new report on how much of americans will pay in federal and state taxes this year. into a look at the pentagon spider program and other weapons systems with defense global business ♪ host: good morning. monday, april 13, 2015. the house and senate return from their two week recess. one senator likely not to be in session today is senator marco rubio. today he will make his announcement that he is running for president in 2016. you will start our program asking your thoughts on the upcoming candidacy of senator marco rubio. here is how to be part of discussion. for republicans, your line is (202) 748-8001.

democrats, (202) 748-8000. independence and all others (202) 748-8002. you can join us online as well. at twitter we are at c-span wj. we'll get your calls momentarily as the field begins to get more populated for republicans. the headline on a number of papers this morning about hillary clinton's candidacy announced on youtube yesterday. here's the washington times headline this morning. they write, mrs. clinton's statement in the video was brief but she made clear that she will run on economic issues and adopt populist rhetoric demanded by the them credit party liberal base.

-- the democratic party liberal base. clinton starts her campaign long expected bid as official. she's bright that she strikes a populist tone. -- she strikes a populist tone. mark fisher running for the washington post, when senator rubio stands before miami's freedom tower on monday and announces that he is the second cuban-american to join the 2016 race for president of the united states, gabriel perez and mike bell this will share a sense of pride -- mike aboutvaldez will share a sense of pride. serious contenders for most american job -- the most american job in the land. he writes that the wave of pride surrounding the candidacy of rubio and ted cruz of texas is

taken by a number of different meanings. he continues, the idea of the cuban-american monolith, the notion that the estimated 2 million immigrants and their offspring constitute a single issue ramrod is chr crumbling. time is turning immigrants into americans. i want to let you know we are covering live from miami, 5:30 eastern. let's go to your calls. john is up on our republican line. caller: good morning. i believe rubio has some good ideas. we cannot afford another four or eight years of obama tactics what with hillary in their. i would support rubio. host: you have three freshmen

senators in the field with rand paul and ted cruz in texas. who would you pick? caller: i am a cruz man if he is the nominee. host: is there one issue that stands out that would be the deciding issue? caller: we need somebody to take care of problems in the middle east. we have issues over there. isis terrorists. it is going to be more problem down the road if we cannot handle that now. host: let's go to our independent line. phil, good morning. caller: good morning. i had to call in because i live in florida and also have a

business in maryland. i'm able to look at both states. i was also affected by a comment made by someone on your program last night. i think was people in the news a news guy was analyzing politicians from -- i guess what their motives and lifestyles are like. i think america needs to look at these professional guys that are running around saying that they can lead the country. florida is a low-wage state. they work the people there very hard. i found that to be something that if rubio really wants to do something positive, change how they pay people entry people before they start taking more -- and treat people before they take national responsibilities.

america needs to look at the reality of our politics. we need real people who are not attached to american -- who are attached to the american people. host: thank you for your call. here's how the hometown paper for marco rubio read this morning. the miami herald has a mention of the candidate's announcement. their lead headline is obama rebuilds regional policy. what a difference three years writes, -- three years makes they write.

asking you this morning about the candidacy of marco rubio which will be announced today in florida. we will have coverage on c-span. let's go to hyde park, massachusetts. antonio is on her democrats line. caller: even though we have a cuban-american at the candidacy i do not see rubio getting the nomination. even if he does, his stance on immigration will not cut it for the growing population of latino voters in the country. i do not think he's making it to the finish line. host: more of your calls coming up. we are joined by mark com

caputo. tell us about the expected themes that marco rubio is going to talk about today. guest: got to give credit to marco rubio announcing at the freedom tower. a mediterranean-style building built in the 1920's in the miami. in the 1960's it was used as what became called the ellis island of the south to process cuban refugees freeing -- fleeing from cuba. use using this as a launchpad to announce he is running for president. it fits within his history and within his narrative of being "the american dream candidate." whether the campaign craft is going to be good enough to get him across the finish line is going to be another matter. host: how is he going to position himself early against

the announced candidates? rand paul? ted cruz? even hillary clinton? guest: rubio up to now has been largely a candidate of ideas and biography. in many respects he has echoes to president obama back in 2008. his campaign strategy and tactics will not necessarily say . i've heard the speech but nevertheless it is effective. he talks about how he is the son of a maid and a bartender and what a ghost of fundraisers he will see a bartender and think back to his father's struggles. expected here more of that. a similar speech he gave at the rnc.

as for where he positions himself, it almost seems like all lanes. he has a little bit of tea party, a little bit of establishment. i would not say much of a libertarian lane. in many respects, his campaign success is premised on the idea that jeb bush has too many structural deficiencies within the republican party. scott walker might not be able to make it either. he almost rises by default. we will see how that plays out. host: your piece in political.com is headlined "why marco rubio could not say no." guest: we've been writing these pieces about how candidate got to yes. when rubio's advisors look at his history, it was more like, what is the reason not to run. they could not find one. the best reason would be to stay in the u.s. senate and run for reelection in 2016.

florida does not allow you to run for two offices in the same ballot. rubio is not a fan of the u.s. senate. he likes the prestige but does not do anything. this is not necessarily the most attractive place for him to stay. rubio has his main residence in west miami unlike a lot of senators and congressmen. he did not move to washington. if he does move to washington he wants to move to the white house. host: mark caputo, covering the story. you can follow reporting on politico.com and on twitter. back to your calls on the candidacy of marco rubio. let's go to mike in thompson, pennsylvania. caller: thank you. i will not be voting for marco rubio.

host: why not? caller: i will not be voting for him because i am a roman catholic. i have read the joy of the gospel by pope francis. he says some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth will spread. i do not think marco rubio is the kind of person i will be able to vote for. thank you for your time. host: on twitter, a tweet from karen who talks about obama was criticized for being a one term senator and therefore not qualified, where's the criticism against rubio, paul and cruz? mary in danville, virginia. caller: good morning. i am distressed by this trend of

camera ready, photo op ready freshman senators who look good on camera running for the highest office in the united states. i am sure senator rubio would be loaded by economic advisers from the top corporations who he will serve, but there is only one guy who carries the nuclear football and that is the president of the united states. i think we need to get back to electing elder statesman, even if they are not as cute as some of these young guys running. this is ludicrous. host: you're calling on the democrats line. what did you think about the announcement of hillary clinton? caller: i am delighted. she is experienced and some of her experience is nontraditional

as a first lady. she knows all the in's and out's of washington politics. she has been head of the state department. i think the most important qualification for a president today may be that foreign policy aspect. all you need is one right-winger with the nuclear football and it all goes up in smoke. she is the gal for the job. host: the tweet mentioned the inexperience in their opinion. the new york times writes about senator rubio's experience especially in elections. they write his father knocked on doors for him. he still defeated a west miami

city commissioner twice his age. at 28, when a man refused to endorse him, he prevailed over a well-known state lawmaker and television personality to become a member of the order house of representatives. at 39, when party officials pleaded with him to drop out of the race, mr. rubio managed to beat popular governor of florida to become a net united states -- to become a united states senator. rubio has built a remarkable career around big political bets that inflame party elders and at times went against his own gut instinct. on monday, when he did -- when he declares his candidacy it may -- it will be his biggest gambit yet. jimmy, in ohio.

your thoughts on marco rubio entering the race. caller: he looks like a baby running for office. i like rand paul. if hillary clinton becomes president i'm moving to canada. host: we go to detroit next. democrats line. caller: senator rubio, when he ran for the senate, he did not tell the truth. his family came over here as exiles from castro's regime. his father baking first. -- they came first. he said that he was exiled from

castro's regime. no he wasn't. his parents came over here exiled from the regime before the revolution. host: looking for your calls and thoughts on marco rubio's candidacy. (202) 748-8001 four republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. for others, (202) 748-8002. this is from the washington times this morning. some of the reporting on the announcement of marco rubio. polls show that marco rubio unlikely to earn gop new hispanic fans. as senator marco rubio prepares his campaign, a pollster who

specializes in serving latinos cast out on whether the republican will help the gop make inwards best inroads with republic -- with hispanics. "we find no evidence that rubio's candidacy will draw significant latino support for his candidacy or for his party more generally." your thoughts on the announcement coming up today that marco rubio is running for president. here's elizabeth on a democrats line in baltimore. caller: good morning. rubio, of all people, does not have any foreign-policy experience.

he does not know how to present himself to the public. he lies. as far as the republicans, all they offer is cuts. all they offer is mushroom clouds. fear mongering. they did not help this president to do anything for the people of the united states. all people. that is all i have to say. host: appreciate your call. at headline in the wall street journal this morning. they write that mr. rubio the florida senator who had tea party support in his 2010 primary victory over a sitting governor has the most approved to his -- the most approved to his tea party -- the most to prove to his tea party allies. they write that a news poll

found that 45% of republicans say they support the tea party still a big share of the republican party. this is a wall street journal poll gauging the three candidates who have announced. registered voters who said they would vote in the republican primary when asked to rank support for the tea party on a scale of lowest to highest. they also asked the percentage of support for scott walker, 73% , marco rubio, 66%. ted cruz, 66%. rand paul at 60%. this is carol on our independent line, go ahead. caller: i would vote for marco rubio as far as an ambassador to cuba goes. i think that is where he belongs because he is a cuban american citizen. i have met him. i met his beautiful family. he is a wonderful guy.

he is not presidential material at all but definitely as an ambassador to cuba. he would be perfect. even the democrats would agree and so would the republicans. thank you for taking my calls. host: this is john. oneonta, new york. democrats line. caller: republicans are saying the democrats are not going to vote for hillary or anything else like that. this is the funny thing about it. every time republicans say everything about cutting food stamps, cutting this and everything that lower people -- lower-class people need -- most of them are all white that needed more than blacks does. republicans will have a rude rake -- rude awakening when i have a election -- when they had

that election. hillary clinton is this, obama is this, if they want to win they should stop doing what they are doing and help obama pass tuition. he is going to cut things for college kids and help people out. if they do not do that, nine times out of 10, they go in -- they are not going to win in 2016. host: we had a caller who suggested that marco rubio would make a good ambassador to cuba in her view. the issue of cuba came up as president obama met with raul castro over the weekend at the summit of the americas. some reaction to that meeting, a

potential softening of relations with the nation. senator robert menendez, he was on fox news sunday this weekend. [video clip] >> i think the president has a misguided calculation that if you open your hand to dictators that they will unclench their fist. while raul castro may have said nice things about president obama, just last month, we had 600 arrests of innocent people inside of cuba who were detained . many political activists who were not allowed to leave the country to go to the panama summit. last year, we had 16 detentions -- 1600 detentions. when you say that and provide those facts as well as their violations of arms shipments and a host of other things like having one of the ten top terrorists in their country

people change their attitude about with this policy is about. host: senator menendez yesterday. we are asking you about marco rubio's candidacy. the announcement coming today at 5:30 eastern. live coverage here on c-span. at the broader look of cuban support in miami cuban americans united in private split on politics. he writes that over the last 15 years, cuban-american community has undergone a major transformation. "in the most politicized hispanic group in the country there is a cleavage in which the second and third generations as well as more recent arrivals do not share the hard-line views and republican affinity of the historic exiled generation."

rubio and crews are not necessarily favorite sons at the ballot box. what are your thoughts on marco rubio? caller: rubio, completely inexperienced. he would be like a deer in the headlights as president. he's like that as a senator. as far as hillary, no way. she works for walmart. she is taken hundreds of thousands of dollars from goldman sachs and other banks. she is told the banks she will be on their side. she is wrong also. i think bernie sanders or elizabeth warren hold the key for democrats and working people. the 99%. host: hillary clinton announced she is stepping down from her position with the clinton foundation.

editorial views on the clinton c candidacy. they write in usa today that clinton's familiarity represents her biggest advantage and biggest vulnerability. she brings more top-level experience in the white house congress then her rivals put together. she is devoted fan base that likes her and wants her to become the first female president. she is demonstrated admirable persistence. clinton's record as first lady senator and cabinet member leaves her with a long trail of controversial -- controversy. oddly, she has more to prove than lesser-known candidates. another view in the usa today from reince previous who writes that for more than a decade she has been running from scandal. can you remember a time when the clintons were not surrounded by controversy?

that is from the usa today. let's hear from john in fairview, north carolina. what do you think about the candidacy of marco rubio? caller: i think that he scares democrats and republicans alike to death. the best evidence i can offer for that, almost to a single person, every single democrat has called -- that has called in to the show today has said exactly the same thing. they all said, he is too young he is too inexperienced. a lot of independents have said that. i think both democrats and republicans are scared because in florida he not off well a step -- he knocked off

well-established candidates. he did support an immigration bill that a lot of establishment republicans also supported. he turned around and said he was wrong to do it. people liked that about him. i do not know who some of these pollster are that are experts on the cuban-american community but personally i think they are nuts. i think marco rubio is going to be -- if we were just to judge it by the cuban-american community, marco rubio would be president tomorrow. barack obama did not have this much experience but we were all excited. we practically put up a temple for him in a football stadium when he announced his campaign. host: does the fact that marco rubio is a freshman senator

does that work against him or any of the other -- either of the other two? caller: absolutely not. none of them have shown themselves to be as ideologically rigid as the current occupant of the white house. he has refused to back down from anything he has decided to do. i think rubio, by admitting he was wrong on the immigration bill, has already shown more ability to govern than either morocco obama -- either barack obama or hillary clinton. let's stay on the republican line from westminster, massachusetts. this is casey. caller: good morning. i wanted to call and say i support rubio. i'm enthusiastic about most of the perspective gop candidates,

with the exception of jeb bush. not thrilled to hear about that. host: what is about jeb bush to does not thrill you? caller: the bush name is toxic for all intents and purposes. it has poor name the bush name is toxic. i'm just not sure we need a presidential dynasty. to be honest, hillary clinton is certainly -- not going to throw up my leg, as they say. she comes with a lot of ag baggage. e. i' hope she doesn't make a progress to become progress. host: congress returns from their two-week spring recess. we are joined by lauren fox from "national journal." a look think they have a lot to do in the coming weeks. guest: they certainly do.

i think one of the first thing that congressmen and senators will deal with is they are clamoring around this deal with iran. they are concerned about that. it is something the senate foreign relations committee will turn to this week. house members are looking to the senate to pass the medicare doc fix. we are also seeing here -- you know, house republicans have a series of bills on taxes that they prepared ahead of the filing on april 15. host: on the issue of the doc fix, this headline -- senate wrangles over medicare payments fix. certainly, among the items to get fixed is a budget

resolution moving forward on 2016 spending. what do we know about that? guest: i think we should note that this budget is very important for republicans. this is what they ran on in 2014. it is important that they prove they can govern with his budget document. i think one of the sticking points here will be brought to the -- broad disagreement on military spending items. moving forward, i think that will be a sticking point. certainly, there are other differences between the senate budget and the house budget that will need to be worked out. that will be on top of the agenda. republicans note that this is a must pass piece of legislation for them. host: it is tax week. tax deadline on wednesday, the 50. the house focusing this week on tax legislation. broadly, will any of that have any trackstion in the u.s.

senate? what will we see? guest: one of them that six out to me is legislation to prohibit irs employees from using personal e-mail accounts to conduct official business. this harkens back to the scandal a couple of years ago for special application to certain groups that wanted special status. it is certainly not something that will pass without any democrat votes, and i don't see democrats willing to get on board with something like that. host: on the issue of personal e-mail accounts. the issue of hillary clinton's e-mail server came up. as congress is going intoo recess, what is the status of the benghazi committee andy status of their request to

interview hillary clinton? guest: i think we will have to see what trey gowdy is saying moving forward. something to remember is they have to be very careful. they are walking a fine line here between investigating benghazi which is what their jurisdiction to do and waiting into presidential politics. i think trey gowdy is very careful to make sure republicans aren't seen on capitol hill as using this as a political statement ahead of the 2016 presidential election. host: you can see more of lauren fox is reporting on "national journal." thank you for the preview of the return of congress. back to your calls about the announcement by marco rubio announcing his presidency. 5:30 p.m. eastern is when we expect our coverage to get underway. we will have you live -- we will

have that live here. he follows ted cruz and rand paul, becoming the third candidate. our numbers are (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8002 independents. let's go to casey in westminster, massachusetts. casey. casey, make sure that you mute your phone -- your tv or radio, and the go ahead with your comment. you are on the air, casey. go ahead. you are feeding back to us. we will have to let you go. make sure you mute your tv or radio. president obama this week will be meeting with the iraqi prime minister. here is the headline in "usa

today," they writeal-abadi seeks more help from the u.s. the united states will likely be receptive to the request because they see it as a new threat. it keeps its distance from shiite militias. james jeffrey says, we need had to wean the iraq military forces from the iranian backed militias. al-abadi, who is scheduled to meet with the president on tuesday, as a leader with the potential to achieve reconciliation. asking your thoughts on marco

rubio as his announcement today the run for the president. here is a gianna from st. petersburg, florida. caller: good morning. i lived in miami many years. rubio believes in the embargo. his opinions are more rescinded of the cuban heart of his family where he comes from. he's not seeking of how it benefits the cuban figures stay, and he is not thinking of the economic benefits for the united states and the cubans. he is thinking with the resentenced of the politicians of cuba. and then i think, why do we have to have rubio? he is too young.

the article that you read earlier, that they set about latins, the americans, they don't agree. if you have followed the cuban history, it's fine. we don't trust is hard. host: appreciate your call. we heard from lauren fox just a short while ago that one of the issues that lawmakers will be commenting about and the senate foreign relations committee will take him on tuesday is the issue of the framework for the iranian nuclear negotiation. secretary of state john kerry was on "face the nation" this week. [video clip] secretary kerry: this is not finalized. this is an outline. parameters. most people are very surprised by the depth and breadth of the

parameters. it goes well beyond what they expected. i think you will need to hold their fire, let us negotiate without interference and complete the job over the next two and a half months. >> did you think -- hearing senator john mccain, i was surprised by his comments. he went so strong here. can you possibly get this through congress if a deal is reached, if he is talking that way already? senator kerry: again, the president spoke to said of mccain's comments. i will not say anything more about it. i am focused on the facts. i am focusing on getting a good agreement. i think what we have so far is the makings of a good agreement. the key now is can we shut off iran's for pathways to a bomb. i think we have -- experts all

agree with us. this is not just the united states of america. this is a global mandate, issued by the united nations to be able to dictate with iran. they are the ones who initiated the beginning of this. congress helped with sanctions. now we are having the negotiations. i think we have heard the right through what we achieved in the interim agreement and what we laid out in this parameter. we have earned the right to complete this without interference, and certainly without partisan politics. host: john kerry on "face the nation" yesterday. a new host for the program announced yesterday. "new york times" reports that

that will be john dickerson. john dickerson, 46, has worked with cbs news for six years. a few more calls on your take on marco rubio c, announcing his run for president today. surely. caller: i wanted to call because i am 83 years old. i studied government for a long time. the thing that gets to me is -- can you hear me? host: we shear sure can. caller: i am 83 years old. i usually call when steve is on there, but i haven't called it quite a long time. i noticed a lot of them, they call more than 30 days. i haven't called for maybe about four months. host: the question on the floor

is marco rubio. what do you think? caller: the thing i wanted to tell you is i have studied government for a long time, ever since i started voting. the thing that gets to me is rubio was born in 71. his parents never became citizens until 74-75. you tell me that the republicans are not stepping on the constitution too. a really may feel upset that people who come here from other countries want to develop laws to benefit their group, not all of us. host: great to hear from you. appreciate you watching the "washington journal." a couple of comments from twitter. a tweet from don who says, i'm with the pennsylvania caller all the candidates stink on both sides. peg says, we know none will adjust either wages and income

disparity. tulsa, oklahoma, let's hear from colin on the republican mind. caller: good morning. rubio basically is a good candidate. coming on with a terrific support from a key state. i think it is basically going to be a campaign, obviously against hillary, with her representing these socialist obamacare because she had hillary care before obamacare. it's big government on the democrat side, more socialism, more control, more onerous epa rules like the global warming stuff, which is just as silly as it can be. that is what we are in for. hillary has been successful so far in burning the tapes

keeping information and burning the rules of government archivist so that we do not know her role at all in the death of the ambassador in benghazi. it's all cover up. it's going to be an interesting campaign. i'm certainly the give forward to it. host: thank you for your call. the news of hillary clinton cost announcement -- clinton's announcement leading the headlines this morning. she started a road trip to iowa. i think we have a click look here at her announcement from yesterday. [video clip] hillary clinton: i'm getting ready to do something too i'm going to run for president. the deck is still stacked in favor of those at the top. every day, americans need a

champion. i'm going to be that champion so that you can do more than just get by, but get ahead. when families are strong america is strong. i am hitting the road to our your vote. it's your time and i hope you will join me on this journey. host: let's get one more take from florida. fort myers. gerald, what do you think about the candidacy of marco rubio that he announced today? caller: i don't think marco rubio will get elected anytime soon. at least here in florida, -- at least what i can tell from public opinion, we are not too fond of the man. most floridians to my knowledge hated his bill. he was in support of the

immigration bill, something that should have never been proposed by the current administration. as for hillary even running, it just makes things worse. right now you will be forced to choose between what i consider to be a very liberal conservative and a seminar at the -- and a femi-nazi. host: based on the candidates out there, do you have a choice yet? you have ruled out hillary clinton and marco rubio. caller: rand paul. at least his father has decent political values. host: we appreciate it. we hear next from entertainer clay aiken who will join us here on "washington journal." he has a new tv program called "

the runner up," talking about his run for congress in 2014. coming up, how much will people pay in taxes this year. kyle pomerleau from the tax foundation talks about a new report showing approximately $3.3 trillion in federal taxes being paid this year. clay aiken up next as "washington journal" continues. ♪ >> were a you a fan of c-span's

first lady series? "first ladies" is now a book looking inside the life of every first lady in american history based on interviews by biographers. but about the details of these first ladies and what made these women who they were. their lives partnerships with their spouses. "first ladies" provides lively stories of these fascinating women who entered the scrutiny of the white house, and even changed history. c-span's "first ladies" is a illuminating, entertaining, and inspiring read, now available as a hardcover or e-book. >> tonight on "the

communicators" spectrum. >> the administration have written memorandum on spectrum. as i first started as spectrum manager in 1979, i came out of the marine corps, i did not know anything about spectrum. most people that i've met, and even those why worked with did not understand spectrum. now, people understand our devices completely rely on it, our ability to communicate. we often use it to do our jobs or stay in touch with our family. >> tonight on "the communicators" on c-span 2. "washington journal" continues. host: a phase probably familiar to millions of americans and north carolina voters, though not enough, clay aiken joins us

today on "washington journal" for the first time to talk about your run for congress in 2014 and your upcoming documentary on the esquire network. thank you for being with us. you lost to rene elders in north carolina. what inspired you to run? guest: i was always interested in politics. i tried to keep up with those things for years. my district, where i grew up in, and my congressman who i grew up with, jerry price, i was gerrymandered out of his district. i was frustrated to find the district that i was put in wasn't doing what i wanted, but was able to stay safe because she was gerrymandered into a very republican district. i recognize that the platform that i had, the microphone ahead, gave me an opportunity for people to pay attention.

people don't pay attention to politics these days. host: your career became familiar to viewers when you were runner-up in "american idol." and did you ever think that a political arc was in your future? guest: probably not. when you go back to my mother's computer in high school, there may have been some posters that i made or something like that. i never necessarily consider that. i was going to be a teacher and made a detour to do the idol thing, but to that to happen. we change our plans sometimes because of need or opportunity. i think we certainly had a need and north carolina to hold people accountable, and i was in a position to do that. host: how old were you when you did "american idol"? guest: 24. host: it is more than just you

making the decision, you have to get party elders involved. how did you manage that? guest: a friend of mine had been involved in the democratic party for quite a while and was the first person to discuss it with me. that friend interest is -- introduced me to people. it was entirely my idea. it was something that i had talked around casually with some friends, and based on how things go into thousand 12, maybe i should run into those of 14. someone heard that and said wait a second, would you really do that? you need to talk to these people in washington. i was put in touch with those folks and they laid out the pathway to victory and why they fell it would be a success. a lot of people were involved in the discussion. host: what happened to indicate that there was some one ability their? guest: the district was gerrymandered to be incredibly

republican. in 2000 12, it was far smaller than it should have been for someone that had been very gerrymandered. she would not show up, she would not do a lot of things that you would expect someone to do in a race that ended up as tightly as her plastid. if you add to the fact that she was not showing up and people were not paying attention, to the fact that her margin was not nearly as big as it should have been, we felt if we could bring people to the race and shrink that margin even more, we could have an opportunity. host: clay aiken is our guest. he ran against rene elders in north carolina. remind us of the district. guest: second district. host: he is here to talk about his four-part series coming up on the esquire network. here is how to join the conversation. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002.

the four-part documentary, "the runner-up," would you have done that either way? it would have been called "the champion," or "the victor." guest: they came and asked. our focus was always on the race. i wasn't interested in having people in the way. this group came and had some connections to me in l.a. and called and said, let them make their case to you. they had won two academy awards and so forth. i listened and they said if you win, you will be in washington and you can affect some of the change. and if you don't, who will tell the story of the district?

they made the argument that they should follow. i said, as long as you stay out of the way, then you can be here. host: let steve are -- let's give our c-span viewers a taste of "the runner-up" on esquire. [video clip] >> this season on "the runner-up," clay aiken's will face off with rene elders. >> serving the second district of north carolina is more than just a game show. >> i would have to start over with a whole new staff. >> even though claim is a democrat if we are going to win, we need to get republicans on board. clay: this is clay again. this is disgusting. this money. >> we have the tea party for him. clay: what in the heck am i

doing here? if we win -- this is unlike the grammys where you can predict. >> it's all spinal tap, isn't it? themit is an abomination. >> and in north carolina, a federal judge struck down the federal gay ban. clay: what bill myers stated, he will never get my vote. that is a walk of shame there. host: that is "the runner-up" on esquire. it begins tomorrow? guest: i believe it began last week.

host: you combine republican and aiken, what was your aim their? guest: i said if every democrat in the second district showed up to vote, i would still need republicans to vote. there were a number of republicans, even in the tea party, who straight up told me they would vote for me. host: why weren't they happy with her? guest: i think they're people were upset that she was not far enough right for them. also, a lot of people who were upset that she didn't show up. we wanted to be old to give republicans an opportunity to show their opportunity and still show that they were republicans. it was a portman to -- portmanteau of the two names. caller: good morning. clay aiken, i just want to say thank you to you. great job and running.

i used to be a political scientist myself and switch to do something different. listen, a two-part question. are you going to run again? what advice do you have for hillary and the democratic party? some believe that hillary will be the front runner and will definitely take the democratic party to victory. that's my question for you. guest: thank you very much for calling. i would say that i'm not sure if i will run again. it is certainly not off the table for me. i will stay diligent about paying attention and making sure i'm involved in the political process. it is not off the table and i might. i ran because i saw a need. if i see another neat and an opportunity, i will fill it. i think the thing that worries me the most about the presidential race in 2016 is the fact that so many people especially in the democratic

party, already feel a sense of certainty of secretary clinton and her ability to win. i think a big problem the democrats have a lot and especially in midterm elections but potentially in presidential your elections, is the fact that we become place and don't show up, don't vote. i think it's great to be excited for secretary clinton, and i am excited for her race, but people have to show up. host: you tweeted this yesterday -- i love you, but why are you the stiffest and most scripted person in this video? talking about her presidential announcement video. guest: i think my concern is that a lot of people on the republican side can come off as really folksy and use it to mask

their incredibly far right views. we have seen in the past that presidents often be elected on who do you want to have a beer with? who do you relate to most? i think the country needs hillary's win. i wanted to challenge her in that moment to relax a little bit. she had a lot of very casual people in the video and then she seemed very stiff, almost. that is just a host: we go to newton square, pennsylvania. steve, go ahead. hello in pennsylvania? steve, are you there? you are on with clay aiken. sounds like somebody's there. one more time. we move onto santa barbara california. dam, go ahead. caller: hi, thank you for taking my call. this has to do with the belmar thing -- bill maher thinks it my

question for clay -- you ran as a democrat, but basically ran away from the president of the united states. he ran away from the leader of the democratic party. like a lot of democrats did. why did you do that? you should've ran as a libertarian or republican. what is it about president obama that you dislike because if you look at his record he has done a lot of good things for the country ? guest: i'm going to stop you there. you probably major assessment based off one video from bill maher. if you were not from north carolina, you are probably not sure if i ran away from obama or if i did and i didn't. i don't think that the follow any the democrats with a good time added to create i support

the president and i vocally said that throughout the campaign. anybody who is in north carolina would have seen that. anyone paying close attention to the race would have seen that. i do not agree with his education policies. i do not think we should treat schools and teachers as corporations and rewarding schools based on tenderized -- standardized test scores. i think that is irresponsible. i do not agree with his protrusion -- position on privacy and surveillance. that does not necessarily think that i don't like the president. i've to responsibilities as a candidate. one -- i have be on cement -- honest. to have to find voters on the ground. listen in a very republican district i have to say here are some things i can agree on. you may not agree with the president and i do it through the president on areas, but these are places where we can find common ground. the idea that anybody would go into congress and fall in lockstep with someone simply because they are in the party

is, in my opinion, one of the reasons we have an ineffective congress. i'm a democrat and proud to be democrat, but i'm not going to fall in lockstep just because someone has a d behind the name. i think that is irresponsible. host: are used on the line? any response to clay aiken? caller: i think he was following the path of any democrat who thought it was a good idea based on the device -- advice of their aid toward visors to run away from obama and go as a basically republican light. guest: i think that is a less than educated assumptions because that is exactly not what happened. that is not what happened in this race. i made my opinion clear and it had nothing to do with my advisors and it had to do with what i believed in felt. i strongly believe that in republican district -- and it is interesting to say -- i'm not seeing all the documentary myself, but the bill maher

thing will come up at some point. it is interesting to note that he did a new rules two weeks ago where he was very clear that democrats have got to stop trashing of the democrats. it is better that someone agrees with you on 90% of things than zero for that of things. -- 0% of things. i think it is better to have rene elmers out of congress that have someone who disagrees with them on everything. i was very clear in my support for aca and quite a few things the president has done including the fact that gas prices are lower in the economy is better and the job market has improved. that does not mean i will fall in lockstep with everything. host: clay aiken is a first-time guest on "washington journal." he lost to rene elmers and 2013 and did a four point -- four-part documentary airing on the esquire network. we welcome you and your calls.

are you a native north carolina ian? guest: i am. my whole life. host: how has the state change politically in your years there? guest: a lot has changed. a lot of people who have moved in half a more progressive bent. from my perspective you can see the state going from voting for only republicans to in 2008 voting for president obama for the first time. as a state, what comes to stay government, 2010 showed the very first republican general assembly in my entire lifetime. there was a lot of redrawing of district lines by republican general assemblies. i think the state is very purple. at best, purple. because of a lot of

gerrymandering that we have come we have 13 districts and only three of them are democrat even though 51% of north carolina people vote for democrats. host: how recently was there a majority of democratic congressional seats? guest: 2009. right before 2012 when they reach her lines for the first time. host: here's springfield, virginia. erica, good morning. caller: i want to ask the gentleman from north carolina. i'm a democrat, but i'd say independent. she speaks to us as an american, but i've not heard any other candidate being worried about our situation.

the republicans have opposed the rise of the minimum wage. they have opposed to change the way of loans for students for college kids. at home, the prices of the house for middle-class is outrageous. why is she not running back? can someone talk to her about this? guest: i'm a very big fan of elizabeth warren. i think her positions on the banks and student loans and the amount of loan debt that students have right now. i think people decide as i did when i chose to run -- i think people decide where they feel they would be most effective. i think senator warren for whatever reason believe that she will be more effective staking the message in the democratic party within the senate. she has a really great platform and can state her case a maker points from a little bit safer

place in massachusetts that she might be able to and a presidential run. for that reason, i think she will hopefully push any democratic candidate to places that we need them to be. but she can do that from the senate where she has a little bit more security and more stability. host: if you had one, what would be your primary issue? guest: listen, i ran a lot on the fact that we needed to start finding middle ground and that people need to work together. a policy issue from the second district -- veteran issues are very important. we still year and more than a year after the v.a. scandal in arizona and the wait times, we still see it right now. people are waiting 30, 40, 50 more days than they should need to see a doctor. i think the v.a. should be addressed immediately. education policy for me is probably the most personal issue i am attached to the most because i do not think people realize how much education and

quality education affects every facet. it is not about getting jobs later, but making sure jobs come to our area. is this is will not come to your area if you do not have good schools for their employees and their students. host: you said you wanted to be a teacher but then the "american idol thing" thing came up. what led you to entertainment? guest: being in the right place at the right time. i was working with students in autism in the classroom. when the parents of one of the students that it worked with suggested that i auditioned. i sort of relented after some pressure from her and went ahead and audition. she and i ended up standing -- starting a foundation together for children with disabilities to find a crossroads in my life. host: what is that foundation? guest: is the national inclusion project. we get kids with disabilities and programs of kids without disabilities. host: we go to atlanta where

joseph is on the democrats line. good morning. caller: mr. aitken, i just want to say that i recently retired from the military. this is kind of a funny story. i was station with a guy from rocky mount north carolina and he was telling everybody on the base that you are running for office and he was so proud of you. that is how i found out about you running. he was a big fan and it was so funny that every day after we mustered and were given our assignments, he would tell us that clay can is doing this and that. he said is going to be tough. you are running in a district that had a military base so it was close to the base or something. he said it would be tough for you, but he loved your life and i followed you after that. democrats need to go out and vote. i wish you the best in

everything that you do. i love you and admire you. one of the think -- both a members and veterans of active duty have to get out and vote too. thank you and god bless you, clay aiken. guest: i wish he had been in the district. rocky mount is not in the district. for bracket is -- fort bragg is. we actually won every precinct within fort bragg which i think speaks a little bit to how much certain parties might claim dominion over the military, but people really just want to be listened to. we were able to talk to folks on base and get their votes. host: did you feel -- he came out as gay in 2008. was that an issue at all in your race? guest: it is really hard to measure that. i think i get inoculated from that simply because i have that celebrity part. for me, the bigger challenge seem to be overcoming the fact that people saw me as a singer.

overcoming the fact that people saw me from "american idol" and didn't know i was qualified. i'm sure it has something to do with it. the fourth circuit court struck down north carolina's gay marriage ban about three weeks before the election which sort of said -- change the tone a little bit. it made people a little upset about that. it was really something that people addressed to me face-to-face. host: here's a call from new york. this is jay. caller: good morning and thank you for c-span. you have a very unique background in a very unique perspective. i think as a former teacher and popular entertainer and candidate for congress that you have an interesting perspective on who the likely nominees will be for republican and democrat in 2016 and who do you think will win and why? i will hang up. guest: i think that hillary

clinton is probably the democratic nominee. i think that is right now -- barring on for seen circumstances. i do not think i would speculate about the republican nominees right now. we have two in and another one coming in later on today. i'm not sure. i think the republicans will build a colorful cast of characters before this is all over with. it is once be a very long primary process for them. i think a lot of them see a window and want to be the person that gets through. host: what about the road for democrats in the house and the trail that you are on in 2014 has been a high hurdle in 2016? 30 seats are so -- what are the lessons that you learned and would impart to democrats running nationwide in 2016? guest: i think the lessons i learned unfortunately is about how much money is in politics. i think a lot of the big troubles that we have in the u.s. right now is that the state

of families and legislatures have redraw on the line so much. i think in north carolina that one of the biggest challenges right now and one of the only cases or opportunities for democrats in north carolina fortunately is to spend time fixing and working towards putting new people and the general assembly to try to get those lines redrawn for 2020. i do not think we give up. there's still some places where we can make progress if we can continue to tout how well the economy has done and see that the last six years have been successful. host: would you run for legislature? guest: potentially. the plus i live has a good -- the place i live has a good standing for democrats. there's no need to take a good democrat in legislature out. i do not think i would district top and moved somewhere else for that. if there were a place an opportunity, i'm not looking to

be in politics necessarily or be elected office necessarily unless there's a place right thing i can help. host: how much money did you have to raise for your house campaign and how much was that of personal savings? guest: we raised shy of 1.5 million. i do not put much in. i was a little bit shy of 100,000. that is a lot. compared to my primary runners they put $750,000 of his own money. money is a huge problem and it is why we don't have good delegates right now. i do not be leave that lying a seat is -- believe that buying a seat is appropriate. i do not think that is the way this democracy should work. host: let us go to philadelphia with bob on the independent line. caller: you said one thing that really made me listen to you and i really love that you said that you are not in lockstep. with that being said, there are

a couple points and i want to make out quick tea. first of all, you said that you love the low gas prices. obama has nothing to do with that. that puts you in category with what we call a low information voters. if you do research, you will find exactly why they are low. it is all done by the public sector. now, i want to get to another point. when you said that you are not a lemming, what does the uptake -- it take to upset a democrat like yourself? like with a obamacare -- i was in your shoes. when obama said that you could keep your doctor or plan and then all the comments by jonathan gruber and that the aca past was because of stupid voters, that is why i became independent. i've registered myself the very next day. my question to you is -- what does it take for you to say that is it and i've had it with his party and enough is enough?

i would really appreciate an honest answer. guest: what would it take? i want to make sure i got the question right. what it would make me upset with the party? if the parties started leaving as a whole and corporations were more important than people, at the party removes itself from its core values and making sure that it recognizes that the government has an opportunity to make sure that that americans to climb out of lower classes and middle classes and approve themselves. do i agree with every single thing that the party does? no. two i agree with everybody in the party? no. that is a point i think i made earlier. i made the gas price,. you saw that new gingrich ran in 2012 was running on how gas prices would be lower in we saw that is something that presidential candidates believe that they could run off.

even without newt gingrich, gas prices drop off regardless of what someone would say cause that to happen. i'm a democrat and proud democrat because i believe the party as a whole despite some of his specific policy issues -- the party as a whole recognizes that the government can provide opportunity for people to climb out and better themselves and improve their lives. host: a couple calls from north carolina lined up. we have kerry. caller: good morning. i've too quick comments. first of all, clay, i want to tell you that i'm going to see bill maher in durham in august. don't get mad at him. he is getting your name out there and get invited to the show. guest: i'm going to be on the show this coming friday. host: on bill maher? guest: this coming friday. caller: you and elizabeth warned

will be part of the culture that changes entertainment and congress. i see that the people that we have been voting for have been entertainment and back corporations that have been paying them just like they pay actors in hollywood. i know you have endured a lot of bullying clay, just as i have as a light-skinned african-american women. people that site are the ones that make the change. so ron and i wish you the best. -- so run and i wish you the best. host: do you think 2016? guest: i don't think 2016 is an time for me. i need time to process. it is not quiet out of the question at all, but i don't think so yet. host: what you hope people get out of your series that esquire? guest: i hope it comes across well. i allow them to come hoping that we could tell the story of

people in spring lake. i do not know that is attacked that they took. if anything, i hope people are able to see that there's too much money in politics and gerrymandering is an issue. people just want to be listened to. that is one thing i found more than anything. we saw in that and people and we went into the tea party form. we left with votes and people saying that they wouldn't vote for me, to pay people want to be listened to. i don't think folks do that anymore. i know it sounds like i'm campaigning right now, but i'm not. i'm not running for anything at all. that is the one thing that i discovered more than anything is lacking. too much money in politics. too many gerrymandered districts which makes politics and politicians feel like they can set it home and feel like they can get reelected anyway. and just sit and listen to people what the agree with them or not.

host: terry, you are maligned with clay aiken. -- on the line with clay aiken. caller: i have a couple of things i would like to discuss. number 1 -- holy clinton. in 2006, her can play an was put us in power. -- campaign slogan was put us in power. we can get a fix. we put you in power and you got the house and senate and we got the great recession. you mention something of about gasoline a while ago. those not forget that obama shut down the gulf of mexico for your. take about how many jobs that destroyed. democratic party is for children. let me tell you something, clay. i have lived in north carolina for 25 years. i can go to hillcrest. the children in those places this morning before they got to school to go to the school bus and have hypodermic and use

condoms to get to school. that is the life that the democratic party has given to the black men in this country. you ought to be ashamed of yourself to call yourself a democrat. host: some tough issues that he laid out right there. guest: one of the difficulties that you face on the trail is people not understanding the difference between what the federal government does and what the state government does. you want to talk about issues with the new school system -- a lot of times that estate. those issues are state government. i've no idea what hillary clinton's campaign in 2006 was. i did not know that she ran 2006. i don't remember that slogan either. i do know that millions and 10 millions more people have health care than they did back in 2006. i wish that every single thing could be done correctly, but not every single thing is going to be the last hope it is. i have to be happy about it and

proud of the fact that we are in a different place today and, i think, a better place today than we were in 2004 2005. host: did obamacare help or hurt your campaign? guest: i think in certain districts it's going to hurt. our state has not expanded medicaid. there are a lot of people and hundreds of thousands of people in the state who still do not have access. i think that argument is something that works for the people there. host: tim is in littleton colorado on independent line. go ahead. caller: thank you. clay, i question and a strategic -- i have a question on a strategic level. when you see hillary answered this campaign, my question is really this. so often when you get to a presidential election, people are looking for change. at this point in time, i'm really concerned. i do not want to see her do what gore did in 2000 and run away

from what clinton has a cop was. my thought process is that her argument should be that we need to hone and refine and get better at what has been accomplished in the obama administration. i think historians will be very good to him when you look back at everything and how he recovered the economy and save the auto industry in the inclusive nature of his presidency and even his foreign-policy. i would be advising that hillary not run from that, but let's say, let's build upon that. host: tim, let's get a response. guest: i don't disagree with you entirely. i think there is a big factor that we forget about or maybe don't forget about a lot is that the media does play a role. propaganda can play a role. a lot of people can tell you when someone comes from a very republican area. we had colors on this morning

that would indicate as much. we have a lot of people who are not able to see past the stereotype they have about someone. and they can see successes. i think that is a challenge and a delicate dance that any democrat running in 2016, whether it is for president or house or senate or whatever they have to figure out how to dance and be able to say listen, here are the things that we had successes with and yet at the same time, figure out how to do that with -- i had people come up to me this year and i have seen tomorrow night's episode. or parts of it. host: so you are one. -- warned. guest: i am of the state fair and someone walks up to me and figures out i'm a democrat. and she asked if i like obama? and i said that i do and i support a lot of things that he

has done. and then she said i'm done. that is where we are at right now is a country where we don't listen to other sites. that is a challenge that every democrat has with keeping people at the table. you have got to keep them there and do it in a way that makes them want to listen. you cannot say something that is going to turn them off without letting them listen to you. that is a difficult thing because it upsets democrats when you give an answer that makes them feel like you are not supporting the president, which is not the case, but you also have to make sure that you keep them at the table. there are a lot of things that hillary clinton is going to say or any democrat will say that will appeal to independents and all stripes of people, but you have got to keep them at the table and you got to stay yourself. is a very delicate dance. host: on twitter, dawn asks, what possibly could qualify clay aiken to represent 600,000 people in congress? guest: it is our constitution. our constitution was written to

be a representative democracy. somehow along the line and i don't know where, we assumed that only people who are qualified to be in congress are lawyers and career politicians. i would argue that those of the people who are least trustworthy and we need to get rid of in the first place. i'm qualified because i'm from north carolina and interested in listening. i think i want to do things that people are not willing to do. i would also argue that the person who is there is not doing a good job of that. i went because as a citizen of the second district and someone who grew up in north carolina, i know the area and a wanted to listen to people and represent their views. that is all you really have to do to be a representative. host: we have some calls. george, thanks for waiting. caller: good morning. how are you today? guest: great. caller: clegg, i have a question for you. actually, i've a statement that i would like to make. you ran because of that

documentary that they did for it and you're basically an outlier and not a democrat who just there to be there to be popular within the entertainment crowd? my question actually it'ss -- i'm not going to ask you for 3, 5, or 10 achievements that hillary has done. just name me one accomplishment that hillary has done for the country and for her party. host: running short on time. guest: i want to address your first part first. i'm not philly came -- hillary clinton's campaign manager. we saw a history of her in the senate with a conference. she was a first lady and forbear and running up in the senate.

this is something she started back in the 1990's and saw a fruition of in the obama campaign. she has been a part of policy change for decades. i would say now that i wish that i had been paid. i do not work for two years to run for congress and not get paid at all. this was something that came to us. it is something that came to us and we turned down several times. finally we agreed to do what we allow this documentary people to do it. i think you will be a mistake to say it is my documentary. it is not. it is someone else's documentary and i'm the subject of it. politics are not what make you popular. if you think they are, you're looking at the wrong tv or internet because as far as i'm concerned, it is not something you do to be popular. it is something you do to see an opportunity to do something for people. host: one more quick call here with mike. caller: hello? host: you are on the air, mike. caller: people are talking about the gas prices and everything.

barack obama try to get a committee together to try to investigate why these prices keep going up under the people who recently lowered the price. republicans shot that after let us let forget that george bush promised the american people oil based on the war and $6 trillion went on to the debt which now have occurred. another thing -- the republicans always say they are for veterans and 42 republicans signed a letter, headed by mitch mcconnell, and said they would not move on a veterans package built sent over last year because they do not get the taxes option. host: you get the last word there. thank you for your calls and comments. clay aiken "the runner up" on esquire tv network. what is next for you in terms of screen and stage work for your career? guest: it is something that i put aside to run and not interested in running back to. i think you have a season in

your life for everything and i spent a good deal time being able to sting -- saying here and there. it is not something i'm focused on going back to. we have done a lot in this past year and we are going to let this documentary finished. we will see how it comes across and see how we come across in it. i would be lying if i'm not nervous there. we can see how i can continue to use the platform i have to talk about a lot of stuff that i've learned. host: viewers can follow your thoughts on twitter -- at clay aiken. thanks for being here on "washington journal" this morning. the program continues next with how much the american people pay in taxes. kyle pomerleau joins us. the tax foundation concludes that $3.3 trillion in federal taxes and when i have trillion and state local taxes for it total of 4.8 chilean dollars or 31% of the nation's income. later on, marcus weisberger on

pentagon plans and the cost of many of its major programs. including the f 35 joint strike fighter are seeing reductions in cost. more "washington journal" the head on c-span. -- ahead on c-span. ♪ >> were you a fan of c-span's first lady series? first ladies is now a book published by public affairs. looking inside the personal life of every first lady in american history, based on original interviews with more than 50

preeminent historians and biographers. learn details of all 45 first ladies and who made these women who they were and their lives and ambitions and unique partnerships with their presidential spouses. the book "first ladies" provides lively stories of these fascinating women who survived the scrutiny of the white house and sometimes i great personal cost while supporting their families and famous husbands and even change history. c-span's "first ladies" is an illuminated, entertaining, and inspired read and is now available as a hardcover or e-book from your favorite bookstore or online bookseller. >> tonight on "the communicators,": of the on the importance -- carl nebia on the importance of the public. >> bo both presidential

campaigns stressed the importance of spectrum. i did not know anything about spectrum. most people that i had met and even those who i oftentimes work with the not understand much about spectrum, but now everybody realizes it is part of our daily lives and we rely completely on devices to communicate and do our jobs and stay in touch with our family. >> tonight at eight eastern on the communicators of c-span2. -- tonight at 8:00 eastern on "the key indicators" on c-span two. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: kyle pomerleau joins us trade hughes and economists from the tax foundation. they had a report on how much of americans are paying in taxes. a new report shows that americans are paying 3.3 chilean dollars in federal for a total of $4.8 trillion or 31% of the nation's income.

how does that amount? this is the amount paid in the most recent tax year or this coming tax year? guest: this is the projection of this year of how americans will pay for federal, state, and local. host: how does that compare to recent years yucca guest:? guest: 31% of national income is a little bit higher than recent years. the recession lowered and the amount of people paid in taxes lowered a bit. in 2007, they paid around this months in national taxes. host: is the reason that taxes are going up is because the economy is better? guest: what drives what we pay in taxes is two factors. one is the economy. the more income we earn, the more we pay in taxes because we have a progressive income tax.

people when they jump of brackets, they tend to share more of their total income. the second piece is policy. when taxes go up in tax rates go up or we introduce new taxes that also jumped the amount we pay in taxes up or down as well. the most recent significant change in tax policy of course was after the obamacare increase in tax. the net investment income tax all those taxes are new taxes and relatively new taxes. we are seeing new collections from those as well. host: on your website at tax foundation.org, the top of the page has the headline of the tax freedom day is april 24. what is tax freedom day? guest: that is the day when america as a whole has earned enough in income to pay the whole tax bill for the year. it is 4.8 trillion dollars in taxes over national income. that is about 31%. that he would present into the year is 114 days and that is

april 24. host: who has the longest stretch in terms of the 50 states for getting to their state tax freedom day? guest: the amount of income that they earn and pay taxes significantly for state policy reasons, but also as i discuss the level of income determines how much you pay in taxes. if you look at new jersey, connecticut, new york, though states had to work the longest to pay their total tax bill. new jersey, i think, has the latest tax freedom day of may 13. if you look at the other states and the want to get a tax freedom day earlier like louisiana and mississippi, they already have a tax freedom day on april 2 and april 4 respectively. host: how long has the tax condition been doing this for -- foundation been doing this report? guest: for several decades. for as long as i've been alive. they have been doing it since the 1970's. before that, a businessman from

florida sort of invented the concept. he had been doing it for a number of years. we took over the whole deal and we have been doing it ever since. most americans know what tax freedom day is or sort of have an idea of what it is, but they don't really know that it is the tax foundation who has been doing it for so long. host: kyle pomerleau is with the tax foundation. the new report is about the amount of taxes that americans are paying in 2015. to be a part of the conversation here are the numbers. you can send us a tweet as well at c-span w day -- @cspanwj. we found a couple of interesting things that tax freedom day is april 24. the poetry -- $3.3 trillion and

federal taxes. $1.5 trillion in state and local. tax freedom day is one day later than last year due to mainly the country's continued stay be economic growth. americans will collectively spend more on taxes in 2015 minute will on food, clothing, and housing combined. how does that compare to other years? guest: in recent years, since option on food, clothing, and housing is relatively steady but the tax bill is more volatile. when the economy started heating up, it is godly getting better. we are seeing people paying more taxes than they are in the last time we were paying last was during the recession. -- and the last time we are paying less was during the recession because taxes were so low. host: this is two days before the tax deadline. report comes out before that. tell us about the process of getting this report ready. guest: sure. we look at 2014's data and it

tells us how much people are paying in taxes from the tv series -- previous years. host: the bea? guest: yes. they do productions each and every year for taxes and states. we connect the dots there and say it is going to be this much this year and the share of national income will be this much. we are at the mercy of government statistics, but we are typically within one or two days of making these productions. -- projections. we are seeing the amount of tax collections of the congressional budget well. host: you are starting work on 2016. guest: we will start hitting ready to calculate that number. host: with issues like obamacare, that is a little more well-known. with unknown issues about the tax code going into a year, does that affect your ability to

report accurately and how much taxes americans are going to pay? guest: that is a very good question. the biggest one we have to deal with is the tax extenders and dealing with 50 temporary tax policies that are not very temporary. they are more or less permanent over the number of years. what do you do with those? right now, they are expired. but it is very likely that the cost is going to extend. when comes to your to your taxes, they do not affect the numbers too much. maybe they will pay -- push it to april 21 of 22nd of having on where it goes. we usually see it as the law does as the cbo does. once those laws are passed, we will look back and see that tax freedom day was actually the 23rd of april last year the cousin extenders changed or whatever. host: the extenders have not passed congress yet? guest: right now, they are

expired. what will likely happen like last year is that congress will vote and retroactively pastime for the previous year. host: but certainly not before the tax deadline dayy? guest: no. i don't see them coming together in today's to do something. host: kyle pomerleau is from the tax foundation. let us go to kyle. caller: it is so aggravating to go through this year after year after year. people keep voting for higher taxes. it is like they cannot comprehend what is going on. i make $19,000 a year. that is on top of what they take from prices. obamacare -- i was charged a fine for 150 dollars or your for not buying the government's product. it is unbelievable that he -- people keep voting for democrats. why don't they get it? something has got to give. host: your comments?

guest: certainly, it a lot of people realize that their taxes may be too high and tax freedom day is a good example of this. when you look at how much people are paying taxes overall, you may think, wow, that is a big number. the usefulness of tax freedom day is that we know what the total tax bill will be and then we can decide as a nation of voters and we can be like, well i think 31% of the national income is too much and we should maybe vote in lower taxes or maybe put -- people don't think that is enough and need higher taxes. i think the transparency lets us know how much we are paying for services. host: it is good to remind viewers that 31% of our nation's income and 3.3 chilean dollars in federal taxes and 1.5 chilean dollars in state and local

taxes. that is a total of 4.85 chilean dollars or 31% of the nation's income. -- $4.85 trillion or 31% of the nation's income. i assume you guys calculate that as attack -- as a tax? guest: we look at what the cbo will count. i'm not sure that will work but time will tell. i'm not sure they fully know exactly how much they're going to get from the individual mandates. it is really hard to tell because we have really not dealt with it yet. we have had income taxes for a very long time and can predict very well how much is going to bring in each and every year, but something like the individual mandate which we have never had, it is hard to account for that sort of stuff. host: daniel in, savannah georgia -- daniel in savannah georgia. caller: i'm trying to figure out

wide 2015 is having such a increase in taxes being paid or is this something we should expect to go up for this country and this nation? host: remind us of 2014. what were those figures? guest: in 2014, it was about the same amount and a little more than 30% of the national income. this year, we are at about 31%. if we go back in time, may 2000 -- may 1, 2000 was tax freedom day. that implies a total tax burden of federal, state, and local with 33% of national income. it has been higher in the past. we just found out recently when it was 2007. it will likely go up as time goes on and the economy continues to catch up to where it was before, if it ever does. we will see that we will be paying more in taxes. the interesting thing about the

american people in general is that once the tax burden gets really high, like in 2000, we will see in a few years that there's a lot of political pressures are tax cuts. in 2004, that was right before the bush tax cuts when in. guest: there was a great surplus of that time. american people were saying, well, that's a low bit too much and we should pull that that force. it did not work out perfectly good spending decreased while taxes decrease. we may see the same sort of pressure as we collect more more taxes. host: you mentioned 2000 -- what was the percentage of income? guest: the national income was 33% of federal, state, and local. i think it is about 22.5 percent federal alone. national is a little bit different from gdp just the point that out. national income does not account for income that is earned

overseas and stuff like that. is not part of what the united states is taxing and the income that we are earning. host: let us hear from florida. good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. good morning, kyra. -- good morning, kyle. i'm a democrat and i wanted a topic to have with my republican friends is morning when i get to work. my question is -- from the statistics that we have or are projected statistics that we will have is it better for us to have affordable health care and pre-subsidized individuals or is it better for us to pay on the backend once individuals go to the hospital so on and so forth? i will hang up guest: and take back your answer.

-- i will hang up and take back your answer. guest: that is a very interesting question. thinking about the total tax bill, people will think that their benefits to the taxes. taxes pay for a lot of stuff like social security, medicare and you mentioned the affordable care act has been a large spending program. i am not an expert on health care economics. i'm a tax economist. but i think that is something to certainly discuss with people. we are paying 31% of our national income. and we are getting all this and we are getting the affordable care act. is it worth that spending? are we getting what we want with the money that we are spending? host: you are a graduate of the georgetown public policy. what made you interested in taxes? guest: i think over time i moved from different policy areas. i think that once i started looking at not just the benefit side -- we will analyze policy

and do the food stamp program and see if that works really well and move from that to sort of funding -- what is the best way to fund programs like that? of course, taxes are how the government funds things. what are the taxes best for funding of the spending that we have your code that is what the tax foundation is really all about. is how to best raise the revenue from taxes and do the least amount of damage to the economy. host: was here from georgia and but best buy, maryland. -- let hear from george and maryland. caller: who am i speaking to? host: you are speaking to kyle pomerleau of the tax foundation. caller: how is that compared from federal to personal income tax act of how does that compare to how much the government expects to spend the syriac o

-- to spend this year? guest: $3.3 trillion of it is federal taxes. individual income tax is about 1.230 -- $1.2 trillion. corporate taxes received will be about $430 billion this year. in total versus -- what was the second question your coat it was the total amount versus revenue and how much we spend, that is a good point. there is a deficit, too. we are paying taxes, but it's not matching the amount of spending. we have a little more than a $500 billion deficit in the calendar year. this represents future taxes owed and so there is that gap as well. an important point to make when

we break it down by individual versus corporation is that at the end of the day, individuals are the on the one actually paying taxes. corporations are really just a piece of paper. they really cannot exit pay tax. when a corporation is paying tax, is actually taking away from the wages of the workers and increasing prices of products that they sell or reducing overturn of investment for their shareholders. host: let me ask you about some be difficult is that the irs is having. there was an interview in "the washington post" and he says that we will continue to do whatever he can to be more efficient and maximize our resources. when you lose 13,000 employees because of budget cuts and expect to lose another thousand, you run off to the physical limits. it does not matter how efficient you get, you clearly get less effective. he also spoke last week at the national press club and at code some of the same sentiments -- and i go to some of the same

sentiment. here's what he had to say. [video clip] >> the eye rest for fiscal year 2015 of $10.9 billion is $1.2 billion less than it was five years ago. the irs is now at its lowest level of funding since 2008. if you adjust for inflation, a budget is now comparable to where we were in 1998. on the budget has been striking however, the taxpayer base has grown by millions. they have also taken on new responsibilities such as the implementation of the tax related provisions of the afford will care act. since 75% of the irs budget is personal, the agency has been absorbing reductions by shrinking our workforce. as a result, we and fiscal year 2014 with more than 15,000 fewer permanent full-time employees compared to 2010. we expect to lose another 3000 more or less the richardson by

the end of this year. -- through attrition by the end of this year. you might think that shrinking in agency make or she to do more with less. that may have been true early but we have heard, held that are funding is deliberately lowered to make sure that we think twice about spending. the eye rest does need to be efficient as possible and be careful stewards of funding that we received from taxpayers. we save over $200 million a year as a result of policies that taken place over the last few years. after five years of budget cuts and the hiring freeze that have lasted for four years, people need to understand that the irs is going to have to do less with less. it means that both enforcement and taxpayer service will suffer. the problem is there are levels of staffing that are insufficient to deliver on a mission. host: lots of issues laid out by the commissioner. do any of those actually affect

the dollar figure that the iris collects? -- irs collects? guest: possibly. when you talk about the iris and funding cuts, you can feel bad for them or don't feel bad for them. you can do both at the same time. you can feel bad for them because congress is essentially told them that we are going to make you do board -- more, but with less money. he is talking about the foreign account taxpayer act, which is a huge administrative burden for the eye rest and taxpayers -- irs and taxpayers, they have to use a greater use of tax credits over time. we have green energy credit and stuff like that. the irs has gone from a collection agency to an agency that does all sorts of stuff e.on collects in taxes. it is now giving out money for certain behaviors as well. at the same time, congress has decided, well, we are going to cut your funding now.

they have to do more with less. of course, over time, they have gotten a lot better as well. the work should not be as hard in the classic irs sends of getting tax returns and people filing their taxes. in one way, you feel bad and the other, well, maybe you should work a little harder and moved to e-filing for everything and ought to make a lot for stuff. you do not have to do as much, but you can still serve. host: we are talking taxes with kyle pomerleau of the tax foundation. they have a report of how much taxes americans pay in the federal, state, and local. we have more time for your calls. those hear from port st. lucie. john is on a democrat line. caller: good morning. how are you?

mr. scanlon, you're working overtime. i enjoyed you at the anniversary series that you have. it is hard to believe that four years of gone by that fast. kyle, you made an excellent point about corporate taxes. corporations don't pay taxes. they just pass it on. john f. kennedy had the first budget that went over $100 billion. and george bush, junior came in and his budget was $2 trillion. when he left, i'm not sure if it went over $3 trillion or was $3 trillion. we have a spending problem. as nothing to do with whether george bush cut taxes were not. that is in this misnomer about clinton. we all he had a budget surplus for one, not three years. we were just adding in the trust fund from social security. one year we actually did have a surplus, even with that added in

or accounting for, so to say. the bottom line is -- if we do not stop spending, we will never catch up. it is like a dog trying to catch its tail. we are nearly at $4 trillion for this budget. this is lunacy. i'm a democrat. i'm fed up with a way that this is gone because i have a child and we are going to have grandchildren. they going to be bankrupt. thank you for your time. host: thank you, john. guest: one of the interesting things about had -- tax receipts is that they are shrinking. that is great. we are getting closer to being closer to a surplus like we were in the past. however, if you look of the congressional budget office is numbers going into the future, that shrinking deficit is only going to start increasing over

time. the budget will decrease in a few years, but then five or six years out, that budget deficit will start going again and will continue to grow over a long p eriod of time. i think, yes, spending is a big issue. in order to keep our current levels, taxes will have to go up and i do not know at the american people are ready to have taxes go up that high. congress is going to have to deal with a long-term spending issue. host: one view from bloomberg businessweek. they cover this week -- "the iris sucks." if you think paying the taxes is bad, try working at america's most unloved agency. we go to and who is in sugar grove, north carolina on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. pardon me. i think was a gentleman from maryland who called in and said

that democrats do nothing but raise taxes. here in north carolina, we have republican legislation. in raleigh, they're going to take all the sales taxes and then divvy them out to the various counties. they call that redistribution. our counties here in watauga county have five $4 billion in tax receipts. the guy in maryland -- i beg to differ with him. in regards to corporate taxes you're seeing places like text on mobile -- exxon mobil and they pay no taxes and they get a refund in the millions if not close to half $1 billion in refunds. that makes no sense to me. those of my two comments. thank you for taking my call. -- thank you for taking my call. guest: the first issue has to do with state and local revenue sharing. in general, it is nice for the localities that they are going

to spend a bunch of taxpayer money and they don't have the raise much revenue from their own constituents because the state is going to reimburse them for their reeducation or roads or what have you. host: forfrom taxes collected statewide? guest: yesterday is a little bit of a redistribution system. we'll believe it is a good tax system because in general you wanted to reflect the taxes that you pay. if locality will purchase that at -- extra fire station that should be reflected in what they actually pay. i'm not sure about exxon mobil specifically, i have not read their financial statements but corporations overall going to be paying a little bit more than 400 billion dollars.

year-to-year, tax it -- corporate tax revenue much weight riley. -- fluctuates wildly. an interesting thing about the way the corporate tax works, if you have losses that exceed your income for one year, you are able to carry forward those losses in order to make sure you can deduct your losses over a long period of time. when you look at a year statement from a corporation usa , interesting, the company made a few billion dollars in profits but did not pay tax. look at a few years prior and that corporation has likely lost a bunch of money and is finally able to deduct it. caller: good morning.

[indiscernible] host: you are breaking up a little bit, you work for the irs? caller: yes, i work for the irs for 10 years under ronald reagan. he raised taxes on the average americans and cut taxes on corporations. when mr. kyle mentioned [inaudible] . host: i'm sorry, you are breaking up. tough to hear, but maybe you can try calling back. to brooklyn on the republican line. caller: this is about the federal tax exemption for inheritance tax. does that cover all inheritance?

the impression i get from watching a lot of these shows that try to sell you things, you can be paying inheritance tax on 457's and ira's, no matter the exemption. i don't know if that is misleading but that is the impression that i get. guest: i am not a tax lawyer or accountant so i do not know all the ways to get around the estate tax or if you will be hit by the estate tax, but what you are talking about is the 55% tax on wealth transfer from an estate to individuals. there is an trip exemption the first $5.4 million from an estate is exempt. you have a high rate but a huge exemption. i am not entirely sure whether things are taxed, i think the

exemption covers a lot. that is why it doesn't raise essentially anything. host: here is a comment that says the individual mandate was a tax and democrats raised taxes on the middle class. and one more here, including payroll taxes, please rake out the individual taxes paid by quintile. i don't know if you are able to do that. guest: kind of. one of the important points of tax freedom day is it looks at the average taxes paid. we have a very progressive income tax which means as you earn more income, you pay more in taxes. our average figure is 21.5%.

if you look at the highest levels of income, they are paying closer to 30% while the very bottom is paying closer to 1% or 2%. it is a highly progressive adderall system -- federal system. host: that number for corporate tax, $430 million this year, and historically that is about the number for the last 10 years? guest: the corporate tax is very volatile. corporation profits have a lot to do with how the economy is working. what you see with corporate tax -- it is all over the place. $400 billion might even be an overestimate. they have a hard time to dictate -- predicting how much corporate

tax will raise. caller: i have two quick questions the first, if 31% of national income comes from federal income tax, could you tell us what other sources of income makeup the remaining two thirds of national income? the second question, ted cruz amongst others has stated that if elected they would abolish the irs, can you tell us what alternative there is to the irs? guest: the 31% figure is the taxes we pay. that correlates with the amount of government spending we have. the remainder of national income is in net national product.

that means the income from wages, dividends, retained earnings -- all the income that anyone earns in any form. tax reform that gets rid of the irs. how do you collect taxes without the irs or an agency that is not the irs but does everything the irs does. it really doesn't happen. a broader point is politically, no one seems to like the irs. they are the ones who take your money, so of course you do not like them. that works very well. when it comes to ted cruz or any other candidate, the broader point is that they want to simplify the tax code? not eliminate the irs, but perhaps they will find that instead of getting rid of it will make the tax code easier to

comply with and that could make people happier. host: democrats line, you're on. caller: good morning. so $.31 out of every dollar i have goes to taxes. let's talk about what i get in return. i don't have to raise an army. [inaudible] i can call an ambulance if i need one. i can get our road and drive everywhere i want. if i want to go to california am i don't have to build my old road -- own road. my grandchildren go to school, i have public water and sewer systems. i have a library, parks and the

list goes on and on. it only costs me $.31. i don't think we should complain to vote much about taxes without realizing what we are getting in return. i thank you for your time. guest: so, $.31 for every dollar is the national figure. it isn't likely that everyone is paying that much. the federal taxes very progressive. some are paying more than that and might be upset they are not getting as much but there are people who pay much less than $.31 for every dollar. they may be getting more than they are actually paying back. we are paying for something. for benefits from the government. whether they are good or bad

you are getting them. when talking about the 31% number, we are not doing some sort of cost benefit analysis, we are just looking at what the cost is. that is what we are talking about. host: stephen moore of the heritage foundation in "the washington times" this morning writes about a new report called rich states, or states. we find that five of the highest tax blue states in the nation, california, new jersey connecticut and illinois lost residents. meanwhile, the big low tax red states, texas, florida, north carolina, arizona and georgia

gained about as many of these new residents. guest: when talking about tax at the state level, this is something people bring up. these high income tax states people are fleeing those states. taxes matter but they are not the only thing that matter. of course there are people moving out of california to florida as of taxes that it is not the only reason. host: are there states that are in a bind because they cut their taxes? guest: the most recent example is the kansas issue. the kansas governor there had a bunch of the cut taxes significantly for individuals but also had the exemption for pass-through businesses. he did this expecting there would be some sort of reflow of revenue. but what do you look at -- you

can only do that with a few taxes. individual income taxes, if you cut those you are losing revenue. that is what happened in kansas. they cut taxes so much on individuals they have lost revenue. now to have to figure out, do we cut spending or bring taxes back up. host: a couple more calls here. caller: first, i want to say thank you for your insight. i have been looking into it because i have a finance background in m&a. you have been very down the line about the information you divided. -- provided. people don't really understand what you're trying to do, not

that you are doing cost-benefit analysis but just understanding what the receipts look like. for me 31% seems to be very high. what are the other ancillary taxes or fees that we are receiving for the services they provided that should have been in the 31%? guest: i am not entirely sure. when looking at government receipts you will notice that if you took all of these numbers and put them together, it is not exactly what the government raises. we drop fees on purpose because a fee is not a tax. a fee is something you pay in return for a direct service. think of it like this. you pay income tax on earned income.

that is not a fee because it is not going toward anything specific. go to your local town hall and get a hunting license, you pay $20 and that the phrase the cost of the government -- efraysdefrays the cost of the government processing that. host: the democrat line. go ahead. caller: i was talking about taxes. when reagan was in and george w. bush was in, we paid more taxes under him then clinton when he was in. he had a surplus, which i don't think any other president has had like he had. we are just low income, we're retired and draw social security.

my husband has a phd and draws a pension. we pay 18%. host: that is your total tax bill? caller: yes. host: good comments there. guest: i cannot comment on any specific person's tax bill and over time, that will very wildly. it is important to know that your tax bill -- it might go up or down due to policy changes. policy does matter. when presidential candidates start talking about their tax plans, what they do might affect individuals and you need to know , is this going to affect the economy? it is paying attention to that stuff that matters. these tax plans have consequences. host: tax freedom day is april

24. the report on tax freedom day and how much americans are paying in taxes. thank you for being with us. more ahead as we look the defense spending. we will hear from defense one's marcus weiss gerber how many departments are seeing a reduction in cost. more ahead. >> were you a fan of c-span's

first ladies series? it is now a book. looking inside the personal life of every first lady in american history. based on original interviews with more than 50 historians and biographers, learn details of what made them who they were. the book, "first ladies" provides lively stories of these fascinating women who survived the scrutiny of the white house. sometimes at great personal cost and even changed history. "first ladies" is an entertaining and aspiring read. >> tonight on "the communicators." carl nevius on the importance of

spectrum in policy for the government. >> the last two administrations have voted on the spectrum -- when i first started in 1979, i came out of the marine corps. i didn't know anything about spectrum. most people that i met and even some who i worked with did not understand much about spectrum. now at least everybody realizes a part of our daily lives and devices completely rely on our ability to communicate. host: tonight at 8:00 est, on "the communicators," on c-span 2. washington journal continues. host: every monday morning at this time, we bring you a look at your money. exactly how that money is being spent, your tax money in particular.

joining me this morning's marcus weisgerber. we will talk about pentagon spending and in particular the pentagon programs where the costs are coming down. we will look at your piece, a cost of major weapons is finally coming down at the pentagon, what is the news behind the story? guest: basically the pentagon has been working to improve the way it buys stuff, for several years. starting with now defense secretary ashton carter when he was the undersecretary of defense and it has continued. basically, what is happening they are being more disciplined in the way they spend money. however the defense budget is also going down. host: you brought along a model of the f 35 joint strike fighter.

tell us about this fighter and why this is such an true essential pentagon project. it is the most expensive program and pentagon history, it is expected to cost just under $35 million. it is replacing fighter jets and other types of planes in the navy and marine corps. it is placing the f-16 in the air force, the harrier in the marine corps and the hornet in the navy. it is a stealth plane so it can evade radar. you can see it doesn't have weapons hanging off and that allows it to have a small signature that cannot be detected. it is supposed to be one of the most technologically advanced planes ever built. when it works, it probably will be. host: the news on the f-35,

their projected costs are coming down? guest: they are right now. it was at a high point of $400 billion. it includes the research and development cost to actually build it which is $60 billion and the rest is physical production. how much it will cost over a lifetime of purchases. we are talking 35 years of purchases. the program has been wildly overbudget for the last decade. pentagon saying right now that the costs are getting more stable and one of the reasons is they are buying more planes. host: you are reporting on the cost of systems and the procurement systems -- the defense spending is still at a historically high level. guest: it is and one of the

reasons it is coming down is because the pentagon is buying less. this year, two big programs came off the total spending list. when you look at it, it is still extremely large. 77 programs totaling $1.6 trillion over a lifetime. it could be over a 50 year period. host: we take a look at some of the statistics. they have 80 major procurement projects. programs include tanks, planes ships and bombs. the valued cost of your reporting is $1.6 trillion in spending. what kind of timeframe? guest: 40 to 50 years in some cases. some of those programs could start falling off. they have reached the end of their production buys. the u.s. military will be purchasing the f-35 well into the 2030's.

host: my guess is here to talk about defense spending and the cost of some spending going down. we will get to your calls shortly. the pentagon held a brief yesterday and we want to show you some of the comments about spending on cyber security. >> cyber security is a pervasive problem for the department pervasive in the sense that it affects and is a danger and a source of risk all the way through retirement. inning includes the support system and their databases and what we hold in government. it includes syllogistic support information, the design information, the tactical information everything

associated with the product is a potential point of attack. we have to do a better job of protecting our things. cyber security will be a major emphasis going forward. we need to be much more attentive about best practices there and staying ahead of the threat. host: what is he saying? staying ahead of the threat? he is doing a briefing about spending overall and the reduction of programs but there it seems they are positioning themselves for more spending in cyber security. guest: the federal government as a whole is under cyber attack every single day. the pentagon has figures that shows thousands of attempted attacks everyday. cyber security for a guy like mr. kendall is important. he is making sure every program that starts has some sort of plan to address ways that something could be vulnerable to a cyber attack. so the f-35, it is very

high-tech with hardware and software, the pentagon is looking at ways to protect that sensitive software from being pulled off. everything they do as cyber implications these days. host: you are talking about the cost of some pentagon systems costs coming down. the headline, they write about a couple things. the overall cost decrease can be attributed to two programs that achieved significant cost decreases through reductions. the network tactical and the ship program from lockheed martin. the former had an increase of $11.8 billion, or merrily do to the decision to eliminate certain capabilities and a letter reported a cost increase of $8.9 billion due to a

quantity decrease of 20 ships. remove these factors and the report isn't so great. the majority featured a cost increase over the past year. more than half of the programs in the portfolio reported issues not related to policy changes. guest: that story looks at it gao report. it looks at the way cost increases in different ways. pentagon looks at it as, is the overall cost going down? if i am going to buy fewer, the cost of the program is coming down. what gao does is look at any cost increases at all. say that i will buy 100 tanks and it will cost $1 billion and there is a war and some of the tanks get destroyed, the pentagon originally said we will buy 100 tanks but now we need

maybe 100 more tanks to meet the demand. they will spend more money, and say an extra $1 billion, they say we are just responding to the threat. we could not plan for attrition. host: marcus weisberger covers defense spending for "defense one." here we go to los angeles on the democrat line. caller: my question is, i had heard a dj on the radio talk about defense spending at the pentagon and i was wondering if you think they are spending too much and it is extraordinary the amount they are spending on defense, when they could spend it on welfare. guest: what the pentagon will tell you is they are spending what is appropriate for the actual threat.

you are seeing all sorts of threats that have popped up in the last year with isis and down in yemen as well. they also say they are planning for contingencies to defend the united states say from a north korean nuclear weapon. the pentagon justifies spending through the threat level. host: i want to ask you about those emerging threat levels. the tour of some asian nations as is the headline here. the u.s. defense chief strikes a harsh tone on south korea. he visited japan to demonstrate the obama's -- commitment to rebalancing asia. south korea largely concerned -- i will pull this off and have a

look at another piece on ashton carter's trip as well. the new york times over the weekend. china's naval buildup yields results. the u.s. navy faces growing competition from china. washington has become increasingly concerned about the maritime powers. to create artificial islands in the contested waters of the south sea. how does the pentagon go about doing that when these new sorts of perceived threats begin to emerge? guest: the pentagon has been looking at the pacific for several years. in a rare move, president obama went to the pentagon and announced a new strategy. it also had a focus on the middle east. clearly the middle east is the hot topic right now.

one thing is to look at ashton carter making his first big international trip to the pacific region. host: what is that message overall? guest: he is showing the region is important to be united states and for the allies over there. they are preaching caution to people like china, to respect international waters in the case of the islands they are reclaiming. host: marcus weisberger is our guest. covering defense spending. let's hear from bill in sebastian, florida. caller: this is nothing more than the project for new american sensory. we are all over the place.

you have ashton carter down in the pacific, with some sweetheart deal for boeing or lockheed or whoever. and to salvation nation? is that what it is? that sounds awfully religious to me. the head of the department of defense -- come on. host: bill in florida, he mentioned a couple of contractors. what is the status now that the wars are winding down in afghanistan and iraq, what is the status of most major contractors? are they downsizing? guest: they have downsized over the past three to five years. they have been preparing for a downturn specifically as u.s. troops exited iraq and are slowly exiting afghanistan. they have consolidated

infrastructure facilities and production lines as well. one thing that a lot of analysts will tell you is they are at the point where they cannot go down much further. despite those reductions in workforce and infrastructure they have very good profits in recent years. host: you write that nearly 70% of the pentagon's 80 major acumen projects valued at $1.6 trillion, -- major procurement projects valued at $1.6 trillion. anything they continue to spend on and have not gotten rid of? guest: the pentagon will tell you they have gotten rid of a lot in recent years.

gates closed a number of programs, and that was to address that. the pentagon message right now is everything on the books is needed to prepare for the current fight or future. caller: [inaudible] the cost of the big bomber that we built, in the billions. host: which bomber? caller: a stealth bomber. one trip to iraq and back. there was no place to land it. each trip to the isis costs at least $500,000. we are fighting people with ak-47's. if we had to fight china, it is

ridiculous. we are not that strong anymore. let's come home and take care of ourselves and let people take care of their own damn problems. guest: i actually visited the air force base with former secretary chuck hagel in january. you mentioned the missile. right now missile spending is going up. there are missiles that cost far less than the $500,000 being used in the current fight, one area where they are expecting a major increase due to the air war against isis is missile and munitions spending. host: the l.a. times has been reporting on the $10 billion that gone bad. they write that a fleet of boeing 747's modified to fire an infrared laser, it would incinerate enemy missiles

shortly after launch and before they could release, contractors include boeing northrop grumman and lockheed. the problem is because of the limited range, each would have to fly within adversary borders leaving it vulnerable to aircraft missiles. are there -- they say it is a $10 billion that on bad, if this enter experimental program? guest: that program was canceled several years ago. it was a bet, a big that. there were plans at one point create these 747's with the lasers on them, they tested it and it actually worked. it was a matter that it needed to be really close to the

missile and it was really susceptible to other items and fire from enemy surface-to-air missiles or aircraft. it summed up the past decade where defense spending was at its highest level ever. projects like this would never get approved in the current structure. host: who is the biggest defense contractor? guest: right now lockheed martin. host: how much annually in the current budget, how much is the pentagon spending with lockheed martin? guest: it is hard to say exactly, for the f-35 program alone you are looking at eight to $10 billion -- $8 billion to $10 million. probably a 15 billion-ish figure it would be close. caller: i have a comment.

what is the united states going to do for its people in iraq and iran, what does it do for them? all they are going to do is bring all the flaws of capitalism, it will bring income inequality, there will be housing shortages. [inaudible] capitalist corruption, that is all they will do and what will i get out of it? an eight dollar an hour job over here. i do have to worry because i live in an area where developers want the area. they will take all of the spending in the street. [inaudible]

give them good education and good housing. host: norman, we appreciate your comment. any reaction? guest: the one thing the military would say is that, people in the united states should care about the isis fight because they say that isis wants to have enter attack on the u.s. homeland. by trying to address it with airstrikes and by empowering the local forces, saudi is going down into yemen. host: is it possible to narrow down what is the biggest amount of money we're spending on isis in terms of the program? guest: the most money being spent now is primarily on bombs and missiles and fuel. it costs a lot of money to keep aircraft in the air for the

periods which they are flying. long distances across iraq and into syria. they need tanker's to support them, you are talking $10 million a day. host: 20 more minutes with marcus weisgerber. join the conversation. and we are on twitter. shorty tweets, the only real threat the budget is protecting is the state budget loss threat. this one says we are building unneeded and unwanted tanks. and finally, is the defense budget based on regional threats? what are the greatest regional threats? guest: that is actually an issue

the pentagon has been trying to get rid of. congress has can -- continued to include them year after year. regional threats, in the middle east, they are u.s. allies, uae that is the main reason why you have this in their conducting airstrikes. host: dennis on the republican line. caller: what i was wondering is how they get commotion, there is a retired general on fox news a lot. he promotes vehicles and armaments over to iraq. what they don't tell you is that he is a lobbyist has a salary

of $11 million a year, i wonder if you know anything about that? host: do you know his name? guest: i can't remember which one it is -- caller: i cannot remember which one it is. guest: i don't know who you're talking about but a lot of generals when they retire do go and work for companies like lockheed martin and boeing, the whole gamut. host: one general not yet retired but in hot water reports to the hill, this is the story about a comment on the a 10. the headline -- a-10. the headline, air force removes general who warned of treason on a-10. he was under investigation for

allegedly telling more than 300 airmen at a nevada conference that they were not to talk to members of congress about the air force's attempts to retire the attack jet. in response to a question, post discussed the importance of loyalty to senior leader decisions and use the word treason in describing his thoughts on communication by airmen counter to those decisions, the investigation found. why is it so important to this general? guest: they want to retire it and they say they need to retire in order to pay for the f-35. to pay to buy new f-35's. they say the a-10 will not be needed in several years. the problem is it is being used every single day. so it is supporting namely the army on the ground. if they are under fire they

would call in air support. the a-10 can get really low and flight really slow. it has a big gun on the front that has been really effective for decades. there is a lot of passionate people on this, especially on capitol hill. it is really unclear whether or not it will be able to get through and retire the air force one. host: let's get back to the jet that replaces it, the f-35. the cost it differs for each of the services. guest: there are three different versions. the program has a lot of similarities and the jets look very similar but there are three types. there is central air force version which takes off and lands like a regular plane. there is a marine version which can take off from a very short runway and the engine actually

rotates so i can push it up in the air and it can land vertically much like the harrier does now. the navy have a special one that can take off and land from aircraft carriers and the wings have to fold up. the price of these planes very a lot -- vary a lot. the air force version is costing $108 million and the marine version is the high one at $134 million. they say they want those plans to go down and plan for them to go down and based on the current directory the air force version will get down to $76 million and the marine corps version at $100 million. host: on the year they are purchased? guest: yeah. host: let's hear from paul on the independent line. caller: i would like to ask two questions and make a comment.

my first is what major program since the army have? and how many will they build? my comment is that these democrats who call and want to cut the military remember the middle ages. it became the dark ages with wars all over the place. if there isn't a superpower you will have more wars. thank you. guest: i did not get the whole and of the first question but one of the army's major programs is called the joint -- it is a vehicle that would replace the humvee. a kind of armored vehicle to carry troops around the battlefield. host: judy, a republican call. caller: i have a simplistic question. when we talk about the cost that we are expending for the war and what have you aren't there

americans designing the planes and building munitions. aren't all of those americans then spending money in america? yes there is a terrible cost, but isn't that brought back around? or are we just digging a hole? it is a very simplistic question but i am curious. guest: that is actually one of the largest reasons why congress never once to close a base because people at the bases are putting money back into the local economy. traditionally if the base closes the local economy takes a hit. even if there is a plan to mitigate the exposure by turning the air force base into a civilian airport. it usually never has the number of jobs a government facility would bring. host: new mexico, roger.

caller: a quick question about the shelf life of weapons systems. there is a joke that one of the reasons we have wars is it is the simplest way for when a weapon runs out of its shelf life, the simple way to dispose of it is to create a war and dump the weapons in the other country. how does the shelf life affect the military budget? when a missile runs out of its shelf life and you cannot use it, don't they have to dispose of it? guest: they do for all types of weapons. they need to upgrade them over the years. when i say weapons i am talking planes, trucks and helicopters. they are designed to last a decade. in reality, a lot of these planes are older than that.

you have tankers that have been around since the eisenhower administration. over the years they get new engines and new avionics and different types of software. host: some reporting out of the briefing that you covered, the headline in "the washington post," pentagon tunes buying strategy to sharpen technology edge. they will have increased scrutiny of their internal research and development projects. for example, the pentagon plans to release guidelines next month that will increase the role the government to play in internal research decisions. what is the role expected to be? guest: this is an area of contention. the pentagon is not spending what it wants to spend and they say that potential adversaries are spending a lot of money on

activities, building fighter jets, just like the f-35. a lot of suspicion that a lot of the plans for the f-35 were cyber hacked and these new planes look very similar. host: the chinese planes. guest: correct. this r&d strategy, buddies spend money on research and development. they have been asking the pentagon for guidance. they say what should we be investing? the pentagon has come out and said a little bit about what it wants. robotics and cyber security. industry on the other hand is saying, why should we invest in something if there is no clear plan down the road to buy it? host: here is sam in michigan on the democrat line. caller: i was wondering, now

that chairman mike rogers is in show business, does he still have security clearance? guest: i don't know the answer to that. host: you are talking about mike rogers who is now a radio talkshow host? caller: yet. guest: i would be guessing typically security clearances expire after a certain number of years. host: i have a question on twitter for mark weisgerber, is the defense budget a misnomer? do these numbers also include amounts that could be spent on humanitarian issues? like ebola syria. guest: the pentagon budget is including what is going on in syria and the work the military has done. there is funding coming out of other areas. dhs to help human services for

that stuff. host: we are talking about defense spending with marcus weisgerber who covers the issue of defense suspending. the piece appears today in "the washington post." the army picks ibm to host logistics data. they are using ibm's blue makes cloud platform to store -- ibm's bluemix cloud platform to store its a just data, the company said last week. how long would a project like that be in the making? how long would the offer be and a process of awarding that? guest: one of the big things of this acquisition reform initiative, that this term better buying power is trying to address, that determines the

timeline, a lot of times it takes years. it could take up to three years to buy something and five years or more before you see a piece of hardware sold. something like an f-35 or a missile or trucks. four contracts like this or cyber or software type contracts, they said that they need to move very fast. so part of the acquisition reform initiative going on is looking to address this specifically for this type of contract. host: is there a danger in the pentagon for the need to do some thing quickly -- i am not saying this about ibm -- but going back to vendors and providers without offering that contract to other contractors? guest: if you're doing something quicker, you will always run the risk -- so the wrong person is missing something here or there

and if there is technology in certain instances, not being as but sure down the road. host: a couple more minutes talking about defense spending. we go to auburn, maine. the independent line. caller: one of the complexity and cost drivers to the f-35, does that affect the marine's demand for a vertical aircraft, what if the marine corps would forgo its six wing aircraft's and go to helicopters? what would happen to the complexity cost and the capabilities of the f-35. it was more simplified and did not need a big engine and a complex arrangement for vertical takeoff and landing capabilities. guest: if they had that debate 10 years ago it would make a big difference.

you are at the point now where the engine and other components are already developed and in production. you would have to go back to the drawing board and change a lot about the jet. probably, at this point you would increase the price. host: it sounds like you have some familiarity, what is behind your question? caller: basically that the marine corps doesn't need the capability anymore. it would go to helicopters like the u.s. army. that would be a major structural decision. basically for unified cost control for the military. guest: the one area you would

get, if they didn't buy that and bought say, the navy model and the marines also fly off carrier and they fly boeing hornets off of carriers, they just thought that i just by the sheer price the price of the navy version costs less. host: watertown, south dakota with ira on the republican line. caller: i was wondering what the cost of this sort of situation is when they get started. there are helicopters flowing back in vietnam and we had a hard time getting parts. what situation do we have to get [inaudible] guest: in terms of spare parts, i'm not sure if there is a question in their, but they do get spare parts from a lot of

the original manufacturers. so lockheed would support the f-35 or boeing would support the f 18. one of the big things now for the older aircraft or older anything is 3-d printing. 3-d printing has become a revolution in the military. the navy is putting 3-d printers on ships, so it can actually manufacture of spare parts right there and then they do not have to carry as much. host: they are doing that now? guest: they are deploying some of it in test phases. this is expected to be a big revolution in the pentagon. the problem you will run into is intellectual property. the company that makes the parts. want them copied, so you are getting into that napster mp3 revolution from the late 90's where people are downloading free music and you will have to come to say itunes

where it can be widely implemented. host: you talked earlier about ashton carter's trip overseas, but he is not new to the pentagon. what is his influence on cost cutting? guest: it is a huge priority for him. this is his baby and he came up with a better buying power that frank kendall has been updating through the years. host: before he became secretary? yes, before. another man and there is robert work, he is very much interested in this. you have three people at the top level of the pentagon and typically the defense secretary isn't always as attuned to procurement acquisition. you actually have three people at the top who are attuned and

that leads people to believe there will be a lot of improvement in this area. host: let's go to the gop line. caller: good morning. i worked for boeing aircraft for 35 years in the helicopter division primarily on the ch 47 and ch 46. i remember the first aircraft we delivered in the early 60's, was $900,000 with spares. now, today, we had the exclusive contract. we're still building the aircraft. today, we married with other companies. my question is where is the cost savings in a that?

you cannot convince me that there is a cost benefit when you marry two major companies. congressman want contracts in their state. guest: one of the reasons why you see these partnerships is expertise in areas. they have what is called the rotor expertise, the ability for engines and propellers to change directions when they take off like a helicopter and then rotate in-flight to flight like a plane. you are seeing this right now there is a classified bomber could petition going on for a new airport bomber and you are seeing boeing and lockheed teaming together. they feel that by bringing the expertise together it will give them a better position. host: marcus weisberger covers

defense spending for defense one and you can follow his reporting online on twitter and at defense one. we thank you for being here this morning. that will do it for this morning, we hope your back tomorrow morning at 7:00 est for more of your calls and comments. details ahead on c-span. >> the house and senate are back today following their spring recess. the house meets at 2:00 eastern