transportation and had spending, and a preview of this year's congressional baseball game. our guests is the republican team manager and mike doyle, manager for the democrats. host: good morning everyone. on this thursday june 11, 2015. fast track friday is on the huffing post and republicans are inching closer and building to friday's vote on faster authority for the president's trade deals. look for our coverage on c-span. we'll begin here this morning with -- we'll talk with lawmakers from both sides about trade but begin here with healthcare. head of the supreme court decision lots of focus on washington on whether or not the law is working. so we'll turn to all of you.

what has your healthcare been like. is it better? dial in. you can also send us a tweet at c-span wj or facebook or e-mail us at c-span.org. yesterday on capitol hill they held a hearing with secretary silvia burrwell to talk about the law and the supreme court decision on whether or not subsidies were meant for all exchanges or just those established by the state. during that hearing, lawmakers went back and forth about whether or not the law was working. here's what the chairman had to say. paul ryan republican of

wisconsin. paul ryan: any objective observer would say this law is on the fritz. the whole point of obamacare was make healthcare more affordable. premiums are going up, way up, all over the country and insurers are proposing double digit premium increases. 30% and tennessee 36%, south dakota 42%, tax season was like a bad dream before and now it's a total nightmare. people could never afford these plans on their own so the law gave them subsidies. now two-thirds of the people who got them had to pay the irs back on average over $700. that's not the kind of money that people have laying around. and for all of this hassle, for all of this, what are we getting

for it? the argument was that if people had insurance, they go to the doctor instead of the emergency room, but now even more people are going to the emergency room. so whatever the supreme court decides later this month i think the lesson is absolutely clear, obamacare is just flat busted. it just doesn't work. and no fix can change that fact. host: chairman of the ways and means committee paul ryan saying that the affordable care act is broken. what do you think? we're getting your thoughts. under the affordable act what is your heltsdalthcare like. take a listen at what the ranking democrat had to say and what he said about republicans' thoughts on the law. >> obviously they want it focus in and i think that's a good idea because what's busted is not a.c.a. but your attacks on

it endless attacks. never coming up with a single comprehensive alternative. all these years. so you sit as arm chair critics while millions of people have insurance who never had it before millions of kids have insurance who would not otherwise have had it. people who have preexisting conditions no longer are cancelled or can't even get insurance. the donut hole is gone. millions of people in lower income categories are now insured through medicare, millions and millions and millions. cost containment is beginning to work. it's beginning to work.

the increase in costs, that rate is going down. so you're livid because it's getting better. that's why you're livid. and i'm not surprised at your fervor. we'll be glad to take it on. host: top democrat on the ways and means committee saying that the affordable care act is getting better. what do you all think? we divided the lines differently. is your healthcare better under this law? 202,748,000 or 202748001 or 8002. in 2010 republicans expected

worse healthcare and today 38% say it's gotten worse. it seems slowly has become more acceptable. for the last few months the economists fewer americans have wanted to repeal it than expand it. the former uninsured feel happy about the benefits they fear and some fears had not been realized. half the public say they've seen no change in the quality of the healthcare and the number was smaller than the percentage expecting their healthcare would get worse. what do you think? we want to hear from you. patricia, you've seen no change. but what do you make of the law? caller: hi and good morning everyone.

i wanted to share that not only do i have -- well we expanded medicaid under new jersey. i'm 59 and i was displaced from corporate america. i reinvented myself. i can tell you that it can work if we all tweak it and make it successful. when we were signing people up through a brokerage firm i started a questionnaire. some of the information we obtained it caused people to pay back more than needed to. we have to be continued to be educated and the right questions to ask so people don't fall in that situation. i hear that people had to pay back $700. whose fault was it? they are working people who make

like 20, 18, $16,000 a year. especially in the south. georgia signed a lot of people and they're working and they're surviving, so am i. i think we all can make it better. and we all have to get, work. we can tweak it so it's successful for the average layman out there. host: you want lawmakers to work together? caller: absolutely and the business people. host: william your healthcare is better? why? caller: i used to be the big naysayers about it until my wife got it. i'm a disabled vet and she's now on social security.

during the time we had it i was surprised it was not a major big deal about having it. all the thing that they were prothlesizing as far as what was wrong with it, it was working. that's all i have to say about it. host: how did it work for your life? did she see her healthcare costs go down or was it that it was easy? caller: because of our income -- actually at the time i was -- when i was working i was drawing insurance from my work. then we switched over to the a.c.a. because i was saving 40%. so that's the direction that we went. of course now she has social security disability and i'm no

longer working because i'm a disabled vet. like i said, i don't see what the problem was. host: are you a republican? caller: i used to be. i'm an independent now. host: when did you switch? caller: i switched about a year ago. the g.o.p.'s were going too far to the right and i can't associate with it no more. host: stephanie in florida. what are your thoughts? caller: my thoughts are -- good morning first of all -- but the thoughts are canada pays for their healthcare with the tax money from the alcohol and that's what i said. why can't we do that instead of screwing around with the whole deal with the funding?

that would take care of a lot of problems instead of using -- you know, tax money, you know that the government says we'll do this to pay for taxes we'll collect taxes they never do that. they're dipping into medicare to pay for it and everything else. i think it's time to start using the money the way it's supposed to be used. host: all right, stephanie. next is christopher in concord, new hampshire. no change for you. good morning to you. caller: good morning. no change. i have medicare but i cannot use it because they have my social security number and i will not give my social security number so they won't accepted the bill to medicare. so we obviously just need to treat healthcare like the fire department. if you get sick then you get help, no questions asked. and i did write up a little

thing about this on a website called liberty and peace.org/healthcare. host: connie in kansas city. your healthcare has improved. caller: good morning. hi. yes, i think it has improved. i had some preexisting conditions that dropped off with the a.c.a. and i'm so relieved and my premium has gone up in the last year but i understand the reasons for that. i think it would be much improved if we had more regulations in the healthcare industry because -- you have to realize all our medical industry is for profit and that goes from your hospitals to doctors to insurance companies and drug companies who keep developing new diseases to sell us their drugs for. i think that uncle sam needs to get in and shake down that

industry and put in more regulation. i think we would see costs going down. i think they take advantage of what's going on now. their profits have gone way up. host: you say your premiums have gone up in the last year. before you had healthcare coverage because you had these preexisting conditions, how much were you paying out of pocket under the affordable care act? caller: i always had my own insurance policy. i've been unemployed for some time and my premiums were around $500 a month, but i had a benign cyst they had to keep watching. the only way i could afford insurance was if i had the writer on this cyst so i spent three years in fear worrying if

something could go wrong there and lucky it didn't. but now i'm paying almost $700 a month through blue cross and i understand their premiums had to go up once they figured in all the insured people and the additional cost for them. host: you don't mind paying more because you feel like you've got the coverage there if something were to happen. caller: exactly. that's what i have insurance for is that peace of mind. i don't mind paying extra for that. but at the same time i just really like the government to dive in deeper and make sure that we're not getting gouged. host: let's go to kevin who says his health care has gotten worse in virginia. you're on the wear. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i'm self-employed. my plan that my wife and i had to get -- my deductible has

doubled and my care is not as good as it was. my program is not as good as it was. my payments are a little bit more but here's the problem. even like my dental, okay i went to the new dentist two weeks ago, i had to go to the budget dental place because that's what my program offered. i go in there and nobody even speaks english in there. here's my problem. the problem is, on monday the president said in his press conference that no one that had insurance before the affordable care act has been adversely effected. that's totally a lie. i'm completely negatively affected by this. i called senator warner, my senator of virginia. i've called senator cane and they don't care. their office is so rude to you

when you call to complain their attitude is basically it's the law. deal with it. host: what type of plan did you purchase? caller: we purchased a silver plan. here's another comment that somebody already talked about it. i just want all the politicians to work together. first of all the democrats did not let the republicans help write the a.c.a. they wrote it all themselves and changed the locks on some of the committee doors. you know the routine. but now you want us to help you fix it. it might have been better had it been bipartisan. this is a completely left wing democrat program. you know who it works for? it only works for people that are completely getting stuff for

free and my senator warner's office says nobody gets stuff for free. people who are quote, unquote poor are not paying anything. they don't pay any federal income tax to begin with so none of their money is paying for their insurance of the they're getting it for free. and illegal immigrants are able to get this -- a healthcare program through the government, people that aren't even here legally -- host: what program are you talking about? caller: you get medicaid and non-status you're in the country illegally you and are not a citizen even if you're in the country legally and you're not a citizen you're able to get sub sized healthcare from my tax dollars. i'm a small business owner and i'm having a hard enough time taking care of my mortgage and my life insurance and my health

insurance and my two young boys and my wife and my dog. i don't need to be paying for other people. you know what, i am. host: okay. you mentioned what the president had to say on tuesday. he was in washington before the catholic health association's annual meeting. here's what he said about the success of the affordable act. president obama: i will suggest that our healthcare is perfect but it is serving so many more people so much better. we're not going to go backwards. there is something -- i have to say just deeply cynical about the ceaseless, endless partisan attempts to roll back progress. i mean, i understood folks being skeptical or worried before the law passed and there wasn't a reality there to examine.

once you see that all the bad things that were predicted didn't happen, you'd think that it would be time to move on. let's figure out how to make it better. it seems so cynical to want to take coverage away from millions of people to take care away from the people who need it the most. punish millions with higher costs of care. and unravel what's been woven into the fabric of america. and that kind of cynicism flies in the face of our history. our history is one of each generations striving to do better and be better than the last. just as we'll never go back to a time when seniors were left to languish in poverty or not have any health insurance in their golden years. there with youas a generation that didn't have that guarantee of healthcare and our citizens can be denied coverage because of a

preexisting condition. when 10s of millions of people couldn't afford decent affordable care, that wasn't a better america. that's not freedom. the freedom to languish in illness or be bankrupt because somebody gets sick. that's not who we are. host: president obama on tuesday saying that the affordable care act is working. you to weigh in. under the affordable care act is your healthcare better worse or stayed the same. no change for you, joel, good morning. caller: that's correct. no change for me and i'm glad i heard what the president had to say because he did add helpful but however the future is bleak because there is no provisions or increased residencies or training of doctors and he's

maintaining a medical apartheid by not allowing veterans have obamacare. if it's so good for everybody else why shouldn't the veterans have equal opportunity and save money on the budget as well. host: steve in chesapeake, virginia. your healthcare has gotten worse. caller: good morning, greta. it either got worse or it stayed the same. because i have no healthcare. i'm self-employed just like the other caller and i used to pay for my insurance for 20 years and i lost my insurance about seven years when they raised it from over $600 a month to about $800 a month. so i was really looking forward to being able to finally a

healthcare policy with the obama plan, but the cheapest thing i could find was about $600 a month premium plus $6,000 copayment and 6,000 -- anyway it will cost me about $18,000 before the plan would pay anything for me. host: the deductible, steve? caller: right, the deductible. when they say that preexisting conditions don't exist, they sure do. it's your age. i'm 62. it's a preexisting condition because that's how they charge you based on your age and your income is the preexisting condition do. if you have little money then

your premium for the time being will be very reasonable because they shift the cost to people who are older and who have some money. host: do you fall in that category that you have some money so you wouldn't be eligible for sub sidsies? caller: i would still be eligible. i make about a $100,000 a year. i would still be -- but sorry, i lost you. host: we're listening. you say you make $100,000 a year -- >> right. but after the expenses and deductions it's more like $60,000. i still be eligible for a few hundred, maybe 200 monthly but it's all temporary because we read in the papers not a lot of papers wrote about it, but they are already raising the rates by

30 or 50%. the private insurance companies. so it's only a matter of time before most people will be priced out except for the group who are very poor. host: what are you doing for healthcare? are you paying the fine? caller: yeah. what else can i do? i pay the fine the first time this year. it will be doubled next year. tripled next year and i pay the fine for not being able to afford healthcare. that's what the fine is for. in three years, i will qualify for medicare and my wife is already on medicare, so i'm just hoping and praying i don't get sick before that. host: you're just buying your time. caller: right. otherwise it would just bankrupt me these costs. what the president says about how it is immoral not to have

people have access to healthcare, 35 million people still have no access to healthcare because the affordable care act is lie. it's unaffordable for most people except for those who have no money. so even the private insurance companies can't figure out how to get money. they shift the cost to people who have some money host: are you a republican or democrat? caller: i used to vote for democrat for about 20 years and after obama i just stopped voting. if bernie sanders is on the ticket i'll vote for him. otherwise if it's another democrat i don't believe a word they say. they're all the same just like obama. it's just smooth liars. that's what they are. host: steve says his health care has gotten worse. divided the lines about this way, if you're under the

affordable care act if it's better 202748000 or 8001 or 8002. we'll get some of the headlines. here is "usa today" with its headline about spyware tainting the talk sites. at first the program was spying on its own network. it discovered the spyware were negotiators from iran, general /* germany counsel members. wired magazine says that israel alone created the first version

of this spyware program. they have not said who it created the next version. it appears to be a nation state. also in other foreign affair issues this is the washington times this morning. the pope met with the president of russia. he gets a warm welcome on his visit to see the pope. "usa today" with a picture of president putin meeting with the pope and say sincere and great effort to achieve great effort is needed. he arrived at the vatican over an hour late for his meeting.

and the ukrainian president is writing in the "wall street journal" to its readers we're making steady progress despite putin. we'll be talking about russia and getting updates on that on sunday here on the washington journal and whether or not the sanctions are working. another story about the pope on the front page of the "new york times". the pope has created a tribunal to try bishops for negligence.

that in the papers this morning as well. back to your calls about whether or not the affordable care act is getting better or worse. karen in oklahoma, you haven't seen any change. what do you think about so-called obamacare? caller: well, i'm on medicare. i have a supplement plan, but what has happened is it should be a right to be able to healthcare like some of the civilized countries give their people canada one of them. we could pay for it as far as the reason it's going up, i would look at the insurance companies. they are for profit.

the bottom line of your health is profit. what do you think the insurance companies are going to do? host: robert in north carolina. it's gotten better for you, robert. tell us how. caller: i just like to say that last call actually made a couple of good points. i completely agree with her on a lot of what she was trying to articulate. but for me as a student saddled with some pretty significant debt, my particular case has been facilitated by this new system. i have -- host: we'll go on to yvonne. you said it's getting worse. caller: i'm on medicare and the

premiums out of pocket and the yearly deductible in that are really high. i only get 1200 a month and i work to that and there's people that haven't worked and get medicaid. they go to the emergency room for colds. they waste it and they pay nothing. they haven't worked ask most of them are on s.s. i.which i live in the northern place which the people now are getting the medicaid and they go to the in the doctors and they get the narcotics and sell it on the street for $300 a month. they have no incentive to work. they get more than the people that work. host: debbie in philadelphia, healthcare has improved for you under the affordable care act.

good morning. caller: yes. good morning. the lady says she was on medicare, that doesn't have anything to do with the affordable care act. the interesting piece about the complaints it depends on what state you're in. the total story -- insurance is high. now you can get it, but that doesn't mean that it's not going to cost you. the president never said that you weren't going to be able to pay for healthcare. it may be a shocker to some folks who never had insurance now you're finding how why it's

a problem of having total coverage -- host: i don't know what happened. we got cut off. hopefully you can call back in. we're talking about this healthcare laws. debating it and the president speaking twice this week about his law touting its success, he says. a lot of people talking about the legacy of this law as the supreme court talks about giving subsidies subsidies. the hearing on capitol hill before the ways and means committee that debate was taking place. "wall street journal" says this --

that in the "wall street journal" on the affordable care act and this headline in the washington times. and also this in the new york sometimes. states and congress urge to act if justices rule against the healthcare law. so there is legislation in the pipeline but whether or not they would have enough republicans to support it in both chambers is the question. but the president also said that the pending legislation he sees now from republicans would get a

veto from him and then also this from the washington times -- push getting your thoughts on this healthcare law. speaking of politics, front page of the washington times has this story -- good morning to you, no change under the affordable care act. what are your thoughts though on

the law? caller: really for me it's kind of polarized itself to become something of an argument. health care fortunately is a personal responsibility i think for everyone really i think while obama had a good idea with his healthcare act i think that it's just moved debt and money from one side of the table to the other. it's been expensive from day one and not everyone is going to have it and one guy had to pay the fine every year and yet you're spending a thousand to 2000 a year just not having insurance. host: he said he's just buying

his time. he's 62 years old trying to get to medicare at 65 and cheap tore pay the fine. senator reveals parkinson's diagnosis and this is johnny isaac son, republican from georgia announced on wednesday he had parkinson's disease but he said the diagnosis will not impact his run in 2016. he served as the chairman of the veteran affairs committee in the senate. and also this news, james billington announced he'll retire. the newspapers with that story saying under controversy he is retiring. in south carolina healthcare has gotten better? caller: yes, ma'am.

it got much better. i got terminated from my state job in tw2009. they left me cold. for seven years i had nothing. i couldn't afford to get medicine or dental care for my grand baby nothing. by the healthcare program it really helps me. we've been able to go to the doctor. i've been able to get the right treatment. last year i almost died. i was able to go to a specialist with the insurance. the only thing that is messing up here is that the state is looking for the state and not the people. if they put more effort in taking care of the people in the state we would be all right. host: in what way? caller: in the sense of medical. we have -- oh, girl. there's so much. the states don't care about us. they only care about drawing income for the state. i know lots of times wasn't

receiving the proper medical treatment and they received -- they was in state care. there's a lot of stuff. a lot of stuff but what really shocked me. everybody is against a black man because i mean -- not a black man, everybody against mr. obama because he's black. don't worry about all that. as long as he's trying to do what's right that's all that matters. all our money and everything is going overseas. damn is anybody tired? do anybody see that. everybody cryin' about we can't afford this and that. if we stop shopping at walmarts and k-marts and all these other places and put stock and money in other people pocket we might have a better state. host: take a look at the front page of your home newspaper. this what is what they write --

cheryl in pittsburgh, healthcare worse under the affordable care act. why is that? caller: it's absolutely worse. i'm a small business owner. i make probably $150,000. i probably take home about $60,000. i'm 63. my healthcare is $829 because of

my age. i'm 63 and 2 more years to go. it's so hard. where other people have $400,000 in the bank a lot of people have gotten money from irnheritances they're getting their healthcare for less. why are we getting penalized? i don't understand it. i don't understand why it's so high for some and zero for others. thank you. host: minneapolis, it's gotten worse, terry. caller: yeah hi. good morning. i'm a recent widower and two kids under the age of two. i pay over $800 a month for insurance and my deductible is $9,000 a year and i have 10s of thousands of dollars leftover from the last year before my wife passed for treatments that

weren't covered or the deductible was so large. i'm a creative director and i make a lot of money doing it but it's like crippled. there won't be any vacation. i avoid taking the kids to the doctor unless something is really wrong. it just isn't working. my deductible on co-pays on medications is higher. i need a new need. i got to get to $9,000 so instead i got to limp around and my tax rate is unbelievably high. so it's like i feel like i'm paying all this money and some people feel it's getting better because of the money i pay. i don't want anybody not to have healthcare but i don't want my kids not to have the kids have the benefit of what i'm working

for. i put myself through school. i work on average ten hours a day and take care of two little kids. what i'm killing myself for -- i don't even have the benefit of good healthcare. i have a torn rotator right now and new knee and it ain't gonna happen. host: terry in minneapolis. sorry for your loss and struggle this. we told you at the top of today's program about the trade votes that is likely to happen friday in the house. politico with this headline --

push the story goes on to say --

so that is the plan so far that. that's when we know so far of how this could all go down. of course our coverage on c-span on the house floor. dave, in indiana, it's gotten better for you. tell us how? caller: it has gotten better but it's going to get worse. i'm 58 and was forced into retirement by the current republican administration. i worked for the state of indiana. and my healthcare when i retired i was paying after retirement about 900 some dollars a month for a single man. now i got on obamacare and obama insurance at least from my experience is a much better plan than i was getting through the state because there are standards within that plan that

worked. it's going to get worse because the reality is is that you got a 0 oh you're required by the government to have insurance but there is no requirement by the government on what the insurance companies can charge. the health insurance under the united states is a profit-based situation or greed-based is really what it is. and they'll charge just as much as they possibly can. so they're going to go ahead and defeat any savings that people are going to get through obamacare by raising their rates. i've been to canada several

times and their taxes are high there and i talked to folks in canada and one thing i learned from being in canada. they will not -- you can raise their taxes, they will not part with their health insurance there. host: jim in pittsburgh. healthcare has gotten worse for you under the affordable care act. tell us how, jim. caller: hi and good morning to you. my premium -- first, let me review. i paid over $80,000 with medicare in my working lifetime because i am self-employed. i had to pay both parts. then when i retired i opted for medicare part b and it's not free. that's $109 a month to go with the -- to fill in the holes of medicare part a and then i opted to go into a medicare advantage

program that also cost me an ten anyone dollars a month in 2014 and then our president promised i get a $2,500 rebate and lower premium. that didn't happen because in 2015 because he took money out of medicare advantage program, my premium went up from $109 a month to about $175 a month, about 70% increase. so i couldn't afford that so i backed off into a lower class of coverage. and fortunately the insurance company didn't make big changes then and they didn't change the copays. i pay a little higher in copay and i can live with that. but i'm getting -- i'm at a lower level of healthcare. obama says republicans should change this program if it fails in the supreme court, he's the one that initiated it it and eliminated all republican input

and they voted only the democrats supported it. so it's up to him to make the changes if the supreme court throws this program out and cost me a lot of money and other retirees have been hurt by this program. >> thanks for the call. we'll take a short break. when we come back, we'll talk with a couple members of congress of the first up is the committee chairman of indiana. we'll talk to him about trade and other efforts on education and workforce issues. and then later north carolina democratic congressman on the funding of transportation projects and the president's request for fast track authority on these trade deals. veteran health administration officials testified on oversight investigations about concerns on heavy reliance of opiates therapy among veterans including the risk of suicide.

here's a little bit of that hearing. >> suicide among veterans is very complex and tragic. those of us who have lost a loved one to suicide know the deep and lasting pain. we've worked dilligently to understand suicide among the veterans receiving v.a. care and across the nation. we know that treatment works. we've identified many positive outcomes for veterans who are receiving our care, for example the rate of repeat attempts at suicide among veterans who have attempted to take their own lives has declined quite a bit for veterans enrolled in our system. between 1999 and 2010 the suicide rate among middle aged veterans fell 31% at the same time middle aged who are veterans or who don't use our

system actually rose during that time period. the rate of suicide among women veterans is higher than other women in the general public, but women veterans who use our system actually are less likely to die from suicide when compared to other women veterans. as you know, our research allowed us to estimate that about 22 veterans die by suicide every day. what's less well-known is that 17 of those 22 do not receive treatment within the v.a. system and i worry that some of the 17 are actually seen in our system and are fearful about raising mental health concerns because of concerns of stigma or privacy. suicide prevention efforts have to extend to veterans who may not seek assistance. any veteran who needs help can come to any point of entry of care in our system and will be

seen that day. "washington journal" continues. host: we're back with republican of indiana. he chairs the republican policy committee for the g.o.p. where do the votes stand? >> it's going to be close and going to require a bipartisan vote. i think you'll see a vote this week. we're going to get it done. we need the votes to get it done because it's important host: why? >> trade makes wealth. trade makes friends. we want to make sure everybody has an opportunity at a good paying job. i represent a rural area of east central and southeastern indiana

that is a manufacturing and agricultural based economy and they're selling their product all over the world. in the factories of indiana from honda cars to toyota forklifts and the engines delta fast sets offense eut /* /* tpau sets. 70% of the world purchasing power lives outside of the america. and trade based jobs pay more. for all those reasons we need to make sure that we're able to trade with the rest of the world. host: democratic lawmakers, ones who have been on the program who told our viewers how are workers like your mom going to compete with workers from vietnam who make $0.55 an hour? >> yeah.

the question is if you get past the rhetoric and lock at the facts the reality this is. the countries where we have trade agreements we have a small trade surplus. the real problem is where we don't have trade agreements and not able to enforce our standards and our trade rules against them. so we have about a $500 billion deficit with those countries. those are many who have the $0.55 jobs that you're talking about. so our best opportunity to create health and create jobs to increase wages because these trade based jobs are jobs that pay better is to have agreements that then are enforced. i do think it's fair to criticize our leadership of both parties over the last several decades. so what we need to do is to raise standards around the globe the way to do that is to have trade agreements.

host: is it appropriate for the republican leadership to try to sweeten the pot in order to secure some more yes votes. here's the "new york times". republicans tie their favorite causes to the trade agreement. the final showdown coming on friday president obama's push the vote brokering has gun and tilting to the right. there's languaging promising the no trade deal can address climate change. >> i would agree with all those provisions. the legislative process has forever been one where

individual members of congress there used to be time in this city where somebody might get a bridge built in their district or new museum built in their district to support all kinds of different bills but republicans have reformed that. so the legislative process is one of acomplicated set of issues. i'm not couraged by our leadership's effort to get that done. host: it's okay to add the unrelated provisions? >> i would presidentn't say they're unrelated. i want to make sure it isn't used in a way that -- to me they would make sense of the they could add things that might change my vote. so i think that's the challenge and really the regulator on what

our leadership will do. if they add provisions on a majority won't support it won't be in the bill. host: let's talk about iraq as well and the policy on that. president says he'll send 500 more advisors to iraq to help win back ramadi from isis. why hasn't the speaker of the house and republican leadership brought up a new authorization for lawmakers to debate and authorize the war on isis. >> i would like to see that. the existing one is a 9/11 era provision. i think it's time to re-examine what our commitments are in the region of the world. we have to defeat isis from my perspective. they are a declared enemy of

america and other allies in the region. and there have been a tremendous sacrifice of over the last decade. i think it's important that we prevail there. frankly, the president needs to lead here. i don't believe the president has fully explained our nation, the breadth and depth and our continued success in iraq and afghanistan. obviously isis has gained major ground. we'll get to the military experts about bringing the troops the additional 450 troops to the region. we need a stronger commitment there. host: he did send up to congress language for a new a. m.f.

>> if he brought it if he brought it to the floor now, it would not pass or succeed. the challenge is that many members of the democratic caucus would not see any military force in that region at all. that weakened the president's success in that region rather than strengthen his ability. republicans, of we brought forward our own version, it would be one that gave the president more latitude to be successful in that region of the world. the president has said he doesn't want more latitude. we are at an impasse. we are operating under the existing am,ff. i would like to have one that better reflects america's current challenges. to do that, we will have to have

a commander in chief who leads. host: there are more issues to discuss. beverly and columbia, missouri a democrat. caller: i have one question. you said on the tpp it would bring good paying jobs to the united states. second question is if that is true, then why are all of these states putting in right to work? we know that lowers wages. the american people aren't stupid sir. that is all i have to say. guest: let me so your first that we agree on the last thing you said. i am certain the american people are smart. we have to first distinguish on the difference between the tpp and tpa. tpp is a legislation that would be the trade agreement for the asian-pacific region. tpa is the agreement we are

debating this week that would give the president the authority to negotiate such agreements over a period of time. it would last past president obama's presidency. every american president has had that authority since roosevelt. i believe that it is appropriate for the president to go and negotiate under instructions of congress. it is important to understand that the tpa strengthens the congress' hands in these negotiations because it requires and agreements be passed separately publicly persisted days before the president can sign it. if congress does not approve of the trade agreement, it will not take effect. it will not become law. as to your questions about right to work, i believe everybody in america has an opportunity to work in a place that they believe works best for them. i believe union workers are to have the opportunity to unionize

if they decide to do so. i believe somebody ought not be required to not work in a facility if they choose to not want to join that union. that is all kinds of economic statistics that show more jobs and opportunity come when you have right to work. it is why all across the country, the state oppressing those provisions. indiana passed a law recently in a help to bring job opportunities to our state. host: jack in new jersey, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i am a registered republican, but i haven't even voted last seven elections. i have given up hope. the republicans time and again put the interests of their financial contributors ahead of the citizens. if you would like an education, read a book called factory man.

excellent. my son moved to virginia some years ago. it is the most depressed area i have ever seen. used to be thriving with factories making furniture and carpeting and linens and clothing. they are all closed and gone. host: sorry jack, i thought you are finished. guest: i know firsthand in my region in the area i represent in indiana in the agricultural sector where folks are growing corn and soybeans and product support at all over the world and manufacturing sectors where automobiles to engines to faucets. folks are building and making things sold all over the world. you make an important point which is to say as much as i am a free trader and belief that

free trade creates jobs and opportunity, but the facts are facts. one in five american jobs are in exports. those jobs pay better than jobs that are not in the four sectors. the benefits of trade don't fall uniformly. there are winners and losers. those trade agreements -- that is why we are debating today trade assistance that would allow and help those workers who are impacted in a negative way through trade agreements. host: we will go to michigan next. brian, a democratic collar. caller: good morning. i just like to say that all of the trade agreements and most recently the one we had with south korea are supposed to be fair.

we export 25,000 cars less to korea last year while at the same time to exported about 247,000 to the u.s. the trade agreements are not being followed through on. they are not being enforced. if you're not going to enforce them i floated for obama twice and i would fill for him again but i don't think the trade agreement is right. guest: it is important that we have our trade agreements.i would trade deficit is with countries where we don't have agreements with. it is fair enough those agreements have not been adequately enforced. i do believe leaders of both parties over decades have taken an approach that if we can open up a market even in small ways we will not require those countries to open up to all of our audits products. those days have changed.

we need to require our trading partners to trade freely and fairly with us. our best opportunity to do that is to trade agreements. the challenge is this. i understand the temptation to draw of the drawbridges unlock in america -- and lock in america. it just won't work. there are hundreds of millions of people all over the globe who are ready to compete in the modern economy. 70% of the world's purchasing power is outside of our country. if we want to continue to grow and prosper if we want the manufacturing sector to continue in our country and for america to stir great, we have to stay a country that makes things. we will have to continue to trade. that's why i support trade. host: david is an independent in maine. you're on the air. caller: good morning. i would like to make a couple of

comments. democratic party and this president is what is wrong with this country. as far as trade goes, the republican party has a chance to stand with the working man. if they vote for this trade agreement, the chamber of commerce and the republican party selling out the american people and working men. my other comment is i believe firmly that barack obama is a muslim or muslim sympathizer. host: he has said he is a christian. let's move on from that. guest: the best way for us to enforce trade standards on other countries around the world is through trade agreements. we have a trade surplus with those countries.

we certainly understand the challenges that are there for folks that have seen jobs lost in their area. there is the old line by harry truman that a recession is when your neighbor loses his job, and depression is when you lose yours. it is important we look at trade assistance as part of the package. if we continue to want america to grow and prosper, they have to -- we will have to trade with the rest of the world. host: the labor department poised to make changes to overtime rules. take a look at the current federal overtime rules and employers required to pay time and a half for each hour of work above 40 hours per week to workers making less than $23,660 per year. the labor department said to raise the threshold to around $51,000.

what do you make of this? it doesn't require congressional approval. guest: congress would have to pass legislation to stop it. it is not something that requires congressional approval. to me, it looks like one more incentive that this president is together to create full-time jobs and our economy. the real challenges we don't have enough people with full-time jobs, not a question of whether people are working at $50,000 jobs are willing to work more than 40 hours to do that. one of my problems with this administration is it often seems to sort of ignore basic rules of economics. the idea that you get less of what you penalize and more of what you consent. we get incentive to raise that to $50,000, you will give the incentive for employers to lower

jobs. what we have seen in the president's 40 hour requirement in the health care law. what you have seen is employers that are pushing employee is to 35 hours or 32 hours and have programs in place. i have heard mcdonald's has a program in place where their managers -- an alarm comes up on the computer and says you are closing in on 40 hours so don't work them anymore this week. that is not the intent of the law, but that is the impact. if the president pushes this bill forward, it will essentially hurt the very people he is try to help. host: you think congress will pass a law to stop this? is there a compromise there? guest: i think it is important to recognize moses didn't come down with the tablets and create

the current lay of the land of the law. in question is are you going to hurt or help working americans with these provisions? the house is looking at hearings . education committee will be holding hearings. i believe you will see legislation come out of that. the president has a veto power over any legislation we can pass. we have the filibuster questions. it would be difficult to pass a law to stop this. question is is this a good policy? i want to put forward policies that create more jobs and more opportunities and better wages for our workers. i worry if we are not careful here, we could create a disincentive for people. host: he served a that committee , the education and workforce committee. stephen pennsylvania, an independent. caller: good morning. my name is steve.

this whole tpp thing has to do with immigration. you talk about comparing jobs overseas and jobs over here. the regulations here are costing jobs. jobs overseas made less. what you want to do is bring the scale down for the american people to compete. it can be done -- it can't be done. health care is another big deal. i can't afford it. i grew up in the 1970's when i saw jobs start to go south. this whole thing is about taxes. this government wants to feed the machine. i can't afford to feed this machine no more.

it is out of hand. taxes are out of sight. companies cannot afford to build anything in this country. regulations are killing this country. you people on the republican side are doing giving obama all the power to do whatever. my thought is obama has dirt on everybody in congress, and that is why he is getting his way on everything. guest: i understand the angst you are talking about. i represent a district in eastern indian aware folks feel like their opportunity for the american dreams have been yanked out from underneath them. the answer to that is good paying jobs, growing economy better opportunities for working americans. i recognize the temptations to

draw up the drawbridges and block off america, but the reality is we will not be able to stop globalization. will to be able to compete fairly around the globe. the reality is in many ways we are not in the middle of a fair fight now. the best way to make it a fair fight, and i believe the american worker can win when given a fair opportunity and chance is to have trade agreements and standards with those agreements, and a buckle up our bootstraps and go to compete. host: james, a republican in georgia. you are on the air. caller: up our i don't understand about this, obamacare comes up and i'll drop the last 2-4 years about him on transparency. you are doing the same thing lining up with him to do the same thing. all you are doing is knocking the working man down in america.

yelled better get it together -- you better get it together up there because you are doing harm to the united states and the people. guest: the caller makes an important point in that i do believe we need transparency. the president and i disagree on most things. i don't trust the president to go out and negotiate an agreement on behalf of the american people without us getting the opportunity to see what is in the bill. if we don't pass to be a the president can go and negotiate trade agreements. paul ryan has talked about the broad debate of a nuclear agreement with iran. if you have tpa-like provisions

whatever agreement is determined will have to sit publicly for 60 days. the american people will have 60 days to examine the agreement. the president can then go negotiate the agreement and force it to congress. if we can hold the president accountable in these kind of agreements, we have to pass tpa, what which will make the agreements sit in the public for 60 days and then require congress to give approval. if not, we will have the ability to. host: if the president were to negotiate a trade deal and put on the house and senate floor the amendment process would be allowed. your own colleagues in the republican party are saying why

would we argue our constitutional responsibility to have a say? guest: the challenge their is as we talked about earlier on the $50,000 threshold the entire world cannot negotiate on the floor of congress.3 the practical effect of not having a tpa and leaving it to a congressionally amended process to pass a bill would have no trade agreements at all ever. if that is your strategy and what you believe is the right position for the future of america, i understand why you might oppose tpa. if you do believe in free trade and you believe we have to have these trade agreements, there has to be some practical way to negotiate. that is why every president since franklin roosevelt has had this authority.

if i were to criticize this president on this process, and i appreciate his courage and conviction in trying to get this one bill passed, it would have been better had this effort been put forward in a time span that was not so close to an existing trade agreement. it is difficult to separate the two provisions now because this is being passed so the tpp can potentially come to the floor relatively quickly. this is a debate that could have been had over multiple years ago. we are where we are. host: the transpacific partnership is the deal the congressman is referring to. that as with 12 nations. kathleen in dayton ohio. caller: i have been listening very closely and i will say i'm not totally up to speed with this trade agreement, but like you said there have been winners

and losers in past trade agreements. clearly, the losers have been the american worker. i spent the last seven years with my aging parents taking care of them, and he was a teamster. i went in a nursing home with all these acts gm workers and postal workers and teamsters. as i go out to the v.a. with my dad, i talked to worker after worker who had formerly worked at gm and other plants who are now making $10 an hour driving vehicles out to the v.a. the dayton region is filled with people like that. there was a plant level about five years ago, and now it is a hollywood casino, where people are working at $10 an hour. have you read the agreement? who can read it?

was matthews recently had obama on a couple of weeks ago or a month ago and president obama said he would debate those opposing the trade agreement like senator terry brown and elizabeth warren and now senator schumer. the american public needs to know what is in it, and our representatives need to know what is in it. guest: absolutely. this week, we are voting on tv pa. frankly, it gives congress the ability to get into the middle of these negotiations and be part of the process. i have read the tpa. the tpp which is not fully negotiated yet a something members of congress do have the ability to read. it is kept in a classified

setting because it is a private negotiation until it becomes public. the reason for that is nothing the various. . nothing nefarious. people all around the world can get the specifics. they want to understand the entire package you i will certainly read it before there is any vote on the tpp. because of the way it is kept in secret, i was scheduled to read it two different times this week and neither time because of schedule reasons was able to get in there and do it. i will get back in there and do it when i can. when you look at how the benefits of trade don't follow uniformly, there are certainly american workers who have not benefited from trade. there are all kinds of american workers who have benefited from trade. whether you are selling honda cars or toyota forklifts or

engines or caskets, would have workers in america who have jobs because of trade. those jobs are higher-paying jobs. as much as folks would like to harken back to a world where we can draw up drawbridges and exclude america from competing with the rest of the world, we cannot do that. if we do that, our economy will wither. will we need to do is make the rest of the world play by fair rules. i believe in the american worker. when the american worker has an opportunity to compete fairly based on standards that a uniform -- that are uniform, we can and will win. to do that, we have to have trade agreements. the facts show that the countries we have trade agreements, we have a trade surplus with them. it is the countries were we do not have trade agreements with

that they are doing a lot of things that americans are frustrated with. host: johnson washington, an independent. caller: i am assuming you are an attorney. i assume what an affidavit under oath is. i would like you to sign one saying you have read the bill and that you can pass a test mine independent person in your district on what is in that bill so you would be incarcerated if you like to the people of your district. the problem is trust. someone like you can come on with platitude and pumped her fist into the air, but there is a long-term that means the thing speaks for itself. the last thing i say is patty bush made the most prophetic statement in the early 1990's. said the american people find out what we have done while they have the ability, blood will run

in the streets. have a good day. guest: i don't know about your last quote there. if you hurt my comment a minute ago, i will promise you today that i will have read the tpp before the tpp is on the house floor. that is not the legislation we are talking about this week. i have read the one we're talking about this week. i recognize the frustration and appreciate the frustration of those who have lost jobs under trade agreements in the past, but you cannot ignore the millions of american workers were benefiting from trade today. those are better paying jobs in our economy .i want to keep them in our economy . the best way to grow and expand them is to grow trade. host: health care ahead of the supreme court ruling on subsidies. what is the plan for republicans if the court strikes down the subsidies on federal exchanges? guest: the reality is if the

court strikes down the federal subsidies, there will be millions of americans who are no longer able to afford their insurance. from a supported thing we can all sit together is no americans will lose their treatment, not have their dialysis or cancer treatment because of the supreme court ruling. republicans are committed to working through a transition p eriod if the court does strike down the law. it is likely although the supreme court doesn't consult with me that if they do pass an agreement, they will have some ramp off pe of monthsriod -- ramp off periods of months so it doesn't end abruptly. we have a task force working on a plan in the house. there are senate plans as well.

i believe a likely plan would include some sort of ramp off period where i hope we have expanded use of whatever subsidy dollars and their so individual consumers can see the market in place. a mandate requires individuals to have -- as one of our earlier callers talked about, the spiking cost of health care is a reality in our economy. one of the things republicans have to knowledge is it is not like it was the land of milk and honey and utopia before the president past this law. i would like to see us look at a malpractice reform and brought in competition along state party

lines so we can get rid of the mandates that drive up the cost of insurance. my guess is that what you will see is a republican approach that looks at trying to deal with a near-term challenge that comes with the shakeup of the marketplace and then a longer term plan the start to look at what kind of transformation we can bring to the health care industry. republicans did not create this problem. this crisis will be one that arose because of the way to democrats jammed their bill through. we are all going to have a responsibility to work together to find a solution for the millions of americans impacted by the ruling. host: paul in madison indiana on my republican. -- indiana, a republican. caller: one of the problems i

saw firsthand when i was an open in okinawa's we were taking american cars and bringing them there under japanese authority. they have rulebooks out and they came out to each vehicle a minute each car had to be inspected a certain way. i believe in fair trade. i believe any country we do business with, we ought to open their books on importing american goods and apply the same policies they have. one of the problems i have had with the establishment ruling class, and democrats have been running this country since fdr's time, so don't blame it on republicans. these policies have hurt american businesses.

the democrats load up a lot of rules and regulations that strangle us. host: i have to leave it there because we are running out of time. guest: sounds like paul and i agree on a lot of topics. the reality is many of our trade partners including japan have not been fair and their dealings with american products. the best way to make sure they have to be pairs to have a trade agreement. host: i will hear from bob from duluth minnesota. real quick if you can ask a question. caller: my first comment would be to understand the dynamic of trade, you need to simple five the concept -- to simplify the concept. if you have two contractors bidding on a job, one working for $.50 an hour and the other $120 an hour, most people can figure out who will get the contract.

the only way you will change the dynamic of that is to lower the american wages down to $.50 an hour. that is my comment. guest: again i understand the desire to draw up the drawbridges and harken back but i will say we have the best education and training in the world. we have the american were worker better for high-paying wages than other countries do. the facts are the highest paying manufacturing jobs are once related to trade. we have a trade surplus with those countries where we have agreements. we have a huge trade deficit with countries where we don't. if we want to change that, we have to have trade agreements. host: more debate to come on this. the house will start this debate today with the job assistance for those who lose their jobs to trade.

congressman, thank you for previewing the debate. appreciate it. when we come back, the house this week approved a $55 billion bill for transportation housing project. we will talk with democratic congressman david price on what is in that bill. later, members of congress play in a baseball temperature ready. we will hear from the team managers. we will hear why they do and why they think each team will win. we will be right back. >> mary todd lincoln was known to be well educated and bright. she spoke several languages fluently and had a strong interest in politics and took an

active role in her husband's career. she suffered a series of emotional challenges. three of her four children died before reaching adulthood, and her husband was assassinated while sitting next to her at the theater. mary todd lincoln, this sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's original series first ladies, influence and image. from arthur washington to michelle obama. sundays at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3. here are some of our featured programs this weekend. on the c-span networks on c-span2 on saturday night kirsten powers says liberals are now against tolerance and free speech. on sunday night at 11:00, former deputy director of the cia on the successes and failures of the agency's war on terror and

his current fight against al qaeda and isis. on american history tv on c-span3, saturday night at 9:15 p.m., author kevin mcmahon on the strategy behind president nixon's supreme court opinions and the impact. sunday night on american artifacts, we visit the american museum of history to visit the newly restored murals depicting the amistad and the founding of talladega college. get our full schedule at c-span.org. "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with congressman david price democrat of north carolina, the ranking member on the appropriations subcommittee. he gives 1.5 billion to transportation housing programs.

what is that mean in terms of dollars compared to last year and the agencies and programs that run? guest: both housing and transportation are areas that are born to brought as a result of the republican strategy budget strategy. the tax expenditures are not addressed, in tandem with spending is not addressed but it certainly devastates our domestic investment. this is a bill where that comes home to roost. we are looking at a state of need in this country. something like $78 billion in capital backlog for transit systems. $25 billion backlog for maintaining public housing. it is a dire situation. this bill attempts to address it. we have a new chairman from

florida. and has been a pleasure to work with him. he has done the best he can with a very tough budget allocation. if your question, the funding is basically level from last year. it is actually a little less than last year. we got a somewhat improved allocation. we are $1.5 billion below where we were this year. this year is already inadequate. we said on the very first day we want to work cooperatively and have a build on the road addresses our needs. we have to have a budget agreement. that was the problem tuesday night. if you fix one thing you'll dig in other whole -- dig another whole. host: the bill passed the house 216.

the president threatening to veto this. guest: yes he is. it is a matter of demanding a recalibration of this budget strategy. we are just going down a path that isn't working fiscally, but it also is decimating the investments our great country has to make in research and education. there is not a single housing and community development program that is not under resourced. ever-present the part of central north carolina. we are trying to invest in

transit. where building train stations. we're doing good things. we have had federal support, but that is increasingly hard to come by. there are tiger grants we are counting on us part of this bill to help with these facilities. we are getting maybe one out of every 20 applications we can address. the backlog there is incredible. when you to address this. and cannot be addressed with heavy lifting by members of the subcommittee alone. it has to be a budget agreement. we had a short-term budget agreement that got us through this year, the current year. the question is can we do at least that much? we need a longer-term agreement. we will not get that because our politics are so polarized right now. we at least need a short-term deal.

my question to my colleagues is why can't we do that right now? why do we have to wait until this fall and have a presidential veto and threatened shutdowns. you can pass these appropriations bills through partyline votes, but everybody knows this is not for real. this will never be enacted. it would be prudent and rational to do this now, to adjust those budget caps and pass bills that would do the job for the country. host: heritage action fund, the conservative group scored this bill asking republicans not to vote for it.

guest: to highway trust fund is in big trouble. that raises a couple of points. you went over that 216-2 number, but that is close10 -- 216-210 number, but as close. to our a fair number of moderate members who shared our views of the bill. there were others marching to the tune of heritage action. they just don't believe in a federal role in transportation at all, or that seems to be where they are coming from because this bill is so inadequate to say that it is too much just means they probably favor the states doing this totally alone which would be a major departure for this country. host: what does this mean for the highway trust fund which runs out in july? guest: that is the other issue.

it is confusing because the transportation funding is partly based on the highway trust fund which is mainly the user fee the gasoline tax the has diminished as a source. we are more efficient now and burning was scuffling. gasoline tax is diminishing. the refusal to face the revenue issue on the republican side is behind a lot of this. it is behind the budget standoff and the failure to do more than just catch up our transportation authorization going forward. alongside this annual appropriations bill, which is in such trouble you have the larger problem of the five-year transportation reauthorization which is also stymied and i am hopeful we can break out of the deadlock this year.

the president has done an interesting thing on that. you talk about thinking outside the box. that is what he has done. we have been beating our heads against the wall. can we maybe do some tolling. maybe we can do an investigation account of that brings in money. the president says you have these overseas profits parked from corporations, and the has been a lot of debate under the conditions of which we tax those and bring them back home. let us tax them at a reasonable rate and bring them back home and put that to infrastructure for the next five years. it is not a permanent solution but it is a lot better than what we have been doing now. that may be where we get this

because i think the republicans are feeling lots of heat on this. we are and we should be. the business community across the board, our state and local governments are beside themselves. we didn't used to worry about this. i remember one of my first votes was an override of a ronald reagan veto of a transportation five-year authorization. we cannot get to the floor fast enough to override the veto. that apply to republicans also. that's how far things have rate fallen. host: bridge talking about transportation issues and some other topics in key debates in congress this week. first, we will hear from jim in hamilton montana. an independent, good morning. caller: good morning.

i had a couple of comments. i agree with you that transportation is so important. it moves the country and makes for safer roads for everybody. my question is the president has spent more from george washington to today. where did all that money go? i don't see anything that shows all that money that has been borrowed because you guys have plenty of money for all the money that has been borrowed by the president. i don't understand why we have such a lack of money and all these different areas of the government. guest: does the budgets simply don't add up. the president came into office at the height of the greatest

downturn economic downturn since the great depression. we did at that point the recovery act under democratic leadership. we did a recovery act legislation, which i think most economist would agree got the economy off that downward track and started a steady process month after month of growth and come back. it is still too slow. i think the recovery act did that. the money was borrowed. a lot of it came back. the investments in the auto industry pay rich dividends and saved the industry. since then, we have had a political turnaround. in 2010, there was a backlash election. we felt it here.

the leadership of the house turned over to the lukens republicans. there was abandonment of that recovery philosophy and effort. fortunately, the federal reserve helped us keep it going. i don't know where the country would be had they not done that, actually. since that republican takeover, we have been faced with these budgets that simple he not adequate to our domestic needs. what should we have done? their our fiscal challenges. -- there are fiscal challenges. i look to the budgets we reached , the one in 1990 and then with democratic heavy lifting early in the clinton administration. why can't we look back and learn

those lessons? we balanced the budget and pay off $400 billion of the national debt. it was a roaring economy, and we continue to invest in exotic structure -- invest in things like infrastructure. now we are stuck with this ideology that does not let us raise the necessary revenue and whcaksacks away at domestic involvements. host: we are talking with the top democrat on the appropriations subcommittee on transportation and housing serving his 14th term. how can we compete with the world? also this issue of train safety

after the crash in philadelphia. guest: she has done her homework because both of those things are on points. -- point. the markup occurred after the pennsylvania crash and the leadership committee had to say yes we are cutting amtrak in this bill. we underinvested in amtrak and maintaining it. would have underinvested in this new transportation technology that would have prevented -- probably would have prevented that pennsylvania crash. it is being installed at far too slow of a face pace. if we are serious about intercity rail, i think this is a mode of transportation people like. it is a great alternative and

has benefits but it requires some investment. we had some battles on the house floor over this. over amtrak and what kind of support was appropriate. every mode of transportation in this country is subsidized one way or another. we understand that going in. the question is do you subsidize or not that how do you subsidize wisely and prudently? how do you have a wise approach? intercity rail's is part of the balance. host: at a hearing, federal regulators said 71% of commuter railroads would not have the system in place by the deadline.

let us go to pennsylvania with greg. you are on the air. caller: long time listener, first time i got through. i think it is a mistake you don't rotate the independent line to the top of the list. i am at least the third one in this segment. people are more and more dissatisfied with both parties and i think you should rotate independent every third month to the top of the list. i think what representative mr essner --please cross examine all the people that show up on your show. don't elections have consequences?

i believe you refer to it a couple of minutes ago that the democrats did control the congress and had a democratic president for at least three or maybe four years criticizing the republicans for not doing what you want them to do right now. you and your party were cr owing about previous elections. don't you share some of the responsibilities of this not happening? guest: sure. we are in an institution where it is incumbent for us to work together and address the country's needs. the democratic takeover the house came after the 2006 elections. 2008 was a democratic year. that changed in 2010 with a

radical change in budget policy as we were discussing earlier. i am very proud of the record during those years where we were writing the bills and usually passing them intact. that would be the first two years of the obama administration. we were struggling to get back from this economic downturn, but we did pass the recovery act which helps create jobs quickly and have a good economic impact. during those years, we had reasonably generous appropriations bills. that was part of a budget process where we were also dealing with revenues and had a plan going forward. that has changed radically office of a -- changed radically

since the 2010 elections. and is one of the less partisan committees. there is a tradition here. the power of the purse is the critical congressional power in the constitution. it is the appropriate committee that implements that i think history would hear me out. it works best when it is cooperative. i have a cordial relationship. these budget issues are to o stark. we have to have a budget agreement and hopefully one that brings about sides together letter this year. -- later this year. caller: the good morning.

this is an important point. you don't look at revenue sources. corporations are the ones that want this global economy. they are pressing to be able to operate globally. they have money sitting offshore they are not bringing back. corporations are 12% of our revenues. if you look at the office of management and budget historical data spreadsheet available online to everybody if you go back to the 1960's and 1970's they used to give 70% of our revenue from corporations. with that kind of drop and everything we are doing globally, why aren't they carrying their fair share?

to keep wanting to look at entitlements as you call them. we the people pay for entitlements. guest: fair enough. i appreciated the chance to clarify what i was saying. the whole point is not to focus on any one aspect of the budget exclusively. that is a disaster. it will not work as fiscal policy, and it will have gross distorting effects. republican strategy looking to appropriations for deficit reduction. military appropriations should be on the table, as it should entitlements spending and the tax code and tax preferences. i believe it is a pretty sound

historical generalization that the stuff works only when everything is on the table and when there is a balance package. that probably isn't popular politically. the budget deals in the 1990's that balanced the budget and produced surpluses and helped produce a roaring economy, t those were not popular at the time. the votes we cast for those budget deals involved everything and something for everybody to dislike. those budget deals were probably among the best votes i ever cast. because of where the republican party is right now, those kinds of conference of deals are simply not reached -- simply not in reach now. fully have to hope for now is a little bargain something that puts us in a better place for next year.

host: i want to ask you about trade. here is the wall street journal yesterday. where do you stand on trade promotion authority? guest: i have in trying to weigh the pros and cons of this particular trade deal. i have not come down on one side or the other exclusively. it is a moving target. i know you had earlier discussions about some of the pieces that are still not totally resolved. i have a history of voting for trade deals on i thought they did what they are supposed to do which is level the playing field for our country and workers and positively influence labor. i voted against deals that that were not sufficiently strict or

stringent in that respect. this big pacific do has the potential to write the rules of the road in a positive way. i think the process under which we are dealing with this, and i know you can just bring a trade deal to the floor and amend away. that is not how it works. i wish we had a better and more transparent process that allowed more give-and-take in terms of fast-track getting this deal together. i wish our republican friends have not been so insistent that no improvements in the bill will be permitted in the house. they amended away in the house. kind of provisions that might deal the currency issue, those

things could be articulated. maybe not perfectly, but at least articulated as negotiating goals or objectives. the door has been shut. that is one of the things we are discussing now. host: what has the pressure been like for you? guest: i read the stories about what is going on in some parts of the country. there is some pressure that has gotten pretty intense on a lot of my colleagues. i have had intense conversations on both sides but mainly on the opposition side. i would say it has been civil and respectful. it has not deteriorated at all. it is a vigorous engagement that i really value. host: what industries would be largely impacted in north carolina by a transpacific

partnership? guest: it is interesting because if you had discussions of trade 10 or 20 years ago, we would have talked about textiles first ago, we would have talked about textiles first thing. it is not about textiles anymore. host: not in north carolina. guest: well, when we first worked on this, i worked on behalf of some of our textile firms. and i think textiles are fine. textiles actually favor this. so, they favorite. and stand to gain, some of them do, some of the firms. the farm interests -- most farm groups are supporting it. agribusiness ibm, and other i.t. firms pharmaceuticals, a lot of the big firms in the research triangle area are

becoming dependent on international trade. host: have you heard from the president? guest: yes. not repeatedly, but i have heard from him and cabinet members. host: what was the conversation like with the president? guest: well, i was listening to your earlier discussion with another member and some of the points are very familiar. most presidents, for most of their tenure, have had -- not exclusively -- but every president for part of the tenure has had this kind of ability to get a trade agreement through on an expedited basis to congress. so, why not this president? and then the president i think very -- sometimes this is like ships passing in the night because -- and i think this is very legitimate -- the president and national leaders are looking at the politics of this and what is going on in the pacific region.

what american releasor -- leadership is going to require. and the advantages that will come for us and for the international community if the rules of the road are written in a responsible way. of course, that is what they are striving to do. but the other ship passing in the night is globalization. globalization is a big thing. it has certainly been a mixed bag for california -- north carolina. we try to compensate that with taa, the trade adjustment assistance bill that is also being tweaked as we speak. host: and could get a vote on the floor today. guest: it could. whether democrats are going to vote for past record not, i think virtually every democrat says that, you know, it is a nonstarter if you -- yes, that vote will probably come first. so globalization has been a

mixed bag and the question is do you come in trade agreements -- are you just furthering globalization or mitigating it? and controlling some of the race to the bottom. host: let's get back to calls. andrew has been waiting and cal of -- south carolina. good morning. caller: yes i didn't know david price used to live in north carolina. and during the time of jim -- jim hunt and yourself and a lot of your constituents. i have a question, and the question is -- the democratic party has had the rain now for several -- reign now for several years, but it appears to me that everything is personal. it is not about the american people, it is not about the

trade agreements, it is not about obamacare, it is about trying to blackball, we would say when i worked in d.c., we called a black ball a certain entity to make them look bad in front of the american public. you know however, we are looking at it from that point of view. we are not looking at it -- what this person says is the gospel. according to the politics in washington or in raleigh. we know that jim hunt has a lot of export, import kind of things coming in, which made north carolina a great state above all the other states i have been to in the united states, which is all of them. north carolina is probably the best date of them all because of what jim hunt did. guest: jim hunt was a great

governor no question. i own a lot to him in terms of our working together over the years. you know, i -- i agree with you but i also want to say something about this personalized politics. i expect your thinking of the president. and i do think there has been a -- a tendency among some people in politics, some people in -- and some of our citizens to oppose almost anything president obama puts forward. it seems sometimes it has more to do with him than it does the of the case. this trade battle, actually, is not like that. in fact, there is some pretty strange alliances here and the president is counting of course i'm republican leaders -- of course on republican leaders to get this fast track. through the congress.

i agree, though, our politics often is too personal, people need to rise above whatever their rivalries and animosities are and look after the common good. i would say, though, we were talking earlier about appropriations and the committee i served on and why i like that committee, and one reason is it is an institutions committee -- institution's committee. we voted against this bill. some republicans voted against it too. but i would say that we, on a personal of a, we are really trying -- personal level, we are really trying to not make it personal. and i don't feel too pessimistic about this. i think we will get a budget adjustment for this year and i think we will eventually write a

bill, which will be everything i want. a lot better than what we passed -- host: let's go to escrow, north carolina. in independent. caller: yes, good morning. host: caller: good morning. caller:i am wondering -- host: good morning. caller: i am wondering why congress can't pass a bill. -- it can't be a felony or some type of penalty for stepping on our flag because when they do that, that is dead americans they are stepping on. guest: well, i am glad to hear from asheboro, by the way. that community was in my congressional district. i'm very fond of asheboro. my political mentor came from there. glad to hear from our friend this morning. and to -- to appreciate his service as a veteran and i think i understand the -- the hurt

that is imposed on veterans. really on many americans when the flag is desecrated. we do, in this country, permit all kinds of speech, all kinds of expression. that is reprehensible and is obnoxious. that is of the first amendment. and so we have to be very careful in protecting the flag, the symbols of this country. at the same time reject -- not to reject the very freedoms we have fun for over the years. host: william. eureka, california. our line for democrats. caller: well, thank you. good morning. guest: good morning. caller: you know, it'll take me just a couple minutes to say what i have to say.

i am a retired -- driver. now, you know where i'm coming from. i think. amtrak is federally subsidized. federally subsidized means that all of us taxpayers going into this trade, which is a losing proposition from day one -- you are putting billions with a "b" into the transportation system. they have been struggling since the time i started working there back in the 1970's. and there were only two forms of bus transportation at the time, and that was true ways and greyhound. trailways got to the point where they couldn't keep going. they were struggling really bad and greyhound were struggling, too. so greyhound absorbed them and what that did was make one entity. so now you say we have a monopoly.

well, the monopoly doesn't help anything when there is only one. host: i think we got your point. i think with you brought up as the debate that is happening in congress. why should amtrak get more money from the taxpayers when they have been operating at a loss for decades? guest: well, every mode of transportation, including bus transportation, is subsidized. greyhound -- and there are some competing bus lines now and some operators that are doing interesting things in dishes -- nicehs -- niches where bus transportation is actually quite profitable. and they pretend on the federal highway system. if you talk about billions of dollars, yes, we are talking about billions of dollars with a"b." -- a "b." providing for maximum safety,

traffic control, and so on and so on. it is true of every mode of transportation. a good deal of highway funding does come from the users themselves. these are taxpayers and they pay a gasoline tax. as we said earlier, that is not going to be adequate down the road. so, i -- you know -- we can't just poor -- pour good money after bad in terms of any transportation. certainly, amtrak is working in the northeast corridor very very well. amtrak is working in north carolina. we have trains of is not between rally and shalit. it is the way to go -- between rally and -- between raleigh and charlotte. it is the way to go. and those trains are very well subscribed. three routes each day, each way. so train travel, especially in these regional corridors, i think makes sense.

but we don't have unlimited resources. we do need to balance our approach and i think all modes of transportation ever place. host: winston, georgia. kenneth, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. just a quick question for you. a lot of americans out here, when we have credit card debt, we pay that debt off. it is obviously in economic issue that we can't survive as a family without it. and i just don't understand how you know, when it comes to cut spending -- and it's both parties. don't get me wrong. i'm not cornering you out on this, but when it comes to spending, nobody ever wants to cut spending. you have the lobbyists and the chamber of commerce who are pulling on your strings and you all aren't listening to the people. i don't know how long it has been, but the point is, it is easy to spend other peoples

money, but at some point, you have to start treating it like a real person does with a pay their debt off. guest: that is right, absolutely right. and, let me just add something. i think you would agree with this. you don't do it just by taking cheap shots at this program or that, as though if you simply were to cut foreign aid to this or that place. that's going to solve it. this is a huge issue. the fiscal future of the country and how you get this together going forward. and what i was suggesting earlier and looking back to the 1990's, you know, that was not that long ago. it was not that long ago that we balanced the budget. it wasn't long ago that we paid off $400 billion of that national debt. and the economy was flourishing during this. -- during this period.

there was some sacrifice required all around. there was constrained on domestic appropriations, military spending, there were some reforms in the entitlement programs and so-called mandatory spending. and there were some adjustments in the tax code, especially requiring more of those who are better off. those -- those deals worked. those deals worked. and so i agree with you, sir. you do borrow money to get you past your present needs, but there is a day of reckoning that comes. and what these budget deals do is -- is responsive that. that is the day of reckoning. and it is a lot better than cheap shots that pretend there are easy answers. host: surely is caller: next in georgia. a democrat. host: good morning. good morning -- caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: this trade agreement is

supposedly going to create jobs for the american people to export. how is it that people in vietnam and wherever making $.50 an hour are going to be able to afford what we exports? it just doesn't make any sense to me. host: congressman the guest: -- congressman? guest: well, that is a good question. some of those are more attractive markets for our exporters than others are. vietnam actually is buying more and more american products especially foreign products. and vietnam, of course, wants to become more of a middle-class country. hopefully that will be a war promising markets in years to come. -- will be a more promising market in years to come. but if vietnam could be brought into an international agreement where they observe the rules of

the road and they allow their workers to organize and, you know, don't become just part of the race to the bottom and environmental labor standards that would be a positive thing. that doesn't settle it for this agreement. there are lots of questions, as we talked about earlier. especially about the process question. help congress is going to deal with the so-called fast-track authority. but i would agree with you vietnam right now is not a terribly lucrative market. although, it has some promise for the future. host: before we let you go, need to get your reaction to the president assad announcement that he will send -- president's announcement that he will send more troops to iraq. the u.s. edges nearer to ground operation in iraq. do you feel that this -- this increase in advisers is a slippery slope to ground operations? guest: no, i don't think it is a

slippery slope. actually, i think the situation in iraq warns this additional -- warranets this additional number of troops. they will be providing some intelligence training, some help in getting more effective iraqi forces on the ground. i don't think we are headed towards a combat role there. even the people who have criticized this don't seem to be saying that. they say we need more, we need a broader range of things that they can do. but i don't believe anybody should think that -- that reintroducing a u.s. combat role in iraq is going to -- is going to save the situation. the situation will be saved only if the iraqis are willing and able to defend themselves. and i want to see us support them and that and that is what

this is about. host: congressman, appreciate your time this morning. guest: thank you. enjoyed it. host: when we come back, we will open up the phone lines and you can continue this conversation. the budget out of washington, but also the trade debate as well as this issue of sending more military advisers to iraq. "when we come right back. -- open phones when we come right back. >> the new congressional directory is a handy guide to the 114th congress with color photos of every senator and house member, plus biography and contact information. also, district maps, a full. map of capitol hill, and a look at congressional committees, the

cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors. order your copy today. through the c-span online store at c-span.org. >> this summer, booktv will cover book festivals from around the country. near the end of june, watch for the annual roosevelt reading festival from the franklin d roosevelt presidential library. in the middle of july, we are live at the harlem book fair. and at the beginning of september, we are live from the nation's capital at the national book festival. a few of the events this summer on booktv. >> like many of us, first families takes a kitchen time. and like presidents and first ladies, a good read can be a perfect companion for your summer journeys. what better book than one that

appears inside the personal life of every first lady in american history? "first ladies." inspiring stories of fascinating women who survive the scrutiny of the white house. a great summertime read. available from public affairs as a hardcover or e-book through your favorite bookstore or online bookseller. >> "washington journal" continues. host: and we are in open phones here this morning for about 20 minutes or so, getting your thoughts on news of the day. weighing in on the president's decision to send more military advisers to iraq. they say obama's latest iraq escalation, the fight against islamic state, needs more than 450 advisers. this is progress, they say, but

it would do more good if it became the headquarters of a brigade combat team that would oversee the training, help the sunni tribes, secure travel, and force protection. the fundamental problem with mr. obama's strategy is that he is so determined to show the u.s. is not returning to a war in iraq that he isn't doing enough to win the war we are fighting. the editorial board fought on the decision to send military advisers to iraq. we are in open phones. done in -- don in oklahoma. good morning. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was calling to talk to representative price, but i will tell you anyway. host: ok. caller: i am old and sometimes i get things confused. and i think he had a few things confused. the stimulus package did not help the auto -- the auto

bailout was only a bank bailout. maybe he has so much on his mind he gets things confused, but he shouldn't get something that large confused with what is going on in washington. thank you. host: craig in tucson, arizona. what is on your mind this morning? caller: yeah, i just wanted to make a comment on fast track. i was just curious, apparently everybody in congress knows what is in fast track. is that correct? host: i don't know. what congressman was telling us that you do have the of -- opportunity to go read the legislation. that is open to members. and he said that he has done so before he plans to vote on it friday, if it comes to the floor. so, yes, members have that opportunity. caller: so the question is, apparently they don't see -- they see things in fast-track

that they don't really care for. as that a good assumption, the ones that aren't voting for it? host: you will hear the debate here on c-span when they gavel in today because they will begin with that trait assistance legislation that would give assistance to workers, american workers that lose their jobs to tray. so that will be part of the debate. there is a customs bill that is also a part of this debate. and then they need to move forward to trade promotion authority possibly as early as friday. so watch c-span because you will hear a variety of opinions and angles to this. on why people oppose it and why people are supporting it. by the word -- way, george reading in the "washington post ," a vote for growth, not obama is what he writes. before presidential politics --

let me go to charles. oakland, california. caller: good morning, greta. thank you for taking my call. i know you can't respond to this question i am about to ask, but maybe some of the callers can help me out with this. first of all, i wonder why -- who names the white house the white house? shouldn't it be corrected and named the people's house? seeing there is a variety of nationalities, of races in this country. and then, of course, the second question i have, greta, is how

is it possible that mr. cruz, who i understand was born in canada but he got rid of that citizenship to become an american -- how is it possible that he can run for president of these united states we have such a fuss about mr. obama as to where he was born. and to this day, a lot of people still have a problem with that. i have not heard one democrat or anyone else call-in to justify mr. cruz's reason to run for president. whether you are an american because you are white or black or born summer else. host: david in clearwater florida. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. like the first caller in this section, i am old. so i forget things. but if memory serves me correctly, before they brought the troops in iraq, we had to stay in with a large force there to train the iraqi army or the

iraqi police, same difference. then we left and isis came in and they fell like a cheap deck of cards. so now we are sending more people to train the iraqi army. it just seems like we are in an endless war. we have had no tax increase to pay for this war. everything is either off the budget or they are just not going to change it. host: also the debate of whether or not to authorize this fight against isis. here is this morning's "washington post," two senators are pushing for authorization of military force specific to islamic state.

ted. virginia beach. an independent. caller: high, greta. thank you for taking my call. host: good morning. caller: my comment has to do with the tpp or the tpa and i am not sure which one it would fall under. the thing i found most onerous under nafta or the courts that would award a corporation who failed to make a profit because of another country's regulations , and specifically hours -- i think a gasoline tax case was in california and i cannot remember the country whose corporation fought it, but they went into a secret court and american taxpayers ended up footing the bill for the profit that the other country's corporation would have otherwise made.

i haven't heard that being discussed at all. host: david. louisiana. an independent. caller: good morning, greta. host: morning. caller: i just want to say that i am absolutely against this war on the middle east. i am a vietnam veteran and the similarities are just out of control. there was a book that was written by fletcher -- he tells you how the cia moves in and takes over and promotes these wars. you made a statement yesterday about the -- that you are not allowed to cover these groups, these meetings. it seems like the media makes no attempt to cover these things. in the past, you wouldn't have taken no for an answer. host: all right, david.

speaking about iraq, this is the headline -- it says the clinton campaign refused to answer questions about the president's decision to send troops to iraq. we will go here to jesse in virginia. a republican. good morning. caller: hello. i am wondering, i'm semi retired and work part time, and i'm wondering why i get penalized for working part-time and have to clean my social security and pay taxes on it again? when i found my taxes. host: ok.

jim in medford oregon. good morning. caller: hello. my question to you -- and i ask the same thing of my congressman is -- in this trade agreement this tpp i have had the information being touted to me that our agriculture will do quite well with this trade. and i don't doubt that at all. the only thing is that i have a question of is -- where are the living wage jobs going to be that they are promoting for the united states? i asked my congressman that. he never answered. living wage jobs is what we lost under nafta. and i we going to do the same thing under tpp? or, what is it? host: the tpp is one of the trade deals being negotiated

with pacific countries. who is her congressman? guest: well, i had -- i actually talked to one in the north part of the state. his name is brown berger or something like that. he corresponded with me until i asked him that question and he never answered it did you know, if we are talking about agriculture, those are the bottom paying jobs. and we have a whole society in that now. that middle class is leaving us because of nafta. nafta, if you will recall, there was to be a big section when nafta was passed. well, it happened. we have not recovered. we will not recover as long as we continue to rely on corporations that make big money overseas. host: let's go to michigan.

joyce's there. an independent. caller: yes, thank you so much for taking my call. i haven't called in a long time, but i'm so upset about this pacific trade bill. it is the most nonsense thing i have heard of since nafta and calf to -- cafta. no one has kept their words on these agreements -- better living conditions, etc., etc. i think we lost, i think, it was 40,000 manufacturing companies from michigan. i can see what has happened where i live. the loss of jobs, the loss of living standards. now we want to do it all over again. only in a little bigger way so we can kind of totally destroy

the middle class and the poor will forget about them. you know, like they don't count, do they? my discussed -- disgust is so deep with us. my distrust of the people who are pushing this bill is totally -- i'm confounded by it. i'm confounded by president obama. who i voted for twice. whom i thought was a very fair man. and he was working for the middle class people. i have to change my opinion. i have become an independent. i don't know who to trust in congress or the house of representatives anymore. host: all the right joyce, you will be interested then in the debate that is going to happen starting today on the house floor. you can watch it here on c-span. it will continue into friday when they could likely vote on

the fast-track authority for the president. a faster way for him to get his trade deals approved through congress. a yes or no vote on whatever the white house negotiators with trade partners. we will hear from chuck next. a republican. caller: hello. yeah, i was involved with this act called predicated waters. it is to help the wounded warriors transition from the military to civilian life. and i did this about two weeks ago in a little town. i was talking to a couple of the people who were wounded from war. one young lady had a broken -- she had broken her spine in three spots. and another young lady had also a bad spine. the young lady who broker spine in three places, she had to go to mexico to get fixed. they do not fix are here. the other young lady, they --

they are retiring all these people. they gave for aspirin, so they didn't help her. that isn't the bad part. the bad part is the two representatives, my senators came to give a speech. they came to me and said, where other going to give a speech. they gave a three-minute speech and left. they never took the time to talk to those people. and i will give you two examples of the people that were hurt. when our representatives, like these two senators, talk about the v.a. and how they are so involved in stuff, i wish they would get involved. i found it absolutely disgusting what they did because these people were messed up. and i felt real bad.

i wrote to senator heinrich and i just got -- they sent me a bullet point message back. they didn't really address the problem. it just gives a candid message and that is what i got. host: ok. make an index will, tennessee. an independent. -- megan in knoxville, tennessee. an independent. caller: hi. i grew up republican and switched to democrat because to me it is very troubling what the parties seem to do. sit back sabotage third -- things that you don't want to work by not signing them and then say, oh look, we told you government doesn't work. i feel like people in this country have a lot of things in common with people in russia and iran in that our government,

there is a faction that just wants to see the other side fail. they do whatever they can tactics, this and that to get the public emotionally driven and, you know, in russia it is enterprise that is the demon. here, it is government. but i think we are all being bold -- bulled and we will create the next echo of work if people don't come to the table being willing to talk about constructive solutions. i believe in republican ideas but i believe in putting those ideas forward. which is lacking, and i don't need to sabotage someone else's idea. if i don't think it is going to work, then i can sit back knowing that pretty soon they are going want to implement my idea.

host: all right, megan. anne in new hampshire. our last here and open phones. what is on your mind? caller: well, i think we need to go by history on the tpp agreement. and let's look at nafta, which sucked jobs out of this country. and what we had was a leveling of the playing field, as far as wages go, between american workers and workers in mexico. now in china. at this -- there is no such thing as a global economy, in my opinion. if i work at a certain job here in new hampshire, i get x amount of dollars. the cost of living is x amount of dollars. if i go to connecticut, i will make more money, but the cost of living is more. so what we have is decisions being made by our

representatives that is supposed to be we the people, by the people, of the people. and it has gotten to be by the corporations. endless amounts of money that wealthy corporations and persons can buy a representative and -- and buy favor in government. in the last 35 years, wages have not gone up, yes the growth national domestic product has. and these wages that have gone up by the 1% ceos, like the ceo of exxon that makes $200,000 a day. host: i am going to jump in at that point because we are out of time for open phones. when we come back, we are going to be talking with two members of congress who serve as the team managers for the republicans and democrats. congressman joe barton and congressman mike doyle.

they will be talking about tonight's congressional baseball game, a tradition that dates back to 1909. we will be right back. >> director of clinical cardiology in boston. on the advances in heart surgery and the progress being made in the understanding of heart health. >> this actually is a valve that has been crimped onto this

catheter that is being opposition into the diseased valve. and it will be deployed here in just a second with the balloon being inflated. and a new valve will be inserted inside the old calcified stenotic valve. as you can see here, the delivery system is being withdrawn and then the wire will be withdrawn. and what we have just seen in this little display is replacement of a diseased aortic valve. in a manner that does not require open-heart surgery. so we are trying to become smarter about predicting who will get disease. we are trying to become smarter as to identifying the most effective means to prevent attenuate the disease. and then smarter about following up over a longer period of time. so we are currently in an era where we are trying to harness the promise of the human genome

research project that has now been in existence for more than a decade with all the informatics that can be driven by the giants of the industries, like google. and information about sociology geography, where you live, where the railroad tracks are in your city, what is your likelihood to get diabetes on the basis of your educational background, and what is your likelihood of developing something like diabetes or hypertension if you live in a certain part of the city where you have less access to the right kind of food or even the right kinds of instruction -- things like that beckett had an enormous impact. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's q&a. "washington journal" continues. host: the 54th congressional baseball game is tonight. congressman joe barton,

republican of texas, is the baseball manager for the republican team. mike doyle, democrat of pennsylvania, is the democratic manager. this is a tradition that dates back to 1909. this continues every year. congressman, tell of your is why you think it is important to do this sort of thing. guest: first of all, it is a lot of fun and the members enjoy the game. but three charities receive a real benefit from this game. and that is what really excites us. over the years, we have been able to build that up. the washington literacy council the national dream foundation, and the boys and girls club of washington dc. last year, we raised over $400,000 for the charities. guest: congressman barton, why do you think? this is a game that is played every year, but how does it help lawmakers do their jobs? guest: well, it is a chance for

both the republicans and the democrats to have some great fellowship. my team practices up on the hill. we do the saving onto in virginia. everybody volunteers. it is not mandatory. so you get these congressman and senators coming out at 6:30 in the morning. it creates some real special positive vibrations. of course, we don't exit play the game -- we are into the managing stage, but we both did play. and when you play for an hour or two, you are back in your youth. and there is a crowd. and it -- ask when he as it sounds, -- as corny as it sounds, it is a lot of fun. back in the beginning, we raised

$10,000, $15,000. now that your, as he said, we are up over $400,000. it is a big deal. host: do you think it lands itself to stronger bonds -- lends itself to stronger bonds in the city? you have a lot of meetings hearings, business on the floor meeting with constituencies. guest: it does around off the rough edges. mike and i are on the same committee. it -- it is a lot tougher to get red in the face mad at mike about some amendment on the clean air act when we have just been together with her staff figuring out how to raise money for charity. guest: there is really not a lot of time anymore. this is my 21st year being involved with the game. members all go home back to their districts after the last

vote. everyone is running to an airport and there is so few opportunities where you have a chance to engage her colleagues without the suits on and debating on the house floor that you're doing it over something that is a tradition that everybody loves. and i think joe is right. it is a lot tougher to lose her temper with someone that you have come to know it it different light. -- in a different light. guest: i have a nine-year-old son, jack, and he comes to washington every year for this. so he came up this week. we went on the house for for the first time. the first person he wanted to go see, it wasn't john boehner or mccarthy or any of the republicans, he made a beeline over to the democratic side, the all-star pitcher. and eccentric took jack -- cedr

ik took jack to a baseball game last year. i'm having to work hard to keep jack in our column. in practice this morning, he was out there with cedric and mike. he even went to the meeting they had at the end of the practice. [laughter] host: it sounds like you are losing him. democrats have won the last six games. including the 56 victory in 2014. how are the teams looking? guest: our team looks pretty sharp. our pitcher had soldier surgery -- shoulder surgery in the off-season. he is a little bit of a question mark on how far he will be able to throw and how long he will be able to throw. so that is just something we won't know until the game starts. guest: well, mike is old school.

if you think of connie mack or some of those crusty old managers, he is going to pitch that guy until his arm falls off. [laughter] but cedric is the best player probably to ever play in the game. there have been former major leaguers that have played, but they were 20, 30 years past his prime. cedric, had he not been a congressman, i think he was good enough -- it's good enough to make the high minors, if not the major leagues. i have been working with the nrcc and, you know, we have recruited a pitcher this year. we have mark walker from north carolina. and last night, i told the president of the crew campaign committee i need a hard-hitting leftfielder next year. [laughter] so we are building our team up.

just to stay competitive with mike. host: how long have you been doing this? guest: this is my 20th year. host: and managing? guest: i have been managing -- i think this is my ninth year. host: so right now, it stands, 38 republican wins, 38 democratic wins. 1 tie. what does that mean? does that intense the rivalry? guest: the democrats have won six in a row. they are the defending world champions. but i will say last her, we came in second. we are only one game behind. [laughter] we will be more competitive tonight. mark walker, our pitcher, and we have a guy -- a congressman from georgia can hit the ball. costello from pennsylvania is going to be pretty good at shortstop. and some of our regulars, you know, starkman from indiana.

davis from illinois. we have a competitive team. guest: yes, they have a good squad. and we picked up a couple new players this year. i didn't realize he was as good as he was. he didn't come out right away and then we finally talked him into coming to the practice. and he throws ropes from shortstop. and he can hit. and tony all starting for the team. they are praying -- playing pretty well. i think of joe would be a good sport and pitch to cedric tonight. [laughter] they are afraid to pitch to him. i think in the spirit of bipartisanship and friendliness, they should at least give him one at that. guest: we went back and looked. he probably has the record for most consecutive hits. he has 10 hits in a row. we have guys who have played for 20 years and they don't have 10 hits in their career. [laughter] host: a little oppositional

research here. guest: it is going to be a cold day that we pitch to cedric. if you are all way ahead or we are way ahead, it is a different ballgame. i don't know that we have ever gotten him out. host: this game takes place tonight. the 64th congressional baseball game. it is for charity. take a look at what some of the members are saying about the congressional baseball game. here is a republican of pennsylvania tweeting this out looking for to playing in tomorrow's congressional base or game for charity. and chris murphy saying, the one weak spot in the order may be senator chris murphy. ouch. and -- just another reason the congressional baseball game is

one of the best institutions in congress. add to me for the congressional baseball game. let's hear from charlie. hi, charlie. go ahead. caller: hi, this is probably the first time i will be rooting for the democrats because i see a uniform with my name on the back. i don't know how you are raising charity for this, but i think if you put this on television and had a charity drive, i think people would really watch it and contribute. guest: that is a great idea. last her we had 8500 people show up for the -- year we had 8500 people show up for the game. roberto was my childhood hero. i used to take the bus down to the field and sit in the stands and watch him make catches. i just think he is one of the best ever to play the game. and always proud to wear number

21 in his honor. guest: and the radio station here in d.c. is broadcasting the game on the radio. it is being televised on -- host: radio station. guest: it is not being televised on espn or cbs, although, one of these years, it could be. espn in the past has been a sponsor. host: think it might make the highlights in the morning? guest: it is possible. [laughter] if cedric hits a home run, i think that will. guest: if you pitch to him maybe. [laughter] host: in virginia, and republican. caller: hey, guys. i want to congratulate you for taking the time to go out and get the responsibilities off your shoulder.

i would just like to encourage you maybe to tie this to the president possible trade legislation -- president's trade legislation and that if the republicans win, they could defeat the bill. guest: that would be fine with me. [laughter] host: you are a no vote on that right? [laughter] host: you don't think tying the game to any so the policy is going to do it? guest: i don't think the president wants to use the came as a yes or no. guest: we should have the president come out and throughout the first page. host: did you invite the president? guest: i guest: don't know that we did officially. i'm sure he is welcome if he wants to. host: in arkansas, and independent. you are on the air with congressman barton and congressman doyle. caller: good morning. this sounds like a great opportunity for you folks to do something together. but talk about changing the

washington redskins name, they should change it to the scandals. as far as you two people, the democrats should be the parasites and the republicans should be the leeches. guest: you have a great day, too. guest: look, there are problems in washington. there is no question. but this is one of the things -- you have about 50 members on both sides donate their time. the washington nationals donate a lot of the stadium facilities. every dollar that is raised minus some of the expenses of actually doing the game so directly to charity, that is a good thing. that is not a scandal. that is a good thing. the washington literacy council which teaches adults to read, i say 70% of their budget comes from this game. the boys and girls club of d.c. they are doing tremendous things

with some of the underprivileged boys and girls here in d.c.. there are problems in d.c. this game is not one of them host: this tradition dates back to 1909. representative john -- of pennsylvania, a former bush official -- a former professional baseball player, organize the tradition. it was ended in 1958 because of too many injuries. guest: we have had people hurt. the players -- mike and i are kidding around, but the guys on the field and the girls, they take it seriously and they play very hard. we have had several people with broken legs, broken wrists. guest: tim holden and jefferson collided looking up at a flyball. and jefferson had a concussion.

he had to have his nose redone and new teeth -- host: did he ever play again? guest: yeah, they both played next to her. guest: when i was pitching there is a congressman from florida and he was crowding the plate on me and i fired one inside. i broke his wrist. he didn't crowd the plate anymore. [laughter] host: have you heard from leadership about tonight's game? the pressure? guest: you know, they are. nancy pelosi, boehner, they will all be at victim tonight. host: all right. guest: and i will tell you that kevin and john, they are getting a little antsy. they are tired of having to watch mike hold of the trophies.

host: and he was brought in as the coach. guest: he was my coach and he played in the atlanta braves system. he was a starter in the college world series. he stayed in touch with baseball. and he is -- you know -- he is a no-nonsense guy out on the field. that is just part of the price we are having to pay to keep up with the doyles. guest: when you win, it is her managerial skills. when you lose, it is the players' fault. host: there you go. tonight's game is the 54th. the game will start around 7:00 this evening. play seven innings. guest: seven is plenty.

[laughter] host: getting tired after seven? guest: guest: i think so. guest:that is enough to determine the comp. host: let's hear from michigan a republican. caller: good morning. i am visiting in michigan. i actually live in texas. so i am directing my question to congressman barton. are the taxpayers paying for your uniforms? i am glad to see you there on fridays because normally you are back with your constituents. but perhaps you are getting ready for your fourth of july three-week vacation. i wish you people would do something there instead of playing. host: ok. i am going to jump in because the house wants to gavel in. guest: the uniforms -- the players furnish their own uniforms. in many cases, they get them from a local college or a major-league team. my campaign committee does furnish the under sleeve

journeys for the republicans in the past. i have also had my campaign committee provide hats and stuff. but there is no congressional funds, no federal funds of any sort that go into this game. guest: no taxpayer money goes into the game. or the uniforms. host: good luck to both of you. i'm going to stay neutral on this. [laughter] congressman joe barton and representative mike doyle appreciate your time. guest: if you are in d.c. come out. you can still get tickets and tickets are $10. the money does go to charity. host: thanks, gentlemen. lack of it here on c-span of the house.