back -- historically black colleges continues. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. and >> when i announced our strategy into december, i said that we are stronger when we work together. today, i submitted a draft resolution to congress to authorize use of force against isis. host: that was president obama at the white house yesterday afternoon after sending a request to congress to fight isis in iraq in syria. that sets the stage for renewed debate over the effort.

this morning, we are opening our phones on that debate. we want to hear from you. give us a call. republicans can call -- the numbers are on the screen. you can also catch up with us on social media on twitter or facebook, or e-mail us. and a very good thursday morning to you. this presidential request to congress is the front page story of most papers around the country.

we will be taking you through that authorization for use of military force. here is what "washington post" had to say -- here is the president and a little bit more from that address from the white house saying what is not is in -- what is not in the authorization for use of military force. [video clip] >> the authorization does not call for use of ground forces to

be deployed to iraq or syria. it is not an underground war like afghanistan or iraq. the 2600 american troops in iraq today largely serve on basis. and yes, they serve face the risk that come in any combat environment. they are focused on training iraqi and kurdish forces. as i've said before, the united states should not get back into another prolonged ground war in the middle east. it's not in our national security interest, and it's not necessary for us to defeat isil. local forces know best what position to take, and that is what they're doing. at the same time, this resolution trikes the necessary balance by giving us the flexibility we need for unforeseen circumstances.

for example, if we had actionable intelligence about a gathering of isil leaders and our partners did not have the capacity to get them, i would be prepared to order our special forces to take action, because i will not allow them to take safe haven. many flexibility, but i also -- we also need to be careful to deliver. host: and for more on this work hours request from a we want to turn to patricia been girly, a reuters national security correspondent joining us on the phone. it seems the restrictions in the aumf, as it's being called, have time limits for ground operations, but it does not define what that means. is that correct? guest: yes, those are the two issues.

but the president did say he intended that for the next president and the next congress. host: what are the next steps and how does congress plan to go about this? guest: those are all interesting questions. the next steps have already begun senators mccain and corcoran talk to the caucus about the issue. and hearings are starting. there is a hearing in the house today. in fact, the house for a fair committee is having a hearing to talk about the threat is by isis. the foreign relations committee is promising hearings very soon. of course, congress is having a

recess next week, so after their break they will adapt. and they will be having hearings on most right away in both houses. there has already been a steady series of consultations, and ensure the administration will have officials here regularly. and then after that, it is accepted to go through committee , and in house it's the foreign affairs committee, and in the senate from foreign relations committee. they will discuss it and run up their own versions of the bill. and then eventually, something would go to the florida house and something to the floor of the senate. -- to the floor of the house and something to the floor of the senate will stop -- of the senate. i'm not sure who will have the

better debate, but i'm sure there will be lots of discussion. host: discussions of what to do with isis have been going on for six months. what is the timeframe for that final signature if it does happen after all of this debate? guest: it depends who you talk to. earlier this week, one of the democratic members of the house said he could envision a vote as soon as march. others are saying it could take months. in the news yesterday democratic representative adam schiff, who months ago submitted his own version of an zengerle -- of an aumf at a news conference with senator mccain and said that he thought there were many members who still might not want to vote on the issue at all. there are just people who do not

want to put themselves out there on an issue as divisive as war. host: how much are you expecting that the congress can change what the president sent over yesterday? will there be a lot of rewriting the president proposal? guest: speaker boehner said yesterday that you could be sure it would change. i've heard a whole range of things for members, some on the left have said that they want the 2001 aumf. that is the one that was signed literally within a few days after the september 11 attacks. allowing the u.s. to go after al qaeda and its affiliates. some have said at the no go for them -- it is a no-go for them. host: four viewers that are coming to this, what is the appeal of that when?

-- that one? that when authorized military force specifically in iraq. guest: yes that one authorized use of military for the iraq war. it was the last one that was passed. this is the first one in 13 years. the 2001 method has been used to go after al qaeda and its affiliates but it has been used as justification for everything from the current ongoing fight againstisil, which started out with airstrikes in iraq. human rights groups have come out and said that it seems to justify in this war -- endless

war anywhere in the globe. and al qaeda and its affiliates are still a threat to the united states. it's an ongoing battle that still needs to be fought. host: plenty of debate to happen. patricia zengerle from reuters, we appreciate your time. and we're asking our viewers for your thoughts. karen is up first, calling in on the line for democrats from california. thanks for getting up with us. caller: i think this is a pretty good idea. i think the original iraq war [indiscernible] and this terrorist group is so effective at rounding of the world's terrorists then we ought to fight it out and take

care of the threat. hopefully, we will get a critical agreement in the region . but we should let the local partners take the lead in the fight. host: what difference is a make to you whether congress signed off on this use of military force? does it change the world view of u.s. involvement here? caller: i think already it does because like we've noted, the president has been working without authorizations already. it shows that the administration is ready to launch some pretty -- at least some limited ground operations in the short term. that is a strong message in and of itself. and obviously, for the judicial and legislative and executive checks and balances, this is an important issue and should have been dealt with earlier.

but i think it will be pretty effective and if it is too short a time frame, the terrorists might just wait it out. i think president obama should be maybe a little more aggressive in deploying ground troops in a supportive role. it is kind of disingenuous to say there will be no ground operation. obviously, a lot of things are in play. host: can is up next, lancaster south carolina. ken, what do you think of this authorization for use of force sent to congress yesterday? caller: yes, my opinion about that is isis, i was watching a documentary about iraq and it all started with the shia not wanting the sunnis to be involved in the government. who's side are we taking?

with libya, it is chaos. with egypt and mubarak, it's chaos. now we want assad to go. host: what would be your message to your congressman on how to vote on this new war powers resolution? caller: get the countries in the region involved. you know, saudi arabia, let them use most of their military force and their money. they've got more to lose than we've got. they are 18,000 miles away in syria. they ain't got no planes. they got no navy. it's a big deal, but they are

blowing it way out of proportion. it costs millions of dollars a day to keep this going. we are already $18 trillion in debt. it's just outrageous. the american people are still going for the same ballgame. we always need host: a bogeyman. -- we always need a bogeyman. host: that is can in south carolina. one of the members, cathy mcmorris rodgers, came out and talked about what she believed was the lack of strategy in region. here is what she had to say in the house. [video clip] greg i rise today about my deep concern about the continued expansion of islamist terrorist groups and the continued threat they pose to the terrorist people. today, the president asked for authorization for a limited action against isis.

but make no mistake, this request does not constitute a strategy, nor does it constitute or result. in august, the president promised to degrade and destroy this terrorist army through airstrikes and military assistance to our partners. since then, his efforts have remained lacking, while isis's sanctuary has grown to this size of maryland. and has signaled a willingness to work with the brutal dictatorship, assad regime. even of a contribute -- even though they contribute to this crisis. we pay a heavy price when we appease brutal dictators and turn a blind eye to evil. the american people deserve stronger leadership from their commander-in-chief and hear directly from him how the action he is asking congress to authorize will destroy host:

isis. -- will destroy isis. host: cathy mcmorris rodgers on the floor the house yesterday. we want to hear from you. the numbers are on the screen. you can always connect with us the a facebook as well. on our facebook page, sandra reising -- sandra writes in about the restrictions specifically the three-year timetable. she writes, no timelines. and above that, brian --

karen on our twitter page -- we can talk about that later with two of our congressional guest later today. one of them is on the public affairs committee, dana rohrabacher. that is the committee that is taking up this resolution on the house side. but we want to hear from you in our first 45 minutes. our phone lines are open. rich is up in south bend indiana, the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. one question that has not been as is, with all of these soldiers are flying, what are we going to do when a u.s. plane gets shot down? and it will, the more missions you go on, the greater the odds it will happen. a u.s. plane gets shot down and

our pilot gets killed like the virginian-pilot was killed -- like the jordanian pilot was killed. what we going to do? the army recruiting office opens at 9:00 a.m. for all of those people that have been writing into you. i seriously doubt that they will be standing in line. host: as far as your comment about the pilot being shot down what to you want to? the president has said that the request is specifically limiting and ruling out ground combat operations. do you think that is a fair balance? caller: no, it's time for us to leave. this is an arab problem, not ours. 4486 killed in iraq.

what was accomplished? please tell me, what the heck was accomplished? we created 4486 goldstar moms. what did their kids die for? what the heck was accomplished? host: rich in south bend, indiana this morning. here is more on the aumf this morning. we want to get your thoughts on this congressional debate that is now starting on the president's war powers request. joe is in woodbridge, virginia the line for republicans. joe, good morning. caller: good morning to you.

i think one of the lessons we could learn is that it's much better to deal with secular dictators than to deal with radical islamic monsters. i think george bush probably made the first mistake by getting rid of hussein, and obama has compounded the problem by basically getting rid of syria's assad getting rid of mubarak in egypt, gadhafi in libya, and so on. those messages, -- the message is, a secular dictator who is not prone to our style of democracy is much more prone to civilization in the region than these monsters from isis. host: if that is the lesson, then what do you do with the really -- the reality on the ground? what is your message to congress on the authorization of the use of military force?

caller: my message would be to look at the overall strategy and what is in the best interest of the u.s. the reality on the ground is that we've lost two thirds of iraq to iran. iran territorially controls two thirds of iraq through malicious. -- malitias. we need to have a relationship with southern syria. we can establish a friendly nation and a democratic nation in the middle east to counter the iranian influence. then we should establish a quick reaction force. i would say, about 40,000 troops special forces combined

with their power. and anywhere isis rears up its ugly head anywhere in the world, we should annihilate them. the goal should not just be to stop them or deter them or to stop their advance. these people must be destroyed. they are us first to mankind. host: stick around for our next guest, dana rohrabacher. on a recent trip to northern iraq, he met with members of the kurdish government as a proponent to sending records to the kurdish government. we will talk to him specifically about the issues you just product. we will go to michael, tucson, arizona, on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: i can hear you, michael. go ahead. caller: they've got it all wrong. this type of warfare has never participated in any time in

human history. we are not fighting a nationstate here. as a former marine, i know. we are not fighting countries. we are fighting a war against terrorists. this is a global war. this war that this president has engaged in is unprecedented in human history. you can name: no country that -- you can name no country that has ever entered into military action like this. the job of a terrorist is to bring horror to you, to terrorize you. there has never been a war like this in our human history. host: michael, you say you are a marine. did you serve in iraq or afghanistan? caller: i served in afghanistan for -- in 1970 nine. i served in the united states marine corps in the fleet marine force from 1979-1986.

i've never seen a war like this before where you are fighting terrorists that have no home country, no borders. they are technologically sound now. they know the internet tweeting, and everything else just like everybody else. the difference with this terrorism is, this is what bush was talking about. but bush made two mistakes. he went to matt -- went to afghanistan where i was in the tora bora mountains. he messed up that region completely. he to out all the resources. he went into iraq will stop the myth that all up. -- he went into iraq. he messed that all up. host: how do we win against these terrorists? caller: this is nothing new. terrorism took place with before the war them in the middle east. you cannot win a war on terrorism, because terrorism --

it's not an art, but it's something that is practiced because people choose to practice it. terrorism has no religion. terrorism has no true military force. terrorism has no borders, no countries. this is a practice that is mostly for people who want to do things to bring harm, horror dysfunction, overthrow governments. they use religion as an excuse. host: all right, michael, i get your point. some others waiting to call in mass line four independents. good morning to you. caller: good morning. about terrorism, terrorism is just a word used by other countries that don't like other people. but as far as we are isis was started, they wanted to

overthrow assad, and we helped them by giving them weapons and training them. annette is what happened in man got the. we got caught with our -- in benghazi. we got caught with our pants down. we were shipping weapons there. that's what happens with the united states always having its hands in always countries starting chaos. in an eight try to blame everybody but ourselves. we have to look at ourselves in the mirror. we are the terrorists. and as far as calling them terrorists, these people are freedom fighters. we rated their land in 1991 when we went over there in the first gulf crisis and we've been over there ever since. host: all right that is richard in malden, massachusetts. jody on the twitter page writes in that most of the world wants us out of the middle east. if changes to come, they want to be the one to do it.

or they are to be the one to do it. with a drake let up republican member of congress -- we played you a clip of her public and member of congress cathy mcmorris rodgers. here is some reaction from the democratic member, brad sherman democrat from california. chris van hollen, democrat from maryland writes this.

in terms of the 2001 aumf they has been referenced several times this morning, here is a bit on that from birth ackerman in the "new york times."

and he notes that before giving the president new powers, congress must rescind the old one. market in milford, new hampshire, line for republicans. -- mark is up next in milford new hampshire, line for republicans. caller: the comment i have to make, there was one of the democrat colors were later on for so there was a man named james foley from new hampshire who was beheaded by isis. and the other girl, kayla mueller, she was just muted -- murdered by isis. when you murder an american citizen, that is the problem with this country, that is an act of war against the united states. it not just a middle eastern problem. we need to do something about it. president obama, he is drawing down troops in afghanistan and iraq that over the last three to

five years isis has built up in this area. they have a stronghold in northern syria and it is a serious problem that needs to be dealt with right away. i think of a ground troops, but gets forces in there. the guys that are cutting the heads, take them out. we cannot just the back and do nothing when american citizens continue to be murdered over there. host: al is next on the line for democrats in california. go ahead, sir. caller: good morning, sir. if i was obama, i would get every man, every woman every tank, every plane out of the middle east. turn it over to the republicans who are always complaining about everything and let them handle it. host: what do you think the solution would be if it were left in the hands of the republicans? caller: i don't know what they

would do. they are always complaining. i doubt if they would do anything. they are not the american people. host: here is the speaker of the house, republican leader john boehner talking about the president's request that came over yesterday. [video clip] >> the delivery of this authorization is the beginning of a legislative process that will involve hearings, markups and i'm sure, changes. at this point i think we've got an awful lot of work to do before we get into what i'm for and what i'm against. i think we need to go through the process. quest in terms of flex ability what does that concern? >> i believe we will authorize military force. the president should have all the tools necessary to win the fight we are in. as you've heard me say over the last number of months, i'm not sure it's a strategy that has

been outlined. a college the mission the president says he wants to -- accomplish the mission the president says he wants to college. he says he wants to dismantle and destroy isis. i have not seen a plan to a college that yet. host: usa today notes that military leaders were says i've -- were satisfied with the language in the proposed authorization, but would have preferred a measure that had no restrictions on the kinds of troops that they can deploy what they can do, and how long they can stay. that is the usa today, and their storage of -- story of the coverage. milton in washington -- terry in milton washington, line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning.

it's time to stop rewriting history. there were mistakes first made just going into iraq. and getting rid of the generals getting rid of the police department to stop bush signed -- getting rid of the police department. bush signed the release. the saudi's are the ones funding crisis. nobody wants to talk about the saudi's. one of the things that the bush administration said that once we went into iraq and got rid of saddam, the spread of democracy would go throughout the middle east. we don't like what we are seeing, do we? the spread of democracy has gone throughout the middle east. we don't like it. it's time for us to get out of there. let the tribes solve their problems and if they want to get ground troops in there like lindsay graham and john mccain do, send out the south carolina

reserves, the ohio reserves, and let john boehner, lindsey graham, and john mccain explain to their constituents why their sons and daughters are dying for this mess. host: chris in alabama writes on our twitter page -- let's go to joe, adams, tennessee, light for republicans. good morning, joe. caller: good morning. i've been watching your show. i spent two years with the air force in turkey. i've been in trusted -- interested in the middle east ever since. i'm very concerned about what is happening. unless we take immediate action and do what needs to be done to totally eliminate this threat they are coming over here. and some of them are already over here right now. we need to stop quibbling over

the semantics and syntax, and get some action going. and totally eliminate this threat. when you put in a highly compromised leadership, all you've got is confusion. it's time to act. too much talk and too little action. host: before you go, you say this time to act. the efforts against isis by the u.s. military forces have been going on for about six months. do you think this debate by congress changes anything? caller: i think it prolongs the confusion. there is too much confusion. most of the american public is not even aware of what the true facts are. there is a concerted effort to keep the public in the dark by the top broadcasting stations.

and this thing about one of the news anchors was a witch hunt, you know, on something that happened years ago. we need accurate reporting, but we need action to totally eliminate the threat from isis whatever it takes. otherwise, we are in for more beheadings, more kidnappings of westerners. we need to wake up, and we need to prepare for what it's going to take to get rid of these people. host: that is joe in adams, tennessee. robert in california, line for democrats. good morning, robert. caller: how are you doing? host: good, go ahead. caller: i have a comment about what to do with isis and all that is going on in the middle east. all of this tension -- all of this intended to keep the folks divided so the western countries

can maintain control of the world. all of the conversations that we have, it's all in the weeds. you talk about what we are going to do about isis, there's nothing to be done. we talk about abstract stuff that doesn't mean anything. as long as people around the world don't come together and stopping divided and realize was happening to them, the people of color around the world, then the people who are imposing their will they will stop and take notice. that's my comment. host: virginia in west liberty kentucky is next, line for democrats. caller: i would like to say that back, i think it was 2014 inmate, the president gave his great speech. some of it was on the nsa -- 2014 in may, the president gave a great speech. some of it was on the nsa and he

said that he wanted this repealed. he does not believe in perpetual war. of course, this is what this will be. i doubt the republicans will repeal the aumf of 2001, because of the military law and gitmo. because under military law, he would now have approval to get rid of -- or i guess you would say, release, some of the prisoners in gitmo. also, the president's record is exemplary compared to other administrations. we've had one attack on us on foreign soil, that is benghazi. there have been no attacks on our soil. yes, there have been some incidents, but they were not terrorist attacks.

under bush, there had been quite a few beheadings, where terrorist groups had captured some of our american people and they had been beheaded. i am for what the president is trying to do, get a coalition together of those most affected by terrorists. what jordan did. i don't think people realize we had been doing that since august. since august, we've been doing airstrikes against terrorists in syria and iran. where is the glory that this president is going to get? where is the pat on the back he needs? he needs support from the american people. host: that is virginia, with liberty, kentucky. the speech that the caller was referring to, you concerning

find online in our c-span archives. www.c-span.org have plenty of speeches to peru's through there. you concerning find when she was talking about issues with the aumf. on capitol hill yesterday, the house passed the bill approving the keystone pipeline for the second time this year, but a veto is expected by president obama. the legislation passed by a vote of 270-152. we nine democrats voted with republicans -- 29 democrats voted with republicans in favor. we will be talking about the issue with congressman mcnerney, democrat, coming up at about 8:30 a.m. this morning on "washington journal." the president would have 10

days, excluding sundays, to issue what would be his word veto since he has become president. -- third veto since he has become president. amy harder writing about the keystone xl pipeline vote. and in news of ukraine and the ongoing discussion of the conflict in eastern ukraine russian and ukraine leaders have reached a cease-fire deal after 17 hours of talks on the ukrainian conflict, this according to the guardian newspaper this morning.

more news, of course, is expected you come out of that this morning. and finally, we want to point out that the egyptian court has freed two al jazeera journalists that have been on bail in egypt. the two men were imprisoned in june. according -- in june, along with a not throwing colleague. -- an australian colleague. we've got time for a few more calls on the president authorization on the use of military force. eric is waiting in stephenville, texas, the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning, sir.

isis is one of our major problems we have today, and they haven't even begun to do what they are planning on doing stop -- on doing. the first thing we have to do is get the top man involved in isis . you get him, we can pretty much control the rest. but you've got a get them out of our white house first. host: ed is in salem, new york, line for independents. caller: thank you. i want to say that a lot of these people's comments, i think, are very well thought out.

and i don't think of the congressmen, senators, legislators, and the president gets it. they are the stupid ones. the american people are not that stupid. i'm meaning, our leaders. they don't get it. they work for us. they are our employees. we play them -- pay them. they need to pay attention to what we want to do. what is the american people want? the american people want to be peaceful, like the rest of the world. most of the countries you visit third world countries, iraq, iran, afghanistan, you name it syria, and on and on, and that includes israel and russia, they all want peace, the general populations of those countries. they just want to do their farming, raise their families, and enjoy life. what does that all mean? you cannot go in and start fighting with everybody. when you take a look at isis they are car would -- they are

cowards, absolute cowards. if they weren't cowards, why do they have to cover their heads? why do they have to hide? host: one of the colors in this morning's segment that thate beheadings of u.s. citizens is a direct reason why we need to respond to isis. what would you say to that? caller: i would say that he's absolutely correct. i think we need to respond. however, the response is left up to people who aren't paying attention to what the american people are saying. that is the american people's fault. the american people have gotten soft. we leave the country. we leave the country -- we lead the country. we leave the country, the american people. -- we lead the country, the american people.

i've talked to congressman and senators over the years hundreds of people. host: we will be joined in just a few minutes i congressman dana rohrabacher, republican from california. gary on the line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. i listen to a lot of these colors calling in, and they've got to remember what happened in world war ii with nazi germany and how it came back to haunt the world later, like the catholic church for taking sides and not doing enough. i think our government knows a lot more about what they're doing than they let the media know. i think the media is one of the worst enemies of the people giving away some of our plans and procedures.

but i think we are softening them up right now, and slitting of their lines. and eventually, we will have to go in, or we will have to look back at it the way we look back at nazi germany in the future. -- the way we look back at not to germany. in the future, as far as how we handle this. host: as we said, up next congressman dana rohrabacher will join us. we will continue this discussion on the president's effort to seek authorization for use of military force against isis. and later, california democrat jerry mcnerney to talk about yesterday's vote to approve the keystone xl pipeline. we will be right back. ♪

>> here are some of our featured programs for this president's day. on c-span two's booktv, live coverage of the savanna book festival with others and topics like the disappearance of michael rockefeller and for women spies during the civil war. and on afterwards, former senior adviser for president obama david axelrod, on his 40 years in politics stop and on c-span3

-- 40 years in politics. and on c-span3 the one at hundreds anniversary of the birth of a nation, starting with an interview with declare. -- digg lck lair. find our complete television schedule at www.c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. call us. you can e-mail us. or send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation. like us on facebook. follow us on twitter. keep track of the republican-led congress and follow its new members through its first session. , best accent, on c-span, c-span2, c-span radio, and

www.c-span.org. "washington journal is quote continues. host: guest: [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, ♪ -- host: we are joined by congressman dana rohrabacher. what is your impression of this authorization of the president sent over? guest: i have not read it yet so i hate to give a specific decision on the language. it's going to have to have some very tough language, or definable terms that would give me comfort that the president is not going to use this as an excuse to put large numbers of combat troops, you know regiments or divisions of troops , in that area again. host: we've been fighting isis

for six months now. what changes with this debate happening in congress? does anything change with what is happening, in terms of over there? guest: yeah, well, first of all there are many people who want to get totally out of that region, which is we've heard some callers say. but we do know we've got to support those people and those elements in the region who are opposed and offer a different alternative to the islamic people who live there in the middle east. and i think that isil has crystallized that, that we have to offer an alternative. that is not mean we pick up the sword and fight their fight for them -- that does not mean we pick up the sorted by their fight for them. but we should be behind the alice-asisi and others who are

willing to fight. and we can draw others into the coalition, so we don't have to send american combat troops. but we should be supporting them with backup air support, etc. host: one of our collars in the first segment was advocating for more support of the kurdish peshmerga fighters. guest: exactly. host: do you think they are our best option right now? guest: well, they, and the jordanians. king abdulla and the crown prince of abu dhabi. as well as egypt. we've got people there.

just focusing on what we can do to help those people defeat this evil force. and isil, you have jury remember -- you have to remember, this seems like a new force, but it's nothing more than radical fanaticism. the words that our president does not seem to be able to utter, islamic terrorists, but that is what they have been for over 10 or 15 years. this is the same group, really. it may not be the same organization, but the same group of people who slaughtered 3000 americans on 9/11. we make mistakes when we are not giving wholehearted support to those people in the region to fight the fight themselves. host: if you want to talk to congressman dana rohrabacher this morning as we have this conversation, the phone lines are open.

the numbers are on the screen. and as those viewers are calling in, i want to ask about your recent trip to northern iraq and what your spirits was. guest: i visited irbil which is in the kurdish region. i believe we should recognize the kurds as an independent country. many of our problems stem from the fact that we have british colonialists, these imperialist of 150 years ago responsible for drawing a lot of these lines. and a lot of these countries were not countries. they were just the creation of some british imperialists 150 years ago. the kurds deserve their own country. they are a national entity. we have been trying to bend over backwards and placate groups of people who are not necessarily

our friends. we are trying to calm in a people -- to accommodate people who we don't know if they are friends. stick with your friends. find out who they are. give them as much support as you can, and let's forget about baghdad. let's deal with the kurds. host: and that includes military legal aid to -- guest: the kurds? absolutely. host: what about arming syrian rebels will stop at the place you have expressed concern in the past. -- what about arming syrian rebels? it is a place you have expressed concern in the past. guest: the president needs to get it right. using the words islamic terrorist might indicate a mindset that might give him the wrong directions as far as who to support and who not to. for example there were

demonstrations early on in his presidency. they called it the air spring. welcome he was very supportive. and guess what, in a ron -- in iran where he should have been supportive of the democratic elements, he couldn't bring himself to support those people against the mullah regime. i think the president has some judgment problems based on his own perceptions of who is the good guy and the bad guy. we should be doing what we can -- we can determine that, all of us. who is our friends? and get behind them. the good not localized to get solidly behind president a l-assis and provide him helicopters at a time that we

know egypt is just teetering on becoming radical. if we lose egypt, it's gone. in our present has a link of a halfhearted support to the non-fanatics in egypt. -- our president has only given halfhearted support to the non-fanatics in egypt. host: go to our first call. caller: we gave wholehearted support in iraq. i remind you of the transportation minister who was put in there by officials. his name is al-amari. he is pro-radicalization and has been leading militias and he is a shiite. i would like to know, give me the names of those syrian moderates that you are so blatant on arming. guest: i never use the word

moderate. you used the word moderate. we are talking about people who are freely to the interest of the united states and are not engaged in fanatic, radical islamic terrorism. yeah, there are a lot of forces there that may not be considered democratic or moderate that we could get behind to defeat this enemy which threatens our security as well as the security of every person in that area. -- in that area who is not a fanatic muslim who will not join their team. for example, this is more controversial. i don't see any reason why we should not be trying to enlist assad. he has an army and an air force. his armies never going to join forces with the radicals to

attack western interests there. at the very least, we know that. these other people are trying to help what has happened. -- are trying to help and what has happened yet we have been giving our weapons to the bad guy. and by the way, let me just note -- when i come down on the president about his shortcomings in being able to deal with radical islam and make the right decisions to position us toward overcoming the challenge, i do not say that the republicans should be growing -- crowing. we have to remember, it was george w. bush and his invasion of iraq that got us into this situation so deeply in the first place. host: on assad for a moment, do you seem as a legitimate actor in a process? guest: yes power military -- in

world war ii, we helped joseph stalin, for pete's sake. this is really the thing group that brought these are radical fanatic islamists and we need to make sure we can work with those people who will help us defeat that which is our primary enemy. host: how you are on with congressman dana rohrabacher. guest:caller: my biggest concern is that if we central out there that they weren't taking care of the troops a first time. i am a disabled vet and have been waiting a long time for my v.a. claim. the president is in charge of the v.a. and i have to admit i talked to jeff miller and

bipartisan support and i have concerns they are not taking care of us now. they haven't built hospitals and 45 years. we are not getting our benefits. i would like to hear your comments on that. thank you very much. guest: you are rightfully worried. i just have to say with this administration, we know there was a cover up of the condition of the actual of the lack of efficiency going on. this administration oversaw a covering up of that and adequacy of them doing their job at the v.a. i think veterans -- i do think we need to take care of our veterans. we need to make sure we

understand and we republicans understand that it was george w. bush and his father who sent all of these americans over there. i think that was one of the great mistakes our country has ever made. now we have to make sure that those brave americans who stepped up, took those orders from the republican presidents are taken care of. i think you are worried about that and have every reason to worry, especially since we are spending more money to send more troops in. i don't believe in major deployments in the gulf anymore. host: let's head out to colorado. charles, go ahead. caller: i agree with you that we need to support the forces over there with king abdullah and

people like that to create a stable middle east. one thing in this issue we always have to keep in mind is that radical islam is an ideal. they are coming after us. one of the biggest rallying cries for al qaeda was we had a base in saudi arabia, the holy land of the muslims. that was how bin laden recruited thousands of these radical islamists. we also have to address guantanamo bay as another big rallying cry. it is the biggest rallying cry -- and the biggest rallying cry whatsoever is our supporting israel. and not going to the two state solution.

guest: i don't care about trying to answer their battle cry or their organizational cry. these are a bunch of masochistic murderers using their religion as an excuse or as a motive. it is also a recruiting tool for them to conduct themselves as animals. let me just say that we should not be having policy based on what will prevent people from attacking us in the islamic world. we should do what makes sense to us to make sure those people in the islamic world who are muslims and are willing to work. i believe 90% of the muslim people certainly don't go along with these radicals. the radical islamic terrorists

are motivated by their religion. they are trying to radicalize all their fellow muslims. the worst thing we could do is make this a muslim versus christian battle. right now we have many muslims who -- the northern alliance that defeated the taliban in afghanistan, they are all muslims. we should have been backing them all along. our government was basically backing the taliban during the 1990's. and when we should have been supporting those people who ultimately became the northern alliance -- then we ended up having to send troops into afghanistan to do their fighting. we didn't have to do that either. i was all for making sure we provide those people like the

northern alliance the air support they need or the weapons they need to be able to defeat these radical islamic fanatics. for us then which is what george w bush did, that is when things go haywire and put our people in jeopardy. we have more veterans to take care of because they are putting their lives on the line rather than have the local people do the job they are supposed to do. host: jan in orlando, florida. good morning. caller: i only have a couple of comments to make. the first thing this representative said, i did not read the speech. i don't know what is in the papers of president obama and

what he asked for yesterday. he had that from yesterday until this morning, but he hasn't read it. he was probably trying to make his plane tickets to go home because he only has five more days. guest: look, ma'am. those type of personal insults are unnecessary. the fact is that i plan to study this with the -- i plan to study what the president suggested. i was busy doing work in washington yesterday. you don't have to insult people who were care thinking we don't care as much as you do. i find that my colleagues care a lot about their job. they are good people. i have my disagreements with them, believe me. i am an outspoken guy. you just heard me criticized the republican party and i am a republican.

i don't doubt people are trying to do what they think is right. i think in many areas we disagree. you didn't have to try to insult me. host: it is a spec to go through the foreign affairs committee in the house. when it -- would it come to your subcommittee first? guest: not my subcommittee, but my committee. and it know it would not -- and no it would not. it would go directly to the full committee. host: what is your expectation of when a final vote might happen? is it months? weeks? guest: within a matter of weeks or sooner. i don't have a read on this particular president's offer. host: that back and forth, are you expecting it to go on? guest: yes and i want to take a

look to make sure there are some real limitations on the type of military forces we can put into that region again. i do not want to see the major deployment of tens of thousands of american troops go back into that part of the world again. that is wrong. it does not work. i will look at what the president is asking us to do. host: what about a specific time limit? there is a three year time limit that could be renewed by congress. is that something you would be ok with? guest: it sounds ok to me. i want to see to what extent the limitations are that he is putting on the actual deployment of large numbers of american troops before i given three years to do anything he wants. i don't think i will do that.

host: ken on the line for independence. ts. good morning. caller: good morning representative, we have met before. i hope we can change gears here a little bit. when you are looking at isis in general as being the problem that they are, it seems to me like all i hear about is that they have identity problems. why can't we do something about offering them a better deal? maybe creating something like a level of a red cross or something where they can begin a good identity to support people and help the people who become homeless or injured. if they would just turn their weapons in and be part of the

cure instead of the -- guest: you think maybe we should offer the ss and hitler's armies a way for them to feel better about themselves so they don't have to wear their uniforms? come on now. anyone who has gotten involved with the organization knows that they are murdering people. they are putting guns to the back of their heads, burning people alive in order to try to terrorize you and me. this is in some psychological esteem problem we will solve the psychology. we will have to defeat these people. when you to work with those people who will kill them so they don't kill us. host: chicago illinois is next. beverly on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: good. caller: i hear the gentleman say president obama won't call these people radical muslims.

what do you call christians when they behead blacks, castrate blacks, thro firebombs and churches killing innocent children all because we are black? why don't you all call christians radicals? guest: you are talking to someone who has used that phrase. we lived in north carolina when i was going up. this is in the 1950's. i am fully aware we had people who thought of themselves as christians who are carrying crosses and burning crosses and brutalizing and terrorizing america's black population. i agree there are a lot of people who deserve the criticism that you just made, but it is not me. host: i want to ask you about a different region of the world. this morning, we found out that a cease-fire deal has been announced.

a cease-fire in eastern ukraine is expected to go into effect on sunday. this comes in a week in which the white house has been debating sending lethal aid to the ukrainian government. your thoughts on that peace deal and whether the u.s. should send lethal aid? guest: we should not send lethal aid. they had about 8000 that's so far, maybe a thousand 500 people -- 8000 deaths, maybe 8500 people. we will succeed in having 30 to 40,000 -- having 30,000 to 40,000 people killed there if we send in lethal aid. these are people who are clearly an evil force. this is a geopolitical struggle.

ukraine is caught between europe and russia. it all started, which people don't want to admit, when there was an overthrow of an elected prime minister in ukraine. it snowballed from there. it is not as open and shut a case right now. i am very happy the european leaders are reaching out and trying to find a compromise with putin and with the people in the ukraine who are totally flabbergasted when their prime minister who they had elected, was overthrown. it appears some of our western european allies were working in cooperation with those who overthrew the government. host: the last time you were on

this program, there was a vote that happened in congress that i wanted to ask you about. you wrote about on your website. has resolution 758 was a resolution strongly condemning the actions of the russian federation which carried out a policy of aggression against neighboring countries and aimed at political and economic domination. guest: i think the charges against who were greatly exaggerated -- charges against putin were greatly exaggerated. he has many flaws. the whole situation started when our european allies were involved with elements in the ukraine to overthrow a democratically elected prime minister. we have to realize that this

isn't just putin committing an act of aggression. things got confusing. there is a conflict. our goal should be to end the conflict and find copper mice. -- to find compromise. host: when we have these truce deals, can we expect a sod to cooperate? guest: the 8500 people who have lost the lives during this, the biggest number are of people who are in these towns and villages who declared they don't want to be under the group in kiev the overthrew the democratically elected government. there has been indiscriminate showing that in these cities resulted in large -- there has

been in discrimination showing that these cities resulted in large amounts of death. i am not saying prudent should have sent his own troops in. i think we should try to be a peacemaker there. we have to find out who our primary enemy is now. it used to be the soviet union. a group there wanted to promote a dictatorship on other countries in the world. there were willing to use force to a comp us that. -- to accomplish that. we eliminated that threat. we did it in a way where we didn't have a war with russia. our threat right now is not the soviet union. that is gone. putin is not the leader of the

soviet union. we need to figure out how to defeat the islamic terrorists. hooton would be a grant ally -- putin would be a great ally in this. we have to find out who our primary enemy is, focus on it and enlist hooton and others to help us defeat the enemy. host: we have 10 or 15 minutes left with congressman dana rohrabacher, the chair of the emerging threats committee. we have a caller in vermont, good morning. caller: one of the things i am concerned about is the dysfunction of our military. the issue is not the actual boots on the ground people. it is the mismanagement or whatever it is possibly the

political correctness of it all that handicaps our military of just getting the job done. why don't we just make a group of people of highly skilled and trained people that want to kill isis. cut them loose and let them do their job so we can be done with the political correctness. guest: a good friend of mine is the founder of blackwater. when he tried to make sure he was offering that type of alternative, he has been targeted and vilified as if he is a bad guy, when he is really one of the wonderful heroes. he is a hero where people have turned against him. he has gotten nothing but abuse for trying to do good things in the defense of our country.

i agree with you that we should try to let some of our military people who are operating on their own work with these various governments. i do see any reason why people can't go there and volunteer to help the kurds, for example. i have been in a few situations like that myself. that is an american approach. we had letters of marquee that we sent our own citizens out to fight the good fight against enemies of our country. host: let us had to north carolina where will is waiting. good morning. caller: good morning. my question is, how do we defeat isis? it is not a country or a state that we are fighting. it is an idea. these people are radical. they are out of the norm.

if we go in there and capture 200,000 of these people, what will we do with them? guest: let me say this, and as a republican you have heard me criticizing george w. bush. we shouldn't have gone into iraq . herbert walker bush could have avoided the first gulf war. for some reason they got compelled to get rid of saddam hussein. it was getting rid of saddam hussein that unleashed this evil in a much greater territory that threatens so many more people than just the evilness of saddam hussein within a iraq. let me couple met the president

-- let me complement the president. there is an adequate use of special forces now. we are utilizing the air support. we could be using that much more effectively. we have drone strikes. i think that is great. you find out some later that is actually organizing these terrorist efforts that are murdering hundreds if not thousands of people, let us target that leader and go in with a drone and get him. i think the president has had that kind of strategy which i agree with. i don't agree with this president that he has not been able to wholeheartedly organize a coalition that would actually defeat radical islamic terrorism. he has a problem with identifying who the good guys and bad guys are there. host: pennsylvania is next.

lawrence is waiting. good morning. caller: congressman, i want to come, you on your -- i want to come plement you. your stance on medical marijuana was spectacular. i want to thank you for that. guest: it was my amendment which we finally succeeded in passing on the appropriations for justice bill that basically stated that if a state legalizes the medical use of marijuana the federal government will not step in and supersede state law. our founding fathers meant that criminal law should be local and state and not the federal government. this should be left up to the

states. let me just note that the gentleman was talking earlier about caring for our veterans. medical marijuana has -- by making it illegal, we are not able to research to find out what these properties are that could really be helping people. i believe medical marijuana has some things that could be very useful in helping our veterans. i know in one case of a person that i know very well, his son signed up right after 9/11, and when they came back, one of them had been in an explosion under his vehicle. he was having seizures everyday. he said they couldn't do anything. every day, seizure after seizure. the v.a. wasn't doing anything for them. finally avi dr. pulled him aside

and said meet me in my office. he said you need medical marijuana for your son. he give him a prescription and now this brave veteran doesn't have seizures anymore. he said my son hasn't had a seizure since we started doing that. last year, we try to make it legal for our veterans administration people that if a doctor think civil work, to utilize that -- that if a doctor thinks it will work to utilize that. my family and friends and guys i love about her that down to not let the v.a. use medical marijuana to help these people who we sent overseas. i got 50 republicans to help me pass that law that says if the

state says it is ok, the federal government will not intervene. maybe we will get more support from republicans on the state's writes. -- state's rights. if we really believe in state's rights and a doctor patient relationship and individual responsibility rather than have the government control our personal lives, which republicans are always talking about, we need to make sure medical marijuana is not taken away from people who might be able to use it to help overcome their suffering. host: preston in idaho is next. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, you are on. caller: pardon me? host: you are on the air.

caller: i have a big question about the crisis the whole world is in right now. that is over in the middle east. the kurds are more willing to chase them all the way to iran if they had the right weapons. they don't want their country taken over. during the iraqi war, we drew a big red line and called that country kurdistan is what we should have done. guest: i agree with that. our administration cannot get behind the guys who are our friends to help us to think this evil force. the kurds -- they want to placate the people in baghdad

who are not necessarily our friends. i think they are not our friends. in order to placate them, we are having to say our military agents have to go through baghdad. that is ridiculous. we have had the president, who has been unwilling to help those people in iran itself -- we should be helping groups of people who will be our friend. whether it is king abdullah and general sisi -- this administration supported a peace conference about iraq in london about a month ago. host: the one where the curtis represented as were not -- guest: they were not even

invited. he insulted and betrayed the ones who are doing the most fighting and the ones who are most reliable on our side in the middle east. this president seems to have done that a lot to our friends. host: jack from pennsylvania on the line for democrats, you're on. caller: you keep referring to islamic terrorists. if you lived in19 in 1920 with the kkk lynching and burning people would you refer to them as christian? guest: yes i would. not only would i, but i have. i lived in north carolina in the 1950's, and it was very clear that you had a terrorist group in the united states who were claiming to be dedicated christians who were out terrorizing the black people of this country.

they excused themselves with bibles and crosses all the time. they were christian terrorists. fanatic christian terrorists. they were. host: dana rohrabacher, i want to appreciate your time. up next on "washington journal" we would will be joined by jerry mcnerney to talk about the keystone pipeline vote yesterday. shortly after we will continue our c-span bus tour of historically back colleges -- black colleges and universities.

>> the political landscape has changed with the 114th congress. there are 43 new republicans and 15 new democrats in the house and 12 new republicans and one new democrat in the senate, that there is also 108 women in congress putting the first african-american republican in the house and the first woman veteran in the senate. keep track of the members of congress using congressional chronicle on www.c-span.org. there is lots of useful information there including statistics about each session of congress. new congress, best access.

>> this sunday on q&a, thomas allen harris explores how african-americans have been portrayed photographic images from the time of slavery up to today. >> some are they work of the per willis. -- of deborah willis. they are very much aware that there is this other narrative that was going on in which black people were constructed post slavery and even before the end of slavery as something other than human. it was part of the marketing for memorabilia and stereotypes that now would be considered declasse. in terms of ways and in which

we might see ourselves and others -- >> on c-span's q&a. "washington journal" continues. host: joining us on our show today is another congressional california member of congress, jerry mcnerney. he is a member of the energy and commerce committee. the house passed another keystone pipeline deal. this is the second of the year. 29 of your fellow democratic members voted in favor of this specific measure. what happens to this measure from here? there is some expectation of a veto from the president. is that a veto fight he can win? guest: he has issued a veto threat, and i think he will follow through with that. i am not sure if it'll sustain in the house and senate. host: some of the democrats to

join republicans on this bill have called this a jobs bill. they said they are supporting this measure because of the job creation. where do you stand on what the keystone xl pipeline can do for jobs in this country? guest: it is not an easy call. it has the potential to create jobs in this country. in my opinion, the keystone pipeline is not really necessary. we are already the biggest oil producer in the world. oil prices are falling. if the pipeline got built, i am not sure it will be used because it would be too expensive. host: the bill the house voted on yesterday was a senate version of a keystone approval bill. one that they debated and had many amendments. with their amendments in that process that you supported and amendments you hoped could be another piece of legislation down the road? guest: the were amendments such as acknowledging that climate change is taking place.

i think it is important for the senate to stand up and say that and pass with sufficient votes. those were nonbinding votes. they didn't have any outcome on the bill itself. they have a good message on some of them, but they didn't do much. on the other hand, if we can get that certain thinking into legislation, that can be helpful. host: one amendment was on energy efficiency, an area that you are obviously outspoken on. guest: energy efficiency is important because you get the biggest bang for your buck when you can reduce our consumption of fossil fuels which contribute to climate change. if we incorporate energy efficiency thinking into our energy policies in the future, we will be better off. host: we are talking with congressman jerry mcnerney.

he will join us for the next 45 minutes or so on "washington journal". " kevin is up first, calling from iowa on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. first, i want to say the first congressman you had on there saying he was right about the christians. my point on the keystone pipeline is how can any congressman want to pass the keystone pipeline when there are farmers in nebraska that are against it going through their property. you are giving a foreign company the right to go through american

citizens'property citizen's property. i don't understand how you are giving a foreign company the rights to go through a citizen's property. guest: thank you for that question. i tend to agree. lots of people in nebraska are concerned about the pipelines going through the farmlands and the region. the pipelines have failed. to have been big spills in the past. it is the right to refuse a company putting big equipment on their land. i voted against the bill because i think it is an environmentally detrimental bill. the full to nebraska should have a right to say no to this. host: if gas prices go back up

is there more pressure on this administration and congress to pass the keystone x pipeline? -- the keystone xl pipeline? guest: it will have a large impact on the way people think. if gas prices are low, people will be more interested in conservation and ways to save money. when gas prices go up, there will be actual pressure to do that. right now, gas prices are low and they seem like they will continue to drop. that is an important factor in how we think about the pipeline. in terms of gas supply, i think america will continue to be a big supplier. host: what is your reading of the process that the president and state department and executive administrations are going through in the approval of the keystone pipeline? guest: they are looking at all the aspects to make sure the

pipeline does not hurt the american economy. to want to make sure it is not an environmental problem in terms of spills and the effects of global warming and climate change, which could be aggravated by the dirty form of oil coming out of canada. host: we have jesse in maryland on the line for independents. caller: a of quick points leading up to the question. fossil fuels and global warming, with nuclear power being the sustainable clean energy source and for the sake of getting behind the state's energy completely and the federal government's promised to the nuclear industry decades ago that they would provide repository for the waste. why not for some resources behind more nuclear research?

guest: thank you jesse. i agree that nuclear power is something we need to have in our back pocket. right now, one of the problems with nuclear power is people are so distrustful of it and so afraid of nuclear accidents. we need to make sure technology is sound and safe. we need to be very transparent to the american people about what we know about the potential for accidents, about what would happen if there was an accident. if people are not culpable with nuclear power, it will not happen. it is in our national interest to make sure we have nuclear power available and we develop nuclear power at a level that would be supported by the market public. host: you have a background in wind power. if you could talk about that and at what point if ever renewable

energy production can replace some of these other energy needs we are talking about. guest: i am very passionate about renewable energy. i spent 20 years or so developing wind energy technology. it was a great way to spend a career. i have seen the technology start from a very primitive technology. year-by-year in improved and became more reliable, more cost-effective. now wind power is very reliable and effective and cost-effective. solar energy is coming down. we are seeing more solar energy installed in california and around the country. we have mandates as to how much power comes from renewable energy in california. we see we are able to meet those goals year-by-year. it is a matter of making the determination to do it and letting our technology and

entrepreneurs -- letting our entrepreneurs develop the technology. i think we have a great future. i think we can gradually displace more and more of the other forms of energy with real renewable energy. i think the future is great. host: one question on the proposed keystone xl pipeline from twitter. guest: trains are more expensive and are more subject to failure. what we need to do is look at american oil. keystone oil from the tar sands is dirty. it produces a lot of carbon. we have american oil. i think the twitter user is

right. any form of energy we use will have some form of detrimental effect on our environment, so we need to become more efficient. that is one of our earlier comments. you get the best bang of your buck with energy efficiency. we need to reduce the amount of energy we waste. i think we can come to a place where we have a sustainable system with a small amount of fossil fuels being used. some nuclear and some are noble. host: let us go back to maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for having me on. in the interest of transparency, i think it would be better for you to advocate for renewable energy so people are not taken aback with the idea you don't like the fossil fuels.

what i don't get is that this oil will be refined here in the united states because we have the best refineries or we have one that can handle it. if we will build the pipeline why not find a way to compensate farmers and landowners so that if they do build the pipeline, they get a benefit out of it? host: i will you answer -- i will let you answer. guest: fossil fuels and particular liquid fuels will be needed for ever. we will have cars and airplanes and transportation needs that require liquid fuels. we need to make sure we have a supply of liquid fuels in this country. when he to make sure there are sufficient refinery so we don't subject our customers to supply hikes and price hikes in a volatile market. on the other hand, we need to balance that with the need for the environment, the need to

create energy that a sustainable and stable that will have a printable price point, and i think renewables the that. there are some challenges with her nobles -- some challenges with renewables. we need some backups. it is a complicated energy question. i am certainly enthusiastic about renewables, but i see a need for fossil fuels and nuclear power in the future. host: we have a talking with the authorization for use of military force this morning. here is the front page of the "usa today." what is your reading of the draft resolution that came over yesterday? guest: the president is trying to find an answer to a problem

here. it is our response ability in congress to examine the proposal and decide if it is something we can accept. if it is we should pass it, and if not we have the ability to modify or rejected altogether -- or reject it altogether. american soldiers are the most effective and most professional and most well-equipped and best trained fighting force in the world. put them in a foreign country where they are not wanted, and no matter how good they are, it will still be a very difficult struggle. what we need to do is find partners in those countries that share our values. when we have partners that sure those values, we can work with them that.

en. if we can take some of the young officers to become professional soldiers with good values and send us back -- and send those soldiers back. it is a long-term project. americans have to decide if we are ready to make that long-term commitment. host: the language that was in the proposal, are you are you seeing the language in there where it needs to be? guest: the way it is written now, i think we could commit american troops to the field. i am not sure that will be a successful strategy. if we use air power, it has to be very limited and targeted. right now, i feel like there is a little too much leeway on the issue as well as using drones. when you are using air power independently, you will create

more problems than you will be able to solve. host: back to the callers. robbie on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. every time they show the map on the pipeline, they are showing like it is coming through missouri. why are they showing that? is a coming to missouri -- is it coming to missouri? how close will a be to the missouri river? guest: when they show those large maps they are more or less cartoons of what is really happening. the detailed map will have some contour in it. host: if you want to see the map that is in the " washington times" today is here. the expansion is the dotted red line here.

one of the conflicted areas of where it goes through is here in nebraska. let us go to steve in scottsdale arizona. good morning. caller: good morning. i was watching the debate yesterday on the house floor talking about we need efficiency with our fuel. it seemed like it was very inefficient. they had the same arguments repeated over and over again. republicans said the exact same thing maybe 100 times. democrats had their view with the same thing. can we figure out a way to more efficiently debate the issue? let us have all the scientific facts and analyze them.

then let us come up with a solution. they are saying obama will veto it so the whole thing is a big waste of time. i sat and watched it for three hours and thought what a waste. host: thank you steve. a lot of times, these debates that consist of each side rehashing talking points. guest: several pieces of legislative initiative have been introduced knowing they would not go anywhere. i think we voted for the 54th or 55th time to overturn the afford will care act. i think this is our third vote this week on the keystone pipeline. these are not going to go anywhere. i would rather see us sit down and put these partisan games

aside and do what is necessary for the american public. there are plenty of issues where we are working together. for example, on energy efficiency, an issue we have talked about on privacy. when issues become too volatile, it is difficult to compromise. that has to do with the way campaigns are financed and the way negative attack ads are out there for anything you decide to do that is controversial. we have a lot of work to do in this country. one of the things we can do to make things better is to reform the way the campaigns are financed. host: if the debate sense familiar to you, this that from the wall street journal story on the keystone vote -- this is the 11th time the house specifically as approved the keystone legislation. since 2011.

charles is next in virginia on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. i have three questions i would like to ask. the first question is is this pipeline going to benefit the people in the united states? the second question is is the reason why our guest solo low is because they're trying to pass the pipeline? my third question is what oil company in the united states is behind all of this? i will turn the tv on to hear my answer. guest: i wrote them down and i hope i got them right. there will be some benefit to americans if the keystone pipeline is put in. mainly in labor. transcanada has been meticulous about developing logic labor agreements -- project labor agreements. i think that was wise of them to

do that. there will be refineries that will employ people that will be beneficial. i don't think it will have much of an effect on gas prices in this country. because of the way the world oil market works, most of the oil will be shipped overseas. host: the other question was that he wanted to know the oil companies that might benefit from the keystone xl pipeline. guest: i don't know the answer to that question, charles. one of the other question you asked is about the gas being so low because of making the type line pass. the recent gas prices are dropping now is because american producers are producing more oil than they have in a generation since the 1970's because of

hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling. new technology has been developed over the past 10 years. there is a lot of -- there are a lot of different market forces at play. host: we are talking with congressman jerry mcnerney of california. and energy consultant in congress. the subcommittees he works on -- environment and the economy. we have about 20 minutes or so left with him this morning. dean is waiting in north carolina on the line for public and's. didn't -- on the line for republicans. caller: it is my understanding the nuclear energy that we produced the waste from -- we have no place to store it and no desire to find a place to store it.

for nuclear waste that is 15 plus years old. if the green and renewable energies are being bought up by the oil companies and if that will continue to happen, how can we expect the cost to come down on green energy or renewable energy? guest: thank you dean. nuclear waste is an issue when he to be worried about. i did work on nuclear waste as a graduate student. i have a phd in mathematics. it was one of my studies. there is technology that would be to ensure the safety of nuclear waste. problem is getting a local region to accept putting it in their region. it is understandable that people would be reluctant to allow

nuclear waste. you not only have a potential for some waste leakage, but also the transportation of nuclear waste to the facility and so on. right now, we have the -- the department of energy in the past did a poor job of informing the public of what the project meant and what it was about. there was no transparency. people turned it down. this goes back to my earlier comment about transparency. if you're going to do something like nuclear waste coming to have to let the people know what is happening. you have to be completely open about the risks and rewards. there are rewards to putting nuclear waste in your region. it will create jobs and technology. that is our biggest challenge. it is a sort of political public relations challenge with regard to nuclear waste.

there is a lot of nuclear waste out there that needs to be dealt with. the sooner we do with it, the better. your other question was about renewable energy. it is a free market. if they wanted to buy stocks in renewable energy, it should be allowed to do that. the market will determine whether renewable energy is a couple -- is acceptable. i have seen it come down to three cents or four cents a kilowatt hour in a good location. it is competitive would just about any form of energy. it will find a way into the market. solar is just about the same place. the market will determine the future ever global energy in my opinion. some require 30% of the energy to come from her and will bowls -- to come from renewables.

that will help determine the future of renewable energy. host: i want to bring you into a discussion that is happening on twitter about the keystone xl pipeline. pointing out that the original keystone pipeline comes all the way down to the gulf. someone responded on twitter that it comes down to capacity at how much oil can be shipped through the original route and how much would be -- and how much more would be shipped through the new keystone xl route. when these groups that support the pipeline come before your committee, can you talk about the capacity argument? guest: i haven't heard the capacity argument so much. the southern part of the keystone pipeline is already in place. it is the part through nebraska

and the northern part that needs to be constructed. thehost: the southern part from cushing to the gulf coast here. guest: that is right. the problem is that the heavy oil is different than the oil that is normally pumped into the united states. it is heavier. can use to be heated under a higher pressure. the pipeline has to have special properties that are not required in other pipelines. that is part of the problem. the capacity of the existing lines may or may not be sufficient. i would not want to put that heavy heated high-pressure oil into the existing pipelines without a lot of engineering beforehand. host: on the line for republicans, good morning. caller: good morning. i am a republican, but i think this climate change problem is a problem for civilization.

there are two books that are very important that have recently come out. one is called don't even think about it, why our brains are wired to ignore climate change by george marshall. wired to ignore climate change. there is another book this changes everything. capitalism versus the climate. there was a pbs special about the melting glaciers. is there some way that congress do they have a book study group? host: congressman? guest: climate change is progressing. even the most committed republicans are starting to admit that. is it caused by human activity? can the united states do anything about it? those are concerns that need to be addressed.

we are dumping a lot of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year. the temperature of the ocean is increasing. we see migrations of biological systems. the evidence is clear that it is happening in the longer we wait to take steps to a dress climate change, the more expensive the solution might be if there was a solution at all. we need to take steps as soon as possible. i will continue to be that drum. it could change the makeup of

civilization if it is left untreated. host: sheldon whitehouse, a democrat from rhode island, with his charts, discussing climate change. viewers can look those up. in the meantime we will go to frank, montana. good morning. are you with us? we will try another frank scranton, pennsylvania. caller: my question is -- host: turned on your tv and talk through your phone. caller: these pipelines will be going through private property. through rivers and railroads and highways and parks and going

through sacred indian land. hasn't the united states stolen enough land off indians already without going through their lands? on top of that, it will go down through the refinery. what will happen with the residue from that? it is the doherty us -- it is the dirtiest oil on earth. host: several concerns from frank. guest: thank you for those questions and concern. i agree that the pipeline is going to have to go through private property. people should have some amount of say of whether that is allowed or not. the state of nebraska is struggling with that issue and it should be. in terms of refining, when the oil goes to refineries, it does not come out as gasoline.

there is tar kerosene, a lot of other products. i do not think there is too much waste that will be the result of this oil. it is dirty because they have to dig, it is like an open pit mine . they have to dig into the earth and get it. i have to use a lot of equipment. it is heavy. it produces a lot of carbon dioxide per unit of energy produced. that is why it is considered dirty. host: wayne, west jefferson good morning. caller: i would like to make a brief statement. i am beginning to wonder if the president of the united states is a worst-case scenario, and at, best case scenario, --

worst-case scenario, inept. why can he do to control reliance on false information to global warming and climate change? guest: i am not sure i agree the information on climate change is false. we see evidence everywhere. all of the glaciers has been receiving. we see severe storms droughts the ocean turned more acidic. that is detrimental to shellfish . the united states can be a leader. if we start limiting our carbon emissions, it will require other

countries to limit their carbon emissions and the manufacturing of those products. since we are such a large consumer, other countries would be forced to follow suit. that would set a precedent and how the united states can show leadership. host: we have about 10 minutes left. you touched on this earlier. i wanted to give you a chance to talk more about it. a constitutional amendment on campaign finance reform. >> this is important for our country. every election, it seems more and more money spent on campaigns, new records being set. that is detrimental to our

democratic institution. it makes our government ineffective and wasteful. there are programs that are being supported that should not. what i am proposing is that we change from the current system, where there is money going everywhere to allowing only money coming from individual citizens and that money only goes to the candidate's principal campaign committee. host: political packs could not give money to political candidates? guest: that is correct. host: had do you think the courts would see that argument that you are making, especially when we have heard about the free-speech argument, in some of

the -- about the free-speech argument come up. guest: they would not be able to overturn anything like that. it is a very big list. you have to have two thirds of the house and senate pass it. it is important that american people understand what is happening in campaign financing and want to make a change and let people in washington know they want change and let state legislature know that they want change. i am putting out a strong proposal. i would like to see people discuss it and it become part of the national dialogue. we see the possibility of money coming in from foreign sources because the new supreme court

decision has made for anonymous donations and anonymous contributions to campaigns. this is a real threat. host: john, virginia beach. caller: before world war i, there was a recession. the demand for oil and steel rose and we followed the 1920's with prosperity. the 1930's was a recession again. hitler got into world war ii got us in there, and again demand for oil and steel rose. 1950's, another prosperity. now we are in recession and the price of oil has gone down. the demand has not risen.

to the other part of my question, how we can boost the economy and instead of subsidizing the oil companies to make more oil why don't we subsidize them to produce industrial hemp. it produces 10 times more than corn ethan all. better for the engine. it works on closed carbon cycle. it sucks and all the carbon that it puts out. host: i will let you comment. guest: i appreciate innovative ideas. i would need to look into the claim about the hemp being more effective in terms of producing oil that can be transformed into petroleum-like products. we need to be open-minded and let innovators create new

technologies. we need to focus on energy efficiency. much of our energy is lost to building inefficiency, building lighting, transportation is inefficient. there is a lot we can do. i want to make sure we have the opportunity to follow down that path. host: ron, the line for democrats. caller: i am against the pipeline. sooner or later, government is owned by big oil and it will be pushed down our throats regardless. i would like to see legislation developing a better pipeline as well as many more shutoffs in line with that pipe, so if there is a leak, you do not have

thousands of gallons spilling out, it is only limited to a few hundred or the shut off valve would almost automatically shut off. why is washington and forcing petroleum companies to develop their industry better? it is the same thing they have had for years. guest: your concern about the safety of pipelines is well-founded. there have been leaks that have been devastating. we need to have high standards with regards to the pipelines. energy is not necessarily a clean business. the more efficient we become, the less we have to use dirty energy sources.

host: lois, palm harbor florida. caller: my question is, i would like current, up-to-date status of the oil spill in our yellowstone river. i will take my answer off-line. thank you. host:guest: i don't have any information on a spill in yellowstone. i cannot answer that question. host: she also wanted to talk about who is pushing for the keystone xl pipeline. guest: it is natural for a

country want to see their products exported. right now, some of the labor unions are favorable because the good jobs that it will create. these are understandable interests. what is the trade-off? is the pipeline going to be used? is global warming a concern that needs to be addressed through the pipeline issue and other issues similar to that? i do not think there is one big interest pushing this through. the refinery's want to see that happen but i think there is a lot of foreign interest in the products that would be produced and refined and shipped overseas. host: we will leave it there. we appreciate your time.

up next, we will continue our series with our c-span bus going to historically black colleges and university. today, it is on the campus of spelman college. during a hearing on the 2016 v.a. budget request, robert mcdonald got into a heated exchange. here is a bit from that hearing. [video clip] >> in the budget submission, for the office of general counsel, you a list, as recent accomplishments, defending against complex litigation such as the construction projects in orlando and denver. how is that a success? you lost in case on every single point for the hospital in my district. hundreds of millions of dollars

over budget and years behind schedule. the only way construction could continue was that the general contractor demanded that the management personnel be kicked off the project and the army corps of engineers be there to take over the project. that is just characteristic of your glossing over the extraordinary problems confronted by your department. this is a department mired in bureaucratic incompetence and corruption. there is no substance. >> i am offended by your comment. >> let me finish, first. as unfortunate as it is, at the end of the day, at the end of this president's term, you will

not have made a difference in changing the culture of this organization. >> i am offended by your comment. i have been six months. you have been here longer than i have. is there is a problem in denver you own it more than i do. when i went to l day to solve a four-year-old lawsuit, you are calling for a hearing to discover what happened five years ago. >> for you to say you are going to the army corps of engineers to advise you as to how to correct the extraordinary problems, what i think you need to do is focus on providing health care benefit that veterans have earned and get out of the management business and

cede it to the army corps of engineers. each project is hundreds of millions of dollars is over budget. >> we work closely with the corps of engineers. the general has been a good friend and has been very helpful. he does not want total responsibility for the construction. we are going to work with him and find out the right balance. we appreciate your help to get that building finished and get it finished for a good value for taxpayers. >> i hope you can make a difference. >> if you want i will give you my cell phone and you can answer the calls and see if i am making a difference for veterans, or go on the websites. >> of the fundamental challenge -- >> i run a large company, sir.

>> the fundamental challenges for this organization to reflect your values. i am not sure that is going to happen. >> i need your help. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we continue our visit to historically black colleges and universities. the buses on the campus of spelman college. it joining us now is beverly tatum, who is live on the c-span bus. you are a race relations expert. in the wake of ferguson and the wake of the "black lives matter" marches, is there something unique about the conversation on an all-female campus? guest: our students are concerned about the issues of our criminal justice system and

how it impacts the community while the ferguson matter has been focused on black men certainly, young black women are impacted as well and they are concerned, not just for themselves, but for the communities they represent. host: the fbi director is going to give a speech addressing relations between police and blacks. he will lead into the national debate about the relationship between the two. it will be the first time one of the bureaus' leaders addresses the issues at length. what do you think he has to say? guest: he needs to speak candidly about the problems. there is one. it is not a recent one, but it has a long handing his every in

our nation. i hope he will speak not only to the past but to the present and the future. host: what changes do you want to see? guest: one of the things we talk about, we want them to think critically about social issues. when we think about the criminal justice system, the increased likelihood of being stopped either walking while black or driving while black, those are important, but more than that, when are the public policy issues involve them what role they can play. coming to spelman is a choice to change the world. we want our students to think critically about how they can make a difference.

host: we are talking to beverly tatum. if you want to join the conversation, phone lines are open. eastern and central regions 202 caller:. we will be getting to your calls for the last 40 minutes of our program. this is the 50th anniversary of dr. king's marches in selma. can you talk about female leadership in the civil rights movement? guest: there is a book called

"undaunted by the fight." he chronicles the role of's bellman -- chronicles the role of spelman women. we know that roslyn pope was the author of "appeal for human rights" which appeared in the papers in the 1960's. it called on the state to respond to the right of young people. they say we will not wait idly by for our rights to begin men to us piecemeal, now is the time to take action.

that galvanized the student action that was a part of the movement in the 1960's. there is a need for action and our students want to be part of that. host: who are the female leaders of the civil rights movement? who would you point to your students as role models today? guest: i think about the democratic whip in the georgia state legislature. the first time an african-american has held the role. she is a voice for her constituents and she speaks up on social justice issues. students can see themselves in her work. we might think of mary wright

edelman. she has been a champion for the underrepresented. she is a spelman alumni. someone that we all admire greatly. host: we are talking with dr. tatum. president of spelman college. it is part of our c-span bus tour. there are 106 hbc yu's we are visiting. we will start with keisha calling in from maryland. caller: good morning. i would like to tell dr. tatum that we really appreciate her efforts and the impact she is making.

also, the lives that she is impacting and the changes that will come out of that. i appreciate her and thank her for all of her efforts. all of those at the university contributing to the progress of our people. that is all i have to say. host: why don't you like the term african-americans? caller: it does not make sense to me. guest: the language we use is very important. when we use the term african-americans, it does not necessarily include those from the caribbean or other parts to identify with the black community. how we use our language makes a

difference. the goal is to be as inclusive as possible. we are educating women of african dissent because they come from all over the world. most of our students are women of african dissent. host: tracy attended a historically black college or university. good morning. caller: good morning. i am american native indian. i look black. the treatment received was -- and i had gotten to look at your show and i was appalled they are only talking about african-americans. it is not just african-americans. it is women of all types of ethnicity groups that should be accounted for. i am american native and i am in

los angeles. host: any thoughts for tracy? guest: when we talk about race relations, we need to broad net beyond black and white. in the context of speaking about historically black colleges, they have survey population. spellman was founded in 1881 not many years after the end of slavery. that said, we have been an inclusive community. when we think about the important role of native people and the education they need, i am pleased to say it is part of our history represented at spelman as well.

host: eight twitter follower has a question for you. how much of your current budget is dedicated to stem majors compared to humanities? guest: i cannot give you exact dollars, but of the 2100 students we have, roughly one third have chosen to major in stem fields. at biology is one of the most popular majors. about roughly a third of our faculty is in the stem field representing. one could extrapolate perhaps a third of our budget. the reality is, it is important for us to offer excellence across the curriculum.

we want her to find factory and curriculum available to her. host: let's go to louisiana. good morning, joyce. caller: good morning. i just want you to touch on the idea of why there is a need for traditional black colleges. i know that most of the black professors were all out of traditional black colleges. i graduated in 1964. i had to leave my home and go to baton rouge. i knew that is what i wanted to

do. can you speak to the necessity of why we still have traditional black colleges? guest: one of the strengths of the education system is the diversity. there are a lot of options. one of the exciting parts of the choice is they are going to be at the center of the educational experience. i want to be at a place that has been designed for me. when she enters the lab, the faculty member will be focused on her. when she wants to pursue undergraduate research, faculty mentors will be available for her. that isn't towering area when she graduates she has women who

are out in the world. it is one of the reasons we take pride in the fact that spelman is a leading producer of those who learned phd in the sciences. host: a new york times survey talking about the struggles and challenges of historically black colleges and universities. the story noting hbcu's once had a monopoly but they struggled

to compete with elite colleges that have stepped up her crude and for the best and brightest of black students today. -- stepped up recruitment for the best and brightest of black students today. guest: students were limited and where they could go to school. the fact that they have choices it is a sign of progress. we know that we offer something special. if you want what spelman has you have to come to spelman to get it. as more mainstream institutions with more financial aid to offer can often make scholarships available that are tempting for students to pursue, am i going to get what i want for my education in an environment where i may be on the margins rather than the center.

we take great pride in the fact that spelman continues to be a source of talent and many young women want to come to spelman. we have had a growth of 40% in our application over the last 10 years. we are comps fun and -- we are confident there are students that want to attend. host: the student faculty ratio 10-1. graduation rates, 76%. we are talking with the president of spelman college. she will be with us for about the next half hour or so. philadelphia, pennsylvania. good morning, ricardo. caller: good morning. it is a pleasure sitting here listening to you.

it is one of the most successful black universities in the country. you kind of answer part of my question. the history of the hbcu's is fascinating to me. spelman, was that founded you said two of them were white. was one of them laura spelman? she was the wife of rockefeller. is that true? and is there a book that you can buy that gives you the history of most of the hbcu's? guest: let me start with the history. spelman was founded by two white women. religious missionaries who traveled from the northeastern massachusetts to savannah.

they established the school in the basement of a local church. they were brief friend it by the rockefeller family. they spoke in a church in ohio. the rockefeller family was generous and getting them established. the land where the college sits was purchased with the help of the rockefeller family. the founders decided that a would change the name of the school, which was originally the atlanta baptist female seminary and they changed it to spelman seminary in honor of mrs. rockefeller's family, her parents. it seemed fitting to honor that tradition with the name of

spelman. host: your recommendation for a good place to go for history? guest: there is a book i read. "stand and prosper." it was a wonderful study of the history of hbcu's. there is a story about spelman. it is out of print, but you can find it sometimes on amazon, through used book vendors. host: let's go to jared, west virginia. good morning. caller: good morning.

i wanted to make a comment about the races down in missouri and all of that. i think the fbi should not have come down there and neither should the attorney general. i am a white person, but i am not prejudiced. i go to a church that has a black preacher. you have good white people and you have good black people. people need to learn to get along and not, it seems like they throw up the racism thing all the time. it should not be that way. host: what are your thoughts

that local authorities should take care of the investigations and not the federal government? guest: when we see a pattern you can find isolated incidents, but when there is a pattern of -- that seems to suggest racial disparities, it is in the national interest to have a better understanding of that and try to correct it. i commended the justice system for stepping forward and i look forward to hearing what the director of the fbi has to say. fairfax, virginia. good morning. are you with us? we will go to -- are you there? caller: i am here. thank you for taking my call.

i am an hbcu graduate. i cannot overstate the nurturing process that i received at the hbcu and i am grateful for that. my question is regarding administrative efficiency. particularly, the administrative areas that students deal with more frequently. can you speak to that and what you might see on the horizon from your perspective, how we can streamline and make the process. thank you for taking my call. >> administrative efficiency is

important. certainly, i have been president here are 13 years. when i came to spelman, it was an area i felt we could focus on. i am pleased to say i think we have made a lot of gains. one of the things that we often hear about is that our alumni graduates of our institution they are sometimes discouraged to support our institutions because of concerns about administrative efficiency. we raise $158 million with more than 12 million -- excuse me more than 12,000 of our graduate participating in that. i think it is something every president needs to pay attention to. we have been working on a here.

host: that campaign is something you started about 10 years ago and has surpassed your goal. you are leaving your position as president of spelman later this year. what are you doing next? guest: if you look at the average tenure of college presidents, it is six or seven. i have been here 13. i feel like i have done my part. completing a successful campaign was part of what i wanted to do. i look forward to, not necessarily retiring from professional activity, but transitioning into a less transient role. i feel it is a great time to pass the baton to the next leader because the college is in a strong position.

we have had a successful campaign. the goal is guest -- we have the highest alumni participation. great opportunities have been made available. we have been able to triple our financial aid budget. i feel like it is the perfect moment to pass the baton because there is a lot of momentum. host: craggy, texas. you are on. caller: want to think c-span for the efforts with this tour of historical black colleges and universities. i want to thank dr. tatum for her efforts and her leadership. we have a daughter attending spelman and she has bloomed and

taken on leadership roles. i wanted dr. tatum to speak to the culture that is there of the training of a young lady to go out and change the world. on top of that, speak to the need for all girls colleges and universities and their counterpart, morehouse being an all-male school, do they still have a --. made times people say they are out of date. thank you. host: dr. tatum? guest: there is an important

role to be played for single-sex institutions. women's colleges are well known for providing leadership opportunities. your daughter has blossomed and is emerging as a leader. the reality is, in a women's environment, she has the opportunity to be a leader and be inspired by women around her who she sees doing things she might want to do. every leadership role you might imagine is something a young woman cannot inspire -- can aspire to do. there is a lot of opportunity for mentorship and inspiration. morehouse college is across the street. we had the best of both worlds. there is opportunity for coed interaction if that is what you want to have, and in the

classroom, you are at the center of the experience. that makes a difference for young women, giving them confidence and the sense that they can do anything. when we look at what our graduates do, they do anything and everything you would hope they would be able to do. host: let's head up to new york. good morning carmine. caller: i have a niece who attended a historically black college. we are not african american. we are italian. her experience was so rewarding and so beautiful. she was not just accepted by the college, students, and president, she was embraced. she had the most wonderful experience. guest: i am delighted to hear that and i am not surprised. because we are historically black does not mean we are exclusionary. we welcome all students who want

to come. our faculty is diverse. i am delighted to know that was your niece's experience. im not surprised by that. that is the history of our institution. host: how many students are currently non-african-american? guest: it is a small percentage. less than 5%. maybe more like 2%. it is the unusual students, the non-african-american student who wants to be in a majority african american space. we do have students, for example, exchange programs around the world and we regularly get students who come to visit us on exchange from places like japan, from the u.k., from brazil.

we have students who come to us from outside the u.s. to matriculate. right now, we have students from paris, from the continent of africa, south africa, zimbabwe. the reality is we do not get many domestic u.s. students who are not as african dissent. they are welcome to come. we have students who identify as hispanic. we also have students who identify as biracial. it is a diverse community in the context of african dissent, but there are not many white students right now. i do not think we have any white students at spelman. host: some breaking news this morning. democrats have decided to hold the national convention in philadelphia. that will be the week of july 25. the week before, july 18th

through july 21, republicans are holding their 2016 convention in cleveland. back to the phones. aaliyah attended a historically black college. caller: thank you for having me on the show. i wanted to thank you for all of your work on behalf of spelman women. in the last 13 years, we have seen the efforts to rally the alumni. we are going to miss you a lot. i recently gave birth to twins. one is a daughter. i hope she follows in her mom's footsteps and enters the gates of spellman. where do you see the future of hbcu's and the environment when my daughter is an a

ttendee? guest: we hear a lot about distance learning, online learning, changing education, i do believe places like spelman will be doing well and strong. fibrin institutions 20 years, 50 years, 100 years from now. there is an important place in higher education for the residential liberal arts education of the kind that spellman offers. we know affordability and access are critical questions and we have to strive to ensure that we provide an education that is affordable and accessible to our target population. the quality provided by faculty the experiences our students are having the opportunity to do undergraduate research and be prepared for the work place, and the professional school

environment, those characteristics i expect to be solidly in place. i hope your daughter will indeed make a choice to change the world and come to spelman like her mom did. host: you talked about fund raising. one major donor has been the cosby family. bill cosby providing $20 million in the past. in light of his recent legal allegations that he is facing, what is spelman's current relationship with the cosby family? host:guest: we have a statement on our website and i'm going to refer your viewers to that statement. host: do you want to paraphrase it? guest: i think it is very concise and anyone who wants to hear it will be happy to refer to it. we think about the new donors

who contributed to our campaign in the midst of the worst recession. we celebrate that. we know salmon is moving forward in a wonderful direction. thank you for the opportunity to talk about it. i appreciate the opportunity to lift up hbcu's and i think c-span for the tour they are doing. host: tina, good morning. caller: good morning. it is a pleasure speaking to you. i am a black student, a black person who attended a black college, jackson state in jackson, mississippi. i loved spelman college, but my family could not afford to send me to spelman. i wholeheartedly admired the

spelman women. you can tell them they stand out. congratulations for all that you are doing for the women, no matter what nationalities they are. if they go to spelman, they have a wonderful place to go for an education. thank you and congratulations. guest: thank you for those kind words. host: mark, columbia, south carolina, good morning. caller: i have a five-year-old granddaughter. she has not started school yet. i am trying to guide her and put spelman in her head it is point. how do we get from -- how do we get them to the route to get to the college. they are saying she possibly needs medication, but she is a very bright child, very independent.

can it be done? i say it in a way that financially i would like to start now to ushelp per se so she will not be a burden financially to go to the school. guest: it is a wonderful example to say i want to start saving now, whether you use a 529 plan or some other method. setting dollars aside to make sure the opportunity is available to her, it is a wonderful thing to do. i know many young people who are sometimes rambunctious and that is a sign of intellectual curiosity. encourage her to explore her interests, to create those opportunities, to expand her horizons. when she is ready, you will be

ready to support her matriculation. any institution, i think there is nothing better than what a family can do. host: rhonda, woodbridge virginia. caller: i am calling because my daughter insisted that i come early so i can see dr. tatum on c-span. she has applied to spelman and she is so excited about the possibility of being accepted. she has always gone to predominantly private schools. she has her heart set on coming to spelman. we have been out there several times.

her godmother lives in atlanta. every day she is on twitter. she could have taken off school to watch her program, she would have. what is the possibility of her being accepted? guest: you are making a great case for her. i want to congratulate you for your advocacy. i cannot comment on her at the nation. thank you for your encouragement of her. we will keep our fingers crossed. host: what advice would you give to students who are looking to apply next year and years beyond to get into's common? guest: take the most challenging curriculum in your school. if you have access to a fee or honors courses, take those courses.

not every high school is created equally. not every school has the same offerings. wherever you are in school, we want you to demonstrate you are committed to your own intellectual growth and you have worked hard to do as well as possible. we encourage students to demonstrate leadership capacity, to volunteer, to be involved in their community. we expect current students to participate in the local community. when students have already had those experiences, we look favorably on that. host: let's go to don. caller: i would like to know about your curriculum at your school. are you allowed to teach black

history before slavery and to know that we, the black jews of america and that the hispanic and native american go right along with us. we are the jews of america. scattered all of the earth. are you teaching our black people so-called black people because we are hebrew israelite jews. the rest of the tribes are puerto rican spanish, native american descent. do you teach this curriculum? guest: let me begin by saying we are a private institution and of course our curriculum is determined not by the state, but by our faculty. we have a first-year seminar that every student takes known as africans and the world.

it does take a global perspective on the experiences of people of african descent and helps students understand there was history before slavery. certainly the places across the world where the populations have been distributed. that is part of every student's experience. it is one of the most transformative experiences they have at spelman because it introduces them to information they had not been exposed to previously. that is one of the benefits of a college experience. host: we will see if we can get in one eat up. can you make it quit?

-- we will see if we can get in juanita. can we make it quick? caller: we appreciate your work. guest: thank you. thank you for having me. we are delighted to be part of your series. host: the series continues next week. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washing