8:30, president and cofounder of the tea party patriots is here to discuss the influence of the tea party heading into the twice 60 presidential elections. ♪ host: rotating from activity here on capitol hill, but a house hearing on benghazi will still play -- take place today. president obama heading to saudi arabia not only to pay respects to the deceased king abdulla but this after a three-day trip to india. one of the representatives from the administrative -- administration will talk about trade policy. the white house is seeking more international trade, saying the

u.s. -- it would help the u.s. economy. you may agree or not, but i will -- but in our forced 45 minutes we want to talk about trade with other countries and if you think it is good for america. the numbers are on the screen. the international trade administration has put out the to six looking at u.s. trade policy in terms of dollars. the 2013, 2 $.7 billion in the imports and $2 billion in exports. a sharp increase from 2009, one

of the goals of the administration being increased trade with other countries. when it comes to american views on trade, p research center has -- pew research center has tracked this topic. they come up with a headline for the chart saying americans are insurer trade benefits. only 20% of those polled say it creates jobs. 17% said international trade rages -- wag raises wages. and 28% said foreign companies are good thing. you may have your thoughts on international trade if it is good for america or perhaps not. here is how you can let your thoughts be known. the numbers are on the screen.

joining us on the phone right now discuss the latest in trade policy, especially with the presidents trip to india, mr. stink. good morning. could you tell us what the trade in india -- mr. csink. good morning. could you tell us with a trade in india indicates? guest: international companies with dedicated billion dollars for u.s. exports to india. another $1 billion will be earmarked for small businesses located in world markets. and then the u.s. government is

also going to invest in helping india with renewable energy resources. for companies that produce solar, wind, to get their products to market. host: justin stink --sink is this trade deal larger than others that we have? guest: no, i think the administration doing what it could with resources we already had. we heard the president speak a lot in the last few days while he was in india this in normal potential -- this enormous potential there.

but there is currently only 1% of u.s. exports there. i think these first -- these were symbolic steps, if not trying to encourage better relations with india. host: stories in your publication, they hope, saying the white house is going to work with democrats on future trade deals. why do they have to reach out to their own party on this matter? guest: the president can talk about promotion authority, which would give him the ability to negotiate a trade deal, or serious trade deals with international partners without having to worry about congress going back and meddling with them after the fact. there are a lot of democrats who opposed this. they see additional trade agreements as something that would pit american workers

against international competitors that don't have to pay their workers as much. it is something that could see american jobs leave. we have seen that in the past. there is a lot of pressure from democratic allies. this is something the president has asked for, for a while, and did not get through. host: the role be a senate finance committee hearing. michael broman will be at that meeting with trade policies the topic. it is led by orrin hatch. how does this policy differ from other administrations? guest: i think michael broman along with orrin hatch have really been lobbying members of congress. the white house is generally

encouraged from what they have heard from republican leaders what they have heard from senator hatch. they see this as an opportunity in the now republican-controlled congress to move forward on this authority and kind of gives the president more ability to negotiate these tried -- trade deals host: again, that is just and --justin sink talking about these trade deals. thanks for your time. if you have interest about trade policy of the united states, a hearing with michael from and speaking right after today's washington journal. his increasing dread with other countries good for america? we want to know what you think.

reach out to us on social media as well. we will begin this morning with mary from danville, virginia democrats line. what do you think about trade with other countries? caller: i think it's very bad for us and always has been. we have allowed big business to do what is good for their stockholders at the expense of the american worker, the unionized man or woman. it will do just what mr. sink said it will pit american workers against people who will work for $.50 an hour. we have seen the believe as manufacturing jobs in this country, and it has and more so in different parts of the country. i came from suburban new york and watched those jobs bleed out of their 40 to 50 years ago. i now live in virginia where there is no tech file in the -- no textile industry left, no

furniture making industry left. and you see municipalities driving companies to come in. i live in danville. very close to me in martinsville, martinsville just paid millions of dollars to lure in an english tech company that will employ nobody from martinsville, because they don't have the skills to work in high-tech manufacturing. it is killing our country. host: if the administration were to make changes in trade policy make it more competitive for american workers, it would be something you would agree with, or not? caller: yes if you don't make it here, you should not be able to sell it here. host: danny, democrats line. go ahead. caller: i want to make this clear. i supported the president. i'm a democrat. but on this crime i'm so fed up with these trade deals. if i could do it, i would indict

obama, and i would convict him and i would hang him. this is unbelievable. 75% of american people know that trade has been catastrophic -- free trade. ordinary trade is good. you cannot possibly compete with workers that are in -- host: lorraine, republican line. caller: i disagree also. and if we don't take things overseas, we can get a foot back into america to work for the companies. i see the influx of foreigners getting a work visa or something and coming over, too, and taking away american jobs over here and over there. host: would you stop trade deals altogether, or modify them? caller: well, i would cherry

pick. choose certain ones. host: fred, we will your from fred in virginia. independent line. caller: how are you doing? host: fine, thank you. caller: i guess my comment is about the increase of the visas and how it is pretty much decimating the american technology worker. and further, i just want to say that these caps on being increased under false pretenses under a false claim of a worker shortage will stop there is no worker shortage. there has been -- a false claim of a worker shortage, because there is no worker shortage. there has been no worker shortage. this basically serves the interest of some corporations. it is totally wrong, and the waste and fraud and abuse in that program really has to be fixed. i'm glad that senator sessions

is one of the guys championing that cause. host: that is fred from virginia. international trade is our topic. and your thoughts on whether you think it is good for america. if you want to call us, the numbers are on the screen. it was during the state of the union were president obama brought up trade policy asking for something called fast-track authority and also making his presentation the case for the trade deal with europe and its specifications. here is a bit of that speech. [video clip] >> as we speak on china wants to write the rules for the fastest-growing region. that would put our workers and businesses at a disadvantage. why would we let that happen? we should write those rules. we should level the playing field. that is why i'm asking both

partners to give me trade promotion authority to protect -- protect american workers with strong deals from asia to europe that are also free but [applause] fair. that is the right thing to do. -- that are free, but fair. that is the right thing to do. [applause] class look, i'm the first one to admit that passed trade deals have not always lived up to the hype. that's why we've gone after countries that break the rules at our expense. but 95% of the world's customers live outside our borders. we cannot close the -- close ourselves off from those opportunities. more than half of manufacturing executives have said they are actively looking to bring jobs back from china. let's give them one more reason to get it done. host: mylan burke off of twitter as this to converse -- to the

conversation. he says to open trade and if you are a person whose job is threatened, change your skill set. scott is on the phone lines. sierra vista, arizona, independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i just want to reference a germ that people know of, but don't know the historical significance -- a term that people know of but don't know the historical significance. and it is called tradewinds. trade goes with the direction of the wind flow. over time, nations learn how to follow the flow of the winds across the globe to increase their productivity, their capital, their ability to be a global power. we have to understand that and remain competitive by counter trade. if 98% of the world population

is waiting to get a laptop or cell phone, we've got to know how to reach them because they have dollars. they have money to spend. and when we close our borders we close off the ability to say we cannot travel with the tradewinds. host: international trade association says it 2013, as far as goods that were exported, 16% of those goods were transportation equipment. 13% were computer and electronic text. almost 13% were chemicals. machinery about 10%. and the trillium and cool products about 7.6% with all other merchandise being 41% of that picture. when it comes to what we take in, all other merchandise about 42%. computer and electronic products about 15%.

14% for transportation equipment. oil and gas at 12.5%. chemicals a .6 percent, and machinery, except electrical, it's .5%. -- 6.5%. don is next in michigan. caller: we need the -- we need free-trade and fair trade. we need trade with countries that have our point of view. as five nafta, which was a republican created deal & -- as far as nafta, which was a republican created deal and signed by a democrat, those are the trade deals we do not need. we need trade deals that look out for the american worker. host: you want the american worker taken care of when these deals are being made. caller: exactly, exactly. host: in terms of salary, job protection, what areas? caller: as far as job

protection, as far as salary. and we need to go back with pensions. having a person work for 30 years, 25 years. he should be able to go home sit down and have a pension to look forward to. we need to get back to unions and bargaining rights for the low-wage workers and the middle-class workers. host: felicia, good morning columbia, maryland, independent line. caller: good morning. hello, everyone. you know what, this is my pet peeve. almost everything that i buy, i have it for about a month and it will break. and you take it back to the owner and he will say, well, it will be better if you buy it then to have it repaired. -- than to have it repaired.

you pay just as much to have it repaired. i'm tired of cheap, crappy things that are imported. please, please america let's invent our own products. thank you. host: steve is up next will stop medicine, nebraska, republican line. what do you think about trade in other countries, increasing trade the? is a good for america? caller: i guess i'm confused. if we are going to have wide-open borders that we can just let anybody in any time, but then we are supposed to block other people's products so what are we doing? importing super cheap labor to hold the prices down? i'm just confused between open borders and free trade. host: what do you think about the current trade policy, aside from the border policy echoed caller: -- aside from the border

policy? caller: i'm a shareholder, so people need to get mormon education -- more of an education. you need to learn about how to participate in the economy and how markets work and educate yourself a little bit rather than just setback -- sit back and complain about what's happening. the ground is shifting under our feet and you learn how to change with it, or else you are just roadkill. host: what kind of shares you hold, what industry? what business? caller: just mutual funds, and just a variety. no one in particular. trust me, not a big hedge fund manager or anything like that.

but everybody complains about the 1% being the investor class. i'm not the 1%, but i do consider myself part of the investor class. i would recommend people just as a hobby if nothing else, just learn the language of money. this is a hobby. you don't have to be totally immersed in it or consumed by it. host: ok. international trade, and increasing that, if it's good for america or if you disagree. you for a wide variety of calls on the topic. you can add your voice to the conversation. and you can also add to the conversation on our social media channels.

there is a picture in the new york times of saudi arabia's new leadership in light of the death of king abdulla. king solomon's ground. also a story about the new leadership. it is mr. ben i have -- ben nayiff's employment.

again, the president to meet with leadership, a four hour visit. that was added on to the trip once he left india. there is a picture. back to our question about international trade and if it is increasing its good for america. rich on the independent line. caller: good morning. this is why i'm an independent, because i don't think either side really -- again, that's why i'm an independent. i don't think it is not has the

interest of the american people. my comment is really about our youngsters. i'm 56. i have two children. and i think the visas allowing the educated to come into our children and compete against that come to our country and compete against our children who also have educations. the chamber of commerce wanted them of the shareholders wanted, except for the people who raise our children here. and at a care of you are democrat or republican. it's just wrong. both sides are giving our children to a future that is not as bright as the one i had growing up. host: freddie from the dale mississippi, republican line you're next. caller: this administration has

been terrible at trading anything. are you still there? host: yes, go ahead. caller: i'm not for doing any kind of trading. i wish they would stop all the trading. host: why would you want to stop all trade? caller: there are taliban leaders in it. host: let's hear from jc, fort worth, texas, democrat line. caller: i was calling about the $.99 stores. americans flocked to the $.99 doors. americans should not complain, because they take -- they spent tons of money buying cheap stuff. host: as far as your personal view on trade, increasing it, is it a good idea? caller: oh, i think it's a great idea, but what i'm saying is americans should not playing stop they buy all of the -- should not complain.

they buy all of the chief foreign products. host: sure, but why do you think it's a good idea? caller: well, we buy their stuff, and they should buy our stuff too. don't you think so? host: jc from fort worth, texas. we spoke about the president going to saudi arabia and talking about shared interests between india's leader and the united states over china. here's the story.

vivian in texas, you are next. democrats line. caller: thank you. we had tariffs protecting the company from chief foreign make her -- foreign labor. now we need tariffs to protect workers from cheap foreign labor. as the markets expand for cars or hardwood floors, you know, all the stuff that goes into building those things the oil the trees for floors, i mean, they are cutting down hardwood

forest in the rain forests just so people cannot hardwood cherry floors. -- can have hardwood cherry floors. it's just going to destroy the world when we have all of these buyers and everything. i don't think that -- it's not free trade. its corporate globalization. host: vivian, when did you first become interested in the environmental portions of free trade? what got you focused on that? caller: i've always been a green voter. i mean can i vote democrat because we all hold our nose and do that these days, because the alternative is horrible. but anybody raised in the 1960's and 1970's has green issues and

should. just to have cans of tuna fish on every shelf all around the world, i don't know what it takes to feed 7 billion people. i honestly don't. i don't know how many forest they have to cut down to have fields to cut -- two plant crops to feed 7 billion people. but i don't think we can do it with free-trade. if i was just going for america or something like that, i would say no. host: the president is asking even members of his own party for more authority on trade issues. something you would agree with or not? caller: nope. i sure wouldn't. i think that today, the free trade issues are just ally building. we have free trade with europe

against russia. we are going to free trade with the philippines against building military in china. i think it is allied building more than actual -- it certainly isn't helping us. host: that is vivian from texas. here is herschel from detroit she can, independent line. caller: look, i look all the time at this new program coming on called "sharp tank -- "shark tank" and you get these people with country to realize he is and everything. and i notice before they -- with entrepreneurial ideas and everything. and i notice before they give them money they asked him how much it takes to make what they

are making. the millionaires and billionaires are forcing those who want to make things in this country to take their design and their product to go overseas and have it made and shipped back here. what hope is there for anyone to do anything about it when all they care about is, hey, i can make more money if we have a product made overseas and then shipped back.: -- back here? and this is a person who owns a basketball team was supposed to be an american. also, the lady from qvc. this is insanity. host: that is herschel from detroit, michigan. there is a follow-up over illinois governor who fell ill

yesterday. yields to be -- over the island governor, who fell ill yesterday. he became woozy during an appearance in johnston. they say he never lost consciousness. his wife, chris, had reached him to stay on because of a bug yet been trying to fight off. it turns out that was good advice. branstad fellow -- felt ok during his speech. but then if here become wobbly. someone got a chair for him to sit in and quickly laid him down on the stage. you can see that video about what is going on at the hospital there. here is kim, washington, pennsylvania. republican line. we are asking folks about increasing trade with other countries, if it's good for

america. go ahead. caller: i have two comments. one, i believe it would be good if it is equal value and not slave labor. host: ok. caller: and number two, as far as the governor giving business loans in india, i would rather see that happen in america where we can develop jobs and businesses and expand our economy. host: that is kim. we will hear next from john. john, north miami beach, democrats line. john, good morning. caller: hello. host: you are on. go ahead. caller: yes, i apologize. this is kind of twofold. based on the past nafta agreement that we had made back in the 1980's and 1990's with clinton the ramifications of

that alone, our trade deficit is in the trillions of dollars. just china, and now korea, our cars, we give tender -- 10 cars a day import and then we export. and then our workers we are importing. which means jobs for our own citizens, we are telling our young kids to go to college and rack this college debt, but at the same time, we are trying to get these kids with visas to come to the united states and go to college and stand have jobs. i don't know. i see this as a negative for us. i understand what they are trying to do, to block out china

and to control the trade and some of the rulemaking process. but again, it had nothing but a negative effect on our economy and our jobs. host: that is john. let's hear from mary, also from north miami beach. hello. caller: yes, i am a democrat, but independent inker. -- thinker. i like free trade. but i'm a little nervous. i would like to have more opportunity for people to play the market. i'm not ready to talk. i'm sorry. host: that is mary calling us

from florida. the story in the wall street journal this morning, taking a look at new drilling opportunities, or federal lands open to drilling. this is amy harder.

this also comes as the white house released sectioning off part of the -- part of and more. andrew from ohio, independent line. caller: i'm concerned with the trade of this nation the top 1% of benefit from it. however, i feel that the wage of the average working american has gone down because of free trade. you cannot compete with someone making two dollars and day. i don't care how efficient you are. it is dragging us down to the lowest common denominator. free trade, we will not be able to retain the style -- the lifestyle we are used to if we are going to continue to retain

slave labor all around the world. host: bill is up next, virginia beach. caller: good morning. hats off to you when all your comments there at c-span for having the ability to keep a neutral attitude with all of these colors coming in all the time on one side of an issue or another -- with all of these ca llers calling in all the time with one side of an issue or another. you do a good job. and with free-trade, you don't want to have none of it and you don't want to much. one good example is the automobile industry, mike honda and toyota -- like honda and toyota, when they first came to the united states, it scared the american people to death. especially the u.s. car manufacturers, because of the competition. but i think the competition is good from the point of view that if americans had to buy everything made in the usa, the

prices would be higher and there would be no incentive for americans to put good quality into their products and services. to some extent it's a good idea. plus, in the automobile industry, honda and toyota, they hire american workers and their assembly plant here in the states. i think a correct balance is the correct attitude to take. host: minority leader harry reid having to undergo eye surgery for an accident taking place at the holidays last year. he is currently sitting in his living room with mrs. reed cracking jokes, and asking about the whip count on the keystone pipeline legislation. the surgery took 3.5 hours and was successful in removing the blood clot in his right eye, and report -- repairing the orbital bones in his right brow and cheek. he was under full anesthesia during the surgery and doctors

are optimistic in his regaining vision in his right eye, but there is no definitive verdict yet. that is the statement from senator reid's office. and the keystone vote took place in the senate that failed to get passage. also from the front page of "the washington times" this morning failing to get security. /a, ocean grove, new jersey, democrats line will stop -- sasha, ocean grove, new jersey,

democrats line. caller: thank you. i enjoy all of your programs especially "washington journal." we cannot be isolationist in the 21st century. we need to be -- we need free trade, but we need to be fair. opening up more markets will bring in more goods and help our economy ultimately. host: david up next in kohlberg iowa, republican line. caller: good morning, david. nafta and all of these agreements, it's not trade at all. if the ability for corporations to manipulate the markets. trade should be -- if a small grocery co-op in a while -- in iowa need bananas and another company needs plywood to build a

house, we should be able to trade them plywood for bananas. the idea of going to vietnam and other places and letting corporations bring these things back and charge us for it, that is not free trade at all. that is sickening is what that is. host: this is operators saying it was democrats that locks the keystone xl pipeline from moving forward monday. the senate failed to get the 60 votes needed to limit debate voting 53-39 on it. the keystone would allow congress to prevent transcanada corporation's project to link canada's oil sand to refineries on the gulf coast. stephen, you are next. caller: thank you for c-span. a lot of people are calling up and saying either is -- you know, a lot of them say it is either black and white, you

know, either good or as bad. in my opinion, it's extremely great -- gray. as long as we can keep trade in the right conditions, it's good. but we have trade with countries like china, who are just manipulating everything in their favor and switching so they can make money. i manage a toy store here in redmond. we get products from china. it's almost unavoidable, just because of the profit we can make from it. but at the same time, one of our best-selling toys right now are the -- host: let's hear from madeleine in washington, d.c. you are next. caller: good morning. i'm a senior. i have disability problems.

everything that comes here, you have to put it together. you have a choice. if i'm going to pay more money and it's put together, that is kudos for me. thank you. host: matalin before you go what you think of the president's ability to have more power would trade deals? is that something you support? matalin is gone. by the way, there is a hearing this morning taking a look at the topic of and ghazi. -- benghazi. the snow has caused some changes here in washington, d c, but the searing is still on. it is the third public hearing on benghazi. c-span3 is where you can find it and that will start at 10:30 a.m. one more call on this topic. james in virginia, republican line. caller: good morning, sir. everybody is talking about the black and white and gray areas

and free trade may be good, but i'm living in an area that has 54,000 people and 21,000 people lost their jobs in my hometown because of free-trade and nafta. the furniture industry is wiped out. the textile industry is wiped out. what good is it doing our area? host: so you would say stop treat -- stop free-trade agreements change free-trade agreement? will would you do? caller: better policies on it. after nafta, within five years it was gone. it needs to be regulated one for one. our politicians here in the county didn't want it at first and they said they did, and then when the jobs were gone, they hated it. it's only benefiting the people in the stock markets because they are making money on it.

host: james from virginia will be the last call on this topic. coming up on our program, to get joining us. -- two guests joining us the first representative hank johnson of georgia. he will talk about the grand jury system in shootings involving the police and a bill he has introduced about that. and then later jenny beth martin about the tea party's priorities for the republican-controlled congress. but first if you go to our website, you will hear from the budget office director, douglas elmendorf, who released a budget yesterday. here is a bit of that press conference. [video clip] >> the federal budget deficit, which has fallen sharply in the past few years, is projected to hold steady relative to the size of the economy through 2018.

beyond that point, however, the gap in the spending revenue is projected to grow, further increasing federal debt relative to the size of the economy, which is already historically high. those projections are based on the assumption that current law, governing, taxes, and spending will generally remain the same and are built upon our economic forecast. according to the forecast, the economy will expand at a city pace in 2015 and for the next two years, to the point where the gap is doing the nation's output and its potential or maximum sustainable output will be essentially eliminated by the end of 2017. as a result of the unemployment rate will fall a little further and more people will be encouraged to enter or stay in the labor force. beyond 2017, we project inflation in gdp will grow at a rate that is notably less than the average growth during the

1980's and the 1990's. let me address the budget outlook first and then turn to the -- we estimate that the deficit for 2015 will amount to 460 -- $416 billion. at 2.6% of gdp, this year's deficit is projected to be the smallest relative to the nation's output since 2007, but close to the 2.7% the deficits have averaged over the past 50 years. although the deficit and our baseline projections remain roughly stable as a percentage of gdp through 2017, they rise after that. the deficit in 2025 is rejected to be $1.1 trillion, or 4.0% of gdp. and two of the deficits over the 2016-25 timeframe are projected to be over $26 trillion. >> and again to -- c-span is

where you can get that full information and see the full press conference on douglas elmendorf. www.c-span.org is where you can find that. and joining us now representative hank johnson of the judiciary committee, also a democrat serving in the fourth district. good morning. guest: good morning. host: you have legislation coming up specifically taking a look at grand jury's. but this stemmed out of decisions made in ferguson and in new york. could you explain not only the go, but those grand jury decisions and how it plays into what you are trying to do in congress? guest: yes, the recent cases out of ferguson and in new york were a wake-up call to many americans that something needs to be done about the secretive grand jury process that seems to

result whenever there is a killing by a police officer of a person. it seems to always result in a no bill, or a refusal to indict the officer despite what many see as clear evidence of probable cause to proceed with formal charges against the officer. this grand jury reform act would restore public confidence in the grand jury system and the criminal justice system, so that we can ensure that all people are treated similarly when it comes to allegations of kernel misconduct. host: some of the elements of this act included appearing before a judge the judge appointed a special prosecutor. and the prosecutor would submit

a written report and the judge would provide a written report as well of the findings. does this take the authority of the local government to investigate these matters and give them to other agencies? doesn't that take away from a locality or a state? guest: yes, it's important to have an independent agency to investigate these allegations and then to submit the findings of the investigation to a neutral authority, a judge, in an open hearing. and in that way, it helps to restore public confidence. and it also is an insurer that justice will actually occur. there is nothing that undermines the justice system in this country more than allowing an injustice to go unpunished. i'm not in anyway inferring that

whenever we have a killing by a police officer that the killing is unjustified. indeed in most cases, it will be justified, or a justifiable homicide. but there are those cases, and it seems to be more. it seems to be a kind of epidemic of unnecessary and excessive use of force that we are seeing unfolding in america. it is a dangerous trend. and whenever those kinds of cases occur it's important that people be able to have confidence that the justice system will work and it will work when it comes to a citizen being accused of an event as well as a police officer involved in a fence. -- offense. but i will tell you that once there's been a presentation -- an investigation and then a

presentation to a judge at a hearing, and the requisite reports prepared, those are sent back to a local district attorney, who then has the discretion whether or not to follow the recommendations were not. we are not taking local power away from local prosecutors insofar as the ultimate decision-making on these cases. host: the grand jury and the evidence of shootings by police is our topic with hank johnson. if you want to ask questions about his legislation, the numbers are on the screen. even as you present this, representative johnson, we are hearing the papers about a federal investigation taking a look at darren wilson in the shooting of michael brown, and saying that in many cases, not enough evidence is found to charge him on that.

your thoughts on that. guest: well, that is exactly why i believe there needs to be a leaker for federal prosecutors to prosecute police officers where there is probable cause to believe he committed murder. currently, we do not have federal -- federal prosecutors do not have the ability to charge someone with murder unless of course there is some federal, or it happened on federal property basic. -- basically. we will refile in the stern the police accountability act -- in this term the police accountability act, which will grant the federal government the ability to prosecute local police officers for homicide or murder, or anything that would

range under that as a lesser included offense. and in that way, we would get at instances where state prosecutors fail and refused to prosecute police killings when there appears to be probable cause that a crime has been committed. so when we have an investigation conducted outside of the law enforcement agency that employs the officer who is under the focus in the investigation, and when that investigation is directed by a special prosecutor or a neutral prosecutor, we have a better opportunity to arrive at justice in the case. but just in case that does not happen, then the federal government would be able to step in with a murder charge, as

opposed to being limited to a civil rights violation, which is what the federal government is limited to at this time. and in order to prove a civil rights violation involving homicide you would have to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer involved took the deadly action because of the person's protected class status . in other words, they were black, or they were hispanic, or they were gay, or because of national origin. to get into the mind of a police officer when these kinds of things happen is quite difficult.

the civil rights law is not sufficient to arm federal prosecutors with the ability to proceed as is necessary if states fail and refused to proceed. host: have you received more support for this legislation this time around because of events in ferguson? and is that from just the democratic side? republicans both? how much support have you received? guest: i think as this issue continues to be demonstrated, in other words, the growing use of excessive police force toward civilians, i think as these cases continue to be in the news then it does create more support for the grand jury reform bill. i will point out the case of a gentleman right here in fairfax county virginia i believe, the name is john gear who was

standing on his door after the police was called to his residence on a domestic violence situation. they talked with the gentleman for about an hour. all the while, the gentleman had his hands above the door seal of the house, as if to be in the hands of position. and there were no firearms apparent. i think he had on a t-shirt. it was during the day, so there was no problem with their -- there being inadequate lighting. and when the gentleman simply put is and down, he was shot in the chest and fatally wounded. that has been 16 months ago. no grand jury action. the police investigation results are just slowly being released. i think, yesterday, there was a

release of information by the police department to the family of mr. gear. this was a white male in suburban, washington d.c. fairfax county. these incidents are not just limited to african-americans or his antics. -- hispanics. they are happening across the country and apparently with more frequency. and it's alarming at this wind that we have not done any on grand jury reform. host: we have folks lined up to speak with you. steve, go ahead. caller: i want to talk about an event that happening orlando florida a couple of days after ferguson. what happened was, a guy with brandishing a weapon. two bicycle police officers showed up.

one of them spraying down with pepper spray and paved in -- tased him. he kept threatening people, so the other officer fired a warning shot and hit a girl in the head and killed her. the guy was still brandishing a weapon, so the police officer emptied the rest of his five rounds in the guy's chest unfortunately, the guy did not die. i've heard nothing about this. the difference was these were two white people and the officer was a black officer. and when i go down to orlando i'm going to march up to that black officer and tell him how much i appreciate he's there protecting my son, who is a bartender in the bar below the one the guy was trying to get into. guest: thank you for your comments sir. i believe 90% of the police officers out there are doing a

great job protecting citizens. my hat is off with --my hat's off to them. my beef is not with those officers who are acting lawfully. my concern is with the 2% who are getting away, literally, with murder. i think you must admit thatany incident involving a police officer shooting or killing an individual is not justified. yet, what we find in just about every instance is that the police officer goes unpunished. i support the police, like you, if this were a justifiable homicide, i would have to tip my hat to officer. i'm not familiar with this case that you speak of. i would have to tip my hat to

officer. and say, thank you for serving and protecting the public. my hats off to law enforcement in general. my bills are designed to get to those cases where there is pierced to be an injustice that is happening. also, i think it is important for citizens to have confidence that their criminal justice system is acting fairly. not just toward civilians but also towards the law enforcement officers to our also charged with acting lawfully. host: next up kathleen, democrat. caller: good morning. i have a question. was slavery a crime?

something they gave me so much pride this year after michael brown was i saw on youtube a group called __ is real united in christ. i found out that i am an african american, but my biblical name is judah. i am a jew from a tribe of jewish. if you teach our black israelite children that, they would have so much pride. i have two young men in my household and we have been __ to see the look on their face to know their true nationality,

to know that our father almighty had skin like wool __ it gives them so much pride. host: i do believe that when people know their history that helps them __ it helps their psyche to be healthy about who they are. i applaud you for your study. i can tell that you've gotten a lot from your study. thank you for calling. host: coming out of my __ michael brown, there is someone who wrote about the grand jury process. he said this __ operating in secret, grand jury can test evidence. if the jury operated openly, it would be easy for witnesses to

tailor their testimony to other witnesses said, make it difficult to determine the truth. do you agree with that? guest: no. generally, when you have witnesses testifying, there is a rule of sequestration meaning that witnesses testified out of the presence of other witnesses. unfortunately, since the grand jury processis 99.9% of the time secret, you never know what happens in the grand jury. i don't know whether or not in the michael brown grand jury proceedings, which the transcripts of the preceding work release, i don't know whether or not witnesses testified in each other's presence or not. i can't say that it is a good point to make that when you don't have that rule of sequestration in effect, where witnesses are separated and can't hear the testimony that

comes before after them, i think that does create problems. this grand jury __ this probable cause hearing held in open court before judge what is sure that certain procedural norms are followed, and that there would be no what we call __ home cooking __ were each year a local person, a local office of you work with every day, and you see them, and there is no way that you can act in a fair and impartial manner as a prosecutor told someone we work with everyday.

this probable cause hearing with the special prosecutor with a neutral judge after an investigation by neutral law enforcement agency would go a long way towards making sure that procedural norms were followed, and that we get a fair and just result out of the process. host: from clans in cary, north carolina. caller: rep. johnson, i completely agree with you. the brown case was a travesty. a pointed out the ancestral relationship between the police and the prosecutor. there is a cultural issue that needs to be addressed. my statement would be __ people will do what is expected. if we have a special prosecutor that will eliminate this notion

that police can hide behind the prosecutor's office. there is a root cause here they go so deep. this is only a part of the solution __ to separate the prosecutor from the police. that is only part of it. we have a cultural issue in that people are expendable. my knowledge is that hispanics and blacks are expendable. we have to get rid of that sort of thinking. this goes a long way that people will be aware that what they do is expected. guest: thank you. people are expendable. some officers certainly feel that way. i think the majority, overwhelming majority, of offices are out there to protect and serve us, and they

do an excellent job of doing so. there is an element out there that for whatever reason human life is not as important to them as it should be. perhaps, that is based on the race or national origin of the people who happen to be victimized by these officers. we must do everything we can to protect the innocent, and to punish the guilty. host: from omaha, nebraska, this is kimberly. caller: i have two questions in a comment. if i don't get it all out i will sound a bit prejudice, which i'm not.

i want to know why blacks teach their children that whites are privileged. i live way below what a lot of black people around me. i'm looking around and wondering where is the privilege. we have shootings here every night and is mostly whites killing whites or blacks killing blacks. i'm wondering why they don't bring cases where there are clean hands, like with michael brown. they are saying there is always a cry behind it. if it is so prevailing __ do you get what i'm saying? guest: i do. you know, white privilege, that is an issue that many black people learn as they get older. i don't think the average

african_american family or parent teaches their children that white folks are privileged. i tell you, many white males are privilege in society and have always been. particularly, if they have resources. why folks in general may feel that they are not privileged. compared to how other people in this country have been treated historically, blacks __ someone called earlier task is slavery was a crime. slavery was at 200+ year old crime, and the legacy of slavery persist to this day. i don't think there's any black person who could rest upon the notion that they are privilege in some way.

you always have the skin color that you have to be more than 100%. there's no doubt that in our society historically, and currently, white folks have been in a privileged position. particularly white folks with money. poor white folks still feel generally that they are superior to black folks. they don't do this __ it's just a position that they are in. if they don't realize it then you don't realize the position that blacks and others are in. if you don't realize the

inherent advantage that you get just from the color of your skin, then it is hard to understand a lot of those who don't have that privilege. that's something that we learn as we get older. i don't think it's something that we go out and teach each other. two second point, an underlying crime. the michael brown case. the allegation being that he took some cigarettes __ eexcuse me, some cigars off the counter and walked away. i miss to __ misdemeanor theft case at best. take the case of eric garner. accused of not stealing cigarettes, but selling loose cigarettes. we get to individuals accused of tobacco related offenses. both minor, petty misdemeanor

offenses. both of them end up dead. whether or not eric garner was guilty of in fact of selling loose cigarettes, we will never know. eric garner, there is the allegation that he had actually put the money for the cigars on the counter before he took the cigars off the counter. there was some dispute with the store owner about the price of the cigars, and he just took them off the counter. that is information that i have garnered from sources close to that case. whether or not an offense was committed or not, these people, at most, were guilty of a minor misdemeanor, and certainly the death penalty was not called

for. host: connie from illinois. caller: good morning, everybody. i hope you do not shut me off because this man is only telling half the story from ferguson. it was on the news immediately after the shooting. it showed michael brown going into that store. he got the cigars, and start a walkout, the man starts to stop him, he shoved that guy. he went right on out the door. the police officer stopped him later. there is no video of the shooting, but there was an audiotape. i heard it for five times. the audiotape proved the police

officer was in the right. michael brown __ the man on the phone that was on the audiotape, he was yelling __ he's charging that man. what's that guy shooting, blanks? host: so the question for the guests would be what? caller: why don't they tell the whole story? michael brown felt sorry for the kid. i know a ton of michael brown's in the united states today, they are not all black. there are whites. this kid tried to take the gun away from the cop. guest: thank you for your call. i tell you, the whole thing about the grand jury perform at

is that it feels the process by which these cases involving a police officer killing individuals __ it deals with the process by which those are dealt with. does the police officer, because he or she is a police officer, get a favored status? whereas, a person who is not a police officer under similar circumstances would be indicted for something? iit is a matter of fair play and substantial justice. are police officers going to be treated the same way or do they have in __ immunity? the case of michael brown was presented by a prejudiced

prosecutor through a secret grand jury which was instructed erroneously on the law. there was a dumping of evidence from different sources __ some credible, some not __ on the grand jury, and they are asked to make a decision after a week, in a secret process. now, these grand jurors who may have not agree with the result cannot talk about what happened in the grand jury proceeding because of the law. in fact, one of the grand jurors has filed a lawsuit up there in missouri to establish the ability to be able to reveal what happened, what really happened. i appreciate our differences in terms of the get the facts of

the michael brown case, i think we must agree that the process by which i know bill was the result against the police officer, does not pass the smell test. that is what this grand jury perform those all about. host: the menstruation would like to see body cameras put on the police officers. does the judiciary committee have any role in that? guest: yes, that would be an issue for jurisdiction for the judiciary committee. there are some bills that have been introduced in congress that would achieve that result. i'm sure that those bills have been referred to the judiciary committee for action. fact is, the leadership of the

judiciary committee, will they actually bring legislation to the committee for action, or they will continue to proceed with things like the border control situation, or other administrative law reform? will they continue to bring those kinds of matters to the floor of the house for a vote? or will we actually get to some of these measures, some of this legislation is pending that cries out for public hearings? we will have to wait and see. we had two years in the session of congress. i'm going to be fighting very vigorously to make sure that we get these criminal justice reform bills to committee and

through committees so that they can come to the floor for a vote. host: do you know if the head of the judiciary committee do any of these things? guest: the stop militarizing law enforcement act is the third piece of legislation to get at this criminal justice reform that is so badly needed. our streets are being fled with military grade weaponry, transfer directly from the department of defense from war zones throughout the world __ iraq and afghanistan. all of these wars have closed out and that equipment is coming back home. through the 1033 program, police departments can simply

request a mine resistant ambush vehicle or m_16 or grenade launchers, or other military style equipment, that is not suitable for civilian law enforcement purposes. these law enforcement agencies can petition the department of defense for this equipment. the equipment is then sent to the local police department, which may or may not have the training to know when and how to use the equipment. often times, as we find ferguson, the military style equipment actually throws gasoline on an already burning fire. the stop militarizing law enforcement act worried curtail and restrict the ability of the department of defense to transfer the surplus military

grade weaponry directly to the streets of america without any civilian authority or approval. we want to stop that. of course, if these local city councils or county commission wants to acquire that kind of equipment for their police agencies, then it would go through the regular civilian process. it would be put on an agenda, published before a hearing, the public would have the opportunity to know what their local government is doing. they would have an opportunity to go to the hearing and say, no, i don't think we need this equipment, or we can afford it. guest: a representative from georgia. from washington d.c., go ahead.

caller: i am a junior in college, i am an african american student. 2014 was filled with hashtags, i hope 2050 is not the same. can you answer realistically what is the time span for your legislation for getting passed? guest: thank you for calling in. as a young man, i'm sure you have a lot of hope about the future, and you should. as an older gentleman, i have a lot of hope about the future as well. i am always a positive, can_do spirit, regardless of the reality of the situation. i know what is right. i will trudge on regardless of the difficulties that lie ahead.

i think you know that with our current leadership in congress, these kinds of measures, like the stop militarizing law enforcement act, the police accountability act, the grand jury perform act, these are pieces of legislation that are not parties for those who are in charge currently. we have a two_year session of congress within which these three bills will have the opportunity to be brought to the floor. the chances of that happening at this time are not particularly great. we must proceed onward. we must fight to do what is right. that is what i will continue to do.

host: next from louisiana, republican. caller: i have a couple of comments in a question. first comment __ the michael brown case had nothing to do with him robbing the store. he also talked to a police officer, then the gun went off twice in the car. at that point, the officer was pursuing him for attempted murder of a police officer. second comment, you will only hear about these cases from most of the media station when it is a white guy killing a black guy or minority. there was just a case a few weeks ago when four black guys killed a white woman. you heard about that case and then it went away. nobody called back case racists.

if they keep doing this over and over again, white people will get tired of being called racist. guest: i don't think that there is a prevailing opinion in the general public among african_americans that all white people are racist. i did say earlier that most white folks feel privilege. in our privilege, in fact. that does not mean that they are racist, or because they are white they are better than a black, hispanic, or is imprisoned. racism is a mentality of

superiority __ racial superiority. that is not what most black folks think. whether or not there are more white folks who feel that they are superior, racially, to black folks, then there are black folks who feel they are superior to white folks, i think we would probably come down on the finding that it is more whites who feel they are superior than blacks. that is neither here nor there. the bottom line is we have stories all the time of white victims at the hands of black suspects or perpetrators. when we do hear about blacks being the victims of whites, we should not blame the

storyteller or the story. we should not say that that story should not be ryan because it puts whites at a disadvantage, as a matter of fact, the opposite. i will point out that there is a case of the new jersey just last week where __ you can go on youtube and see __ there are two police officers to pull over to black gentleman in a car. after some dialogue and some confrontation at the car, the passenger got out of the car, apparently with his hands up, and the black officer, along with the white officer, shot this man. it turned out he was unarmed.

these kinds of police incidents occur, and not just with white officers towards black suspects, but also block offices with black suspects, and why offices with white suspects. this is not a racial issue. it is more of a criminal justice issue. when we stop the flow of these military weapons to these local police agencies, when we answer to grandeur and perform wear neutral and detached police agencies investigate along with the special prosecutor that then presents the case to a neutral and detached judge, then we will have some transparency in that process.

that will increase public confidence in the criminal justice system, which is something we all need in this country. host: let's hear from bill in georgia. caller: how're you doing congressman? guest: good. caller: we called your office 11 times talking about someone in missouri. the tea party saved his life and the black caucus has turned its back on us. it is them doing something like the hot dog vendor up in missouri. i don't know why you keep getting voted in office. guest: i will tell you, bill, i

get elected because the majority of citizens feel that i am doing a good job. i will continue to try and do that. i want to reach out to you as well and convert you to a voter. i think we probably miss understand one another quite a bit. i'm not aware of this case. i would be happy to hear about that if you would contact my office about that. i would certainly like to know more about it. i have not heard it from the standpoint of you calling my office, nor have i heard about the black caucus being made aware of this particular incident. i really can't discuss it with you. i will say thanks for calling. host: our next caller from mississippi. caller: rep. johnson, my

friends call me a crazy liberal. that's not the issue. i will tell you, i agree with you that we should have an outside prosecutor in any case where a law enforcement officer is involved. guest: we have established some common ground. caller: now, in mississippi, there is a saying that when you don't know what you want to do, you think about it. ever heard that? there's some things that you need to think about. i can assure you that at 74, i know there are some things that

i need to think about. i want to go back again to what we started with. i agree that there should be an outside prosecutor to look at some things when there is a local police officer involved. do you agree with me on that? that's what guest: that's the legislation that i have filed. we are in agreement with that. caller: part of what i just said was my point. host: finish your statement please.

caller: congressman, there are some other things that you said that i totally disagree with. i'm a white mississippian, and i have a lot of great black friends. guest: i'm glad that you do. i'm sure that some of them are your best friends, as a matter of fact. i thank you for calling. host: on to our last call. caller: he's telling half the story, again. his right hand was up. before he put his right hand up, the officer said, there is a gun in the glove box. they both said that. you can see his left hand.

all you see is his right hand. he was reaching for the gun or moving towards the gun, he was shot. as far as you save, white privilege. i'm a white american. full_blooded american. as you are. i'm not in congress. so, i guess you are more privilege that i am. guest: i will tell you, there is privilege that comes with being a congressman. i try not to allow that privilege to overwhelm my sense of just being a regular and ordinary workingman, just like yourself. i don't let that privilege affect me. when i do, i think the citizens will bring me on home.

i appreciate your call. i did not see that gentleman's hands in new jersey. it was dark out there. that's why i said, it appears that he had both hands in the air. it does appear that he had both hands in the air when he was shot. i'm not making any allegations as to whether or not that was accepted use of force. i do insist that that situation should be investigated by a neutral agency, police agency, like the one that employees those offices. that investigation should be directed by special prosecutor. within 90 days of the roof world to the special prosecutor, i think that is

enough time in which a prosecutor can present the results of the investigation to a local judge in open court for determination of product __ probable cause, and then prepare a report that can be sent to the local da and can either take action or not on the case. that is what the grand jury perform act would entail. we could have some transparency in these police homicide investigations. right now we have none. it destroys the confidence of the citizens in the criminal justice system. that is bad for our democracy, and i think we need to do everything we can to restore the public confidence.

host: rep. hank johnson, thank you for your time. coming up we will have our next guest, jenny beth martin, of the tea party patriots. that is coming up as "washington journal" continues. ♪ >> this sunday on q&a __ neuroscientist on the recent discoveries about the teenage brain. >> they don't have frontal lobes to reason.

the cause_and_effect consequences of actions are not very clear. their frontal lobes are not at the ready. they're not as readily accessible. also, don't forget, the bodies of those young men and women are changing. the brain has not seen these changes yet, until you hate teenage years. the brain is trying to respond to these new hormones. they are trying to __ it is trial and error. i think this contributes to the roller coaster experience that we watch as parents. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c_span's q&a. >> "washington journal" continues. host: the cofounder and member

of tea party patriots, jenny beth martin. how would you assess the current condition of the tea party? guest: the tea party is alive and growing. we still stand for the same things that we do as we began. we want more personal freedom, more economic freedom, and a debt_free future. we continue to hold all elected officials accountable. host: how have you personally reach out to the new congress? guest: we have reached out to some of the congressmen. we work __ we empower our local supporters to reach out to their own congressmen. it's not about people who work with tea party pages going out to congressmen on capitol hill. it's about local people establishing relationships and holding the senators and

representatives accountable. host: what would you like to see the group accomplish? what are some of the goals of your organization? guest: some of the things that we would like to see happen is we want a debt_free future for our country. we are $3 trillion in debt. we want to see that congress show that there is a plan working towards a balanced budget, and we can work towards paying down our nation's debt. one of the best way to do this is the penny plan __ spending one penny less for every dollar. if the congress would do that, we would end up with a balanced budget. host: the deficit is reportedly going down. what do you think about the numbers of that that going down?

is it the result of the administration? guest: when the deficit goes down, it is easy to do. when it increased so much during the first two years. what we are looking at is what is our overall debt. it is over $3 trillion. we will likely be $20 trillion in debt once his administration finishes. average hard_working americans understand that that is real money that someone will have to pay back. we don't want to see our children and grandchildren have to deal with this that. host: our lines are divided in the typical way __ democrats, republicans, independents. if you align yourself with the

tea party, there is a separate line. by now, you know that the house speaker, john boehner, went on 60 minutes this week. particularly, members of the tea party coming up in that discussion. [video clip] >> mr. speaker, can you bring the tea party in line. there are tea party groups that hold fundraisers under the heading of __ let's fire the speaker. they don't think you're very conservatives. >> my voting record is as conservative as any. the issue with the tea party is not one of strategy. it's not want a different visions. it is a disagreement over tactics from time to time. frankly, a lot of it is being driven by national groups in washington who raise money, beating the dickens out of me. >> conservative groups __

>> beating the dickens out of me. it works, they raise money. >> how many parties either? >> there is one. we continue to work to bring those members along. it is always a work in progress. host: a couple of things, but start with the idea that there's one republican party. guest: there is one republican party that is a political party. there are people across the country that vote republican and they expect the republicans to live up to their platform. the tea party is nonpartisan. we hold both parties accountable. personally, i used to be a republican. now i just consider myself an american that one step more personal and economic freedom. host: is that a fair statement about the tea party beating up

on john boehner? guest: we started because we were so concerned about our government. the government is spending at out_of_control levels. we start because we're so concerned about the debt and spending. it is specifically about the stimulus bill. what we have seen is that congress and the demonstration continues to spend. congress people get elected claiming to want to address the problem, but they're not doing anything to address the problem. our donors across the country donate to us so that we can help to amplify their voices and hold congress accountable. that account that he is uncomfortable when you are not doing what you were elected to do.

we are still increasing our data in this country. host: does the tea party take any position on whether john boehner should be speaker of the house? guest: i am the tea party patriots. we did call on our members to call on their members of congress to vote against john boehner. host: and there is the idea that you use that for fundraising purposes. guest: there may have been a fundraising email that went out about this. we did this because our members said to us, leading up to new year's day, i was talking to people working on this issue, they were concerned about this. they wanted to make a stand and say that this is not the leadership that we think should be in the house of representatives. host: jenny beth martin is

joining us. again, the three lines are for our parties, and if you identify with the tea party, there is an additional line. our first call. caller: jenny beth, you are from georgia. are you aware that there was a black man __ here in georgia, it seems to be that the tea party does whatever does to get money from big donors. what is the difference between the tea party __ also, are you for the police to stop what they are doing to the black community? remember, the first person that died in the boston tea party was a black man. guest: thank you.

i think what you are asking is what is it that we stand for. what we want is personal and economic freedom, and a debt_free future. we want congress and the menstruation to find a way to reduce our nations that so that our generation and our children and grandchildren are not saddled with our debt. we want more personal freedom. we want the government to leave us alone unless we are harming others and infringing on the rights. as far as energy goes, we want energy policy where the government is getting out of the way and allowing competition with energy. i think you also asked about police. we want police to be held accountable if they act and properly. we respect the lease and those who are enforcing our laws. we understand that they had a

very tough job and we want to make sure that they are respected. host: norm for michigan, someone who supports the tea party. caller: we were talking about the deficit. i heard you talking about the deficit. i think what a lot of americans don't understand is that under the world banking system, they are coming out with what is called special drawing rights. in this economy, the way it is going now, under the un agenda, they want to collapse this economy. they want to rebalance all the world economy so that america is brought down, and other third world economies are brought up. my point in all that is to say that what will end up happening is they will collapse the dollar, they will default on the dead, like they did in 1971 under nixon, then they will start over with the sdr's.

hopefully americans will wake up. guest: thank you. we, at tea party patriots, have supported auditing the feds. one thing we have been doing, and have encouraged our supporters across the country to support, is taking a stand and support the greatness of america. that means we support that greatness of american voters. so, when they get engaged and vote, great things can happen in this country. i don't have the same negative pessimistic view of what will happen in this country. instead, i get my inspiration from people all around the country who are holding their government accountable and who want to see good things happen.

host: from a republican line, richard. caller: i'm not a member of the tea party, but i look at the people who are running for president from the republican party __ at least 10 or 12 people now __ at any one of those people would be 100 times better than whoever the democrats will put up in 2016. i want you, as head of the tea party patriots, to hold your membership together. if someone is elected were nominated, and on one or two points does not agree with your philosophy, you hold your members together.

don't vote and sit out the election. i was actions of republican __ people that have the republican philosophy of governing to stick together and unlike a republican __ elect a republican in 2016. guest: thank you, richard. i encourage you to get involved with tea party patriots which you can do on our website. as far as the election goes for 2016, we're looking at all the candidates, especially on the republican side, but also on the democrat side to see who supports the penny plan, and who wants to repeal obamacare, and who wants to address how we

can have real economic growth in this country. as far as supporting the republican nominee, i can tell you that tea party supporters around the country really backed romney when he was nominee in 2012. a lot of them did not support him, at least in the primary, but once he was the nominee, they were out working to see that he would be collected. i think you will see something similar happen in 2016, especially if the nominee will embrace the values that the tea party stands for. i think it would be good for each other candidates to look at the solutions that the tea party is putting forth, and endorse our solutions. when they do that, i think you'll see that our volunteers will support them.

host: did you give a formal endorsement of romney? guest: at the time we did not have a super compact so we did not give any endorsement. at this time, we do have a pac aand we will see what we decide to do. host: an article saying that 45% are currently undecided, 60% for romney, 13% for bush, 6% for ben carson. guest: i think the most important thing is to watch how the field plays out and to encourage candidates to support our issues. especially the penny plan, repeal of obamacare, and tax reform. we will see how it all unfolds.

there are a lot of good candidates as we saw in iowa and south carolina the we can before. host: next caller. caller: i'm glad the caller earlier mention of upholding the constitution. the tea party is not a party to uphold the constitution, especially when their members are putting through legislation to discriminate against members of gay and lesbian communities. in marriage equality, the arrogance that. i think that is promoting discrimination. guest: aat tea party patriots, we do not get involved in social issues. as far as being the party to hold up the constitution, we are not a party. we are a movement.

holding up the constitution is up to each of us as american citizens. it is our job to look at what our elected officials are doing, and that they are in line with the constitution. when they are not, we have to reach out and hold them accountable. it sounds like you're doing that and that is great. host: you talk about the issues of freedom, why not enter into social issues? guest: we were so frustrated with the out_of_control spending. we saw that there was no grassroots organization that focus on fiscal issues. there are all sorts of organizations on both sides of the social issues that already exist. we encourage our members to get involved in whatever side of of the social issues that they exist. ours is one that focuses on

fiscal issues. caller: i wanted to ask jenny beth if she would make a note about this. i'm wondering if she would be open to bringing an event an event or 22 e. tennessee, western north carolina, in southern virginia. there are a lot of people who would like to have some more enthusiasm for the tea party. around where i live, the enthusiasm is not what it should be. i wonder if she could seriously consider bringing an event or to to the areas that i'm speaking of. guest: i will reach out to our state coordinator, lynn, who is

in tennessee and you also mentioned not the carolina to see what we can do to help you. host: mike from the divine. caller: hi, how are you doing. i know this will come out wrong, but great time, it matches __ great tie, it matches your hair. jenny beth, you are fighting me. i am a disabled person. i have a foot_long scar on my back. the republican party is doing everything they possibly can to take money out of the disability act. i feel like the tea party is behind this. this sounds a lot like what you would be trying to do. i wish you would expand on that a little bit.

to the first caller that called in, it was a black man __ it was the a black man who started the revolutionary war. guest: thank you. he does have a very nice tie. as far as disability goes, we have not said for money to come out of a specific agency or program. what we have endorsed and supported most of all is the one cent plan. that is where the government spends one penny less for every dollar that is currently spent. i think we would agree that across the board, they could find a way to reduce spending one penny. if we can do that, and

that is what we are very concerned about. i'm sorry to hear you are disabled and i think that safety nets are important. we are not out to harm you or to harm anyone. we want to make sure we have a debt-free future. host: carolyn in maryland. caller: thanks for coming on the show. i always hear people talk about reducing the debt and they talk in generalizations. i would like to ask you specifically your idea on what specific area, line item, something specific where you would cut expenditures to reduce the debt and how would you explain the cut to the people directly impacted by that cut? sometimes we just look at the money and we do not realize how it hurts people when you cut something from their schedule or

something that they need. guest: we are not focusing on any single department or agency. we support the 1% plan or the penny plan. that is where you simply spend one penny less out of every dollar that the government spends. each agency can determine the best way to do that. or congress can go about doing it. we want to say what is the way that we, as americans, can find a solution to bring us to a balanced budget? you, in your own household in many households across the country, we have had to tighten our belts when finances get tough. if someone said, you will have to spend one penny less out of

every dollar that you spend, within five years you will be balanced, most people would understand that that is something we have to do. host: you talked about safety net issues. the president talked about a desire to see free community college and coverage for child care. guest: i think the thing that is most important is making sure that there is opportunity for people to work, so that instead of using this economic hpie where it is fixed, we need to looka at a way to grow the pie economically. i don't think you do that by taxing more and spending more and giving out free items to some people or others.

the way to do that is grow the economy, cut taxes, address problems with the tax code, free yet businesses to create jobs. -- free up businesses to create jobs. host: tallahassee, florida. caller: god bless you and thank you for all the work you do. guest: thank you. caller: would you please dispel the rumors that the koch brothers are the ones that pay for this? i identify myself as a tea party republican. what can we do to bring more black people into the tea party? they were offended from day one because they do not like how we do not like obama wasting our money from day one. we want the black people to

understand we are for lower taxes, we are for protecting our children and grandchildren. we want a brighter future with less debt. guest: thank you very much. we have over 650,000 people who have donated to us. our average donation size is $45. we are not getting our money from the koch network or many people who are very wealthy. by and large, our donations are from smaller donors. as far as, how do we expand our base and be more diverse? the way to do that is to talk to people in our own communities and tell them what our solutions are how we want the same things they want for america, the same things they want for their own

households. we want to elect people who share our vision for america. it is important for us outside of washington dc and in different parts of the country, you are from florida, i am from georgia -- i go all around this country talking about people to remind them that those of us in the heartland of this country we see that the problems are in washington and it does not matter so much which party is in charge. the government spending continues to go up. the debt continues to go up. it is time to get to a debt-free future. when we hold people accountable regardless of party -- you look about how speaker banner has talked about the tea party -- speaker john boehner has talked about the tea party recently. host: you mentioned the koch

network. what do you think about the billion dollars going into the 2016 elections? guest: it is a lot of money and i'm sure we will have a lot of money from the left, as well. it is going to be a tremendous amount of money being spent. host: what do you think about that influencing elections? guest: i think that it is the way that elections are done right now. instead of sitting there trying to dismantle that system, we have done what we can to figure out how can we work within the system right now to best amplify the voices of our supporters from around the country?

as individual citizens, it is important that we pay attention to where donations are coming from and we look at, no matter which side of the aisle we are on, what do they expect in return for their donation? tea party patriots and others similar to ours, we are looking for a government that is smaller, more responsible, and leaves us alone to live the lives the way we see fit. host: what do you think is the likelihood that that money will go to candidates that you align yourselves with? guest: i would say that a good bit of what the koch network does is in line with what we want. not everything, but i think that a lot of it is.

we look for opportunities for synergy when it exists, whether it is on the left or the right. when it does not, we stand up for our principles. host: oklahoma city. sherry. caller: hi. you actually contradicted yourself. you said earlier in the show that the tea party patriots that you all came together so that you could exercise the voices of the people. you are wholly supported and are a creation of the koch brothers. particularly charles koch, who does have a social agenda. he wants to remove all of the bills that have helped

minorities to reach a certain income level. they went after education. they went after disability. they went after all of these areas that have impacted and helped to raise the middle class. they do have a social agenda. the reason why blacks do not join is a black joining any kind of tea party is like a black joining the kkk. you are all the same. guest: wow. we are -- are -- not the same. it is really important that you understand how i got involved in this movement and how people like me got involved in this movement. in 2009, rick sent tally --

santelli had a rant complaining about the stimulus bill and he asks, who wanted to pay for their neighbors bathroom when their neighbors had more bathroom than they did and the neighbor was not working or paying for their own homes? there were mortgage bailouts and others happening. that really spoke to me. i thought the stimulus bill was wrong. i thought bailing out big companies was wrong. bailing out big companies was something that really bothered me. on a very personal note, when he started talking about bathrooms and who didn't want their neighbors to pay for bathrooms i had just come out of personal bankruptcy. i had to accept responsibility for the fact that my husband and i have problems financially and we wound up having to file personal bankruptcy because of a failed business.

the business the government did not bailout for us. when we came out of bankruptcy, we got a call from our mortgage company offering us a fannie mae or freddie mac loan. who offers somebody who just came out of bankruptcy alone? are federal government did. we decided it was not right for our neighbors to be bailing us out when we were opposed to the tarp bill from 2008. we did not take that. we were actually cleaning our neighbors houses at the time. that is how we were working to make our ends meet. when he had this rant, a couple of weeks later and he called for people to have tea parties like our founding fathers did, i heard that on the radio and i said, i'm going to do that. i don't know exactly what a tea party or a protest is, but i'm going to get involved because what i think what the government

is doing is wrong. i was doing it because i had a problem with the direction that this company was going in. millions of other people are involved in our movement and that is how tea party patriots get involved. host: erin from illinois. caller: i was wondering how you feel about our airport security, tsa? they are government under homeland security and i heard that they are trying to privatize a lot of those airports, which i know that some have been privatized. i was wondering how you feel about that because i think that would be one of the most biggest mistakes you could make. being under homeland security is a deterrent in itself. i think privatizing it would open up more and more loopholes for a terrorist attack. i was wondering where that was going. i already have a fear of flying.

if they privatized it, i definitely would not fly. guest: i'm not familiar with exactly what you are talking about. i can say that i fly all the time. i know that we get a lot of frustration from the way the tsa does what they do and they are doing what they can to make sure our airports are safe. i am on airplanes generally for or five times a week. host: the front page of the "washington times." border security. the border bill had to be pulled after conservatives objected saying it did not do enough to build up the border fence. guest: that was the tea party influence. we were very focused on the immigration bill. we began to get focused on at the year before. last year, i had the opportunity to go to the border in texas. i was on the border for much of

july and some of august. i visited over 700 miles of the border. what i saw is that our immigration system, our border security is broken. it is not secured. it is very porous. what we hear from the border patrol agents is that they are not free to do their job. they're not allowed to enforce the current laws that already exist. the fencing is just a joke in many cases. i saw this multimillion dollar fence that went for five miles and then just ended. people could go around the fence. we need to address border security. when he to pay attention to the people on the front lines. we need to make sure that they have the resources they need to do their job.

host: frank is up next from new york. caller: good morning. i am calling. this is a black man, an independent black man. you can win him to the your side of the argument. there were two calls by george bush, one by mr. obama. two wars not paid for. he added $3 trillion to the deficit. adding 700 billion to the tax deficit. why did you not say anything? as soon as obama came in, you

begin to oppose it. now convinced me, miss beth martin, why? guest: convince you why. ok. i can to you that where i live, i live in an area that is a suburban area of atlanta and it is a very republican area. when mccain went and voted the exact same way that obama did during the campaign in 2008, voted for the tarp bill, people in my area where so upset that a lot of them did not vote for mccain. they certainly were not voting for sex lee chambliss -- senator chambliss. the frustration was mounting. what happened is we had the bank bailouts, we had tarp in 2008,

we had the stimulus bill right on top of it in 2009. it was a coma nation of all these bills and all this out-of-control growth and bailing out big business and people had enough of it. it was never specifically about president obama. certainly not in february 2009. they was more about the out-of-control spending we were seeing from both parties. senator mccain voted for tarp just like senator obama did. host: don from oklahoma. caller: i am a democrat. i was afraid you might not let me speak if i said so. yeah. i agree with the caller just before me. nobody said anything about the deficit when the war was going on. ok? i would like to ask beth--

host: keep going. caller: i lost my train of thought. where is best from? she is from atlanta. all right. i don't know. i'm just totally confused. host: i'm going to put you on hold for a second. we will go to regina from pennsylvania. go ahead. caller: yes. i just want to thank jenny beth martin for making it clear why she got involved. i have been involved with ron paul since the a long time ago. trade promotion authority is coming up again under fast-track trade. i wonder if the tea party would look into this.

when you talk about congressional authority, congress regulates trade. there is no reason to give any president authority to negotiate with a country and then bring it back to congress and tell them, they have a vote of up or down. that is a total lie. this happened under george bush for china. case sick comes out and he is for faxed trade. -- john kasich comes out and he is for fast trade. thank you. thank you for making it real clear. guest: thank you, regina. that is something we have not specifically taken up. we focus more on economic issues that are domestic rather than international. thank you. host: hyannis, massachusetts. the last call. caller: good morning.

thank you very much. we are just enduring this blizzard. thank god i got through. i want to ask your guest, ms. martin historically, after world war ii, there was over 90% income tax. people were proud to pay taxes back then because they felt like they were helping their country. two, as far as energy freedom is concerned, i'm all for being fiscally responsible and everything else. there is a 40,000 barrel spill in the yellowstone river yesterday due to the situation going on there. last week, as far as debt and spending, if we did not bailout our country and bailout the auto companies and the banks, we would probably end up where europe is right now. guest: thank you very much.

one difference that i think you were making is you were talking about the taxes being so high after world war ii and that is an instance where we were actually paying the generation that was incurring the expenses. right now, we are $18 trillion in debt and we are on track to be $20 trillion in debt before we have a new president. we know that this is real money that somebody is going to have to pay back and we think it is time for congress and the president to stop spending so much money, to look at the penny plan, simply spend one penny less out of every dollar, so that we can get to a balanced budget and pay down the debt for our children and grandchildren. host: we did not talk about obama care, but do you think it is realistic that you see some type of overturn happen? guest: i think as far as this congress goes, they have to act in order for something to happen.

i am optimistic that they are going to act and that they will vote to repeal obamacare again and they will continue to show the differences between what health care freedom looks like in a plan that will allow people to keep their health insurance that will protect the doctor-patient relationship versus what we are seeing now where the costs are spiraling out of control and so many people have lost access to doctors and health insurance policies. host: jenny beth martin has been our guest. guest: thank you. host: you heard the last couple of phone calls talk about trade. today on c-span, michael bowman the u.s. trade representative, will appear before the senate finance committee to talk about trade policy. you can hear those discussions live at 10:00.

do you think increasing trade with other countries is good for america? again, the topic, do you think increasing trade is good for america? we will take those calls momentarily. washington journal continues. ♪ >> this sunday neuroscientist dr. francis jensen on the recent discoveries about the teenage brain. >> they do not have their frontal lobes to reason.

the consequences of actions are not clear to them. the frontal lobes are not as readily accessible. the connections cannot be made as quickly for split-second decision-making. a lot of the hormones are changing a lot in the body of those young men and women. the brain has not seen these yet in life, until you hit teenage years. the brain is trying to learn how to respond to these no home or on's -- new hormones rolling around. it is sort of trial and error. i think that this contributes to the sort of very roller coaster experience that we watch as parents. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern. and pacific. >> " washington journal" continues. host: if you think increasing trade for the united states with other countries is good for america, here is how you can

give us a call. you may disagree as well. give us a call. according to the trade association of the government, when it comes to 2013, when it came to imports, $2.7 billion worth of imports. $2.2 billion worth of exports taking place. that is a sharp increase starting in 2009. this administration has called for more international trade. a trade deal for india taking place. the president also calling for more trade with the pacific nations. we are talking about the larger issue of trade with other countries. the numbers on the screen. think the one that best represents you. if you called us in the last 30 days, please hold off in doing

so. we will take those calls momentarily. the president just finished up a trip in india. he is traveling now to saudi arabia. the president of failed that $4 billion trade deal with india and its leaders. -- a veiled -- unveiled that $4 billion trade deal with india and its leaders. they want to do better in taking advantage of an economic relationship defined by so much untapped potential. the export import bank would dedicate $1 billion to support financing exports and imports to india. just 1% of u.s. exports go to

india and 2% of u.s. imports come from india. let's hear from you on the topic. john is from spring, texas. independent line. caller: i think trade is a good thing. i was wanting to hear about india. i wish i had talked to that lady from the tea party. she declared bankruptcy. she owes the irs. how is she going to deal with that? host: what do you like about trade? caller: i think it is a good thing. it is a good thing. host: "the hill" newspaper reporting that the president and the white house showing a need to reach out to members of his own party when it comes to a trade deal.

the white house plans to work hard to secure the democratic votes needed to pass legislation that would grant the president fast-track authority to help negotiate a parent of trade deals. -- pair of trade deals. they are taking nothing for granted, they said. the president was really hard on his state of the union speech concerned about the importance of this. matthew is up next from maryland. republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. it is interesting. it kind of goes along with deficit spending and things. taking civics classes in world history, you start to hear the word tariffs a lot. you more here about trade

negotiations and deals between nations. i see in moral hazard when you start to enter into trade negotiations with countries that don't really play by the same economic rules as our own countries. you see this in greece, in china and a lot of countries where they have a totally different dynamic in their economic structure. it is strange that we import so many goods from a country that does not really believe in the same kind of human rights when it comes to the economy as we do. where they can actually pay people so much less than wages by rule of law. it kind of disadvantages american workers because we don't have those laws, we have a competitive structure. host: do you think those kind of issues need to be based into future trade deals? caller: i think they need to back off trade deals altogether. it is not really appropriate to have the executive branch

negotiating these deals and bringing him to congress for an up-and-down vote. this is something that needs to be hashed out in the ballot box. especially with companies -- countries we see committing major human rights offenses. host: steve from hudson florida. democrats line. caller: thank you. i do believe that america should have trade with most of the other countries in the world. it should be down on a fair, level playing field to where we are not being cheated by the manipulation of funds, the import-export regulations are the same, the wages are based the same.

also, a quick thought on your prior guest, the person from the tea party. host: she is already gone. caller: it was more of a comment. i would certainly like to have a discussion with her, but she is gone. time after time after time again, the democrats have to come and rescue this country from the failed policies of the republicans. go back to the crash of wall street back in -- host: i apologize because we have to move on and stay on topic. gary from san antonio, texas. democrats line. caller: [no audio] host: you are on. caller: i am here. hello? host: go ahead.

caller: how are you doing? hello? hello? ok. host: susan, reading, pennsylvania. good morning. caller: i think in order to -- i think the average person feels the effects of fast-track in trade agreements. i think historically you have to look at how we got here. fast track was started by richard nixon. he was known to have one of the most corrupt administrations in history. he was impeached. why do you think that people are spending millions, hundreds of millions of dollars to get a job that pays $460,000? does that make any sense? that one person, one person has the power to negotiate trade agreements. our congress gave up any right.

one man has the kind of responsibility. one person can easily be corrupted. here we are with wage deflation and we are wondering how the heck we got here. i think we need to get rid of fast-track, get rid of lobbying. one person should not have the audacity to be able to do that. each one of those trade agreements were supposed to bring jobs into this country and each one of those trade agreements, signed by democrats and republicans, which is why i am independent, has lost jobs. everyone of your listeners understands that we are now a service nation thanks to ronald reagan. what does that mean? it means we do not create wealth. talk to warren buffett. there is a thing on youtube about that one. host: we will continue on these

calls. we are asking you if increasing trade with other countries is good for america. we do want to point you to a story on the front page of the "new york times." it deals with a cia officer who has been declared guilty and leaking sensitive information to a reporter. joining us is the author of that story, matt apuzzo. good morning. guest: thanks for having me. host: could you tell us about the story. jeffrey sterling is the man in question. guest: it is important for a number of reasons. the disclosure that sterling was convicted of occurred in 2003, during a run-up to the war in iraq. jeffrey sterling approached the senate intelligence committee

and said he had real concerns about a covert operation going on in which the united states is slipping plans for nuclear components to iran. the scheme is that the plants are supposed to be intentionally flawed and delay the iranian nuclear program. he was raising questions that the flaws are easily findable and that they may be advancing the nuclear program. soon after that, my now colleague, jim risen, began acting -- asking questions about that. risen included details about that operation in his book "data of four" in 2006. this investigation has been going on for a decade. they have been fighting to try to get risen to reveal his sources. when that did not pan out, they

went to trial against sterling. they had a largely circumstantial case, but a fairly strong case and one that the jury agreed with, where they convicted him of all the charges , espionage charges. this is a real win for the obama administration. host: now that he has received these charges, what is next? guest: he will be sentenced. he faces decades in prison. more likely, a judge will give him less. it is not typical that a judge would sentence in four consecutive sentences. they tend to bundle them up together. he faces years in prison. it is a real shot over the bow for the obama administration to let people know, you don't talk to reporters. what is going on here is that

the obama administration has used these espionage charges and investigations more than any other administration, more than all other administrations combined. sanctioned leaks where the white house says it is ok to talk about osama bin laden those are fine, but it is the unsanctioned leaks, typically stories that are unfavorable to the government -- those get investigated and leaked to cases like this. host: did mr. risen have any response? guest: jim has been fighting for seven years to not have to testify. he has been subpoenaed several times. he had a stare down with attorney general eric holder holder and said, if you put me on the stand, i am going to refuse to identify my sources and you will have to put me in jail. eric holder ultimately blanked. -- blinked.

so they did not call him a trial. jim said that this is bad for free press. when stories that are embarrassing to the cia lead to criminal cases, but stories flattering to the government lead to nothing. host: could you tell us where areas of national security may have been concerned from the government perspective? guest: there is no question but that this was an extremely classified, extremely closely held case. or program. condoleezza rice testified at trial and said that this was one of the most closely held secrets in the government during her time in office. the program itself dates to the clinton administration. the government says that this alerted iran to the fact that

the nuclear plans were bunk, but more importantly alerted other countries to be on the lookout for this sort of thing because this is what the united states government does. the government made its case to the jury. they disputed risen's characterizations in the book that this was a mismanaged program that jeopardized national security. host: a line in your story says that jeffrey sterling was frustrated and thought that he suffered workplace discrimination. can you expand on that? guest: sure. he filed a lawsuit against the cia saying he was discriminated that turned into a big part of the government theory on the case. the motivation for the leak was

payback for his perceived discrimination at the cia. the arguments the government gave were very strong. only one person had the information, had the motive, and was in contact with jim risen. well they could not prove that he met with him and passed the material, they made a strong circumstantial case that this guy was disgruntled, unhappy with the cia because they would not settle this discrimination lawsuit, and he decided to lash out. that was the theory on the case and they prevailed in the end. host: a full story you can read on the pages of "the new york times." matt apuzzo writing that story. thank you for your time. guest: always good to be here. host: back to your calls. taking a look at trade in the united states. ty in idaho. caller: the main reason i would

like to ask is why don't they spend the money in the united states instead of other countries helping them? i think it should just be done here. that is my opinion. host: louisiana. republican line. caller: hi. when i think about trade -- host: go ahead. caller: can you hear me? host: go ahead. caller: when i think about trade with other countries, it is obviously important, but it is how it is done that is really crucial. when you look at some of the stuff that is leaked about the transpacific partnership in particular, we could get stuck -- a municipality who does not like what is happening, a foreign country, one of their companies comes to do -- if you

see them or make them stop or kick them out, you could be liable for their losses, plus future profits. it is insanity some of the things they are putting through here. it has got to go through congress. i don't know if that would help much these days, even with the republican congress. but we have to protect ourselves and the stuff needs to be out in the open. it is insanity. it needs to go through different channels. host: darrell, long beach california. independent line. caller: basically, just recently on the news in india, you have children 8-13 years old whose parents have had to sell their children into the workforce, and we are talking about making a deal with a country that is going to have kids on the workforce.

i am a union member. in the union you got free schooling. you go to an apprentice program. it is like we are basically just flip-flopped on who the ideology should be. everyone is worried about iran and the nuclear weapons. we have russia as an enemy again. i would say there is not much smarts going on in the entire washington dc. there is my comment. host: "the washington post" writes an article. the bill's main sponsor has proposed legislation to provide paid parental leave to federal employees. you can count on one hand the number of countries that don't

provide paid leave for the birth of a child and the united states is part of that club. the office of budget management says that the six weeks of paid parental leave would cost $250 million annually. bill from alabama. democrat line. caller: over the history of humanity, an author named stephen think pointed out something interesting. when trade exists between nations, hostilities go down. i am setting aside all of the technicalities involved with trade and all of the economics, but in general, when two

countries are trading with each other, the likelihood of violence between the two countries is reduced for obvious reasons. they have vested interest in each other. in general, it appears that trade can be a way of solidifying the world view of cooperation and so on. i hope that when the trade deals do occur, they occur with a good deal of sophistication. thank you very much. host: up next is mario. to know what, new york. good morning. mario is from connecticut. i'm sorry. caller: good morning. my comment is on what you just recently aired about the journalist you just had on. you did not mention that the cia basically fumbled the foot all. they handed off these documents

to what they trusted to be an agent that was cooperating with them. he turned out to be a double agent and in turn handed over the paper to the iranians and they found out the ruse was up. as for as the trade deals trademaking beneficial to the united states. but let us be honest with ourselves. we are exploiting these countries so that we can benefit our capita and we don't really get to the basis of where we can make a global democratic push by interacting with them on an equal basis. that is my comment. thank you. host: shanna from new york. independent line. caller: good morning. i feel, from my perspective that the trade agreements are really harming the united states and many ways. i went on a nafta trade mission in 1996.

what i saw was that is soon as we went over the border, it was more about the u.s. government supporting mexico and guaranteeing the mexican government trade treasuries so that there would be investment there and it took a lot of jobs away from here. one quote that the politicians should think about is that thomas jefferson said something to the effect that we should have trade with everyone, but alliances with none. the trade missions end up losing american jobs, but also end up where the american taxpayer is funding other countries. host: a tweet regarding bowe bergdahl. he is being charged with desertion. the army has decided to charge him.

according to a former military intelligence officer, he told fox news, he learned of the military decision from two sources. bowe bergdahl will be charged with desertion. that is from fox news. john from texas. independent line. caller: yes sir. i just have a question. i want to know, is there anything that we trade for from these third world countries and that kind of stuff, is there anything that we trade for that we can make here at home and put our people to work? 99% of the people that we trade with hate us. we are making them rich. it is not any cheaper to buy the stuff from over there.

it absolutely makes no sense to me whatsoever. we can be energy independent. we can make our own junk. we have plenty of plastic to make toys out of the you can go to walmart for and all that kind of stuff. it just absolutely makes no sense to me. host: "the wall street journal" puts out a tweet. there is a link. if you go to the story, you can find it online or in the paper. it talks about what the federal government will offer from 2017 through 2022. the government is required to take every five years.

cap from michigan is next. -- pat from michigan is next. caller: the reason i think it is not good for america which was evident when they started touting up the consumer sales over christmas. even though they expected a big market. we are the mass market. the price of things does not go down. they still charge us the same price, they just increase the amount of profit they make a making things over in vietnam or china bangladesh or wherever they are making them. if americans cannot buy it, who is to be the market? host: jonas from maryland. caller: thank you. like the lady just said previously, who is going to be the new buyer?

i think it is going to be china and africa. they want to replace the american consumer with a new desperate, upcoming economy. the american boom is dead and done and i am only 33 and that is what i believe. you can get cheap labor overseas , but they don't put tariffs on it. the thing we have here to export is financial terrorism and weapons and drugs. that is it. what about the chinese? $250 billion trade deal they did with latin america? and now we are communicating with cuba. host: the white house is considering changes to the way doctors are paid under medicare. medicare's current payment system known as fee for service

costs taxpayers $352 billion last year. according to the federal centers for medicare and medicaid services critics say the traditional payment scheme failed to discourage overuse of services. the agency said alternative payment structures represent 20% of medicare payments and that will rise to 30% by 2016 under goals set by the obama administration on monday. this marks the first time medicare has set specific goals for expanding the scope. gail from new jersey. caller: yes, i think that trade is good for the united states. i would like to see trade policy go through the congress, so that issues are understood.

host: would you look the president to have the power to do it? caller: no. i would like to see it go through the congress so that it is transparent and we know what is in it and so that we can understand how it can be done in a way that is fair to america. the goods we are importing are not as good as the goods that we manufacture. i want us to understand the issues so that we get a better trade agreement than the ones we have had in the past. host: chris christie announced

that he is setting up a pac of his own. he and his allies have filed paperwork. his advisor concerns the formation of the pack. he gives them a vehicle to support his travel as he ramps up for the expected bid that will need aggressive fundraising . leon in brunswick, georgia. republican line. caller: i think it is a bad problem that we are losing so many jobs to fair trade. in china, we sell them like tractors or anything like that. they will make the same tractor by tearing it apart, see how we build it, and selling it cheaper than what we can sell it for.

host: would you and future trade deals altogether or change them? caller: they would have to be changed with a cannot copyright. host: transportation equipment was one of the larger specific categories and exports in 2013. that was followed by computer or electronic products, machinery and petroleum products. when it comes to imports for 2013 the larger specific category was computer and electronic categories -- products. that was followed by transportation equipment oil and gas, chemicals machinery. otis in great falls, south carolina. thanks for holding on. caller: i think it would be good

for you to get the tractors back in the united states and bring jobs back to the united states and south carolina. caller: all right. i am calling to say that our president must help the patent office with a simple call. so that patents are receptive so that we don't have to go into long litigation. we have a lot of intelligence in our country. we have people who apply for patents who have had businesses for year. small entities. we have to respect to them. the inventors are what cause a lot of the great things in our country. facebook was one great thing. there are many mark zuckerberg's of all races. blacks, american indians, the handicapped.

litigation should not go even passed a month. litigation for a patent evidence that they made the products, it should not go past. patent inventors should not be treated poorly, you was not have a to this product. a good mind is a good mind. you won the case, but you are not going to be a light to get anything beyond it. host: the senate finance committee holds a hearing today and they will be hearing from president obama's trade man. that hearing will take place right after this program.

you can see the room where they are just about to go in just a few minutes. up until then, your calls on increasing trade. caller: i have been listening to a lot of the callers, the republican callers. it sounded like they were saying they do not want the trade agreement. that is probably because they think the president is the one is doing it. it is the republicans who are interested in the trade agreement. the democrats have been against the president with the trade agreement. i just wanted to make that clear that it is the republicans who are pushing the trade agreement. host: what do you think about the democrats resisting the president on this request? caller: i think it depends. he is saying that the information will make it much

clearer and better than what has happened in the past. once it is done, i guess they would get to see whether or not it is clear and some of the concerns that they have have been taken care of. the important thing i wanted to say is that i hear all the republicans talking against it, but they are talking against the president. they don't realize it is the republicans who want it. host: a lot of people calling in to talk about trade policy. a hearing that takes place today starts in just a few minutes. if you are interested in following that. rocky, the republican line, go ahead. caller: i would just like to talk about how someone has the hugest cock -- host: russell, democrats line. i probably just have to stop you there. it looks like members of the senate finance committee are coming in.

we start this hearing. it features michael bowman. the u.s. trade representative. the trade policy of the obama administration. >> the committee will come to order.