they taught us the importance of family and faith and community. they told us that, for us education should not be a goal but a value. we were eager to have that opportunity. a lot of us decided we would buckle down and take advantage of that opportunity. so my parents were able to live and see that my parents were able to live and see my brother ramon graduate from harvard law school. they saw my brother carlos become a federal district court judge, the first hispanic in the state.

my twin sister mary graduated from law school and was the first latina to serve on the bench in arizona and moved on to be nominated and serve on the 10th circuit. they saw me graduate from law school and ultimately serve in the white house. we have experienced the american dream firsthand and it is what has inspired me and motivated me to be at the helm of a great american institution, 47 years having been established to

create opportunities to break down barriers. so my parents are very special. we have lost my father but we still have my mother, she is very frail and is 91, we treasure her. my parents are very representative of our success because of the great example that they instilled in me and my brothers and sisters. my brother's son graduated from yale and is a trial attorney in the office of civil rights. his son, nick, is a firefighter

and his daughter, kelly. is a teacher who graduated from teach for america. she just got her masters from harvard. this is the american dream and in my family, we have had the fortunate privilege of experiencing that american dream. at the root of it is those values and the hard work and sacrifice that my parents really demonstrated and the importance of giving back. my mom taught us it is important to be compassionate. my dad taught us it is important to stand up and speak up. between the two of those things, public service has been an important component for my family. >> we cannot leave out martha. or rosemary. >> martha is the oldest. she is mentally challenged and has been an inspiration because while she does not have the capacity that the rest of us do,

she has been a great example because she managed to be personally responsible and that she held a job for over 30 years where she was able to contribute to the family economy and took three buses to get into her work and come back. rosemary, she has been doing a phenomenal job because while she was working in a bank for many years, when my mom was diagnosed with alzheimer's, she offered to step down from her job and to help manage both my mom and martha as we needed to care for them. so it is a remarkable story. every one of my siblings has, i think, are part of an incredible link in terms of the family bond that we share.

but i do not know anything different because i see those values replicated over and over again across our community. and what i see is that when given the opportunity, our community, like my family, is ready to step up and contribute. that can be a public service. as you know, the community has a long history of contributing. in military service, i have cousins and uncles. that is emblematic of the latino community, willing to give the ultimate sacrifice to defend and protect the country. we have made many contributions as a community. my family is emblematic of what we see through the community in terms of our potential to give back and contribute. >> i read a comment by your brother ramon who i gather is a lawyer in kansas city but was

the chairman of the board of la raza for how many years? >> three years. he introduced me to the work of the national council of la raza. >> when you hear the story of your family, whatever you are, that is an incredible group of people. he says that he attributes the success to scholarship, grants the war on poverty, the kansas city kansas school district, and the andrew carnegie funds. can you break that down? >> we were able to see that my dad worked hard and my mom worked hard. they contributed financially to create a stable home for us. but you cannot get to harvard law school, have four kids in college or law school -- >> in kansas?

>> my brother went to harvard but the rest of us were jayhawks. you cannot do that on your own you need help on the way. what my brother is referring to when he refers to the carnegie grant, we have one of the original carnegie libraries in our district, this mexican-american neighborhood in kansas city. we would not have had some of the opportunities had we not had access to that library and space to do our homework and be able to know we could have access to books and knowledge in addition to the kansas city kansas school system. we received a great education in that school system, we had great teachers who cared about

students. frankly, if it have not been for loans and grants, we would never have been able to make it through college. we needed the assistance and were beneficiaries in many ways. perhaps that is why we understand fundamentally where people need to have bridges in those gaps to get to advancing themselves and their families. >> what was the world like for you all in high school before you went to college? what did your dad do, what did your mom do? >> we grew up in a neighborhood in the argentine district. you would think that was a community of argentinians, no. it was argentine because it was a steel mining town, they mined steel there many years ago.

my dad worked at a steel plant. if you were a man providing for your family in the argentine district of kansas city, kansas, you worked the steel plant, the stock yard, or the railroad. in our community, that is where the men worked. my mom contributed to the community by taking care of kids. she helped, she would sew, take care of kids. make sure there was always some additional income coming into the family. my dad was the main breadwinner. he worked at a steel plant for 37 years. >> what did he do? >> he was a machine operator.

we talked about as kids seeing someone get up, putting on the heavy jacket, the steel toed boots, a construction hat. in the summer, it was really hot, and in the winter, it was cold. but we noticed that not once did we hear him complain. he knew this was a great opportunity to provide for his family and he was very responsible in showing up, doing his job, and making sure he provided. the example is something we carry with us. having someone that provides stability.

between he and my mom, they made sure we had what we needed. sometimes my dad would get laid off, and although we did not seek federal assistance, we had to rely on others. i remember the big blocks of orange cheese and powdered milk. sometimes you need the help to get you through difficult times. my dad was a proud dad and he never wanted to receive assistance, so he worked hard and would take over time to make sure he provided. in the 70's, times were tough with the recession. we made it through. at the time, you do not know when you do not have a lot of resources because you don't know anything different. >> how many worked?

>> as soon as we were old enough to work, we worked. but we went to school and in the summer, we took jobs when we were old enough. everyone was trying to contribute and it was a household that was always, you know, economically it was challenging but we always had a roof over our head and food on the table. it was a real point of pride when you can have that kind of stability. >> in your high school, how many hispanics were there? >> it was actually, because it was in the city, the kansas city kansas side of it, because there is kansas and missouri with the river separating it, we had, i would say at the time, 10%, 8%

were hispanic. probably 15% were african-american. mostly white. it was of the diverse schools in the area, in the kansas city kansas school district. in kansas, the rest of the schools were not as diverse. we grew up with a diverse population and played basketball alongside african americans, african-american girls and other latinos. and also a significant white population. we had a good cross mix of folk. i think our teachers were also a mix, mostly white. but we were fortunate at the time. teachers cared about students and work hard. i could list every one of my grade school teachers and middle

school teachers, they were that good and that invested. >> back away from where you are now. took the job in 2005. when did you work for al gore? >> when i first came to washington, d.c., i worked for a member of congress named jim slattery. a moderate democrat from kansas, eastern kansas, the third district at the time. it has been changed. that was right out of law school and jim slattery gave me opportunities to learn and understand the workings of capitol hill. i worked for him for seven years. from there, he served on the energy and commerce committee. bill richardson was a fellow

member of the committee. when president clinton was elected, i had not worked on his campaign, but they approached bill richardson and asked if he could recommend anybody. bill richardson, in his inimitable fashion, said that i will tell the white house to call you and you should talk to them. i did not know what they called and i interviewed and served in the clinton white house. i served in the office, becoming the only chief but deputy director for six years. it was in the last year that al gore asked me to serve as

campaign manager for his campaign. in 1999. >> here is video of you with bill clinton, talking about girls state. >> afterwards, the president answered questions about secret service agents. >> good morning and welcome to the white house. mr. president, girls nation president alana, and vice president jennifer hall, welcome to all of the senators. it is an honor to be here today to welcome you and introduce my boss, the president. before i do, i would like to share thoughts as a former girls nation senator representing kansas 21 years ago this summer. it seems like it was not too

long ago that i was in the rose garden, full of excitement at being in a historic place. i am glad that the tradition has -- of hosting the senators at the white house not changed. >> what do you remember about that? that was a long time ago. >> yes, that was some time ago. i remember being summoned, i think they actually wanted one of the cabinet members to introduce him at the event, and they were called off to something else and could not do it. someone had heard that i had been a girls nation representative and asked me to speak. it continues to be the greatest honor i have had, to serve in the white house and work with

president clinton. he gave me an opportunity to serve and learn. he knew that when he was bringing on many young people of color who have not had an opportunity in the white house. for me to have a chance to be in front of the podium with the presidential seal and introduce the president, i think about that young mexican-american girl growing up in kansas city, kansas, and my parents and how hard they worked in hoping we had a shot at opportunities. to be in a position to work in the white house and introduce the president of the united states and help advance his agenda on capitol hill, that was a great privilege and honor. i have never worked harder in my life, although i am being

tested. it is a great honor because you learn so much. not many people have the opportunity to see what happens in the white house, the behind the scene machinations, the confluence of issues that comes together and the pressure cooker environment that you are in in one of the most powerful places on this planet when it comes to policy and politics. it was a rare and incredible honor for me. >> let's go back to 2008 and show you in a different light. this was lou dobbs, he was at cnn. do you remember why there was a confrontation? >> in 2007, congress had made an

effort with senator kennedy and mccain to pass a bipartisan bill, and those negotiations were falling apart and there was a lot of high emotion on getting that effort to provide immigration reform done. and it was hanging in the balance in that year, 2007. i think we had seen it come apart. this is when we had two legitimate runs at getting immigration reforms done. >> let's watch this. >> i believe you -- >> you distort immigration, lou. >> you are not trying to level anything. >> you are part of a media elite, a corporate conglomerate. >> i could not agree with it more.

>> you embrace your title. i do not embrace the title you are given me. >> you are now attacking me. >> we are opening the door for opportunity. >> you are stepping over the line and are tearing apart the first amendment. >> not at all. free speech is one thing, hate speech is another thing. >> are you attacking him for hate speech? >> lou dobbs crossed a line by presenting himself as a journalist.

he was investing in opinion and repeated negative perceptions of hispanics and immigrants. as a journalist, you may have appreciation for this. it was in this time that we saw the media, the news media changing significantly. when lou dobbs, on cnn, which is supposed to be a a news program, projecting itself as a nonbiased program, was using that banner and yet creating this new genre of opinion journalism. and it is fine for lou dobbs to have that opinion, but he cannot project himself as nonbiased because we had done the research and seen he had actually demonstrated 70% of his news stories were on immigration and projected negative images of immigrants. it was clear he had crossed the

line when it came to journalism and was using latinos in his stories as scapegoats for why the immigration system was broken. lou dobbs is no longer on cnn, so we made the strong case for why he was not the face of a journalist in that space and with that brand. and if they wanted to use him, they needed to rebrand how they were doing their shows. we are seeing the emergence of opinion related news shows. but for lou dobbs to be able to say that he was a nonbiased journalist, when we saw evidence to the contrary, and real damage

being done, as he was, in many ways, changing the mindset that people had with the latino community. we had worked with the anti-defamation league at the time, who had done a series of research to show that certain words that lou dobbs was using had been used to create a different mindset around people, when they are referred to in terms related to animal. he had used the word horde and other labels around the latino community. it creates a pejorative mindset. one that tries to change the views that people have when we should be talking about the issues. for us, it is one to talk about the issues, but he was changing the perception that people had of hispanics with terms that the adl said were

hate speech terms. >> explain the difference. what is the difference between a chicano, latino, hispanic. what do people like to be called? does it depend on where you come from? >> there is a lot of self identification in the community, we are not a monolithic group. for many, some like to refer to themselves based on the roots of their home countries. cuban-americans, puerto ricans others. the issue for us is to capture terms that we believe represent

inclusive terms. in california, the word chicano emerged because they thought they were representing the mexican-american community. there are some that do that, but that is not universal. what we try to do at nclr is use both hispanic and latino, and use them equally, because i think some people embrace one over the other but there is not one singular term that i think captures the essence of our community. i think we can use a few terms. you can use either the term hispanic or latino. >> how many hispanics are there in the united states? >> 55 million.

16% to 17%. one in six americans. >> does that include those who are not citizens? >> that includes those who are not citizens. there are 11 million undocumented individuals, and hispanics represent 70%, 67% or 70%. the vast majority of hispanics in this country are americans. when you look at children, hispanics under the age of 18 represent 25% of americans. one of four students are hispanics. 91% are u.s. citizens.

we are talking about a very american community, even though the perception is to conflate undocumented immigrants, the fact is that the vast majority of hispanics and latinos are americans. >> there was a speech delivered not too long ago by the president. here is a little bit of it. i want you to jump in. talk about your view of what he said. >> first, we will build on progress at the border with resources so they can stem the flow of illegal crossings and speed the return. second, i will make it easier and faster for skilled immigrants to contribute as business leaders have proposed. third, we will take steps to deal responsibly with the millions of undocumented immigrants who live in our country. i want to say more about this third issue because it generates the most controversy.

we are a nation of laws, and undocumented workers broke our immigration law. they must be held accountable. >> where did you watch the speech? >> i was in the office with -- do you know where i was? i was in the studios here because i was on msnbc and commented after the speech so i watched it from the studio. >> how much did you know? >> i knew most of it. i met with the president that afternoon. >> there was a time when you were at odds with the president. didn't you refer to him as the deporter in chief? >> that happened in march,

deportations hit a historic high and there was frustration and anger. i used that term to highlight how off-base speaker boehner was when he said the reason he could not move a bill was that he could not trust president obama to enforce the law. the fact is, at least 2 million people have been deported in this fifth-year of the obama presidency. it was a fact that we were reporting on and there were many

separations occurring among families with citizen children. it has created great pain and suffering in our communities and i was trying to capture that. we had come to the conclusion that congress was not serious about moving forward legislation. we had come to that conclusion because we had pushed hard on a legislative solution and we still need to do so because this is a temporary solution that the president has forward. we have been pushing on a legislative solution, an administrative resolution, because at some point the president did need to step in and could step in to reduce the number of deportations. the third front we were moving on was an electoral one. we understood and continue to

understand that it is important as a community to use our voice and power in the ballot boxes. the national council of la raza was pushing multiple solutions and when i used that term to describe the president, i thought it was important to push back on speaker boehner and to get obama to do more on deportations. to push back on both sides to do what they could and for us to be the voice of the community that was very angry and frustrated. >> what do you say to someone that says, you have heard this

many times, that they should go back home? >> i think what we say is that the fact is the system is broken. it needs to be fixed. people keep talking about making sure that whoever wants to come here has to go to the back of the line. right now, there is no line. any hope or expectation to reunite with families or you with families is not there. this action is extremely temporary and is a protection, not a legal status. it is a protection that says folks who have been here will be at the bottom of the list of those law enforcement officials, because there are other

priorities. the president said in the speech we should be targeting felons, real threats to this country not families. it is prioritizing how we are using precious resources to enforce the law. the rule of law is something that we value and respect and appreciate. it is how you enforce the law, and what are the resources that you have, and using common sense to go after real threats. it highlights and underscores the continued need for us to achieve a permanent solution and a comprehensive solution. >> if you were illegal, would you come forward? >> if i was undocumented -- >> you do not like illegal? >> we do not like that term, it is offensive for many. >> why?

>> because an act can be illegal but a human being is not illegal. it is very demeaning from a humanitarian standpoint. you may disagree with what these folks have done in overstaying their visas and we need to hold them accountable. in fact, the action the president has done, and certainly the legislation that passed the senate 500 days ago asked people to come forward, to get right with the law, and to make sure we are taking the steps to better promote national security efforts. but you may not think that what they have done is legal, but from a humanitarian standpoint it is demeaning, because they may have different reasons, and you may not agree with it.

for some people, it is their last act of desperation to try to provide some sort of opportunity for their family. and to be able to survive. for some people, that is the approach, the mindset they have on this. i want to get back to this other point, that it is temporary. the fact is that we have to work on a solution because we need to modernize the immigration system. what this action has done is an important first step, but it is a temporary step in allowing some folks to come out of the shadows and not fear deportation. and to allow some to be able to work, to make sure they provide to the economy, and we know that this will help to create gross

domestic product and add to the country. but what we know is that comprehensive reform would do that. adding $1 trillion to revenue if we had comprehensive reform. >> would you come forward? >> absolutely. >> no worry? >> no worry. we have to ask the community to come forward, and the community organizations serving hispanic communities across the country are going to be well-positioned to help many in our community come forward, get good information, and help them apply for this protected status. it is essential for us to do it, because the more folks that come forward, will be protected, and

we will have a stronger case to make for a broader resolution. >> what if it is rolled back by the republican congress? >> i do not think we will see that happen. we have been very clear, and have heard from the president, that he will veto any effort. we have seen the house republicans pass a measure that tried to undo the executive order. it cannot pass because the senate has adjourned and the president would veto. there is not the support in congress to override a veto. i think that republicans have to be very careful. i worry that they see this effort to undo the executive order and to attack president

obama as about politics, the president, and process. what they needed to understand is that, for hispanic voters the fastest growing lock-- block of voters,we see that as attacks on american families. and there will be consequences to be paid. as soon as the primaries start next year, every candidate will be asked, what are you going to do? latino voters will be watching and listening very carefully. and we will be a very significant voting block in the next election. so i believe that the next president will have to come right through the latino community to get to the white house.

they will have to be thoughtful with how they position themselves on immigration and stay away from this executive order and not try to undo it if they want to be president. >> of the 55 million hispanics how many voted in the last election? >> in 2012, 12% were latino. in the midterm, there are bigger challenges because they are off-cycle. they are not in the middle of a major presidential campaign. it is tougher to turn people out. for latinos, it was tougher because we had not seen action on this issue. where the president had promised that he would do the executive

order before the election, he backed off. i think that hurt us in turning out latinos. we had less people. i want to say, not a lot less, close to 8% of the electorate overall than where we were before. at nclr, it has been a key priority. to date, la raza is registered half a million latino voters. in 2014, we helped educate and inform voters. 300,000 voters. we have been very involved. we made that a priority because i think in a democracy, you want full participation. it is important to use strength to advance not only our agenda

but an agenda that will make america stronger. that is at the heart of our efforts. >> what would you say to the most conservative people in the system, voters who often vote republican, who are saying that this is not legal, breaking the constitution. and they are really mad about this. you are a republican politician. how do you deal with this? and they say that this is nothing but a political move on the part of democrats. >> brian, what i would say is, look, i mentioned to you i am from kansas. born and raised in kansas. i understand the demographics. and i sense that, in addition to

people being concerned and confused about what this executive order means, there is a lot of anxiety about the demographic shifts. but as americans, our view has to be, what is in the best interest of the country going forward? there is a strong case to be made that this action by the president is absolutely legal and within his authority. that is substantiated by the office of legal counsel. it is substantiated by over 150 legal scholars in the country. even, i think, most, from a hispanic point of view, latinos understand, including latino republicans. they support this action.

for those who need to understand that this is absolutely a legal action that the president has legal authority to do, and we believe that for the country, it makes absolute sense for us to be able to know, to ask these folks to come out of the shadow, from a security standpoint, to ask people to sign up. it makes sense from an economic standpoint to make sure we are benefiting from the contributions these folks are making. and to level the playing field for employers who are trying to exploit folks. the benefits ought to be what we focus on. it should be clear that the case can be made that it is a legal action, within the authority of

the president to make. and there are benefits to do something like this. the real benefit will come when we can do comprehensive reform. >> when your parents came, were they documented? >> yes. >> your dad was born in oklahoma? >> he was born in dewey, oklahoma. when he was 10 years old, his family moved back to mexico when he was five years old. he came back to the united states and helped my mother through the process of legalization. he went through that process for my mother. i think that was something that we did. there are different stages were the immigration laws have

changed over the years. one of the things that, as a country, we recognize, and i think the president was very eloquent and articulate when he talked about it at night. when we recognize that we are a nation of immigrants. it is a part of our history, and that is why we need to fix the immigration system. in the meantime, we need to make sure we are not separating families and causing great pain to families and communities, and that we are benefiting from the families that are willing and able to make contributions. we should be targeting those folks who are real risks to national security with the limited resources that we have. and which the supreme court and congress has said that the president has the authority to

designate and prioritize who they can and how they can enforce those laws in terms of prosecutorial discretion. how you prioritize how you use the limited resources you have. you should go after those higher threat criminal elements as opposed to families and individuals who are really just making contributions and serving in different roles that many others are not willing or able to serve in. >> i found something on the internet, under an assumed name. suzanne. have you ever read this? it is “a response to janet murguia.” it is strong, and i will not read all of it, but this is a way certain people think. "you may believe that people like me who feel this way are racist. so be it.

i don't care. why should americans give preference to illegal alien criminals? don't hand americans anymore male cow manure." it gets a lot nastier. what do you say? >> two things. one, on the days i was on with lou dobbs, there is nothing that would match the horrible things that were said to me. i understand about people saying terrible things. and i do think we have to be careful to not assume that because some people oppose

immigration reform or certain approaches, that they are racist. that is not an assumption that we want to make at nclr. i understand that people can have honest disagreements about how we reform our immigration system. it does not have to be about race. there is another conversation about race that is a relevant conversation about race today, but this conversation does not have to be about race. i would like to exclude that element. it has been hard to find a safe place to have that conversation where it is just about the merits of the issue and when we can get to common ground. and frankly, i feel like there are folks in the republican party that are so fractured that it is hard in one party to find consensus on the issue. it has been more of a fight within the republican party

than it has been with others about finding a resolution on this. i agree that no one should make assumptions that because you disagree with how we are trying to achieve comprehensive immigration reform, that they are a racist. i agree that that should not be a part of the conversation. but nor should my patriotism be questioned when i am trying to present a solution in the best interest of the country. if we can remove those elements, i believe we can find common ground. and we did find common ground in the senate bill that was passed 534 days ago. and that had bipartisan support, 68 votes. it is hard to find 68 votes today for anything in the senate. that bill represented a compromise.

there were things i did not like. we do not have to make the conversation about race, i simply do not choose to go there. i want to make sure we have the safe place to have a conversation and move forward with a solution. it should not have to invoke race or anti-immigrant language. >> let me ask the political question. say the congress stays republican and the next president is republican. if the person that runs is against this, are they taking a chance? >> they are taking a chance, but not a big chance. we have to make sure that people sign up and be trusted sources in the community to navigate

them through this. the more people that sign up the less chance there will be that this will be rolled back. that will be an important outcome that has to happen at the end of this term of this president. and he has a responsibility, through his administration, to do that, but we as leaders nationally and at a local level, have a responsibility, too. >> how mad were they at the white house when you called him deporter in chief? is it true you were not invited to a briefing? >> i don't focus on that. >> did it work? >> other people have to make that conclusion. we are in the place were we have to be. it is clear that the republican-led house was not

going to do a legislative solution. this puts the president in a position of strength because what we do know, brian, and the answer to the folks that are worried that the president has ignored the constitution, i disagree with them, legal scholars disagree with them, but if the republican congress disagrees with them, guess what? their response should be to put out an alternative. what is the consensus alternative? this is not the end of the debate, it is the beginning of a trajectory towards a permanent solution. for those individuals -- you talked about the woman who wrote the piece and the folks who think the president destroyed the constitution.

i disagree, but the reasonable response is for congress to step up and say that they have an alternative. and if they would put out the alternative, we could have that honest debate over what is right. there will be another compromise that could create a permanent solution. for me, at nclr, we call them as we see them. we follow issues on the merits. sometimes we push and criticize republicans and sometimes we criticize democrats. including the president. it always means we are reaching to both sides and praising both sides when they do what is in the best interests of not only

the latino community, but the country. so that is our role. be a voice. >> we only have a minute. how many people work for la raza? >> 135 people work at nclr. more importantly, we are connected to a network of affiliates that are community-based organizations, 300 across the country. it gives us a reach to serve. we provide services through grants in health, education, workforce, and community development and housing. >> how much federal funding do you get? >> less than 10% of our dollars. most of it is through our housing work because we are hud certified. >> what is your budget?

>> $36 million, operationally. >> i am sorry to say we are out of time. janet murguia, thank you for joining us. >> thank you for this opportunity. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> alt in years of interviews are available online. if you enjoyed this week's interview, here are some others you may like.

you can watch them all at c-span.org. up next, your calls on comments live on "washington journal." at 10:00 a discussion on u.s. policy in the asia-pacific region. we will examine what the white house and congress should do over the next two years to strengthen trade and diplomacy. tonight, three technology reporter's review the big issues of 2014 and technology issues facing the new year.

>> the chairman is not expected to unveil his proposal until february or march at the earliest area. is i going to force the chairman to move forward quickly or put him in a position where he will have to do is negotiating with congressional republicans? that is not clear yet. >> i am expecting he will come out with final rules on net neutrality. president obama is in support of reclassifying broadband service. that would make it treated like a utility. the broadband industry groups are opposed to this. a lot of pressure on chairman wheeler to go that route. we will see what happens. once the rules are on the books,

the fight is not necessarily over. there will be lawsuits from the industry groups, like verizon and comcast especially if chairman wheeler does what the president wants. >> we are talking.net neutrality . now that the republicans control the senate, they have that working as well. republicans want to get pen to paper in january. we could see movement on that soon. they will push back on any rules they think are an overreach on wheeler's part. >> tonight at 8:00 p.m. on c-span 2. >> bob to sack on legislative priorities. then juan zarate.

later, john. as always, we will take your calls. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. host: good morning. it is monday, january 5, 2015. we are little more than 24 hours away from the opening of the 114th congress, and we will talk about political positioning on opening day and the policies the new congress will address the month ahead could we begin by opening our phones to our viewers to hear about the top issues you want this new congress to address. let us know what your message would be to congress on that issue. our phone lines are open. we would love to hear from you.

host: you can also catch up with us on social media -- twitter, facebook, or e-mail us. a very good monday morning to you. several headlines in today's papers about the upcoming opening day of congress. here is the front page of "usa today." "powershift tests gop." another headline from that paper -- "obama, new gop congress brace for battle." over to the "those angeles times." "gop takes the helm, to where?" front page of the "