debates for the control of congress. " continues. ournal host: we are joined now by ofbert graboyes o george mason university mercatus center and ron pollack of families usa. howdy think the health care issue has played? has it played the way you have expected it would? guest: we are seeing a reduction in how health care is being discussed in the election. the affordable care act obviously has been controversial , but one of the things that i think is very encouraging is that you are seeing a whole lot less in terms of people talking about repealing the affordable care act, and probably that is because the surveys all show

that the majority of americans, irrespective of whether they like or dislike the affordable care act, think either it should be retained or somewhat modified. and we are seeing republicans who happen critical of the affordable care act doing some remarkable things. for example, you have nine republican governors who have approved the expansion of the medicare act, so that a significant on you even have mitch mcconnell, senate minority leader, say the other day that key aspect of the program in his home state of kentucky are working very well, and he would want to retain them. so i think we are seeing a reduction in some of the rhetoric. to keepe those who want on talking about president obama this or president obama that, often obamacare is part of a litany, but i think that we are really turned a corner with so many people who have gained

health coverage as a result of the affordable care act. it is not exactly a popular thing to say i'm going to take that away. host: bob graboyes, same question. guest: sure, one of the great things at my job as i do policy, not politics. i will talk more about the policy. at times we have been on the same side on some things, and on the other side -- i would not say we haven't turned the corner on obamacare, i would say we are in the eye of the storm. there are a number of temporary provisions, delays, mandates, the subsidies going to the insurers that are delaying when the real turbulence starts. the real problems start in 2017. i just produced a study out of mercatus called fortress and

frontier in american health care commented takes a different tack. it says we have been pursuing the wrong goal in health care. online for 70 years, we have been arguing about how many people have an insurance card in their wallet. really what i would like to see is for us to change the whole goal of health care discussion produce better health for more people at lower cost year after year after year? i don't think either side is really making that argument. host: as we are having that discussion, we want our viewers to call in. our phone numbers in this segment, republicans can call host: we will leave those numbers on the screen for a bit. phone lines are open.

this week, you like in the over healthttles care to world war i french style warfare. what did you mean by that? guest: go back to just the post-world war ii era, you had a very bitter and partisan divide. it has not moved all that much. in 2010, the affordable care act past, and the trenches move this way a little bit. the 2010 midterms moved it back a few feet, but basically you still have two sides entirely at all is with one another. they are both missing what i think is the real key to making better health, which is innovation. to make health care as dynamic and innovative as information technology has been in the past 25 years, and it hasn't been. the great thing is i travel all over the country giving talks on this, and i can make that point in front of audiences who are right-wing, left-wing, center, all over the place, and i guess

miles and e-mails afterwards saying i like that. to me it is a lot more fun than being in the trenches. host: ron pollack. guest: i like inclusiveness, and as bob knows, we have tried to bring a lot of strange bedfellows together. we have brought folks on the right and left together to say health reform is needed. we at families usa -- we join together. pharma, the insurance agencies, some of the consumer agency saying we need health reform. we have made some remarkable progress. one of the things that is extraordinary, gallup has been surveys about how many people have coverage and don't have coverage, and there has been remarkable success by the affordable care act. , 18% of thef 2013

american population did not have health care coverage. after the first enrollment period ended, it got down to 13.4%, so one out of four people who were uninsured before now have health care coverage. that is extraordinary. when we started this effort, there were 48 million people in the united states who did not have health insurance, so we need to bring them under the tent. obviously you cannot talk about quality of care or the cost of care if you are uninsured and you can't get any care. we are making progress on that, it isere bob i think absolutely correct is now our agenda as more and more people gain coverage, we still have a lot to do -- there are 23 states to have not expanded medicaid for the poor -- but as we are making progress on that, it means we moved to a new frontier, and the new frontier is to deal with cost and to deal with quality, and i think ultimately this is an agenda

that democrats and republicans can come together on. graboyes, would you agree? guest: absolutely. if we talk a little more, we will find a few differences of opinions there. i would say at least 50%, maybe more, of the favorable e-mails i get out of the blue, from -- are come from people who out of the political left, some of them i don't even know where they are, but it is a question of -- how do you get the cost down? what do we end up in health care? the problem is as i see it, there is a tendency -- and i am afraid we will see that when a new congress convenes -- are you going to have another debate over how do we distribute today's modes of health care rather than how do we create and develop and innovate host: are we far enough away

from the divisive debates over health care? i'm not sure it is going to make that much difference who is controlling the senate. the problem with obama care is that it went for everything. the problem with repealing is that it goes for everything. where you can find commonalities is an smaller places. rather than being in the trenches, go after 10,000 islands. , a variety of

aspects where you can get coalitions, but not to try the whole thing into one giant law. guest: it is important to understand while the affordable care act made a huge leap forward, it has started the process in a significant way in trying to improve the quality of care and to deal with health care costs. , we arepect to quality investing much more resources in finding out what clinical approaches are most effective with respect to different health problems. with respect to cost, we now have a competitive system with lots more private health plans competing with one another. i do think we are going to see some bollocks votes in the next congress. the tea party is not going to give up and saying, we have got

to repeal obama care. republicans are probably going to have a bunch of symbolic votes about repealing the affordable care act. i think there are some things with her will be movement area d. what is going to happen to children's health care? insuranceen's health program was created by orrin , to reallyed kennedy different folks who came together in a bipartisan fashion. the funding expires at the end of september 2015. i believe that we will see bipartisanship. i'm very encouraged by comments .eing made by the staff upton, the fred

chairman of the house energy and commerce committee. i think we are going to try to work together. will be really interesting. those two members join together wyden.nry waxman and ron letter to all governors across the country asking for their recommendations about what to do about the children's health insurance. i think we will see bipartisanship with respect to how doctors are paid under medicaid. there has to be some change in the current format. i think there are opportunities for relatively small matters, but very important matters. and i think that will create a good atmosphere for dealing with the bigger issues. host: as we talk about what is next for health care and what is on the horizon, we definitely

want to hear from viewers. republicans, democrats, independents. let's start on the phone with thomas from florida. caller: hello. is i don't think the affordable care act went far enough. the insurance companies are just going to play games like they are doing right now with deductibles. it has to go farther. i don't think it is going to have any effect in 2014. in 2016, when miss clinton is elected president, we will see what happens then because the way it is now, it is helping a few.

if thed help a whole lot insurance companies had to truly come up with a fair price. guest: thanks so much for your thoughtful question. i won't get into the politics of it, but i appreciate what you are talking about. i can agree with some of what you say. .e are missing real competition , if you want to think about how health care is now, we have a guy tied to the railroad tracks. if you are just going to talk about coverage and insurance, you are talking about untying his left leg. that does not fix the problem. deeper and more fundamental problems that predated the affordable care act.

computerse is where were in 1965. everything was million-dollar mainframes and you made slight changes. you need to get the bill gates process that suddenly puts computers and smartphones into everyone's hands. those technologies are coming in the next 5-10 years in medicine. the big question is whether we in america are going to be able to innovate. i'm afraid most of that is going to be top-down. if it had been up to the u.s. government or the big corporations, you never would have got the smartphones. host: is there room for innovation? guest: certainly there is. supported the so-called public option. i supported that as well.

it did not make it into the legislation. is we areappened seeing far greater competition because we have more and more plans coming in. that is how you help to get costs down. when you have different competitors seeking to get different customers, they are going to have to provide greater value. the affordable care act, like any piece of legislation, is not perfect. it is a historic piece of legislation, but we have some improvements that i think need to be made. i would like to see the public option. meanwhile, i think we will make bunch -- much bigger steps in the direction of securing that we are paying for quality of care rather than quantity of services. host: al is in arkansas. on the republican line.

since you and family usa compensation to support the health care law, you're hardly impartial, aren't you? on medicare is no longer receiving pain management because she is a two-time cancer survivor because they cut medicare funding. she is now bedridden even though i'm being told that there had been no cuts to medicare benefits which is a blasted live. i would like to explain -- you to explain that to me please. a zerowe have received dollars from the obama administration. is a national organization for health care consumers. we have pushed really hard over 32 years for health care reform. we joined with folks across the aisle.

we had some rather strange bedfellows work together to try health reform had in the hospital industry, physician groups, business organizations, and lots of consumer organizations. moneye not received any from the administration, either directly or indirectly with respect to. , we have seen some significant improvements with medicare. the most significant one relates to prescription medicines. president bush was able to get the congress to adopt medicare part d, the prescription benefit program.

it had this thing called a doughnut hole. it was a big gap in coverage after people would receive some coverage through medicare for their prescription medicines -- all of a sudden it was stopped and the next dollars people had to pay totally out-of-pocket. for a lot of seniors and people with disabilities who depend on medicare as their lifeline, they could not get prescription medicines. the affordable care act shrinks the doughnut hole and eliminates it ultimately. it means that seniors will have much more affordable access to prescription medicine. host: a comment from davy .rockett on twitter we need more health care and competition. good morning, dave. the health care, i was

born with epilepsy. [indiscernible] epilepsy. with health care was good. no transition has been made because we had coverage. [indiscernible] [no audio] he was somebody who seem to like his coverage before the health care law was implemented. there were lots of wonderful things about the american health care system before. slipnk we are beginning to in being a leader and on some

surprising countries. , we can now do some miraculous things we never dreamed of doing a while back. we are going to have to change the systems. ,f i were to start somewhere looking into the way the fda is structured. it takes far too long to get the drugs, new devices through. sometime in the next 5-20 years, to be ablehe verge to put a new heart, a new liver, a new kidney so we don't rely on donors and worry about rejection. fears that we will drag our heels through 20th century regulatory mechanism rather than rejuvenate it.

by the way, the european union is doing better than we are with that respect. it is their drug approval process. even places like india are beginning to do amazing things. caller,ople like the who may have liked their health care plans before, are there going to be more planned cancellations coming? some of those extensions are coming to an end. dave may very well be one of the many individuals in the united states who got their health coverage through their employer. that is the predominant way that most people have health coverage. one of the things that is quite is with each passing

year because of the high costs of health care, employers are saying we cannot sustain that, so you see employers either dropping coverage or you see them increase the cost that their workers have to bear. workers are paying more in terms of deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs. that is something that preceded the affordable care act. with the affordable care act , for those who are losing or employer-sponsored coverage, now there is an opportunity to gain coverage through the private marketplace. as employers have continued to drop coverage, you see some companies like walmart has just dropped coverage for a whole bunch of its workers, their need to be alternatives for people.

if your employer continues to provide coverage, then you can stay in that coverage. the affordable care act is not going to affect that. host: in terms of the impact of some of those issues, politico has a story from last weekend. "obamacare october surprise? " the story notes that the attacks could give the impression that the health care law is causing premiums to go through the roof around the country. haveality, most states premiums arriving at about the normal rate for health insurance throughout the country and in some places they are going down. that story is from earlier this month in "politico." ted is in new hampshire on the independent line.

caller: good morning. my question is for the people that are on medicare. i have a situation and i have known quite a few who have had quite a few situations with the dental. i feel that medicare should be covering dental procedures, especially extraction. i know a lot of people that are on fixed incomes, including myself, that cannot afford these thousand dollar extraction fees. if you don't get some kind of coverage with that, you end up paying a dime now or a dollar later in the emergency room. i feel very strongly about that because there are these patients and people get older and they cannot afford it and their bodies are more fragile and this is a very serious thing that needs to be dealt with.

i can't speak directly to dental itself, but let me talk about the costs on medicare. it is a great question. a couple of years ago, i saw a urologist from atlanta speaking about a patient with a bladder problem and there were two possible remedies, one cost $60,000 in one cost $2000. for her patient, for medical reasons, the $2000 procedure was superior. medicaid told her we will not pay the $2000. we will only pay for the $60,000. for one person, that is $58,000 that medicare could have used to put more toward the things you are talking about. when congress gets back, rather than tackle the entirety of medicare, which is overwhelming,

may be it is a good idea if they look for a whole bunch of individual pieces that are problematic like that. right.ted is absolutely is probably the next frontier in terms of coverage. it doesn't just affect seniors. it obviously does affect seniors, but it affects children and middle-aged folks. we have made some progress on the children's side. under the affordable care act, is nowic dental coverage a required service. , it so, for many children still is not being provided adequately because you don't have to get your dental coverage through a health plan, you can get it through a separate dental plan and that means you pay more

in premiums and out-of-pocket costs. i think the new frontier is to make sure that dental care is provided for people of all ages. if you go to any health fair, which occur across the country, what you will find is the predominant thing that people come to those health fairs for is for extraction of their teeth because they have not had dental care. i am very hopeful that one of the next steps we make with respect to health care is to make sure that dental care is included as part of the coverage, whether it is for medicare beneficiaries, whether it is for the children or middle-aged folks. right now, we have somewhat a shortage of dentists and the country. coverage, we have to make sure that people get coverage and care. one of the things people are trying to make sure happen is

that alternative providers like dental therapists can provide care. these are well-trained people. i have seen the training of people in alaska, where this has been pioneered. i think we are going to need more of those alternative providers so that as more and more people get coverage, they actually can get care because there are not dentists in their communities. host: a comment from c-span democrat on twitter. as long as there are insurance companies manipulating the health care market, we will never see progress. is waiting in long beach island, new jersey. caller: good morning. comment is for mr. pollock. just about a year ago, i received a letter announcing to me that my medicare advantage

byn was being discontinued the major insurance company blue cross blue shield in new jersey. i was very happy with the medicare advantage plan that i had. i found that it would not be continued and i had to scramble and go through the drama through three months of trying to find somebody who would cover me for which i would pay. plan that was discontinued was an individual plan, it was not a group plan. tripledum has more than through the plan that i have chosen that i did successfully get in january 2014. by the way, i have been diagnosed with a chronic condition. the drama of that as a result of the affordable care act was most

traumatic. i don't understand why they could not have been a total grandfathering of those plans with which people were happy, with which they could use a doctor of their choice, and that they had to be forced into an uncomfortable arrangement. plan that would cover them. mailbox is full of huckster literature trying to convince me that i should change my plan for 2015. guest: i can't speak to the particular market in new jersey. is thatan say however if you take a look at what has happened with respect to medicare, we have seen a significant growth, now about 30% of those in medicare are in the medicare advantage program.

to private coverage through the medicare program, it has grown and the premiums have actually been fairly moderate. he wanted a complete grandfathering of all plans. why did that on happen? i'm sure his republican colleagues would say, we are not going to require businesses to participate in the medicare program. i don't think you can tell a particular company that it has to enter the market or it cannot leave the market. that are decisions left for each of the companies to decide on their own. i don't think we are likely to see a change where someone is grandfathered into a particular company. but because of the proliferation and theare advantage

larger portion of those people in the medicare program, in most areas there will be plenty of opportunities to find a good alternative that will serve people at an affordable price. host: john is on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: i have one comment and one question. your feedback would be great. the comment has to do with emergency room care. canle who are uninsured always go into emergency room's as i has to -- or somebody has where somebody has to treat them you still get filled for that -- them. you still get billed for that.

do with the has to pricing of services and hospitals. one of the things that has to change is that you never know what the real prices are because hospitals charge different amounts to people who are andred versus uninsured they charge different amounts based on who is ensuring you -- you for the same service. i'm talking about what the actual bill is. the free market cannot work. you cannot shop around when you have no idea what the costs are ahead of time. guest: fantastic comments and questions. first of all, the emergency room.

the total cost of the uninsured is about 2.5%ooms of the cost of american medicine. let's think about before obamacare. if you were able to get rid of , that would get costs back down to about two where they were in july 2014. it is not trivial, but it is not a huge amount. that was somewhat overstated, but you hit it out of the park on the hospital one. i could spend an hour complaining about insurers. healthre going to fix care, we need to do serious changes in the way hospitals are ,aid, hospitals are structured

and that is going to take changes in the laws, the regulations. a lot of those are going to have to take place at the state level. there needs to below to slay make sure competition does not occur. legislation that makes sure that competition does not a coccur. hospitals are being enabled to have these fake prices. host: do you think we will ever get to a place where a patient can walk in and see a price list ? the oklahoma surgery center has every price posted online. i teach at a couple of universities, my students are

doctors. some of them do the same surgical procedures and were stunned. lowerices were so much than where they were practicing. i wish we had transparency in pricing. people are not entitled to get care in the emergency rooms except under certain circumstances. if you are at immediate risk of life or lamb, federal law says that a hospital has to treat you. under other circumstances or when you get stabilized from some life-threatening problem, the hospital does not need to treat you. however, many hospitals do. when they serve a low income person without health insurance, the hospital cannot eat those costs. they will go out of business. what happens?

quite naturally, when those of us who are insured go to the hospital, we actually pay a hidden surcharge to pick up the cost of those people who got care who could not pay for it. before the affordable care act was passed, we released a study that looked at what is the impact on premiums for insured people that pay simply for the costs of those who are uninsured? what we learned is that for averageoverage, the surcharge on her premiums was over $1000 to pay for the uninsured. as more people gain health care coverage through the affordable care act, it means that cost shifts to people who has insurance is being reduced. obviously less today because we are making such progress.

one of the things that the caller said is absolutely correct. we have different prices depending on who the payer is. if you have certain insurance, you pay one amount. if you are uninsured, your charges higher. it is very different from one payer to the other and we have preciously low transparency. host: william is in pennsylvania on her independent line. caller: good morning. i want to ask a couple questions. my daughter just lost her health benefits. and shelly found a plan has some brain problems. doubled and now she

overhead, at a $6,000 deductible. and sheed me crying said, i thought this was going to be a good thing, i'm all for it. when i hear people talking about lawrtisanship, this whole was passed only by the democrats . the republicans did not vote for it. we have a president who has us in a war in libya, he's got us back into a war with iraq. debtcountry is going into at the tune of about $2 million per minute. how anybody is going to figure out how we are going to pay for s my in the future boggle mind.

nancy pelosi we have to pass it to see what's in it. then i remind myself that it was just the democrats who did this to us. it makes me mad. guest: sorry for your daughter's troubles. you raise a great point on the premiums. an awful lot of people are seeing their premiums shoot up. aren't, the costs of care are not going down. they are going up as rapidly as ever, if not more so. i expect that they will continue you taketially after the duct tape off that is holding this legislation together. to the extent that the policies are subsidized, somebody is paying for those. it may not be the person paying for your premiums or deductibles

, but the money is coming from the federal government, which means it has to come in three ways. they either have to raise taxes, borrow it from overseas, or cut other services. for me, the most important thing is to not focus so much on rear ranging the furniture of who is covered on which procedures, but how do we do for health care what steve jobs and bill gates did for the information technology industry? get the costs plummeting. william raises a very important question. those people like a starter who had pre-existing health conditions. one of the things that the affordable care act did that was long overdue is that it said that insurers cannot deny coverage to someone due to a pre-existing condition. they cannot charge a discriminatory premium to the

person because of health status. they can't charge a discriminatory premium based on gender. women typically paid quite a bit more than men did. that has changed. is thatll is a problem we still have pretty high deductibles and a lot of policies. people buy insurance, but they have to pay the deductible before they get care. one of the things i'm hopeful we will be changing over time is making sure that there are certain key services that people can get without regard to the deductible. preventive care is provided without a deductible. i hope there are more services that are included without a deductible. will beetition, there plans that his dot or get with lower deductibles. host: let's go to washington dc.

gina is calling on the independent line. caller: good morning. very interesting conversation. i certainly want to make a comment and have one question. all of the talk about republicans against obamacare and the democrats taking some steps towards spearheading to the future, i think that the insurance industry itself for 40-50 years was a monopoly at some point and competitively speaking, we have to break that down. obamacare see that has sort of played to this giant conglomerate. we need to start educating people all the way through that it is not obamacare that has made a mess, it is the way the insurance industry really came to be.

i work for a major corporation and the technology. i'm 60 years old now. i've been away from the workplace for five years. individuals from 55 to 65 don't have good coverage. i got picked up by a decent health market and now i can thanksy breathe better to obamacare. i'm all for preventive care and i'm a very healthy 60-year-old. i really work at it. i think blaming a particular party or president, that is not even remotely true, it is what we need to do is a country to put people into the right track of health. it is always about money, it is a was about premiums. it is really not about that. host: on the problems of the

structure of the insurance industry and these issues that predate the affordable care act. guest: absolutely. that with the foundation of blue cross blue shield in the 1920's. it created a strange product. it needs to be fixed very much. on the other hand, for all the problems that the insurers cause , they are somewhat the messengers. are that weroblems have a regulatory structure that is outdated. we need a new one. it is slowing down the development of new and less expensive and better acting drugs and devices. the medicare reimbursement system which is updated bit in

is an illogical mess. until we fix that internal working, which in turn will fix the internal workings of the hospitals, we don't get out of there. discussing who has an insurance card and how do you divvy it up is not going to fix the deeper problems. host: if you are interested in reading the studies, you can go to the website. fill in pittsburgh, pennsylvania. the republican line. calling because i'm seeing the aca imposing an immense expense on society without any real way of dealing with the cost itself.

this is a fantastic review of the kinds of things that would reduce the cost of health care which is what we should of done in the first place. the complainth that 43 million people are without insurance. many are the young indestructible's who didn't want insurance under now being forced to have it to pay for the subsidies. the cost of the system itself continues to rise. we will be bankrupted by it unless we take the approach that has been advocated on the show, which is looking at the system itself and making it as efficient and cost-effective as possible. i wonder if anybody wants to say anything about that. guest: let me try to pull the last two comments and questions

together. comments as the insurance industry has too much of a monopoly control. one of that has changed significantly as a result of correct, this is a very conservative notion that the democrats at cap, namely that we will have competition in the private sector. we will have more companies competing with one another. that is what these marketplaces do. there has been moderation in cost increases. there are a number of factors for that. some have to do with the economy, some have to do with the affordable care act. as more and more insurers decide that they are going to sell their coverage in these marketplaces and we have greater competition, that is going to

help to get costs down. thankfully, we have seen a deceleration of health care costs. not a reduction, but a deceleration. the aca has been helpful in that direction. host: our last call from rob in pennsylvania. question is there is a case in maine regarding public-sector unions being able to purchase drugs from overseas. if the main supreme court decides that that is their right , what effect is that going to have on patients, medicare, big pharma, and the affordable care act? guest: the comment he is making is very interesting. are fartion medicines more expensive in the united states than they are in any country.

do the innovation, but the costs are much higher. getre going to see this much worse because there are the so-called specialty drugs, you have heard about this drug for costs $84,000at and the pills are going to cost over $100,000. we have got to make sure that there is greater equity in terms of pricing for people in the than the prices that are much lower in europe and elsewhere. i'm sure that pharma is not going to like that, that people can buy drugs from overseas or from canada. a lot of people go to canada to buy their drugs, some people go to mexico. we should make sure that prices in the united states are not higher than they are elsewhere,

particularly for companies that are based in the united states and have done innovation here and yet people in our nation are paying a whole lot more. to go back to my i.t. analogy, if we had spent the last 50 years trying to figure out how to get the price of million dollar inside mainframes down, it would not have mattered how much competition you introduced in the market. we needed pcs, smartphones, and they were not handed down from above. part of the international competition will help us in that respect. we appreciate your time. up next, we open our phones to you to talk about the issue of the economy and how it is playing in the 2014 election and what you want to hear from

candidates when it comes to job creation. first, an update from c-span radio. >> the secret service said that the 20 three-year-old maryland man who climbed over the white house fence last night has been charged with felonies for assaulting a police dog and making threats. custody of the u.s. marshal service. he has been charged with four misdemeanor counts of resisting arrest and unlawful entry. he was unarmed when he was arrested. the president was at the white house at the time of the incident. korean legal experts say the u.s. government must make a theal apology to secure freedom of the two other americans who remain imprisoned did north korea. after the release of jeffrey well who had been detained for six months for leaving a bible and a nightclub.

that eight inds 10 americans are in favor of sending aid to regions hardest hit by ebola as far as developing vaccines and treatments. alsoout of 10 in a poll favor tighter screening of people entering the u.s. from the outbreak sounds. -- zones. most americans have some confidence that ebola can be prevented in this country, but they are more skeptical of their local hospitals. c-span's 2015 student cam competition is underway. the competition will award 150 prizes totaling $100,000. create a 5-7 minute documentary on the subject, the three branches and you. they must be submitted by january 20, 2015.

grab a camera and get started today. be part of c-span's campaign 2014 coverage. follow us on twitter and like us on facebook. get debate previews from our politics team. c-span is bringing you over 100 debates. the battle for control of congress, stay in touch and engage by following us on .witter, liking us on facebook "washington journal" continues. leading up to election day, we want to hear about issues that are important to you in the 2014 election. today we are talking about the economy and what you want to hear from candidates when it comes to job creation. we have the last 45 minutes

today on "washington journal" to open up phones to you. we will get to as many of your comments as we can in this last 45 minutes. we kick off the discussion on the economy with a story from "the washington post." the bottom 90% are poorer today than they were in 1987. once upon a time, the american economy worked for everybody. the story notes that it is not a story about the top 1% away from everybody else. top 0.01%. the

wealth pie hashe increased by 8.6 percentage points. the bottom 99% has seen their wealth share fall 18%. we want to hear about the economic issues from you in the last 45 minutes. we also want to know what you want to hear from candidates when it comes to job creation. that is the topic of a recent debate in kansas between the republican senate candidates. pat roberts and his independent challenger greg gorman. here is the exchange. [video clip] we havenk the challenge had with this recovery is while we are creating jobs, we are not necessarily creating middle-class jobs.

i've talked a lot about how we get this country started again. we've got to get washington back into the business of solving problems. i can't tell you how many business owners i have talked to who have said we need to deal with health care affordability. if we could have an honest and meaningful discussion about how to address health care affordability and change the incentives to drive cost out of the system, we would be in a far better position to create jobs and see wages grow. toor people tell me we need deal with immigration reform. a number of businesses said they would add jobs if we simply got congress and the president to get their act together and pass some sort of immigration reform that gives them certainty. we also had to give the government out of the way. that is why we put forward our small business plan to help get regulations out of the system and help businesses grow again. into someoing to go

time back on one of the other questions. endorsement with the national federation of independent business. they represent all the small businesses up and down the state and also the chamber of commerce. the chamber of commerce takes a look at your record and we also meet with all of the chambers in kansas and they give those issues to the national chamber. we'll drop growth, less regulation, less spending, providing certainty the best that we can. me. endorse host: that was the kansas senator debate early this month. we are asking about job creation and economic issues. which party is better on the in campaign 2014? what do you want to hear? john is up first in pikesville, maryland. good morning.

are you with us? go ahead. we will go to ashley waiting in washington dc. caller: good morning. regarding theion future of millennial's, the class of 2015. we see if very low percentage of job opportunities given the fact did most large corporations not utilize the job stimulus funding properly and the job credits. what would a candidate do today to set a new standard or a new type of era of jobs? kids are living at home until they are 28 years old. i don't see a future for us.

plans for't see any the younger generation in 15 years. host: what would help you? caller: i would like to see more of the corporations, instead of hiring interns, we need to have more programs or job invites like a co-op, like it used to be in the 1970's. were corporations were going to colleges and recruiting and putting people to work. instead of agram four-year college that gives specific skills. are calling in on the independent line. which party do you think is better on this issue that you are concerned about? caller: i think the democrats are better because republicans focus on the wall street and the higher 1% of the world.

i think democrats have really programstake a stab at and are trying to be more in tune. i think we need to start in realistic terms. we are not going to be millionaires right out of college. we are going to be attaining a job that gives us minimum wage and we hope it will be more than $10 or we are going to be at $50,000 to $100,000 per year. i would like to see a higher wage. we are not getting that. we'll start at the bottom grid. how we cant see really get out of the middle todayand move forward from where we were 10 years ago. we don't understand the

equation. we want to see something that is going to put us at a higher range. that seems to be depressed by something that is much bigger. i'm not sure why. host: that is ashley from washington dc. let's go to charles calling in from raleigh, north carolina. good morning. charles, you are with us. edward is up next in manchester, connecticut on our independent line. caller: good morning. idea on the economy and it might be connected like the food chain is connected or dominoes, that sort of thing as far as problems being fixed goes. when we rely on our

representatives to represent us for the reasons that we vote the men and they don't get those things done, how do we fix that system? we don't know which one is truly representing us. the ones that do are outnumbered by the ones that don't. we know why. that just as we pick jurors in court randomly to decide whether a person is guilty or not guilty, we should republican,k democrat, and independent voting americans in each and every one of our states, let them sit in the seats of the representatives and the white house and keep the representatives in the back room for this stages and house speaker is and let them convince us for our votes to pass these things that affect our lives and the direction that our nation goes.

they are supposed to be representing us, not deceiving us. manchester forom his proposal on how to change the government. we are asking our viewers which party is better on the economy, the economy is the issue of several debates, the top issue in many polls about the 2014 election. some economic news out of the associated press. less jobless aid applications rise to 283,000. jobless applications rose despite the historically low levels. it suggests hiring is gaining steam. some of the economic news out

this morning. let's go to charles and charlotte, north carolina on the republican line. caller: good morning. thank you for all that c-span does. i think the american dream is still alive and well in america. we are the country that everybody wants to come to an risk their lives to come to. i was reading a book by charles murray called "coming apart." the wealthy and successful follow certain patterns in their life. people who wind up on public assistance do not follow those patterns. that includes not waiting to get education, marriage, or to have children out of wedlock. of all african-american children born today are born to a single parent. they are behind the eight ball before that even get started. look at people's habits.

look at the bottom of the income structure. it is the habits that people follow that cause them to be on the bottom. america has not changed, people have changed, their work ethic has changed. would invest in themselves in their education and wait and get married to have a partner and work forward, you can still be super successful in america. economicare discussing issues in the 2014 election. taxes are always a key issue of debate. it came up in the debate in iowa between bruce braley, running for the senate seat, and jodi ernst. here is a bit of their discussion. [video clip] >> i would like to see our iowans keeping more tax dollars and their own pockets so they can pay for their children's

college educations, so they can pay their bills, so they can buy a home, all of those wonderful things we would like to see iowans do. i implemented one of the largest tax cuts with the leadership of governor terry branstad. it was the largest tax cut and we are saving iowans $4.4 billion over the next 10 years. this is just one part of our greater economic plan, which also includes reducing job killing rules and regulations and balancing the budget, which we have done in iowa for the past four years. >> would you consider raising a cap on the social security as a tax? >> it is an option that can be discussed, but we have better options we can look at. >> senator ernst may think there are better options, but you gave her the opportunity to explain them and she did not. the things that i will tell you is that right now one of our

biggest problems as we provide tax incentives to corporations that ship u.s. jobs overseas. i would eliminate those tax thattives and that would cause corporations to go up. can i was -- most iowans accept that reality. they want a tax system that is fair for people in the working class. [indiscernible] host: that was -- we are asking our last half hour or so which party is better on the economy in the final 12 days of the 2014 campaign. we want to hear your thoughts this morning. steve, oklahoma city, on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. kind just wondering, it is of tied into the economy because health care is so expensive for us. compared to other countries. i just wanted to make sure, and

make clear that the aca -- because there was some confusion in the last segment. basically the republican model for health care, and it was designed to keep the insurance crooks in the game. if you are under 55 and you want at 70, keepent voting for the repugnance. democrats do a much better job on the economy because they want equitable -- keep voting for the republicans. democrats do a much better job on the economy because they want it equitable. for republicans you hope great jobs when you keep voting for the wealthy. how is that working out for you? sid from clark, new jersey. good morning. are you with us? line foro to our

republicans. joe is in cleveland, ohio, this morning. good morning, you are on the "washington journal." caller: i would like to take a different tract here. the differentthat races in our country have no idea what is going on, republican or democrat. but the real issue is that the has turnedte woman against what society has given them up to this point. look around you and all the cities that were built, all the appliances, the standard of living that has been raised. they talk about the war on women, but the war has been malest white caucasian that have created the gift of wealth in america. if you keep hearing that down, you will end up with sherpas on your head and nothing in your refrigerator. the real war is between the white dresses and the -- whiteive

progressives and the conservative population in america, the moral population. look at all the things the progressives want to get rid of -- being in church. 55 million babies that have been killed. the national organization of women that have condemned men in this country. that is the real war. it is not between the races, it is between white people that are liberal progressives and conservatives. if we do not wake up to that war in our own society, no group will make out in this country any longer. host: william in detroit, michigan, on our line for independents. we go to joe in cleveland, ohio, on our line for republicans. caller: hello? host: go ahead. caller: this is william. i don't want to blow through this opportunity. i have been through this once before. your guest got me so boiling mad

. i blew that opportunity. i thought about this for about 40 years now i have investigated this. this is what i found out. statisticknows the that most new jobs are created by small businesses. that is a statistic you can find, that you can justify. but what do small businesses need to thrive? they need customers. who are the customers for these small businesses? the wealthy employees of big businesses. they are the big businesses themselves in many cases. there are lots of different kinds of education. i attended universities in three different states. i have been all over the country, ran my own business several times. i have worked for small businesses, and i came to michigan because i wanted

obamacare. we did not call it obamacare back then, but we called it health insurance. , so i came tosion michigan and worked for an automobile company. this is what i have learned. a lot of the businesses around here exist to sell to the automobile companies, in particular the large businesses. the other small businesses survive on their customers, people like me, who are bringing down a uaw paycheck. people like me who work 12 hours a week and make lots of money as fast as we can -- and spend it as fast as we can because we have to get back to work. we spend it and other people make money, and they spend it and other people make money, and america works well that way. host: there is a close senate race happening in your state. where do you come down in the senate race? independent an

because it goes back and forth over time. for 30 years the good guys are republican, now the good guys are democrats. 30 years from now, hopefully, the democrats will be in power and they will have been in power that they will need to be thrown out because they are corrupt. partynow the republican has been taken over by a very small group of people. it is not my dad's republican party at all. this small group of people is -- well, itfeating is all about reducing the taxes for people in the coal industry and the oil industry, and it is all about not having to pay the true cost if you have an oil spill in the kalamazoo river or in the gulf of mexico. realdo not want to pay the cost. they want a profit and they do not want to pay the cost. it is a terrible thing. all that cultural war stuff is smokescreen. it is all about getting you to

fight each other when 90% of are on 99% of this, we the same side. up theilliam brings coal issue, a key issue in one of the most closely watched senate races this year, the one in kentucky. a couple of articles in "the washington post," one by dana milbank. "kentucky's grimes left in the cold, shows some fire." another story from "the washington post," george f will has a column about mitch mcconnell, the republican senate minority leader who alison lundergan grimes is trying to unseat in that kentucky race.

i also want to point out one other story, one of our callers brought up, retirement issues. this is the money section of "usa today." 1.7% richer year for employees." cost-of-living raise for social security recipients in starting in january, the social security administration announced wednesday. for the average retired person receiving social security, monthly payments would rise $22 28 from $1306.3 we are talking about economic issues. the question for you -- which party is better on the economy? let's go to david, waiting in

grand rapids, michigan, on our line for democrats. caller: good morning, everybody. you were saying since 1987 america's people have gotten poorer. tocomment is, are we blind who is in charge and who has been mainly in charge? the republicans. i do not understand how we cannot see what is right in front of our eyes. the republicans are all about old white guys. go back to roosevelt and how he that everybodya can have a chance. what watching a ken burns documentary -- he wanted to make it fair for everybody. get richve a chance to or state court, but let's make it fair across the board. the republicans do not do that. in grandt is david

rapids, michigan. susan is waiting in kingston, illinois. good morning. caller: i want to respond to one of your other callers about paying in school. i worry about the economy and money and stuff, and i am a republican, but i am ashamed to be this -- i am ashamed to be these days. a publico we have broadcasting system, which is great. republicansrainwash into voting for you. what scares me about money, talking about money, is the nrb wants donations from the people like public broadcasting. we have pbs, which is great, but what a mind controlling thing to try to get your vote. to respond to one of your other callers, my father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and great-great-grandfather are republicans. it is not there party anymore.

sorry. host: joe is waiting in greensboro, north carolina. good morning, joe. are you with us? go ahead. us, but we will continue talking about economic issues for the next 20 minutes or so here on "the washington journal here go government spending -- on "the washington journal ." arkansasclip from the senate debate where mark pryor is trying to keep his seat against republican challenger tom cotton. here are their thoughts on government spending. >> you know me and you know i am serious about this. closely, ands very we have to get spending under control. that is why i voted to cut spending by $4 trillion in the last three years. again, where i focus is on the

middle class and small businesses. where congressman cotton focuses is on the top tier wealthy. i do not think you build the economy from the billionaires down, i think you build it from the middle-class up. >> mr. cotton? >> over the last six years, if you make a living off assets like stocks or bonds, the 5% on top, you are doing ok. but if you make a living by working, if you labor as a means of putting food on the table, your incomes are down, to include arkansas. tend to climb 5% over the past six years. it is because mark pryor is a loyal rubberstamp of barack obama's failed economic policies. host: one of the more than 100 debates we have aired here on c-span ahead of the midterm elections. here is a story from "the theington examiner" about

big three networks. noting that the big three tv networks that breathlessly 2006 anti-bush election have practically ignores this year's anti-obama are expected to return full control of the hill to the gop. the last seven weeks of cbs, nbc, and abc news coverage, disparityx-one between the democratic election wave and the current election. the show has the -- abc's world news airs 36 stories on the midterms, including a weekly feature that then anchor charlie gibson promised would look at critical races around the country. we want to hear your thoughts on the midterm, specifically on economic issues and which party is better on the economy.

randy is waiting in iowa on our line for democrats. caller: my line of thought goes back a ways. it would have to begin with free-trade and nafta and cap the fta.nd cap what has been controlling our economy and has solidified our future is the unfunded mandates between 2002 and 2008 and the economic crash that conservatives left us through deregulation. that theyat debt, amassed, they are actually controlling the democratic side of the economy that said we have to stimulate the economy to get out of this recession. the republicans steadfastly gridlocked the congress and said we want austerity.

democrats havehe a better idea for economic development in america, and the republicans really could care less about their responsibility to america and creating jobs. they are about free trading and , and let theion poor people or the working poor, the minimum wage people fend for themselves. so the bruce braley, and got bless you. -- and god bless you. thank you for this forum. host: let's go to kentucky on our line for republicans where don is waiting. can you talk about the republican issues and how they are profiling the senate race there? think the senate race is going to be republicans. the republican party without a doubt has done more for this country than any party.

look at your history. you do not even have to go back as far as lincoln. let's go back as far as carter and reagan. you have people saying that carter is a better president than the president we have in office now. i am sorry, but i have to agree with them. are for theans working individual. look at your history. a lot of young people do not realize -- they did not grow up through reagan and carter. you want toller say vote for republicans, you will work until 70, so go ahead. well, i worked for 70 -- i worked until 70 and i did not mind. what do you do in hopkinsville, kentucky? caller: what do i do? i work in hospital

administration. talk about the employment situation in hopkinsville. caller: it is pretty good right now. we are at about 6%, 7%. host: don in hopkinsville, kentucky. which party is better on the economy, on job creation. tohave 10 or 15 minutes left get your thoughts and comments. let's go to tyler waiting on our line for independents from binghamton, new york. good morning, tyler. thank you for taking my call. there are a lot of things i would like to say. in response to your question of which party is better, i really think neither party is better. in all honesty, i would like to see the diminishing of political parties in general. that is how we create stagnation in our government. watched yourtently

program and all of your programs on c-span, because it is the most reliable source of information about the ongoing's of our government. see are equal votes on both sides come and nothing happens ever. it is disturbing to me that we cannot make progress in our government and we cannot get things past. how do you pick candidates in binghamton, new york? here.: i go to school i am at university. i am originally from long island. aretical representatives more difficult for me, although want toor people that create jobs, especially in binghamton. there is a large issue with unemployment and with financial instability. property been a lot of here. one of the issues i am concerned with is fracking. there is fracking heavily in

pennsylvania and they want to create fracking here. it creates jobs, but it also problems.vironmental although we do not deal with those issues, i understand my children will have them. i would much rather see money invested in long-term solutions, not temporary solutions to permanent problems. if i could make a plan regarding -- you mentioned government spending. i think about subsidies. subsidies in at this country, the things we subsidize most heavily are corn and then soy and then tobacco. what are corn and soy for? that is for feeding the animals. they do that naturally. they feed to a degree on grass and things like that. directly tobutes feeding into the pockets of people. a few more points are

waiting to chat about this question about which party is better on the economy, including john, who is waiting in brooklyn, new york, on our line for democrats. myler: thank you for taking call. i believe in the last five years that the democrats are better on as the energy far economy. i think they are focused on a more comprehensive energy economy. but i do believe our country needs to get away from old coal and hydrocarbon technology because we need to start more renewable and what jobs can be created with that, especially with wind and solar. especially for the future of our country, that is the better way to go. the other thing i want to mention that democrats are focusing on, is making sure that young people, that there is more education and skills training opportunities at the local colleges and the high school because all of these high-tech jobs the companies say they are are soling because there

many jobs on their website, that is a nice transition to these jobs by training and focusing on the young people. on that real quick, i spent many years in learning about the way that we make energy using call and fossil and things like that. that is old technology. that is technology of the past. we need to think of newer, more renewable for the future of our country. i really believe we are not making -- we try to pull energy out of a small little planet. the sun and renewable power are so much more available to us to make more environmentally friendly energy. a lot more jobs can be created with that. host: energy production in the united states, also the subject of the u.s. senate debate in montana earlier this week. danes, thees

republican, and his democratic challenger, amanda curtis. >> i was at the electric co-op in alaska, and they told me that the keystone pipeline is approved. those montana co-op customers will see no interest rate increase in the next 10 years. if the keystone pipeline is not approved, they will see an increase in rates of about 40%. the co-op provides electricity. that is how you help the middle class. people are living month-to-month, barely making it. we do it by creating jobs, make sure that energy prices are -- that energy prices are low. why are gas prices topping in this country, which is a big help to the middle-class? the saudi's see that the u.s. will be the biggest oil-producing country in the world. next year we will pass russia

and saudi arabia. that is not because of barack obama, it is in spite of barack obama. curtis?a just five minutes left. middle-class montana, asked yourself -- are you better off in the last two years since we have had congressman daines? we have spent -- we have sent more of the same to d.c. for millionaires, billionaires, and corporate interests. now you have heard it for yourself. the truth is i have rolled out a jobs plan that emphasizes small businesses as the back of our economy in the state and agriculture, which is hampered at every step of the process by corporations. toill work for all solutions all sectors of the economy, not just to the wealthiest individuals. with a few minutes left in

"the washington journal," i want to give answers -- to get answers. dave, good morning, on our line for republicans. caller: the country is not educated enough to take these jobs that are available to them. that is because of our public school system. they have dumbed down this country unbelievably so. we are not competitive with the rest of the world, and the rest of the world takes a better product and we do, and that is just a fact. we have to become more intelligent, more capable of producing a better product. right now we do have an ability to make our country -- the economy better if we invest in energy. that is oil, natural gas to look at north dakota and south dakota. it is booming there because of energy. that is easy to

produce, relatively speaking, to other products. you do not need that much education, and our country is not that well-educated. and ourvested in energy deliverers of energy and producers of energy like russia, we could make life more comfortable for the people in this country. host: i did not mean to cut you off. but the democratic party is always fighting against energy and the production of it. the environmentalists are a big problem with that. i suggest you vote republican, and then you will have people friendly to energy that will make jobs more available in that sector. host: a few more people are waiting to talk to us. david michigan -- david, michigan. dave is waiting in california. caller: i would like to say that

best in thee the jobs situation. they are for keeping jobs here and not sending them overseas. the republicans are for sending all the jobs out of the country. the only thing they are for is income, and lower minimum weight -- and lower income, lower minimum wage. the question on social security giving a little bit of a raise to people on social security -- how come they never talk about putting all the money they took out with social security and giving it to -- giving tax breaks to the rich? they never talk about the trillions of dollars they took out and using it for other things. how come they never talk about that? i would just like your opinion. want to get the of viewers around the country. , onrt is waiting in oregon

our line for republicans. caller: let me take my little world in oregon. theree the governor up who is opposed to a coal mine that wants to ship coal, environmentally safe. notis opinion, they should be putting it into effect. i am a free-market republican. it would help oregon tremendously. then we have jeff merkel who is running for senate there. he has voted 99% of the time nothingma and has done for jobs up here in the pacific northwest. people continue to vote for this guy. aboveemployment is way the national average. both of these individuals are doing nothing to help the

economy appear. is tone like everybody deaf to the free market and taking responsibility to where you are at in this world. wisconsin. jack is waiting on our line for republicans. neither democrat no republican party offers anything in the way of dynamic leadership. let's say the economy is a bar and field and you have those -- and you have two powerful horses pulling the plow. one is pulling west, one is pulling ease. you get no plowing done. the next thing i will talk about is a little bit of a problem solving. identifying the problem is the easy part of problem solving. what you need to do is to find

-- ok, i have got a problem. but now you have the hard part. why didn't my car start? what do i have to do to fix it. yell about all of the problems that we have, but we do not come forward with a plan, unattainable plan that actually goes to the matter of fixing the problems. host: in our last 30 seconds, what are i couple of solutions you have to fixing the problems? caller: i would focus on the fact that the government has grown way too large so that we cannot find competent managers to run the departments. we are suffering from incompetent management at the below the executive level. the executive has good intentions, but his staff is

bad. he does not have good problem-solving managers to regulate all the things they want to regulate. jack in wisconsin. check out our campaign 2014 website with information about , and you cantes view past debates. that is going to be our chauffeur today on thursday, on "washington journal -- our show for today on thursday, "washington journal." the event will feature david cohen, outlining the strategy to undermine the islamic state's financial foundation. hope you have a great thursday and we will see you tomorrow morning at 7:00 eastern, 4:00 a.m. pacific. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by