"time" magazine on his reporting of the shooting of an unarmed black man in north charleston, south carolina and the relationship between police departments and communities of color. host: the house will pick up nine bills related to the irs into the irs targeting conservative groups. eight republican senators including ted cruz and marco rubio voted against a bipartisan bill tuesday. it did pass the senate hours before the cut was to take effect. president obama had to charlotte north carolina to address issues relating to women including wage

discrimination, child care tax credit, and efforts on expanding the earned income tax credit. we will learn about why the white house is taking on these efforts. in the first 45 minutes we want to hear from women in the audience am a particularly public policy issues that impact you and are important to you. for women in the audience, we want to hear about your top public policy issues. here's how you can reach out to us. (202) 748-8000 for those of you in the eastern and central time zone. (202) 748-8001 in the mountain and pacific time zone. you can post on twitter at http://twitter.com/cspanwj and on our facebook page. if you want to send this e-mail you can send it to journal@c-span.org. that events will be a private help event in charlotte, north

carolina. the front page highlight the event and chose the headline " obama to address pay for women" adding that he will have their tod -- head there today. even as data suggests wage and inequality persists in north carolina. other issues will be discussed. joining us to talk about those issue is david jackson of usa today. he covers the white house. can you tell us why the administration is taking this effort today? guest: because it is tax day. midnight is the deadline for people to file returns. there are millions of people who wait till the last day. it is a good day to highlight economic issues. host: as far as the headline saying it is women that he especially reaching out to, talk about that. guest: it has been a big part of

his political coalition since the beginning of his career. it appeals to women, working women in part of a. of single women as well. this is been a constant theme for his inauguration. he has followed through on it. we have a presidential election coming up. north carolina will be a state. host: talk about the specifics. what will he specifically talk to the audience today? guest: stress the fact that his agenda is much more family-friendly than the republican agenda. he has the those tax credits for things like child care and education and a second earners in working families. his brains will cut taxes for the middle class. the republican are only interested in cutting taxes for the very wealthy. host: tell us a little bit. he launches the effort this week. hillary clinton launches her this week here it is there any coordination? guest: they say there is none

the can't help but wonder. hillary clinton. of the white house two or three weeks ago to have a private conversation with president obama. we do not know what they said. she is a meeting with president over, and then begin rolling out her campaign a few weeks later. the issue seemed to dovetail with each other. i do think there is in the over coordination. there is an alignment of interest between what the president is doing and what candidate clinton is doing. host: how important are they going to play, women's issues, and this upcoming grace? guest: very important. there's a huge gender gap. it seems to be growing. more women, single women, seem to be voting democratic. the republican party as well. i think both will make very strong pitches to women, particular working women.

host: that is david jackson talking on women's issues. thank you for your time. you may have similar interest when it comes to what the white house is proposing. you may as a woman have other interests as well when it comes to public policy. in the first 45 minutes we give you the opportunity for women only to tell us about public policy interests and issues that are important. your site you can reach out to us. (202) 748-8000 for those of you in the eastern and central time zone. (202) 748-8001 if you live in the mountains and pacific time zones. if you want to post on their twitter page it is http://twitter.com/cspanwj. you want to send as e-mail journal@c-span.org. the pew research center put out a report a look at the pay

issues between men and women. this was yesterday. when it comes to equal pay day it is a date that symbolizes how far into the new year the average american woman will have to earn to match what a man did. -- host: women only this morning for our first 45 minutes to

public policy issues that are of importance to you. (202) 748-8000 four eastern central time zones. (202) 748-8001 four mountain and pacific time going 0-- for (202) 748-8002 that is the biggest public policy issue should be to stop this ridiculous name about a war on women. whether we have fought for our civil rights. we should get up every morning go to work, take care of our family, and realize that we are just on par with men. we need to stop complaining. when you to start getting tv in acting like we're all victims all the time. i have a son. i reason to respect women i reason to be the best person he

can be the same way i would raise my daughter if i had one great i think it is ridiculous for women, the complaining and the victimhood. after a while gets a little in their nursing. especiallyafter a while it gets a little embarrassing. you are going to hear in this election about men beating up on women and the republicans beating up on her. it gets embarrassing. i am a young women. i hope young women do not succumb to that. host: when you hear about the issue when it comes to who's this effect light weight discrimination, and the gap in the wages, how do you after that into your thinking? caller: i believe there will be some disparity the same way

there will be disparity between white and black. i think that women should fight for that. i think that men should help women fight for that as well. to segue that into the notion that there is this huge discrimination, socialized discrimination, against women is read to the list. women are at the forefront in college. i own my own hair salon. we own our own businesses. it gets a little bit ridiculous. it takes away from some other issues. i think we are doing fine these days. we are not victims that is for sure. host: we will hear from linda in north carolina. go ahead please. north carolina. caller: i basically, i am a

woman. i have seen discrimination when it comes to jobs. i have worked in the corporate environment. i have seen the discrimination. there is a lot to discrimination when it comes to a black woman. i want them to speak on issues when it comes to jobs, when it comes to health, when it comes to my christian values. they are just throwing out the lesbian and gay. they need to talk about how to fight for the christian values. i do not have a problem with lesbians or a gaze. i feel there is more talk about fighting for them instead of a christian. i want someone to speak on the disparities when it comes to jobs, when it comes to help ♪alth

when it comes to religion. there is discrimination when it comes to older will when they're in their 50's and they are looking for a job. i feel like when you are filling out and application there is discrimination. he should not put whether or not you are black or asian. you should not even feel out an application. i feel like when you know online the many when you put white black, asian or whatever. it should be based on your experience. host: the top public issue for women that is what we are interested. asking women only to call in and comment. (202) 748-8000 for those in eastern and central and (202) 748-8001 four mountain and pacific. duty, go ahead. guest: i have three issues i

have a concern with. can you hear me? host: yes. go ahead. caller: one was what the women was just talking about. our mission values and attacked. being a christian you are now on a terrorist list? the second issue would be altercation systems. it starts with the very young. this new, core program is a rent is here it be -- is horrendous. colleges need to put out programs that involve employment. they need to be getting our children so when they leave college they will have a future in making some money in a career.

they need to get together with industry in terms of making this happen. as we see there are so many college students that are not working. they have these huge loans. host: that is judy from hawaii. tricia from indiana. go ahead. caller: my issue with the that i would like to see the cost of health care addressed. we are currently on the obamacare land. the cost of our individual health care, the premiums get going up every year. it was unaffordable without doing something. we are in our late 40's, early 50's. we need health care. as you get older health problems due to pop up. -- do the cost needsp to beo

addressed. pas up. as a woman it is my responsibility to make sure my household is ran in a way that is good for my family. the cost of health care, something needs to be done. the increasing costs we cannot sustain the increasing cost of health care. to go back to what the other lady said about hillary clinton, i am a woman and i would never vote for hillary clinton. i would love to see someone to make the competition besides hillary clinton from the democratic party even though i'm not a democrat. we need to address the cost of health care in this country.

that will be my main thing i would like to see done. host: politico had a story taking a look at recent hires by the clinton campaign when it comes to policy issues. it'll be headed by my a harris -- miaya harris. -- you are up next on top policy issues for women. go ahead. caller: i would like to comment on the lady who owns a beauty salon who think is all right to discriminate it ends women. she talks like it is life and wishes stop complaining. there's a certain amount of

discrimination against blacks and women. that we should set it out. here i am, a black woman, and she says not to complain like it will get better. it is better already. it is not get better until we complained. i have a real issue with that. host: that is fran from jacksonville, florida. the ministration dropping cuba from the terrorists list. it is their front page story. it quotes john kerry --

that is an the miami herald this morning. let's go to maxine and austin, texas. caller: thanks for taking my call. i would like to say this lady that call to let owned the beauty salon i do not know what type of degree she has. i am a registered nurse. i have been for 44 years. i was discriminated grossly in the health care profession in my profession. i think hillary will make a good president. because of her accomplishments. she first went to law school. then she got out and she did lots of public service. then she got her a paying job. then she became the first lady, a senator. her accomplishments have

exceeded anything. i educated for children by myself -- four children by myself. all have college degrees. one happens to work for the justice department. needless to say, women deserve everything. we run the house. we run the schools. we do everything. we need to get paid. we need to be respected to the highest. if you do not give respect you cannot get respect. we respect people and we deserve reese that. thank you. host: women only in this first 45 minutes asking about your top public policy issues. the things you are interested in. hearing about things that you find that are important to highlight. (202) 748-8000 for eastern and

central time zones and (202) 748-8001 four mountain and pacific time zones. maryland is up next. this is tammy. caller: i am calling, i think you started the conversation talking about wages they are achieved. yes it is real. it has nothing to do with open road i don't feel like a victim. it is real. it is not right. it is an injustice. it is women and their families. not only is their wage disparities in there is a recent article saying they certainly cannot handle more than one woman on a board at any particular company. i am tired of this.

i'm tired of being attacked over access to abortion and birth control, wage disparity. it is time for women to get to the polls and run for office and get into position for leadership in our judicial branch and so on. i hope people get inspired and get out there. thank you. host: jane in las vegas. go ahead. caller: thank you so much for having the ability to talk about this. women need equal pay 40 work. everybody knows that -- for e qual work. everybody knows that. the second thing, women should be able to have an abortion they so choose. it is their choice. i am tired of people telling women that they cannot make

their own choice about their body. then the third thing it is time government stepped in and started forcing men to support their children. we need child-support so that they can stay home with their children. it should be paid through the court. host: we will have to leave you there. in washington, d.c., commemoration is taking place your member the assassination of abraham lincoln. this is that ford theater. here's a little bit of the commemoration service. ♪ ♪

all the land is draped in mourning hearts are bowed and strong men weep fori our loved, joble leader sleeps his last his dreamless sleep gone forever gone forever

fallen by a traitor's hand though his precious work remained there how redeemed webeloved land fareell father, friend, and guardian. host: that is a little of the commemoration service taking at the ford theater in washington, d.c. >> our glorious work remained how redeemed beloved land ♪

honored, loved and memory cherished be hearts shall praise for their freedom hearts unbown shall sigh for thee he who gave the might and wisdom gave that they secret, sweet release farewell father, friend and guardian rest forever rest in peace ♪

farewell father, friend, and guardian though has joined the marchrytyr band but they glorious work remained how redeemed beloved land ♪ host: our colleagues at american history tv covering this on c-span2 to coverage the assassinate -- two on it -- to cover the assassination of abraham lincoln.

your top public policy issue. trish is a pennsylvania. go ahead. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. you are on. caller: i just wanted to say that a lot of us are victims in weight. the one policy i'm concerned about is federal policy in the workplace in which -- i am a victim i was chased by a veteran with a weapon. the only thing that happened to them as he had a $5,000 fine. that is just an example. i really wanted to say i'm an independent voter. i am really excited for hillary clinton this time. i just wanted to say for

everybody that is listening, this is the first time ever that we have ever had a chance for somebody that is truly qualified. she has been a lawyer, a signature, a first lady. she ran the white house. she can run the white house now. she has been serving in foreign relations. she is a mother, a grandmother. this woman is famous in places that nobody has even heard of. if anyone steps on that, i don't care what mistake she ate. everyone has a list eight. this is the first time where she has made a mistake and grown in her leadership. take advantage of it and vote for hillary. thank you. host: diana from florida, you are next. caller: it is good to see you. i would like to comment. i agree with this lady that just

talked about hillary. i hope she makes it. she is the greatest. i know her backgrounds. i want to talk about social security and medicare. people are not talking about the seniors. we vote. the little bit we have got in cost of living with social security is counteracted diabetic here. then -- by medicare. then we do not get anything. down here in florida, doctors and medicare are leaving in droves because they're going into the concierge for the wealthier people. because of the cuts they are leaving medicare. i'm stuck without a job or, trying to find one who is very well if i which i mean now because i do have some things that need to be taken care of. i hate to be a burden to my

children. i tried to take care of the house. if you have any money in the bank at all that you have been saving and you are a husband and have gotten together, we have no interest on our money. the money i had five years ago from when my husband passed away five years ago has dwindled to have. i am worried. we need to pay attention to the seniors. my kids are like 62 and a 63. they will be going into social security and here. they have had to pay for college educations and their grandchildren. we have a lot of expenses, women and everyone else here. the good jobs, not just minimum wage jobs. trade hills are making this happen. people have not gotten the benefits from unemployment.

they are trying to find out on the people have lost their jobs wouls. we have twoo re-enter it every year. host: diana and florida talking about social security and jobs. hunter is from california. caller: good morning. thank you. who's going to speak up for the homeless women of this country who lost everything to to the economic meltdown who are out there just to survive with their children on the street, buying a shelter every night? being homeless is that mean you're sitting around doing nothing. they are moving around every day, trying to find work in daycare and day programs for

their kids. being looked down and spent on by society, not knowing that you are probably's hitting on a doctor or former dentist. people can say that is impossible. it is not impossible. that is happening. i have met them. i am appalled in california alone the homeless women between the ages of 60 and 705 is out of control. the government to me is a bad joke that has to be to bed. if we do not do something for the homeless women and children, we will lose a society of children. these women are talking about hillary lenton. a mother, grandmother. she is a liar. eight shea cheat, a liar, and a

murderer. let's get these homeless women a place where they can go and be safe, where they can get their lives back together. i am trying to organize a nationwide homeless woman march. ladies, keep your eyes open. try to buy a meal for a homeless family. show some love. that is all i have to say. host: that is hunter from california talking about homeless issues. timmy is in florida. go ahead. caller: i am tired of having all these women say they're going to vote for hillary because she is a woman. i am a mother. i am a grandmother. i am not all fight. just because she is a -- i am not qualified. just because she is a grandmother. she did a poor job as firstly the end of secretary of state.

i am tired. women say they're going to vote for hillary just because she is a woman. we need a president that is going to look out for everyone. hillary's not going to look out for anyone. thank you. host: tammy from florida. hillary clinton it kicking off a round table when she talked about the issues that she wants to bring to this campaign. you can find more of that whole discussion on our video library at www.c-span.org. the wall street journal has a picture of hillary clinton. it also has a lead story about a deal that was struck with senators when it comes to iran. it is a deal that has been approved by the white house saying the white house and president barack obama would sign the legislation which would unanimously after lawmakers made changes to the will that they say mitigating concerns.

it set up an expedited framework for congress to vote for iran from the nuclear deal sometime this summer. it was yesterday. senator bob corker discussed about the agreement specifically the nature of sanctions. here's part of his statement. >> what we have before us is a bill that forces the administration before they are able to lift the sanctions that we collectively put in place that brought them to the table. it forces them to bring every detail if there happens to be an agreement. we have worked through the house to make sure the procedures are appropriate. i know we will have a colloquy in a minute to further confirm that.

amy's extensions that have been put in place by the senate and the house cannot be lit to cannot be lifted without the administration bringing to his every minute of the bill. there will be time that congress will have the ability to debate and to decide whether congress wants to move ahead with a resolution of approval or disapproval. during that time no mandated sanctions can be lifted. [end video clip] host: we go back to our discussion with women only on this first segment, taking a look at your top public issue. melanie from florida. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i wanted to say that in any candidate whether it is a man woman, democrat, i am looking

for a candidate who shows recent for women. i think we have had that missing a lot of elections. i am a university professor. the first color indicated that young women are [indiscernible] i see that every day. i do not see them in leadership positions alongside their male peers. it is important to me as an educator that i have candidate that are helping to shape a culture, community, emphasis and the system that encourages women at every stage of their life. host: linda is next from texas. caller: thank you. humboldt, california. please wake up.

hillary was in office when jobs are being sent away. she did not stop that. it is not thinking that she is a woman she is honest. she is not a true person. she cannot even look people in the eye when she is talking to them. she needs to go out and sit somewhere, razor grandbaby, and get out of the way. -- raise her grandbaby, and get out of the way. caller: i am a student. a lot of people are really quick to identify as a group they never chose to be in. a lot of women who just have kids and way more in common with other women who just had kids then maybe with someone who is retiring are getting ready to go to college or enter the workforce.

i heard hillary clinton talk about regulation after regulation that she was losing your as soon as we -- that she was focusing on. as soon as we start focusing on this we will get better policies that work for everybody that everybody is satisfied with. a person that has not been brought up [indiscernible] she is someone who is a candidate on the right. based on the choices that she makes in the values she has, it has had a serious effect in the private sector. for her to embody that we need to pay more attention to. host: carrie is talking about her top public policy issue. you are on. caller: my feeling about women in politics is that there is a gender bias in this country. it is amazing to me that women

who profess that they would rather work for a man than a woman feared seems to be the idea that women by the kool-aid that they have been dealt for hundreds of years, that we are to take a second class citizen position in this country. when hillary ran the last time, the things that affected me most was the way the male newscasters denigrated her. they called her everything but a walking prostitute your that kind of gender bias forces women to vote against another women. we are so far behind in the world in that area in terms of having women in leadership positions. it is pathetic. it pains me. it is not vote for her because she is a woman, you do not have to like or vote for her, to go

along with the idea that women are second class citizen because we bear children and have to have leaves that we are not as qualified, that we do not deserve the same pay as others. redoing equal work. it is time we outgrew this negativity women in general and women against women. it caters to the male ideal of supremacy. i am so frustrated in this area that i had to call. thank you very much. host: pamela lives florida and is next. go ahead. caller: i totally agree with the last call. in terms of our identity of being a woman in this country. one of the things people do not realize that is so important. c is so very important. when he diversity in leadership. i work for a fire department.

im one of the only lack females there. my life has been heck, 10 years of nothing but harassment and hostility and discrimination. the leadership is all made up of white males. people think you call 911 and you are in a black community you may be in worse shape. it comes down to not having diversity or women are looking out for other groups. please. i would love to have elizabeth warned. she does not want to run. vote for asians. get other people to share about other communities. thank you. they are looking at the state of security forces. one saying that the army that

what counted 832,000 personnel is now believed by some to have 4-7 divisions. jill is from new hampshire. hello. caller: i feel that although there are many of origin issues

-- important issues, the environment should the. without improving the environment and working on climate change, this will have as of life. i also feel that working toward peace is very important. as far as hillary goes, i am taking a wait and see attitude. i voted for her when she ran the war. i liked her very much as a candidate. i really want to wait and see what she says now and how she presents herself now. i feel that she is portraying herself differently. i want to see the person that had the ideas, that have a concrete view of what she was going to do. anyway. that is my opinion. host: from twitter --

let's take one more call. this will be from pat in south carolina. hello. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. host: you are on. go ahead. caller: my issue is the earlier caller talking about the homeless people. what about our homeless children? write in my area we had an area that has 102 children living in the woods been trying to go to school. our government sent 3.5 billion dollars. i would like to see them address the issues of our country, our

people. i jive on the roads. the kids strive on the roads. potholes galore. i want someone in government who cares about the american people first. as far as hillary clinton goes, most politicians will lie to you. the american people to get a woman a vote to blatantly lie to parents of dead military, they have no right to be the white house. inc. you. -- thank you. host: on this tax day we had to legislators joining us from the ways and means committee. first we will hear from jim dermot, democrat from washington state talking but the state of health care and then later on republican congressman jim renacci of ohio.

nine bills being considered today. all that as "washington journal was quote continues after this. -- "washington journal" continues after this. ♪ >> this weekend they have partnered with, has to learn about literary life of saint augustine florida. >> they may or may not have been focusing on this.

this is very decidedly true. we do know that one possibility came ashore after searching for good harbor took on water and would. this area presents lenity first freshwater springs. it is also the location of the 1565 first settlement of saint augustine. 42 years before the settlement of jamestown was settled. >> this was built by henry morrison. he is a man where it is very little known out i of the state of florida. he was one of the wealthiest and in america. he has been a cofounder for standard oil companies with rockefeller.

he was a man who always wanted to undertake some great enterprise. as it turned out, florida was it. he needed to own the railroad between jacksonville and saint augustine to ensure the guests get to his hotel conveniently. clearly the was beginning to grow. he was a visionary. >> watch all of our events from saint augustine saturday at noon eastern on seascspan2's booktv. "washington journal" continues. host: jim mcdermott joining us. many stories in the paper talking about the medicare bill that was passed yesterday.

tell us a little bit about what it does. what does it mean for. doctors in the system? caller: we put it back into the law in 1988 and hit has been effective in helping the increasing cost of medicare. we have not been able to replace it with something else here and we have been catching it every year for the last 12 years. this year we decided to fix it and take it out. it always has the potential work cutting doctor payments by 10% or 12% or 15%. it had gotten to the point where there would have been a 25% and dr. payments for medicare. that was never going to happen. we finally fixed it generally. we got tired of waiting patches on it. host: generally, what do you mean by that? caller: we took out of the gsr the sustained growth rate.

doctors offices only supposed to grow a certain amount each year. of course a group more than that or they did not. if they grew more there's a post to get a cut in their payment. we said that does not work. we put a new payment schedule into the law in place of the sgr . host: they are saying more money will be needed in the future to keep what has happened from happening again. what do you think of the idea that you have to visit this down the road? guest: medicare's problem is going to be the question of how do you control costs? when the president took on the aca he said we had two problems. one is access. secondly, how do we control costs? we will have to confront the issue of cost.

we have got so many possibilities for treatment today that the cost in health care continues to go up. and leslie will say that we will not replace knees or hopsips or something which is very ciccone, we're going to have to eager out how to do it. the pressure will be on congress in the medical profession. host: is the burden on the medical profession? who bears the most burden? guest: it is jointly. congress can continue to appropriate money. they can throw money at it forever. they are not going to do it. they're going to put pressure with money and the doctors will have to put on pressure to be more efficient in order to live with the same level of care. you don't want to not to people for what they have. you want to make sure you do it in the most efficient way.

there are some really big issues and all of this. one is the whole issue of the last months of life and how much time and money is at a time in people's lives when they will not get better. how do we let people to in a dignified way? all those questions have to be raised and how much money we went. we will not live forever. woody allen said i do not mind talking about death as long as i'm not there when it happened. we have to talk about death and how we're going to do it. there are a lot of issues that we are facing in this country host: is and of life issues a congressional issue as well? guest: we had some money in the affordable care act four. your's to consult with their 00-- for

doctors to consult with their patients what they wanted done at the end. they call the death panels. it was an awful public relations thing that was done. doctors need to sit and talk with their patients and say here is what the options are. what do you want me to do if this is what happens? that takes time. that is not an easy discussion to have someone your it i did a ted talk on this whole issue. i think everybody should write their own final directives and say what they want to talk to their family and kids and spouse and anybody around them. make it clear how you would like to go if you have the choice. you do not always have the choice. an awful lot of money gets and in health care. -- gets s inpe health care on issues where people do not want itnt.

they want to be able to die. firstly they are ready to go in they would like to go. the medical professions will is to keep you alive for as long as possible. that is the mission of a doctor and a nurse. that is the mission of the hospital. you have these two things colliding of the mission of the health care profession and what a person wants. you have to be strong and have not through what you want otherwise doctors what we have seen is where people have been on machines and all these extensions of life. it is a very tough decision to make. you ought to have the first shot at deciding what is going to happen. host: jim mcdermott to talk about this and other issues. here are the numbers. (202) 748-8001 four republicans

(202) 748-8000 for democrats (202) 748-8002 for independents. he takes on issues of medicare but he also at social security. he said he would call for an income cap for benefits and medical security and reduce payments were those making more 800,000 -- 80,000 for additional income. what do you think about that approach? host: everybody pays into social security. everybody ought to be able to draw the benefits out in my view. you have a very small number of people i the top who do not need the money. it is the main source of income for senior citizens today in this country. when you start saying if you have more than 80 house in

dollars or more than 30,000 in whatever it is easy to then slide it down to the point where you get rid of social security altogether. these people who are talking like that are people who want to get rid a socialist surety or money in -- of social security. the worst thing that could happen is it someone took your social security is a totally to invest in and wall street. most people lose half of it. social security is a known amount of money. you get a letter from them every year that says this is what your benefit is going to be when you're 65. you know it is going to be there. if you have it out in the market , i mean, the market goes up and down. we had is discussed the -- this destructive thing in 2007. lots of people lost huge amount of money.

you do not want your security in that kind of ink. that is what chris christie is talking about, moving the money to wall street. host: the first call comes from alabama. this is larry. go ahead. caller: good morning. i have a question here and it comment. i would like to know from him if he knows whether or not the republicans and maybe some of the democrats want to establish a marketplace for those who do not have any income or health insurance. i would like to hear whether they will establish one or they had tried to stop this one for indigent people, folksy do not have income. it is a disgrace for states to

opt out and medicaid and let millions and millions of people without health insurance. most of these are republicans. i do not understand that. i would like to know him. do you know anyone who would like to establish a marketplace for those who are indigent? the republicans are establishing one for those who are making a certain amount of money. what about those who are poor? thank you for giving me the opportunity to say that. host: he raises a very important issue. one of the decisions congress made years ago in 1964 was that medicaid, money for people with less money, would be administered by the state. each state can design their own program. some states have been very generous. washington has been very

generous. some other states have been absolutely inhumane to their citizens. one of my concerns always has been that medicaid ought to be a national program where we say everybody in the united states should have the same set of been its. it should not make any difference what state you live in. if you live in alabama are washington state will get way different treatment in a medicaid program. that is not fair. in this country we are all americans. we are all one. we ought to be treated the same. ultimately, the medicaid program have to be taken over by congress. there are a number of states where they refuse to expand medicaid coverage. president obama, 10 year expansion of medicaid and said we will pay for it, and hundred percent at the federal level and governors will send we do not want to get it.

they are saying to the poor people in their states "no, we do not want it." you can look at florida and texas and alabama refused to take care of the people in their states. i think it is wrong. host: from florida, the independent line. good morning. caller: hello, good morning pedro. last time i spoke to you was before christmas, and it was regarding the medicare and the ways and means. my question to you is, number one, will we ever see some kind of exchanges so that we can get a -- an agreement with some of the state so if you want to get care in other states and you are on medicare or medicaid, a combination, or just medicaid, will we ever just see that rectified? and also, last time i talked to, we talked about fema.

can you get many care to take care of -- get medicare to take care of a singular? [laughter] guest: my view is i have always been someone who believed in a single-payer system. everybody in the united states ought to be in the same system. not the doctors and -- you don't have to control all of that -- but everybody ought to begin to the same set of benefit, no matter where they live or how much money they have or anything else. no difference for any american on this issue. when he will allow insurance companies, when you allow state governments, when you allow all these other people to manipulate or fiddle with the benefit package, you are going to get the problems that you are seeing today. and i think ultimately, the

congress, on the basis of fairness, is going to have to come back and make medicaid a program that is at the federal level. that is why medicare for old people, was done at the federal level. we wanted every senior citizen to have the same benefit, no matter where they live. if they lived in maine or florida or california or illinois or arkansas, they get the same set of benefits. that ought to be true for everybody in the country. the health budget -- host: the health budget takes a block approach. what do you think about it? guest: i oppose it because we already know what stump -- some states do. i believe that everybody -- i don't care which state you live in, i think you ought to have the same access to health care. and that is not true today in this country. it is not -- the block grant simply says to the governor,

here is the money. it doesn't say it has to be used for a certain economy health-care plan. it could be used for roads or schools or whatever other problems he may have. or she may have. because you have seen money used in mississippi from the medicaid budget being used for the schools. and it is just simply not a good way to distribute money. you ought to put it into the health care budget and tell people what you have got give your people in your state. host: representative jim mcdermott joining us. in florida, jim is on our phones. go ahead. caller: good morning, sir. i am here in florida as a medicare patient. not a medicare patient, but the thing i see here and florida -- i think florida alone is going to bankrupt medicare. they spend way too much time testing and testing and testing over again tests that were not

done by doctors i know in new york where i used to live. and there seems to be a relationship. between the testing and hospitals and bonus payments made to the doctors later on in the year. and i swear, medicare is going to go broke if this continues. and if people relies how much they pay into medicare over the years and how soon it will all be gone after a few operations, they may think differently about what their doctor asks them to do. especially down here in florida. thank you. guest: what you are pointing out is what we were trying to do with the sustained growth rate. the sgr, the fix. we pay doctors on the basis of how much they did. so, if they did two tests, they got a certain amount of money. if they did four tests, they got twice as much as money. so, that was the problem we were

trying to fix with the sgr. we said, you can only go so much. and if you go more than that, we are going to touch -- cut you. then you are saying to the doctor, you are doing tests you didn't need to do. so, what we are now looking for is alternative methods of payments and in alternative way to get doctors paid on the basis of quality, not on quantity. so, then the question comes, how do they make the quality of your life better? is giving you three or five more tests going to give you improved quality of life? if it isn't, don't do it. and that is what is going to happen in this new payment system. it is going to be a gradual slow evolution, but that is the direction we are going because we want to pay for value, not volumes. host: mike from michigan, you are up next. caller: hello. yes.

medicare and medicaid were the first government programs that begin the third-party payment system for health services. and then the hmo act of 1973 followed. cadillac union health care plans followed. and also to government intervention followed that basically insulate people from the cost of their own health care. so, i am wondering -- this is economics 101, supply and demand , when someonefor your car, for example, you are going to want to buy two cars instead of one. i would like to know how the congressman thinks the government should address this problem. and then i have a second question if you can fit that in. host: go ahead. caller: where in the constitution does the

congressman find the power for the federal government to pay for and regulate health care? guest: well, i think generally the answer to the second question is that the federal government has the responsibility for the health and welfare of the people inside the country. a part of that has interpreted to be health care. so i think we have some responsibility to do that. we could say it is not the government's role at all. but that is not a surplus country like us. we have taken it is our responsibility to do that. now the question that you asked first -- do people have to have the ability to know how much they are paying and pay everything and then make decisions? i don't know your own history very well, but most people, when something happens to them -- i had to have a heartfelt replaced. so i didn't go to the phone book

and look at all the cardiac surgeons in a seattle and then call them and find out how much it was going to cost and decide whether or not i was going to spend $7,000 or $8,000 or $3000 or whatever. i went to the hospital and i trusted them. and i had the work done by a physician i knew very well. and what he charged was what he charged. i wasn't going to shop when i was dealing with my heartfelt. now, if you're talking about a knee surgery, maybe that is a little different. but nothing about medicine is like going to buy a new refrigerator. when your refrigerator stops you know that area in your kitchen where you are going to put the new refrigerator. you go down to where ever and you begin to shop, and you say well, it can only be 40 inches wide and 20 inches deep and so forth. you find the one that fits that spot and fits your budget and you buy it.

that is easy to do. but you don't know what is going to happen to you as a human being. how can you shop for your health care? anybody who talks about this thing like a market simply doesn't understand health care. my son got a call from his wife saying the doctors told me to come to the emergency room. and he raced home, got her, went down to the hospital. within two hours, she had a c-section. and saves the baby. -- saved the baby. you don't drive down the highways in california trying to find the cheapest obstetrician. you are worried about your wife, your child. that kind of idea of shopping in health care is simply -- it is a nice idea, but it does not work. that is not how life is. host: california is up next.

here is anne. good morning. caller: good morning. mr. mcdermott, i would like to know, is there a way that you guys can bring up or at least fix the social security benefits for offsetting under pension? like when you retire, especially a federal employee that has been retired and president reagan put that in the fix. i believe january first, 1983 we couldn't offset -- in other words, you offset so much money from your federal pension to your social security, and then you and up with maybe nothing. and that is what usually happens. you can't collect because of that. and what hurt us -- because the federal government had their own retirement plan, they never had to pay into social security

because they had their own retirement plan, but you had entitlements to your spouse. two thirds or a third of your spouse's benefits when he retired or when he died. now, it is set up from president reagan we are can't get anything like that. and it really hurts a person when that income is gone. it is like two people working and one person loses a job and can't find another job. or at least another one that pays that much. and your income has really dropped almost to a standstill. and everything has to be rearranged and so forth good you really just cut it down to the bone. host: we will let our guest spot to your question. guest: retirement security is a worry for all of us. and social security was started in the 1930's -- 1935 -- to give

people a base on which they could count. and we have done lots of things in this country that i think now because we have most families or many families, people are working, both husband-and-wife are working to make a living and cover the expenses of the family. and in my view, we need to rework some of social security. the reason we have been reluctant to do that, because there are some people who want to get rid of social security. they want you to suddenly be in the hands of wall street. and i oppose that. we are very reluctant, those of us who want to change social security, because there are some things that would make it better. but we are afraid to put out on the table because if we do, those people who want to get rid of it will start taking pieces away and saying, we don't need this, we don't do that. and suddenly, we will have much less than we have today.

so that is one of the dilemmas we are facing in congress. the problems you are raising our great common and they are not unknown to us, but there is a reluctance to get out there because when president bush came out and said he would like to make -- we would have our own private accounts without social security money, we all looked at that intent, hey man, you don't understand. well, towards the and of his administration in 2007, the banks collapsed and people were running around with their hair on fire. if you had been only invested in the stock market at that point you would have been in big trouble. so that is why we were reluctant to open up and fix medicare because we are afraid we will lose. host: from rockford illinois, and. good morning. caller: good morning. senator, thank you for being on today.

if people who are in the stock market had stayed in the stock market and left their investments in the same investments they had, the stock market rebounded over the next few years. and that has happened repeatedly, year after year after year. but the point is, we are, right now, involved in an end-of-life situation with a person here in rockford. and we are dealing with trying to find a place for him to go. and we are talking to the place called -- here in rockford. and they are saying that medicare is ending payments when they shouldn't. because they have -- because patients have a certain amount of time that they can be under the system and have payments made. so, in one week, a couple of weeks ago, they had 16 patients that were told to be discharged.

so you have central government running the process. and i think we do start getting involved in all this, it is kind of like central planning. you guys think you know best but you don't know maybe what is really going on. the downside. so, we are dealing with that right now. you guys have really made this a mess. thank you very much. guest: the whole question of hospice, it is an interesting question. the hospice program -- i can tell you what the state of washington is. if it is judged by your physician that you only have six months left to live, you can go into hospice, which is really a process of using people as they are clearly passing. we know that they are going to die, and it is obvious. now, the fascinating thing about that is that sometimes getting into hospice and getting them in a more comfortable situation

they live longer than six months. and so they get the on the six months from which medicare pays. well, those are situations where clearly there should be exceptions made for those kinds of things. that should not be a hard and fast rule. once you go into hospice does that mean you got to die in six months. as a physician -- i am a physician, so i have been in that situation. and you think you know, and to the best of your knowledge and professional experience, you make a judgment. the federal government has made it six months in hospice. ok, we don't want to make it a must because what would happen then if people by get into hospice five years before the end that is going to come. so, we tried to corral the cost with six months. but there should be a way for exceptions. if i were you and i do case like

you are talking about here, i would call my congressman and let them deal with this and talk to medicare about this. i talked to medicare on a daily basis. or my people talk to that a care -- talked to medicare on a daily basis about end-of-life care. host: mansfield, ohio. mike. good morning. caller: yes, good morning, jim, and everyone there. i do have one question and this pertains to social security. the social security i heard, i don't know for a fact, but i heard that if you make over $150,000 a year, it is cut off on social security taxes at that point. they know longer pay after that rate did is that correct echo -- correct? guest: i think the number is now $110,000. you pay social security taxes up to $110,000.

past that point, you stop paying them. there is a movement among seniors -- a so-called scrap teh cap -- the cap. if you move that up to $250,000, he would have plenty of money to cover social security. people have been told that social security is going to go away, but it is partly because we have been unwilling to lift the cap and put more money into the program. we are never going to get rid of social security. they will hours be social security in this country. -- will always be social security in this country. i would bet a year's salary on it. host: that is mike in ohio. dennis from york, south carolina. you are on. caller: yeah, i think that first

and foremost, people vote against their own best interests. if more people vote, they would get better services. the republicans want to end all services for all people, but they are the first in line. that is all a have to say. what percentage of people voted last election? thank you. guest: boy, do i agree with you. i watched this last election and worried. we had 22% who voted in the primary and a little over 40 voted in the general election. that is terrible. a democracy operates and is based on an informed electorate going to the polls and making a choice of who they think can best are their interests. when only 40% show up, you can believe that those folks who have the most to gain go out and

vote. and a lot of other people who think they don't have anything to gain, they say, what difference does it make? what possible difference could it make if i vote for social security or not? my view is voting -- if you look at what the supreme court has been doing lately, you have to ask yourself, if you don't vote for the president, he appoints the justices to the supreme court. and this next election is going to be very important because we have a couple of judges who are rather old. they are getting more senior. and the and a going to live forever. none of us live forever. and they are going to have to be replaced. and the decision by the supreme court justices affect all of us. and that is just one place. the benefit programs, there are lots of ways in which people do

not vote in their best interest. this idea that you can run a government without money, that you can never have any taxes is -- is a crazy idea that appeals to our greed, in my view. because every industrialized country has taxes to pay for things. and right now, our roads are in bad shape. congress, for two sessions, has not been able to pass a transportation bill. we get to the end of may this your, there is going to be no money in the federal highway trust for roads. no money. zero. that means no road money goes out to the states. the states are going to be able to plan anything. so you ask yourself, why don't they fix the roads? it has a lot to do with the fact that congress has not come together and said, we have to find some additional money to put into the road fund.

that, in my view, what is missing at this point is the willingness to share. we have to think of the common good. i had to think about what is good for everybody in the country, not just for me. if i vote just what is good for me, then that is not in the best interest of the country. and that is what we are struggling with when people don't go out and vote. host: the topic of voting, "usa today" poll found that 55% of democrats say it is very important to them to see a strong challenger to hillary clinton for the nomination. 25% call it somewhat important. what do you make of those ideas? guest: well, i thought that barack obama made -- was made a much better candidate by mrs. clinton pushing him again and again in state after state.

mrs. clinton has had all the testing she needs, and she has all the experience that you need to be a good president. a candidate were not be, in my view, a threat. but i don't think you necessarily has to have one. she has been a senator, she has been reelected, she has been secretary of state, she has done the whole thing. i really think she is probably the best prepared candidate we have ever had going into the election. i don't remember anyone else who had as broad an experience as she did. host: it sounds like an endorsement. [laughter] guest: i might throw my hat in her ring. host: dawn, thank you for holding on from florida. the independent line. go ahead. caller: hi, thank you for taking my call. i just want to get back to the point about having to make these choices and decisions. i took my elderly mother out -- she is 83 -- for her birthday

yesterday. and come to find out, she has two aneurysms. she needs to have annual echoes on it i just found out yesterday at her birthday lunch that she had an insurance man come to her house and he somehow switched her from an hmo to a ppo. without knowing what he was talking about. she is 83, she didn't understand. now she is dark for a year and a health care program -- stuck for a year in a health care program or she cap did any of her tests -- can't get any of her tests. we are expecting people of her eight to go out with vouchers and know what they are purchasing and know what they are doing. it is dangerous. she could essentially lose her life because she can't get the tests she needs now because she

didn't have enough knowledge and 83 to take her health care. and i see this all the time. i work as a nurse. a lot of them don't know what you are talking about when you try to explain these programs to them. and i fear that if we may get a voucher system, it is going to be a whole lot worse. also, i want to say thank you for having this program. a lot of people down here in florida vote. they listen to one corporate new show that is based on fear, and they vote against their own best interests based on these repetitive fear statements that they hear all the time. thank you. guest: you are welcome. you are talking about the plan that paul ryan has put forth for a voucher system for medicare. that is, give everybody a certain amount of money and they can then go out into the marketplace and buy their own health insurance. i already talked about the fact

that i don't think this is like about buying a refrigerator. and exactly what you're talking about with your mother is the problem. i remember when my mother was alive -- my mother died in 1997 -- but which he was about 90 years old, we got the drug benefit in medicare. and she called me up with a and asked me to come over and asked her to help -- and help her figure out which plan to buy. i mean, when you are 90 years old, you don't want choice. you want certainty. but -- what you want to know is when i am sick, my health care will be there to take care of me. that is the number one thing you want. which insurance company, the whistles and bells they talk about, and the salesman, and make it seem like this is the best way to go -- that kind of thing is simply asking seniors

to make choices when it is very hard in your life. you have enough problems thinking and remembering and remembering -- and your memory is going. to have that put upon seniors simply doesn't make sense. that is why medicare is a guarantee that set of benefits. i would again recommend that if you have a problem like that, she should be able to go to her congressman and talk to him about this whole issue. and find out what he says about what he can do to help her because she should have continuing echocardiograms if she has aneurysms that are already known. that should not be cut off by the health care system. i don't know enough of the facts to make a real judgment on it, so i would say, but i think you have to go and look at it. host: here is larry from west virginia. go ahead. caller: yes, i agree the states shouldn't have -- but i feel the

government, when they make rules, they should be not mandates, just suggestions for the states to go by. everything can be the same in every state because the cost of living is a lot different from one state to another. and i feel the best thing to help the medical system would be to have some sort of reform and have stuff for the doctors that -- there is too much suing doctors. and they're doing stuff sometimes that is not necessary because of they don't do it, they are afraid of being sued. there is a lot of ways to save money and the government, and i think the states are a federal laboratory for different experiments. but they should make recommendations on what type of coverage should be in the

medical insurance in every state. it should be up to the state people. i think you need more choice and one size doesn't fit all on anything, whether it is education, medical, it doesn't make any difference. when i started paying as it -- into social security, they said social security would never be taxed. now that i have a second job and a section -- second social security, they tax it. i do believe the cap should be raised on social security to change it. there are a lot of changes we need in this country. then is to be more accountability by the money spent by the people in washington. host: thanks, caller. guest: there is the choice congress made. to tax security, as we do, or

raise the cap and tax the people who are out there working who are not in social security. we always have this problem in government. don't tax you, don't tax me, tax that guy behind the tree. and we are always trying to find somebody who isn't there. in this instance, you have a chance -- choice between taxing young people who are working and taxing old people who are retired. and we chose to tax the old people. i personally would agree with you. i think raising the cap and taxing young people because they are all going to get old sunday and they are all going to want -- right now, when you're 25, you can't imagine you will ever be 75. it is out of your mind. you look at your grandfather and you say, i will never be as old as him. it is gaining on you. and it is. all of us are getting older, and

i think young people should pay in at the beginning so that when they get there, there is no question it is going to be there. i don't think anybody should be fearful of not having enough money. any other thing that happens, i tell young people, i have lived long enough to remember my grandmother who didn't have social security. and every year for three months, she had four daughters and she lived with each of them for three months. i wound up sleeping on the couch because we had a little house in four kids. have a grandma come was a problem. there was no question we're going to have grandmother. even though she was not a nice warm grandma, we didn't particularly like her, but she was coming and it was our responsibility to take care of her. social security has given independent to seniors in a way that they never had 50 years ago when i was a kid. so i think social security is

essential. we have to figure out how to make -- sure, it is going to be there and make it adequate them to live on. host: before we let you go, the house because has chosen those who will be on the committee. from where you sit and looking at this issue, what is at stake as far as these negotiations are going? guest: well, you have the republicans in the senate of the republicans in the house. it will really be a republican budget one way or another. i will try to make an impact and point out things that are not going to work. i think that is the most we can do in the minority. your job is to point out to them the things that aren't getting done. the health research that is nothing paid for, the transportation budget that is not being passed, those kinds of things we will do and we will push. i think some of those issues are

really important in the long term future because this country is great because we invest in it. we invest in the infrastructure, we put in the highway system, we put in schools and universities and research, we invested in human beings. we got to keep doing it. host: representative jim mcdermott, thanks for joining us. guest: my pleasure. host: coming up, we will hear from another republican congressman, jim renacci. later on, our spotlight segment. we'll talk about the cover story he was part of the reporting team up. taking a look at the subject line of black lives matter. all that coming up on "washington journal" after this.

>> at age 25, she was one of the wealthiest widows in the colonies. and during the revolution, she was considered an enemy by the british, who threatened to take her hostage. later, she would become our nation's first first lady. martha washington. this sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on "first ladies." examining the public and private lives of the women who filled the position of first lady. from the washington to michelle obama, sundays at 8:00 p.m. eastern on "american history tv"

on c-span3. and as a complement to the series c-span's first book. providing lively stories of these fascinating women, crating and illuminating entertaining, and inspiring read. it is not available as a hardcover or in e-book. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now is representative jim renacci joining us to talk about several pieces of tax legislation on the floor. guest: we have a number pieces of legislation. of course, it is tax day. but we are trying to bring some issues to the table, especially my bill and other bills, a taxpayer bill of rights, targeting issues, and putting those issues to the forefront. host: is this over the issues

that several hearings were undertaken because of that? guest: i think over the past several years, there have been a number of fishes talking about that, but also some other issues within the tax code and the bill of rights, the taxpayers will of rights. it is an important day to make some clarifications. host: clarifications such as what? guest: we have to major that the irs commissioner and the individuals work for the irs realize that the taxpayers do have some rights and their rights are also protected. when it comes to targeting, my bill is making sure that anyone in the irs doesn't target. if they are targeted, they are terminated. these are issues -- specific issues throughout the system. we have a number of other bills. i can go through them, if you like. host: one of the ones that would be considered later on this week. what are they considering on that? guest: the estate tax, that has

come out of the committee, and that is to appeal the state tax. host: why is that important? guest: i think it is one of those issues when you talk about small businesses and farms though seemed to be the issues where people are getting really hurt. i could tell you story after story of individuals that are not prepared for that tax burden when somebody passes away in the family and their assets are passport. they don't have -- our past forward. they don't have the dollars because there land is tied up in fixed assets, whether it is a small business or a farm, where it is tied up in land. they don't have the money to liquidate those assets. it is so problematic if you want to have that farm passed onto future generations. host: a columnist writes about the state tax day. he says, hurting family farmers and small businesses with a question mark.

for that time he number affected, -- that tiny number affected, there are all sorts of provisions already in place to soften the blow. guest: what is interesting whenever p2 -- people want to use statistics, they forget that the very wealthy have ways of eating around the estate tax. those that don't have the dollars, are the ones who always get caught. and it is usually that small farmer, that small business owner doesn't have the ability to prepare themselves for the state tax burden. host: the associated press says for the estate tax, the joint committee on taxation says that over 10 years or so, about $270 billion could be lost because of the state tax. guest: again, think about it from the family farmer.

i love to go back to those instances we talk about the small businesses where they lose their estate, their farm, their small business because they can afford to pay the taxes when it liquidates. host: the taxpayer loses potential revenue, though. guest: again, the tax code is mixed with all kinds of issues. but we have to do is have a fair system of taxation. host: what does that look like? i know the ways and means committee is working on some sort of taxation. guest: look, i know the chairman, i know chairman ryan. this was prior. i know the president wants it done, the senate once it done and members of congress wants it done. myself, as a cpa and business owner for 20 years, i believe it needs to be done. but we need to simplify. today, 6 billion hours spent in doing taxes. $168 million to file their taxes.

this is a complicated system. 4000 changes in the last 10 years. we need to simplify it. we need to make it simpler fairer flatter, not only so that the american people don't have to spend this kind of time, but so the businesses can grow and not spend their time thinking what a couple get a tax rules will they use or try to work around. host: on this tax day representative jim renacci joining us. if you want to ask him questions, you can do so. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 745-8002 for independents. and you can also send us an e-mail, if you want. mickey is in arizona, the republican line. go ahead. caller: yes, thank you so much. on the tax issue, i agree with you 100%.

it is like that money has already been taxed. so why, when you die, do you have to have it tax the get? it is just kind of will -- weird. but i do have a serious question. why are we obliged to allow illegal aliens into our public schools? why can't we just have the -- have to be a citizen to be in that school system? for instance, when you have somebody here on a temporary basis going into the schools. i don't quite understand that. people won't bring their families here illegally if they know they can't put them in school. guest: thank you. immigration reform is an important issue. it is something i believe we have to work on. in the house, we have a number of issues we are going to break -- be bringing forth, including

border security. but also, a number of other issues when it comes to immigration and immigration reform. those are all important issues. when individuals get here and they go to the schools, these are the kinds of things we have to be able to see it the processes that are current and also make sure that it is a fair process. but those individuals who have gone through the immigration system properly -- i was in an airplane one day flying with an individual who is almost finished getting to the immigration process and she said to me, congressman, please don't allow people to get in front of me. i have spent the time, i have done it right. i need to have the opportunity you know, why should anybody have the opportunity to step ahead of me? and that really rings very true. we have to make sure the system -- now, we have a complicated system there, too, talking about

the tax code. we have to make sure this is simplified also. host: here is either -- edith from kentucky. good morning. caller: good morning. my question is, yesterday, i believe there was a gentleman who came on and he made mention that the taxes that are collected by the government, that these taxes aren't used for government spending, but instead there are things called appropriations. and that these appropriations are, in fact, what are used for government spending. so this is something that is new to me. i didn't quite understand the difference by what the caller was implying. so if the representative could maybe shed some light on what exactly appropriations are? and if tax money that is collected is not used for spending, then i thought that was the case, so i am just

looking for some insight on that topic. guest: sure. again, i understand -- i have only been here for four and half years. it is interesting when you go back and you see the process done. the starting process is a budget. what a budget is prepared, which gives us a guideline to move forward, the next process is the appropriations process. and that is where you take the dollars that you're going to a spend -- going to spend and you appropriate them to the appropriate areas. that whole process has to actually fit under the budget process. and that is where the budget is so important. it should be one of the most important things that congress does, to not only pass a budget but to pass all the appropriations bills. then, once those are past, now you have -- passed, now you have an appropriations process which says here are were those

taxpayer dollars are going to be spent. host: myron up next from new york. hello. caller: good morning, sir. great show. what i understand is that the taxes start at 5 million plus. so anything below five -- if you have a family of four in the inheritance, that is $20 million. how can you say it is small? and number two, with farms, they receive a lot of subs these from the government -- subsidies from the government. they do get money from the state. all they are doing is getting money returned at the state gave to these people. we will use as the example ralph wilson, he received an $80 million grant to build facilities for training. these people here are getting money back along the way as we the citizens, we are only getting the money that we gave back.

and we are getting it back to use for future people. guest: look, that's not an example of small businesses or small farms in the buffalo bills. remember, some of the farms some of the agreement is $1 million apiece or have him on dollars for a combine. land values are very expensive. the new get to some businesses, some small businesses only have 10, 20 employees but they have millions of dollars tied up in equipment and assets. so when you really look at small, i agree with you, you have to look at the definition of what people are saying is small. but for those small businesses and the small farms, small, again, could be hundreds of acres of land, but also the equipment on the spot. so you're talking about valuation, fixed assets, a lot more than a definition of small or large. host: our guest is a republican

from ohio on the ways and means committee. our next caller is from akron ohio. this is tommy. go ahead. caller: good morning. before i make my comment in my question congressman i am 59 i have never owned a computer and i never will, so i can't go to your website, but i live in portage lakes. a marina and trailer park. and beside today and beside seeing you in the "begin journal," i never -- "begin -- "becon journal," i never see you. when will you start communicating with us up here in the portage lakes, akron area? and breakaway from canton. let us know your outlooks ahead of time. and maybe i will dislike you a

little bit less if i know your platform. thank you. guest: thank you, tommy. one thing i can tell you is i am one of the most reachable and approachable members of congress. i do a lot on the computer. i understand you don't have a computer. quite quickly, i am on the radio every week. i am on every radio station at least monthly talking about issues that we are doing here in washington. i do a weekly report that goes out into every paper that will accept it. and then i do visits every time him back in the district. i have spent time and time again going to every -- here is the interesting thing. i have actually made it a goal to visit every public entity, whether it is a city, community or township, everyone in my district every year at least once. my district is pretty big. but i have made it a point to try and visit everyone of those

locations. i have had a multitude of town halls. i have had tell a town halls -- tele-town halls. people say i am one of the is is people to talk to her see what we are doing here in washington. i apologize you are not getting that information, but there is also the opportunity to contact my office. host: provo, utah. sherry is from there. hello. caller: thank you. hello, congressman. i am just getting ready for work this morning and i was really interested to hear your discussion -- your first discussion about farmers and small farmers. and getting the brunt of this. and you experience as an accountant. i know in public life, of course, we take your experiences, but what you are in a position of power, it is my belief that your experience

should brought it to see the impact on all the people when you are making sweeping legislation. and the money lost, if you're very concerned about people not being able to get -- keep their farms, maybe some money appropriated to help those people do a little estate planning -- could better this country, or those people, then taking $270 million, was it? i can't remember. when i wrote are going to be funded by the end of a. the ways and means committee is extremely, extremely powerful. it is the most powerful committee probably in washington. i am also concerned, you talked about a flatter tax. but i heard you say nothing about getting rid of loopholes for the large corporations that are squeezing companies for profit. and that giving raises, like me,

i'm 60 years old, to support -- keep insurance for my husband and myself. and the answers for taxable vacation for the american family and a small american farmer are not just getting rid of the estate tax. it is helping them keep their neighborhoods so that they don't have developers encroach. it is maybe getting a system -- i was just wondering if you could add a little bit more to the ways and means committee what are some of the loop closer are willing to get rid of four corporations and the huge businesses -- for corporations and huge businesses who we all know don't pay many taxes? i appreciate listening to. and i think c-span for this program. guest: thank you. and again, what i believe i do is i bring 28 years of

experience to congress as a cpa, somebody who does understand the tax code and understand how the convocations of the tax code really drive the decisions businesses make. one thing we have not talked about is some of the ideas. we have to reduce our tax rates to be competitive across the world. we can't have the highest tax rate in the world. at the same time, we do have to eliminate some loopholes. that is part of the plan. it is going to take a lot of time and a lot of energy, but we already went through this last year. we already had a tax -- comprehensive tax platform that was actually bipartisan reviewed discussed, and there were a lot of issues and items that were taken out. i think that is the key. we'll have to rework that plant and move forward, but we have to have -- plan and move forward but we have to have a president who is willing to do that.

when we talk about conference of tax reform, we are talking about reducing the rate, eliminating some loopholes, and there are a magnitude of those that have to be looked at and discussed. i think laughter, under chairman cap, there were a lot of those issues -- german camp -- chairman cap, there were a lot of those issues. host: -- go ahead. caller: yes, thank you for the program. i would like to ask the representative why he thinks it is a good thing for people who have worked their whole lives and been able to save a little bit, and contribute to the taxes , the have contributed to social security programs. but when they get older and they are in the retirement years and he needs a basic health care, you know, help at home, the government, they want you to

burn through your savings and then they will help you with simple health care, as opposed to people who do that work at the that contribute, and they get all their health care needs provided to them on the backs of the taxpayer. you want to talk about a cap that they could save, you should have a cap that they could keep money in the bank and in their savings so that they can continue to pay the property tax , continue to keep their home and their vehicles, whatever it may be, without having to go through that in order to pay for visiting nurses and everything else, which is like $40 to $60 an hour to with their paying those wrecks or do the work maybe $10 an hour. how do you justify that? not that i'm holding it on what you saying -- you are saying but you work at the department. thank you. guest: i know the caller did not give any specifics, but my aunt to would be, that is the medicare program.

the programs that are supposed to help. and they do. medicare does help. medicaid, at the same time, for those on low income. so i know those programs are available. i am a big supporter of those safety nets for individuals who need it. and i think we need to make your that medicare, medicaid, and social security are solvent and around for future generations. i am a big supporter of those areas. those of areas i think the government needs to make sure are around. host: todd from ohio, good morning. caller: good morning. i understand that you want to reduce the income tax rate, and i am with you with that. but in addition to that, do you have a position on implementing a consumption tax? if so, what is it? how do you feel about taxing on refined sugar and flour?

and in addition to that, this is my final question, what is the figure on unclaimed income tax that the irs does not get each year? and do these law specifically apply to all heil -- two ohio -- to ohio? guest: i don't know what the number is on unclaimed income taxes. i think that is something we need to continue to always work towards, making sure that all income taxes better do are paid. -- due are paid. whether it is consumption or lowering the rates i'm a big believer in a lower rate, fare system eliminating -- fairer system, eliminating loopholes. i am an advocate on looking at what is best to move this economy for. the only thing we are ever going to move the economy forward is to bring these rates down,

especially corporate rates, so we can compete globally. we can talk about individual rates. there are so many businesses that are pass-throughs. we also have to make sure that the pass-through rates are brought down,. those businesses pass through their taxes. host: one of the bills being considered would target those federal workers who oh back taxes to the tune of $1.1 billion. guest: again, i think it all comes down to make it sure we are collecting those taxes that are due and payable. host: cleveland, ohio. danielle. good morning. caller: high, this is -- hi this is danielle. my question to you is what was the last time you were in fairview park and spoke to fairview park residents? you say that you are on the

radio and you, you know, you all this other sort of stuff, but i always hear about republicans talking saying this is what my constituents want. i never see you in fairview park. i never see you in rocky river. i never see you in west pike. i never see you in these communities. i am just curious, what was the last time you are in fairview park? and what have you done for fairview park? thank you. guest: thank you. i have been to fairview park a number of times. in the summertime at the soft all tournament. but i actually also worked with the mayor in the last couple years on some vacant government buildings that are right there by the airport in fairview park. i worked very closely with the mayor to make sure that those buildings got sold because they were sitting vacant and when asset -- were in asset to fairview park.

together with the mayor, we were able to get those buildings sold to a five -- private developer. i get out of fairview park at least once a year as a minimum. i have a big district, and we are down here many days in washington. i get back and i do a lot of traveling. westlake, i was there probably a month and half ago. i can tell you, we are in washington a lot. and i am committed when i get back there. but my staff is always out too. i have staff members that have been to the fairview park council meetings, westlake council meetings, they show up at chamber meetings because i want to make sure that if i can't be there, my staff is there representing me. host: here is gary for michigan. go ahead, you are on. caller: yes, good morning. the inheritance tax. does it affect people that oh just over $10 million -- owe

just over $10 million? and the money that will be lost from that. is that figured in the republican budget? and the amount of people that affects -- what is the percentage of that amount, the percentage that it takes of people paying the taxes of that? i thank c-span for everything that they do. i think it is a great program definitely the best news program on tv. thank you. guest: as i said earlier, the interesting thing about the estate taxes those who are very wealthy have been able to hire the attorneys and make sure they set up there estates -- to make sure they set up their

estates. those less than $5 million do not pay estate taxes. in the percentage where you are calculating it, anytime there is a passing of an estate from a husband to a wife, there is no estate tax. those are some of the calculations to calculate out when you hear it is a small percentage. the small percentage affects those caught in the middle -- farmers, small farms, small family farms, the small family businesses that their family has worked their whole life, the american dream to build up this farm or this small business, and all of a sudden because of a death and a transfer to an estate, and the estate tax and very difficult times, trying to continue that small business or that small farm. those are the people who are really affected by this. that is why the repeal of the estate tax is so important. host: kathy is from --

go ahead. caller: i am a big follower of freedom works, that rates your votes in congress how it affects our economic freedom. i have a problem not only with you but also congressman tom young, having such low scores on that. i think your lifetime score is about 58%. you are supposed to be watching out for our best interest, and then you do things like vote in favor of the kronos -- of the cromnibus bill and then vote in favor of obamacare when you could use the power of the purse. i don't think most of you have any clue what you are doing there. you voted in favor of the

agriculture reform and risk management act, which pretty much should have done away with all the changes we made to it. can you explain your voting record to some of us? guest: keep in mind that freedom works and other organizations pick certain votes. in one psycho we will vote 1600 times. i would like -- in one cycle, we will vote 1600 times. take a look at all of the votes. call myself or a representative that you have a problem with our votes. the bill had very good things in it that i support it. if you just want a one-issue vote -- most bills down here you will not get that. it would be nice if everything was simple, but what happens in most of these bills, there are a number of things in it -- some

positive, some you do not like -- the question is, what is best on moving forward? i have gone back to my district many times where i will have tea party group saying -- and i will never forget this -- that i voted x way on four votes. i stopped into their meeting and i explain the specifics on those votes, and i asked for a show of hands, if anyone would vote the same way i did. everybody what one person put up their hand and said yes. again, it is not just zeroing in on four bills out of 16, or 16 bills out of 300 or 400. it is looking at the entire record and the basis of why you voted for a certain piece of legislation. host: a member of the ways and means committee joining us today. bobby, hello. caller: my name is bobby, and i

am calling in regards to where i have worked for different companies. i had a fire at my house, so my record of receiving pay per week , per month, i do not have. so therefore, i am receiving social security now, so there are about five to seven places i work that i am not being compensated for the amount of hours worked. how can i go about being -- receiving what i actually should be receiving? guest: if you have an issue with social security, contact whoever your congressperson is. ask them to help you. my office does a lot of work on social security, medicare, medicaid issues, irs issues.

this is something that the representative in your issue -- in your area actually can help you with, and the social security office, to get that sorted out. host: so many tax bills on the irs on the floor today. what is support in the senate like? guest: the senate will be supporting many of these bills. these bills are coming out of the house with bipartisan support, many of them, coming out of committee. many of them should be supported by the senate and by the president. host: st. charles, missouri republican line. this is karen. hello. caller: hi. my question is, when you own a small business and you are taxed , and you get behind, do you believe that it is appropriate that we get charged high interest rates? because i do not know how we are

to ever get caught up. that is my question. guest: again, i am not sure where the interest rate is coming from -- the bank, or there are statutory rates within the government. i'm not sure how to answer the question, other than to say i know that is outside the realm of the federal government, from the standpoint of other than a statutory interest rate, whether the bank is raising them. i know there are contractual agreements whenever you get behind that the banks raise that. there are many things the financial services committee has looked into and we will continue to monitor. host: david from ocala, florida. he is next. caller: good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and representatives. what i am about to explain is something that is very factual and i would like an answer to what i am about to say.

back in 1913, between 1913 and 1880, the corporate taxes that paid and balanced the budget throughout the wars -- the first world war, the depression, the second world war vietnam, so on and so forth korea -- we all know as americans that at one time corporate was charged with paying whatever was needed for the country. if the country had to reach out passed its own borders in order to take and do something on behalf of the welfare of the people, the gentleman i am speaking to is well aware of the taxes. he is an expert, so he knows exactly what i am talking about. he knows during the period of time from 1913 to 1980 that corporate paid for taxes. they did not have a credit card, and they did not have a mechanism such as what we have

today, which is a debt clock. i would like this gentleman to explain to the united states public exactly why, in the 1980's, you dropped taxes to the 28 that you put it out when ronnie came in. explain how you took the tax from corporate and put it on the backs of the american taxpayer with a sleight-of-hand with a card. and every day the debt clock keeps running up, these "no new taxes." can you explain that to the american public? you are the expert. you are well aware of the 1980's when ron came in and they lower corporate taxes to a point where you now took out a card. i/o $56,000 $772 -- i owe

$56,772. i do, my wife does, and so did my grandkids. can you explain the corporate bill of $18 trillion, please? guest: i cannot tell you why things were passed in 1913 and 1980. this current year, we will bring in the highest amount ever in the treasury. the highest income receipts ever in the treasury. that is amazing. i was a businessman for almost 30 years. if i ever had record earnings, we would have a record movement forward of that company. the problem is we are spending too much. that is a big issue today. we have to look at our spending, not our revenue side. our revenue side is the highest ever in the history of this country, but spending is moving at a very high rate. some of that is because of programs we have to look at.

some programs were initiated 40 years ago and need to be looked at, need to make sure they last for the future. social security, medicare, medicaid. people want to talk about those issues. those are great programs. we have to make sure that they are solvent and moving forward. we also have to realize that 10,000 people are retiring every day, starting last year. so we are spending too much. we have to look at the waste that this government is doing. i say to people, you can come down for a day and spend a day with me. i will show you waste that we need to cut out. we need to look at all federal programs, everything we are spending down here. we do not have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. host: did the revenue come from personal or corporate interests? guest: i am not sure which percentages greater. host: the pew research center did a poll, asking americans

what they were bothered by about taxes. more than a third were bothered by the fact that some corporations -- more than a third of corporations do not pay their fair share. guest: the interesting thing corporations have to live within the rules that we make here. so the question is, you always get the story, this corporation pays zero taxes. what a lot of people do not realize, if you would have taken their tax rate over five years it would have paid plenty of taxes. they had one year they did not another year they paid more. the problem with washington so many times is we take one factor and use that to explain everything off instead of taking the overall picture. many corporations are paying a lot of taxes. the biggest problem we have now is we cannot compete globally with the tax rate.

we have a tax rate that is the highest in the world, and until we lower that, we will have a tough time competing with companies. look at how many copies are going overseas because their tax rate is less. host: this is mount pleasant, south carolina, for our guest. go ahead. caller: i have two points. i am a small business owner. if i paid into a program like social security, medicare, it is not an entitlement. it is something that all of us are owed. i really resent hearing that, although i have not heard it this morning. the second thing is -- and i have been following this discussion not just this morning -- small businesses can be passed on to the next generation very easily and economically.

i have not heard anybody mention that, a product that has been out there. if people do not know about it they need to explore it because like i said, it is relatively economical and easily obtained. thank you very much. i appreciate it. guest: i appreciate your comments as a small business owner. i was one, too, so i understand the challenges you have keeping and running your small business. we have made commitments on social security and medicare and medicaid. many of our programs say that we should not affect anyone ready for retirement. we need to make sure that the guarantees we set out are available to those. that is really what the budget says. the budget is trying to make sure -- the budget we just passed -- we want to make sure that those who paid in and are expecting those benefits realize

they are going to get those, but those may be coming down the road knowing that we have to look at this program to make sure it is around for our children and grandchildren for sure. host: one more call. this is from fort lauderdale, florida. this is max. caller: i wanted to respond to the representative's numerous comments about the low rate of the inheritance tax. i'm glad you did not use the word "death tax" as so many of your fellow republicans have for so long. i think the exemption nowadays is $5.5 million net worth that there is no tax on. i think about three quarters of a percent of the u.s. population , this affects a small businessman, small farmers, and people without much money -- it

forces them to get rid of their assets to cover the inheritance tax. it is foolishness. that is incorrect. most people that are average income, middle-class people, cannot even afford cpa's to do their taxes. so obviously you are working for and your sympathies lie with the top income spectrum. we would like to get the inheritance tax is eliminated so that those inheriting hundreds of millions of dollars or tens of millions of dollars do not have to pay anything on that. if the person who now is getting it that never paid taxes on it and they are getting it, so they should pay taxes on it. that is all i have to say. guest: the only thing i would like to comment back -- and i appreciate your comment, sir -- as a cpa, i work for a lot of hard-working americans that have small farms who had a lot of

equipment tied up. the value of that equipment exceeded $5 million over the years because it was a family farm that was purchased built up, and those assets were required. on the other side of the business, many of my accounts were small companies, not large companies. they also had assets that they built up over the years because of their grandfather or father who had built up these businesses over a long period of time. these are hard-working americans that should not have to lose their business because of the death of an individual and an estate and an estate tax and a transition from one family generation to another. it is important we take a look at those. we had numerous people come in. i have had people come to me and talk about it. these are not the wealthy. the wealthy do not need my or anybody else's protection in

congress. they protect themselves with their attorneys and cpa's. it is those individuals caught in the middle with the estate taxes. you hit the nail on the head. these people have already paid taxes on this income. now because it is transferring to their family, to their child they are going to pay taxes again. that is not really fair here in america. host: representative james renacci, thank you for joining us. on our spotlight on magazines segment, we look at "time's" cover story, taking a look at the shooting death of walter scott and south carolina. one of the authors joins us next as "washington journal" continues.

announcer: at age 25, she was one of the wealthiest widows in the colonies. during the revolution, she was considered an enemy by the british, who threatened to take her hostage. later, she would become our nation's first first lady at age 57. martha washington, this sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern, on c-span's original series "first ladies," examining the public and private lives of the first ladies and their influence on the presidency, from martha washington to michelle obama. as a complement to the series, c-span's new book "first ladies: presidential historians on the lives of 45 heroic american women," creating an illuminating, entertaining, and inspiring read it is available as a hardcover or e-book.

announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: it is our regular spotlight on magazines segment. "black lives matter," the "time" cover story. justin worland of "time magazine." good morning. guest: good morning. host: could you tell us the latest of where we are on the shooting of walter scott? guest: we really have not seen too much come out since the day the video was released. the agency that took over the investigation is a state law enforcement agency in south carolina. they have been pretty mom, as -- they have been pretty mum, as you would expect. it might be days or weeks before they handed over to the prosecutor. we heard soundbites, that perhaps it is not a case where

they would be pursuing the death penalty. but we really do not know. the case is still in the hands of the investigator the state law enforcement agency, and they have not said much. host: how would you describe the relationship between the police department and the community? guest: i think there is a lot of tension. the police department has changed a lot in the last decade or so, and in 2002 they brought in a new police chief who came in to crack down on violent crime. he did a great job of it. violent crime declined by about half during his tenure. but at the same time there have been a lot of allegations of racial profiling, profiling, and some other measures that have led to, may have allegedly have led to police brutality. there is a lot of of tension. having said that, i think most people in the community are pretty satisfied with what they have seen in the last week or so

, sort of immediately after the video was released -- or rather, immediately after the shooting. it is a state agency, and they were told take over the investigation. we do not want to be in charge of investigating our own officers. and the officer was arrested and charged with murder right after the video was released. most people are pretty satisfied with what they have seen thus far. host: we will continue with our guest on the shooting in south carolina. justin worland is joining us from new york. host: as your story shows, it is the video that made the difference. we have the chance to talk to walter spot -- walter scott's brother. set up that story for us.

guest: we talked sort of right after the murder charge came about. he told me about how he first saw the video, which he was at a vigil for his brother. walter scott's brother said he never really bought the story as it was told to him originally. he did not think his brother would be one to confront a police officer, so he was sort of skeptical at that point, and he was approached by a man who said he had something to show him, and he pulled him aside and showed him the video that is now infamous. at first the man did not want to go public with the video. he hoped the police would tell the full story themselves. and then walter scott -- excuse me, anthony scott -- stayed in touch with him and he did release a video. that is sort of how he came to

secure the video. but the interview, he was still shocked by what happened. as you would expect, he remembered his brother as sort of a good family man. yeah. host: the man who had the video -- why was he hesitant to release it? guest: he told -- anthony scott told me that the man with the video basically was hoping -- he did not want to be thrown in the spotlight. he was concerned about retaliation, potential police retaliation. it is hard the state law enforcement agency saying we understand if you witness something like this, you might understand -- you might be scared of what the police might do to you. host: did the law enforcement division conduct its affairs of what happened afterward, based

on what happened in ferguson, missouri, and new york city? guest: i absolutely think it did. i think the mayor and the police chief in that city did not want to have another ferguson on their hands. they did not want to have protests and violence in their city. that is why they handed it over immediately to state officials. i think they were absolutely aware. i do think it is different. different from the other cases we talked about -- ferguson, or even the case of eric garner in new york -- just because of the video. it is hard to imagine that this video would not have prompted this kind of outcry, even if they had -- even if it had come out before ferguson had happened. host: justin worland, your first call comes from andre in georgia.

caller: i wanted to make the comment in regards to the shooting -- the black community we realized that these things are happening. not all officers are bad, but it is these kinds of instances that happen. because of the video, i think we feel like there are much more instances where there are no videos. one of the news agencies was there to report, and they said how they would have to report these incidents if the video had not been released. i think that is what happens much more often in the black community, when there is no video and then the officers wind up getting off, and we have to rely on forensic evidence. sometimes those things can be adjusted to make it beneficial to the officer. definitely glad that the video came out. definitely glad that the leadership, they went ahead and

charged the officer. now we just need to see what is going to happen as far as the trial. as the trial goes on. thank you. host: mr. worlan?d? guest: you make two good points. we have to wait and see what happens. a video is a video, and it is sort of amazing that the video came to light in this case, but we do not know what will happen until it goes to trial, how things might be spun differently. when i talked to anthony scott he said that he is happy with the way things are going, thus far, but he is skeptical until he hears "guilty as charged." of the other thing to say is you are right, there are not a lot of videos in instances that could be similarly tragic. one of the things police departments are doing as a first

step to address the issue is police body cameras. that is something that we saw just this week. the killing of eric harris in oklahoma. this was caught on police body cameras, and the officer was immediately charged. this is something we might see going forward that hopefully will address what we are talking about. host: donna from washington state, hello. caller: the whole police department is responsible or culpable because before the video came out, everything was just as this as usual. when they bounce the facts he said he was fighting for his life. but when you look, the distance from when the bullets hit him

does not match the police report, but they did not say anything. that means the police department supported -- and a shooting that police do without checking the evidence. they should look at every file, every police shooting and match it with what they said, what the police report said compared to the evidence. if someone had shot from that distance in the back and you say you are defending yourself, it just does not match up. because of the video, they have to deal with it. so they are responsible. they should all lose their positions, all the higher ups and redo the whole police department in that area. and probably any other police department. there should be a second party looking at it and the evidence, compared to the original report. guest: i think that is a very good point. the interesting thing in this particular case is, as i noted

the investigation was taken over right after the shooting. even before the video reemerged -- before the video emerged they saw these inconsistencies between what the police report said and what the officer, michael slater said -- michael slager said, and what the evidence was. i think you are absolutely right. i hope that they do when there is clear evidence, that they make that effort. it is difficult to say what goes on across police departments across the country. host: have we heard any reaction from the justice department on the shooting? guest: the justice department has opened their own investigation. they are not commenting on it at this point. the role of the justice department is an interesting one. it is a role for the justice department to play.

by nature and after the facts, i think they are looking into it and i am not sure what they can do because of their role as a federal organization. host: from princess sand, maryland, got that from princess anne maryland, go ahead. caller: when we look at what happened in south carolina, this is an ongoing thing in the last 30 or 40 years in america in black communities. in various areas of northern virginia, there were incidents of police misconduct. in all of these cases, the wrongful death suits. wrongful death is not justice.

as a citizen, if i shoot somebody in the back, regardless of what is going on, i am charged with murder. a man of 73 years old was too old to be on the police force. we talk about terrorism in the country, the disenfranchisement of people and how they are treated -- nobody talks about the casual killing acts implemented in virginia in the 1700s that stated if a white person shoots and kills a negro he will be exonerated of all charges based on the corrections of the negro. but you see white police officers, they get off on all of the charges. we need to go back and rework the criminal justice system. host: mr. worland, go ahead.

guest: i think you make an excellent point. there is an entrenched problem in the criminal justice system. the question is, how do we deal with that? that is tricky. naturally, there is going to be some leeway for police officers who work and discharge their weapon in the line of duty if the evidence is unclear. that is what they get for putting their lives on the line. but absolutely, there needs to be change, and there are too many incidences where we see the situations like this. the question is, what is it that we can do to reform? host: nashville tennessee. here is rose. hello. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a couple of points i want to make. first of all the mantra of "lack lives matter" is really getting old because -- the

mantra of "black lives matter" is really getting old because all lives matter. in the black community, there is little respect for the police and the law. in my generation, we were taught and brought up that if police stop you for any reason, you are supposed to be submissive because they are the authority. they were put in place to protect us and to serve us. nowhere was i ever talked to by a police officer, and i would try to grab a weapon or try to run away. if the police shoot you, you deserved it because you did not submit to police authority. as far as "lack lives -- as far as "black lives matter congo it

has been -- "black lives matter," it is statistically true that most of the babies that are aborted our black. do those lives not matter? they are just important as people who are born. guest: i appreciate the comments. as far as "black lives matter," of course all lives matter. the point it is making is that there are a disproportionate number of black lives being taken at the hands of police. that is why the slogan, the cover story is called "black lives matter." there is a segment of the population disproportionately losing their lives. i think with regard to the question of what is submitting to the police, i think the bottom line really is that nobody deserves to be gunned down when they pose no threat to

a police officer. to say otherwise is just simply not true. i think -- i do not really have much to add. host: from byron minnesota, you are next without guest. caller: thanks. i just had to call in and say i agree with what the woman who was on just said. completely. the "black lives matter" slogan is completely inappropriate in this day and age. there is a complete -- there are white people who are murdered every day and there is no coverage whatsoever. every day in the news you hear that black people are suffering this, black people are suffering this. asians are suffering this. what about the white people?

why focus on one group? get over the stereotypes and the bias. it is a new age. you need to get back to everyone matters. that is all i have to say. guest: i would agree that every life matters, and i think that the " black lives matter speaks to a disproportionate number of people who are murdered. the media does cover white lives in addition to lives of every shade, because we are the media and every outlet looks at black lives because that is what is in the national line at this moment. host: there is a piece taking a follow-up look at "the washington post." i will get you to's ♪ expand on it. it says, "the law allows a lot

of leeway." does your reporting bear that out? guest: absolutely. that is certainly the case. it is hard to get a sense of what the nall -- what the numbers really are because of police reporting requirements. in south carolina, there was a report of the state newspaper there, 209 shootings between 2010 2004 -- between 2009 and 2004. in three of those cases they were accused of wrongdoing and none of them were convicted. that is absolutely the case. two reasons -- you have prosecutors and the people of law enforcement and the criminal justice system who are reluctant to take on their colleagues at the police department. and that is tricky. how do you address that? the other problem or the other issue is that people are reluctant -- people on a grand

jury or a jury are reluctant to take any side against the police officers. part of that is fair. we have asked police officers to put their lives on the line. i think it is pretty clear in many cases that we have seen recently maybe there is too much leeway and maybe things have gone too far. but that is a fair point. host: here is john from virginia. he is on with justin worland from "time" magazine. caller: i am a conservative republican, and i was watching fox news this morning and i saw a cop run a guy over. he was just walking! that is how he stopped him? some of these guys need to be taken off the force. i do not think the government needs to be involved too much, but with no evaluation on these cops, some of them are out of control. you do not see the man -- you do

not shoot a man in the back! it is stupid. that cop did not have no remorse in his eyes. if you ask me, he did it out of vengeance. i do not know what is in the man's mind but i think he did it out of vengeance. i heard that on fox news yesterday, that he might be helping the guy cover it up. there is something going on and there needs -- something needs to be done. i am a white man, and i get pulled over because my hair is black, i think. i have cherokee indian in me. i have been pulled over for nothing in this town. thank you, sir. guest: body cams are not necessarily the only answer. thinking about how and who you hire and evaluate is a valid

question. i think some police departments are thinking about that as well right now. host: charles windsor, ohio democrats line. go ahead, please. caller: good morning. as far as this guy getting shot in the back, you have to wonder -- is this an isolated incident, or has it happened so often, is it so common, that it was inevitable that sooner or later somebody was going to catch this on tape. i also feel, if people would take money on whether or not he would be convicted, i think he will not be. 50 some cars in ohio a few years ago chased down a couple and executed them in a parking lot. one cop on trial for an slaughter shot 45 times, and teach the gun and reloaded -- emptied the gun and reloaded.

they charged some of these other cops with dereliction of duty. as soon as these things happen, they put all of these cops working together. if someone else commits a crime they separate them. they put all the cops together and get their story straight. so now they are trying this guy in cleveland, and all the cleveland police department, all the lieutenants and captains or whatever, they are charged with dereliction of duty. they are all pleading the fifth so they do not have to testify against this guy. the other cops that did get charged with these smaller offenses, that all got overturned. so they all got paid vacations for the trouble. host: charles, we will let our guest respond. guest: right. i think there is a question which is how often do these

things happen and how often do they ever come to light. would we ever be here without the video? those are all good questions. the cases that you bring up our unfortunate. i think body cams are one way to perhaps address that. the justice department in some cases, when a police department is not functioning or is brutal or is doing things that they should not be doing they can mandate and sue to make potential changes. these are things that are happening or hopefully will happen more. we do not know without body cams or sort of video evidence. it is hard to know. host: what is the trend as far as police departments switching over to body cams, in light of these shootings? guest: it is definitely happening. a lot of police departments are making that effort. in north charleston, they are going to add 100 and they are

committed to ordering 150 more. i think the former new york police commissioner, ray kelly said this video changed his mind about body cameras. i think we are saying this abound the country -- i think we are saying -- i think we are seeing this around the country. what is the cost? body cams are expensive. you have to store data. in south carolina, they estimated it would cost $20 million to outfit all of the officers in south carolina with body cams. that is just to buy them not to store the data that they are taking. things are moving in that direction, but there are reasons why things are not necessarily going to change overnight. host: up next from georgia, go ahead. caller: i wanted to ask -- how much transparency do you think

there is in the training of the police officers, the training of the police force? what is it that they are being trained to do, exactly, in these situations? does that training mirror the way that they perform their jobs? that is one question. perhaps we can possibly look into that. but the other thing is, it seems that the police force is trained to treat all stops, particularly in african-american neighborhoods, as potentially dangerous, and all of the black men that they encounter could be harmful to their lives or thugs. but not all of them are thugs just the same way that not all police officers are bad. not all police officers are bad

but not all people are thugs. i think we need to look into that. i wanted to get your response to that. guest: those are two really great questions and points. on the first one, it is worth noting that no police officer is trained to shoot someone who is fleeing. the supreme court has said that is unconstitutional. certainly no one is trained to treat a fleeing suspect the way walter scott was treated. i do think oftentimes what you hear, it is not so much the formal training, but oftentimes what is being exchanged between police officers and the informal training, the conversations that they have with one another about the way they conduct their jobs -- that is something that is a little bit hard to grapple with. absolutely you could go in and look at the formal training and see that this is something they are not being taught to do. i think you make of -- you raise

a very good question going forward, and i think those are things we should look into more. host: louisville kentucky -- louisville, kentucky, is next . ann, go ahead. caller: i would never say that someone deserves to get shot by a police officer, like the woman said earlier. where is the responsibility on the individual who committed the crime in the first place that they are getting stopped by a police officer, like michael brown? no one wants to talk about the fact that he went into that store and he stole in that store and he also roughed up the clerk in that store. your guest talks about the disproportionate number of lax being shipped -- the disproportionate number of blacks being shot by police officer, but what about the

disproportionate number of crimes being committed by the black population? the percentage of crimes in louisville kentucky, in the black neighborhoods is unbelievable. you can see where the crimes are being committed. what is going to happen next? are we going to get to the point where people even want to go into law enforcement because they are going to have fear of -- are we going to become a vigilante type mob, that we are going to gang up, that the population is going to gang up on police officers and they will not be able to do their jobs for fear of retaliation? what about these individuals who are committing these crimes in the first place? if they do not want to be stopped by a police officer, why commit the crime? do not do it. guest: well, i cannot speak to

what is going on in louisville but i do think -- the job of a police officer is to apprehend a suspect. a suspect is innocent until proven guilty. they are charged, set before a jury of their peers. their job is not to take the law into their own hands, to make a ruling on what happened. i think some people would use the word "execute" over what in some cases is a petty crime. certainly in the case of self-defense. the idea that police officers, that somebody who is fleeing or someone who has committed a petty crime is sort of all of the sudden free to be shot is sort of a bad road to go down. host: from georgia, this is al. go ahead. caller: hi. i just wanted to let people know

that there is an article on the internet about two weeks ago roughly that the police in oxnard california, were getting tattoos for every shooting. it was a skull and bones, and in the nose was a barrel of a gun. and if you killed the suspects, then you got smoke coming out the barrel. anytime you get people like this here on a police force running around with guns and badges, you have a problem. there are no if's, aunts, or butts about it. i don't know if you are taking pride that you are shooting people in the streets per you are going to be wrong about some of them. some of them will be like this guy walter scott, or the other guy in south carolina, who was murdered in his driveway for not pulling over at a traffic stop.

for no reason, really. that is no reason to kill these people. guest: that is a great point. i think it goes back to sort of what i was saying earlier. sometimes, not always -- i do not want to color the police community in any way but there are these cultural examples that lead to problems. what you point out -- i was not aware of it, but it is a very sad example of the way that sometimes police communities might sort of encourage behavior. sometimes. i say that with a lot of -- with a big caveat. host: there is a line in the piece that you participated in that goes like this --

host: can you expand on that? guest: sure. policing is a local issue. it is hard for the federal government to come in to thousands of police departments and do anything. one, they do not have the authority. the justice department does an investigation, and then at that point they can come up with an agreement with the community with the local police department, and say this is what you have to reform, or they can sue them. it is a costly process that can take a long time, and it is a process at the federal government, the justice department, cannot be reasonably expected to do in thousands and thousands of communities. it is pretty unusual that a place like ferguson got this treatment. it happens in los angeles, cincinnati, in places where

there have been consensus to reform the police department. but you cannot expect the federal government to do it everywhere. that is on top of the fact that a lot of people are resistant to the federal government coming into their backyard telling the police what to do. host: temple, florida, go ahead. charles in tampa florida, go ahead. caller: yes. i wanted to make a comment that we are sick and tired of the media itself making african-americans look that. it does not make any sense on what is continuing to go on with the police department. host: do you have any response? guest: i think there are a lot of questions that that raises. i think it is something worth thinking about. i do not know that i have a concrete response. in situations, absolutely in

situations where people are covering crime, i think somebody mentioned this earlier -- it is hard when you do not have a video, like you have in the walter scott case to write about something because all you have is the voice of the police, who will say that walter scott beat him up or he did whatever he did. or rather, he shot him with a taser. it is hard to write about that without having both sides of the story. host: from chevrolet, maryland helen is up next. caller: i am helen and i am calling in reference to "black lives matter." i have two sons, and i have lived in fear that they are -- that someone is going to shoot them. they are grown men, and they have been stopped multiple times.

in the end, the mayor, the police, i thought they did the right thing. if the video did not come forward, the story told by the police officer would have been -- would have vindicated him. he seemed to be reading from a script. these officers seem to be reading from a script. they all say the same thing -- "fear for my life, reaching for my gun." if someone is reaching for your gun, that should tell you that that person does not have a weapon on them. multiple officers choose to beat shoot, and kill these children of ours. where there are multiple police officers, i see that they could have restrained that person. they have them down on the ground, they are beating them in the head. what happened to handcuffs? you also mentioned the judiciary system. if there is a crime committed by the person, they have a long

record. that should go back to the court system, and the court should be doing their part. persons who are calling in and do not realize the pain of raising a child, you are not only losing your child, you are losing your family. that whole family is caught up in it, and i feel sorry for the people who are shooting the children, as they move forward and then the next thing you know, they have shot another person. please stop the trying -- please stop destroying our family units. thank you. guest: i think what you said makes a lot of sense, and there are a lot of people who feel the same way. what we see when we see a case like this is really tragic, and i do not know that i could say much more. i think you said it perfectly. host: let's hear from jared, in michigan. you are next. go ahead. caller: thanks for taking my call, c-span. i wanted to comment on mostly

the woman from tennessee who called. basically saying to be submissive to police -- you know, it is real easy for someone to say that when you are white. the concept of white privilege when you are walking around as a white american, you generally are not profiled by the police. and how other callers want to link all of this crime and supposedly abortion statistics to the black population -- the black population in this country is 13%. so we are supposed to believe from these people that 13% of the population is committing the majority of the crimes, more than white people? i find that hard to believe. it is embarrassing for me to hear that. it is an empathy gap this vengeful emotions that we get as americans a lot of times.

these people, to me, are nothing more than red coat loyalists. those are my comments. thanks. guest: i think sometimes hearing those kinds of sentiments is kind of startling to me, to be honest. right now we are talking about a case where a man was shot eight times when he was fleeing. it does not seem appropriate to make this a conversation about the crimes that lack people -- that black people have committed. i think that is somewhat out of touch. host: we have ron from springfield, virginia independent line. good morning. guest: i just want to say that i think the solution here is to expect the police to follow all laws, from traffic laws to murder. and we as a society have so much tolerance for police at all levels. we see police every day running

red lights, speeding, parking illegally, all that kind of stuff. it sounds like a broken window solution, as they did in new york. we need a broken window mentality to solve police abuse. i come from l.a., and i am white. the abuse the police do is universal. there are so many bad cops because the wrong people are hired to be police officers, and they are oftentimes bullied. we need to stop abuse at all levels. thank you. guest: i think you are absolutely right. i think most people would absolutely agree that we should stop of at all levels. you mentioned you are from l.a. l.a. is one of those cities where the lapd is notorious, at one time for tragic sort of cases of police abuse, and then they have a justice department come in and revamp and take over

. i think it is a case of how things could move going forward in other places, if the justice department is more active. i think it is hard to see exactly how you get to where you are going, where you say you would like things to go. host: the "time" cover story is "black lives matter. justin worland, thank you. guest: thank you. host: we now go to the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., april 15, 2015. i hereby appoint the honorable david w. jolly to act as speaker pro tempore on this day.