Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal  CSPAN  June 8, 2015 7:00am-10:01am EDT

7:00 am
later, a look at the funding, training, and technology by screeners for the ♪ host: e-3 are washington journal for you today on june the eighth. as far as activity on the hill, the house could take up senate as that would give the president fast-track authority to a deals. on politico, it is story about the labor department. a possible role that could make changes to overtime for millions of american workers, giving them more. that is on politico's website. it was on the sunday shows. governor chris christie and new york mayor bill de blasio spoke about voting and the voting
7:01 am
process, specifically responding to hillary clinton's speech about improving the voting experience. when it comes to the voting process, we want to hear from you in our first 45 minutes on how you would improve the process of voting, with her on the federal or state level. here's how you can call and make your thoughts known. for republicans, (202) 748-8001. for democrats, (202) 748-8000. for independents (202) 748-8002. if you want to share thoughts on improving the voting process you can post on twitter at @cspanwj. you can also go to facebook at facebook.com/cspan. if you want to send us an e-mail, e-mail journal@c-span.org. eric clinton laid out some ideals she was like to see when it comes to the voting process. the story in the wall street journal highlight some of those.
7:02 am
one of those is that everyone will be registered to vote when they turn 18. the front runner for the democratic residential nomination also encouraged expanding early voting, called congress said reinstate part of the voting rights act shutdown in 2013, and said that felons who have served their sentences should have voting rights restored. those proposal getting some responses. if you watched or listened the sunday shows, including the star at a new jersey, ever chris christie responding, saying the headline attacks clinton on voting rights. he said she does not know what she is talking about when it comes to voting rights. here's a little bit of governor christie yesterday. [video clip] >> she does not know what she is talking about. a new jersey, we have early
7:03 am
voting. i do not want to expand and increase the opportunity for fraud. maybe that is what mrs. clinton wants to do. folks in new jersey have plenty of opportunity to vote. maybe she took question -- maybe if she to questions and learned things, she would not make ridiculous statements like that. >> she says there is fear mongering. >> as she -- well, she is never been in new jersey. host: you may share and believe in those things that she does, you may disagree, but when it comes to improving the voting process, if there are things that you see that you could possibly change, here is your chance to share. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. for independents, (202) 748-8002 . and you can post on our social media. we start on improving the voting process with willie from maryland on our democrats line. good morning.
7:04 am
caller: good morning. i would like to say, i think mrs. clinton -- i think that was a great move to attack voting rights. i think one of the problems is we have to stop tampering with that. there have been too much of the civil rights issues. we have so many people, because -- especially the white community -- but certain numbers think they will be outnumbered so that is why i think they are tampering with the voting rights. i think the federal government should take away with the states process in this completely -- completely. host: what is it like for you in an apple us -- an apple us -- annapolis? tell us about maryland's experience. what kind of things go on that you like about the voting process? caller: i like it in general.
7:05 am
we do not have to worry about being suppressed in the voting actions. everything is the same as it used to be. host: from arizona, this is robert, democrat line. go ahead. caller: good morning. this is genius robert. i appreciate you taking my call. i am very adamant about this. the preamble to the constitution , i think the fifth phrase and it, it says "to promote the general welfare." i believe the general welfare includes everybody. the only three -- the only way you get representation for everybody, especially because this is a country and i think their states do their own political stuff, the only way to get it for equality so people will be represented is that have
7:06 am
publicly funded elections. and also, mandated voting. the reason for mandated voting is that what you do not have to worry about getting scrutinized are your employer about which way you would vote and which way they would think you vote. my dad went through that many years ago for a long time. he was from mexico, but what happened is he had some dealings -- feelings about how his country had been overtaken militarily by people from, generally, colonial situations from europe. so he had feelings that way. host: when it comes to arizona, what rules are in place as far as where you can vote. is it an easy or difficult process? caller: let me say this. you do not know what it is like. if you want to really know, you
7:07 am
read a book by the name of -- this has been about 12 years ago. how the boat is scattered. there is too many tricks, ok? host: that is robert in arizona. in the bronx, new york, lawrence. we are talking about how to improve the voting experience. caller: as a republican, i am a little ashamed -- i am so ashamed. people should know why we republicans are afraid of the vote. i do not think they should do anything to them vote. there is no constitutional right to go on a plane or to even have a drivers license. but there is a right for us to
7:08 am
vote. i am very shame to be a republican. host: was specifically when it comes to voting are you ashamed? caller: republicans are doing anything to stop people from vote, especially minority like me. i do not want to be a republican anymore. i do not like what they are doing to poor people like me. host: so when you say they try to stop people to vote, what do you mean? caller: making laws -- you must have an id because he must have an id to go on a plane, to drive a car. that is not in the constitution. host: what is it like and the bronx when you vote? what things do you need to vote? caller: all you need to vote is your name, your registration.
7:09 am
you are a voter for years. republicans -- i do not know. they are acting like romans like the devils. they are strictly against poor people. i do not know why. i am ashamed. host: that -- we hear from texas on our democrat line. thomas, good morning. caller: good morning. i believe everybody should be allowed to vote. when they call in, they have their code number. if they want to vote democrat, republican, whatever. -- when they key it in one town in the computer, they say that is a. they try it again.
7:10 am
host: you would trust the phone system that way? you would not worry about fraud? i think thomas left us. we continue. if you want to give us your thoughts and improving the voting process maybe have specific things you want to share as far as ways you may want to see a change. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8002 for independents. as congress goes to work this week, a lot of activity in the house and senate side. to get up-to-date on what to expect, we are joined by lauren fox with national journal. can we start on the house side, specifically reports that trade may come up in the legislative process. is that what you are hearing? guest: it sounds like trait could, at the end of the week. there are a significant number
7:11 am
of amendments that could come up as they are debating a probations bills that could push into next week. but they are trying to get enough votes to pass the trade bill. it looks like democrats are struggling to get more than about a dozen folks on board. that will be something to watch. host: speaker boehner was asked last week about if he had the votes, he said he would. what does it look like an far -- as far as things like that? guest: it sounds like republicans are making inroads, slowly. this is an interesting moment for paul ryan, who is leading this effort. when i talk to leadership aides, they said this is becoming their number one priority. this is consuming much of their time at this point.
7:12 am
democrats, it is more difficult to see if they will get -- they need to dozen to 30 votes. so far only 17 have said publicly they support this trade ill. that is far short of the number they need. so republicans will either have to go harder on this or democrats will have to make up the deficit but it is harder to do when democratic leadership is not supporting this and the same way republican leadership is. host: what is expected on the senate side as far as activities are concerned? guest: it looks like the focus will be on this defense bill led by senator john mccain from the armed services committee. it looks like senate democrats are taking aim at the additional $38 billion being added to the contingency operation fund that is meant to avoid automatic budget cuts and sequestration.
7:13 am
democrats are not sure if they will go for this yet. they say this budget is gimmicky. they have not decided whether they will go with republicans there. that is going to be of much of the time in the senate. senator mccain is optimistic that by the end of this week, it will be wrapped up. host: we talk specifics, but as far as spending bills, what still has to be considered in terms of those keeping government programs operating? guest: is the house of senators houses transportation and defense, that leaves them with six more to do. it is unlikely that all 12 appropriation bills could get past the end of the fiscal year. the 1990's. it is unclear what other -- whether that will be possible. they are about at the halfway point. host: lauren fox with the
7:14 am
national journal, staff correspondent talking but the week ahead in congress. thank you. how would you change the voting process or improve it? that is what we want to talk to you about. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8002 for independents. jeff from pennsylvania, republican line. how would you improve the process? caller: thank you and good morning. you have to know your voting laws in the state. pennsylvania has early voting. but i believe that, like everything, you need a photo id for voting. it should be required. you need a photo id for everything you do. why not have it so that you have an id to be able to vote? my experience this year was that
7:15 am
i could have been anyone when i went up to the voter place. the voting facility to place my vote. even the lady behind the counter was laughing about it. i think voter id is crucial for fair and impartial voting. host: jeff from pennsylvania. william, california, democrat line, talking about improving the voting process. would you make changes? caller: i do not think so. aren't all states require to give you an id to register to vote? don't you need some kind of id for most of those? also, i want to respond to hillary clinton's idea. i think if it was mandatory for
7:16 am
everyone to register automatically when you turn 18, is that right? host: yes, one of them. caller: is that occurs, is it mandatory for them to have to vote? host: it does not say anything specifically about that. as far as your way of doing things in california, do you have to show an id when you go to the polls? caller: i have been voting so long i do not remember if i had to show id when i registered or not. i just want to ask a question -- host: but when you go to actually vote, do you have to produce an id? caller: no, but we have a registration card. your card that shows where you're from and your name. there has never been any question about it. the i live in a small town, so most everybody knows everybody which i do not understand. a bigger city i could understand
7:17 am
, but not sure about that. host: the wall street journal talks a little about this event that features secretary of state hillary clinton. and offer diesels about her campaign. this will take place in new york saturday. the topics include wage growth early childhood education, emily leave policies. according to an aide, mrs. clinton is not excited to focus on health care nor is she planning a big speech on k-12 education. advisers say she also will not focus on foreign policy in the coming months. a contrast to the republican primary campaigns, she will perhaps the what one speech to the subject. if you watched the cbs show yesterday with governor christie, when asked about his
7:18 am
potential to join the field, it says that governor christie told cbs that he will probably decide this month on whether to join the already crowded republican field. but he must first answer a basic question. does he really want to do this? that is in "usa today." go to "washington post," scott walker, gay is the topic he took on. saying "i personally believe marriage is between one man and one woman" but if the supreme court favors marriage, the next step is also to consider pursuing a constitutional amendment. you could read more of that in the newspaper this morning. the voting process and how to improve it your opinion on that, is what we want to find
7:19 am
out. bill is from oregon, independent line. good morning. all caps good morning. you are my favorite host. host: i appreciate that. as far as oregon's expanse, how is that done? caller: i am 66. when i got from vietnam, i registered in my hometown in michigan. the court clerk knew me all my life, did not recognize me because i had grown a beard and long hair, then i moved to california in 1980 and to oregon in 1990. the only time i have had to reregister and all three states is if i changed clinical parties or if i moved and had a different residence. in oregon, i no longer need any registration because we vote by mail. people from other states it
7:20 am
could be fraudulent. there has not been one incident of fraud since we developed voter by mail. you either take it to a drop off place, the county clerk's office or you put a stamp on it and mail it in. it has been working great for several years. i cannot remember one it was first enacted, but i think the other states may want to look into that. we are a very progressive state. also, i know this is primarily a state issue, but i think this should be a federal registration law. there are other things are state issues like marriage and driver's licenses and things that the federal government probably should not be involved in ordering into the constitution, which i read. host: so one of comes the
7:21 am
clinton's idea the automatic registration should take place at 18, you agree? caller: absolutely. i had to register for the draft when i turned 18 in 1967. we do not have the draft anymore. what they could do is go into the high schools. most of the seniors are either 18 or close to it. they know which ones are 18. almost every high school student has a drivers license or their birth certificate would be a file in the school and the could go into the classrooms, certainly the civics ones, and register them there. host: that is still in oregon especially his mail in experience. tennessee, republican line. and, good morning. caller: ok, thank you.
7:22 am
in early america, they had people have different dates for voting and people would go to the town meeting area and hold their hand and vote. but they found out that they would go to another town on another day when an election was held. almost from the inning there has been corruption in politics and especially voting. some of these things are being adjusted are silly. if the person does not have enough interest in getting himself to a registration area why do we think he will vote and vote with any knowledge? we have early voting in tennessee, which i do use, but i do not like the same registration day of voting and registering that same day, because it is setting up a situation where people who are asked will cheat.
7:23 am
we know that everybody is not honest. host: and in tennessee. albert from chicago. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: i am well. what is the voting experience in chicago? caller: i have been voting since 1983. we have to present an ide. the point is, the same id we use in 1983 is still acceptable in 2015. that is the way it was. if people had acceptable forms of id to vote. the problem came with the election of barack obama in 2008. all of a sudden, different forms of ids were required. that attack comes under the old southern reconstruction fable that has all these restrictive laws to deny former slaves the
7:24 am
right to vote after -- it was a case of when they started to fill up the game and they change the rules. people had acceptable forms of id. after obama was elected in 2008 all of a sudden different forms of id were required. that is the problem with voter id laws. no one knows this better than the republican lawmakers passing these laws and those supporting these laws. host: cranked from nashville, independent line. caller: i just want to say, i am 57. i would propose twice, just to see what the voters situation was, as far as people coming in to vote. in nashville, we did not have a problem. i do not see how anybody can vote without -- i do not see how voter fraud exists, because you
7:25 am
come in and that anyone vote everything is electronic. the two times i worked the polls, there was only one person came in without an id and we did not let him vote. he gave us hassle about it, but we could not let it go. the only thing that i regret is that the lines were so long that there was a person in the back who had to come in and we had to cut off at a certain time. and this last person had to go to another spot to vote. you also check that. if they are not in your district, we sent them to another place, and we know where that is because they are in the system. i do not see how voter fraud exists. i do not know why people want to change it. it is ethically line. host: craig in tennessee.
7:26 am
on twitter, elliott says we need to treat election fraud with the same scene is as high treason, money laundering and drug distribution. another viewer on twitter adding to that. you could make your thoughts on twitter as well @cspanwj. the president is at the g7 in germany with other heads of nations. russia is a target of the topics , especially with actions in ukraine. also, the german chancellor angela merkel is taking the lead and trying to lead things along. if you go to politico there is a story about the relationship between germany and the united states, especially after edward snowden and issues of phone tapping and spine. there is a picture from getty images. if you go to the pages that talks about this relationship, it says the public narrative skews a narrative. --
7:27 am
she thought it seemed especially narrow of the view of the pragmatism that was more like amateurism. there is some video this morning from the g7. if you want to read more of that piece, it is an politico. the voting experience, the voting process, how would you improve it? democrat line, terry in missouri. caller: i was thinking that if laws are going to be made to restrict voters and their ability to vote that the courts should then step in and mandate that there be an agency created so the federal government can issue a photo id for those places that tried to restrict voting. so the agent could go around from town to town in a bus
7:28 am
even, and allow people to calm with their pieces of mail or their bank account and get a photo id is they do not have one. because not everyone has a drivers license or has the ability to go somewhere far away that they could try to get them. if the laws are going to be made to restrict voting, then the court should step in and say ok, you have made this law. now you have to find a way to not abuse the voter by requiring these photo ids. so unable us to get the photo id on an easier basis. host: from texas, we hear from mike, republican line. how are you? caller: hey pedro. the old if you tell a long -- a
7:29 am
lie often and strong enough it becomes true, that is what is coming -- happening with this voting business. the old fashion photo id was always a person's signature. when it comes to fixed and rigid elections, that occurs where the account and not cast votes. host: so would you make changes to the process of voting? caller: i would pay a bouncy actual money, to people found fraudulent in voting. like a reward. and then people who committed the fraud, i would put them in jail. host: what about this idea the former secretary of state posted, automatic registration at 18? caller: yeah, if you come in and put your signature down and use that as your id or take a picture of the guy right there and take his signature. how about a thumb print, what the heck. host: from arkansas, fulton is
7:30 am
next. caller: first of all, you need voter id. i do not know what people have an issue. if you prove you are a u.s. citizen, i think that is a good thing, as that is the basis for voting. beyond that, i do not know why we do not have the canadian outlook. this is supposed to be a republic. you're supposed to have multiple opportunities to vote. i feel it is basically republican and democrat. no one will vote independent because you will feel they wasted their vote, but if you have the same median concepts of runoff elections, you have a 1 2, and three. so you may have an independent as number one. he does not have enough votes in moose to number two. same for republicans and democrats. it makes it more likely for people to pick independent and
7:31 am
more opportunities in the stagnant republican-democrat we have. host: is there an independent voice not getting attention you would like to see get attention? caller: i am not particularly any one. a lot of times i am republican as i do not agree with some democratic policies, but if you see someone who you actually like ideally and their independent, you be less likely to pick them if there is anyone remotely close republican or democrat because that candidate has a lock chance of getting in. i do not understand the baseline. plus, it is more money to have a runoff election. you could tell you it right there. host: fulton in arkansas talking about improving the voting process. the leakage of the washington post deals with the topic of immigration. the headline says an idle path
7:32 am
to citizen status, writing that is series of legal step backs have halted the government's process in moving forward obama's executive action shielding millions of illegal immigrants from deportation, even as community organizations continue a rapid push to get ready for the programs. since a federal judge first block the new programs in february, the department of homeland security suspended plans to hire up to 3100 new employees most of whom would be housed in an 11 story building the government leased for $7.8 million a year in arlington virginia. that building and the crystal city air he a sitting mostly unused, dhs employees say. a foundation headed by billionaire george soros pledged at least $8 million to help people apply for relief.
7:33 am
florida, hello. caller: i have been listening to some people and you guys are clueless. let me ask you a question. is it more important for someone to vote or to visit the white house? you have to have an id to visit the white house. the idea that because there has not been any fraud proved -- there have been no investigations. but there have been issues in louisiana in chicago. voter fraud is out of control. the other issue is look at all the illegal aliens who have been given government ids who can go and vote. and also people have been able to buy state ids for a long time. one last thing is making the exception the rule. making it that the few people who do not have ids or cannot get to the polls on time that are comes i cannot be solved, it
7:34 am
is so shortsighted. the right to vote is not in the constitution. it is not a federal responsibility. i do not understand why you keep getting the federal government involved. they are the most corrupt. host: pam from washington, democrat line. caller: i think your previous caller is totally ignorant. your vote is a constitutional right. on like -- you do not have a right to have a drivers license to get a credit report to go to an airport. but your vote is an absolute right. are you elections are pretty much for sale. they are raising millions of dollars to affect an election, but nobody can by someone's
7:35 am
vote. i live in washington state. you do have to register, usually one time when you get your license -- drivers license, then we vote by mail. we get a ballot in the mail, fill it out. we get at least a week or two to mail it in. if you do not want to put a stamp on it, there are boxes all over the place where you can drop it in. and you sign it. in terms of saying that there is fraud, it is ridiculous. we have computer power. you cannot go vote all over the place. you only get one ballot in the mail. host: when it comes to the vote, the right in or mail in, have there ever been issues of fraud after an election and after ballots are received? has there been an issue when it comes to fraud or accuracy?
7:36 am
caller: never. i am originally from california. down there -- i cannot believe people do not know this. you enter your polling place and they look you up. you do not just go in and vote they have a record of everyone in that precinct. what is wonderful about washing state is if you are older or disabled, you do not have to stand in line. you do not have to stand in the rain or work around your work schedule or whatever. there has never been any issue about voter fraud in washington state. host: pam in washington state. you have heard from their experience and oregon's experience in maryland votes. your states may do other things in the voting process. here's your chance to talk about how you want to improve it. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8002 for.
7:37 am
you heard governor christie making remarks about hillary clinton's ideas for voting. mayor bill de blasio of new york also talked about it. here is some of what he had to say on sunday. [video clip] >> first of all, john congratulations to you. you're taking one or one of the great shows in television history so i am happy for you. i think what governor christie is saying distracts from the core point of the dialogue. we have a democracy problem. we have declining voter turnout. secretary clinton put forward the notion we need a national strategy to energize voting and get people involved, obviously to address the many efforts made by republicans to repress voter involvement. i think governor christie should speak to the proposal rather than just attacking her personally. >> you talk about a national strategy but you single out
7:38 am
republicans. hillary clinton did as well. but new york city and democratic town, has very restricted voting rolls. clinton did not mention that. by making it political, does that undermine her case? >> i think she is saying the right thing because she is talking about a national vision. we have to get early voting across the country, supply the registration process, get rid of the efforts to repress voter involvement. host: comments from massachusetts, democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. my question is to give people access to vote. both state and federal. we have registry of both. we have homeland security. we can incorporate that and we know everybody that is a legal voter or citizen. if they can use that database to
7:39 am
the voting system we should have no problem and giving people more access to vote and then they can give everyone an id to vote. host: from west virginia, janet on our republican line. good morning. go ahead. we move on to lydia minneapolis, independent line. caller: i think there is a number things we could do. you cannot be the greatest democracy on earth if your people will not participate. let's make election day a national holiday like christmas or thanksgiving where almost everything is closed so people are not at work and they can vote. as soon as your prison sentence is over -- not probation or parole -- as and as you get out felons should be able to vote.
7:40 am
i agree with the earlier caller who wanted ranked choice voting. we need more choices. i think the two-party system increasingly discourages people from voting because their point of view is not represented. i would like to see at the least rate tracing -- ranked choice voting to open up choices. host: from maryland, republican line. hello. caller: hi, pedro. you have to use a picture id for almost every place you go. i want to the hospital on friday for a procedure and i had to have a picture id. every time i go to my doctor, i have to give him a picture id. everywhere i go, if i charge something in the department store, i have to have a picture id. i cannot see where it is such a hassle to have a picture id.
7:41 am
there were even offering to have them for nothing. i do not understand what the problem is. no one is trying to suppress the vote. one more thing, the last time i got through to you was in 1994 at the republican convention. i was the last caller, and i got preempted by mr. barber. and i appreciate your a class act. host: the washington post has a story looking at abortion. according to a recent survey since 2010, abortions are declining nearly everywhere in red states and blue according to the associated press. one factor is the decline of the teen pregnancy rate. there has been no official update since then, but the teen birth rate has continued to drop, which experts say is a
7:42 am
similar trend 14 pregnancy. the president of americans you for life suggest that the ron decrease in abortions reflect a change in attitudes among pregnant women. there is an entire generation of oman who see a sonogram as her first baby picture. there is an increase awareness of the humanity of the baby before it is born. but advocates for abortion rights said the figures am assured that restrict of laws are not needed to reduce abortions. i can be achieved by helping women obtain affordable and effective contraception. democrat line from california hello. caller: i have been involved in the process of getting out the vote where we go to the polls and see who will go and get them to vote. the same person i was working for was able to go to oakland and watched them count the votes are a glass window. this was a while ago but i am pretty sure they still do that.
7:43 am
so there is some accountability for people who vote and people running for office to make sure the process is running effectively. and i do vote by mail in california. host: have you ever had issues with voting by mail? caller: no. host: michigan, steve, you will be the last call on this topic. go ahead. caller: good morning. you do you know that some of the democratic caller's have been lying to you? the one man that said in 2008 the republicans were trying to pass laws? the democrats were in charge of the house, senate, and presidency. if anyone was doing it, it was the democrats, who have a lifelong history of trying to prohibit. they made the jim crow laws. the kkk came from the democratic party. i was support someone going to jail where ever they were, if they were trying to hinder people to vote. but these people are lying.
quote
7:44 am
i do not know if you catch people lying and say nothing about on this program? host: people call in and express opinions like you did about a variety of topics. that, we do. that is a last call on this topic. you may have missed it last week, but when you go to the washington post, they have a chart that breaks down the various pieces of what is known as a clinton foundation, generally. it takes a little analysis of what comes in, how it is broken down, the money that comes in. david fahrenthold is joining us to talk about his recent piece looking at the clinton foundation and it current worth. later in the program, we speak with peter loftus of "the wall street journal" and take a look at the increasing drug shortages taking place in the u.s. and what a means for patient health. all this as "washington journal" continues. ♪
7:45 am
>> this summer, booktv will cover book festivals from around the country and top nonfiction authors and books. watch for the annual roosevelt reading festival from the franklin d. roosevelt presidential library. in july, we are live at the harlem book fair, the flagship african-american literary event with him discussions. in september, we are live from the nation's capital for the national book festival celebrating its 15th year. >> tonight on "the communicators ," at the consumer electronics show, we met up with author andrew keen and asked him what he feels the internet is not the
7:46 am
answer. >> the internet is not the answer at the moment. it is not the answer in the sense it is not working, currently. it is lending itself to undermining jobs. it is compounding the inequality of economic life. it is creating new, massive monopolies that were unimaginable in the 20th or 19th century. it has treated this economy were all internet users have been turned into products. you and i have been packaged up when we use google or facebook. we have become the product, like a hitchcock movie. >> tonight on "the communicators" on c-span 2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: as promised, david fahrenthold of the washington post. he is a reporter. a recent look at the clinton foundation.
7:47 am
how the clintons built a $2 billion military. good morning. one look at this? guest: it has been in the news. as hillary clinton got it -- got into politics. we were struck by how you had contrasting images of the clinton foundation. people saw it as the red cross that did all this great good before she started writing the second time. but as we see more of her connections to the foundation it has been cast in it different light as he saw the stephanopoulos coverage. it was like the slush fund. it was a clinton put cooperation that have the name foundation. so we wanted to explain from the beginning what it was and what it was not. host: with that in mind, what is it not and what is the hybrid? guest: it is a charitable foundation. a large and wealthy one. it does a lot of good. it channels money to great causes. interesting thing is that it is
7:48 am
not -- it was not built in any deliberate way. it was not like they sat down when clinton got out of cause asked when clinton got out of office and say we will go into this area or that. jimmy carter has done focused things with similar topics, so it was not like that. the topics the clinton foundation is involving itself in is the things that caught clinton's eye. age in africa. child obesity. the only thing they have in common was him. he saw something he was interested in or his friends sought so they branched out. also, clinton thinks of himself as a convener. he is not a philanthropist that gathers money and spend it. if you have $1 billion, you can use the clinton foundation as a conduit and as it goes by clinton gives it his prestige.
7:49 am
the foundation also has an apparatus to see if or you are giving is working. that is the charitable part. along the way, there has been this involvement with the clinton political machine. bill clinton's a's had jobs in the foundation and as hillary clinton has prepared a second presidential run, some of her eight have been paid employees are consultants for the foundation. her political operation has been entwined with the foundation. host: what is the specific role of bill, hillary, and clinton and do they get paid? guest: they are not pay. they are on the foundation -- hillary is not. she was but now she is not. bill clinton gets paid to do speeches. he is paid by people who do donations and also gets paid for speeches on how the foundation works. so he does not get paid by the
7:50 am
foundation but by people who donate. host: it is not pay to the foundation and then directed to him? guest: been your times had a story about this charity run by a czhech model and he was paid to show there. and sometimes, you can pay him to show up or you could pay him to talk about the foundation how it does for the world. host: what about hillary clinton and -- guest: bill clinton set this up to be close to the wealthy and powerful. it is close to wealthy and powerful interests, take their money, and it blesses their money as it goes by and gives it the pristine each. that is how it works. that is how bill set it up.
7:51 am
not a hillary clinton wants to run for president, this same feature, all those people, it looks like they paid exclusively to be an exclusive clinton family network. and if she becomes president these interests can say they gave to the bill, hillary, and chelsea clinton foundation. she could have firewall this off, saying this is her husband's foundation and she admires the work. but she chose tom price find herself with it that makes it hard for her to say that -- host: whether firewalls in place when she was secretary of state? guest: yes. she had a different job and there was a lot of this closure. the moment the administration set limits on what kinds of countries and people could you to the foundation. that was imperfect because the foundation had rogan and said
7:52 am
independent entities. it appeared some of those did not follow those rules as well as the main foundation, but that was the arrangement when she was secretary of state. now that she is not anymore, those rules have changed. host: david van pelt, lead writer of a piece looking at the clinton foundation at how it works on "the washington post." if you want to ask questions about what you have heard, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 for democrats, and for independents, (202) 748-8002. if you want to tweak your thoughts, @cspanwj and post on our facebook at facebook.com/cspan. the foreign governments angle how many foreign countries is the clinton foundation have a roller presence in? guest: i would say 180 were their work is in. only about 195 countries according to the state department. they have their presence in a lot of countries.
7:53 am
a lot of the work is done by the clinton health access initiative which was supposed to lower the cost of aids drugs and countries. they lower the cost, gets drugs to provide lower-cost drugs, but also do work to make sure the countries that get those drugs find aids patients, test people and get the drugs that most efficiently. that is what a lot of there on the ground impact area but they get impact in 180 countries. host: one of those countries that came out in those is sweden. could you tie that up for us? guest: i do not know much about that. someone else handle that. if i talked about it, i might be wrong. as far as i understand, it had to do with the rules of whether certain countries could donate to the foundation but i do not
7:54 am
know enough to talk about it. host: john from montana, you are on our independent line. go ahead. caller: your young guest mentioned the fact that what caught bill clinton's i was foundations he wanted to get to and things he wanted to help. i can think of other things that caught his eye. i will like your guest to a comment on the past scandals. even the pedophile guy who flew to an island. where there is smoke, there is fired, young man. i would like him to comment on that. guest: the scandal part of bill clinton, one of the things i will say, the role -- you can read this foundation as a way for clinton to transform his persona. he goes out of office under a sort of cloud. we talked a lot how in 2001
7:55 am
after leaving office, he sort of lost. his wife is in the senate, his daughter is at stanford and then oxford. he is stuck at home and stewing about legal bills and all the bad press. apparently someone had given him a tivo -- steven spielberg -- and he sat watching old movies. i think he was both a loans -- alone and lost it did not have a sense of his role in the world and unhappy that he had gone out on this low note after being president eight years. a lot of the work he has done in the foundation is him repositioning himself in the world. if you look back at where he was and where he is now being able to be in a global conference dedicated to him the wealthy being with him -- giving money to be with him. that is an amazing turnaround. host: chicago heights, illinois annette, you're up next. caller: i have a, and question
7:56 am
about hillary clinton. i think that nobody really cares about how much money she has. most people are concerned about what she can do for us. we are not concerned about who she is working with as far as the initiatives. she sounds like someone who cares about our issues. income inequality. voting rights. trying to help every day blue-collar workers get ahead. that is all we care about. we understand that republicans are angry and they are the ones who kind of a strict and make things difficult for working-class people. my question is, why it is no one talking about the republican money? there are a lot of rich republicans running and no one is talking about their money. i can tell you one thing. myself and my friends, we only
7:57 am
care about what she can do for us. we think she's and's -- we think she stands for the working-class americans. guest: that is an interesting question about whether clinton's money matters. i see your point about what it matters is what she cares about. it is different with the foundation. the clinton foundation is a charitable organization that does not pay hillary clinton. the question is her associations with people on wall street and around the world, rich countries. and the political context, there is something related to her wealth. the problem for her politically is going to be we have seen her casting herself as a champion of the middle class. taking some of the language john edwards and those of war and has used. there are two americas. the rich have too much and the poor have too little and there is too much income inequality.
7:58 am
the associations she has treated in the foundation and the connections she made their and her own personal wealth will be used against her if that is the message she is trying to use because in an academic or political sense, she understands the importance of pushing for the middle class, but it is not something she can feel and her bones with the life she leaves and the people she is associated with. host: does she get called out for that kind of thing? guest: i am sure. think about marco rubio, scott walker. if we get into a general election, one of those guys says my dad grew up bussing tables, in the case of marco rubio. i built myself up from nothing i still ride my motorcycle. all of the cultural associations those guys will bring up if they end up running against hillary clinton in the general election. even if she has the right rhetoric, she has no cultural touch downs and part of these associations and because she has basically been in public office
7:59 am
since 1992 and even before then, the governor's mansion. it will be hard for her to create the sense that she understands it. host: little rock, arkansas. richard, good morning. caller: we have no they -- we have known about the clinton since they started here. a quick question and comment. as i understand, the foundation pays out less than 25% of the money it takes in to charity. so if you donate one dollar, $.75 goes in and they are paying for meals and salaries in all that and $.25 or less goes to the actual charities. as far something else another caller said, you hang around with and how you make your money is important. there is a reason the clintons have not carry arkansas in any presidential election. just see what hillary has done since she got into public office. judge her from that. guest: the question about the
8:00 am
way the foundation accounts for its money. there have been a lot of reports about that. there are two main organizations that rate charities. they look at their finances and decide whether they are giving enough to the causes they claim to focus on. something like 80 or 90% of their money actually goes to a charitable purpose. it is confusing because it depends on whether you count travel pair a lot of what the clinton foundation uses is called the clinton global initiative, what i was discussing earlier. a giant convention in new york every year. produces a lot of the pledges and commitments they use the rest of the year. if you count that as a convention, it looks like they give a less fraction of their money to charitable work. if you counted as charitable work, it looks like a lot more. the foundation got an a out of a skill ago's to a plus.
8:01 am
-- scale that goes to a+. host: does provide a way to measurably prove whether this foundation is having an effect? guest: the clinton foundation as i said earlier, if you give a bunch of money, $100 million part of my gift is giving money to the clinton foundation to monitor that gift. they say all but a tiny fraction less than 10% of their commitments after know to be successful. that is their accounting for it, not my accounting. we did not go back and look at all of those hundreds of pledges. but if you listen to them, they say more than 90% are successful. host: is a normal for a foundation not to be funded by the people setting it up? guest: that is what is so interesting about this story. you think of a foundation, you
8:02 am
think of andrew carnegie or any of these american philanthropist swear they matched money and gave it away. clinton has this interesting view he calls himself the convener. he takes rich people's money and wrangles it, packages that for war people. it has a much greater impact than his own personal wealth though that is pretty great. the downside is you are tied to the people whose money -- back to come down in a couple of wasted one thing you're worried about is people whose money you convene might run out of money. clinton sat next to a interparty nest a millionaire. they go to africa together. they set up a $100 million fund funded by this guy. that is before the financial crisis. tom was is a lot of money and cannot spend $100 million. the thing they set up with him with his money helping small
8:03 am
farmers and coffee farmers come all the sudden he can only afford to fund part of it. that is one downside and the other is what we are seeing lately. both in haiti and in other places, it turns out those people by associating with clinton, at these big conferences, they have made lucrative deals and those folks have used the clinton foundation in a way that was not completely charitable. you could argue whether that is an unfortunate side effect or a fine side effect. that affects your view of the clinton foundation there that is the downside, you do not control whose money comes in. you do not control what they do with that. host: david fahrenthold talking about the clinton foundation. europe next, good morning. caller: i want to recap what the
8:04 am
german said about the clinton foundation. i know he is trying to remain neutral. it seems to me going thing he can report is that the clinton foundation, a hybrid. however he said is not useful for political purposes. they're not getting paid off of it. they do not receive a paycheck. if bill clinton did not run the clinton foundation, he still would see large checks. george bush, 30% in our own country, but he still receives large checks. it seems to me someone can run a capitalist company and they receive less questions about her husband who is an organization that takes from the wealthy and gives to the poor. the clintons have been around a long time and i think maybe if
8:05 am
foxnews wants to focus on something, they can find it out there. to use a charity i have heard the number on fox news. 25%? you are saying they're giving more than 80 or 90% going directly to the work. can you answer this question for me -- do you find any quid pro quo? that is what we have heard. clinton goes to people and promises them favors in order to get a donation to the clinton foundation, as if she cannot do it in a better way. i appreciate ringing on such a neutral guy, but you can let the cat out of a bag. there is nothing wrong with this program. thank you very much. guest: let's start with that question. we did not find any p or what we were doing in the story was not
8:06 am
to look for that kind of thing in any particular donation third it was to tell the story of how it began any -- and got to where it is today p or my colleagues did a lot of other reporting about individual gifts and relationships through the clinton foundation. today we did not find it or included in the story, it was not really the purpose to dig that deeply into the relationship. i do not think secretary clinton's is greater detractors or promise a secret quid pro quo. i know a lot of folks will be looking at that. it does not exist. to talk about the foundation and how we should think about it related to hillary clinton, to me the most important point is what i said earlier about the idea where there should have been or could have been a firewall between her and the foundation. if the foundation were purely bill clinton's, and there were be a second order of whether
8:07 am
somebody give a big order to clinton's's foundation, he has his own global standing. it is operably easier for her to defend. the degree to which she hand her aides and ideas have been wrapped into this, after she is secretary of state she comes back to the foundation and starts a couple of initiatives that are primarily her ideas about helping women around the world, small businesses. the degree to which she has wrapped her own people and ideas and identity in the foundation, not to say there is anything wrong with that but it will make it harder for her to say, there was nothing there. because she has chosen to be part of the foundation in a way she had not been before. host: one name that comes up is sidney blumenthal. guest: a long time clinton aide for a long time. after bill clinton left office,
8:08 am
he had one point got a consulting job from the clinton foundation geared at that time, hillary clinton was secretary of state and sidney blumenthal was a reporter for the new york times, that channel intelligence from libya. libya was sort of chaotic and they were trying to figure out what to do there. he was sending these that channel television reports. he was working for businessmen who had investments in libya hoping one particular group of people in one particular set of outcomes happen spare passing this intelligence to hillary clinton not an entirely new trolled server. it was an interesting view. you can see it in the mouth. a hacker found them. even though this guy is not in libya, does not know that much about libya as soon as that intelligence comes in, she passes that out to the main state. it raised questions about the degree to which cronies would
8:09 am
have that kind of influence even though they do not have actual expertise. that person was employed by the clinton foundation briefly. host: amir, hello. caller: thank you for accepting my call. as we were warned 30 years ago tom a we must stand up against evil. as your guest is implying, the clinton foundation, the clintons are evil. thank you. guest: i have gone from neutral observer downhill pretty quickly. it is important for us to talk about this foundation in as detailed a possible way. understand how it works because it will be a big deal in the next year. it is one of the most important things in her family's's life and her life. it certainly will be a campaign issue. the sooner we understand what it
8:10 am
is and how it works, the better we will evaluate her. if we do strawmen, one that it is a red cross or an evil slush fund, we will not figure out how it works. host: texas, pat, go ahead. caller: i was wondering how much investigations you have done on similar foundations like the reagan foundation, carson foundations, they all do the same thing here is what is so different from the clintons and how much does jeb bush -- benefited from obamacare? guest: the interesting comparison with past residential foundations, it is interesting but not that obstructive shared none of those, at least the most recent folks would run again for president. a lot of times, the foundation
8:11 am
mainly focuses on the library. jimmy carter has done some work on habitat for humanity. that is what makes this an interesting story for us. there is a potential, this was created to be a permanent residency for bill clinton. it is seen by outsiders in a and you see the foundation trying to retool itself to be the foundation of a future possible president. two totally said -- total sets of needs. no one is really looking hard at what our next president does and future presidents because it is totally different and a much more severe set of needs. greater demand for transparency. one transition into the other we have never seen that before. host: have there been discussions about how it should operate if hillary clinton becomes president of the united
8:12 am
states question mark -- states? guest: yes. the fundraising has been great when hillary clinton is running for president. they made a lot of money. hillary clinton runs for and becomes resident, then you cannot have a sitting president taking donations from these equal. her role would have to diminish and the foundation itself would have to change. he wanted to do things mainly overseas because he wanted to stay out of the way of domestic politics. a sitting president, where would you put something that it would not affect the domain of the president of the united states, that would be really hard. the last few years of the clinton foundation, the fundraising has been partly based on the idea that maybe hillary clinton will become president or become powerful again. if that does not happen where does this go? what is the endpoint and what
8:13 am
does it take him? either way, the outcome of the election will change the foundation. host: washington, d.c. caller: i had a question and a brief comment. who were the top 10 donors to the foundation or to you the most interesting donors and what do they expect to gain from giving that money and rubbing elbows? my question or suggestion is i wish they would also, and i like bill clinton and i think he is a nice guy. but i wish they would focus on 600,000 residents of our nation's capital who cannot vote according to the constitution for u.s. senate or the house of representatives. some of that money helping us people here in our own capital who are legally prohibited from casting the vote for office. we have no voice or our own
8:14 am
government at all. also, how about a few more public toilets. their only two and the whole city of washington dc. that is my comment, my requests. guest: on d.c. voting rights, one thing that has not been done at all is political activism. they had not really done a political accent -- you just have to find bill clinton. you can find bill clinton, shake his hand and talk to him, there is a chance that will happen. this foundation focuses on elephant poaching in africa, childhood obesity in america crop yields in rwanda, they are all over the place. it could be one of their causes. host: another question, if bill clinton decided he wanted to place her time in the white house -- guest: i do not know.
8:15 am
because it is not a typical philanthropic organization and it is not like there is a giant sum of money, there is some money, it where you just headed off in that person could give the money away, he is the engine that makes it work, and you need him flying around the world giving speeches. it would not be there if he were the first gentleman. i cannot imagine he would have the kind of freedom to do his own freelancing project. imagine the headaches that would create if the gentlemen were there shaking hands with all these people, all these heads of countries, which we have very nuanced relationships. host: roger, new hampshire. caller: the republicans are the ones that, because they're trying to do stuff hillary ended up having citizens united past, citizens united has allowed a
8:16 am
lot of donors donors to be tax-free. to me, it is ridiculous. i would like to see transparency of all the donors, political organizations. that is my comment. guest: anyone wants to run including her will have to take advantage of that system. no way she could win without disarming herself to her when she comes into the office, she would be crusading for fighting politics and probably be an north beneficiary of politics. you can see that now it is created, it would be hard to fix. host: new york, caps on, you're up next with our guest. caller: i would like to say, the democrats try to see what hillary will do for everybody. she is just lying the does the last time i saw her talking, it
8:17 am
was the lady asking for a picture and said, you better get to the back of the line. back of the line. the rich ones in the front. for everyone to see what she said, that his state. she does not agree to talk to any reporters yes, everybody for everywhere. [indiscernible] the rest of what is going on. thank you very much. thank you. good morning. guest: talking about hillary clinton's put glass durations. i wrote another story this morning about was interesting about hillary clinton in iowa in 2008 and why she did not catch on and what caused her political demise back then. it will be interesting to see, aside from the foundation
8:18 am
whether hillary clinton do what obama did last time around, which is not just inspire people to respect her but actually make people feel like they're being swept along in something greater than themselves. part of that will be cultural identifications. people will feel like hillary clinton is like them or understands them in some way. given the life she has led to the success of herself and her husband, she is coming from a different place. host: you wrote a line in your piece. the clinton's charitable causes for aids and allies and indirectly for the clintons themselves, for the a's and allies. we talked about sidney blumenthal. guest: the state department was paid a second salary by the clinton foundation. was paid consulting between the
8:19 am
state department and hillary running for president. there have been other fundraisers and it worked for hillary clinton and also the foundation. that is just her aides and allies. look back at bill clinton. the top person at the white house runs in a's drug initiative. there been other folks, the body man in the white house, is sort of one of the top people in the foundation for a long time, who sort of came up with the idea for the clinton global initiative. a lot of infrastructure from the clinton foundation was carried over from the white house. you can see a lot of the same infighting for bills time that you saw in the white house among people. host: do businessmen benefit from that especially from their associations through the foundation? guest: of course. frank, a canadian mining tycoon who has funded a lot of clinton's's work at the foundation especially helping countries through mining is
8:20 am
prevalent. met the president of a couple of different countries. met two countries who later signed a lucrative uranium mining deals. not only does your name get to be on the gift, but you often physically go with him to these countries to inspect what you have done or set up a deal. often folks who have come along with clinton have made lucrative deals with the heads of state. host: tony is up next. caller: good morning. everyone knows bill clinton is an economic genius.he balanced the national budget. left george bush with a surplus that he squandered. the comment i really want to make is everybody is trying to make this a campaign issue for
8:21 am
hillary. she went for the democratic nomination, but she is not here there are a lot of democrats that feel like me. they are just -- they just really do not trust hillary. i am looking at some other candidates. bill clinton is going to make money, but talking like she is an automatic nominee, i do not think that is the case. that is my question or comment. thank you for your time. guest: it is interesting you say that. the folks with hillary clinton bernie sanders and martin o'malley, no one are taking them seriously as challengers but that could change. the perception a lot of folks have of the clintons, even folks who are democrats see the clintons as ending the rules. just the idea if they remember the first clinton presidency that you have to spend a lot of your time defending the clintons in these ways were it is not
8:22 am
really cut and dry what they did, that kind of frustration are we about to go into another time of what is the meaning of this and me defending the clintons, if i am a democrat, i think that weighs on people. if the foundation creates that kind of fatigue, it can hurt hillary clinton the primary or later on. host: can all those phone or debt foreign donors make direct touch visions in their own country? guest: that is the genius of the foundation. at the clinton global initiative they are in front of angelina jolie and bill gates and bono. you get to ponds age and be honored with bill clinton. if you just give money to some cause somewhere else, you do not get that prestige, you do not get to have your name on something with bill clinton. that is powerful even for people who are incredibly wealthy. the mexican telecom billionaire, one of the richest men in the world, it would not seem like he
8:23 am
needed extra prestige or gravitas, but that is someone who has gravitated to bill clinton. he is to go to bill clinton's speeches, right down lists of top 10 orders around the world even people like that see a benefit associated with bill clinton on stage. that is the genius of the clinton foundation. to get a piece of clinton prestige, they get -- host: what about nonprofits? do they get the same access? guest: if you want to sponsor the foundation, $250,000. if you just want a ticket for your company it can be twice thousand dollars per ticket. but they have a way for nonprofits, to get in for reduced rates or for free. they are there also, but obviously the whole thing is set up, it is a big moneymaker for the clinton foundation because
8:24 am
these companies want to be there. host: jane, columbus, ohio, thank you for holding on. you are up next here good morning. are you there? caller: yes. i have a statement. i think it is great people are donating money to the clinton foundation where they go and help other people. you have to have rich people donate. poor people will not be able to donate the kind of money they need but when it comes to the presidency, nobody talks about how much money it takes to put a man or a woman into the presidency. guest: i think that is right. you need a lot of money to become president.
8:25 am
that is sort of a different side of hillary clinton. she will need a lot of money and a lot of political donations if she will make a successful run for president. i do not want people to get the idea of a mingle with the foundation. the foundation is a separate entity. it is not a part of the presidency to those things are separate. they are not the same thing. host: there is a listing of all the various arms of the clinton foundation, a good deal of them starting -- does it only -- only go to clinton foundation programs, or does it donate to other charities outside the clinton foundation? guest: it makes grants to other charities but a lot of them are funneled. a healthier generation come
8:26 am
after clinton had emergency heart surgery, she partnered with the american heart association, that is a huge program trying to get -- in schools, which employs hundreds of people in schools around the country, that of its own thing. it is kind of broken off into its own thing. host: james in houston, texas, you're on. go ahead. caller: is that me? i'm sorry. my comment was, i was just wondering when they come out of office when he was president hillary was complaining they were just totally broke and like he was going to have to get in line for food. how come none of this ever comes up when she is getting ready to run for president and telling all these lies? i do not understand how that works?
8:27 am
host: go ahead. guest: that was something she said early in the preparations for the presidential run. at that time, there was a lot of fun raising requirements for the presidential library in arkansas. the comment i think she said was not flat broke in the way regular people understand flat broke. obviously, if you look now, the change in their network has been just incredible. part of that is due to any president, as an earlier caller said, can make a lot of money giving speeches. but there is an extra -- that is the great thing about the clinton foundation, as she blesses the money, the my also blesses him. he gets to be a greater global figure and become more demand run the world, the more he convenes the money. host: are there programs the
8:28 am
clinton foundation decided to stop, because of lack of interest? guest: one major program. it helped get the clinton foundation its start. clinton's moves from the base of operations in arkansas where they were building the library to new york, where hillary was a senator. she says i am a small business woman, i want to get better, but i do not know how to get better. he set up a whole mentoring program to show small businesses to understand things like marketing, websites. it expands to nine cities. we talked to a lot of people who are really involved in this and thought it was a great program. it and. it is not scalable. it is too much work per person to go around the world to it with the clinton foundation likes to do, it is mostly about bringing in money as found was
8:29 am
people in that program found it to be, it was not scalable. it is one major initiative they shut down. host: david fahrenthold and others, you can find it online. communist, we will talk with peter loftus from the wall street journal talking about the pharmaceutical industry -- drug shortages and white is happening. that is as "washington journal" continues. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> the new congressional directory is a handy guide with color photos of every senator and house -- and twitter
8:30 am
handles. also, a full doubt map of capitol hill, and a look at congressional committees. president passes cap, federal agencies. order your copy today. through the c-span online store. >> this summer booktv will cover book festivals. near the end of june, watch for the annual roosevelt reading festival from the presidential library. in the middle of july, the harvard book fair with author interviews and channel discussions. at the beginning of september, we are live from the nation's capital. that is a few of the events this summer on c-span2's booktv. "washington journal" continues. host: joining us from
8:31 am
philadelphia is peter loftus, who covers the pharmaceutical industry. good morning. a recent sorry -- story of yours , possible set of drug shortages that take place in the united states, here is drug line. peter loftus, first of all, what do we mean when we say drug shortage? guest: it would just be a drug in short supply so it is not enough to go around to meet the demand by patients and doctors. host: give some examples. what are the drugs that are not in supply? guest: one i focus on is bcg, a treatment for bladder cancer. early stage, after somebody undergoes a procedure. bcg can be given over a time of
8:32 am
few months to two -- two a few years to help prevent a relapse of the cancer. that drug has been in short supply recently. the companies that make it have experience some production problems. this is one of the common features of a lot of these shortages. the company is making the drug, but they run into some sort of issue with potential or actual contamination of the drug, so they have to scale back production in order to fix the problem, fix the equipment, and while they are doing that, that contributes to the shortages and that is what happened in this case. host: the company that makes these types of drugs, are they required to build up backlogs
8:33 am
supply, so in case something like this happens -- guest: i not sure there is an actual requirement from a legal or law perspective. i think companies try to do that. in this case i really only as of a couple of years ago, there were only two suppliers for this drug. it was an older drug, derived from the bacteria that causes tuberculosis. in fact, it is a reformulation of a much older vaccine. it is actually a complex product to make and it involves using live bacteria and they converted into a liquid solution that has to be sterile obviously because it is given to the patient. because of the complexity and cost of manufacturing that jim
8:34 am
is limiting of the pull of manufacturers. there were only two as of a couple years ago. as of three years ago, there were some problems at a manufacturing plant in toronto where they were making this product, including mold contamination. obviously, that is not a good thing, so they ended up shutting down a plant and temporarily suspending production. that left one other supplier for the u.s. market, and mer c double door more than doubled production to try to meet demand. but they ran into more of a hiccup compared to the problem last year, so that compounded the problem with other was basically a six week time where none was produced. even though production has resumed, there is still sort of
8:35 am
a backlog. host: drug shortages in the united states with our guest, peter loftus. if you have questions for him -- go ahead and call and we will take those calls in a couple of moments. not only those specific drugs you talked about, but overall, when it comes to this corner -- quarter, two legit 65 drugs in short supply. guest: that number is down slightly from late last year but it is up about 75% from i've years ago. it is an increasing problem and i should point out there was a big rash of new shortages that cropped up about four or five years ago. the number of new shortages does
8:36 am
seem to be coming down, but the total number of ongoing shortages is still relatively high. host: as far as trends are concerned, is this something the united states has always had in shortages? guest: i think there has probably always been some level of shortage but it has become more of an issue in the past five to 10 years. there are some explanations for that if you wanted to get into it. one of the contributive factors appears to be the reimbursement system for medicare and private insurers, for drugs that are administered by doctors in physicians offices or at hospitals. there is a reimbursement system where the reimbursement rate is more frugal van for certain other kinds of drugs.
8:37 am
it makes it tough for companies to raise prices because then that customers will feel a pinch because they are being reimbursed based on trailing average prices. that seems to be one. another is the activities of the fda. a number of years ago, you might remember there was a big scandal with a drug and that led to patient deaths. it led to a lot of accusations that the fda was not keeping on top of making sure the drug manufacturing plants were here -- adhering to the quality standards. both in the u.s. and abroad. so they took some steps to try to increase inspection activities or to be more rigorous. a lot of times when you look at
8:38 am
these drug shortages you will see the company was having a problem. the fda visited, identified problems that may have already been identified, but also additional problems. and they said you really need to fix this. so the companies would respond by either scaling back production or just entirely shutting down of land. host: we will talk more with our guest about the jerks supply in the united states. once again, the lines -- let's hear first up from tom and maryland. democrats line. good morning. you are on with our guest peter loftus from the wall street journal. go right ahead. caller: i think probably some of this has to do with the fact that the older drugs are less expensive than the newer drugs.
8:39 am
they have drugs that cost much more. one does good jobs in small doses. they put it in a black box. the ekg changes so they want to see his other drugs. they all prolong the cardiac rhythm. i do not know -- i do not know if there really are shortages because of contamination. guest: that is a good point, tom. one of the drugs image in my story.
8:40 am
, a doctor i think a nebraska who i talked to who said he couldn't get his hands on it. he describes it as in addition to preventing nausea, as you mentioned, it is used for other purposes in the er, for treating migrants. and he has not been able to get his hands on it. one potential explanation, a lot of these are older and generic the prices are relatively low, and those are the ones that seem to be having the shortage problems. in contrast, when you think about a newer drug that people use and is promoted, those jobs tend to be higher price and not as much in shortage as these older drugs. i think there is probably a
8:41 am
correlation. any manufacturer -- deciding which just to make with a limited capacity. that might play into the shortage issue. host: from tampa florida, you're next. caller: about year and a half ago on c-span washington journal, there was an expert talking about new changes and drug manufacturing guidelines. he was saying that increasingly american drug companies are using inactive and even active product being manufactured in china and india. when you have these sources from these unreliable countries, is that a big cause why these american drug companies are having problems, because they are relying on these companies instead of manufacturing here the u.s. and and they have to shut down because fda defines quality is an issue? guest: that is a good point as
8:42 am
well. i think that is also one of the factors. the supply chain for prescription drugs is becoming increasingly globalized. you do have plans in india and china that seem to be running into issues. the fda does in a sense have jurisdiction over them. they do send inspectors to those countries to inspect those plans, if that ingredient will end up in a product sold here. as i mentioned earlier, there was that scandal and that is a clear illustration of what can go wrong. i think the fda has increased inspections of those foreign plants. it is a question of whether that is to the satisfaction of everybody. you do still have a number of
8:43 am
companies in india, for example, they get their products but on what they call it import alert where they are basically not allowed to sell a certain drug product here is fda inspectors have found some sort of problem in one of their plants over and india. i would also point out there are plans in the u.s. that it had manufacturing and contamination issues. host: when it comes to the reason for shortages a story 25% goes to manufacturing and 70% goes to supply and demand. business decisions about 10%. p loftus, almost 50% are listed as unknown. is there anyway to clarify what factors go into the unknown category as far as the reasons for shortages? guest: that is a good question. i think the fda has increasing
8:44 am
requirements and some of it is legislation the past few years ago. and companies -- it is possible the unknown category is left over from the time when fewer reporting requirements did not really have to say why. i do not have a good answer for that because i think they are an unknown category. host: rick from kentucky, democrats line. caller: has anyone looked into the fact that veterinarians are using a lot of these drugs without much supervision? one of them for lyme disease or tick disease, most of the time, they do not even have proof the dog or cat has the disease.
8:45 am
they also use a boatload of prednisone for everything, so has anyone at the fda looked at the facts these drugs have skyrocketed because of that use? i will take my answer off the air, thank you. guest: that is something i've heard about, drugs approved for human use and not animals. veterinarians prescribe them anyway. it can include anti--- antidepressants and things like that. to be honest, i do not know if those can be cited as a reason directly for shortages. it would seem to be a plausible as the nation if in fact the strokes are in shortage. i do not know if that is something. host: what recourses do they have find the drugs they need? guest: it has been a tough
8:46 am
situation for a lot of patience. -- patients. if they cannot get the drugs they need, it results in delay treatment, or they take reduced doses. there have been cases where patients have been put on waiting lists. just go back to the bladder cancer drug, the one i really focus on, it is sort of used in two ways. it is used up front to treat someone soon after they undergo the procedure to have the tumor removed, and that seems to be the used that has taken priority, so a lot of doctors and hospitals have said, we do not have enough to go around, let's use it for the patients who have just undergone the procedure and we will give it to them for six weeks, but then for
8:47 am
the patients who would take the drug after that, the maintenance therapy, some of those patients are just not getting it. so in those cases, they might be switched to a less effective alternative. chemotherapy is one that studies have shown bcg can be more effective than chemotherapy in preventing a relapse. there's not enough to go around so some patients have to get the chemotherapy. host: for republicans -- for democrats -- peter loftus, or people traveling to other countries to find drugs? guest: i am not hearing you to all right now. host: i asked if people are traveling to other countries to find the drugs they need.
8:48 am
let's go to bury from island heights, new jersey, independent line. caller: thank you, c-span. federal agencies should be supported by taxes and politicians know it is death to their reelection possibilities if they ask for taxes. the fbi -- the fda came out he does years ago and stated they needed $300 million to support their generic drug evaluation the side of their -- evaluation business. these fees are standardized, and i'm just talking about generic drugs right now. when they came out the fda said every manufacturer of generic drugs has to pay the when they started, it was 117,000 dollars annually. if you made one generic drug, you paid 170,000.
8:49 am
if you made 1000, you paid 100 $70,000. today, an annual fee is over 247 and -- $247,000. if you made one generic drug, you now pay $247,000. the reason why the fee is raised is because the number of generic drug manufacturers have gone out of business because of the fee. they lost 65 manufacturing facilities during the past three years because of those fees. if you look at the advisory group for fda everyone of the generic drug advisory groups makes in excess of 500 generic drugs. the problem is they should be charging based on the number of generic drugs you make. that would level the playing field. host: we will have our guest response. peter loftus, is there anything you want to take from that? guest: i am not too familiar.
8:50 am
i'm familiar with the fees charged to generic drug companies, and it is not something it came up when i looked into the reason for the shortages. somewhat related to that, there seems to be a backlog in the fda approval of generic drug applications. in a way if there were increased funding that reflects the number of drugs the company makes, to cover the review of new drug applications, there are people who do think that could potentially help alleviate the shortages. host: ohio, this is gerald. how are you? caller: ok. this seems to be a very good reporter from the wall street journal. a lot of investigation into the trap of drugs. it seems they have taken over
8:51 am
the aspects of money making aspect, to the detriment of all other drugs, including the vaccines we need. it is called the citizens commission on human rights violation. a pulitzer prize because that is the mother lode of what the problem is, including what he has discovered with the fda and other federal agencies. i'm sure the wall street journal would probably have the resources to get into this. the commission on human rights. host: mr. loftus? guest: i am sorry. i missed the first part of the question because of technical difficulties. host: why don't we try another call, let's hear from alan. caller: ok. i hope this is coming through ok.
8:52 am
this is speaker phone on a cell phone. i became aware of this a long time ago and i noticed going back, i have an article on my lap top right now ismp from 2001, who were already pulling pharmacist and having extremely difficult supply chain problems. recently, i noticed an article from a foundation. what i am seeing is a lot have to be compounded. all compounded pharmaceuticals that have to be made for legal applications are other methods they are going to be really impacted. a lot of physicians i talked to are scrambling in different specialties to find solutions to
8:53 am
that. right now, the way the outsourcing is happening and probably a good example was, i just became aware of being not available is a medicine, a drug used off label for hypersomnia. suppliers are no longer allowed to bring the base material in the u.s. because they did not check the supply chain accurately so it is completely dead. guest: i think talking about solutions, the fda has taken some steps to head off these shortages and i think some other solutions, there have been a number of solutions proposed out there.
8:54 am
the buyers of these drugs could strengthen the supply contracts with manufacturers to ensure there are no interruptions in supplies. if there are, there are heavy penalties. some people have floated the idea of incentives for some of these companies, like tax credits or other incentives to continue making these drugs and to invest in them. i do not know how that would fly politically. the drug companies already get research and development tax credits. some people have even talked about the idea of stockpiling that if you make a list of essential medicines, there could be some sort of government provision to stockpile them and -- in case there is a major action problem, that would not deprive patients of the medicine. host: what is the role of the
8:55 am
fda in notifying the public about truck shortages? guest: they have a list on their website of all the jugs and shortage. they send out periodic updates -- the drugs in shortage. they send out periodic updates whether a shortage has been resolved or not p are they also recently came out with a mobile app that you could check on your device if a drug was in shortage or even use that apt to report a drug shortage. host: charles in virginia you are with peter loftus from the wall street journal. caller: i have been listening to this and it blows my mind. i do not really buy into and believe there is any kind of shortage in the drug pharmaceutical business. i think it is just a fiasco or a system of just jacking up the prices.
8:56 am
wherever there is a shortage there will be a need of the patient one morning trying to get, in desperation, the medication. he will go anywhere or pay anything. it is just like the oil business. i just do not i into the shortages. i experienced this with one of my blood pressure medicines and after doing some research, i found out it went from five dollars to $50 for a months supply. i checked with my family doctor. he shook his head and said, that is the thing with the drug people. they were not making money off of the old medication so they jack up the price. again, i think it all has to do with getting pharmaceutical companies richer, getting more money in their pocket, and the sad part about it is the patient
8:57 am
, like this cancer drug you have been talking about it is just like the oil and gasoline at four dollars per gallon. i just do not buy into shortages . and they have got think tanks that i am sure sit there and just try to analyze and figure out, how can they get more money on the medication. host: we will let our guest respond. thank you for the call. guest: that is certainly an understandable sentiment. the issue of pricing is a big one. i think a lot of the newer drugs that come out, especially for cancer, they have priced ties of over 100,000 per patient if they're used for -- per year. i can understand why people would see that, you know, that
8:58 am
companies want to focus on drugs with high prices, but the thing is, i have not come across any evidence that would suggest a company intentionally limited the supply of a drug just to jack up the price of that drug. what does sometimes happen, and this is the subject of a congressional report a couple of years ago, there are these gray market distributors. they sort of operate outside the authorized network for drug distribution. when they see there is a shortage, they get their hands on whatever they can of that drug. in turn, they sell it to hospitals and dr. practices at a marked up rice. -- price. there is evidence that happens. in those cases, the middlemen gets the windfall and not necessarily the drug company. i'm not ruling out the
8:59 am
possibility, but i just did not have any direct evidence. host: is there oversight? any requirements of it? guest: the committees that investigated it i think in that case they acted as oversight. the fda may have some role, but i'm not 100% sure. host: from illinois, good morning. caller: i'm a vietnam veteran. i was listening to a previous caller talking about the drugs and i notice a lot of vets from afghanistan on the straws, -- these drugs, they him out. i also think -- space them out. i also think they are making money, like all these other drugs.
9:00 am
-- companies. they drain them like a parasite. thank you very much. host: mr. loftus? guest: again as far as the company's jacking up the prices, they do raise prices for when they entered is new drug they charge high prices. as far as direct evidence of companies intentionally causing a shortest -- shortage to drive up price of a drug, that, i do not have evidence for. host: are less call -- our last call then. inindependent line. caller: i'm wondering how the free market affects drug prices. guest: that is a good question. i think in the u.s., the market
9:01 am
for the drugs does more closely resemble what some people might call a free market or total capitalist market. that is partially because the buyers, the piers for these drugs are very fragmented. in other countries, in europe you have a national health system where a single tire -- single-payer is the buyer for most drugs. as a result of that, they are sort of the only game in town. they have a lot of leverage. in the u.s., medicare is a big buyer, but for certain drugs, they are not really about to negotiate -- allowed to negotiate prices. they have to pay whatever the companies charge. then, you have a whole other segment of private insurers, or drug benefit plans, they are
9:02 am
paying for these. no single plan is big enough to have the leverage to push down prices. i do think that companies try to the extent that they can, in the u.s., to charge what the market can bear. i also think there is increasing resistance to that and p push back from insurance companies and politicians who want to get medicare the power to negotiate these drug prices. host: our guest covers the pharmaceutical industry for the "wall street journal." if you want to read a story about drug shortages, go to the "wall street journal is quote website. in our last segment, we take a look -- it is our regular "your money" segment. we look at the transportation
9:03 am
security administration. i guess, chad wolf, former administrator at the association will join the conversation as "wall street journal -- washington journal" continues after this. ♪ >> this summer booktv will cover book festivals from around the country. near the end of june, watch for the annual roosevelt reading festival. in the middle of july, we arrive at the harlem book fair with author interviews and held discussions. at the beginning of september, we are live from the nation's capital for the national book festival, celebrating its 15th year. those are a few of the events this summer on c-span two's booktv. >> tonight on "the communicators" at this year's
9:04 am
consumer electronics show, we met up with michael who says that the internet is not the answer. >> the internet is not the answer at the moment. it is lending itself to undermining jobs. it is compounding inequality of our economic rise spirit it is creating new massive monopolies that were unimaginable in the 19th of 20 a century. and, it is creating a greater economy where we are all turned into products. you and i. we have been package. when we use google or facebook, we become the product, make a hitchcock -- like a hitchcock movie. >> "washington journal" continues. host: at this time of monday, it is the "your money" segment. joining us today for the
9:05 am
discussion is chad wolf. he works in washington, d.c. but before he was at the transportation security administration. thank you for joining us. our topic is tsa. tsa was in the news again last week due to a test that was conducted on the screen is. can you paraphrase what this test concerned and what it found out. guest: is testing the takes place at the checkpoint on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. tsa has red team testers there are always probing the checkpoint to see what they can and cannot smuggle through the checkpoint. what we saw was a very large failure rate. there it was a success rate and you want that. you want them probing the system. the startling point was the 96%
9:06 am
failure rate. almost everything they tried to smuggle, they were successful. host: how does it work? guest: essentially two different ways of they get through the check point. one is the concealed the item on their person and go through the checkpoint, or they can consider in their carry-on baggage, it goes through the x-ray machine and they get through that way. it is primarily that way, on the person or in your baggage. host: cap people, technology, and yet this failure rate. can you connect those things and why this is occurring? guest: i think there are a variety of reasons. it has been 13 years since 9/11. we have really not had a domestic event here in the u.s.. most of the events that we see from the aviation perspective are overseas. that does not touch on tsa screeners. the tsa workforce has not seen a
9:07 am
major incident of terrorism in the u.s. during in and day out, there's complacency. that is not only of the screeners, that is the supervisors. another one is the training at the checkpoint. isn't significant enough? and the third leg is the technology. i think what we have seen over the last several years is that technology at the checkpoint is not cutting it. you have walk through metal detectors but medical is not -- metal is not the enemy. it is weapons and explosives. used a two-dimensional x-ray. that was there two decades ago. i think they need to take a holistic look at the checkpoint. host: about $7 million spent on tsa. how much of that goes to the screeners? how much goes to the technology? where is the breakdown when it comes to security issues? guest: about $3.2 billion goes
9:08 am
to paying screeners and training the screeners. that is compensation benefits. outside of that, they have a capital fund for technology. you are looking at something between 350 million dollars to $400 million for both checkpoint and checked baggage. checked baggage is obviously what goes in the cargo hold. that is where the vast amount of money is spent. the checkpoint has been given the short stick. tsa has tried to do that on a limited budget, and i think we're seeing some consequences. host: chad wolf, if you saw it headline, like we did in "the hill" that would you have advised to your fellow colleagues at tsa. guest: we need to do something dramatic. it is not enough to say we have this under control. i think what you see here is a loss of confidence that the
9:09 am
american public has an tsa. i think you need to go to little radical in this case. i think you did a third-party group to come in and look at the checkpoint function. i think tsa has lost a bit of credibility in this realm. have them take a look at the checkpoint function. to be have the right technology? if we don't, what is the right technology? i think we need to have a comprehensive view, third-party to do that. host: if you have questions about how tsa operates the screeners, and security, here is your chance to ask the guests. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 745-8002 for independents. if you want to tweet your thoughts, you can do so at @cspanwj. the bureau of labor statistics
9:10 am
says about 43,000 screeners so far. tell us about who gets to be selected as is greater and what technical absence -- technical aspect you have to bring to the job. guest: there are minimum requirements. u.s. citizen ged, and then a rigorous background check process. it is all that checks out obviously this for the location of the airport you are applying for -- if all the checks out then you become a tsa screener. then training kicks in. you have 40 hours of classes before the job starts. you also have on-the-job training. then, you go into specialized training. throughout the course of the year, there is a variety of different trainings, recurrent training. there is a ready -- variety of different trainings and aspects. host: how often do these skills
9:11 am
get updated? how often does the additional training take place? guest: probably not often enough. from most screeners that i hear from one more training. it becomes an issue of resources , and what can be accomplished at that airport. host: (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. fair defendants -- for independents, (202) 745-8002. i guess not only works in washington, d.c. for wexler and walker but previously worked for tsa. guest: the checkpoint is such a big caution at tsa, a lot of different offices have a specific role. there are the operation folks who make sure that what is going on at the checkpoint is operationally feasible. there is policy behind the checkpoint procedures. that was part of my job, as well
9:12 am
as others. host: the tear from loretta in lucasfilm, ohio. you are on the chad wolf. go ahead. caller: i think the way things have been going, 5% success rate is high for washington. nobody gets fired up there no matter how incompetent they are. they just get shuffled to another job. i am one that is very disappointed in our government. no one has to answer for anything. guest: i think it is a good point. i think we saw here with the tsa idea minister being dismissed earlier last week points to the severity of the issue. that is not something that tsa does lightly. i think the dhs secretary made the right decision to replace the acting administrator at the tsa. i do, i think more needs to be done. i talk about a third-party group coming in to look at tsa operations, and i think that is the way to go. host: is a tsa screener is
9:13 am
having problems, how long before they are let go? guest: it will be a while. it depends on the problem. if they continue to miss items they will be dismissed. it is not a one-time sale and you are gone. they will go through recurrent remedial training procedures to get a chance to improve. host: from mobile, alabama, debbie is up next. hello. caller: i think they should fire all the tsa agents and put in marshals -- air marshals for every flight, with dogs, and get away from this total independent screening junk. when they are screening persons they should have a dog there with the screeners, and get completely away from tsa and that marshals and dogs handle everything. thank you. guest: a couple of thoughts. i think tsa has a robust canine
9:14 am
detection unit. they do use canines in the airport. obviously, the federal air marshals is part of tsa. that is on the aircraft themselves. i think there is value in having checked checkpoint and screeners. in many cases, that is the last line of defense is individuals are trying to get things on the aircraft. exactly how tsa conducts those operations is what is in question. are they doing it the most sufficient weight? host: one analyst look at this askeds -- no one has hijacked a plane with a knife or a gun since 9/11, not a single plate has blown up due to terrorism i understand this conclusion is counterintuitive, and contrary to the for monitoring we here.
9:15 am
do you agree? guest: it is tough. if you look at the tsa blog they confiscate hundreds of weapons. in some cases they are pocket knives in other cases they are weapons. there is a value that tsa provides at the checkpoint. our stocking a lot of prohibited items from getting on the aircraft. the question comes, is a weapon going to take down an it across? in most cases, probably not. what you are looking for our explosives that were think of the aircraft and caused the destruction that the terrorists once. you have to balance those. i don't think you can do one of nothing other. host: on that question, is tsa still stranger on liquids and the things you can bring on the play? is that still an issue? guest: absolutely. the screeners have a very difficult job. they have between five and eight seconds to decide whether or not they take a deeper look at a bag.
9:16 am
do i pat down the individual and the more intrusive patdown? the only way they could do that is if they have the technology. it comes to your question, the baggy, you have to take your laptop out. it all comes down to the line. screeners are trying to keep the line moving. in some cases, i think this can -- i think they are sacrificing their ability to find items. right now, i do not think they have the right tools in the toolbox. you have to look at more up-to-date technologies. some technology we are using the checked baggage room could be moved to the checkpoint. right now, we do have not heard anything about checked baggage policies. host: richard from virginia republican line, you are next. caller: how is it going? guest: good. caller: i have worked as a
9:17 am
security contractor for tsa. i worked for a technology company that was developing technology for tsa for checkpoint technology. i have worked at airports pretty much all over the world. i can honestly say that the biggest problem with security everywhere is management. you have people from the 1940's mentality running these checkpoints. one of the big problems is public attention -- public perception. that is due to people begin by -- being in line, waiting together playing, and not seeing anything to speed up the process. you are using metal detectors, and i will not get into the technology, but it is a waste of time. management has known that for 40 years. they have changed nothing. fire everybody from the
9:18 am
screener. the screen is not the problem. i trained screeners. every one of these guys want to do a good job. they are focused on trying to do the job, but they are not being given the right tools because there's too much bureaucracy at the top. too many people making $200,000 per year and not doing their job. that is the bottom by. it is the technology that will fix the problem. host: thanks. guest: i would agree with you. i think technology is a big part of this issue. you have to give the screen is the -- give the screeners the right tool in their toolbox. we have seen a variety of different technologies, some have worked, some have not. my opinion is that they have lost the credibility with capitol hill and the traveling
9:19 am
public. we need a third-party group to come in and take a holistic view , without preconceived notions of what should and should not be there, and get the right technologies at the checkpoint. it also goes back to pray about leadership. again, i agree 100%. it should not stop there. i think they need a different mentality. if you recall, after 9/11, we were in a hiring frenzy, we needed people. we staffed up from zero to 45,000-50,000 people in a very short timeframe. a lot of those folks came from a law enforcement background. that may still be the model by think what you are seeing is folks need to look at what is the right management set. he is a security.gov? it could be. tsa has always tried to balance
9:20 am
between security and customer service. the pendulum goes back and forth. i think what you're seeing in this case is the pendulum swinging a little towards the customer service side. screeners want to make sure the light is not backing up, that the flow of the checkpoint is operating smoothly. frankly, that is -- it is in their mantra, and mindset, you have to do the line moving. host: here is that several miami, florida. you identify yourself as a tsa officer. caller: yes. host: what do you do for tsa? caller: prior to tsa, i was alive was the state of florida. basically what happened is i came in 2002. like everyone else, i was very upset with what happened in 9/11. when i became an officer, i had to sign a document saying that i would not join a union.
9:21 am
we do not have protections. when they created the agency, they took away every benefit that federal employees receive. you have people like myself who on the floor have been harassed come from law-enforcement backgrounds, but to management we are treated like pleons. the fact that they bastardize the entire agency, we're like the walmart of the federal government. the problem -- the reason we have silly problems on the ground is because we are under said lester -- sequester, and we're also underfunded. we are the only agency that has part-time employees working. you have people there are trying to go to school, there is no tuition reimbursement, there are no veterans benefits for being an officer. how do you have an agency that
9:22 am
was built on 9/11, and you do not have veterans benefits at the agency? the problem is that we should have followed the same guidelines as customs or prisons. we should be a regular federal agency, but the thing is, we are on it pay for perform agency. we are not a time in system. i would like to hear your response to this. thank you. guest: there are couple of issues there. one is the budget. i think that is something that tsa always struggles with over the years. do they have the right resources for the job at hand? i think what we see -- obviously, we have to remember that tsa's authority and mission is be on aviation. they do all those of transportation. we see is they are geared
9:23 am
towards innovation and the airport. i do not think that will change. how we pay our screeners and publicly that means to be looked at. it is a large workforce. they are screeners that have some level of training, but they are law enforcement officers. i think we need to realize that. folks need to understand that when results like this happen, when the team results occur, you need to keep that in mind. collective bargaining, tsa screeners do have that right. they do not union as presently. it is an issue that we have heard from screeners time and time again. working conditions are tough. how we are treated is tough. i think that is why you see on an annual basis, tsa is one of the lowest ranked federal agencies to work for. there is a morality issue there.
9:24 am
when tsa was created, there was recognition that it has to be flexible. getting it on the same schedule as other agencies at the time, the decision was, let's give them some flexibility. we can decide whether that is working or not working. host: from the bureau of labor statistics 43,000 screeners and the median annual wage of about $30,000. is that right? guest: that's right. host: how much higher can they go from there? guest: there are different levels. there are positions -- you can progress into a different career path within tsa. it is not for everyone. not every screener has those opportunities. as you come in to be a frontline
9:25 am
screener supervisors and other should identify which of those move up the chain. host: josh, you are next. good morning. caller: good morning. think you for having me on. my question is -- the fourth amendment. it clearly states the right for people to be protected against searches and seizures. how are the surge is legal that are being conducted on people at the airport? obviously, it is in violation of the constitution. what legislation gives it to us a -- gives the tsa the authority to do that. the gentleman who is beginning to set up a get treated poorly.
9:26 am
you are basically conducting illegal searches on anyone who has to go across the country. a lot of people will be upset with that. guest: is certainly a question that tsa has gotten a lot over the years. it was given broad authorities in a bill passed by congress. tsa has gotten a lot of questions about the first amendment. it has been determined that the searches they are doing are perfectly legal. that is about all i can say. host: a screener has about the eight seconds to make a decision. what strikes them off? guest: it depends on what screener we're talking about. there are behavioral detection screen is, looking for types of behaviors that passengers have. the idea there is that someone is the fairness, perhaps it will
9:27 am
be sweating. there are physical clues. host: and their undercover? guest: sometimes. other times, they are in a tsa uniform, walking around. sometimes people get the wrong idea, they're just walking around, not doing their job. in fact, they are. there is the ticket checker. as you walk through the checkpoint, the first person you interface is the person checking your ticket and your id, making sure they do match up. there are also do some sort of behavior detection, making sure you're ok. you will go through the checkpoint and you have a couple screeners working. they are working the full body imaging machine. once you get to that point, they are relying on technology. that screeners looking at that
9:28 am
bag as it goes through on the belt. they have back after bag. you have to make a split second decision on does that object -- is it ok? if you need to take another look, he will stop the belt, and that causes backups. the screener is incentivize that if i stop that, it is for a very good reason. sometimes they get right, sometimes they don't. host: by the time you reach that first to give as a already determined the need to go through a search? guest: not necessarily. a lot of times that is determined before you go through the checkpoint. a screening makes the chairman on if we need to take a closer look at you are not. sometimes that decision will be made before you get there. there are things that you can do an airport at the checkpoint that will have you pulled for a
9:29 am
closer look. host: here is thes fred from indianapolis. caller: i was for my baggage, and also i worked checkpoint. it is ridiculous. you have screening managers that walk around in these empty suits , hitting on the female screeners. i have heard that they had been drinking. it was later and later of useless empty suits. everything from the fsd down to the assistant supervisors and managers. if you play the game of political correctness, and all those training, most of it is about diversity. the grinch rubble they send them off to d.c., pay them -- the in
9:30 am
trouble, send them off to the sea, pay them six figures. i have seen it from top to bottom. it needs to be fixed, exposed to the private sector, and you need to wipe away 5 million -- $5 million of your $7 billion cost with the md suits hitting on female screeners. it is ridiculous. host: ok. thank you. guest: it goes to the issue management and tsa -- in tsa. is it uploaded system? -- is it a loaded bloated system? congressman mica has been outspoken about that, and others have as well. my view is that we need an outside party looking at the
9:31 am
structure. tsa says, we understand the red team at the results, we looking into it. i think you have lost the credibility to do that in a constructive way. it is the agency bloated? it is a hard answer. i think someone needs to look at it to see if the structure is in place, both at the headquarters and at the airport. host: (202) 748-8001 for rural health gets. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 745-8002 for independents. this third-party, who should comprise a? guest: folks outside of the industry. there are players that need to be reached out to, communicated with. i think it needs to be a third-party group that has no vested interest in the outcome.
9:32 am
those folks are critically important in making sure that the right decisions be made and be communicated with. it has to be an independent group. host: is their willingness within tsa or on capitol hill to the capital and on bringing a new technology? guest: it is a great question. after 9/11, there was a hard push to make sure there were checked bag systems in the airport. it was a heavy investment. i think what we got at the end of that process, which was a 2-3 year process was fatigue on the part of congress saying, look we invested all this money, and that we have to turn to the checkpoint, and frankly, we don't have money. they said, we will give you more, but it will come in drips and tradrabbles.
9:33 am
tsa says we cannot have the very best, we wish we could, but we can't. i think that having buyer's remorse at this point. they want the machines to be upgradable, and they're not. i think that taking a comprehensive view. i get we have great systems screening checked baggage, i think we need to move those to the checkpoint. i think we need to take a look at -- do we need walk-through metal detectors? and the whole body imaging systems, do they work as intended? i think are that needs to be looked at. yes, technology is critical because it helps the screen is. it will either enable them to do their jobs or not. host: joseph, your next. caller: thank you very much. i just wanted to make two observations.
9:34 am
one is -- every time i go to the airport, i am faced with what i do not like to see from my government. if we picture them in army uniforms, and in some other countries, served world type of appearance, then you see what we are looking at as citizens. i would like you to comment on that. guest: it is a difficult balance. a hard balance the tsa has to contend with. again, customer service versus security. they could have these tests be around 0% success rate. that would mean locking down the checkpoint and more than today. what the government says is that that is unsuccessful. they tried to institute a very aggressive patdown about five or six years ago. the american public and congress said, absolutely not, that is
9:35 am
against our culture. tsa was faced with the problem of the intelligence that they had not being able to do a certain procedure. that is when you saw a lot more of the full body imaging machines come into the checkpoint. again, going back to customer service versus security, that is the difficult part that they have. that comes from the top, from the leadership in setting the right tone. host: are the lessons that we can learn from other countries? guest: it is different in other countries. tsa is the only federalize workforce that is doing screenings across the world. we had a previous call talk about privatized airports. if you go to europe, those are private screeners. tsa, we have a almost the opposite. we have a federal workforce that is not only writing the regulations, but also enforcing the regulations.
9:36 am
some have said, maybe that is a dichotomy, we can have that -- can't have that. it is certainly a valid argument. tsa does run a privatized screening program. if an airport says, i do not like what tsa is doing here, i will opt out and hire private screeners. they have to do that to tsa standards. tsa overseas that. some commentators have said that is what we need to see across the country. have someone else more customer oriented, to actually be the boots on the ground. host: gene from arizona. thank you for holding on. caller: i had a bad experience with tsa one year ago, and i'm afraid to fight again. i had a golf bag, it hard cased golf bag with a security strap
9:37 am
on it. the only people who could open it was tsa. when i got home, there was a note in the bottom of the case that it had been expected -- inspected, no one signed it. what happened was a tore my bag apart and store everything. i called tsa, and they gave me a form. guest: obviously, there are incidences that occur when flying. whether it is tsa, the airlines whatever the case. there is a claim service that you can fill out combo when you were fine, what airline you were flying. in some cases it will be tsa's faults, in others it will not. they have a pretty good process, it but complicated because of the size of the systems they have. depending on what airport you
9:38 am
are flying into, and what procedures that have come i can see how it can be complicated, but there's certainly a claim procedure that you can go through if your luggage was damage or you have items missing. host: next up his miranda -- is loretta from texas. caller: hello. you kind of already covered this when you are talking about the tsa screeners and the imaging machines help a lot. very often, they say they are not turned on. i am a 60 euro limit with an artificial knee. i have been flying for years. i have had tsa people put their hands underneath my bra unzipped my pants. sometimes even squeeze your be reast.
9:39 am
i am aghast that they are allowed to do this in front of everybody with those gloves they put on. it is so embarrassing and humiliating. i think they should do something for people with disabilities. something as little as an artificial knee will set off an alarm. guest: tsa does have a screening with disabilities office. more or less, that anticipates a lot of these different medical conditions going through the checkpoint. there are a variety of things that you can do. if you have a medical condition and you are going through the checkpoint, contact tsa to understand the procedures you will encounter. two is to let them know you are coming in advance. if you will require more than 15 or 20 seconds going to the checkpoint because of the condition, you can contact them in advance. if you are pulled aside and you are undergoing a patdown, and
9:40 am
you do not like that it is being conducted in front of everyone, you can request -- every passenger has the right to request a private screening. you will go in a room with the same sex screener and receive the pat down that way. tsa is trying to be accommodating. it is a large workforce, 45,000 screeners, and it right every day. we have to keep in mind that the screen about one million passengers per day, and more baggage than that. a lot of times we do not hear about tsa. they are doing the job right. we have to put this in perspective. host: what happens to contraband? guest: a lot of it is discarded, some is donated, some is sold. it depends on what it is. a lot of the change that they find -- obviously, as banks go
9:41 am
through the x-ray machines change falls. it is a variety of different things. host: joint is from illinois. republican line. caller: good morning. i guess i'm echoing the women right before me. i am a breast-cancer survivor. i have a prosthesis. invariably, i get felt a pretty good. is there not a way to tell? if i tell them i have a prosthesis and ma 69-year-old woman, is that necessary? guest: i think the best course of action for you is that that airport and that checkpoint know in advance the you are coming. the more they can no before you get to the checkpoint, the better. the worst-case scenario for tsa is when that traveler shows up or a host of travelers show up,
9:42 am
and there unprepared for that kind of volume or issue. i think for the most by the right, but there will be cases where they do not get it right. i think at that point, you do not need to be shy about asking for a screener supervisor. as for the supervisor, for a private screening room. host: by the way, your comment about spare change. there was an article from "late," people let 67,000 -- people left over $67,000 in spare change last year. has there ever been an argument to on tsa officers? guest: absolutely pure going back to the elliotts -- lax
9:43 am
shooting where he tsa officer died in the line of duty, there has been a big push to on tsa officers. in my view, that is the wrong course of action. these are not law enforcement officers. they are not hired with those standards, page not have a background. host: lauren bacall. this is from mobile, alabama. hello. caller: i watch the news a lot. it appears to me that whatever the republicans are getting ready to privatize a federal agency, first you start hearing about what is wrong with the agency, issuing these reports about everything that is wrong and then you have congressman mica. he shows up, and when you had that transportation accident on the train, on the eastern
9:44 am
corridor he showed up on cnn. he was so giddy talking about how it should be privatized. the same thing. this guy just said it a few minutes ago. he said the tsa departments all over the world are run by private agencies, except for in the usa. who is your affiliation? it is just another way that they start stripping down be set or agencies and talk about -- stripping down the federal agencies and talk about privatization. guest: privatization of tsa is not a new issue. there are a lot of different arguments. with the studies that have been out there, they are pretty neutral on the subject. they have taken a look at federalize airport suite you have -- federalized airports
9:45 am
where you have privatize screeners, and the results are about the same. the question is whether one can be done cheaper than another. again, there are studies out there. they are about the same, it takes about the same amount of money running in tsa airport versus a privatize airport. then, you get into the hiring and firing of staff. there's is a variety of issues that airport looks at what they decide that they want to go privatized. it is definitely a tough issue. it is not that one is right and what is wrong. i think it is one that more folks will look at. the more incidents of tsa has in the news, i think they were looked answers. one answer is if private
9:46 am
screening is an option. host: chad wolf, in his previous life was the assistant minister for security policy at tsa. thank you for your time. further made of a program, open phones. here is the number you can call. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 745-8002 for independents. from now until the end of the show. start calling out. ♪ >> tonight on "the communicators " at this year's consumer electronics show, we met up with an author who told us about why he thinks the internet is not the answer. >> the internet is not the answer at the moment. it is lending itself to undermining jobs. it is compounding inequality of
9:47 am
our economic lives. it is creating new massive monopolies that were unimaginable in the 19th of 20 century. and, it has created this economy where all internet users have entered into products. you and i, we have been packaged up. when we use google or facebook, we become the product. >> tonight on "the communicators" on c-span two. >> the summer, booktv will cover book festivals from around the country and talk nonfiction authors and books. near the end of june, watch out for the fdr book festival. at the end of july, we are by from the harlem book fair with author interviews and held discussions. at the beginning of september, we are live from the nation's capital at the national book festival, celebrating its 15th
9:48 am
year. >> "washington journal" continues. host: about 13 minutes of open phones until the end of the program. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. for independents, (202) 745-8002 . that from north carolina, you are up for us. good morning. caller: i was wondering how voter identification would keep you voting for more than once. when ivo, i go to my precinct they asked me my name, and i tell them. they check it off. is somebody else comes by and wants to use my need to vote they would have a check mark. if someone already used my name they would have a check mark. another thing, i could surely
9:49 am
voter -- show a voter id, and if i were registered in another precinct, i can go there and vote. host: go ahead. caller: it is like a federal offense for voter fraud. i understand it is like a five-year maximum penalty. who is going to vote and take a chance of having that against them? it is kind of ridiculous. host: that is bad in north carolina. olga is in miami. caller: i was wondering about the screenings they have in airports.
9:50 am
also, the plane that they used to have going to puerto rico which they don't have anymore. you could have screeners over there on the island. they forgot about the little people over here. transportation is very important in our lives. i don't know about the cameras and a lot of things changing daily. yes, the man who talked before about the cost of florida, yes i see the different than new york. over there they are talking about not having enough money to pay these people. it doesn't seem fair. it is very different than new york.
9:51 am
it is totally different. i'm so confused living in florida. i wish the fda will talk more -- my uncle was in world war ii yes, veterans. there's nothing here for people from puerto rico in miami. i want to go back to new york. you only talk about people in florida like -- the spanish people that live here, like we don't count. me, as a puerto rican who grew up in new york, i wondering why puerto ricans have no worries here -- no voice.
9:52 am
also, i want to know why people don't talk about regulations in the streets, would you put a lot of money into transportation. host: ok. ralph in missouri. hello. caller: i have a couple of comments. one, news. i think the fox format has taken over. when this lady came on -- she was mid 90's. all of the media is to hear. i can't believe gayle king is on, charlie rose, i have lost a lot of respect. of course, abc, nbc, all the rest. the news is not the news. another point, religion. for crying out loud, people were
9:53 am
out for investigation back in 2007. i don't know what happened to that. i know people can send money to where they want to however, it does not make a difference. our gospel is the resurrection. that is free. you have to be almost homeless and down and out to know you are a sinner. another thing, i thought president barack obama would do something about race relations. this country seems to be falling backwards with that. i don't know what to say about that. i just wish people would have courtesy towards one another and understand things. back to religion -- people are promoting what we call prosperity message gospel. this needs to stop.
9:54 am
first read corinthians, and that would give us a big help. thanks. host: ralph from missouri. it was yesterday on "face the nation coax wo" that a republican from texas appeared on the program. here is some of what he had to say. [video clip] >> this is a huge data mining project. a targeted for million employees. in my judgment, this was an attack by china. it quantifies to espionage. that raises our efforts issues that we need to deal with. >> if i can be clear, you need china, not just a person who has been in china. >> that affirmation has not been
9:55 am
affirmed by the u.s. government. i believe the author indicators point to the fact that it is china, and perhaps nationstate sponsored because of the weight was done. it was not done to steal credit card information, and that kind of theft. it was done to get personal information on political appointees in the federal government to exploit them so that later down on the road they can use that for espionage to either recruit spies or compromise individuals in the federal government. host: we were here next from someone in georgia. caller: i'm calling about g7. i thought it was very nice of mr. putin to speak before hand and said he had no animosity for nato. i quit being a democrat yesterday -- last year when mr. obama stopped dealing with mr.
9:56 am
putin. he is the key divan and isis. isis lives next door to pyutin. now, mr. obama has russia and china against us. i would vote differently. host: virginia is where douglas. good morning. caller: i disagree with the fellow from the tsa saying they are doing a great job. actually, there the weakest point in port security. we would be better off without them. a lot of people don't realize that tsa employees are not licensed. of course, there are issues with theft. even if it -- he even assist friends and family to bypass security. if you have any sort of criminal background in your history, you
9:57 am
cannot be trusted traveler, you can qualify for employment at the tsa and have unrestricted access not just to the passenger cabin, but to the entire aircraft. nowhere is the tsa failure more evident than checked baggage. if you go to the airport and check your baggage, you cannot be sure that you will get everything back. not only will the tsa not take any responsibility, they will either look the other way or take part in bulooting your back. what is tsa leadership to? they say they can't do anything about it. my own feeling is that if there is a problem with theft at the airport, the tsa administration be down there and find out what the security director will do to end it.
9:58 am
if they can't do anything about it, we need a new federal security director. his offer management -- if upper management thinks it is not important, that we need new leadership of tsa. tsa has long taken the attitude that if they can force people to take part in their peak show of body scanners, than they have done their job. the drug, we have people's baggage being loaded into the cargo bay of the airplane and tsa saying it is not a security issue. you have to wonder, where are these people's heads? then, you look at tsa, and what they have a problem, when one of their people misbehaves -- i have known at least for cases where tsa has said to the courts the video disappeared or is destroyed, or we don't have it. whenever they are criticized,
9:59 am
all of a sudden the video becomes available. host: and for missouri, you're the last call. hello. caller: i'm glad that i am the last call. basically what i am talking about today is -- there was a lady who got a ticket. the same thing with student debt . guess what, that is going up. every time you file for income taxes, they take money because you are in default. if they would apply to student loans, the money that they take from your federal tax return the student loan debt would disappear. i wish the president would do
10:00 am
something about it. thank you. host: that was, the last call. that is in for a program today. another addition comes your way at 7:00 tomorrow morning. we will see you then. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪ ♪ >> this morning, live coverage from print germany where president obama has been attending the g-7 global summit. world leaders have been meeting to discuss issues like climate change, terrorism, and the threat of disease. and we will hear from the president shortly and he will hold a news conference anytime now. this is the second and final day of the g-7 summit.