efforts to overhaul toxic chemical regulations. also north dakota senator on energy and climate change and reports that the administration will reject the proposed keystone xl pipeline. the house panel on ben gas stkeu has confirmed that hillary clinton will appear before the panel. they'll question her e-mail arrangement. the philadelphia enquirer reporting that federal prosecutors inindicted miss appropriated funds. in a statement the congressman said, i have never participated in any illegal activity.

it's the "washington journal" for july 30th for our next hour we turn to presidential politics. particularly interested in hearing from you in our top issues. jeb bush has been talking about spending and hillary clinton has been suggesting changes to capital gain and donald trump talked about immigration. maybe there are top issues for you and maybe there are others. here's your chance to let you know. 2027488000 for republicans and 202-748-80002 and you can also post to any of our social media channels on twitter and facebook or an e-mail.

jeb bush cast himself as an evangelist of the republican party and a campaign stop after campaign stop he spreads his arms wide and say, we have to campaign with this and not angry posture another democratic block is different story but bush will try anyway when he speaks friday to the annual conference. national urban league of civil

rights group. maybe they reflect issues important to you. maybe there are others that the candidates should be talking about. what do you want the candidates to address. if you want to call 202-748-8000. republicans and 202-748-80002 for independents. you can post on our facebook page too. patrick from carnegie, pennsylvania, you are first up about top issues for 2016. patrick, what do you want to hear the candidates talk and? >> i want to hear the candidates talk about mainly violation of the constitutional rights.

i think it's outrageous the way he's being treated in the press. it's astonishing that the american people get the viability of the candidate who is a very smart entrepreneur. it's the same insidious candidates i mean seriously another bush in the white house? is any american stupid enough to even think of voting for another bush. host: you said you're concerned

about constitutional rights what are you talking about should >> the talking of spying on the american people. host: that's patrick in pennsylvania. your top issue for the 2016 election. republican line, hi, there. >> high, good morning. my concern is still in the headlines. i'm looking at this from all angles and as a republican i'm nowhere near the tea party chant. i don't think you guys on c-span

are pressing those opposing the negotiation on what their stance is and what their resolution will be. host: what do you want to hear from the candidates? >> i want to hear from the candidates what the hell are they going to do once the tea party and the europe and the european parties involved with this say we'll go ahead without you. it's clear for those with common sense and i need c-span to step more to the realm of news and reporting versus sideline cheerleading and horse race analysis.

you guys need to step up and put these facts out there. what is the alternative. what will happen? under under bush and its sanctions they are still stockpiling materials and now they're offering to have their sights inspected. one more. host: go ahead. caller: if we think that going into iran -- if we thought going to iraq was a problem, can you imagine a war with iran which is iraq times a million. host: robert in carolina. independent line, hi. caller: yes, hello. thank you for taking my call. did day to all the people listening. i think this is probably in the campaign and you ask people to identify certain topics they

would key on to view the candidates. i think that there's myriad of topics from the jobs and the economy and social issues and trade issues, immigration and i think that the person that speaks the most truth from his heart to the american people in a reaganesque and fdr fashion will be the candidate that people will choose for the election. i hope the best man wins.

i hope the best man wins. thank you very much. god bless you. host: pensacola, florida, go ahead. caller: my topic is education and we're not dealing with a young 30 and younger individuals. individuals. it's also most of the people who don't graduate from high school end up in two places they end up in jail or on welfare and sadly most of the time it's both. i think we need to put emphasis

on young people. it seems like it's the same old story. back in the year 2,000, how much did it cost nationwide just for that test now. not teachers and equipment and supplies. how much did that test cost in 2013 just in america? just the test itself. how much was it? host: i don't know a figure. caller: $7 billion.

i mean it's ridiculous just a test. don't penalize the child because of what they were born into. we have a bad habit of prejudging somebody and it was an act of god that put them in this situation. don't penalize people. get to know them and then make a judgment. if they're an s.o.b. move on. i'm not saying you need to take t host: you heard about constitutional rights. iran, education. issues very important to people especially in the campaign cycle. what's your top issue.

marco rubio also running for president, the senator from florida talking about issues when it comes to national security specifically. he was asked what he would do in the fight against isis. >> in order for a jihadist to grow they need somewhere to operate from. al-qaida needed the sponsorship of the taliban to plan 9/11 and sear whyyria and other places as an operational space. to deny them thees operational places. next place isis will focus on is of a began stan. as america retreat isis is moving in and improving their capabilities as well. obviously syria and iraq but i think that needs to be expanded to include the areas of libya

where they operate from i also think we have to be able to could be confront them in afghanistan as well. host: let's hear from the republican line. good morning. >> good morning. host: you're on. go ahead. caller: good morning. host: you're on the line. go ahead with your thoughts. what's your top issue for 2016. caller: immigration and iran. people are not obeying our laws. i don't think you can trust iran. host: who addresses those issues best for you? >> trump but i would not vote

for him. host: why not? caller: he's a loose cannon. host: gabriel, democrats line. what's your top issue for 2016? caller: yeah, i'm on the independent line but i kind of weigh two big portions. the most important thing that should be addressed in this proceeding is campaign finance and how irrecollect rev /* -- irrevicable it's been and how little influence our voice is having on election and which direction they go. i also look at it from a standpoint that is more balanced because i look at the extreme

right and those tops leaders that have all that money. but i also look at the people who are sucking the system dry living day to day off the tax that's come out of my pocket. the balance is there are people very high up controlling elections and then very lowest wrung sucking the system out of the middle class and those are the people we see and closest to and so it's very easy for spin doctors or fox news and msnbc and c-span, you're probably one of the institutions that really report good news anymore. but it's easy to try to turn us around on those people who are on welfare and things like that and not saying those aren't good programs. but there is something really

wrong when i see folks who are suppose iedly out on their own and they have bmw's and these cars because it really, really does happen. the supreme court obviously attacked that big time in the whole system. we have to see where the campaign finance has gone. host: here's betty from blue island illinois. hi there. hello? caller:, hi, how you doing? host: fine, thank you. caller: i want to deviate from the topic. i want to say something and i know people will laugh when i say it. but can you give mow a second to really explain what i'm talking

b any time you see somebody like donald trump running around in america winning polls and people just don't understand what's going on with donald trump. i'll tell you what's going on. donald trump was one of the ones that talked about this president like he was nothing of the these republicans went along with donald trump talking about this president from day one this president was stopped in his tracks from getting this country back like it should be. you've had white presidents all along. they did not have the opposition that this president had. what i'm going to tell you is going to happen, i can mark it down in your book. god sent donald trump to do one thing, to make sure that republicans didn't take that white house. his policies will be put forth through the next democrat. because you reap what you sew.

john mccann out with bb america has got to reap what they sew and one more thing. this iran deal. if iran wasn't a serious -- you know what they could told america? you want me to get rid of my nukes. america got tphaoubgz stocked up and israel got nukes of the they said do what you do to do. president obama in the next democrat because you all include some of the democrats have miss treated this man.

they say he gave more than democrats than republicans from 1999 to 2007. when it comes to 1989 to the present contributions to candidates party committees and super parks democrats of $3,357,408. that's in the wall street turnl. we're talking about top issues when it comes to presidents and the top issues would you like to see reflected. 202-748-8000 and 202-748-80001 and 8,002. good morning.

caller: my first choice is hillary clinton and bernie sanders who will run together. whoever is president. we need a female. remember when republicans say, we're not ready for a black president? we're more than ready. we're ready for a female president in history and united states. host: why bernie sanders? caller: oh, man. bernie sanders is the next candidate -- the next great president that we have in

history. host: what is it -- go ahead. caller: bernie sanders is the next f.d.r. he's george washington. bernie sanders is the lincoln and ted i diddy roosevelt. host: what policy is he saying that has you interested? caller: well, bernie sanders is for the 99% for the poor for the middle class. bernie sanders are is not for the oil companies and not for the brothers, those two

billionaire brothers the coke brothers they're going to destroy this country. and we need bernie sanders. listen, as americans listen to me american people. we need to vote for bernie sanders. host: senator senators holding an event on online. he held a grass routes organized event featured simultaneous parties in all 50 starts. as he seeks to mobilize the progressive base. he made remarks broadcast simultaneously to all meetings locations from alaska to florida. we find a bit of that event from yesterday.

>> now if somebody as i mentioned who has four kids, seven grandchildren and married for 27 years i believe in family values. let me tell you about what i think are real family values, values based on love and support of family. first, the united states of america must end the international embarrassment of being the only major country on earth which does not guarantee workers paid medical and family

leave. host: our republican line this is sam talking and top issues for the 2016 election. what's the top issue for you? >> my top issue is national debt. we're $18.3 trillion in debt. once they raise interest rates they say it's going to go to almost a trillion dollars in

interest. you got 246 republicans and 435 republicans and not one of them addresses the national debt because they can't. this country is over unless we bring down the debt. russia and iran, people back in the seventies

caller: good morning. my deal is unemployment. i've seen more over my 52 years than i care to see. how can we bring people into our country and give them jobs when the people we have here don't have jobs? the jobs that we're having that people from out of country are taking are the ones that americans can't afford to take because if we take them we can't pay our bills.

it just leaves more americans ub employed and leaves them homeless and on the streets and our homeless situation is oust control. caller: good morning pedro. you're doing an excellent job i don't think i would say i miss susan on thursdays and brian on fridays and i wish they would come back at some point for a visit for something.

most of the reacters are leaking and have leaked and continue to leak and they're getting away with it. we're a society of people who are very health conscience and i would imagine eventually it's all going to come back and bite us. this 2010 a group of children who were proponents of nuclear power and grand prize winners of the student cam and i would hope that c-span would bring back -- bring those students back and ask them what they feel now about the safety of nuclear power as well you could have

some unpolitically affiliated experts on nuclear waste, disposal and leeching off the environment and the cover the-up that's going on on the west coast of florida, especially the food belt of the nation is puig contaminated by fallout. it's raining down on top of us every taeu and not going to cease or stop. it's only 6,000 miles off the coast of california. three melt downs and going right to the pacific ocean. they tried freezing the reacters whatever, the meltdown. how are you going to freeze what biffingly burns 60 times hotter than the sun.

there's no place to put the waste. host: another candidate entering the field it's jim gilmore and filed the paperwork to run for president as a republican according to the election commission. i bring to the table experience others don't have. he said he planned formal announcement in the first week of august ahead of the first gop

debate and mike huckabee is talking about issues. one of the groups he's talking to are the al fcio. he pointed out the shared opposition. i don't think it's fair to think of labor unions as the enemy of the republican party. i see them as millions of work e salt lake city, utah, james up next. caller: how are you peter this morning? host: i'm well. go ahead. caller: well okay. i'm calling from salt lake, provo actually. what i'd like to say is this, none of the candidates we're hearing in the media are approaching the subject of god and religion.

if we do not as a nation turn back to god and seek god first in our lives as a nation we well not revolve any of our problems. because he alone has the power to solve the problems. and as a religious person i'm not saying i'm overly religious that i can't relate to people, but i believe i have a lot of answers as james shaver took to the problems of the country. because i have been homeless over 20 kraoerz and i do not relate to the rich so i would never put the rich first in my candidacy if i were to run for president. i have a lot of positive things to offer even though i'm disabled and a senior citizen i can see the issues clearly and if anybody wants to back james shaeuber try to reach me in provo. if that's not 805-878-2388. i only get texts on it though. if anybody wants to support me and really change this nation

for god and for the betterment of americans as well as the world i'd welcome their texts. host: if you have the ability to go on your computer, candidates appeared at something called the face freedom coalition and talked about religious issues and many of the candidates talking about those issues. i just want to say no more bushes and no more clinton. i will never vote for jeb bush because he's an 'em necessity lover. democrats? forget it. they're all amnesty lovers. i don't want no president that will want to dictate more as it

is right now. host: why is this your top issue? caller: because if you're in illinois, that's you will you see. is the illegals. and i talk to them and everything and they're all illegals, the ones that are here. they take the apartments and the jobs. my daughter, she don't have no job and she's an american citizen. why? because these people got all the jobs over here in the united states.

she's been out of a job for like a year looking and can find it. host: what's your top issue? caller: i would probably say immigration and we can solve that real easily. one vote in the congress could solve that. and that would be that any illegal alien that becomes a set seven cannot vote in an election and particularly cannot vote for a democrat. if that would be the case barack obama would shut the border down tomorrow and send the 101st airborne. i want the news media to cover the murders and rapes and other

criminal activity by illegal aliens. he's often criticized rand paul another candidate hoping for a strong showing in new hampshire for his work and dismantle the patriot act. he's gone after mike huckabee. he's built a formidable team in new hampshire.

from santa monica, gabriel good morning. democrats line, hi. caller: hi. i wanted to say that there are several issues that are most important issues of our nation at the moment and we need to consider them for the election like economy and lots of monday if i that we're spending outside our country and wars and warfare. or like peace of mind that is lott because all the pain we're caution. the route of the problem and thing that causes all these problems is the political diversity. we have only two major political parties that have been dominating and individuals who want to contribute to our politics and the ruling our country for over 200 years. why is that? this isn't freedom and we don't

have a choice. we have all the ideas that are almost 200 years old and we need new blood in our politic and new ideas ask approaches to solving our problems and we don't have that because we have only two major parties that are getting elected over and over and over again and nobody else can get elected to a president, congressman or senator not in a meaningful way. and why? because they don't have our support as americans because we just go for these two parties and they have all the money and all the power he control our politics and they don't have new ideas. host: they look at the upcoming

forums and debates in the month of august. it might be tempting to dismiss the debate that's pointless exercises that won't provide much information for voters. that would be a mistake. candidates will appear on stage one at a time and order determined by a live fish bowl

drawing. questions will be by the audience and members of the pollic. you can see at an on c-span august 3rd. bill, go ahead. caller: good morning, c-span. i think two topics that come to mind. smaller federal government. i believe the states could handle the business a whole lot better than the federal government: i think the highway trust fund and highways should be donated back to the states. let the stakes take care of it. that would also include the usage taxes for each state would go toward the highway fund. what would really help is term limits. if you have term limits on the politicians you get fresh ideas.

you don't get the same stagnant views that these lifetime politicians constantly have. thanks for your call. hi jonathan. caller: agree with that last guy. one side i see reducing the national debt while increasing the wealth of the nation which can be done at the same time. that would be done through the military or increasing safety through a variety of means here

locally. heading to california to participate in the form sponsored by the coke brothers. "usa today" is gop hopefuls gear up. they'll gather with 450 contributors who pledge to spend 900 million before the 2016 election. the three day is hosted by the chamber of commerce. at the meeting parts of which will be open to journalists for the first time the donors will meet with candidates to review

polling. jack from massachusetts. democrats line. hi. caller: yeah, hi. first of all i'd like tosy thank you for answering my call. and i called just from the democratic side but i just really had two issues that are more universal than knit picking. me, i just really am concerned of the lit cal field in terms of corruption. money seems to be dictating who we're paying attention to and who we should be voting for. i never hear much policies from some of these people. it's whatever the media wants to hear and that ties into my other

program. i don't think there is much concentration on better environmental factors and smaller ways of reducing climate change. caller: i'm writing a book on the history of marijuana, back in 1937, indians african-americans and mexicans were the only ones. and they were making money and buying land and that why we made it illegal. after 1966 evangelical christians didn't want mixed raises. they wanted the united states to be white. that's why we made it legal so we could keep them people off the street. all black people. you look at the history of how it went. we took away from money tree from all those colored nations down south and that's why we have to feed them today. because they have no money down

there. we stole their income so the white people could grow marijuana. look at all and the history of who gets to grow marijuana in the united states. it's rich republicans don't want to have anybody illegal because they won't make $300 an ounce for marijuana and that's what's all about. all it is is about making sure races don't mix. host: is phaeufrpb phaeurpb a top issue for you? caller: it's the very biggest top issue. we look at how many people were thrown in prison for this. we're throwing people in prison and letting them get raped into prison and turning them into something different. if they hold down jobs and good people in the community, those

are the people -- if they smoke pot we can't let people know that they're educated intelligent people that hold down jobs. i'm from wisconsin scott walker's state. $26,000 everywhere else. that's my taxes. i own a brand new home and can't live there because of this law. caller: i'm wondering why we don't have a national preventative law about violent offenders. about 10,000 felons will be released and a lot of them are violent this year. we're trying to enact a law

trying to get britney's law in new york when there are eight other states that have a law for preventative measures. i cannot believe the amount of people who have been murdered in the last year and last few months from people that have

violated our country over and over again. and we need some sort of preventative measures. a lot of these officers that are on the street would be a bit -- they're supposed to be available for them. we had a person in rochester got shot straight in the head two weeks after another violent offender had gotten out for early release. have some way to know who our neighbors are who is walking these streets. also i mean i've had the d. a. in our area has told me her friend, my daughter was attacked by a man. and she said that her friend had this man painting her house two weeks before he attacked and tortured my daughter for two days. he left her for dead but she survived and started working on britney's law in new york state. i think it should go national

and one of the things we need to protect ourselves. we only have a handful of officers now because they're trying to disarm us all. at least know who is around us. i think that will help everybody. host: one of the candidates jeb bush recent event of his talking about the topic of spending and how it's done in washington and what he would do to control it. here's some of what he has to say. >> anyone who wants to see the federal governmentment bigger and further removed the other party will be offering that option. as for me, i'm offering a different agenda all together. will be my intention not to preside over the establish. but disrupt it and make it more accountable for the people. [applause] paeurpb

>> the ultimate disruption is to object as i do beyond anybody's ability to control it or comprehend it is not the right way to go. i have no illusions about what reform really takes. the next president of the united states has got to confront the spending culture in washington and i promise you i'll do it. host: if wasn't to see more of these events online you can go to the website at c-span.org as far as the full statements they're making. milwaukee, wisconsin, derek on the democratic line. hello. caller: hello. my name is derek. i'm from will milwaukee, minnesota of the my biggest issue is people -- well, youth

and my generation doing something more than hearing all the conspiracy theories on television or blaming everything on the man or big brother. we're supposed to be running the country the next couple of years and i don't think we're doing enough. yeah, we got marijuana legalized and that got business going but the youth is one of the biggest incomes for the country. we could be doing a lot more than sitting on our butts and worrying about what we're going to buy next or who is in office next or who we don't like in office. i mean, honestly kind of sick of it. it doesn't get us anywhere and that's what i want to do is focus on younger people more and just hear more in the media for younger people and. i think that's all we pretty much need. because in the next you canl of years we'll be where you are

now, where you're sitting. host: is there a candidate that reaches out to young people in your opinion? caller: honestly no. i'm surprised scott walker ise pulling votes. most of the people i know, most of the young people i know don't like scott walker too often. i'm sorry to disthe guy on t.v. but he hasn't done much for me. my school was complete crap. we didn't get much money at all and much funding at all for anything. i look at my city every day and i see nothing changing really. i see buildings falling apart and trash everywhere. milwaukee is a great city to come to and vacate to, but it's slumming. kids my age, kids older than me and younger than me, we see everything but we're so quiet.

and we hear everything that's going on and sometimes you just feel like we don't have any say so in the matter and he kind of wish the media would push us to have our voices heard. i didn't even want to call into this tv station because i never thought i'd get through and the fact that i'm talking to you right now i feel so happy that i have a say so and people can finally will he listen to somebody young earl. i heard is some lady talking about how religion is the cure for everything or how racism is horrible in this country and we shouldn't let people do the borders of the that's not what it comes down to. what it comes down to we have a country we have to make stable for the next generations and actually start making progress. this of some talking about the negative stuff why not just focus on your country, your people which we're all each

other's people if we're living in the same country. host: from hunting ton west virginia. >> caller: i wish they would have an evening program so we could get a fresh opinion on the subjects and not have to wait until the next morning. but i guess that is too much to ask from the media because then they wouldn't have that primetime advertisement. i know what the main issue will be it's going to be imtkpwraeubgs because that's what the main parties want. they want it to be everybody upset about this but i know and

you know will object un-stan nance. we know how to temporarily stop this but we don't have the political will if we put the people in jail that we're hiring illegal people and knew they were -- these trade deals they are making overseas and the expire american public is against it. and they know but they go ahead and pass the deals and it serves to ratchet the wages down. and all the time the countries we sign deals with their wages stay the same and the american public is getting the shaft and we'll get bush and trump and

clinton shoved down our throats by the media and continue this slide. we're not going to be able to -- i read in the paper today where cars are now 11.5 years old the average car on the street. people can't afford to buy products like these because the good jobs aren't there. it should be our main issue. but you can expect the media with everything with hatred and separation and flags that are flying in the wrong spot or and then they'll sign some sort of a trade deal where they say -- or some kind of a foreign policy

deal and they're going to say it's good for the public and good for america and the world and it's going to be -- there will be piece from it and what are they going to do? a bunch of big companies like boeing and g.e. will sell munitions for another country and they'll say it's for peaceful conditions. host: hillary clinton talked about economic issues particularly changes to the tax code she'd like to see and what she would do when it comes to the topic of capital gain taxes. >> the current definition of a long term holding period just one year is woefully inadequate. that may count as long term for my baby granddaughter but not for the american eek mondayconomy economy and no way to run a tax system. i would move to a six year

sliding scale that provides real incentives for long term investments. for taxpayers in the top bracket families earning more than $465,000 a year, any gains from selling stock in the first two years would be taxed just like ordinary income. then the rate would decrease each year until it returns to the current rate. this means that from the moment investors buy into a company, they'll be more focused on its future growth strategy than the immediate profits. and so will some executives who are paid in part with stock or stock option. host: james from new york. good morning. go ahead. caller: hello. i like to say that in domestic issues we should pay more attention on most of our people

are tired of a two party system and only having testimony kratz and republicans policies. and on foreign issues making war with iran would make a more fragile middle east. we've seen in the past century that iran has bombed anywhere of course we made a lot of mistakes around the region. i think these policies should be reformed. host: one more call.

shawn from louisiana. democrats line. top issues of 2016. caller: hello. i'm going to go with campaigni'm going to go with campaign finance on that one. actually, everything else really -- is really immaterial until you get that out of the way. money right now is speaking louder than the people. host: -- and that is sean from -- go ahead. caller: until we get the money out of the game, nothing else really matters. host: sean from louisiana finishing off our look at top issues for 2016. the house has started its august recess. two senators joining us today. first, we will hear from senator tom udall on a bipartisan effort he is working on. and then later on in the

program, john hoeven on the hughes -- future of the keystone xl pipeline. that is "washington journal" after this. >> this weekend on the c-span networks politics, books and american history. saturday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span, net roots nation host a discussion on illegal immigrants and arizona's laws. and sunday at 6:30, chris christie on national security. he speaks at the university of new have to at manchester. on c-span2 saturday night at 10:00 eastern michael tanner

talks about the growing national debt and looks at restructuring entitlement programs as a solution. and sunday afternoon at 3:00, glenn beck presents his thoughts on islam extremism -- asked -- extremism. and on sunday at 10:00, the 1965 voting rights act. our coverage includes white house phone conversations. and lbj's 1955 speech at the u.s. capitol and the signing of the bill. also this weekend, saturday night at 7:10, university of berkeley california history professor looks at the gun production in europe and how arms trading contribute it to an american victory during the revolution. get a complete schedule at c-span.org. "washington journal" continues

host:. -- our -- first -- current -- continues. host: our first guest, tom udall. first of all why this topic and who are you working with? guest: i have been working with senator vitter. and the reason i'm working on this is because the law is broken. everybody thinks you have a top cop when you -- it comes to chemicals, but you don't. we have a strong bill and we think it fixes the problem. host: so chemicals, specifically, what type of chemicals? guest: these are chemicals that are all out in our society, in our products. the examples are from aldehyde, asbestos -- formaldehyde asbestos, some pretty dangerous chemicals. and we have 85,000 existing

chemicals out in society, most of them have not been tested for safety even though people probably believe there is kind of a top cop on the job that does that. so what we are tied to do is update this law, which was completely gutted and the agency was crippled in 1991 by a court ruling which basically set a standard that was so tough that they could not move forward. host: so if there is not a top cop, who does the regulating and enforcing? guest: right now, the epa has been crippled, so the states have moved in. but they don't have the resources, except for the larger states, to do much of anything. when you add up all the things the states have done, they have maybe wade into about -- weighed into about 12 chemicals. host: so the effort that you and senator vitter would make, what

kind of support have you got in and will you see a vote on this before you go to recess? guest: i hope we are going to see a vote. we are working hard to get it on the schedule. i am confident we have the strong bipartisan support to get this through the senate. it has already gone through the house with a very significant vote. senator vitter and i started working after the death of senator frank lautenberg. i have to say at the beginning that he was the one that worked early on with senator vitter to craft the law. it was at the time endorsed by the "new york times." that was a couple of years ago. we have worked very hard to make those changes. we have a strong bill. we have 52 senators on this piece of legislation. very bipartisan. and it is something that the american people, if they truly understood this issue about the dangers that are out there, the

body burden we carry of chemicals today that 75 years ago we didn't have in our bodies, they would realize we have to do this now, we need to get to work on this. host: even as you try to push this legislation through senator barbara boxer has resisted this legislation. what are their concerns and what would you say to them? guest: first of all, we are trying to work with everybody. we have taken suggestions to heart when they say improve the bill. one of the areas of improvement is to look at a better public health safety environmental standard. we believe we have done that. compared to the house, i think we have a much better -- a much better bill in terms of the safety standards. there are some differences with the house bill, but the important stiff -- thing is that i think we can resolve those differences. we have worked with all parties.

and that is why i think we have gained support overtime and why we are up to 52 senators representing 32 states. it is almost evenly split, democrats and republicans. we have been getting bipartisan support every day. so what i would encourage any senators or house members that want to weigh in, make constructive suggestions. we are still in the process of working this through and massaging it. we can improve this bill and make it better, but the main thing, let's protect the american people. host: our guest with us until 8:45, if you want to ask them questions, it is (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 745-8002 fors independent. -- for independents. the first call for you is from texas on our democrats line. you are on what the senator, go ahead. caller: good morning.

good morning senator udall. guest: -- good morning. how are you doing? caller: i'm doing great. i don't know why, it seems like to meet the epa and other bodies that have been used to protect us as far as food, as far as chemicals, they are losing strength. what is -- we don't even know -- we can't even find out from the grocery stores whether we are getting cloned food or regular food. it seems like all of the guidelines have been made so they help the big production companies and the big companies like this, and there is less pay done to help us the american people. what can we do to help you? guest: one of the thinks you can do is speak up to your representatives, your senators and talk about needing stronger laws. participate in the local community.

if you are a shareholder in a company, you can advocate for that company to do full disclosure like you're talking about. i am one that really believes and labeling. i believe that consumers should have the information they need when they are purchasing food or when they are out shopping. that is something that is very important to them. and we shouldn't be afraid of labels. you asked the question, why don't we have stronger laws? in the case, we put him law on the books in 1976. that law works for a while. it banned five chemicals. but basically what has happened in 1991, we had a court ruling with the fifth circuit court of appeals. and what they ended up doing is really gutting the statutes. they hurt the ability of the epa to really do its job. so what we are doing with this bill, we fixed that situation. we put the epa back as the top

cop when it comes to dangerous chemicals. they can do the evaluations, they can feed in the ideas in terms of environment, public health, and really take a strong look at the chemicals that are on the market and the new chemicals that are coming onto the market. people don't realize it, but every year, we probably have 750 to 1500 new chemicals making it onto the market. we are not able to do the kind of safety analysis that we need to do. and that is what this bill does. but you have to look i'm -- look to all the different areas to see why it isn't stronger. sometimes it is resources. unfortunately, some of our republican friends don't give the resources to the federal regulators that we need. we are seeing a real's rollback in some areas. -- a real rollback in some areas. and that is not to make it a partisan issue, it is to make sure the resources are there. host: albert from tennessee, go

ahead. caller: hay. i am really -- hey. i'm really upset about these trade deals. every time one is made, the standard of living in this country drops. why do you guys keep supporting these trade deals? thank you. guest: thank you, albert, and i'm with you. i voted against tpa and i'm very, very worried about this agreement and terms of what it does in terms of shipping jobs overseas. this is pretty extraordinary what we have done with the trade promotion authority and what we have done their as we have given six years of authority to several presidents. we don't even know who they are going to be in addition to president obama. i would much prefer it would have been very narrow. we would have said to obama present this transpacific trade agreement to us, we will give

you authority to that, but we didn't do that. and so i -- i really liked the days when i came in the congress and one of the things we did is congress was much more involved in the trade agreements. we were at the table. we travel to countries. we asked the tough questions. and then we're pushing for our people here back home to get some of these jobs. unfortunately, i think we have handed it over to president to negotiate the deal -- presidents to negotiate a deal. i am with you on trade, albert. host: from las vegas, nevada. hello. caller: good morning, senator. guest: how are you this morning? caller: oh, pretty good. i just want to applaud you for your bill. i supported and if we can get a vote on it, which i doubt, i know that my senator here in nevada will vote on it. the reason i have doubts about that is because we cannot even get anything bipartisan as a

highway bill through. and that is, like, the most bipartisan thing in the country and we can get that done. so i i'm a little skeptical about that. and i just want to ask you one question. you have a long institutional memory. the other day when ted cruz was on the floor and calling the majority leader a liar, i was just wondering isn't he supposed to be gaveled down and supposed to be told he is out of order? guest: the very, very good question. to me, this is a very, very saturday in the history of the senate when you have a senator using terms that really attacks the character, attacks the integrity of another senator. and you are absolutely right. there is a provision in the senate rules that says you shouldn't do that. the next morning, or the tradition is in the senate, they

reread that provision so that all senators see you are not supposed to attack character integrity, you are not supposed to -- it is basically a golden rule. don't do something to somebody that you wouldn't want done to yourself. so i think we need to tone it down back here. my uncle used to have a thing he called a politician's prayer. and he would say, say those words very gentle because the next day you may have to eat them. and that is really true. we should deal with each other in more gentle ways rather than these big accusations one way or another. that hurts our ability to do bipartisanship. and let me just say a word because you have raised the issue about where we are heading on this. this is even more bipartisan than the highway bill. i mean, we have worked over two years, senator vitter and i.

we have moved to this along in a very bipartisan way. we have been completely open transparent, put it out on the table saying, give us your suggestions. at this point, we have 33 states that are aboard, 52 senators. i think if we had a vote, it would be much bigger than the highway bill in terms of the 65 votes they got to shut off debate and before. host: so on the highway bill, the senate was looking for six years. what do you think you'll get in the and? -- end? guest: i would first notes that i think it needs to be stronger and i haven't voted to move it forward, but only three years are funded. some of the pain force have been taken out, so now we are down to about 2.8 years of funding. this is a very difficult trade-off. one of the big issues is, are we going to have enough money to do

a ryan-murray budget to deal? we may have taken all the pay force and put it over with transportation and not have any in the budget area. i think our first responsibility is to put the budget together for the government. for my state, tremendously important. the federal government in terms of military bases, air force bases, national laboratories national parks, we need a budget every year. as you know, you have been here observing this for many years, we have not done the job we need to. host: so if it comes down to a two-month extension, is that something you will support? guest: oh, yeah. i will support the extension. they say they have jammed desk. they left town yesterday. they sent us a three-month extension. they did not vote on our six-year bill. so if we don't pass this extension, tomorrow this expires. so that is not what we have --

what we want to have happen. host: so do you think issues could be resolved come october? guest: i think the interesting thing, if you look at the legislative process at this point, the house has some good ideas. have worked a bill and the senate, we also have a bill with significant support. we need to put those together and conference them. we will have a timeout with this three-month extension to get that done. i'm hoping will get a much longer bill and it will be a real credit to mitch mcconnell senator boxer, others that have worked on this to get a long-term extension. what i'm still worried about though, is those trade-offs. is it all going into transportation? we need to have that discussion. host: let's hear from jim in ohio. caller: good morning. every chance i get, i think my local cable provider for c-span.

guest: i totally agree with you there, jim. i am a c-span junkie. i will sometimes get up in the middle of the night and watched c-span if i can't sleep. caller: i am trying to get them to get c-span3. i'm a science teacher of over 30 years. i've got something caught in the ringer during the 1980's in the 1990's when i was informing my students about the hazards of long chemicals -- lung chemicals. i asked one of the superintendence of the school to sit on me about the hazards of lung chemicals. first of all, if you could get -- give the numbers of the senate and house bills we could follow the progress of this. and the second thing i would

like you to, please, comment on -- there is a lot of confusion about chemicals. imagine 85,000. a lot of confusion about when a chemical is registered with the epa that it is somehow approved for use. in other words, some of the lawn chemicals are approved for use on residential lots, but you cannot put them on a golf course because they are too dangerous. and in ohio, of course the chemicals that are proprietary and that listed in the fracking solutions. so if you could talk about the numbers of the bills and also the difference between being registered by the epa and being approved. thank you. guest: ok. i don't have the house number. i believe the senate number is 692, but we will get those numbers and get them into pedro. what you have demonstrated here and you have talked about this chemicals that are in daily use on people's -- putting it on

their lawns they have green and feel good about their homes and neighborhoods. people think today if you go and buy a product in a grocery store, in a hardware store, they think, oh, somebody in the government has tested at to make sure that chemical is safe. and if it is used in the way it is recommended to be used, it is not going to be hurt -- it is not going to hurt anybody. unfortunately, since 1991, that is not true. there has been a court case. a crippled the environmental protection agency states have weighed in, but most states like my small state of new mexico, we don't have the ability to have a regulatory agency. even large states don't have a regulatory agency to deal with dangerous chemicals. so we, as a result of that, the last 75 years, we have seen the buildup of chemicals in our body, in our blood.

you can go out and get a blood test today and many industrial chemicals are in our bodies. the real point here is that our bill is bipartisan. we have worked on it to fix the problem. it is not a perfect bill, but i would tell you that this is something that can really make a difference in people's lives and it is a good solid piece of legislation. host: i a big told it is senate bill 697. guest: there you go. host: 2576 for the house. from texas, hello, you are on. caller: i keep hearing all this stuff about infrastructure. all that has done -- and you talk about it making us more money, putting the middle class back to work. i go up and down i-20 down here in texas all the time. all that is putting together

making money for the illegal aliens. there is not anybody out there working on these roads but these illegal aliens. they come over here with work he says. they let them expire and they stay over here and work. and nobody is paying attention to that. i have been in the concrete business 44 years and went out of business because of illegal aliens over here. that is all they do is concrete. they are taking over everything in construction. all the epa has done this costing us more money. that is all i have to say. guest: thank you very much. you have raised two really important issues. one is immigration and i cannot agree with you more at we need comprehensive reform. i have fought for that in all the years that i have been in the congress and i'm going to keep fighting for that. what is -- does cap hands of are four main? first of all, the 12 million people who are here, we need to

pass citizenship for them and we need to bring them out of the shadows. obviously, if there are criminals here, we don't want them to be able to stay. so we are going to end up supporting them and shipping them back to their -- deporting them and shipping them back to their home countries. but many are a fabric of our society. so that is a part of comprehensive reform. we need to look at a number of aspects to make it better in terms of this situation that we have. the other thing you hit on is transportation. and infrastructure. i don't have the situation that you have done in texas. i don't know the specifics, but i really believe that about a third of our construction workers -- these are americans , hard workers, they are out of work and they need a highway bill.

and if we don't do that, we are really shortchanging future generations. the path in the 20% to is to have good, solid infrastructure. we are being passed by china and india and other countries. there was a piece yesterday on high-speed rail in japan. these are trains that are moving on a magnet system of 300 miles and hour. -- an hour. the fast as go between washington dc and new york is 80 miles an hour on amtrak. it is important that this transportation bill that is before us, we get it done. it is important that look at the big infrastructure projects in our states and get those done. and that will put people back to work. i am convinced that we could lower the -- the unemployment rate by a percentage or two if we did all the big projects we needed to be doing now. host: next is josh from indianapolis, indiana.

caller: good morning, senator. guest: good morning. how are you this morning? caller: i'm doing fine. thanks for taking my call. i had a comet and a question. here in indiana, i sell industrial pumps. so i go to different factories and agriculture distributors and i'm touching equipment that i'm not sure what is on it, tanks, labels, so i guess in my line of work, i guess i sort of trust that these chemicals are safe for me to be around unless i'm told otherwise. you know, i can't say i have any health issues or anything like that. everything seems to be pretty safe all in all, but i think about things like asbestos and how everybody was handling it and it seemed to be justified to be breathing and working around. then we found oh, man, the stuff is really bad for you. recently there was a toothpaste that had a certain chemicals that i brush my teeth with and

now i'm told, hey, that can cause cancer. are there any chemicals that you know, has raised this concern with you that is out in society now? guest: josh, thank you very much. there are. asbestos is one of them. formaldehyde arsenic. these are all chemicals that the epa has not been able to regulate because it was crippled by this court case back in 1991. that is where senator vitter and i have fixed that issue. when thing i would just recommend in working in your industry is our companies really try, in many cases, to protect workers. they are out there giving your recommendations. if they say you are working around the chemical to wear a mask or a breathing respirator everybody should do that.

you should follow the safety procedures that have been set down by your company and that is going to help with overall health. but in order to make sure that these chemicals we are using all across our society are tested for safety, we are going to have to update this law. that is why senator vitter and i have been working so hard to make sure that the toxic substances l passes the senate, passes the house, and gets signed into law. host: from wyoming, carol is up next. caller: hi. i was calling to find out about senator udall's bill hr 994, the amendment to the radiation competition act. and it seems like it has stalled at the workforce committee. guest: yes. caller: could you help me with that? guest: you bet. what this piece of legislation is about, we are trying to up to the -- update the radiation

compensation act. what happened during the cold war years in the united states is many americans were sprinkled with radioactive chemicals from aboveground testing. we exploded a number of atomic bombs in the 1940's and the 1950's. and people all across the united states, but more intensely in western states, were sprinkled with radioactive debris. what we have discovered from the sides is that people -- science is that people are getting cancers. those have been identified scientifically. we have a law on the books that has an apology from the federal government to these people because in many cases the government lied or didn't tell the truth or failed a warrant. and they also have compassionate compensation. it is not a huge amount, but i

think about $2 billion has been paid out to thousands of claims over the last couple of years. the bill that i'm pushing right now is to update the areas where people have suffered that haven't been compensated. and i believe have a right to get into the system. one of the biggest areas is the trinity explosion. that was the very first atomic explosion in new mexico. people were not warned. they are now having severe health problems. and i believe the trinity site down winters -- downwinders should be in this legislation. and the way minors -- miers got -- miners got into this to build the atomic bomb. the post 1971 miers were also not protected -- miners were

also not protected. i have written a letter to ask for a hearing. it is a big issue. it has been around for a long time. i first learned as a young lawyer with my father, who was the champion of these radiation victims, or many would call them in guinea pigs during those cold war era's. host: the obama administration is set to release its rules for climate change. what are you expecting? what would you say the state to ultimately have to deal with not only plans on how to reduce it, but also implement those plans? guest: the really important thing here is that the administration was very sensitive as to the fact that states all over the country have different energy mixes. and so what they did is craft a plan that basically said meet these targets, but do it very specifically with regards to your energy mix. so i would advise all states

and i think new mexico is going to do this and many of the western states are familiar with they are going to look at their energy mix, they are going to look at the target, they are going to put a plan together and limited to the epa and begin working on this. this is not always should be doing, but it is going to significantly move us in a direction where we can be a leader in the world, where we can work with china and india and these other big countries. the only way to tackle this problem is on a worldwide basis. this is a planetary problem, not just the united states. so we have to show leadership and work with the other countries to get this resolved. host: implementation by 2022, something like that. some would say that is maybe too short of a time to not only make a plan but implemented. guest: i think that the first thing to do is let's get the plants in. -- plans in.

if it is apparent, what always happens in this case is you can come to congress as a there isn't enough time. but let's not at the outset where we have set this down, where most of the experts are saying we can get this done in that time, let's take a good stab at it in and take a look a couple of years down the line to see if it is too aggressive. host: what you think it does for industries like coal? guest: i think the same thing when we try to work through how we have less of a carbon footprint. if cole can come up in the research -- coal can come up in the research area with cleaner more efficient ways to use coal -- the big push in the marketplace, the less coal is being used, the cheaper and cleaner natural gas is. so there is going to be a lot of research. how do you get coal cleaner? how do you get other fossil fuels cleaner?

and then how do you wrap up in a significant way the renewables? we need, as a country, to use all forms of energy. do it all, do it right. a lot of what is doing it right means lowering our carbon footprint, being aggressive about moving into a new area let some of the other countries around the world are. we ask the have a state in the united states that is going for 100% renewable energy, hawaii, by a think 2045. we can do these kinds of things if you put your mind to it. i think we have to have the political will to just formulate those plans and put them in. host: great falls, virginia bob, you are next. caller: good morning, senator. guest: good morning, bob. how are you? caller: very well, sir. i have another topic which i would like to raise with you. i saw the recent senate foreign relations committee hearings regarding the iran deal.

i want to thank you very much for your very fine and thoughtful questions in that hearing. i'm glad to see you are keeping an open mind on the deal. sir, i have a couple questions regarding that, which i hope you can answer here. first of all, it is my understanding that bradley the existing sanctions on iran all into four broad categories -- eu sanctions, u.n. sanctions congressionally enacted sanctions, and executive lee connected sanctions. so i'm wondering if you can tell us which of those are most onerous for iran's present economy and what do you think the effectiveness of only congressional sanctions would be on iran's performance in the future? guest: what really -- and this goes to the heart of your question -- what brought iran to the table was all of the

sanctions. if you just had congressional sanctions, or just had executive sanctions, that would not have done it. and that is what is remarkable about this process is that we have had to be p5+1 and countries like japan, south korea, china forgoing purchases of energy from iran in order to force iran to the table. so it was the combination of all of the sanctions that did it. and that is why we need to take seriously the idea that we have a deal. it may not be a perfect deal and it may have flaws, but a lot of those things that people are arguing about now can be corrected over time. we can have aggressive oversight, in terms of congress. we can take a look at additional legislation down the line. but the important thing to remember is that they have gone from, right now ,two months to get a nuclear bomb -- now, two

months to get a nuclear bomb. we are going to be in a one-year break out period and that will run for 15 years. so that puts us in a much different situation to kind of change the dialogue in the middle east, working with other countries to make sure we have a more peaceful and less valid situation over there. host: orlando, florida, here is mark. caller: hey, senator, i want to let you know that i support you on the bill, especially after the water contamination back in the latter portion of the last century. can you tell me if -- if you can't get it to a vote before you adjourn, does that bill still have to go back to the house before the president signs it? guest: no. and we are pushing to get it before the adjournment. we may get one vote on a motion to proceed, but we still have an entire next year for this

congress. so this bill is still alive. for another 18 months. and that is why we are going to work hard early on in this particular year to get it done because we need to conference it with the house. the house has already passed the bill. as you know the process you bring it together in a conference committee, you have an agreement, then it goes back to both houses for a vote and then up to the president. so that is -- that is why we want to move forward now while we have 52 senators, 33 states in the senate. represented in saying this is a good bill because the sooner we get this done, the more protective measures -- protective measures we can put in place for the american public. host: there is a story today saying that republicans in the senate next week plan to call for a vote to defund planned parenthood. guest: well, i -- you know -- it

is difficult looking at those tapes and seeing them, but the thing that really is -- is so central to this issue is a woman's right to choose, a woman's right to have health care. planned parenthood does a remarkable job in terms of wellness visits, birth control cancer screenings, mammograms, all these kinds of things. and i think the idea that that significant amount of funding would be taken away would really hurt women's health in this country. so i'm going to vote against the bill that is coming before the congress. i wish we could put this aside. this is a more partisan kind of social issue that is going to split everybody. we are going to have some real fights over this. i would prefer that we -- if there -- there are allegations that they are violating state law. at the process work out in the

congress to the oversight, but let's keep funding planned parenthood. host: the "washington times" says that it would redirect those moneys to community health centers. went to think of that approach? guest: i think what would happen is the transition would be devastating to women's health. i think planned parenthood does a very good job. i would keep the money's right where they are -- monieys -- moneys right where they are so they can continue doing a very very effective women's health measures. and the one thing people are to realize, and a lot of what is to having this is the whole issue around abortion. what people need to realize birth control makes it so you don't have to go into an abortion situation. and that is what is a central

part of planned parenthood. so you should be funding birth control and family planning because then you don't get yourself into the situation where a woman has to make a choice on an abortion situation. host: do you see this issue affecting other bills or being attached to other bills? could that be problematic? guest: it could be. these other kinds of issues we get bogged down in. we end up getting very partisan, divisive issues, attach them to a larger bill and then that kills the larger bill. so i think having this as an isolated vote is fine. but let's not try to attach it. i don't think it is going to get the 60 votes. but then let's move down the road after that. i don't begrudge people who want to that to this issue and get it out there, but let's not drag on

the rest of the legislative process. host: let's hear from tiny shop in seattle washington -- tenis ha in seattle, washington. caller: yes i have some issues with what the senator is talking about. what we really need to do is do an overhaul and get rid of all of -- [indiscernible] because for whatever reason, you guys are up in there and you guys have our lives in our hands. you can't seem to get it together. and we don't understand why. because if it is left up to us, to get rid of you all -- [indiscernible] you all consider new officers and do what you do, but we go through a struggle every day. you people don't understand what the american people go through. you talk about planned parenthood and child welfare. [indiscernible]

you have a prison system right now that i could pay for my system if i could play for my bills. but if i can't pave my bills i'm not getting out of jail. i had to sit there and wait for you to decide what you're going to do. we have been out of work for 14 years. -- at war for 14 years. we are always dark and in the blind. and the government is deceitful. [indiscernible] they go over there and fight for us and when they come here they cannot even get rightful benefits. they have to prove that they are going through a disability the phase. they have to prove they have ptsd. they have to prove they are in need of this, that, and the other. the first objective that we have -- [indiscernible]

-- sent out children to a school with a committee competent in order to do something with their lives. you guys care about us enough to where one in every four child in the united states goes hungry. host: ok. guest: thank you very much. on your comments about us staying in touch, tremendously important. i travel back to my state an eight and a half hour commute. i visit with citizens all the time, read my mail, to everything i can to stay in touch. one of the reasons i love the c-span program with pedro is a get collins -- call ins. i think that is important and we need to carry on his can of activity tuesday in touch. your frustration, i feel it, too. you can imagine being here, wanting to come here, wanting to do big things, wanting to do

good things and seeing that we are locked down in many cases. so i am just as frustrated and angry as you are about that. and i'm trying to do whatever i can to break the logjam, as you have probably seen with the toxic substances control act and other pieces of legislation. without incurring due to do is do not give up on our democracy. get out there. vote at the local level, the state level, participate in campaigns. participate draw society to try and influence the policies you believe would make a difference. thank you for your comment. host: clyde from oklahoma, go ahead. go ahead. guest: clyde, how are you this morning? caller: all right. how are you? guest: good, good. caller: i'm going to comment on that guy that called in about immigration and stuff. here a while back on the show.

i'm 75 years old and on disability. i have served my country, by golly. anyway, they need to do something about this immigration. it is just getting out of hand. you know, you have the jugs over here and stuff and the disease. other foreign countries coming over here. the concrete work that i worked on in construction, that is one job i worked on, by golly, they had -- they had a lot of white guys working on their, you know operators on equipment. and there is one company that went down there and they brought back a bunch of mexicans down there in mexico. they come up there and i don't know how they did it, but anyway, they finally got rid of

some people on the construction work there and they put all the mexicans to work. they did that. and these truck drivers driving these trucks across the country i don't know what nationality them are. there are also some mexicans driving trucks and everything. they are taking jobs away from our truck drivers. i know a lot of guys who used to drive trucks and they got laid off and this and that. that is my comment on it. tom, we need to get something done in this country and we need to downsize this government. guest: clyde, one of the issues you have raised is if you have a job opening here, the american should have the first chance to get that job. one of the provisions i have always insisted on that his income grant of immigration

reform is that you should have a provision that says companies need to go out they need to try and find americans to do these jobs, and then if they can't find them, only then get into a foreign workers situation. but i can tell you, many of the company is back home that i visit with tell me they cannot find american workers to do the job. so they are in the situation of then they want a program, they want to be legal, and there is not a good comprehensive immigration reform system in place so that they can get the labor they need to do the job. the important thing you are talking about, or its again, construction jobs and jobs that people can make a good living on. these are the type of people we need to put back to work. these other people who have been out of work for six years or so now. and is an important -- it is important we get all these things done so we can get these people back to work.

host: from littleton, colorado, here is ernie. caller: thank you for taking my call. guest: thank you, ernie. caller: there are so many issues this country is going to write now, it is just mind-boggling. but a few of them i'm going to hit, this keystone pipeline. they are more worried about bringing dirty oil through our country down to the refineries for the billionaires who own the company. then here we have california and several other states that are going through the droughts. back in the 1960's, they had a program, the north american water project. to convert water from alaskan rivers down to our country to whatever states needed the water. and as far as these poisons go, you never hear about fukushima anymore. all the radiation you are dumping and that the pacific ocean and all the fears that are dying.

and why is this administration keeping quiet? that is about all i have to say. so many projects -- i mean somebody things you could say. it is crazy. host: thanks, ernie. guest: ernie, thank you very much. first, i don't know whether you know it or not, but the national laboratories in new mexico, they have some top-notch scientists that deal with nuclear power plants and nuclear issues. they have been assisting and have been assisting in japan on fukushima and trying to resolve a lot of these issues. clearly, no company that runs a nuclear power plant has -- and has a disaster should be dumping nuclear radiation in the ocean. i hope that japan gets really aggressive in terms of tackling that. and then talking about good, solid jobs. once again, i just come back to

we need to do a transportation bill, we need to do infrastructure at the local state, and federal levels. host: senator tom udall of new mexico joining us. thank you for your time. guest: thank you. host: coming up, we will talk about issues of climate change the future of keystone with our next guest, senator john hoeven as "washington journal" continues after this. >> when first lady ida mckinley arrived in the white house in 1897, she was in poor health, suffering from epilepsy. her husband would sit next to

her at white house events so when she saw -- he sought she was having a seizure, he would cover her face with a large handkerchief. despite her health problems, she traveled as first lady, even attending the 1901 pan-american exposition, where her husband was assassinated. i did mckinley, the senate are to 8:00 p.m. eastern on "first ladies." examining the public and private lives of the women who fill the position of first lady and their influence on the presidency. from martha washington to michelle obama. sundays at 8:00 p.m. eastern on "american history tv." >> joseph banister is the only pirate in history to ever brought the british navy to a standstill. >> this is unheard of. >> most pirates, they saw the

british navy and they hightailed it. >> this sunday night on "q&a," on the search for the pirate ship the golden fleece and its captain, a merchant turned pirate, joseph banister. >> he started off his life not as a pirate at all, but as a noble english sea captain who was trusted by very wealthy shipowners to sail their ship this beautiful ship, between london and port royal, jamaica which was known then as the wickedest city on earth. and kerry valuable cargoes between london -- carry valuable cargoes between london and port world. but then one day, for reasons no one could quite determined, he stole the golden fleece, he stole his own ship, recruited ecru and went on the account of piracy. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's "q&a."

>> "washington journal" continues. host: the second guest of the morning as senator john hoeven republican of north dakota. guest: good to be with you. host: there were reports in recent days of you talking about the future of the keystone xl pipeline. guest: i'm hearing from a number of sources that we work with an irregular basis that it is very likely -- on a regular basis that it is very likely the president will turn down the keystone pipeline. host: where are you hearing that from specifically? guest: i am not going to go into specifically who is giving us the information, but what has changed is we were getting the word delay and defeat through the by -- through delay, if you will. the president has the latest decision six years. so it is kind of defeat through delay. but now that has changed. i'm hearing he will turn it down in august. host: how long ago did you hear

this jekyll guest: -- this? guest: really just in the last few days. host: and this is someone from the state department? guest: we got it from several sources. host: your name came up during a recent press briefing yesterday. can i show you a little bit about what they said? guest: absolutely. [video clip] >> i appreciate senator hoeven's remarks. imf track reclassified as a confidant of our state department. but you should check with him. host: back to you. they don't classify you as a confidant. guest: number one, i would agree with them. i met a confidant. and i disagree with their position on keystone. i have worked on this project since i was the governor of north carolina -- north dakota.

i worked with a lot of people that were involved with this project. but i'm not going to go into specific sources. instead of this, well, they are continuing to delay and they will defeat it with continuous delays, what i'm hearing now is they will turn it down. host: if they do do that, do you have any other recourse aside from that? sr is putting keystroke back and play. guest: the same request we have been working on for some time, which is to approve it through congress. 62 votes in the senate, overwhelming votes in the house the senate vetoed that congressional approval. host: would that be attaching it to another bill? guest: very likely attaching it to another bill. that would probably be the most likely strategy. the trans-alaska pipeline i believe was approved that way. host: so if keystone does not happen, what does it ultimately mean to you, at least? guest: well, we have to build the infrastructure we need to

have the right kind of energy plan for this country. that means the right mix of pipeline, rail, and roads to move energy safely and efficiently around the country from where it is produced to where it is consumed. that is part of building and gg security or energy independence we want. working with canada, we can produce more energy than we need in this country, which makes us secure. we cannot do that without the necessary infrastructure. and that is why, again, it is about having the right next of infrastructure. and also transmission lines. we need all those things. host: senator john hoeven here talking about issues of energy. serves on the agriculture appropriations committee. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 745-8002 for independents. the first call for you comes from maryland. this is robert. robert, go ahead. caller: good morning. how are you doing? guest: good morning.

caller: one of the things i am happy about is the energy thing you have going now. but the problem that i, i do think a lot of americans, are having, is i don't think i see anywhere with the government is able to get something done anymore. how can we help your party get sane people in it to get something done again like we used to have in the republican party? it seems like everybody in this party now is totally crazy. how can we help you get some sane people in this party? thank you. guest: well, you make an important point. at the end of the day, this is about getting the job done for the american people. i think we need people who are very practical and realistic. as you know, i'm a republican. i believe we have to build a good business climate in this country and empower small business and people across this country too, you know, pursue their dreams and create jobs,

grow this economy. with a growing economy, you get more revenue. that revenue is used for things like the highway bill that we are in the process of passing right now. making sure we have a strong military. all the things we need. but to the extent possible empower people to pursue their lives less government interference. so i think it takes, again practical people with back and a philosophy that will roll up the sleeves and work in a bipartisan way to get things done. not grandstanding, but doing the hard work of figuring out solutions that serve the people of this great nation. i appreciate your question. that is the approach i try to bring every day. i think it is a working man's approach, if you will. it may not be flashy, but it is about getting the job done for the american people. and i think you, and asking a question, you are making a very important point. host: here is carl, chicago

illinois. caller: good morning. senator, i am dismayed that your party -- somehow this is the holy grail and this will solve all the problems of the country. as far as the pipeline goes, all it seems to me is just basically for the benefit of the canadian company that wants to put it through. it is not going to do anything for the american people. i don't think we are going to receive any taxes any revenue from this pipeline. the second point also is that if you really, really wanted this so terribly bad, why didn't you all -- when the president in his second year led the infrastructure bill -- why didn't you put it in infrastructure and try to get it that way?

you could have given the president his infrastructure and you could have had this. instead, you made this we are in guest: you asked a whole series of questions there. the pipeline is a hundred thousand barrels a day. a hundred thousand barrels a day for my state, and also montana. north dakota produces 1.2 million barrels of oil a day, but we have to move 700 barrels -- 700,000 barrels a day by train because we can't a little sorry pipeline to move that product as safely and us cost effectively. again, moving it from where it is produced to where it is consumed. that is what we are trying to do. i am trying to build up the whole network which includes everything. pipeline roads, rail transmission lines. so that we can build an energy plan for this country that is not only about energy security

and economic growth, creating more jobs, it also is a national security issue. so we don't have to worry about getting oil from places like opec, russia, venezuela. our adversaries. it is a plan that is very important for this country. that is why we have been working on it. i agree. it should be part of our intersection plan. if i could have gotten it in the highway bill that we are passing now, i absolutely would have. but that passed as a stand-alone measure. and the president vetoed it. that is why i'm trying to included as part of another infrastructure bill. host: of you are on twitter says has the drop in prices maybe keystone pipeline unprofitable d? guest: we have to build a long-term plan. oil prices will go up and will go down. but if we don't hold our industry we will not continue to keep prices longer open -- over

the long term. we are dependent on opec and like i say, our adversaries. we are trying to avoid that. that means you got to have a long-term energy plan overtime and we continue to grow energy supply in this country. host: but we are producing more. guest: we are producing more. that's exact with my prices have come down. in north dakota, people don't realize we put sanctions on iran in 2011. in 2011 i ran exporting 2.6 million barrels of oil a day. because of the sanctions they are down to 1.1 million barrels of oil and day. i stayed alone produces more oil than that. here we are in a situation that were the president is talking about leaving all the sanctions on iran so they will be producing oil, the same time he is making it harder to produce oil in this country or get from canada. that put us right back in the situation where we are getting energy from opec. that's not what we want. we need to build a plan for this country.

host: would you advocate the export of crude overseas? guest: absolutely. that is vitally important. it's about growing our industry. we have to build the on a global basis. the more we produce, that is what helps keep energy prices lower and that is what keeps prices low at the pump for our consumers. host: here's jim from west virginia. go ahead. caller: good morning gentlemen. i respect the hard work that you guys try to do but this thing with iran and the oil they, and the gun issues, and all the freedoms that they are trying to lift -- i have no faith in the administration. as far as i'm concerned the president is weak. that is why he wants to sign this pact with iraq because, if you go back to the crimea incident where prudent invaded

their -- where present -- putin invaded, he was not going to commit to anything. he backs down. putin basically called him a coward because he would not stand up and do anything about it. with iraq, yet they are talking about they're going to do this, they are going to that, but they have broken 27 treaties within a year of fighting them and did was they wanted to do anyway. that is why this thing with the nuclear deal, i'm telling you, i just don't trust them. congress needs to shut this thing down. ok, sure they go ahead and try to build a nuclear device with international -- intercontinental ballistic missiles to attack us and what israel off the map. well we have first strike capability in the region, so hey, i'm sorry -- i'm not a

prejudiced man. i don't hate anybody. what i hate is ignorance and hate. that is what i am prejudiced against. host: thanks jim. well he was talking iraq, i think you made the agreement with iran. guest: i have very serious concerns about the proposed agreement with iran. i believe that our sanctions have been effective in really hurting iran. i was a very strong proponent of those sanctions. i cosponsored legislation we passed in 2011 to put the sections in place. i believe the best approach right now is to keep the sanctions in place and even strengthen those sanctions. that is what is really hurting iran, and i am concerned that this agreement would provide hundreds of billions of dollars into iran by releasing them from those sanctions which put them

in a position to strengthen themselves. continue their state sponsorship of terror. then in five years they can buy conventional arms, because the sanctions are lifted. in eight years they can buy missile technology. by that time, 10 years, they will have developed their nuclear technology. now they have an arsenal with a nuclear weapon. i really feel instead of this agreement we need to keep the sentence in place and we need to strengthen them. the sanctions we put in place prevent countries from dealing with iran and stealing with our banking system. there are a few countries can afford not to deal with our banking system. those sections are effective. the administration has provided exceptions to countries under the sanctions instead of fully enforcing all of the sanctions. i think that is what we need to do. rather than approve this agreement -- i don't think congress should approve this agreement -- we should instead keep sections in place and strengthen them. host: is very timeline in the

senate when the consideration will take place? guest: we have 60 days from the date we received all documents that means we have roughly september 19th, that range to approve or reject the agreement. again, i oppose this proposed agreements. the alternative is not military conflict -- although all options have to be on the table. the alternative is keep the sanctions in place and strengthen them. host: here is sadie from maryland. hello. caller: good morning. guest: good morning. caller: please give me a few minutes to state my case. with the keystone pipeline i am wondering if you are going to train american workers, because it since the influx of immigrants there has not been any training and they are training each other. in my neighborhood there are about a thousand homes being

built. when you go through the area there are no blacks, no whites. just immigrants. this keystone pipeline, and the iran agreement, it is things to distract us from the fact that we are not getting anywhere care. we need training. we need -- [indiscernible] people to learn these things because we have unlearned them. guest: i appreciate the question. the keystone pipeline project is an example of a instruction process -- projects that can create good jobs in this country. it is a $7.9 billion pipeline. there is no government costs. it is all private investment. it would create hundreds of millions of dollars of tax revenue at the local, state, and federal levels. it is a good job creator.

of course there would be job training from various sources in both the private and public sector for whatever training is needed for those workers. the key is job creation. that is of course what we are doing with this highway bill. we are -- matter-of-factly will finish up today in the senate -- we will pass a six year highway authorization. that is a long-term highway bill that we need for our roads. rebuttal and researcher in this country, and bridges. that is also a huge job creator and we do it without raising the gas tax. without raising any taxes. and making sure we don't increase the deficit. this is a very important infrastructure bill, but it is also about creating a lot of good construction jobs across this country. we will pass a 90 day extension to get the house time to take it up. we obviously want to work with them to get it completed and put in place. host: they are working on a three month timeline. what does a copy for you? -- , locate for you? guest: today we will have the

final vote on the positive the bill. we will also pass the 90 day extension which gives the house time to come back in september, work on their version of the six year bill, and then we hope to be in conference in october. and passed the bill through both houses and get it to the president. we are after a longer bill. we are not after a short term extension. host: did issues like the export import bank amended, kate legault? -- complicate the goal? guest: absolutely. it at the end of the day when i am focused on is getting a long-term, six-year highway bill. a lot of this -- these interceptor project, those are multi-your project. we can't go with these short-term extensions. this is the first long-term highway bill i think we have done in a decade. this is important for the country. back to the very first question we had about getting things done for the american people. the previous guest had said --

host: the previous guest had said only the first three years get funded? guest: it is authorized for six years. then we will have to come back and find the next three years. but it is fully authorized for six years as state and counties can plan these projects. host: here is micah from here makes, alaska for our guest senator john hoeven. caller: good morning. talking about the keystone pipeline. there is another pipeline that has been in the works for a while. it is the trans-alaska pipeline. during the palin administration they signed a contract with transcanada to build a pipeline down to the lower 48. i think that was before the energy renaissance in your home state of north dakota and all of it down the lower 48. it seems like that has kind of been put on the back burner.

i wonder if you happen to hear anything about that happening? or is it pretty much hush-hush now and we are on to other things? i will take your answer off the air. guest: well, as i understand it right now, i think that is on hold from the standpoint of the trans-alaska pipeline has to move about to million barrels of oil a day but it is only moving about 600,000 barrels of oil a day. it is so difficult and alaska to get permission to drill, it so much of the land there is federal land. it is very difficult to get permits from the federal government to drill. as a result, alaska's oil production is not going up. they don't have the oil production to fill an additional pipeline. they're not even filling the trans-alaska pipeline right now. again, moving only about 600,000 barrels a day in a pipeline that has a capacity of 2 million. host: on our public and light, jeff is from frederick

maryland. caller: good morning. i just wanted to stress and throw this out there. i hear in bits and pieces from callers calling in. i grew up in the 70's. it -- in the 70's there were six people standing in line for jobs. every job you had open. i worked all over this country. lived and worked in the eight states. i ended up here in maryland for my last two years of work. i can't find workers. you cannot find people that want to work. what are the three basic things people need. they need a roof over their head. they need food on the table. they need a way to communicate. the government is giving them away for free and is taking away just what i had when i was younger. i had a need. i wanted my own car. i wanted my own place a live. so i went out and worked hard. we don't have that. we are getting all the things went free. now we can't get workers.

we have got to stop giving away all these freebies to people and give them away that they have and the need to get out there. the foreigners are coming in and they are hungry. they want work. that is why they are taking the jobs away. other people are saying well, we don't need to work. we get a free apartment. we get a free obama phone. we get all the freebies. that's my statement. have a good day. guest: i share your concern about the role of government. no question about it. i am very concerned about that. we have a huge deficit and debt in this country that we've got to get on top of. that comes with economic growth. we have to continue to create more jobs. at the same time we have to get the economy growing which creates more jobs, but that also then, without raising taxes generates a revenue to get on top of this deficit and the debt. but of course the other thing we have to do is we have to engage

in our government programs and find savings to reduce spending. i agree with your point. the growth of government is a real problem. too much regulation, too much burden. it does take away incentive. i am very concerned about it as well, and i appreciate the point you are making. host: the obama administration is set to release its plan for climate change next week. how does it affect your state and were you expecting from these rules? guest: it's a real concern. we are a big energy producing state. i think of 14 states of the country that do a tremendous job with any land reclamation. we are a big-time producer of not only traditional energy, being oil, gas electricity but we also do a tremendous amount in renewables. biofuels ended wind -- and in winter. i believe in a results where we

develop all forms of energy. but the plants yet -- plan he is putting forth is a huge problem for are: history because they don't have the technology to meet the requirements in the way the administration has designed the plan. the way we get good at one -- good environmental stewardship is by developing and deploying these new technologies. you have got to have a regulatory environment that enables the energy industry to do it, rather than putting through regulations that will actually shut plants down. that hits our families. that hit our small businesses right in the pockets. higher costs for families and big-time costs that basis is will have to pass -- businesses will have to pass along. better environmental stewardship, but through adopting, developing deploying those technologies that help us use this energy more independently. host: you've made the point that

if cold is invited way to produce clean technology natural gas could serve as its place? guest: we are doing a lot more of national -- natural gas. we produce a tremendous amount of natural gas. we are doing a lot more with new technologies. with coal powered electricity and again the administration needs to work with industry to do it, not afford regulations that will shut it down. it will affect our families and our small businesses across the country if the assertion does not find a way to help them develop and employ these technologies rather than putting regulations in that shut plants down. host: here is karen from leesburg virginia. democrats line. caller: my comment is, maybe i believe in the united states of america to much. i believe there has got to be a better way. we really have to think about digging a trench, digging a hole

through the middle of the country so that oil can go all the way down to the gulf. i think it's ridiculous. if you sit down and think about it, it's ridiculous. congress is always trying to take the easy way out. if you want to fix this problem prop up the rail industry. i'm not saying if it eight broke don't fix it, but this is clearly a stupid idea. regarding iran, yes. iran is powerful because they have a lot of oil. there are a lot of resources here in the united states. there are a lot of people depending on those resources here. it is always the quick fix. not always the best one. i trust that if iran was to build a nuclear weapon or a ballistic missile that my united states military will take care of that very quickly. that's why i live here and i don't live abroad. i think we need to stop and take a look at all of these radical ideas. we live in the greatest country on earth.

let's work with the resources that we have. let's work with the industry and the people that work here. building a pipeline that is coming from canada to the gulf is ridiculous. when you think about it. i'm so embarrassed that people in congress can't come up with a better solution other than that. that is my comment. guest: well you are saying develop the energy here, produce the energy here. don't get it from iran. i couldn't agree more. but again, you got to move the energy from where it is produced to where it is consumed. to do that you need a transmission lines. you need pipelines for natural gas. we have millions and millions of miles of pipeline moving natural gas and oil. we have transmission lines of that move electricity. we move energy by rail, we move it by track -- by truck. that's why are talking about highway will. but you have to have that for structure and you have to have

it in the right mix. all these different halves of energy whether you prefer electricity, oil, gas. whether you like biofuels, solar, wind energy. you still have to have the kind of infrastructure we are talking about to move it safely, cost-effectively from where it is produced to where it is consumed all across this great nation. that is how you build a long-term energy plan where we produce our own energy rather than getting from iran. then we give the sanctions on iran so they don't have the resources to build a nuclear weapon, thereby avoiding military conflict. at the same time you create a growing economy in this country. you create more jobs. you have national security through energy security. host: james, from wisconsin. republican line. caller: it kind of amazes me that the senators are thinking about signing this agreement when the only alternative is war. it just seems ridiculous that

anybody would want to keep having more and more worse. the last thing i -- more and more wars. the money for these wars is coming indirectly out of our social security trust fund. all of these wars are just putting the nail in the coffin of social security. thank you. guest: i appreciate how concerned you are about the situation, but the alternative is not work. the alternative is giving the sanctions in place. understand that we are denying iran billions of dollars. billions of dollars. if this agreement goes forward they're going to get somewhere between 100 and $150 billion that they can use to get their economy going and they can use to build up their military. they can use it as the largest state author of terror in the world. if we keep the sanctions in place we really keep the pressure on them so they don't have the resources to continue to move forward. that not only makes it harder for them to develop a nuclear weapon, it makes it harder for them to continue their activities in support of terror. it even makes it harder for the

current regime to stay in power. it is the sanctions would have an impact over time. when the relief is immediate, it is those sanctions that are the alternative. that is why it by saying is that of those -- this agreement we need to keep a sense of the place because they are having a real impact. that is why iran is so desperate to get the sanctions release. at the same time they are still chanting death to america. they have a record of cheating. they have said they are not going to sponsor -- stop at their state-sponsored terrorism even with this agreement. we have to be very careful here are to say oh, it is this agreement or military conflict. it is this agreement or keeping the sanctions in place and even making the section stronger. host: senator hoban, -- hoeven we talked about how there will be a vote in the senate about the funding of planned parenthood. when you think about this? guest: we have a bill on the floor next week. essentially what it does is it

provides that no federal funding will go to planned parenthood. instead, that roughly $500 million a year will go to community health centers. so the funding for women's health will still be there, but it will go to community health centers, not planned parenthood. there will be no funding -- no federal funding to planned parenthood. instead it will go out to community health centers. they can apply for it through the grant process. that can be used for women's health care. again, we should not have federal funding that goes to organizations that provide abortions. that is in law under the hyde amendment. that is certain -- essentially what the bill will do. host: the president of planned parenthood, cecile richards, writes in an op-ed today. one of the things she says is that attacking this funding is attacking women. including women who need cancer

screening and contraceptives. congress should not allow -- should not get in the way of life-saving care. guest: that is what i say. we are making sure that the roughly five million a year -- $500 million year that goes to planned parenthood will be made available to women's health. this is not an issue about women's health. it is making sure that federal funding does not go to planned parenthood when they are providing abortion. again, the hyde amendment requires that federal funding not be used for abortion. that has been one of the big concerns for those of us who feel that there should not be federal dollars going to planned parenthood. we are making sure that that does not happen. that federal funding does not go to planned parenthood. the we are protecting women's health by making sure that $500 million year goes to community health centers. host: she frames that as attacking women. how would you respond to that? guest: absolutely not, as i just explained. host: from delaware, albert is

next. republican line. caller: senator, the gop position -- the gop has become a patriarchal party. it is quite evident that you guys have never paid the price for that. however, getting back to the keystone pipeline, all that is going to do is continue to eat up our planet. the reason why the republicans in congress are against the iran deal is because they don't want the iranian oil on the market so they can continue -- so oil prices can remain low for everybody in the whole darned world. that is iran's money. it is an banks all across the eu and the united states. that is their money. don't be worried about other people's money. we have been fighting, how should i say it -- our foreign policy is totally draconian.

you guys have blocked cuba, who has 20 five labs bio -- bio labs. they even have a drug that is going to knock the heck out of diabetes if it ever gets in this country. you guys are in bed with the pharmaceutical companies. we have to do things right and you guys are not doing things right. stop eating of the planet. we have to do better. -- heating up the planet. your answers to these things do not make sense. the keystone pipeline is for canada. it is not going to do us any good. it is bad oil. we have to move on. our infrastructure -- when are you going to be coming about our interceptor? we shouldn't even elect politicians that don't want to deal with the interceptor host: how about host: how about we let our guest response? guest: as far as interceptor i am telling you we are passing a

six-year highway bill in the senate. as far as keystone and energy as i said hours -- my state is producing 1.2 million barrels and we have to move seven hundred thousand barrels a day on rail because we cannot build a pipeline. it is about, actually, better environmental stewardship. you are talking a huge number of rail cars that has to move every day because we do not have the right mix of rail and pipeline transmission. i have trying to make sure that we continue to develop and adopt better technologies. that is about environmental stewardship as well as producing energy as cost effectively as possible and doing it here at home so we don't have to depend on places like iran. that is the largest state sponsor of terror in the world. as i said, the alternative to the agreement is not military conflict, it is strong sanctions which we need to keep in place. in a women's health again, we

want to do all we can to make sure we are addressing and supporting the issue of women's health. that is why i talk about 500 million dollars year that is currently going to planned parenthood going to community health centers for they can address women's health. i think those are the issues you raised. in all cases we are trying to put forward solutions. not talking points. direct solutions. host: on our independent line rachel from 40, texas. hello. caller: hello. seems to me that they care more about the oil companies than they do people's safety on the highway. they are more worried about the keystone. another thing, this oil reserve they built out there not too long ago by bush's ranch, is that going to go close to his ranch out there? i mean, taxpayer's money went into that big oil reserve you got there?

there are a lot of people nervous about that. how close is it going to come to that? the keystone pipeline, is a going to go there for his ranch? guest: i don't know the answer to that question. actually part of the pipeline has artie been approved. the president went to cushing oklahoma, a number of years back and actually announced he was approving a portion of the pipeline that runs from cushing, oklahoma down to the gulf coast refineries. that part of the pipeline president obama has already approved. but i don't know the specific route. host: this call comes from sue in hawaii. hi. caller: i have a question senator. one is, if we needed the oil but yet we are reliant on opec, then why in the world are we exporting it? keep the oil. the other question is, in places

on the mainland like in arizona why don't we have solar? it is required in hawaii and has been for many years. the extrasolar can go back into the plants without any problem. they have the technology. get the technology from them and give us more solar. inc. user. i will take it off the air. guest: really good questions. first, as far as solar we are developing solar. remember, as i said i am for all forms of energy. we want a mix. we want renewable, we watch traditional. we watched the right mix of energy infrastructure. we want to build it for the long-term so we don't have to get energy from opec or any of our adversaries. u.s. to great question, because in a way it is kind of counterintuitive. why should we need export if we are trying to grow energy here

at home and be self sufficient? the answer is because it is a global market and the prices set by north zero crude -- the more energy we produce helps bring down pressure on brent crude. that lowers the price of gasoline at the pump. as argument energy cannot compete globally that instead of growing it shrinks. we produce more energy it gets us to the point where we can be energy self-sufficient. and at the same time it brings world prices lower which provides lower prices at the pump for our consumers families, and small businesses. it helps our economy grow, creates more jobs. i think it is a win all the way around. for the consumer, but also for the economy and job creation. and ultimately national security. host: senator john hoeven of north dakota, thanks your time.

coming up in the next half-hour, open phones. if you wanted was a call, (202) 748-8000 four about -- -- for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8002 for independents. we will take those open phones when washington journal continues. >> the c-span cities to her, working with our cable affiliates, visit cities across the country. this weekend we are joined by comcast to learn more about the literary life and history of the best at georgia. jimmy dyess was see any we have a medal at the age of 19. he was also awarded a medal of honor possible sleeper's actions in world war ii. >> we are here in the augusta museum of history. they said they would do a permanent military display to honor him.

when i did my research on the book i went through over 9000 carnegie medal recipients in the last hundred years. of the 3500 or so medal of honor recipients since the civil war it turns out he is the only person ever to have earned both awards. -- he would almost -- >> he would almost for sure is that he did not deserve it. he was very humble. he never talks about the carnegie medal. when i interviewed people who knew him, when i did the book a long time ago, people knew him well. i said tell me about the carnegie medal, he earned when he was 19. they didn't know anything about it. i have known many medal of honor recipients, and most of them will tell you i did not deserve this metal. it should have been given to 70 else. it is a piece of humility that we can all learn from. i think he would have been in that category. >> we also visit the boy had home of our 20th president

woodrow wilson. >> president wilson moved to a gust as a child, when he was just a year old. he lives in another house, and send this house when he was three. president wilson's very first memory was in november of 1860, before he was four years old. he was standing on the front gate out in front of the house and two men came by in a hurry with very excited tones of voice. they said abraham lincoln has just been elected president, and there is going to be a war. so young tommy ran inside and asked his father what was war? what did that mean? why were they so excited? we think it is remarkable that his very first memory was about another president -- abraham lincoln -- and about another war -- the civil war. of course wilson would have to leave the country through world war i. >> see all of our programs from

augustine on sunday afternoon at 2:00 on c-span3. "washington journal" continues. host: open phones until the end of the program. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. and for independents, (202) 748-8002. usa today announced that represented at the from pennsylvania was charged with conspiracy. they allege that he conspired with others to hide a $1 million loan from a wealthy donors who is unsuccessful 2007 campaign for mayor at the little theater. fatah said he has not seen the indictment. he said quote there is a lot for us to digest. also, this coming from the office of representative the

era, saying that he will announce that he is running for reelection in the 36th district of the -- los angeles california. he says, my decision came down to this -- how can i make the biggest difference for people like my parents? i am best positioned in the house of representatives to stand up and get things done. to open phones, it is larry from south dakota, up first on our independent line. caller: i just wish i would have got senator hoban, being that north dakota is northwest there. i can see a variety of things he just did not understand. one of them is, he was wondering why iran has said death to america. basically that all started back when we deposed to the democratic government in iran and then we put the shaw of iran and -- shah of iran in with his

death squads. then they take over our embassy and we freed their money. this all started with the brits who were getting kicked out of iran when it was democratic, and then they went to our cia. we went in and deposed their government. then he was talking about oh make more energy. i talk to guys all the time. they are being laid off in the oil fields. they are being laid off because oil prices are low. they have shut down so many rigs up there in north dakota that it is just quiet now because of the low oil prices. he is way off on that. lower oil prices are keep them low. people don't work when they are low. they just don't do that. i really think that our government is kind of misled. this country has come to a point where we could actually vote on bills that come up through the

populace. we've got the computers to do it. we don't have to wait for those guys to make bad decisions time after time. host: robert from sterling, virginia. democrats line. you are next. caller: hello? host: you are on. caller: i just want to talk about iran. congress, the republicans both through off those deals. secondly they are saying iran is a sponsor of terrorism. it is ask without a -- saudi arabia. most of those hijackers on 9/11 were saudi arabia. also the money. we are not giving them $100 billion. it is their own money. we just releasing it to them. that's all. thank you. host: richard is from twin falls, idaho. republican line. good morning. caller: good morning.

first off, planned parenthood. i would just like to clear up a fact, and i have heard of said several times. planned parenthood has performed no mammograms. they don't pay for mammograms. then on the pipeline, pipelines are low price. it is still better to have national oil that it is to have opec oil. i was in the oil business back in the 70's, and there was a congressman named moe udall who i do with time after time to investigate all the bs that was being put on about a shortage. it was a created shortage and i still think there is a bunch of crap -- corruption. it is so cockaded i have actually lost track and have not

paid any attention to it in years. high-priced or low price, it would still be better to have our own line they do have opec oil. i just spent several hours last night watching these videos from planned parenthood. anybody can watch that and not get their stomach turned inside out is just beyond me. we talking mangler and goebbels. exterminating people. god dang. but affordable. host: donna is from new jersey, democrats line. caller: my comment would be about the immigrants that are here illegally. well even americans do it too. they work for cash. they don't pay the taxes that if you work for a company that they take out of our pay. check cashing centers are popping up all over the place. and in the foreign countries

that they come from, they want our cash. is that it back home. host: we have a story and politico about representative mark meadows from north carolina and his effort to remove a john boehner. boehner cu bleeder an army of new one -- boehner cu leader an army of one. he writes, you are on your own. in fact, the message is delivered to meadows three times since tuesday afternoon by some of the arthritis or publican closest friends and political, then house. just hours before meadow introduces motion they pleaded with him to reconsider. after the measure was unveiled at cop had a members only phone call on tuesday night to discuss the response. the speaker was asked about this i represented of mark meadows at a brief -- briefing that he gets on a weekly basis. here is his response.

[video clip] >> couldn't you kind of put an end to this by just bringing it up and having a vote? >> listen. this is one member. i have got broad support. frankly, this is not even deserving of a vote. >> have you spoken with congressman meadows? >> why? host: let's hear from matthew, silver spring, maryland. republican line. hi. caller: i just wanted to throw another log on the fire, adding momentum to this planned parenthood defund effort. i really think it is one of those things that the american people have looked away from for a long time, much the way, quite frankly, good people can look away from terrible things like slavery. we have looked away from the

murder of all these little babies for a very long time. i think this is one thing we can do what we don't just crossed to the other side of the street and leave a bunch of suffering women and suffering children on their own. also on their own being smothered by an evil kind of funding. we need to defund planned parenthood. i encourage all americans not to look away. host: cal from hawaii independent line. hi. caller: hi. i just want to know that about -- about that solar power that was invented in 1948 and they stopped at? i want to take a look back at that and see where they stopped it. i hope mr. trump goes on the road to a white house. have a nice day. host: general martin dempsey, during a hearing on capitol hill-ish -- offered his view on

the iran deal. the headline, top general gives a pragmatic view of iran a new pair deal. general dempsey answered a barrage of questions from the public and senators that appeared intended to make them criticize the packs. instead, he gave an assessment both of the potential and the limitations of the packs. " if followed, the deal addresses one critical and the most dangerous point of friction with the iranian regime." from newark new jersey, here is rob, democrats line. caller: good morning. i would just like to reinforce and added to some of the comments made i other colors.

-- other callers. first of all, in terms of iranian assets, it is true that it is most evidently iranian money. the united states is not going to be giving taxpayer money to iran. the other aspect of this is that most of that money apparently, based on comments by the secretary of the treasury is not in american banks to begin with. the noise -- north dakota senator said perhaps at this deal falls apart the sanctions can be continued. the secretary of energy, the secretary of state, the defense secretary, the defense -- the secretary of the treasury have all stated before house and senate committee hearings that it is their belief that the sanctions would fall apart. my question would be, how does

he expect to continue sanctions if the p5 nations, based on the comment of our various secretaries -- who have stated repeatedly both before the house and senate committees that they ran would walk away from any continued hearings -- sanctions. i don't want to cast aspersions on the republican senate and house members, but their whole attitude seems to be to present the talking points rather than a truly listening to any of the responses offered by the american representatives who negotiated this agreement with the cooperation of great britain, france, and germany. this truly, in terms of the first, britain and france, truly are our greatest allies. we would lose the support of our

longtime, historical allies. if we don't go forward with this deal. that is my comment. thanks for listening to me. host: thank you. peggy from wyoming, hello. caller: hi. i wanted to comment about keystone and fracking. water is the most important commodity that we can ever have. it takes so much water for fracking, and that keystone line is going to take a lot of -- a lot more water than we can afford to lose. what is more important? oil or water? one of the six, we're going to find out -- it is water. you cannot ignore oil. maybe we should worry more about the water that is concerned with all of this fracking and the keystone. in a few years water is going to cost us a lot more. that is all i have to say. host: the lead story in the financial times takes a look at potential interest rate hikes by

the federal reserve. the reserve signaled that it remains on course to lift interest rates this year. in a statement after its policy meeting yesterday, the central banks give a stronger endorsement of progress in the job market, saying it was seeing a solid job gains and suggesting it was nearing its goals on full employment. however it stuck with existing language, saying activity was expanding moderately and risks to economic outlook were nearly balance, the latter being acknowledgment of continued uncertainties over the recovery. jenny in illinois. you're next. caller: thanks for taking my call. i wanted to just bring up a point of how important the power grid is. there has been a lot of discussion of this but it seems like nothing is going to get moved in the senate or house on this. all of the issues that we have that everyone is discussing -- from minimum-wage hikes to the

keystone pipeline -- not that is going to make any difference at all if iran gets the icbms and we have an emt attack on america. a lot of people i'm sure, are not aware that 90% of our population will be dead within a year. people need to get on the phone, call their representatives, and demand that something be done to protect us. host: jenny, have you called your representative on this? what has been the response? caller: i have. i have not really gotten any response. i'm not surprised. i know that apparently there was a move to bring an issue like this to the table in the next upcoming session, but it seems like other things always get in the way. to me this is one of the most important things protecting the american people.

our cell phones won't work. our cars won't work. nothing will work. you want to go to the grocery store and buy food. people just seem to be completely unaware of what can happen. that is one of the most important things for protecting america, protecting us from an emt attack. host: susan from goodyear arizona. republican line. caller: good morning. i agree 100% with your last caller. what i am calling today about is if sometime this week you could get somewhat to talk to me about planned parenthood. my daughter works for herself. she applied for the obama health care. they helped her with her birth control. they help her with the mammograms, pap smears and stuff. but before she got on that last year, before she got on that she went to planned parenthood.

me and her were talking about it the other day. planned parenthood said they would not do a pap smear or a chest cancer screening. they don't do that. the only thing they do is give up or controls -- did out of birth controls and information about abortion. they give out information about where to go to get help for other stuff. somebody really needs to check out the planned parenthood here in goodyear, arizona. it's the truth. i felt so sick to my stomach when me and my daughter saw that. planned parenthood and my daughter has helped me and my daughter out. but when that obamacare came out, she got on it.

$10 a month she pays for. her premium is very expensive on her delectable. she only makes maybe $10 or $11 an hour. the thing is, this planned parenthood. please. i wish somebody and congress would do something. the second question i have for next week is can you please get some of the. i watch your show every day. i recorded some of my husband and daughter can see it. the prisons. here in arizona. i have sent a letter to mccain. there are a lot of us mothers who do have some of the in prison that have a dui or a smaller portion of a crime that is getting 10 years or 15 years.

then there are corrupt ceos -- cos that are in those prisons. nobody has an answer to me to protect my family. host: that is say that in arizona. we will hear from richard in verona, missouri. democrats line. caller: good morning. i attended one of bernie sanders parties last night. we had a big turnout. host: is this the party that you watched online? caller: no. i was there at the meeting last night. there in springfield missouri, we had a big turnout. host: go ahead. caller: my offer on? host: you're on. caller: i think he represents the majority of what people want his country.

they want to cover everybody. they deserve. host: cnn reporting that senator sanders has fallen behind hillary clinton in the democratic nomination. but a poll finds bernie sanders would beat donald trump in a general election. that is a poll released today that shows in a hypothetical election, sanders trumps trump 44% to 39%. the poll shows that although trop is leading the gop pack right now he could prove to be a disaster in the general election. jesse from texas. from our republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning sir. i would ask -- i would like to ask, they keep talking about putting limits on our

congressional leaders because they have been there for too long, like harry reid. i would like to know when they are going to stop all of these executive orders that our president is doing, that is ruining our country. that is it. they are not doing their job they needed to be held accountable for what they are in office for. host: in louisiana, in -- ellen is up next. caller: good morning. god bless for everything that they do. i wanted to say that. in the holy bible under genesis is held -- it says, when it comes to pass that the man of god again to multiply on the face of the earth that the sons of of god told daughters they were born fair. in the face of any black or stormy or cloudy color, let the men of god choose wives. i had looked at it is on page

186 or something like that. it said, all pure and innocent and beautiful, with perfect features. free from any ash or cloudy color. everybody says you know, how black folks matter and everything. but god made the white people and white folks matter. almighty god is superior to any race. they can't be calling us racist. i looked at the word black and it says wicked evil. it is on page 70 of the merriam webster dictionary. it says very wicked, evil, the race of africa. i even wrote down the words wicked, and in the word wicked

it said degenerate and dangerous and contemptible. host: ok ellen, we go to atlanta georgia. chris is in atlanta georgia. independent line. caller: good morning. i would like to make a couple of comments. the senator from north dakota earlier spoke of his airy a -- area, employers could not get american workers. if they would be willing to pay a decent wage they would get american workers. the mexicans, the immigrants they work for anything you pay them. that's my comment on that. my other comment is on cuba. the united states fought two wars and lost a lot of american lives -- soldiers, which i was involved in -- in korea and vietnam to stop the spread of communism in the world today. cuba is a communist

dictatorship, and why would we be shaking hands with them? that's my comments. thank you very much. host: with the month of august comes the start of debate. all 17 current candidates have been invited to dissipate in the forum in new hampshire. the voters first four and will be a two-hour event moderated by jack keefe. candidates will appear on stage one at a time. questions will come from the audience and members of the public. that voters first four and takes place live on monday, august the third. you can watch it on c-span. listen to it on c-span radio and also watch it on c-span.org. from petersburg, florida emmanuel. immigrants line. hi. -- democrats line. caller: i've got a couple things

i want to talk about. it should not be built. anything bad for health should not be built. everybody knows that it is bad on people's health. number two i pray for everybody every night and everything. people that are dead, i pray for people who had tragedy. i'm going to take you back, and i want the americans and latinos and blacks listen to this. when the young lady in california that just got killed by the mexican ok. everybody talks off the top of their head in capitol hill. what they do, they said here and people come to capitol hill and testify in a joint session. they testify what happens to their kid. you never see this other side.

you never see the gop or the tea party inviting people to capitol hill that are sitting here getting killed by these police officers. they sit here and they talk about how they wanted to reach to the other side. i do not see that. when you have a tragedy in california and you have people come to capitol hill to testify about their tragedy, why haven't you said here and had these people come to capitol hill and testify about their kids getting killed by these police officers? on top of that the reason why i am sitting here and saying don't critique the other side is because the president sent them a bill for to be thousand body cameras and they never responded to it yet. -- 50,000 body cameras. what type of reaching on the other side of a doing? they are really a cricket.