will also speak with steven komarow about planned parenthood. host: good morning on this thursday, september 16th. contenders squared off last night over immigration, planned iran, the economy and others. the they're analyzing the performance but we want to turn of you to get your take on the debate. who lost st night and ground. numbers.phone

202 202-748-8000 and 202-748-8001 and 202-748-8002. e-mail us o journal.c-span.org. take a look at politico's headline. insiders tell politico bloomberg ed it and politics put this together. fiorina getting the most twitter to one and according ocial intelligence firm she accumulated more than 1 billion mpregz and donald trump with 621 million and ted cruz with at million and take a look sayinggton post" website "it's lady's night." very clearly what mr. trump said. what do you think about last night's debate. who won and who lost? at the exchange when

rena was asked about this. trump said, look at that face. can you imagine that. was rump later said he talking about your persona and not your appearance. please feel free to respond about what you think about his persona. it's interesting to me, mr. trump said that he heard mr. bush very clearly in what mr. bush said. i think women all over this ountry heard very clearly what said.rump applause] >> i think she's got a beautiful ace and i think she's a

beautiful woman. host: from last night's second cnn.. debate hosted by of the you think debate. epublican, you waited, go ahead. caller: greta, i thought clear cruz.re was ted he's the only one that's got a perfect 100 rating from heritage. these guys we don't know anything about. we know that ted cruz will put want xpayers first and i to announce i would vote for ted historyr anybody in the of the country. andink he's the best leader the smartest. on the debate between hillary national ed is the debating champion. how long been how long have you supporting him? caller: caller: i went to washington and met one on one with him in april i started supporting him in

january. even fired up i can't sleep at night over ted cruz. ronald what did you think of last night's debate? -- er: i thought the debate ou had a whole bunch of -- there last night. host: i didn't make out what you said. say again. said as far as they had the hawks out last night. this country going to succeed we to have a plan followed as far as trying to take on the world itself. a better plan. everybody is talking about the military. when you go to war you got to break it down and build it back up. you heard the same message from all of those republican came to s when it foreign policy. you heard conservative hawks? yeah, i hearing all these hawks -- i'm a military do it elf and we can't

alone. when we go in as far as taking out the enemy we got have to help. host: didn't you hear rand paul umped in and differentiated himself from some of the other candidates saying you can't just tear you the agreement with iran you.e you got to engage to china and to our enemies. caller: that's true. paul was just one person. host: thurman, your thoughts, an independent. caller: yes. last night it was an interesting debate. rand paul?toward host: you're for rand paul? caller: yes because he's logical. we can't do anything by ourselves. and it's like a dog and pony up there. e need somebody in washington

that . -- everything you talk about we see it. we people are tired. we're not stupid out there. to e tired of people going washington and talking that talk when they get there we don't hear nothing. host: what about donald trump last night? caller: donald trump he talks that talk. around him is good people because you can't buy them. that's one thing everybody is donald trump. he don't need the money. you cannot buy him. need is good people that have knowledge of the world. he'll be okay. host: donald trump was asked last night to respond to by governor bobbie indal in the earlier debate that took place with four candidates. jindal questioned donald trupl's testimony tra many.

as far as testimony practice many i think i have a great temperament. phenomenal business with iconic assets, one of the eally truly great real estate businesses and i maybe an entertainer because i had tremendous success with number all over the rs place and the apprentice and everything else i've done. am far and away greater than an entertainer is a kind ssman and that's the of mindset this country needs to owe it back because we $19 trillion and you need this kind of thinking to bring our back.ry and believe me, my temperament calm, but d, very respected outside of this country. we are not respected now. who npr did an account of got to speak the most at last night's three hour debate. politico notes, donald trump 19 minutes and

huckabee just over nine minutes and scott walker was last with and 29 seconds. we're asking all of you who won last night's debate. louisville, kentucky, good morning to you. caller: hi. comment nt to make a that every time donald trump says something unkind about his polls gorities up in the republican party. ist i'm interested in seeing if he wins these primaries are the republicans going to him? te because i'm hearing from insiders they're saying they donald trump the nomination and since 1980 they're saying they're the party people. and i think people of america respect what he's accomplished than any other candidate nd i'm interested to see if republicans will nominate him? host: why do you say that? because you don't think they with him but respect his business? caller: republican party since

controlled by the religious people in the party on the right and that's why i grew in a republican house before 1980, but the insiders have 1980olled that party since but they say they're the party of the people. host: you'll be interested in this. this is in the pages of the "new york times". writing, he's s show.on our have evangelicals lost their values? to see the t demand long form certificate of trump's character of ut business and personal morality not because of tabloid exposes but because of his own boasts. one of his books that he rels in the fact that he gets to sleep with some of the top women in the world ask divorced two wives so far for other women. tos should not be surprising social conservatives in a

by pornographic understandings of the meaning of sex.and some self identified evangelicals say they're for mr. leaders are e praising mr. trump for telling it like it is. russell moore goes on, jesus taught his disciples to count the cost of following him. should know, he said, where we're going and what we're count behind and also the cost of following donald trump. so means we would decide of the the other side culture war. we ought to listen to get past the boisterous confidence and he television lights and the waving arms and hear just whose applauding.e ruth a republican, good morning to you. you are on the air. caller: yes, ma'am. i wanted to pray every night for

our governor from ohio. i believe the man is a christian andand got a sense of humor that is something that our government and our country need more humor. host: ruth, you think -- was r: i thought mr. trump a fool. host: you're for governor kasich? certainly am. i hope that governor kasich -- i lord that he will be trump is only reason where he's at is because he's who has gotten any -- and all of them, they all they talk about trump reason -- thishe man has never run a country. to watch , you need our road to the white house coverage because if you are

of rested in following some the candidates that are not getting as much media attention go to thend it here. website c-span.org to find the scheduling. hi, martha. good morning. morning.good can you hear me? host: we can. what did you think about last night's debate. and who won? caller: donald won. donald won on so many levels and he is a christian and he said the most, hat i love he said he would give back his security and as far as i t karly woman, you know, don't see what the excitement is about her. she hasn't r career been successful at anything. just good talking points. once nald was awesome and again giving back his social security he said he didn't need that's where we

should start. thank you c-span. host: all right. of the orange county register which is republican land in california, this, things turn serious fear rena wasarly the winner last night. rena christie e stood out and this from the journal constitution, outsiders clash at the g.o.p. morning from the ront page of the miami hearld, rivals bruise trump but no knockouts. roberto, what do you think? caller: i just want to say that if you believe all those lies are talking about, they're going to tell you bigger

lies, for example, they say verybody will be able to buy a house. that means that they'll give us a week because that's how much you need to pay for a for a house is $200,000. the thing about immigration, building a wall and all that, to build a wall. got to realize people come here why? because they get 7.25 an hour and pay rent. if they want a global economy a global minimum wage. mexico and give them the same benefits that but they're thinking about any of that. get $2 a day or $2 an hour so they exploit the

out of these people so they come here. justin, an, north indiana. what did you think? only : well, i caught three quarters of it. but what i got i like the guy best.hio the so a democratic voter and far i'm independent though and i and he's i ybody think for sure the guy that's up there.st smarts the rest was -- talking about governor john kasich. caller: yeah, but the rest of a side show.ke who could miss chris christie? looks like tom green -- ost: hold on before you go there. hat do you think though how

carly fiorina did? many of the headlines say she won? caller: i disagree with that. why? caller: she was bullish. he was like the classroom teacher. but as far as -- no one had any were going tothey do or had a plan on anything they wanted to improve for the people. all about themselves. point.hat's a big losing i'm actually for bernie sanders. the burn. host: independent. lee. caller: good morning. i want to just say that donald clearly won the debate. host: why is that? caller: he's just being very up transparent with

the problems that we're having here in the united states. in regards to our governor john kasich there are a lot of things need to come up about him in regards to his willingness to minority groups here in ohio. there's been a lot of stuff that not s not done and i'm happy with the things that he's done in ohio. that's my comment. thank you very much. host: before you go, let me analysis in the front page of the "new york times" off you because you said trump is the winner. said, donald trump arrived at he republican debate facing a critical question, would he use the moment to move beyond attention grabbing theatrics and present himself as a candidate many could envision as the to mention nee not as president of the united states. but as became clear within new es there would be no mr. trump taking the stage

wednesday night. rather than ignore prodding from , mr. trump not nly went on the attack but focused his attention on andidates like rand paul that polls suggest is anything but a threat to him. respond? u myself, personally in my opinion is a lot better candidate. not the culture of ashington politics or any politics across this country right here. and i hear what the is saying in regards to ho is better and who is not better. bringing a sense of exposure to people who are not really transparent.

transparent in my opinion. and i take it right back to our ohio.or he has not dealt with the issue f working with women in minority groups. if the media prints information out like that about donald trump need to print that ame information about john kasich here in ohio. in regard to that article right there i hear what the saying but he's a very transparent person and he's exposing the other individuals. right. so lee, this goes into what ben carson had to say. asked about the appeal of utsiders like donald trump and himself. >> typically politicians do hings that are politically expedient and they are looking for whatever their particular goal is. that is not the reason that i have gotten into this thing. i am extraordinarily concerned about the direction of this

visiveness did he that is going on and this fiscal irresponsibility and failure to leadership position in the world. all those things will lead to a situation where the next generation will not have a chance that we've had now. so i don't want to really get who is the ing politician and who is not a politician. but i think the people have kind made that decision for themselves already and will so as time goes on. host: "denver post" this morning page, the debate turns to issues and below they note this, at ben carson's poll numbers back in july. 6%. he's now in september at 23%. ben carson there talking about the people deciding what outsiders is for the and who is a politician and who

not. lewis in virginia, republican. louise. caller: jake made it appear it was the jerry springer show. these questions that and hewell she said this said this and at a was ridiculous. nd that's the media. people who were calling in about john kasich. '78. man came in he ruled -- he was ruling they threw george h.w. bush out which was a criminal he went to ink and work for the lehman brothers. i mean, come on. away.uy needs to go i liked chris christie. i thought he was very honest. i don't like carly fiorina . i was kind of excited about her there for a while.

brought up the frie friend, i thought oh my god. in the live united states of israel, i live in the united states. i'm curious what is it that we israel so much that we take all things? not just a few things but all things. okay. lorena, texas, lin linda, democrat. aller: it seemed that the republican debate all they 0sty and s religion war mongering. who clearly chris christie with endorsement of bush's war in which he kept saying bush kept us safe and he gave us 9/11 watch and the war was ofh a disaster that the rise

jihadism against the united states was incredible. i don't think they mad anything substantive to offer. looking ate ask you, the field, who do you think the greatest challenge for democrats in a general election? caller: the greatest challenge probably ben carson. because ald trump donald trump feeds into the feel that a lot of people out there a. trump kind of represents that. host: linda, who are you supporting in the democratic field? >> bernie sanders. host: why? caller: because i think he has the ost to offer for people. host: okay. in what way? talking what he's about? universal healthcare and all those things? right.: i think that he is someone who stands for the average person

corporations ig and wars. host: have you donated money to him? caller: yes. do you mind telling us how much? caller: $30. disabled so i had to -- i didn't have much. host: do you plan to give more volunteer? caller: i may give more next month. linda, lorena, texas. to ndependent, good morning you, jackie. caller: good morning. i think that marco rubio was the winner. whatever question was asked he gave a very good answer. gave a plan for what he was going to do. he was a very outstanding debater and i think that in this situation that marco rubio was the clear winner.

all right jackie. other news this morning. want to update you on what's hill.ning on capitol lawmakers are in washington and the "wall street journal" says g.o.p. tension over planned parenthood and what to defund them ng to and do the republicans do it in continuing resolution which would be sure to fail and poses the threat of shutting the government. turnl e wall street senate republicans including mcconnell ader mitch says it would only distract from defunding. million come from medicaid. medicaid funding is based on for an entire fiscal year in the first quarter of the next fiscal year that means it will continue for a few months shuts on ernment october 1st.

on to say this. shortcut to defund the group. have heard about this, a texas teen was arrested for a digital clock that he carried to school. he just wanted to impress his teachers with a homemade invention. next ory of what happened to the 14-year-old from texas as led to national outrage and tension. eager to show off, he walked high school with his hastingly assembled invention. was escort out of the school

and the teacher bomb.ok the device for a >> we should inspire more kids like you to science. makes america great education secretary tweeting out. then also from the "wall street journal" this headline about healthcare. 10.4%.insured dropped the share of u.s. lacking a plan plummets but poverty poverty.le to ease the many of those uninsured come getting on to the exchanges but also because of edicaid expansion across the state and then on "usa today's" money section. justice department

re nearing a deal on ignition switches. they reached a settlement to resolve a criminal investigation deadly andling of a ignition switch blamed for more han 120 deaths and massive recalls. g.m. would pay a penalty of less han 1.2 pwreul in connection ith its handling of the case.ended accelerated he deal which is including a charge and what will when the federal committee meets for its second day, hike or no hike. the explanation will be critical. at 2:00 p.m. we'll find out what the federal reserve has decided to do and then the chair woman will go before the cameras and have coverage on c-span3

2:30 eastern time and u.s.a. day said she'll be peppered with wanting er to explain the thinking behind their try to raise rates or not. janet a democrat, good morning to you. to our question. who won last night's debate. i don't think either one of them won. either one of them really spoke do as a hey would president. either one of them won that debate. and ted cruz, he needs to citizen.e was not a he is not a born citizen, so how he be the president if he citizen? born he has a it that right to not be born and proof was not born here. how

could he be with president? ost: i'm looking up the citizenship question right here because i'm failing on the details of where he was born. i know the issue of canada has come up, but let me find and we'll let at you know. ed, a republican. morning. caller: hello. i thought the republican party debate.e it seemed to me that just the form f and cnn's conduction of the interview, i'm wondering does cnn have responsibility for conducting the interview? it seemed to me in the past they the league of by women voters or third parties ratings t seem to have and entertainment agenda as the most important thing? so i would hope that the

at blican party took a look what happened last night and took over responsibility for running the debate so that viewers could have an an idea how o get each of the candidates -- what issues sitions were for that are important for the president of united states. host: did you watch the fall three hours? i did. host: what did you want -- did of hewitt in this r questioning from him the conservative radio? caller: more structured format hether you get immigration and then you have all the candidates immigration or defense and then you have an opportunity for the candidates express their views on efense, but about what we had was a ping pong game of you said that and i said that and do you want to respond to what he said? candidates at the think about other candidates?

he important thing is for the candidates to get the opportunity to express to the to the people what their views are on the key issues of the country. all right. that's ed. bill, good morning. you're on the air, sir. caller: good morning. yes. perplexed that carly fiorina is one of the most ones of them all. rebuilding theon missile defense system and to ilding the military back where it should be and this hers is the ude of direction we should be going in.

one.here's another their insistence that hillary is opponent and eir just without even any mention of bernie sanders to me is very puzzling too. ahead of so far hillary and she does not even in these debates. 'm wondering are they so strayed to mention him? are they afraid of him? interesting. i don't know if you're on twitter, but bernie sanders was tweeting during the debate #berniedebate. if you are interested in what he had to say you can go to his follow along nd there. they write, cruz who was born if canada there are no

constitutional barriers. run? cruz he likely can just as obama could have even if he were to in kenya which he most certainly was. in el edward cruz was born calgary, canada and family was living there because his father working for the oil industry and moved when he was four. he grew up in texas and raduated from high school and later attending harvard law the first term senator already considered a pro released his ate birth certificate which says his father n delaware and was born in cuba. hey say he's in the clear despite his canadian birth place. that the tution says two provisions are obvious. he candidate must be a united states e

for 14 years. democrat, hi, robert. good morning to you. go ahead. for taking my ou call. and i want to say quickly a lot it.eople touched on it shows that the country is in trouble. the people that a bickering -- it's and they're pandering to their people that they want to be them k of them or support because if you look at the fear talk one wants to really about this is a country that that -- the people re making enemies and you see that the fear that this one and you look at carson, same thing. and the problem is not about

democrat but about a country going to hell and the ends meet.making this is why all the democrats other guy that we -- sanders is making a lot of sense. so soul of country the the country is gone. nobody is talking about how it.re fixing nobody is focusing on the of the people of the country with healthcare and people losing their house. me this is a football match and people's lives are at bickering -- and i think we got a long way to go if kind of people that is selling their soul just o make it big and the country can go to hell. e're going to hell in a hand basket. host: you talk about the

bickering and the back and forth. responding to h criticism from donald trump president rother, george w. bush's he decision to go to war in iraq. >> it's about judgment. i didn't want to go into iraq i fought it. what i said -- >> may i respond to that? to destabilize the middle east and that's what happened. >> what do you say in the senate when you're talking and debating. here at facts when donald trump talks about judgment, what was on who would have been the best negotiator to deal iran. it wasn't a republican, it was hillary clinton. the lack of judgment and lack of understanding about how the orld works is really dangerous so is this the judgment that you bring to the table the hillary great negotiator and she could bring about --

brother and your brother's administration brought barack obama. you know what, he kept us safe. remember, ow if you you remember rubble and fight firer with arms around it. and he a clear signal did keep us safe. now? you feel safe right i don't feel so safe. and forth between the two over the decision going iraq.r to we'll go to texas. you're up. caller: hi. good morning. i carly because when

media like in all the i e combining, think donald trump did win. well.d fairly and i think the biggest loser as -- we're not going to see the -- i'll leave it there. mike, republican. caller: hi. i thought ben carson was pretty precise. intellect and he doesn't believe we should have gotten involved in iraq and i don't should have gotten involved in iraq either.

we have enough problems of our own. never felt unsafe in this country and i still don't today. fathers put provisions in the constitution so that we have the obligation defend the constitution and defend the country ourselves. meaning. us the i do like his intellect and he's like to see d i'd him as the next president. thank you very much. good day. host: all right. democrat.epl hi, donald. host: what did you think of the debate? caller: i thought that people is nderstand where trump coming from. he's a regular man who is in business. if you've ever been in big business you treat people a little bit different. the same thing as talking to you like i'm talking now.ou t's a different personality, a

different idea of how you deal with people and that's where he's coming across bad with some people. host: okay. all right. at what ke a look priorities u.s.a. action has put together, the liberal organization. look at their website and there on it is hillary clinton. in is a campaign ad that they contrasting the republican field against ronald reagan. morning again in america. the american dream is dead. willday more men and woman go to work than ever before in our country's history. >> people need to work longer hours. >> i don't think the minimum wage law works. got lame ideas.

>> this afternoon, 6500 young be married.n will >> you think being gay is a choice? >> absolutely. >> why do you say that? >> because a lot of people who prison go into prison straight and when they come out gay.'re >> and with inflation half of years ago they can look forward to confidence in the future. > we need to increase the retirement age. >> these programs actually weakened us as a people. again in rning america. host: priorities u.s.a. campaign ad released yesterday contrasting the candidates with ronald reagan's message was. go ahead.

caller: yes. wage goes he minimum i don't agree it should be increased. if your business is doing well you can increase it. you don't have to. you hire the cheapest labor you the most qualified at the lowest price you can, that's business. the debate? out debate was , the very good as far as donald trump goes. his a real man talking from heart. he says what he has to say and he goes.ere people aren't used to that. host: okay. aller: they're used to being politically correct. and they're not correct by listening to that guy. georgia, al what are

your thoughts this morning about the debate? really well, what i wanted to say is i don't believe serious and i don't believe he'll get the nomination either. i would have a problem voting for him if he was getting one but i don't think they will. i don't think the republican party wants him at all and i don't think that would be reason orgetting him to sign that pledge which says he wouldn't candidate.ay party lady uptalked about the in alaska being vice president ridiculousg, that he to me. that up i brought didn't think he was serious. ost: one of the callers mentioned that marco rubio was winner. he was asked to explain his views on immigration. s many of you know he was part of that gang of eight who came

plan.comprehensive >> immigration -- illegal immigration and all the good immigration and negative ones i live w my family is immigrants and my neighbors all immigrants and in-laws so i've seen every aspect of it. doesn't have one immigration problem, it has three. first despite the fact we are generous country in the history of the world we have people still coming illegally. have a legal immigration system that no longer works. built on the s base whether or not you have a 11 or e here and we have 12 million people who are lready here illegally and we must deal with all these one massive piece of legislation. here's the way forward. first, we must secure our

border, the physical border or the wall, absolutely but we also have an entry, exit tracking system. of the people who come over legally come here legally. system.eed a verify after that step two would be to modernize our legal immigration system. on what you merica can contribute economically and not whether or not you have a here and after we've done those two things i believe the american people are aboutable and responsible what you do with someone who isn't a criminal. f your a criminal you will not be able to stay. part marco rubio, he was of gang of eight that came up with a comprehensive look at immigration reform. backed away from it and got criticism from those in the field you and saw his answer there last night. ome other headlines, this is from the "washington post". ongress is poised to lift the 40 year ban on oil exports.

this is from the washing post to house ay according g.o.p. leaders a bill could be come to the n and floor and also in the "usa sergeant bow bout bergdahl. he gets to tell his shutdown of the story. a two day hearing where his awyers will be able to witnesses who are testifying against bo bergdahl. also there is this about execution that was slated at 3:00 p.m. 3.5 hours before he was die by lethal week ion, he won a two reprieve from an oklahoma appeals court which said it study new to

evidence. he was center at the major case in june along with two other condemned inmates as llenged oklahoma unconstitutional but they rejected the argument and his was set for wednesday at 3:00 p.m. to the senator about this and he said and he and other leaders in oklahoma asked there to issue a tay for him until the evidence could be seen in his case. also in the pages this morning "wall street journal", ceo of morgan said put partisanship aside and start understanding, ducation, immigration, trade and tax reform. e'll get your thoughts on last

night's g.o.p. debate. jesse. caller: i got two issues. debate is more like what i last night was like a -- i would like to see the better ing a little bit thought as far as questioning derived from the news commentators. here's one more important issue that i want you to talk about. there's millions of people living in this country and the 13 delegates who is going to be running the ticket is not he'll really going to come down to a of the people. delegates chosen by and that he a small my kwrort when you talk about all the living in threu.

host: why do you think it's up? rtant to bring it caller: there are millions of people living in this country and i just don't believe that voicing being adequately heard. when it gets right down to the convention, the choose who run on the ticket host: you don't believe the represent the people? caller: i don't host: david, independent. hi, good morning. host: good morning. i lessen list d /* /- -- listened to the debate and they talked a lot about illegal immigration. right now isration kind of at a low. lot of been liken a people flooding the border like they ike to believe and can't talk subjects that i think serious.

i think climate change is very serious. that's going to effect everybody i think that and needs to be address the at some point in time. believe in don't it. wrong.y're absolutely so and it just seems to me that everything and alked about matters that didn't -- i guess they pertain pu they make them pertain more really should. host: we'll focus on what's happening up on capitol hill. members of that the congress are having in washington. e'll talk with democrat marcy kaptur of ohio members of the appropriations committee and parenthood lanned and talk about foreign policy issues like what is happening in sear wra and republican pete rosscome will talk the iranian nuclear agreement. when we get back

after this break. our road to the white house of the presidential candidates with ues saturday morning a democratic convention. include five canned tkatsdz. former secretary of state bernie clinton and sanders, lincoln chafe if i and harvard malley and professor lauren less iing.

c-span and c-span.org campaign 2016. taking you on the road to the white house. the pope's upcoming visit to the u.s. has live coverage from washing top the first stop on the pope's turn. francis will visit the hite house starting with the followed by amony meeting with president obama and irst pontiff to address the house of representatives and senate during a joint meeting. coverage of e live the historic visit to washington. t.v. or online at c-span.org. "washington journal" continues. tot: we want to welcome back our cable marcy kaptur and sits on the appropriations committee

so since 1983? >> no it took me over a decade to get on it. 90s. host: okay. but you serve on energy and water ranking member homelandnd defense and security. so this is a water to talk about you. i want to begin with homeland security and national skpaouz what is syria.ng in here is the front page of the "new york times". released a diplomatic offensive offering to to military talks on syria. should this administration hold military to military talks with putin.r >> i hope they're going on behind the scenes perhaps in ways we don't know. branches have a tendency to do that. but i'm probably one of the few

members of congress that syria.ed to in the many years ago ate 90s with lebanese and district.tionals in my and the entire syrian situation is a deep tragedy. gotten it wrong years.syria for 100 and as i walk through that country, and i went to different i saw how s and entrepreneurial the people were, artistry and very putin's country, i thought how did the west ever go? his orthodox faith and the -- if you go through syria

and you see the religious can ry of the region, you see the pull toward the in some ways on the side but they have a muslim population and it'sous religious sects and too bad that we are at this point in the world's history syria. over 200,000 people have been 300,000 at this point. it's just a blood bath and we refugees across europe and what a deep mistake. include ld you president obama on the list of leaders that made mistakes? did his strategy on syria work? > i like to go back to president bush because the united states never should have invaded iraq. i voted no. were all kinds of weapons of mass destruction in iraq and

were not. services knew e that. but we were unable and all the people that were picked at the tkpeupbing to try to put a governmentment and a country back together again. leaned heavily toward one tribal sect, the shia and the sunnis and they became radicalized and that of isis which s expanded into the western part and bled over into the nation of syria. a we see the results of failed policy that extepbsdz over a long period of time, a half deck aide and now. biggest blunder i think in american history in policy.f foreign it has created headlock in that region. >> president obama is in charge

now. senate telling the armed services only 4 or 5 u.s. fighting in s are was after $500 million allocated to train syrian fighters by the united states. or 5 fighting. >> when you pay people to fight same as those who ideological perspective. hat is true throughout that region. if you look at iraq, same problem. you know, we might hold baghdad you go into the iran has effective now culturallyaq a much more complex situation. i think many people the tribal ed affection of sects in that up with d so we end

this array now. i won't speak for president obama. and his hat he administration tried do the best they could with a very broken you can't go into iraq or syria and think you're it.g to run remember colin powell said, you break it you own it. the president envisioned 5400 fighters and now from the "washington post" the is preparing a major strategy shift in syria. the administration said that assad must step down it throw its weight behind forces seeking to oust him. nstead they've been restricted to the separate but overlapping fight against the islamic state iraq.ria and should the administration put the military weight of this overthrow assad? >> i never agreed with overthrowing assad. assad was the -- his father was

middle leader in the eliminated tually qaeda and terrorist organizations. multi-phased society that -- multi-faced society that functions at some level. syria haves towards been ineffectual and backwards for quite a long time. now, it is broken. and i think that at the very highest of the medic levels, our country, along with -- highest diplomatic levels, our country, along with russia and other nations, have to figure out a way to stop the bleeding because next door is lebanon. and that is so fragile at this point and is under the effective control -- well, the strongest

institution there is the hasnese army, but hezbollah effective control of large regions of the country. and they are associated with iran. it looks like iran's expansion dreams in that region are being met, even though they may not have effective control of the formal government that are set in place in those countries. but i think in terms of syria, lebanon, we do need to recalibrate. host: and what is a solution? guest: the solution is not just for the united states to go in and dictate i think we have to have alliances in the region that we work with to try to, first of all, deal with the refugee crisis and to work with jordan, some of our allies, egypt, to try to put together in coalition ifab led

possible to temporarily house those were fleeing and try working with the u.n. -- and i hope president obama uses every opportunity for that -- to put together the kind of coalition in the region to calm the situation because it is -- it is at a tipping point. host: this is one of the images from the papers this morning. asylum-seekers at the border crossing into serbia clashing wednesday with hungarian riot police who responded to -- with tear gas and pepper spray. jim in buffalo, new york. an independent. go ahead. caller: good morning, ladies. i have a quick question for both of you. marcy, i understand there is a movement in congress to cut social security benefits -- for social security disability. first of all, is that true? guest: since i began in the congress, there have always been

threats to social security. i do not support any proposal such as you describe. socialal security -- security is a program that represents earned benefits. large number of seniors in this country survive only because of social security. are inse on disability special programs. there are those who keep looking at those funds and saying that, well, you know, we have to cut because we need money in one of these other funds. but i don't believe that we should take it out of those in our country who have worked hard, who have disabilities after don't need to worry about anything else. they have plenty to worry about. we are a very rich country. we can find ways to meet the needs of those who have difficult challenges -- physical challenges and mental challenges. but there are always those who

are looking at the trust fund and trying to invade it. caller: thank you. greta, very quickly, this drives me knots. is there a lip around your stage so that the seeds don't roloff -- seats don't roloff the stage. -- don't roll off the state? [laughter] host: yes, there is. alexander, a democrat. caller: yes. -- [indiscernible] -- talking about people coming over to the united states. the best plan -- [indiscernible] president reagan told gorbachev to tear down this wall. [indiscernible]

they are not talking about what they -- what they ask in syria and what they're going to do. -- [indiscernible] they never did anything. host: ok. do you want to weigh in on the debate last night? guest: i thought there was a lot of personality that came through last night. i think it was little short on substance. and let me just say, i don't think debates are the best way to actually listen to someone in their reflective -- and their reflective proposals for the country. sometimes it rewards those who have the quickest answer, but maybe not the best answer. i hope there are other formats. i have seen this in my own campaign. sometimes the more relaxed framework like this one with several candidates is better than an actual debate. i want torms of the --

say a word about the refugees from syria and adjoining countries. cofounder of the hungarian caucus also, and it is a tragedy that serbia and hungary and germany are having to absorb this human exit is. atope that nato will look many of our former army bases, military bases, in germany that are still available. they are vacant right now. there is not activity on them. i met with members in ohio district, one of the communities i represent and live in, and we talked about the germans have no theirense -- tents, railway stations are full of people, school auditoriums are full of people, they just absorbed as much as they can.

i said what about our former military bases? ii, we had war displaced persons camps in germany. we have to work as a world to vet people. many of these people want to return to the middle east. we need to work with our allies in jordan, and egypt, in the gulf states to see if there are -- and even russia -- if resettlement could occur in other places in the world can't come back immediately. but within germany itself, to use some of our u.s. owned properties that are currently vacant to give these people shelter. we all know we have a family heritage where people fled from tyranny and war. this isn't the time -- it is a time to be carrying, it is a time to help -- to be caring, it is a time to help.

we have to be very careful working with the u.n. and refugee services. host: is the u.s. doing enough to bring this refugees who want to get out to the united states? the administration saying they will lift the cap, but only about 5000. guest: i think we always have refugee resettlement in this country every year. i think about 70,000 people a year. here we are talking about many more than that. frankly, a lot of those people don't want to come here. they want to go somewhere where they are more familiar. i heard that some of the gulf states were looking to purchase property in some places to make land available. this is going to take time to work through, and this is where our state department, our national security council i think are very important. we have to look at it temporary place to hold people to make sure that life -- they are cared for. many of those children need a medical pair. we have to be better than in the

last century in terms of handling refugees. the world can work it through, everybody can take their fair share. and i think a lot of those folks want to return to the region from which they came. host: greg in illinois, an independent. caller: how are you doing this morning? host: morning. caller: i have to take you to task on your first statement. i agree that bush really screwed up and going into iraq; however, since then, with libya, and bush had nothing to do with the decision to bomb libya and fragments that country. over 45d family, for years, has had control of syria. it wasn't until 2011 went through ngos and our little nefarious cia dealings to have this new civil war. we instigated it. and tens of millions of people have been displaced from their

homeland, and it wasn't bush doing it. it was this administration. host: ok, congresswoman. guest: sir, you raised a very good point, both on libya and on syria. and the removal of secular leaders in that part of the world without replacement, without a government that could sit in place and actually govern. and i simply don't understand what the strategy is. there wasn't a free country in the region. nor a democratic country. they are all bureaucracies or repressive states. so i don't see where it is any better than it was before. we don't like dictatorships. i wouldn't want to live under a dictatorship. what you are correct in that it is sometimes easy to remove a leader, but what replaces that individual? chaos.

maybe there is a long-term strategy you and i don't see that someone else who has perhaps more power than we do is -- about implementing. but it seems human carnage has been far too great. we have a lot to account for as a country. host: a couple tweets. who are we to decide who the leader of syria should be? and this one, every place we destabilize and remove strongmen devolves into chaos. is this successful policy? i also want to ask you about issues on the domestic front because the big debate happening on capitol hill this week, what to do about planned parenthood. and the funding for it. how would you describe your stance on the issue of abortion? guest: i would say that i am someone that supports the law of the land. family, every woman

has a right to make their own decision. child, choose to have a decision within their own family. it is not a decision the government should make. if they choose abortion, for whatever reason, and we don't know whatever -- what every family faces, the government shouldn't pay for it unless the life of the mother is at stake. we lose in our country annually almost 700 women die in childbirth every year. about 23,000 fetal deaths occur every year. 23,000 has gone down over the last century because our neonatal units and so forth in advanced medicine. because it is a moral decision for many individuals, i don't

think that the government should make that choice for them. so i support the law of the land. obviously, that includes the roe versus wade decision to let families make their own decision. and it just seems to me that politics -- these life choices are so difficult for many families. the last thing they need in the delivery room is the government of the united states or some set of organized interest groups on either side of the issue. host: i want to get your reaction to what carly fiorina had to say at last night's debate about this issue of funding planned parenthood. take a listen. [video clip] >> i would like to link these two issues, both of which are incredibly important. iran and planned parenthood. one has something to do with the defense of the security of this nation. the other has something to do it the defense of the character of this nation. you have not heard about it plan -- you have not heard about a

plan about iran from anyone up to. i will make a phone calls, first to netanyahu. the second to the supreme leader to tell him that unless and until he opens every nuclear facility to real anytime, anywhere inspections by our people, not his, we, the united states of america, will make it as difficult as possible to move money around the financial system. and every ally and every adversary we have in this world will know that the united states of america is back in the leadership business, which is how we must stand with our allies. with regards to planned parenthood, anyone who has ideahed the videotapes -- hillary clinton, barack obama to watch these tapes. watch a fully formed fetus on the table. beating its hard to -- heart beating.

this is about the character of our nation. if we will not stand up and force president obama to veto this bill, shame on us. host: congresswoman? guest: well, i don't think we should put the country in a position of shutting down the entire nation's governing structures because of one program. help to find planned parenthood across the country, which provides family planning services to the majority, vast majority, of women who use the services and helps to prevent abortion by careful family planning. in my region of the country, our family planning clinics don't perform abortions. fiorinave heard ms. talk about that child that was on the -- i don't know -- operating table or whatever. and i didn't see the film she was referencing, but we have a number of deformed fetuses that

cannot survive that are born that their legs kick and they have a beating heart, but they have no brain. and that child eventually dies. and the family deals with the grief of that loss. i don't think any political inure should be interfering decisions that individual families have to make and endure the grief that goes with those decisions. so perhaps the child she is talking about could have survived, i don't know. but i would want to know more about that particular situation. host: republicans are trying to defund planned parenthood. either through continuing resolutions to keep the government running because appropriations bills have not all been passed and sent to the president, or budget reconciliation. doesn't matter either way? guest: again, to shut the

government down or to hold up the whole country over one program i think is so misguided and so disruptive and chaotic for the nation. if i could just say one moment as an appropriator, i have spent my left eye to serve my country on a committee that a love and it gets no publicity, but i want people to know the appropriations committee, our people work very hard. our chairman is a republican. he has brought in 12 appropriation bills that should have been voted on on the floor of congress. i was 50 when members worked very hard. we are not presidents of the united states, we are not speakers of the house, but we have done our job for the country. we are architects of everything from the defense budget of the nation to the energy and water policies of our country. each of those 12 subcommittees function as specialists in their area. we feel we reached compromises. we never get to bring our bills

to the floor because our power has been subsumed by a few the leaders in both chambers, who refused to bring our bills to the floor and make political hay for whatever reason out of the hard work we have done. frustrated as a member because we worked -- i don't believe any committee and the house works as hard as we do. with our 12 subcommittees, all the work that our ranking members and our german do, and we have a right to have our bills brought to the floor in regular order. we have not had regular order for almost 15 years and it is really so damaging to the country. now some members care about one issue and they want to derail everything. it is so disruptive to this country and to good governance of the nation. i just wanted to speak out as a member. remember in high school you learned that the real work of congress is in the committee's?

yes, it is. and we want to do our work. we have bags under our eyes because you are doing your work and you get no respect. -- [indiscernible] and then the outside people, the public is confused because we are not operating under regular order and the constitution demands that our committee complete its work every year. you can go right to the constitution and look. we have to do our job and we are being handcuffed. i want the public to know that because there are many good members, republicans and democrats, who are trying to do their jobs. but just like if you companies control the banks and airlines, the same thing has happened in the congress. if you people are trying to control what used to be a more open community -- committee process. thank you for letting me say my piece. host: we will go to thomas, a democrat. caller: yes, good morning, ladies. i have a question for the

commentator and the representative. my question for the commentator is, are there any black editors that are ever allowed on your show? because i don't see a lot of black faces sitting across from you and i know c-span takes money from black cable subscribers. my question -- host: can i answer that real quick? go back and look at our website, c-span.org. journal"he "washington and look at all the different faces and genders and everything we have had on this show. go to our website, c-span.org. you can go to the "series" button right there at the top. we are covering many different events, many different people, trying to get in as many different voices and perspectives as possible. your question to the congresswoman. caller: just a quick follow-up on what you enlightened me to. i would say that if you go back and look at c-span on a monthly

basis, you don't see that diverse blackface anywhere, especially when it comes to something intellectual. maybe on black lives matter or something like that. the proof is in the videos. go back and look at the videos. host: we appreciate the feedback, thomas. absolutely. thank you for calling in and talking about it. caller: my question for the representative. host: yes. caller: yes. you say that you are -- you worked very hard, yet you want to take on this refugee issue. my tax dollars pay for you to take on united states, ohio, people's issues. [indiscernible]- being on this commission, being on that commission? your focus should be on being in -- an ohio and -- ohioan.

we have to many problems are to hear to have our congress people focusing on european matters. our tax dollars pay your salary. host: let's have the congresswoman respond. guest: thank you very much, sir. when we take our oath of office, our responsibility is to protect and defend the constitution of our country and the american people from all enemies, foreign and domestic. and we take a very serious oath. our country has enemies. and part of our job is to make sure -- and i am a member of the defense committee, the home and security committee, the energy and water committee, which has jurisdiction over all of our nuclear weapons complexes -- we are a global nation and, as you well know, there are threats to our country. and we have a responsibility, i have a responsibility, to serve the people of my region. i believe i work as hard as any

member ever has on doing that. you can go back to my constituency and ask. but i also have a global responsibility because of the position of this country. the alliances we have been a part of, what liberties -- liberty requirements ask of us, and obviously because of the united states involvement in wars that i did not support when they were first authorized, particularly the war in iraq. i did vote for the war in afghanistan to go after osama bin laden. but we have become embroiled largely in that region because we were not energy independence. and i am one member that spends a lot of time on trying to move this country toward energy independence so we can have back our security. and we are not energy independent yet.

so, i would agree with you. we have to serve the people who elect us. but we also have to meet the needs of the entire country and our role in the world. host: virginia, a republican. caller: hi, good morning. thank you. marcy, i was listening to your comments on planned parenthood and i completely support your stance on that. and i understand you're on all these other committees, as far as here at home as well as foreign. if we can't take care of our own people, how can we go out and take care of other countries? i understand the refugee crisis over in syria is awful. but it is awful here, too. jobs are being taken away from this country and exported out to other countries, and they are making money off of our backs. these things, you know, you made a good point.

congress hasn't been working together for many, many, many years. and it goes back even further bush you know, the papa administration. this country hasn't worked together well for a long time. it may be perhaps because government is just too big. there are too many hands in the pot. you yourself said that you go into, you know, work and you are working with all the senators and nobody wants to agree. there are just a few who want to stymie situations, who want to, you know, just keep things in a band, nothing is getting done. and they want to put all the blame on just a couple of people. last night, obama got a lot of blame. then bush junior got the blame. the truth of the matter is is that this congress and this government has not worked together for many years. what do you suggest could be done?

how can we as a people get back control of this country and, you know, take control of this awful situation? host: congresswoman? guest: that is a big question. first of all, i think you have to play by the rules. that and the congress means you should not subvert the committee process. the regular order by which congress functioned very well after world war ii and right up until, oh, i would say the mid-1990's. that is when things canada fell off the rail a little bit. i asked myself is this a generational problem with too many me thinkers rather than us thinkers? we have many people that want to work together. but i think the influence of big money and beat all the requirements of running for office today has polluted the environment inside the congress,

and certain people have gained more power because they can raise more money. and that has really changed the dynamic inside the institution. in terms of fixing the problems of the economy -- and we haven't talked a lot about that -- i have a chart that i brought that basically shows how heavily our country has gone into trade deficit. 1980's, deeper and deeper each year. the red represents more imports coming into our country, including energy imports rather than exports going out. closed markets around the world that we have not been able to open up to our goods. and ourse more jobs companies outsource their production elsewhere rather than producing it here. so we have a really -- a real problem on our hands of a slow growth rate. we have had several months -- several years now -- of job

increases, rather than job losses, which was because prior to president obama taking office. but we have these wars that are sucking so much out of are very vitals and we have not been able to reduce our expenditures on those. and that is seeping a lot of the lifeblood of this economy. and i might say that -- it is really a miracle and a credit to the american people we have been able to grow the american economy as much as we have over the last decade or so coming out of that her rent is 2008 recession -- coming out of that horrendous 2008 recession. for example, passing a transportation bill -- they can't agree on funding streams to fix our streets and our bridges and so forth. years ago, we used to pass a transportation bill with no problem. now, because we have financial constraints, the committees are

tied up in knots trying to find a stream of funds to send to the states so we can fix the infrastructure of our country. but those are certain bills. that particular bill should be an absolute must pass because it is a jobs bill and it is investing in this country. my haven't, we have invested so much money in afghanistan, in iraq, and what do we have to show for that? we have been able to secure our borders and try to protect the american people from those who would do us harm, but we really haven't made america energy independent yet. and truly unlock ourselves from those spigots and other parts of the world and diversify our energy economy here at all. our top two accounts were we hemorrhage our oil imports and automotive imports. and when we fix those and become energy independent as a country, we will grow again. host: will your vote to lift the

40 year ban on export oil? guest: i am very reluctant to do that. first of all, oil is a diminishing reserve and the united states is importing oil. why should we be exporting oil? we should be protecting our strategic petroleum reserves and moving this country toward energy independence here at home. if i believed that we would not pay a price for our own energy security, i would support it. and perhaps others can convince me my position is incorrect. i represent many refiners back home and it is great to live in ohio and pay $1.99 a gallon for gas. we are told if we export to much, prices at home will go out. host: in new york, a democrat. you are next. caller: how do you do, representative? guest: good morning. caller: very eloquent, i must say. i have learned a lot from listening to you. you made a commentary about the

-- the difficulty that the appropriations committee has had sending your bills to congress in a reasonable fashion for the past 15 years. the opposition party is always talking about, you know, run -- run government like a business. and they are so concerned with the cost of government. how much are they costing our government and me as a taxpayer? this is just a generalization. nonsense andical getting in the way of you and new colleagues doing their job, your constitutionally mandated job. guest: you have a really good question that you asked. and if you look at the government contract, let's say you work for a company that bills -- builds veterans'

clinics and you don't know what your bottom-line is going to be because the government hasn't paid you for building that clinic. and you have to delay construction, the costs go up over time. and you don't have certainty. the other thing that happens is the payments to go out to you on time. when is a lot of deferrals you're have to stop this government mentality. it throws the accounting system into chaos. and all the contractors that work with the government can't hire, they have to -- it is very difficult to do business with the government because of that. a studyve never seen that estimates the cost of all these delays, but you have raised -- i might ask for one. that is a very good question. we know this is true whether it is the department of defense, the department of education. and the other thing that happens is the demoralization of the people who work in the different departments. they have been furloughed at

different times. right now, they are getting ready to be for load -- for low -- furloughed. it throws everything into this limbo of uncertainty. and it rolls back progress. that is the net result of being -- of not having regular order. so i am a fighter for regular order. i want to move bills. that was what i was elected to do. let me do my job. let me work with the republicans. we have a lot of good republicans. let me tell you, our kind of people, we never get publicity. i'm glad i'm on the show because nobody pays attention to us. a lot of the work is really hard and boring. for most people, it would be really boring. all the books we have to read, all the ledgers we have to look at. there is never a camera in the room because it takes work. and it takes give and take.

imagine having a $31 billion budget for the department of energy. think about that. billion for all of our research labs, 17 of them around the country, that are inventing the future for america. who even knows about it? we are into the weeds, we are into the specifics. we have a great country. the greatest country in the world. and it is liberty for the world. we shouldn't be little the governments that made this possible. we shouldn't take it for granted. we should respect it, we should elect the finest people, the most honest, most intelligent people we can find because nothing is a given. every generation has to say freedom on its own. .t isn't bequeathed you can't hurt the institutions

that have allowed us to reach this point in our history. and that is what is happening. there is a lot of kicking. and our institutions are strong, but they are not completely invulnerable. host: c-span is in the weeds, and i'm sure we have been looking at some appropriations markups over the years. let's go to calvin. north carolina,an independent. -- north carolina, an independent. caller: kudos to c-span and thank you for taking my call. in 1948 when the state of israel was formed, its leader made the acquisition of atomic weapons a high priority. in 1979, u.s. military experts believe israel tested a nuclear weapon in south africa. why does israel not get brought up in a conversation when we are talking about iran or any other nuclear threat to the united states?

israel has never consented to any inspections. israel has never admitted nor denied owning a nuclear weapon, but they have them. and they certainly never agreed to be a member of the iaea. why does the u.s. government not question israel, one of our partners, about their nuclear program? israel is ank that very, very close ally of the united states in that part of the world. capablee a very military and security structure. iran ient agreement with causeit's going to several countries, including israel, to seek even additional weaponry for their own defense. i think some of the gulf countries feel the same way. and we are going to have to work very hard as a world not to build up more forces in that

part of the world. and make it more dangerous. but i think that is easy to say, but very hard to do. i think iran is partly responding to a fear of israel. and though no one from iran has ever said that to me. and i hope that the arms talks on nonproliferation will continue and that we will be able to de-nuke and continue to bring down the nuclear weapons that many nations have, including our own, the two primary nations that hold nuclear weapons are the united states and russia. we have been reducing our inventory, and our relations with russia now are rather tense, but i hope these continue and i hope someday -- wouldn't it be great to have a middle east that doesn't have nuclear weapons? i think it has to happen as part of nonproliferation talks. host: were you a yes on

approving the iran nuclear agreement last week? guest: yes i was. host: we have to leave it there. thank you very much for talking to our viewers. guest: thank you very much. host: when we come back, we will hear from congressman peter roskam on his efforts to try to delay the vote on the iran nuclear agreement. later on, we'll take a closer look at the players to watch in a budget showdown and the strategizing going on behind the scenes.

announcer: this sunday night on "q&a," "washington post reporter on the 2016 presidential campaign and the similarities between donald trump and 1992 candidate ross perot. >> the themes are really overlapping and i think perot has a distinct personality that is different than trump. the celebrity factor was not there in the same way that it drives trump and it attracts people to trump. you see people throw themselves at trump. but to being outside of washington, being outside of the republican party -- the republican party's relationship with trump has been rocky this year. he said -- they said, could you tone it down on immigration? trump said, we will see.

he has not toned it down. i think we could see it this year what happened with perot happening with trump. trump is, if anything, unpredictable. announcer: sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific. journal": "washington continues. host: and we are back with peter roskam, republican of illinois and chair of the ways and means oversight subcommittee. thanks for coming back on the show. fight, it about this looks like, over planned parenthood. where do you stand on the issue of funding planned parenthood? do you feel stung enough that it is worth shutting down the government? guest: planned parenthood is a scandal. and those videos that were shown is i think iconic images. i liken them to the images that came out as a result of the

marches at selma. that was a pivotal point in the civil rights movement when people saw, hey, that is really what is going on. i am for the peaceful protesters, i am not for the racists. i think the power of these videos -- and you notice something with planned parenthood, they have had to not deny the activity because they are doing the activity. they have had to say these videos are illegal, which they are not. in answer to your question, i, like most people, i think the majority of my constituents are scandalized by them. ok, what to do do now? there is a lot of different things under discussion now, greta. some of them are removed. there are only $60 million -- i shouldn't say only. $60 million and planned parenthood funding that is coming in the discretionary part -- in a planned parenthood funding that is coming in the discretionary part. that is still a lot of money and it is going to be a part of this big fight. congressman franks has

introduced a piece of legislation that the president has a history of. we debated that very same issue when i served in the senate. how do move this movement forward, and is -- is putting this into the cr the best way to go? i am tired of assuming we are going to lose a fight and then reverse engineering from there. i am tired of that. i think it is a better thing to mean in and say, look, this is who we are, this is our value system, let's put this -- i would argue -- put this cr, get it up, get it out, then make a decision from there. but not to presume that you're going to lose all the time. host: republicans, though, point to the last government shutdown and say that their message was not heard. instead, the republican party was blamed. a cnn poll was taken recently.

just over 7 in 10 americans say it is important for congress -- more important for congress to avoid a shutdown. guest: you can ultimately get to that point, but then you would, i would say, fall back to a position -- [indiscernible] -- it should be a crime not to offer medical assistance to a baby who is born during an abortion. i mention i served with president obama in the illinois he opposed that measure, not once, but twice. then in the 2008 campaign for president, in an effort to try to dismiss those bad votes, they were very vulnerable votes and he was tied to dismiss them and put distance between himself and those votes, he said i would vote for this frank bill, this frank language. you could put the born alive language into the cr -- host: instead of trying to defund it? guest: that would be, i would

argue, maybe a second position. first try to defund it, make that point. if you are not successful, many folks say you can't, then fall back and put the frank bell. then the argument is, really? are senate democrats going to block an effort to keep children alive who are born as a result of abortion? i don't think so. you are going to get some senate democrats were willing to come over and say i am not willing to shutdown the government on this basis. president obama has already said he would sign this bill. it is an issue that obviously brings a lot of emotion all the way around, but i think we need to make sure that the moment is not lost in terms of the scandalous nature of what is going on. if we are dismissive, if we say, well, you know what, that is really a tough situation and that is always do, then i think that is a shame. host: listen to what president obama had to say yesterday in

washington about republicans possibly threatening to shut down the government. [video clip] president obama: america's next fiscal year is almost upon us, which means congress has about two weeks to pass a budget. if they don't, they will shut down america's government for the second time in two years. democrats are ready to sit down and negotiate with republicans right now. today. as we speak. but it should be over legitimate questions of spending and revenue, not on ideological issues. you'll recall two years ago the republican shut down the government because they didn't like obamacare. today, some are suggesting the government should be shut down because they don't like planned parenthood. that is not good sense. and it is not good business. the notion that we play chicken with an $18 trillion economy and global markets that are already

skittish all because of an issue around a woman's health provider that receives less than $.20 out of every $1000 in the federal budget, that is not good policymaking. the last time republican shut down the government, a cost our economy billions of dollars. consumer confidence plummeted. i do think anybody here think that is going to be good. host: congressman. guest: well, look, he has laid out a couple of markers. one, he is very dismissive about the number -- amount of money planned parenthood gets. saying, itrgument is is no big deal. that is the first argument to point out that the absurdity of the argument. he characterizes these things as not related ideological issues. that the life and the health of children is somehow disconnected from the federal budget. that is ridiculous. i think you should be called out on it. host: let's get to calls.

brian first in massachusetts, an independent. caller: yes, how are you doing? i watched that debate last night and i was so disgusted. i am dying for somebody to run. i wanted to vote for ross perot. he is the most smartest guy i have ever seen. [indiscernible] -- because they threatened to kill his daughters. he has never been on tv again. now you get rand paul on their telling everybody to buy this book -- there telling everybody to buy this book. all the people that are profiting from it other people in the stock market. host: do you have a question for the congressman? caller: i am so frustrated. that is all they do all the time. you get people -- their families are going down the tubes because they don't make enough money to pay rent.

and you are talking about bull shit. guest: i don't think ross perot has faded from the scene because he can take care of himself. i have not heard that and i don't necessarily think he was threatened physically. it seems like he is a pretty capable guy. the larger question you are raising is frustration about the candidates. look, this is the process. this is the process of governing. this is the process the united states has of choosing and selecting our leaders. so what you will find over a all,d of time -- first of it wasn't just abortion that was discussed during the debate. i didn't watch the whole debate, but the part i watched i saw a number of issues being discussed. this will begin to whittle down. over time, you will have two or three men republicans to choose from. then you will have two candidates, presumably, next november to make a decision.

this is not going to lack for the ability to host: have a wide discussion. host:we are going to go to iowa -- -- availability ability -- ability to make -- to have a wide discussion. host: we are going to go to iowa next. caller: trump is right, we need to have high tariffs on imports. but on the iran deal, during the late 1980's, we sold weapons to iraq to kill iranians, and then the iranian deal, we sold weapons to iran to kill iraqians. then we shot it down in the late 1980's a jet airliner and never took responsibility for it. when you know, that -- iranians say death to america, i mean, we did kind of, you know,

kill several iranians and all that stuff. and i don't see them actually really killing any americans or having any proof that they killed any americans. ok, so, kevin, your question? caller: my point is during the debate i have seen is that the republicans, you know, that was the one thing they were against. is, well, youdeal know, the iranians, they were killing a thousand americans and stuff. and i don't, you know, see any evidence that -- of iranians were behind the killings of americans. host: i will have the congressman jump in. guest: a couple things. number one, it is a widely,

widely accepted premise that the iranians have a very aggressive unit. they have done terrible things. president obama and a number of leading democrats are very comfortable where apparently you're not persuaded yet. but most americans are convinced that the iranians have been incredibly bad actors in the past. what does that mean? that means they have been funding efforts to kill americans in the iraq war through their development of various technologies that -- ied's that have caused incredible harm. so that is what they were talking about last night. the larger point is, look, is -- are america's hands clean 100%? ourry generation comes to -- generation right now is coming into the situation and there's always a back story, isn't there? there's always something that

has gone on as different things have gone on. the question is, what to do with the knowledge of that back story and try to move forward, make decisions now that are going to have an impact on the future? here is where i think you and i need to be like-minded and very concerned. and that is this -- when the iranians are shouting death to america, when they say -- and this without doubt -- they are funding has below, they are funding -- funding hezbollah, they are funding hamas, the question is, what do we do about that? do we say, well, i think it is just chanting and it doesn't matter? i think the fruits of their activity are very, very bitter indeed. and we need to go after that. host: last week, c-span watchers of the floor probably know, you delayed a vote on the iran nuclear agreement. you put a proposal forward asking for these so-called side

deals to be revealed before congress votes. do you feel that leadership listen to you? what is your relationship like with the speaker of the house deco guest: i have -- house? guest: i have a very good relationship with the speaker and i have a lot of admiration for him. he heard me. he was willing to listen to me. and i appreciate that very much. i made a proposal and my point was this -- i felt like congress, up until now, was basically sleepwalking, greta. there was an assertion by the administration that they had complied with the corker-cardin agreement. subsequent to that, the associated press reported and it has been confirmed these two side arrangements between the iaea and the iranians -- and we didn't have access to them. why is this 60 day review clock ticking if we don't have access to that? so i urged this be good not to

put the bill on the floor. just to reject the arrangement under corker-cardin. he agreed with me. it takes a little while to make an argument and build a little bit of a coalition, but he agreed with me and i worked closely with congressman zeldin and others who are like-minded. so we did three things, as you know. the house isto say not received these documents, therefore corker-cardin timeline doesn't start, number one. number two, on a straight up-and-down vote so the members could be recording, do you approve of this deal outside of cork or-cardin? and the answer was overwhelmingly know. -- overwhelmingly no. but all in all, look, democracy is a bumpy process and they give a lot of credit and appreciation to the speaker. host: the coalition that you built behind your efforts, this is from the "washington post,"

-- with a small but influential block of conservatives who have signaled -- are you behind that as well? guest: no. host: do you agree a proposal should be put forward? guest: no. i think that is a very bad idea. i want john boehner to be speaker. i think he has done an incredible job under extremely difficult circumstances. a motion to vacate the chair, and my opinion, are counterproductive. and i will participate in it. host: why not? guest: number one, i think he has done a good job. number two, to vacate a chair is to say essentially procedural chaos. and i'm not for that.

by march, my view is we are much better off -- by in large, my view is we are much better off with him as a speaker. host: from september 10, back in the spotlight, -- will not rule on a leadership run. dear rot -- do you want to be a part of the leadership? guest: i enjoyed my time and leadership very much. the enterprise of trying to bring people together is -- is the most -- it is the hardest thing i have ever been involved in. that said, i'm not in leadership now, and there is a lot of readers -- a lot of freedom to that. and -- so, i also said in that article that people who spent a lot of time scheming and manipulating and trying to plot and all that to the stuff, there not really much of a percentage in that. you waste a lot of time, in my view. you are much better off doing your job and then seeing where

circumstances take you. host: we will go to pat next in michigan, a republican. caller: hi, i have to commend you with your iran workings -- guest: thanks, pat. caller: you are welcome. i am a registered nurse and a pediatric nurse. and this whole planned parenthood issue, whether the baby is born alive and not, the previous congresswoman said that it was often a time, you know, when a baby is born alive, they have a small grain and they can't live anyway -- brain and they can't live anyway. well, you have a duty at the glee to not make that judgment right there -- you have a duty ethically to not make that judgment right to there. position as your representing us is to be moral, first of all, and ethical.

if you look at planned parenthood, you look at the veterans situation, how they use our funds, how the epa has just allowed leakage of dangerous materials into beautiful rivers, everything that comes from the budget should be examined through the eye of ethics. nothing that is truly what is missing. to hand out money without it is in -- of duty. guest: pat, i think you make a great point. someone with your insight knows the tender nature of life. and you have been in a number of these situations i'm sure over the time you have been serving as a nurse where you have gained real insight into sort of heart and soul kind of issues. but i take your point, and it is one that a thing we need to be reminded of that our first duty is to do our best to apply a moral principle. obviously, there is a lot of discussion around that.

part of the beauty of the united states is we all have the ability to influence that. and i would hope, i would really hope, pat, that you and i would be reflecting what a lot of people should be saying. and that is this idea that a child really deserves the protection of the law. it is interesting. if you look at younger voters who are beginning to learn more and more, the trend is that they more open on the lifethe life su friend to the pro-life movement in that the more people learn about life in the will -- womb, the more they say that is special. host: peg on twitter -- how can the gop scream about too much government in our lives and then why government to make our most personal decisions? on twitter, ieg don't think government is supposed to make the most personal decisions, that it is the same quandary that we have when anybody is marginalized

under the law. when there is a group of people that just said you are outside of the protection of the law, then like pat or michigan was saying, look, is that really the people we want to be? last night, carly fiorina last night carly fiorina i think made a brilliant point. she said this is about the moral character of our country, and politeet aside largely and largely pro-choice questions and let's just realize that there is a wide range of opinions. i respect the fact that you and i don't share the opinions. the where we may be able to be -- where he may be able to come together, is to say a baby who is born alive deserve the protection of the law and that just should not be done easily treated. i think that is where most people are, and i think that is why the planned parenthood videos themselves are so pivotal . as i was telling greta a couple of minutes ago, i think these are actually iconic images over a. period of time a

in that they persuade people. tweet, anyone who says they want to shut down planned parenthood should be voted out of office for their in a future -- for their ineptitude. guest: no one is voting to shut government down. bery member of congress will voting with their own view and their own vision of keeping the government open. , thats sort of the point we are all having a debate about it. president obama has said what he will shut the government down over. he will shut the government down over this question. i hope he is willing to change his mind. he changed his mind, interestingly, in the past as i observed a couple of minutes ago when he was a state senator in 2008. he voted against the born alive bill. he spoke against it. i was there in the senate judiciary committee. the floorresent on and then it came up a year later and he did the exact same thing,

voted no in committee, voted no on the floor. but then as i said, he changed his mind. if barack obama has changed his mind on born alive, it is he is willing to come and deal with what he says are not related ideological issues, i would argue that life is deeply related to the federal budget and that he should not be an objector. , noin answer to your tweet one is going to be voting to shut it down. people are going to be voting with different criteria. host: we go to new york, myra, and democrat. caller: hello and thank you for taking my question. planned parenthood, how much of the money, of the funding, goes to abortion juncker none, right right? -- none, is a very big percentage. i can't give you the number off the top of my head.

you raise an interesting question and the subtext of your question is, isn't this all about women's health, if the answer is no. there are a lot of other organizations that do a fantastic job on women's health that are not involved in any of these controversial things. here is a third point. if the amount of money they are doing these gruesome things with is so low, then why are they so defensive about a? why do they cling to it so? i think it is sort of raising the questions that a lot of people, regardless of where they are on the question of abortion, are beginning to ask these things about planned parenthood. why is it that they are clinging to this money and why are they so defensive about this procedure, trafficking in baby parts for goodness sake. i am sensing body liquid from language from greta. host: npr has this, but i just

want to clarify, no federal money goes to it, that is in the law. guest: there is a fungibility of money argument here that is really significant. point is that the lion's of this money goes through medicaid. host: 70%. about $60 million is the discretionary line that you can actually get to in the immediate future. there are a lot of permutations on this that i think the more we are all talking about this, i have learning new things about this issue every hour. new proposals, new thoughts about how to approach it. and then you get the sense from the tweet of the calls, people are really interested and they want to make sure that we do the right thing all the way from pat to myra. npr says this. those public funds come from two programs, medicaid and title x,

a federal family planning program that likewise primarily serves low-income families. overwhelming majority of federal funding to plan. it comes from medicaid, 75%. of the public funds planned parenthood receives arts federal spending. youcan see npr also said can take a look at the breakdown right here as we go to the next caller. planned parenthood services, this is how they are using those federal dollars. we will go to trevor in massachusetts, an independent. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. where to begin and i will keep it short. i have a comment, a question, and a comments. first of all, i can't even fathom how someone so passionate

about this planned parenthood abortion topic can't come on national tv and be prepared enough to spare us the information as to the fact that federal funding goes towards abortion practices. guest: you want me to be defensive about not knowing"? quote?t not knowing a caller: can i just finished. this speaks volumes about the lack of knowledge you have on the topic. my question is, what specifically is the scandal? investigationery called upon by republican governors. .he videos shown were edited the whole idea of selling baby parts or profit has been disproved 100%. and a comments. i have been paying attention to politics long enough, only 10

years, but it is really obvious that the system is completely influence,onetary especially after citizens united. other it is the democrats or the republicans, it is 100% open and corrupt. i want government and democracy to be run by politicians who take into account opinions on matters they vote on, not their own opinion. for decades we watched politicians who know absolutely nothing about the subject matter make outlandish statements based on hyperbole and emotion, not on fact, not on research, not on credible majority opinion. host: let's give him a chance to respond. guest: i am sorry that i disappointed you, trevor, and i'm not able to give you chapter and verse on statistics and i chose not to overstate and over characterize. i am sorry if you find offensive. what is the specific scandal?

i don't agree with you that these claims have been debunked. i don't believe that these videos have been edited. wanedt, that has really as a claim over a. of time. there is a lot of opinion that you are outside of. most people look at those videos and are scandalized by them. and you ask what is the specific claim? 's claim is that planned parenthood is actively trafficking in baby parts. you have videos subscribe in incredible detail the manipulation of a baby in the womb so as to harvest those parts for her benefit. that is a scandal. now as it relates to the process itself, congress has a different view than you have. is founders said, look, this how the system is going to work. what we are going to do is rare going to have a representative government, and a representative government means of representatives go to the

public, this close to their constituency what the worldview is. and then they make a commitment to go to washington and reflects that worldview. for example, i represents the sixth congressional district and illinois. to be the reflection of the sixth congressional district to the best of my ability, recognizing that there is a wide range of opinion within the sixth congressional district, and mars possibility, according to the founders, is to reflect my constituency to washington. i am not washington's ambassador to the sixth congressional district. reasonable people can differ, but that is where i come from. host: we will go to bury next, ashbrook, north carolina, a republican. -- barry. .uest: hi gary -- barry country isnow this

having lots of turmoil, but what really bothers me is i check out these executive orders that president obama is doing, and that people should be in an opera. this man is destroying our country. u.n.,so he is for the with the new world order. this is a scary thing. i agree with you that the president has been incredibly aggressive, and i would argue very harmful on a number of these items, not just executive orders, but things that are coming from federal agents. there are a couple things to keep in mind that i think will harden you a little bit. the first is, remember the administration has been spending money on obamacare that congress has not appropriated, and they have played out a false claim. the u.s. house, under the speaker john

boehner, initiated a lawsuit to say that the administration you do not have the authority to do that. the big issue is that congress has what is known as standing, in other words, the ability to bring a lawsuit in federal court is on some sort of injury. and lasting something interesting happened. something really significant happened from a legal point of view, and that is a federal court that you do have standing and we are going to hear you out. it is huge. it is going to have influence. it is not a done deal, this will continue to be litigated, it will be appealed and it know it -- and it likely will get to the supreme court, but that is on the that is really significant. in other words, going back -- you know how a couple minutes ago trevor was criticizing the founders, it turns out the founders are brilliant. the founders came up with three co-equal branches of government and now we have the judiciary wing.

ok, second point. congressman jeff davis from kentucky, who is no longer in congress unfortunately, he was a great number of congress, he came up with a great idea that came out of a town hall meeting. a guy raises his hand in this town meeting and kentucky and he says, congress a davis, how is it possible that the environmental protection agency is going to move forward on cap and trade rules, which are so controversial they can't even pass congress, and congress created the environmental protection agency. how is that possible? andcongress with ava spot he said, you know what, you have a great point. introduced a bill that now moves through congress. it is called the reins act. ranes acts. purpose is to- push back on executive overreach. it's as if there is a rule that has more than a one hundred

billion dollars impact on the economy, before you can it lamented and finalize it has to be voted on upper down i congress. it is not going to become the law while barack obama is president. you can imagine, if you had a different president and i would argue in favor of a republican president, who said i want this bill on my desk, it is very possible that the could become a law in the next three years or so. so be encouraged. there are some recent things going on. host: a caller from washington dc. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have a few very brief points which you guys need to pay attention to. first of all, they treated trump .eally badly it's obviously republican establishment does not like top and they are doing everything they can to get rid of him. was, they talk

about helping the average guy. well, it doesn't take anyone beyond a third grader to figure out that if 1% of getting 90% of the country possible, that does not leave much but crumbs for the bottom 99%, and you wonder why the middle class is not doing well. we have been creeping up on taxes. we have been moving into higher brackets because the taxes are not being adjusted. the third point, just before i get into c-span, is global warming is the same. trying to address the issues of global warming is going to cost jobs. that is so far from the truth. there are hundred and 87,000 -- 187,000 jobs in the country related to the green movement. and you invited some hack to debate climate change on the other side. of scientists say global warming is real and it is going

to hit us. the other thing is, if you think that somebody who is part of the oil industry should represent an opinion on global warming, i think you should invite the kkk the next time you discuss race relations, or maybe the not the party when you want to discuss israeli relations. your point. got guest: a couple things. i think donald trump can take care of himself. he can dish it out and he can obviously take the incoming fire. host: is he your candidate? guest: donald trump is not my candidate. theerms of cap -- helping average guy, that is really in a just a question because it really gets down to the nature of this debate, and there are two views of the economy that are being stuck. one view of the economy, and

this is the president's view, he has largely articulated this over the past several years, it is a zero-sum game. in other words, the only way someone can be successful is if they stuck it to someone else. he does not say it that way, but when you scratch down that is really the worldview, in other words someone's success is another person's demise. i take a different view than that. i do not think that is necessarily true. yes, there are some bad actors, by and large we need to his lower barriers, make it easier for people to enter the economy. easier for people to initiate things, easier for people to buildings and to grow things, and over a. of time that growth expands. right on thefinger nub of the issue.

it is going to announce itself in several different ways. there will be some people who say the only reason someone is successful because they took , so on so forth. i don't think there is much buoyancy in that. what if we were growing again and let's say, for a 5%. can you imagine how great that would be? that would be great for everybody. in a coupleget calls. we go to mike and pennsylvania, an independent. caller: hi. i don't like the idea of abortion very much, but it is legal for planned parenthood to provide fetal tissue to research with the permission of the parent. day thatd the other ben carson, the number two

, that guy running for the presidency has used feel tissue in the past. for research. host: congressman? guest: mike, fair point in terms of research. i guess the banality of that video, go back to the description by the abortionist who was describing the manipulation of a baby in the womb so as to harvest parts in a certain way. you are not defending that, are you? about, a we're talking the gruesome this, the heartlessness of that. it baby was born alive and is not given medical care, that is too tough for words. host: we move on to 10, west palm beach, florida. republican. it doesn't make sense to

stuff.se children and if a guy is going to kill a baby and everything else, how is he going to look out for you any ?ther way we have to meet our maker. him one of the worst things would be to let him that we are part of some thing as terrible as abortion. guest: thank you. i mean, i think that he is echoing a sentiment that is out there that there are a lot of people that this is grievous to .hem host: always a pleasure. we are going to take a short

rank -- break and when we come back we will take a look at what is going on with these shutdown politics. we will talk with steven komarow , that's right after this break. >> a signature feature of booktv bookr all-day coverage of fairs and festivals. near sept -- in september we are in new york with the brooklyn book festival. southernoctober, the festival of books in nashville. after that we are live from austin for the texas book festival. and knew the end of the month we will be covering to book festival on the same weekend.

from our nation's heartland, it is the wisconsin book festival in madison. and back on the east coast, the boston book festival. at the start of november we will be in portland, oregon, for thestock, followed by national book awards in new york city. and at the end of november we are live from the -- for the 18th year in a row from miami for the miami book fair international. that is a few of the fairs and festivals is fall on c-span2's tv. our road to the white house coverage of the presidential candidates continues saturday morning with a new hampshire democratic party convention, live from manchester. this will include five presidential candidates, former secretary of state hillery clinton, vermont senator bernie sanders, or governor of rhode island lincoln chafee, former maryland governor martin o'malley, and harvard master lawrence lessig. on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. taking you on the road to the white house.

>> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with steven komarow of cq roll call. so what is the likelihood that we are going to have a government shutdown? the deadline is september 30. guest: we have two weeks left for them to pass a cr or having shutdown. the betting is a starting to lean towards shutdown because the leadership has not found a way around it yet. we have got reporters all over the hill trying to find that magic bill and tactic that will fix the situation and we have not found it. who is leading the effort to make sure that defending land parenthood is continued in a continuing -- is included in a continuing resolution? guest: on the house side the

conservative who called himself the rate of congress are the main force behind it. they have enough membership and support -- there are a little over 30 members -- who say they will vote for acr, republicans who will not vote for a cr if it does not, -- a couple us they want on planned parenthood. that means that speaker boehner would need democratic votes to as the bill through, but soon as he gets them credit both users losing were republicans and he is at risk himself. it could be off with his head. it is a really sticky situation. host: some in the house freedom caucus saying if you cut a deal with democrats or the president there could be a motion for forward to vacate the chair. as you know motions are partyline motions, so the democrats are not going to support boehner on that either.

then the question is, who else is there? host: tom mcclintock sending a letter to jim jordan who is the chair of the house freedom caucus saying, i am resigning from this congress. i don't like what we are doing. that is interesting. his argument is some of the tactics that have been used up and did some legislation but have actually not a college the goals of the conservatives in the house. i think that was a pretty interesting moment, no indication yet that there are others following him. host: this is what the house freedom caucus has to say on the for planned parenthood funding. this is september 10. given the appalling revelations surrounding planned parenthood we cannot in good conscious --

in good conscious -- good textience vote to send here money to this organization will still fulfilling our duty to represent our interests. -- representing our constituents. guest: there is not an appropriation that says give this money to planned parenthood. it is, it is a fungibility argument. if planned parenthood gets funding from the government it all mixes and, and so government in essence helping to fund abortion. host: any indication from leadership in a house or the senate that they are willing to concede to the conservatives who want to defund planned parenthood? guest: they can't have the bill. that is the problem. you have got the president saying he would veto a bill that defunded planned parenthood, and the democrats would be virtually president,upporting

so we would end up in a shut down all over again. why not listen to the rank and file on this? why are people saying, if this is what we believe let's go for it. i think it is a question of how you do it. bigger banner is trying to, and it does not look that he will succeed, trying to have both on other measures separate from the cr in order to accomplish what everybody wants. would veto be -- that too. host: c-span recently sat down

with the head of that caucus. here is what he had to say about whether or not planned parenthood should continue to get federal funding. [video clip] where thison video organization was involved in the most criminal activity you can think of. is -- if we just make that argument clear, we are going to take the money that was going to this organization which was engaged in with being -- and what we now know they are doing, wrong activity, maybe criminal activity, we are going to take that money, put it over here. same level of funding. if the president and harry reid think ok, we can't fund that, if they say that is more important than funding our troops, and frankly funding women's health issues, well they will have to defend that position with the american people. i think that is such a common

sense, logical position. we just need to make that in a compelling way over and over again. cr -- if a >> if the house passes that cr that would prevent planned parenthood from being funded, as you want, and the senate strips it out and send it back, what happens at that point? >> we don't know what happens then because we have got several -- 21 days to debate here. .ots of things change we decided to go a different way on the iranian nuclear resolution in the house. things can change. as i said yesterday to a few you don't script out the whole game. it is a dynamic process.

know is that organization should not get another dime of taxpayer money. i think anyone who has watched the video agrees with that. there may be some people who do not show the same pro-life opinion as i do, even understand that if they don't have that same decision they don't want their money going to that organization. that congressman -- congress put the onus on democrats if they go forward with the funding of planned parenthood. by the way, harry reid, nancy pelosi meeting today to map out their strategy on this spending issue and a possible government shutdown. some in the leadership have put forth an idea, and roll call reported on it, reconciliation is a way to deal with funding planned parenthood. how would that work? guest: budget reconciliation can touch on things that -- acr -- that a cr would not.

it has some attraction, but so far -- and this came from congressman police -- so far it has not caused them to bend on this at all. they think that their best leverage is the threat of a government shutdown. that is the most dramatic thing they can do. if reconciliation does not happen, it is not like the government just comes to a halt the way it would with a cr. host: let's go to calls on this. we go to mentally a, texas, kathy, and democrat. caller: i am a 74-year-old woman. this nonsense that all these men in the government say over planned parenthood is stupid. what men take their hands out of men takes -- would their hands out of our wombs? it is totally ridiculous. host: all right.

we go to david in south holland, illinois. caller: hi. how are you doing? i'm just wondering why they would allow the government to shut down planned parenthood when it offers so much. no one is for abortion, however there is more to it than that. that we willme is billions of dollars to israel, but they have abortions every day. why would we take our money to for abortions but we won't do it in america? host: ok. another caller made that point, but there are also others that are fearful of ramifications of

a government shutdown. roll call is reporting pentagon warns of acr -- of a cr disaster. even as it gets passed, the pentagon does not like what is in it. guest: that is right. we were down at the pentagon the .ther day what people don't realize in theory is that the cr extends funding for agencies including the pentagon, but it also extends current spending world, so the spending for example, there is a new bomber program they want to get off the ground. this would hamstring them in terms of getting development going. all the programmatic changes that congress is overseeing in just get frozen. it is not simply that the money levels get frozen, a lot of other stuff gets frozen and the agencies really don't like it. host: jimmy in new york, a

republican. hi there. caller: hi, how is it going? i have a question. are to take already getting -- aren't they already getting medicaid? what does it really matter if we defund them? fundingost of their comes through medicaid, that's right. 70%, 75% according to the report that we heard earlier. we will go to celina, fort myers florida, democrat. you are on the air. what is your comments? caller: my comment is i believe this issue of planned parenthood is being treated in a hysterical for political gain. i think if the democrats and republicans would work together, we all would agree. we don't know whether the videos were right or not, there is not enough information.

host: she is reflecting a recent cnn poll that said seven out of themericans say don't shut federal government down over this planned parenthood issue. guest: right. have had a tapes dramatic effect in raising andic awareness of abortion the people who are highly motivated in the syria are energized and putting pressure on members of congress. there are certain district for this is a more important issue than others. i think we're seeing that. we have talked about how the votes lined up. it is a tricky thing when you have got a divided government. host: so if the leadership or go forward with a continuing includeon that does not planned parenthood, therefore probably getting votes from

democrats, to get that through? guest: even that is tricky. the democrats not only don't want planned parenthood defunded, they want to be spending levels changed in the bill. domestic programs have been frozen. they would like the spending caps raised on domestic and defense programs to get back to the spirit of the budget agreement. that will cost more republican votes, even those who were not going to make a stand on planned parenthood. certainly it would make a stand on the government spending levels. speaker boehner has a very tough road ahead. host: so if they are unable to cut deals and make this happen, some in the caucus has said then they will put forward a proposal to vacate the chair. how would that work? guest: the speaker is elected by the full house.

the speaker does not even have to be a member of the house, technically. a he loses a -- even relatively modest number of republicans and none of the democrats vote for him, he may not get a majority if there is a vote. then there would be a scramble to see who would be the next speaker. host: in fact he is not saying

let's get rid of the speaker of the house. he has publicly said that. but do they have an alternative at all? guest: no. you may recall at the beginning of this congress there was a challenge to mr. weiner, and even the conservatives who don't like mr. weiner, there was not unity around one person. this proposal to vacate the chair was initially put forth by representative mark meadows, a republican from is disenchanted with leadership and has voted against the speaker. is that still floating out there and easy to bring up? guest: i guess it is. there are a lot of ways to it was not a privilege motion. there was kind of a backdoor way out of it. but it think it can be forced if

the members wants to force it. it would be pretty ugly. host: in florida, john is next, a republican. hi. caller: hi. good morning. speaker hasat the mentioned you don't have to be a you haveaker to be -- to be a house member to be house speaker. we have an ignorant voting electorate. any way, getting to the point, all i see with the planned parenthood is how desensitized our nation has become. now we have people, just like the people who say the planes that went to the twin towers, that was all a government conspiracy. videos and 10 plus everyone is saying well, it has to be doctored. have a taste you need before you see in fantasized echo -- before you see infanticide?

i am always amazed at how the president gets away with murder. we don't need any democrats. we have a majority. we don't need to go to 60 closures, we can go to 51. againstes of government one, being the president. i am sorry. that is one body of government. we would have both branches passing a bill. the president vetoes it. who is shutting down the government? the president is, just like clinton did in the 90's. guest: well, i think the viewer hits on an issue that we saw even in congressman jordan's remarks, the blame game has started. who is going to be responsible if the government shutdown. each side is already blaming the

other one. we are released a poll, part othe economist group and .e do polling with them index we showed that the public share the blame all over the pot callingt of a the kettle kind of way. obama is not off the hook. the senate is not of the hook. , obviouslybreakdown republicans blame democrats. bothful lot of people said are to blame. host: one need a is next, -- juanita is next, d.c.. caller: republicans are always looking for a reason to shut down the government. this time it is and parenthood, the last time it was obamacare. let me say this about planned parenthood. my brother -- my daughter was in her 50's when she had her first was 15 whichh --

he had her first visit to planned parenthood because that was all he could afford. it was not about abortion. congressmen who say they are so pro-life, they are pro-birth. once the child is born, every time a bill comes forth that would provide food, clothes, shelter for a human being, they vote against it. you cannot tell me you are pro-life. pro-life does not mean just when you are born. it needs from the day you were born until the day you die. so don't tell me you are pro-life. the other thing is -- juanita, ieta -- think you're perhaps speaking to the members of -- the member of congress we had on before. we go to another color. caller: hi. i am a labor -- i'm a nurse who works in labor and delivery.

planned parenthood was set up to prevent an informed teenagers and women about pregnancy and about other stds and things like that. that is what was set up for. it was set up for women's health so that they would go and get help if there was something , and a lot of teenagers would go there and get information about birth control. it would prevent pregnancies because they are a little too young to be having children and finishing school and to college and making something of themselves. we have so many children in this world. we have so many children in this county that are being abused and not taken care of because the mothers and everything are on drugs. they do this their whole pregnancy.

the whole system is failing. .t needs to be looked at it needs to be a personal decision between a woman and her doctor. host: we have heard a lot from the folks who want to defend head. what about the supporters of planned parenthood and what they do? guest: there are many supporters, they would make the argument that this caller made, but most of what land parenthood does is along the lines of birth control, medical checks, those sort of things. the argument is that it still needs to do it because it is a woman's health issue. supporters are basically arguing

that abortions should be a woman's choice and the rest of it is something that all of the .ublic would want they do mammograms, all this sort of thing. host: have we heard, or will we hear, this whole war on women argument, that the republicans are waging what? guest: i think we will have a lively debate exactly along .hose lines they -- the rules committee met last night to come up on the .bortion issue host: there are two bills. one would defend planned parenthood for a year while they investigate these issues, and the second one with terminal is -- the second one would

criminalize what people have seen on the videos. so to votes that will be two both happening tomorrow. again, we will have gavel-to-gavel coverage. kathy, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? guest: doing well. doing well. caller: will the government shut mighty ssi check up -- ssi?- my guest: no. you will still get your social security check. this is not an appropriated program, it is what we refer to broadly as an entitlement and it is separately funded. so what happens when the government shutdown? she brings up a good point.

does: the whole government not shut down because a whole swath of agencies made the argument that they are essential for national security. the fbi is not going to shut down. employees will be told to shut but employees will be told to stay home and it will not get paid. construction,ad new money cannot get spent if there is a shutdown. thing. broad i think the dramatic pictures you always see of the gates going up at yosemite national .ark host: social security and veterans benefits would continue to be paid.

workinghe employees cap as they were considered essential. would national security be hurt? no. they are considered an essential function and they would continue . and yes, you would still be able to travel. the air traffic control systems air systems are essential for the safety of the country and will continue to operate. caller: i just want to say i was watching the republican debate where carly fiorina talked about planned parenthood and how the baby was alive and kicking his legs. and then one of the commentators was talking about what

statements were false and true, and they said that statement was false. i just wanted to get this in. did 9/11 happened on bush's watch? sorry, i cannot make out what you said there at the end. we will move on to douglas, an independent. caller: yes. i just want to say if any organization or association has the power to shut down the american people we should be vigilant enough to make sure that this never happens. if we have somebody like planned parenthood that does more bad , that is not the pursuit of happiness or prosperity, let's get right of it. we need to make a big change in the united states of america. we had a tweet earlier from a viewer who says if any member of congress votes to shut down the government they should be run out of their post,

because of their ineptitude. so republicans are in charge any house and the senate. does it seem logical then that they will get blamed for shutting down the government? guest: that is a tricky issue because they have people in their own party like donald trump saying that they are full of stupid people. within their own party they have this kind of commentary going on . i think the senate majority leader mcconnell has promised there will be a shutdown. he has started discussions with boehner to start to figure out a way around it. i think the leadership very strongly feels that they need to deliver. because of the arguments. mitch mcconnell -- host: mitch mcconnell saying yesterday that if there is a government shutdown that will distract completely from the argument on planned parenthood. guest: yes. he also pretty good they will try to get some democratic votes by raising those budget caps a

little bit. for maryland, eric, a republican. good morning. caller: under our constitution it is the people's house, the house of representatives, that must originate a revenue bill. people exercising the power that therse, the power founders gave the people's house, it they decided that the money will not be spent on certain projects. the senate refused to abide by that decision and the president refuses to abide by the position. it is not the house that has shut down the government, it is the president and the senate. i just wanted to point that out. host: ok. steven komarow? bills, spending

bills, always originate in the house. we are back to the point that if you don't like mitch mcconnell and the way he is doing business, a lot of republicans don't. host: what are you watching for over the next 24 or 48 hours? to showership starts their cards about what they're going to do. looking at we are any bridge between the parties, as you mentioned the democrats are going to the white house today to talk to the president about this. is talking. what we are not really seeing much of his cross party communication, and i think if we start seeing that that might be the beginning of a turn. but as we mentioned, it is very tricky, especially for boehner because he is already viewed as a turncoat by a lot of conservatives in the house and this would be another threat to

his leadership. host: the house is about to gavel in, and in less than 10 minutes we will bring you gavel-to-gavel coverage. but first, more of your calls. katie in grand junction, colorado, democrat. hi.er: i just wanted to share a couple of things. personally, this but you want to get your way on planned parenthood so you're going to shut down your government. it is almost embarrassing. wow, these are the people who are running our government. give me a break. they want to do this so they can go to war. anyone think of plant -- planned lifehood? it sounds to me as grandstanding before an election. how many years has planned

parenthood been around? a lot. host: grandstanding. guest: i think it's a fact about the way congress is works is that you have leverage on a bill. the funding the government is a must pass bill. sure it's politics, but there representing their type of view, there are presented their constituents and trying to get something done. i think one thing that is interesting this year is you to talk about election-year congress is a difficult congress congressesion-year being a difficult congress. mill, carolina, and to get -- atika. caller: thank you so much for taking my call. first of all, in reference to boehner, yes, we want him replaced.

conservatives, independence, republicans. we want him replaced. host: why is that? he does not do his job. he should stand up to obama and he does not. as far as closing down the , the last time there was talk about doing that we did wasand that what happened congress did their job to stand up for the people. obama put on his hawaiian shirt and shutdown the veteran memorial right there at the open memorial. it did not cost any money for -- well tos to go to

veterans did not -- eventually got in, but he did not want to let them visit their own memorial. obama ordered the monuments and everything to be shut down. he did it to make the republicans look at and because people that are not educated -- as well educated or don't watch the news as well did not understand that it was obama that wanted to hurt the american people as much a secret. host: ok. jump have steven komarow in. it lets have a little history lesson here. what happens? guest: the world war ii memorial which is just down the road here was fenced off by the national parks service, and it is, as the viewer said, it is really a plaza as much as anything else. help,terans, with some had the gates pushed aside and

went in and saw the memorial. sincerely that president obama set down and said, let's put some gays around the world war ii memorial. he does not get to that level of specifics. but i think government agencies probably follow the rules to the point of killing us. host: how long does the government shutdown last? guest: a week or two? host: 21 days, something around that time. forgive me, my memory is bad. but it was enough time for pressure to build and legislation finally got through. the way the timing works this time, it was started more or less over a weekend. two weeks from now really is the last day. i guess the impact would build up a little more slowly. host: we will go to georgia next, a republican there. good morning.

are you there? go ahead. caller: i am not sure there was enough of a response to the caller who asked, doesn't medicaid cover most of this, and if it does what does the $500 million go for? i think that may be the true back story here. i think it goes to salaries and owners of the individual planned parenthood establishments, for instance, and richards daughter -- and richard -- ann richards'daughter. where is the research on that have a thing? and about shutting the government down, as a taxpayer who is funding all of this, the more it is shut down, the less my money is wasted. thank you. that what we think are talking about with medicaid

money is reimbursement for specific services. so it is comparable to say a doctor's office or a medical clinic or hospital. salaries andfor other services. host: again, this npr report put together where the money comes from what they do with it and how much the government pays to planned parenthood. they say that planned parenthood received $500 million year and .overnment funding this is according to their latest annual report. order percent of planned parenthood total 1.3 billion in revenue for the year, which suggests that they would be in trouble without public funding. what programs are funding that money? those public funds come from x, thed and the title federal family planning program that likewise primarily serve lower income americans. this is the breakdown of planned parenthood services, 42% for

, 11% cancer screening. is for abortion services. statistic isthe 3% pointed out by many critics who say that it doesn't explain how much of the revenue comes from abortion. some patients received more than one service from the organization. this means that more than 3% of patients receive abortions. that that figure is estimated at about 12%. caller: high. caller:i really sick of seeing these men on here talking about women's personal issues and abortion.

byas raised -- i was raped 40 -- about 40 years ago by a man. children and three i did not know if my husband was the father or if the demon that me --me -- that raped host: sorry, we lost you there at the end. sorry to hear about your story. we have to go, the house is gaveling in for their session. live coverage here on c-span. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 6, 2015, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate.