rights. 30, david of the center for medical progress will discuss his organization's primary role in a secretly recorded videotape of planned parenthood staff. >> today, we live in a time of threats like few others in recent memory. it can be tempting to follow the siren call of the angriest voices. we must resist that temptation. host: several new pulls out showing that the majority of the american electorate is angry, angry at the direction of the country, of the president, of congress, at the economy, angry about some of the issues we face today in the u.s.. are you an angry voter? we want to hear from you on the washington journal. code, the area

democrats,0 for 202-748-8001 for republicans, 202-748-8002 for independents. if you want to join the conversation there, here is a new refuse and pull that says three likelyof u.s. voters, 67% are angry at the current policies of the federal government including 38% who are very angry, 30% say they are not angry at these policies, but that includes just 9% who are not at all angry. voters remain even angrier with congress, 84% feel that way, 53% very angry, only 13% are not angry at congress, 57% of voters are still angry at large corporations. 41% are not hearing this includes 29% who are very angry,

12% who are not angry at all. and -- wall refuse street journal nbc also put out a poll about anger and voters. here are a couple things that they found, 69% of poll respondents agreed with the statement that they feel angry because our political system seems to only be working for the insiders with money and power like those on wall street or in washington rather than working to help every day people get ahead. one more comment from this nbc , thestreet journal poll key may be channeling their collective anger. among independents, 44% feel strangely -- strongly that the country's political system only works for insiders. 20% expressed pride in the shift private nation. 16% were highly uneasy about

some of the bigger tectonic shifts in the country. again, nbc, wall street journal poll. we have gotten a lot of comments already on this issue on facebook. we just posted it this morning. here are some of the comments coming in. -- i'm a smart voter, not a racist, fearful, angry voter. change is needed but not by someone who sold their soul to special interests. it is either rand or bernie or bust. angry ati am a little how crazed and uncivil politicians have gotten. i will miss obama who did a good job and was mostly a class act. blair says i'm a relieved motor. obama will be out, hillary's corruption will be end of her, and there is no well -- way that sanders will be elected. myra is pretty angry, wishing all career, bought and paid for by big business banks and wall street politicians, a swift boot

to the moon. very angryip, i'm a voter. i am very angry about our foreign policy, immigration, my wife and i took a big hit with obamacare. it seems like no matter who we vote for, we remain on the road to ruin. we are hoping trump can reverse course before it is too late. for democrats, 202-748-8001 for republicans, for748-8001 --202-748-8002 all others. are you an angry voter? paul and orlando, republican line, good morning, paula. caller: thank you for taking my call, thank you for c-span. if the petersons are watching, i hope the new year is treating them both well. peter, i am an angry voter. i would imagine that most of the people, republicans, democrats, independents who are calling and

will identify themselves as an angry voter. think that thele country is heading in the wrong direction. workforce, the labor workforce participation rate is at an all-time low. unemploymentt being at 5% is not accurate. in the last eight years, the medium income of families has 16%.ed by about some of the previous comments that you read from facebook are pretty much spot on. your anger, how will that translate? caller: i am going to get out and vote. i have already contributed to carly fiorina's campaign. if she can make it down here to

florida, i will be a volunteer. i will put a yard sign out. if i have to lick envelopes, i will do that. i think the most important thing for all of us angry voters, whether you are a trump supporter, bernie supporter, hillary supporter, bush supporter, is to get out and vote. we should all do our homework on all of these candidates. host: paul in orlando. this is friend in chicago, f --red, democrat. caller: i'm a first time caller. i am an angry voter. 61 years old. there are two issues that are most important to me. they have been getting worse. the first is income inequality. all of my adult life, the rich have been getting richer and the poor have been getting relatively poorer.

largely bought and owned by rich people. it is true for most of the democratic party and most if not all of the republican party. the other issue that makes me angry is i have -- i have lived experience of severe mental system and the health was recognized many years ago, george bush in his freedoms , it is fundamentally fresher -- fractured and it is only getting worse. there is not enough money. the money that is spent is being spent badly. the response seems to be more coercion which is demonstrated to not work. host: that is friend in chicago. democrats, first time caller, thank you for joining our

conversation. several of the republican candidates have talked about the anger in the election. trump: our country is being run horribly. i will gladly accept the mantle of anger. our military is a disaster. our health care is a horror show appeared obamacare, we are going to repeal it and replace it. jeb bush: you can see why people are angry and scared. this president has graded a condition where our national security has weakened dramatically. rand paul: understand why americans are feeling -- ted cruz: understand why americans are getting frustrated and angry when we have a president who refuses to acknowledge the threats we face. ben carson: i have encountered so many americans who are discouraged and angry as they watch our security and freedom and the american dream slip away under an unresponsive government. from roseburg, oregon

on the republican line. are you an angry voter? caller: yes. i have an angry for -- probably since 1990's. there was much talk event about the coming problems we would have with fiscal responsibility, among other things. nothing got done. was 2010, they have the committee for her stash fiscal responsibility. thought to -- they fought tooth and now to try to get something done. absolutely nothing, nothing got done. feltat time, most of us like just throw them all out. replace the whole congress. again, that is not going to happen. i also think that these problems are entrenched. i think there is a ruling political class in both parties

working hand in hand with crony capitalists. it is recognized by nearly everybody that this is the case. republican and democrat. host: 45 years is a long time to be angry. -- 25 years. what is your solution? caller: i -- being a republican, i am hoping that we get back to the principles of the constitution. i think the federal government is way too big. tom coburn said this. he said we basically have a government we can't afford. right or wrong, it is vastly bigger than it was ever intended. that sucks resources out of the economy. basically, it has caused a lot of the fiscal and economic issues we have. host: mark in roseburg, oregon. says she ister, she not an angry voter. emotions cloud your judgment, must stay the course. david is a democrat intel said.

-- in tulsa. caller: i am not an angry voter. if you look around the country, look around the world, what a privilege it is to have the right to vote. the threat oft violence in the polling place. we live in a republic where we do have the right to vote. sayhe angry voters i would run. run to change the system. there have been people such as that in our pastor for example, former senator tom coburn from oklahoma did just that. he was frustrated with the system and he ran. in the united states. i love the fact that we have the opportunity to vote. i don't always like all the candidates that are the alternatives, but i'm certainly not an angry voter. host: what do you do in tulsa?

caller: i am an educator. host: would you consider yourself -- i hate to use this word but, would you consider yourself an establishment voter? caller: i am not sure i understand what you mean. host: i am not being very clear. a lot of this discussion is about outsiders and establishment, etc. i don't consider myself an establishment voter. one of the things that does frustrate me is the last time we had a congressional race in the primary, 10% of the republican voters showed up to vote. 10%. that elected the new district fromepresentative oklahoma. 90% of republicans in district one stayed home.

i don't know -- i don't know if i am an establishment voter, but i certainly don't think that anyone that we have elected to office, be it the president or even the house of representatives or the senate, gets up in the morning and says i am going to do what is in the worst interest of the country. i believe that they get up every morning and they go work and want to do what is in the best interest of the country. if you don't like the direction the country is going, do what senator coburn did and run for office. get involved with a campaign. don't just sit at home and complain and watch the cable networks which feed into this anger. hasink the candidate that benefited most from angry voters in the united states is donald trump. he has talked about anger. he has hit a nerve.

participate in the system. we are so fortunate that we live in a country where we can participate in the system. host: david in oklahoma. tim and wilson, north carolina, independent line. tim, your on washington journal. are you an angry voter? caller: i am. i hope you give me a little time to talk. thank you very much. i am a very angry voter. we elected barack obama, the majority of the people did, for him to be president, and from day one, the republicans said they were going to do everything they can to make him a one term president. a chance to get a handle on the racism in this country. we did a great thing when we elected him. then, they have worked totally against the president on everything. i am surprised he has gotten as much done as he has gotten done.

we are in a war. i cannot believe the things they are saying, bringing up things about his legitimacy of being president and going against him at a time of war. this is a time that we need to be pulling together. getting so isis is much stronger. every time they do an attack, the republicans come out and we thethe president -- weaken president. they are aiding these people. i look at the deal they made with thiran. gas prices are way down. when people can remember when you were four dollars a gallon under george bush, it was directly because of the deal he did with iran. it is making our economy better. host: is a fair to say you are angry at the republicans? mainly atam angry -- the republicans. a lot of democrats -- don't get me wrong. a lot of them let this stuff go along.

they could have backed the president. -- with allave been of the good things the president has done, they haven't come out and pointed it out. with gas prices, all of the things. unemployment. the economy is great compared to what it was when he got them. the democrats don't know how to take credit. i don't know whether they running with republicans out there, i think a lot of democrats are out there not really with the democratic party. the values. i think a lot of them don't like obama. i am not calling the whole country racist, but all you need is a few key people in positions to have that prejudice and they can run the whole country. they can run everything for everybody. host: timothy and wilson, north carolina. .obby tweets in one angry, one doesn't think right. you can't make good decisions.

we don't need an angry president. never make angry decisions. juan williams who writes for the hill newspaper and appears on rocks news, gop to blame for civilities breakdown. obama ask me, president is being too hard on himself to one of the few regrets of my corsidency is that the ranran and suspicion between the parties has gotten worse instead of better. the president said during his final state of union address last week, he added, the president with the gifts of lincoln or roosevelt may have better rich the divide. i am all for humility, juan will writes, he was not to blame for his presidency. it was mitch mcconnell who said his number one goal is to make obama a one term president. obama is not responsible for the byrecedented obstructionism

mcconnell's senate the block all of his proposals. he has not even use executive action to get along congress as extensively as clinton and george w. bush, but his credits -- critics deride him as a constitutional a lot. obamacare is based on republican proposals such as the health care plan mitt romney put in place as governor of massachusetts. foris obama to blame for -- republican stopping cap and trade proposals, to reduce air pollution when the ideal originated with them? despite the president being willing to take responsibly for polls showing that a high percentage of americans think the country is going in the wrong direction and are angry at him in washington. a little bit from onjuan williams'paper. the, you're on washington journal. why are you angry? caller: it is easier to give you

an example. flint, michigan, perfect example of government failure. democrats, republicans, independents, anyone who had a hand on it. it is all across the nation. hometown politics, the way our government is run. city that theire property values will never be worth anything. they can't afford to do it. the federal government can't afford to help them. , they being the powers, they spend millions of dollars of their studying how to fix it. our politicians are stupid. the way you get it fixed is you that. you hand the governor a show once i start digging.

that is the way you get -- the mexican-united states border. that is how you get cities fixed. we can't have these people sitting in prison when we can run 24 hour shifts up there and have that done in of and i as euro cost. host: mark in versailles, kentucky. now, lawrence in trenton, new jersey. next on the democrat line. hello, lawrence. caller: how are you doing? host: how are you? caller: i am fine. i am an angry voter. because of the voters. we don't hold our politicians accountable. i am angry with the media that covers them because they allow people to come on interviews and just say stuff here it nobody challenges them. it doesn't matter if we know that what they are saying is

wrong. if we know what they are saying is a lie. they won't challenge them. they know what they are saying is a lie. out and recently came he was going to war. he was ready to go to war. that is what he said he wanted to do. hours, the whole thing was settled with a phone call. it was settled with a phone call. -- youhas asked this man were ready to go to war and take out our country into another war because of this, because of something that was settled with a phone call. nobody is asking that. this is the way you plan to govern? i need to know -- do the people who plan to govern, donald trump running out there, everyone is talking about what they are going to do, how they would handle everything differently

and the country is going in the wrong direction. i think the country is going in the right direction. i am able to work now. we act as if the president took on a country that was so great. this president took on a country that was falling apart. leave itare going to there. lawrence in trenton, new jersey. bernie sanders also talked about the anger issue. this is an interview he did with rapper killer mike. bernie sanders: there are a lot of people in this country who are angry and they are angry abroad.the jobs went they don't have any money to take care of their family. they don't know why they are angry. there was a study that came out recently, front page of the new york times. white, working-class families are seeing, men and women, are seeing a decline in their life expectancy. did you know that? the mortality rates are going down. -- up.

unemployment, suicide. the white community, not the black community. evil are angry and frustrated. -- they are angry and pressure. rapists --minals and we have to give them out. that is what he says. i am perplexed why an angry voter would choose one more establishment candidate which would result in same old, same old. republican, murphy, carolina. you are on the washington journal. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am an angry voter. mainly because the policy we have in this country considering -- i look at immigration, for instance. we have a problem with that as far as voters. we are going to try it again.

i am in the paint business. if i didn't resolve problems quicker than this, i wouldn't have a job. i wouldn't have a business. you take immigration as far as refugees. i have been to vermont monday at times. they have refugees from africa, bosnia, india. they live on section a welfare, they all get a food stamp. my relatives own a store to their island of your my cousin will say are you going to get a job? they say why do i want to get a job? i get a check every month. things like that. if people want to change in this country, they have to vote every senator and congressman -- and get people with new ideas. the old people already gave their ideas. they have no new ideas to come up with. how do we expect anything to change? host: who has the new idea for you? trump is think donald

wanting to resolve issues that are resolved. that is the biggest thing right now. we need a new -- we need a change of mind. it doesn't matter who we vote and. we need people with new ideas. people who sat there for 40 years, they have given you their ideas. have nothing new to say or do. really, if you want a change in country, you have to have a change of president. host: ralph in north carolina. if you can participate in a phone mind and want to participate on our conversation on angry voters, go to twitter or facebook. a conversation going on our facebook page, facebook.com/cspan. blake, leland, mississippi. independent line. to talki just want

about the elephant in the room. african-americans and native americans who are genetically african-americans, we built this country. i am sick of people saying we are a nation of immigrants. this country gave our wealth away to immigrants. they are constantly doing it. 2 million people come in on visas? we can take of the whole world. we had a criminal justice system disenfranchise african-americans. all of the other races -- they don't care as long as it is not them, their people. tired of and politicians not talking about reparations when 85% of the u.s. economy at the end of the civil war was built on slave labor. you are not talking about reparations. no culture, no religion, no

, and you built a whole world. industrial revolution was off of my people's blood. host: blake in mississippi. edwin on twitter. of course i am angry. a do-nothing congress that has put corporate wet -- welfare ahead of the people in the country. says just depressed. i wish our president could do another term. kenny in missouri, democrat. are you an angry voter? caller: i'm a helpful angry voter. host: what does that mean? caller: -- hopeful angry voter. i am hopeful because i will support bernie sanders and his vision for america inspires me. i think health care is a right. i want affordable college. i agree with him on climate change and so forth. -- i am angryause with the citizens united decision. the dark money in politics.

i am angry at the very blatantly partisan gerrymandered districts. i am angry at the voter suppression and disenfranchisement. those are things that make me angry. sanderseful that bernie is going to be our nominee. he can be our nominee if we go out and vote and he will be our nominee. if we go and vote, he will win by a landslide. let's say hillary is our nominee or it i think a lot of us democrats in 2016 will still vote democratic because we know that supreme court justice appointments and to hold health care together is important. but i say watch out in 2020. i think we want the money out. you see what i am saying? 2020 might be a different political scene. i am just hoping for bernie.

does that make sense? host: penny in sedalia, missouri. tweeting and, why would an angry voter support petulant, politically incompetent rich candidates exploiting their anger for personal gain? rand paul pledges to spend every waking hour trying to stop trump . donald trump takes us and the wrong direction. he would be a disaster. we will be slaughtered in a landslide. this was an interview on the alan: show. thehinks that we, republican party, becomes the party of angry people that insinuate that most immigrants are drug dealers or rapists, that is a terrible direction for our party. out againsto spoke the anger issue. here is what he had to say. so angry with washington and so frustrated about their own lives. i saw a survey that 63% of

people can't afford a car repair of $500 and more than half of americans have less than $1000 in savings. the big guy comes in and offers the moon and stars and people are latched on to that." he was referring to donald trump in that case. the next call is mike. go ahead. caller: i've been angry about this stuff since after vietnam. we were supposed to get a peace dividend instead of making any attempt to do anything for peace. they went ahead and build a monstrosity that we are supposed to support. everyone tells you alive. you cannot get the voting records. you don't know what they think . i run up on some that are good as gold, but for everyone of them, they are 30 up there that

is pedaling power so they can sell a book and live in a mansion somewhere. i spent a good bit of time on the ocean. we are all in the same boat together -- sink or swim. you can load a vote on top just so much and it's going to flip over. we are going to survive or none of us are. frustrated, beyond but i'm with a lady before you . if there is any hope, i think bernie will bring it about. the rich have enough of themselves already. let's take a care of ourselves. but all these occupied boys and wikileaks, they are on the right track to need to put our heads her and we need to stand behind this fellow. nobody really stood behind obama. he was up there on a wing and a prayer. i will give him credit for that.

host: mike, like i asked the previous caller, since the vietnam war, that's a long time to be angry and frustrated. caller: some of us are working for two dollars or three dollars an hour. i'm working in georgia where he can go to work for six dollars or seven dollars an hour. try paying 800 dam dollars a month. i've been supporting my family and mother-in-law for 45 years. broke.e is i can't go no further. i have lived a long time here and i know other folks can't fit i know bunch of good men over the years and they look something like out of a damn old movie or something. we should not have everybody angry. we have got to do it. look at our infrastructure.

if you really want to get aggravated, take a look at our commons. everyone one of us paid our money and a lot of graft and corruption went on that. at the roads and the ports and this or that, what do they do? they socialize the cost of building appeareit and privatize the profits off of that. how ain't that stealing? host: this is michael been on twitter. " i'm angry these people do not call the representatives public servants. instead, they treat them like royalty. " he has a bible verse reference uel, chapter eight. donald and sim internal, texas.

-- in san antonio, texas. caller: i'm very angry. i'm angry at the media. i'm angry at the politicians feared i might th. i like the gentlemen before. you elected these politicians. you know these people sitting up there lying. you never challenge them. when we challenge the all, the first thing i hear people in the media say is that if we do not challenge them, they will not come back on the show. let us know why they refuse to come on. we will know why because you're doing your job. how can we ever trust anyone? we cannot trust the media because you are in bed with the politicians, too. host: donald, what is a question that you would ask a republican presidential candidate and a democratic president candidate? caller: donald trump is always hollering i'm going to make america great again.

i would ask him how? how are you going to make america great? host: what about on the democrat side? what is a question you ask a democrat? caller: hillary clinton is the first question i would ask. and all this e-mail crap everything, the first thing i would ask her -- i will tell you i'm a black man. how are you going to correct the error that your husband created with this prison system for black people? because he created that problem. host: that is donald in san antonio. what do you do in san antonio, donald? caller: i'm giving up every morning watching you all on tv. we should not know your political affiliations coul i ca. i can tell which one. host: thanks for calling appeared if you have been watching c-span for the past couple of months, we cover events all

around the country and nearly on daily basis because of all the activity in all the candidates. the white house program, which used to be a regularly scheduled program on sunday night, is now on nearly every day. we are in iowa, new hampshire, south carolina, north carolina, wherever the candidates are speaking, we are there. 10:00 a.m. tomorrow eastern time, there is a gop presidential candidates town hall in nashua, new hampshire. c-span will be live from nashua, new hampshire tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m. eastern time. william is in hardin county, tennessee. he is a republican. are you an angry voter on top of that? william is gone. let us try anthony in new york on the independent line. are you angry? caller: yeah, i'm quite angry.

host: why are you an angry voter? caller: it's kind of a strange thing to say. i'm kind of a young guy. i think a lot of other colors have agood -- callers goat that the political system is captured by the wealthy elitec and basically we are disenfranchised. but twos a study princeton professors where they basically showed that our domestic policy in our foreign policy are ridden by the top .01% of the country. and i think that is reflected in what we see happening. the trillionsin of dollars, wars and the trillions of dollars, these things benefit big oil interests. they benefit big ranking interests. -- banking interest. you see things in flint and

detroit with schools underfunded and water contaminated poisoning little kids. we cannot fund infrastructure. we do not have a fast rail system. in thes no investment public sphere anymore and we are losing our middle class. people have a right to be angry. they're politicians don't work for them. pol is up next in appleton, wisconsin on the democrat line. i'm not angry, but i'm disappointed in all the people that are supporting donald trump. you want to know why there's so much anger in this country? all those people that are so angry need to turn off fox news . that's all they do just spew antigovernment stuff from night in till morning and morning until night. it's anti-obama.

what really frustrates me is donald trump trying to compare himself to ronald reagan. i was in high school when ronald reagan was a president and he never insulted anybody. he did not insult people by the way they looked. reagan was a class act. donald trump is a man child. he is like a childish kid that was never disciplined his entire life and now he is a billionaire manchild that acts like the kid that should stand in the corner. host: where do you think -- what would you attribute his success in the polls to? itler: i attribute a lot of mostly to white supremacy. i think he is latching into the white supremacist movement our country, that -- and our country, that anti-minority movement.

feel that a lot of its racism comin, you know? ump supporterr saying that if obama was on onre, he would urinate him and throw gasoline on him. host: some angry people bash their heads against the wall. some are motivated to go do something constructive. #feel the bern. here is a special edition of "the national review." the cover that. they have put out a full issue of anti-donald trump. they write he is not deserving of conservative support in the caucuses and primaries.

trump is a philosophically unmarred political opportunist who would trash lebron conservative ideological consensus within the gop in favor of a free-floating populism with strongman overtones. because of that issue, the republican national committee review"nvited "national as a debate partner. it says that the rnc has disinvited "national review" from a presence will debate partnership followed the release of an issue devoted to taking down donald trump. jack fowler, publisher of "national review," outlined the rnc's rationale and a piece published on the magazine's website. wrote,ason," he explaining the rnc stance, "are against trump editorial and symposia. ing."pect this was comping

lynn, do you feel like an angry voter? caller: certainly. if you like the government tries to do too much. of every agency in the government has to do more and more to justify themselves. all the things that everybody does. we will never have 100% clean water. does not make it 100%, they will run themselves out of business, so they will keep going and going. as far as climate change, if climate did not change, we would still be cute fuzzy creatures in the force of africa. climate change has been going on before humans. it will be going on after humans. we may contribute. may,tainly agree that we but such a small amount that if everybody in the entire world

went back to cooking over a campfire, we would just destroy the air and water even quicker. we have got to understand the things that we can do and the things that we can't do. they're in his wisdom. host: how long have you been angry as a voter? caller: so long that i can hardly remember. everybody wants to do too much. constituency to do more. those who believe in gambling what people to gamble. those who do not believe in gambling want people not to gamble. those who believe in certain religions want everybody to do things their way. i am personally a fiscal conservative and a personal real liberal. you live your life. you have to face your god. if you are happy with what you are doing, that's wonderful. i do not have to pay for what

you're doing with what i've worked for with the sweat of my brotw. host: that is lynn in san antonio on the republican line. "the wall street journal" this morning has michael mukasey saying a criminal charge is justified for hillary clinton's e-mails. that is in "the wall street journal" op-ed page. today at 12:30 p.m. eastern time, more road to the white house. this is senator tim kaine. he is campaigning for hillary clinton in davenport, iowa. that campaign rally will be live on c-span at 12:30 p.m. eastern time today. john and you rica springs, arkansas. eureka springs,springs arkansas. are you an angry voter? caller: the system is so rigged

against us. we are seeing anger on both sides of the political sect spectrum because there is no accountability and no respectability. you heard me call in several years ago. i live on table rock lake. my comment would be look at hillary clinton. her and bill were supposed to be public servants all their life, and yet the clinton foundation is worth over a billion dollars. i would ask any voters considering hurt to ask yourself this -- if your child was lucky enough to graduate from college, could you turn around and give ?er a $400,000 a year job to even consider voting for another corporate democrat or corporate politician, i would suggest to you this -- do not vote for any incumbent.

break the chain. these people are not entitled to have this continually revolving door that's tearing our country apart. donald trump is nothing but a joke. he is going to kick the can down the street as far as capitalism is concerned. we are already $19 trillion in debt and counting. the question we are all going to have to face ourselves in the upcoming years is how do we service this interest on this debt? no one has talked about it in this campaign so far. for gosh sake, people, wake up. democrat.his, caller: how are you? host: are you an angry voter? caller: i am very angry. do you know who i'm angry with? the voters! [laughter] i am angry with the voters. host: why? and onewe are a country

of the few countries in the that provides a free education to all people who live here, starting with kindergarten. and we are allowing those who decidinge, who are common sense issues with americans who live here. concerned when a man called into your program angry because we were giving money to iran. he is not recognizing that we were not giving money to iran. we were giving iran their money back. we are a people who do not treasure history. listen to what other people tell us. we know nothing about our

history ourselves. host: that is in memphis. this is david in bismarck, north dakota, a democrat. david, are you an angry voter? caller: well, i'm more of a dissolution voter, i guess, because i agree with that last ller as far as the ignorance of the voting public. we need to have somebody that is going to try and resolve some of these problems. nobody is going to do anything until we take care of this inequity in the wages and in the wealth. you cannot let the waltons of walmart have 40% of all the wealth in the country. host: where did you get that figure? caller: well, it was on some news program. maybe i saw it on the internet. they had it on their last night.

chunkave got a date, big -- big chunk. 40% might be wrong and it's a big chunk of wealth in the country. percentage of all the welfare money in the country. all the food stamps and that stuff comes from the fact that their people cannot earn enough money that they have to be on the social programs. we have got to resolve this. the big thing is the gross national product. that is dropping like a rock. host: david, we are going to leave it there. i appreciate everybody calling in. we are going to return to this question a little bit later in "washington journal." if you have an opinion or statement you like to make about whether or not you are an angry voter, that will be a little bit later. right now, we are going to turn our attention to the issue of abortion, the issue of roe v

wade. january 22, 1973 is the roe v made in then supreme court. today is the annual march for life, which is a pro-life rally here in washington, d.c.. focusgoing to talk to to on different sides of this issue coming up in just a minute. donna crane is with naral. aleiden is partdeligh of the group that put out videos. that is coming up next. ♪\ c-span's campaign 2016 is taking you on the road to the white house. this weekend, saturday morning at 10:00 eastern, live coverage from national, new hampshire for

the first in the nation presence of town hall with eight gop candidates. paul, jimenator rand gilmore, jeb bush, ohio governor john kasich, new jersey governor chris christie, carly fiorina, rick santorum, and marco rubio. saturday at 8:00 p.m. eastern, live coverage of the campaign rally in waterloo, iowa with texas senator ted cruz and tv and radio host glenn beck could sunday afternoon at 1:00, live coverage for gop candidate donald trump. for the complete c-span schedule, go to our website at c-span.org. c-span's campaign 2016 is taking you on the road to the white house for the iowa caucuses. monday, february 1, our live coverage begins at 7:00 p.m. eastern on both c-span and c-span2. we will bring you live

pre-caucus coverage, taking your phone calls, tweets, and text. to the take you republican caucus on c-span and then the democratic caucus on c-span2. be sure to stay with c-span and join the conversation on c-span radio and on c-span.org. as i've been watching the campaign this year, it is far more interesting to look at republicans than it is on the democratic side. that may have something to do interestthere is more in these candidates and their books. "q&a," a night on critic for "the washington post" discusses books by the 2016 presence of candidates. >> everyone has interesting stories in their lives. politicians are so single-minded in this pursuit of this power and ideology. they could have particular interesting ones, but when they put out these memoirs, they are

sanitized. they are vetted. they are therefore minimum -- there for minimum controversy. >> sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's "q&a." announcer: "washington journal" continues. is donnaning us now crane, vice president for policy at naral pro-choice america. a couple supreme court cases coming up that involve abortion. what are they and what is naral's position? guest: there are two important cases. one pertains to abortion and the other is reproductive rights for sure. the first case will have a look at the texas is law that some of your viewers might remember wendy davis made famous with her filibuster. the texas law closes abortion providers and a very deliberate way by imposing so many

regulations on them that they cannot possibly stay in practice . the law has gone partially into effect and has closed more than half of the providers in texas. if it goes fully into effect, nk, lessll be, we thi than 10 abortion providers in the state. what happens with the supreme court case does not just affect texas women. it could have effect on women across the country. there are abortion bans with a softer name. the second case deals with contraception. you might recall the affordable care act make sure that every health care plan must add concert poster -- contraception without an added cost. some people may remember the hobby lobby case. this is a second set of challenges. the question is here -- does your boss have a right to decide whether you the employee can have come to hous contraceptivee ar or not?

host: let's go back to the texas case for a minute. is it unreasonable to say a medical provider needs to be licensed by a local hospital? guest: absolutely. not unreasonable to have safety regulations. as a medical procedure, abortion is regulated as any other procedure would be. there are plenty of state and federal laws that make sure health care safe. however, the texas law and similar ones across the country are actually targeted specifically at abortion providers and add regulations that are not in any way related to whether that care is safe. thenumber of parking spaces clinic has, how big the janitors closet is, those kinds of things will not in any way enhance women's health or their safety. they are all about looking at what restrictions we abortion provider cannot possibly meet and then imposing them only on

abortion providers with a full purpose of closing their doors. host: the second case -- the aca case. if you're going to work for thos the little sisters of the poor, don't you expect you would agree with their positions on issues? guest: actually, no. the little sisters of the poor are a good example because they employ people of all faith and no faith. the mission that they undertake serves people of all face and no faith. this is not a religious enterprise. this is very much a social service organization. we wholly respect the fact that the women themselves or a boss himself might have personal views about contraception. we totally believe that they should be able to carry those beliefs out in their own personal life. i would be the first person defend a boss who says i do not agree with contraception. that is how you will carry about your personal life. we do not agree that in their

capacity as a employer that if they are not a religious organization, and they are not. they are carrying out a secular mission. it is not right to impose those views on someone else. that is where the right of conscience ends. host: would you have a problem with the catholic church did not pay for contraception with their health care? guest: i think that's a very different question. if you're are looking at an explicitly religious organizations like a church, i think that's a different question. it's not even at issue here because the policy does already exempt churches. secularalking about organizations that hire people who might or might not agree with that. they are carrying out a secular social service system. if you are a nurse or a home health care aide, you're not necessarily following the religious teachings of that employer. it is becoming a bigger issue by the way as catholic facilities are buying up more and more hospitals around the country,

acquiring general hospitals and other kinds of hospitals. do we feel comfortable having them impose their beliefs on largest loss of employees and clients? host: have you ever attended the march for life? guest: inadvertently i have. i got caught in traffic in the best way to get out of it is to march. host: is there any middle ground between naral and a pro-life organization? guest: the american public is vastly pro-choice all th. seven out of 10 americans want abortion to be safe and legal. what we find is that our opponents are not just antiabortion. if they were, they would actually agree with us that we can do a lot more in the area of contraceptive coverage and sex education to actually help prevent unintended pregnancies.

it would therefore reduce the need for abortion. i feel very much that is where the common ground is and we certainly invite our opponents to join us there. we also believe that is where the vast majority of americans are. host: how did you get involved in this policy issue? guest: i've always been passionate about this issue. i remember be much younger and talking to my mom about it. i've never dream that someone in my generation would have to fight this fight. but here we are. it's an extremely important year. i do not think i've seen so much of that state -- so much at stake with a puzzled jewel -- the present selections -- presidential elections and the supreme court nominations coming up. it's exciting time with a lot at stake. host: there's an article this morning and "the washington times." what it talked about is that younger women are more pro-life rather than pro-choice.

" nancy keenan, the former naral president, saying she was troubled by the intensity gap between older women and millennials. she is saying that a lot of millennials are on the pro-life side. guest: that is certainly not accurate. the americanound the marylan league and anecdotally is that younger people are more pro-choice and more respectable of the diverse the of families we have in america and are more tolerant of lgbt writes and women's rights. we have seen a resurgence of feminism in recent years, which is great news i as well. we do not agree that there is a generational issue. we find younger americans are more pro-choice. we find that younger americans care about a broad swath of

issues. women like my mom's generation and older had personal expenses when abortion was illegal. that probably and prints you -- imprints you and a different way. it is not more or less, but different. i can tell you as someone who speaks to a lot of different rooms that i've never seen such intense interest on the part of young people. host: donna crane is our guest and is the vice president of naral pro-choice america. maureen in indianapolis is the first up. go ahead. now, murder is called a medical procedure. --iewed that to our video that to our video where planned parenthood employees, doctors, etc. were drinking wine and eating lunch and discussing how they are going to harvest organs

the best way. i can't think of anything more inhumane than 55 million unborn babies getting slaughtered by women like you. maybe the holocaust. no, it's worse than the holocaust. it is unbelievable. host: that is maureen in minneapolis. two issues there -- the use of the term murder, slaughter, and the videos that our next guest put out. guest: i certainly respect the fact that we disagree. in no way, shape, or form is legal abortion murder. that is what we believe strongly . i would also comment that it's very important to understand that fetal tissue donation is a very important ethical and legal option for women who are ending

pregnancies. fetal tissue has led to important advances in scientific research. this is entirely proper and legal and ethical. i'm proud to consider myself an ally of planned parenthood, which conducts proper health care services and meets the very highest standards of ethics and quality. we certainly disagree. host: dan is in new hampshire on the democrat line. you are on with donna crane of naral. caller: good morning. perhaps your guest could do a little tutorial on lady parts. conception is an unobservable moment in time. it could come anywhere between copulation and six weeks when a woman realizes she is pregnant. for her rights on something that

you don't even know is silly. if you outlaw abortion, you can always go to mexico where they investigate miscarriages. they prosecute women in mess carriages. -- miscarriages. peru,r instance in 11-year-old girl was forced to have a baby because they outlawed abortion. a separate question for you next guest and i hope that you do not let him slide on it -- the last caller talked about murder. how about the guy that shot up the clinic and repeated the next guest claimed that they were chopping up body parts? that is murder. host: any response for that caller, donna crane? guest: thanks very much for the observation. i share your sense of dismay and irony that there are some on the other side who believe abortion is murder but also are prepared to use any means possible in

exercising their rights. i think really the most isortant fact in this debate that without the right to control our own bodies and to make our own private decisions and our families on if and when to have children that women cannot participate fully in society. we cannot realize our full potential. families don't drive and communities don't thrive. is a slaves to our biology terrible thing to do and a progressive society. keeping abortion safe and legal and making sure contraception is widely available -- these are critical protections that we have to keep in place if women are going to be full partners in society. that is the most important thing about this debate. host: hey ralph put out is -- naral put out a state-by-state report card on abortion rights. hy is it that hawaii gets

na minus in a state like massachusetts gets a c plus? several states get an f. guest: we are very proud of this research c. some of the states may surprise you. some states may seem progressive, but their legislatures are not as progressive in the case of women's rights. we weigh the different laws on the books and states and we tally them up. there are some states that have what we call refusal laws, which allow for health-care corporations to refuse to provide certain services. other states have really progressive loss and we simply bounce them out. host: california is the only state on your list to get an a plus. guest: that is right. as a california native, i'm very proud of that. host: bill is coming in from pittsburgh. caller: good morning. i'm calling because it have all

spent the last 43 years basically watching two sets of extreme views, i would say extremist, talking past each other on this issue. that a womanelt should have the opportunity to plan when she would have her children. but at the same time, at some point, you do end up ending a human life. ask if your guest -- at what point during the just station process -- just station gestation process does it become homicide? guest: i would never use the word homicide. the supreme court looked at this

question when they issued the road the way decision in 1973. wade decision in 1973 and we agreed with the court in that time. the pregnancy involves the progression of life. atn a pregnancy is viable that point, the state has a greater interest in protecting the potential for life. decision says that states can restrict or ban abortion after that point. that is this basically the law of the land across the state today. women can only terminate pregnancies at that point if there's something in the pregnancy that threatens her life for her health. that is something we agree with you w, we think that's a reasonable decision. it is also worth saying that the american public agrees. seven in 10 americans believe abortion should be safe and legal and that is the proper balance of rights. host: it was 43 years ago today

that the roe v wade case was decided by the spring court. c-span put on a program called "weimar landmark cases," and one of the cases was the roe v wade case. because of the anniversary, we are replaying this "landmark cases: roe v wade" tonight at 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. arlene is on our washington, d c democrat line. caller: good morning. i want to make a comment. if i could, i will ask a question as well. i find it surprising that there is even a debate about whether your employer can be involved in your reproductive rights. i would think it would be a can akin to be hired by naral

and saying they had everyone on birth control and all the employees should have an abortion. of course that would not happen because naral is pro-choice. but that would be an employee or being involved in your abortion -- i'm sorry, in your reproductive rights. naral ison was if going to do a primary endorsement like planned parenthood did? thank you. guest: do you mean in the present election? caller: yes. guest: naral has proudly endorsed hillary clinton for president. yes, indeed. host: why? guest: first of all, let me say that we are very lucky that we approaches -- fully pro-choice candidates on the democratic side. stake with the supreme court and all the restrictions that our opponents are trying to impose on

reproductive freedom, we think it is very clear that hillary clinton stands head and shoulders above others on her commitment to this issue. she has always put women from center in our governing philosophy and she will be a leader on this issue as president. host: do you have to be pro-choice to work at naral? guest: that's a great question. i'm confident that everyone who works at naral is pro-choice come about perhaps the more interesting settle the is does everyone personally believe they might choose abortion if they were confronted with that question? that is really the difference between us and the other side. we actually would support a woman who makes that decision. just as fiercely support a woman who says that is not the decision i will make for myself, but i'm not prepared to let anyone else make that decision for me. so yes, probably pro-choice, but your views on abortion and your family are your own. host: does naral receive federal

money? guest: no, naral does not receive federal money. host: what is your relationship with planned parenthood? guest: we are proud to stand as an ally with planned parenthood as our sister organization. host: but separate? guest: totally separate. host: is it necessary for planned parenthood to receive federal money? guest: absolutely. land parenthood is one of the most important, respected, and vital providers of women's health services in the whole country and they are absolutely essential to the net worth of health care that i'm a content available to them. akron, on thein independent line. go ahead, sir. caller: a couple of comments. she needs to understand that if you say your progressive or living in a progressive society, that's euphemism for communism for starts. i also want to ask her, but you

took my question in front of me. i want to know how they are funded if not funded federally? is ay planned parenthood great provider for women's health care, all they do is an abortion factory. they do not do anything else. there are no mammograms. all they are is an abortion factory. they charge women money and then get money for the aborted fetuses. to stand there and say that is what you stand for is great. i think you're right to choose is fine, but i do not want to have federal government pay for it. i'm glad to look at your report card and see that georgia has an f. host: why are you against abortion? the second part of that question the play devil's advocate -- why do you feel you have a right to tell a woman she cannot have an abortion? caller: i did not mention that at all.

i said everyone does have a right to choose. my issue is having the federal government subsidize it. host: thank you, sir. i apologize for mischaracterizing your statement. guest: thank you very much for your comments. i appreciate the fact that you are pro-choice. yourfraid to say that characterization of planned parenthood services simply is not true. i have applied to planned parenthood for contraceptive services. the vast majority of what planned parenthood does is preventive health care. they are also a proud abortion provider, but that is not factually accurate. the reason they are so vital is because this is where women can go for not only abortion services, but for contraceptive services. we should all agree that is vitally important whatever side of the abortion question we are on. to the question of federal funding, we will simply have to disagree about that. abortion is a constitutional right. it's a uniquely important havece that women need to

available. without it, we cannot participate fully in society. the supreme court looked at that question and said it's that important. constitutional rights do not depend on how much money you make in this country or where you get your health insurance. some women do get the health insurance through the government. it is just not appropriate than for politicians to step in and say, well, we will support the service but not that service. that is a two-tiered system where rich women get access to some kind of health care and other women don't. that is, i think, fundamentally un-american and i hope you will reconsider that. host: how is naral funded? guest: with private donations and foundations. host: harry in iowa, a republican. ander: good morning thank you for c-span. thank you for having the program today on the national right to life.

i hope that god is with everybody in the east coast as we face this blizzard and that everyone remains safe. i am a charter member of lutherans for life. i was an ordained pastor. having a troubled pregnancy and the doctor said to come in and just have the products of conception removed. daughterour child, our five months and her mother's womb. receive ourable to child's body for burial because

it was a product of conception. i'm a charter member of lutherans for life and kansas right to life. i was serving at a parish and kansas. i had anorward to now, invitation to visit with pope francis. sentutheran church president matthew harrison to washington, d.c. host: let's wrap this up and make your final statement. caller: i was in d.c. with senator grassley and senator cruz on pro-life work. a pro-choice man and his wife ,ook me and my daughters kidnapped me and attempted to shoot me an stab me. i'm a witness protection. host: we are going to leave your comments there.

the march for life is today. atwill be live online c-span.org. you will be able to watch it later on the air. it will be live online at c-span.org. maryland democrats lives. caller: good morning, peter. this drives me crazy. i'm a 79-year-old woman who was married and had four children and for live births. i lost a husband to domestic violence and he deserted our children. i moved to another state and refused to pay child support. i raise two jobs to pay for my children. i get so angry when i hear men calling up in men most of the time when there's a pregnancy, they don't take any responsibility for them. they desert their girlfriends and then the woman has to make a decision. no woman wakes up in the morning and decides she's gone to change her haircolor and have an abortion. when did women's reproductive

rights become a political football? i get so sick of men. you don't get pregnant. you don't carry children. you don't give birth. i get so sick of men every time the subject comes up in most of the calls this morning have come from men. this is not the 17th century. we are not the property of our fathers. we are smart. we are independent. we are courageous. e and we have a right to make our own decision. it is a decision between a woman, her god, and her doctor . the bible says we all stand before god to be judged. thank you very much. guest: thanks for a for your courage and your comments. it is no surprise that i wholeheartedly agree that pregnancy and the decision around pregnancy, especially

unplanned pregnancies, but profoundly impact women and their ability to participate fully in society and to raise healthy families. this is a profoundly personal and fundamental ability to the whole people. it's a decision that has to reside with us and whomever we choose to consult. thank you for your bravery. host: does the father in your view have a right to opinion or voice and it comes to having an abortion? guest: i absolutely believe that women should consult with their partners if that is appropriate for them. in many cases, that is exactly what happens. in some cases, it's not. i believe that when women make that decision about whom to consult, they are wise about it. they know who is going to give them good advice. at the end of the day, the decision has to be there's -- has to be theirs. host: wasn't that recently a frozen embryo case? what did you think of the outcome of that case? onst: i would rather comment

what i find most interesting about that case. right to life organizations step in and try to influence whether the embryos were preserved or not. i find that very fascinating because it tells me that those organizations are not just antiabortion. is trying to about influence families to shape them to look only the way they feel comfortable. i do not think anyone among us or certainly anyone reasonable among us would believe that a frozen as embryo is akin to murder. this is about controlling how families choose to grow. that is a space that no other person should have a right to get into. host: what is naral doing today while the march is going on at the mall? guest: there are members of congress making floor statements, but mostly we are busy organizing and communities across the country and looking forward to the spring court cases coming up this year and

organizing for the president will race. -- thenterested presidential race. host: helene, texas. caller: it is now oklahoma. don't ever apologize because you do not misinterpret the statement of that man's said. -- that that man said. you had every right to say what you have to say because he is dead wrong. andust shows his ignorance the uneducated populace. that first woman who called him, o my lord, please, lady. why don't you go to one of those clinics and inform yourself first of all? i would advise all those people for the right to life, go ahead, go to the hospitals, and comfort those babies who are born to addicted mothers, all right?

become foster parents to all those unwanted children that are being born, all right? cry overand more and the cousin of the child that has and abused and neglected dies a miserable, horrible death. i will tell you. in oklahoma, that occurs on a daily basis. crane, for you, miss your call demeanor even if you are being called a murderer. you are the perfect vice president for your organization because, yes, indeed, they do offer health care. the health care system is so broken in the united states, even though i president has been trying hard. kil: all right, and either , it's time for cynthia. go ahead with your question or

comment for donna crane of naral. caller: i have three questions that take about 15 seconds. there are one million people who would like to adopt children. my second question is what percentage of abortions save the life of the mother? the third question is do you believe that a fertilized egg is a person if left alone to develop? host: before we get donna crane's answer, do you believe that a fertilized egg is a person is left to develop? caller: sure. host: but why? caller: they become a person. it's common sense. host: donna crane? guest: i will take them in reverse order. i believe a fertilized egg has the potential to become a person. i believe it is not a fully developed person.

abortions thatof are necessary for the life of the woman is very small. for the health of the woman, it's larger. for all the other reasons that woman would feel strongly that at that moment in time that she cannot bring a child into the world, it is much larger than that. i enthusiastically support adoption services. naral would be the first organization to defend them if they were under attack the way legal abortion is under attack. as a woman feel strongly that is the course she wants to choose, if she has a planned or unplanned pregnancy, we applaud her and we defend that right. host: the next call for donna crane comes from jerry and george appeared -- in georgia. you are on "washington journal." caller: thank you a much. i want to make a comment and i have a question. the comment is that i grew up in a baptist church in south

georgia. they get all riled up about wastion, but the church within rockthrowing distance of children living in dire poverty and they would do nothing about it. my question is why did the european countries and other civilized countries not have this problem? guest: that's a great question. thank you very much. i'm afraid that i do not feel like i have a lot of expertise about the european countries and how they approach this issue. that i'veknow is experienced a lot of what you have observed. i'm i see sorry to hear that about your local church. lots ofe certainly church that do the opposite and take good care of people living in poverty. that said, it's really distressing that the people on the other side of this debate so frequently seem to think that there is a right to life until birth. after that, you're on your own. these are the people that do not

step forward and urge the government to spend more money or, let's say, the appropriate amount of money for education and health care and programs that would actually helped lift poor children and families out of poverty. there is a real hypocrisy there and it is really distressing. host: what did you think of the iden andhat david dela his group put out about fetal tissue sales with planned parenthood? guest: i did watch all the videos. i think certainly any kind of explicit talk about medical procedures is difficult to watch. it seems quite clear now that the videos were doctored. we have not seen the full context. it has been pretty thoroughly to accredited -- discredited, which seems like a what -- it was intended to do. i think our opponents for years have wanted to try to bar

planned parenthood for participating in many health care programs. this seems like another piece of ammunition in that battle. host: you referred to the pro-life movement as opponents. again, we are going to go back that there are two sides with no shared space. guest: i think there is shared space. andink that mr. delaiden his colleagues are the fringe of that movement. when you talk to most americans, they believe that abortion should be safe and legal and we could be doing a lot more to help women with health care and information so that we can prevent as much as possible the need for abortion. there will always be a need for the abortion and we will defend it. we have an unusually high pregnancy rate and there's more we can do about that co. host: please go ahead with your question or comment for donna crane of naral. caller: how are you doing?

good morning. and i'mndependent pretty much a progressive. i'm a fiscal conservative. pro-choice. i think that's a no-brainer. i do not think anybody should have the right to tell another human being what they can do with her body and with their own property. if i paint a picture and i want to take it into my backyard and burn it in a pile, that's my right to do so. i cannot go to my neighbor's house and take their painting off the wall and burn it. that is against the law. but i should be able to do whatever i want with my own property. pro-choice, no-brainer. i also heard your guest, you asked the guest if her organization was backing a candidate for president. she said yes, hillary clinton.

then you asked her why, and she kind of hesitated for quite a while. but i think it is obvious the reason she is backing hillary clinton is because hillary clinton is a woman. i am for women's rights 100%. but she said feminist them is -- them and is having a resurgence and she thought that was a great thing. maybe in some respects, it is. i think a lot of feminist today are different from the feminist of before. to remember many of the feminist from the 1950's, 1960's, and 1970's. are going to leave it there and get a response from donna crane. guest: let me clarify the record. there is no hesitation

whatsoever. we are probably supporting hillary clinton for president. her gender does not especially make a difference. it is the leadership she has shown throughout -- throughout her life. she has made women central to her philosophy and we believe she will be a leader on this issue and gender does not matter much one way or the other. host: you said all three democratic candidates you can see supporting. guest: they are all pro-choice, which is a great thing to have happen. i would love to see pro-choice candidates on the republican side. that is not the case this year, but i would love to see that. , this is what she puts on her twitter feed. asks the question, explain the double side -- double homicide issue please. guest: i could guess at what that might mean. it is possible what she is referring to is a series of laws

in which when a woman who is pregnant is harmed there are considered to be two independent legal victims of that crime. we fully believe when a pregnant woman is harmed, that is worse and the penalty should reflect that additional severity, the brutality of that crime. we don't believe there are two legal victims in that case because primarily those types of laws are offered by our opponents as they are looking to change the legal foundation of abortion rights by creating what we might call personhood rights and creating legal tension. we believe those crimes should be punished fully. but we don't believe they should abortiontangled in the debate which is what happens we identify a second legal person. host: when a man decides to tell you his view on abortion, does

he have a right? guest: definitely. he is an american citizen or a world citizen. he has the right to an opinion. does he have the right to have his view supersede mine if i'm making a personal decision? no, a woman does not either. democrat,yn, chicago, you have the last word with donna crane. caller: good morning and thank you. profession, with any tissue the donor has to sign a release. in the catholic hospital, you have a choice. you went out and found another place to have an abortion. i witnessed women getting abortions in the alleys coming into us and dying.

i am so sad to hear all of this stuff being brought up again. malelso, what happens to contraception? thank you. host: evelyn, before you hang a, could you explain what you meant by your medical profession? what was your position? caller: i am a registered nurse. i came to chicago to take the specialty. i entered the hospice unit. i have 45 years of all of this. host: prior to 1973, and in 1973 you were 41 years old, had you -- what experience had you had seeing the results? where did women go for so-called illegal abortions at that time? alleys, a lot of them came to the alleys. host: do you mean a doctor who

would do that or somebody who was not a doctor? caller: this was all illegal. i don't know. a midwife? i have no idea. we used to have quite a few of those. host: that is evelyn in chicago. guest: thank you very much for your courage. host: donna crane is the vice president for policy for naral pro-choice america. we are going to continue this discussion. david daleiden is going to be here. he is the gentleman from the center for medical progress that put out the videotapes we all saw last july with the interview with planned parenthood. our conversation on this issue continues in just a minute. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

announcer:? booktv has 48 hours of books and authors every weekend on c-span2. here are some programs to watch for this weekend. saturday night, charlie savage shares his views on president obama who came into office saying he would turn back the bushes of the--excesses of the bush administration. the former senate leaders on their book "crisis at the current climate in congress and offering recommendations for moving america forward. they are interviewed by the former congressman of oklahoma. >> just the insatiable demand for more money is one of the issues i think is exacerbate --

has exacerbated all of this and made a harder for the leaders to bring people together. because first, they are not in town. secondly, they are doing all of this other stuff that does not allow them to be the legislators they were elected to be. third, you have special interest pressures. >> we don't want it to be this is how we do things. look at history. history is littered with dysfunction and challenges. george washington almost had to resign. we want to look forward and say here are some things we think would make a difference. announcer: on sunday night at 8:00, the journalist examining the changing world for young women in the middle east in her book. she looks at the kind of choices young arab women are making and how they differ from those of their mothers. universitye going to in bigger numbers than men all over the region. especially in the gulf

countries, the proportions of women are even greater compared to men. the women will tell you this is partly because it is a socially acceptable way to delay marriage or to be outside the home in a way their families will support. watch booktv all weekend, every weekend on c-span2. television for serious readers. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: david daleiden is the founder of center for medical progress. what is that group? guest: it is an organization of citizen journalists. we monitor and report on medical advances with a special emphasis on bioethical issues that impact human dignity. host: you are known for the so-called planned parenthood tapes. guest: i am. host: are you antiabortion or pro-life? guest: i am a proud pro-lifer.

host: where did you get the idea of interviewing planned parenthood people about fetal tissue? released the time we the first tape, it had been about 15 years since the issue of baby parts trafficking had been part of the national discourse. there was a seminal exposé done on that particular topic in 1999-2000. unfortunately, it kind of got buried in the mainstream media at that time. i first found out about that about five years ago. i was really struck by this paradox i feel is at the heart of it. on the one hand in our country, the baby fetus, their humanity is not considered to be equal to our own in order to be totally protected by the law from being killed by abortion. but at the same time, it is precisely that humanity of theirs that is completely identical to our own that makes them so valuable for scientific

extermination and makes planned parenthood and their business partners and researchers hunt after their body parts like very treasured. -- buried treasure. host: are fetal tissue sales legal? guest: for profit body parts sales of any kind are not legal. host: cecile richards, because of the tapes, this is what she had to say. [video clip] >> planned parenthood has been in the news because of deceptively released videos by a group dedicated to making abortion illegal in this country. this is just the most recent in a long line of discredited attacks over the last 15 years. the latest smear campaign is based on efforts by our opponents to entrap our doctors and clinicians into breaking the law. and once again, our opponents failed. to set the record straight, i

want to be clear on four matters. first, using fetal tissue in life-saving medical research is legal according to the 1993 law 93-4 and the senate based on recommendations from a blue-ribbon panel created under the reagan administration. second, currently less than 1% of planned parenthood health centers are facilitating the donation of tissue for research. third, indo centers donating fetal tissue is something many of our patients want to do and regularly request. finally, planned parenthood allah sees not only comply with but go beyond requirements of the law. the outrageous accusations leveled against planned parenthood based on heavily doctored videos are offensive and categorically untrue. host: david daleiden, cecile richards, president of planned parenthood, was talking about you.

guest: she was. one of the main talking points for planned parenthood has been the videotapes are heavily edited or "deceptively edited." in this case, she came out with what they really mean to insinuate that we have doctored what is being said. , we haved of the day been more transparent than any mainstream media organization in the way these were produced. we have put out full conversations with top level everyone can compare the full conversations to the highlight some reversions we present and see for themselves --summary versions we present and see for themselves. throughout the four points she mentioned, not once did she deny any of the statements on the video are made by planned parenthood senior-level leadership. we did not put those words in

their mouths. those are their own words captured on video for everyone to see. host: did it hurt your legitimacy to go in under false pretenses and edit the tapes in the first place? guest: i don't think so. every news report you will watch on tv, even a live broadcast, is in some way edited or produced to make it more easily presentable for the public. i think most people realize that. most americans think undercover work is important part of law enforcement and journalism. it is an important part of life and discourse. host: how did you get involved in this issue? guest: with abortion specifically with the baby parts issue? host: however you want to answer that? ? guest: i have probably an eight or nine years of experience doing investigative journalism

type work with a focus on the abortion industry and planned parenthood. i have encountered the baby parts issue specifically about five years ago for the first time. i do think there is something about it that is particularly disturbing to people and also throws into stark relief our underlying -- the underlying conflicts the regime of abortion on demand we have in america now presents to some of our core american and human values of human dignity and equality. i am a proud millennial. we grew up in school learning about the history of slavery in america and how there is a dark stain on our history where people used to be part -- bought and sold in our country. you turn around and see companies buying baby parts from planned parenthood. even sometimes turning around and selling entire fetal cadavers, and people are still being bought and sold in america today because of that.

i think that is a contradiction to the values we hold dear and something most americans don't support. host: you are a graduate of claremont mckenna college in california. are you from california originally? guest: yes. host: is this a religious issue for you? guest: i don't think so. my friend and a representative recently authored an op-ed in "time" magazine. thehe end of the day, pro-life movement and our position on abortion is not a religious movement and is not necessarily a political movement. this is a movement about love and compassion for other human beings and for the smallest human beings, for the human fetus. in most states, fetal homicide laws are on the books. in almost every situation, the human fetus is considered equal to another person. , andnly exception for that most constitutional scholars would agree is a big equal protection violation, the only exception is in the case of

legalized abortion. host: david daleiden, are you in favor of outlawing all abortions? of,t: what i am in favor and i have to be a little careful because we don't do model legislation or legislation advocacy. behink the ideal law would similar to laws on the books before roe versus wade. host: david daleiden, center for medical progress, is our guest. final question. i have to follow up on that. what were those laws? guest: the laws in most states before roe versus wade criminalized doctors who would perform abortions, by which they meant feticide, anything that would intentionally kill a fetus. there were always exceptions for the life and health of the mother. it is interesting.

those laws were made exceptions -- made clear that women would never be prosecuted in those situations. it was criminalizing the conduct of unethical medical providers who would do abortions. host: let's take some calls. joseph is calling from fort lauderdale, florida, on our independent line. joseph, you are on with david daleiden. caller: good morning to both of you. let me start off by saying i am a father of two. i raised my teat of children by myself. their mother had mental issues. i raised my kids by myself for 16 years. life, valuey entire the life of children. i wanted to ask a question. i did not get an answer from the lady earlier.

if a murder is committed when a lady is pregnant, you get charged with two murders, right? if so, what is the difference if you have an abortion? isn't that murder? host: david daleiden. guest: sure. my understanding is i think in thereimately 40 states are fetal homicide laws on the books that do make it equally criminal homicide if you kill a fetus in the process of an assault on a print woman or you kill a pregnant woman and kill the woman and unborn baby, that you can be charged with two murders or fetal homicide. the bourneral level, life protection act also provides the same equal protections to unborn children in all stages of gestation. host: diane is in tennessee. she is a democrat. please go ahead with your question or comment for david daleiden. caller: good morning.

incest ands with rape? you said you are right for life. there are babies starving. people have been killed who are already here. you are not saying anything about that. there are little children everyday killing children. do you say anything? no. you are sitting up there now. you don't have to carry that child. thank you very much. host: david daleiden. guest: sure. for the first question about rape and incest, i think everyone has a lot of compassion for any person who is a survivor of asexual assault. thing a pregnancy in that situation creates is that if there was a way to do an abortion without killing a baby,

i think nobody would have a problem with what is going on. at the end of the day, that is the problem. i don't think anybody wants to punish someone whether they are a woman who is a survivor of an attack or a child completely innocent. nobody wants to punish them for something that is not their fault. as to the second issue, my concern and other pro-life americans' concern about unborn children compared to our concern for other children in bad circumstances, i think if we cannot have compassion for and respect for and protect the smallest and most innocent children, there is no way we are going to be able to effectively take care or have that same concern for those who are in more difficult -- less-than-perfect situations or less than innocent situations. i think compassion begins with the very smallest and the ones who are so tiny there's nothing they could do to oppress us in any way.

if we cannot have compassion for them, we will not be able to have compassion for bigger people. i believe there was a third issue, but i have forgotten it. host: i wrote down the first two as well. i apologize. guest: the third was something along the lines of i am a man and will never carry a pregnancy. i was a fetus. i have the child of a crisis pregnancy situation. my parents got pregnant with me their junior year of college and got married after graduation. there were people who said i should be aborted. i'm here today because their voices did not win the day. i think at the end of the day, abortion -- is not totally correct to say does a woman's issue because it is a human issue. host: is there any middle ground? that is the question we asked donna crane earlier. between the pro-life and pro-choice position? guest: i think there is middle

onund in a political sense what sort of policies we are going to have. i think it is clear from pulling data and testing the attitudes of the ever -- average american that most americans are not in of abortion being practiced in situations where it is most commonly practiced. most americans are ok with abortion to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest. in most other cases, most americans do not favor abortion. most americans are in favor of no abortion after three months of pregnancy. that means no abortion in the second or third trimester. i think there is a lot of room for commonsense policies like that where we can move forward as a country. unfortunately, we are largely prohibited from enacting a lot

of those policies because of the row versus wade supreme court decision that persists even though in many ways the precedent is unsettled and we will see interesting things happening at the high court in their future. --in the near future. for the past 43 years, there has been an institutional barrier for democratically grappling with that common ground. host: lara is in pennsylvania, republican line. go ahead. caller: thanks for c-span. i want to applaud david for your courage. you have had to go through amazing, scandalous remarks about what you have done tearingng the unjust apart of unborn babies. but doing it in a specific way to harvest their organs. for planned parenthood to say youhave doctored the tapes,

did not put numbers like the liver is going to get so much, manipulating the procedure to get the highest value is disgusting. the person who said what about those innocent, babies who were the product of that, they are not rate this -- rapists. their fathers were rapists. i know two people who had repressed -- rapist fathers whose mothers in them up for abortion. you should not have to abort the baby because of the way it was conceived. guest: it has been interesting that it has been six months since cmp started releasing the first undercover tapes. planned parenthood has yet to tell us how much money they have received from companies like stem express in exchange for harvesting fetal tissue.

they have yet to explain why one of the chief medical officers was endorsing a stem expressed advertisement for financial benefits to the clinic. they have yet to explain why their senior director of medical services was talking about flipping a baby on ultrasound to harvest more intact fetal organs. the talking point from planned parenthood that the tapes are edited, by which they mean to insinuate they are doctored, is a disingenuous talking point in an attempt to distract what is on the tapes because they cannot deny what is there. host: since you started releasing tapes, are there more tapes coming out? guest: there definitely are. there is a large body of footage from the national abortion federation annual meetings under a tro in a court case now, they temporary restraining order. host: is that because of the planned parenthood suit against your organization? guest: that suit predates the

planned parenthood suit. it is a little different but a lot of similar allegations and issues in play. there are more planned parenthood tapes as well. there is no injunction or tro against those so some are being prepared for production and presentation. host: did you participate in any of the undercover interviews? guest: i did. host: were you with the woman from planned parenthood or somebody else? guest: in most of the tapes we have released so far, i was present for those interviews as one of the undercover actors. there are a few older tapes were i was not one of the actors. but for most of them, i was present. host: adam is in easton, pennsylvania, independent line. i amr: i would like to say amazed in 2016 we are still having this debate about what someone can and cannot do with their on body. i find with groups like your guest, they are more than willing to tell you what you can and can't do, but as soon as you

tell them what they can and can't do, they are up in arms. we have to understand women have a choice to do what they want. if i had told this gentleman what he could do or could not do with his body, i'm sure he would fight me tooth and nail. we have to understand abortion nowadays is not something that is accepted as a whole but sometimes is a necessity, and it is your right to have access to that necessity. ultimately, what does it matter to these people that are fighting for this issue? host: adam, sorry. thought you were finished. david daleiden? guest: it is interesting. if you choose to look at abortion only as an issue of what someone does with their own think you are necessarily going to be ok with the for-profit sale of baby body parts because those just part of the woman's body anyway?

and so there should not be a problem with on the hearts and lungs and livers of unborn children. i think what the guest is saying is out of step with what the majority of americans believe. all of usircumstance, have limitations on what we are able to do in a society where we live together and have to get along. the really extreme pro abortion position he is staking out would permit abortion -- abortion up to nine months of pregnancy, which is permitted in states like colorado and new mexico. it really cuts against the grain of what the public is comfortable with. i don't think that is a winning talking point or issue for the abortion industry. in please guy tweets ask david daleiden why not one federal, state, or local agency has found wrongdoing at planned parenthood. guest: i don't know that is

correct they have not found wrongdoing. it is correct to say there have not been indictments filed or full on prosecutions yet. there are ongoing state, federal, and local criminal investigations. we will see what comes of those in the next year. host: when will we get more from these court cases? are they in the discovery mode right now? the lawsuits. guest: those cases are at different places right now. it is a little complicated. they are probably not likely to yield anything quickly. i think the timeline is going to be stretched out for both of them. whetherainly i do think more information comes out through the select committee congressional investigation or through some state and local criminal investigations or through the discovery process and litigation process of the lawsuits ongoing, i think you

will start to see in the next year a lot more primary source document type evidence corroborating a lot of what was on our videotapes. host: what is posted on your website? posted are the full media release videos cmp has put out so far, both the summary highlight versions and full footage of those conversations that went into the highlight versions. we also have a document vault that has a lot of primary source documents we received from whistleblowers and others who work inside the abortion industry. also, that we gathered at different industry trade shows. there are a few other pages of a blog with press releases and contact forms. things like that. host: how are you funded? guest: we are a nonprofit, tax-exempt recognized by the i.r.s. we are funded by donations from the public who has been generous so far. host: is there a timeline for any tapes to be released?

are they all under restrictive order now? guest: the only tapes under restrictive order of those specifically from the national abortion federation's annual meeting in 2014 and 2015. the national abortion federation is the trade organization of abortion providers in the united states. another, thatly would be 40% of the footage we gathered in the two and half years of the project. we have released approximately 20% of the significant footage so far. there's probably another 30% of footage unreleased now. we are working on producing that now. host: would we see that in the next couple of months? guest: definitely. host: db, democrat, go ahead. caller: i am an old lady. i have had experience with this issue, personal experience. what strikes me is women have

the power, and that is what the men resent, that women have the power to decide whether they want to have a child or not. i think they should have the power. i wonder about this fetal tissue stuff. does it have any value? these youngdn't girls giving up their fetal tissue, shouldn't they get the money? thank you. host: phoebe, are you still with us? caller: i am. i know it sounds like a nazi. but on the other hand, when i had my abortion, the someone wanted to buy the body parts, i would have said fine. i needed the money then. i had my abortion a long time ago. you don't really have to go to a doctor. that is what i learned because there were not anyone i did it myself. host: before roe v wade? caller: absolutely. it was a most in the last century now.

it is a shame. it is a real shame women are put in this position of having to go to some higher authority when they are taken care of themselves at a very emotional time. host: david daleiden, what do you hear from her? guest: i'm going to strike out a little bit on a limb on this one. orhink people watching listening this conversation can hear some of the pain in her voice talking about that experience, talking about all of the stigma that goes into unintended pregnancy, some of the fear, the need for a solution to try to get out of that situation. i think that is something we all need to be honest about and need to have a lot of compassion for that kind of situation. it is not just men. pro-life men and women and men and women across this country, i don't think we resent but are

horrified by the idea that any person can choose another person lives or dies. and that any person could go on to sell the body parts of that person who we are choosing to kill or not kill. at the not just rhetoric end of the day when we talk about the humanity of the unborn baby and what that means. you want to talk about the value of fetal tissue for research or extermination. what about the value of the human fetus in all of his or her integrity as a human being? you can say harvest the brain, keep the brain intact so you don't destroy it. planned parenthood will get $75 that specimen. $700 andess might get some researcher will use it for a study. how much more valuable with that beef it was kept in the child and the baby was allowed to live and contribute to society? i don't think any of us are doing and have ourselves a service if we deny that real,

physical reality. i think that comes through in the pain you hear in the voices of people like phoebe who have been through that experience. there is an expense we have to be honest with. otherwise, we will never heal and be comfortable as a country. host: it was 43 years ago the roe v wade decision was decided by the supreme court. this past fall, c-span did a series of landmark cases that this country has faced. we finished up with the roe v wade case. we are going to re-air the program tonight at 630 -- 6:30. it looks at the history and the result. 6:30 tonight on c-span. richie in butler, kentucky, republican line. caller: how are you doing today? i want to thank the gentleman for what he is doing.

of this newpart generation of christian leadership is worrying more about selling the next book on how to feel good about these things. 78% of americans claim to be christians. yet they sit silently while all these things go on. but they say it is the law of the land. we are the law of the land. in a democratic society, we vote. we don't allow people to stand by and say that. ministers today sitting at home worrying about the next lines they are going to read on the pulpit next week. they are not on the steps of the supreme court fighting these things. thank you for listening to me. keep up the good work. maybe the christians of america will finally wake up. host: anything for that caller? guest: i hear a feeling a lot of american share now, that there is a crisis in leadership. maybe in spiritual leadership. i am a catholic and a follower

of post francis -- pope francis. pope francis has spoken out several times about the issue of fetal tissue trafficking and has had strong words about that. i think it goes hand-in-hand with his emphasis on the importance of compassion and mercy, even for people in difficult situations, and showing that by accompanying people in difficult situations. america is a great enough country that we have been able to put men on the moon. i think we can find better solutions to unexpected pregnancies than the violence of abortion. host: patrick tweets in to you, cmp is partially funded through 501 tax-free status but fights against the use of tax money for planned parenthood. guest: i am not sure i completely understand the question or objection.

it is true cmp is a 501(c)(3). it is true we think planned parenthood is engaged in a lot of unethical and illegal activities that ought to be investigated and prosecuted and perhaps remedied by a loss of federal taxpayer dollars. i don't see a contradiction in those two statements. organsf i donate my after death, is that selling body parts? guest: no, donations are not a sale. what is supposed to be allowed, the way things are supposed to work, is you are allowed to donate your organs or tissues. nobody is supposed to be making money off your body parts. that is where the problem comes in. host: mike is calling in from akron. caller: i'm glad you and i have two things in common. we are both catholic and pro-life. we differ in one main way. my definition of pro-life may not be the same as your

definition of pro-life. as an historian of the catholic church, i realize the catholic church is one of the reasons why so many europeans came to this country centuries ago because of its repressive ways towards the people. thank god the catholic church has changed his attitude in many ways. i think the pro-life as somebody who i don't care what your views are on abortion or guns as long as you don't go around killing other people. you may not be the best example of pro-life, but you are pro-life enough for me. here is my question. i know a catholic. he and his wife go to church every week. they would never have an abortion but they believe a woman has a right to choose like me. if my friend went into a burning building, same people, two kids in his arms, could you look him in the eye and say i am pro-life and you are not? guest: sure.

i don't think it is pro-life to be in favor of abortion on demand up to nine months of pregnancy, selling the body parts for profit afterwards. i don't think that is pro-life according to anybody's definition. i think if you support activities like that, it is a huge contradiction to any other area in your life when you're claiming to respect human beings or value their dignity. i think it puts you on a slippery slope as to whether you're going to be able to continue to extend that same compassion to other people. it is a deliciously vague phrase when people talk about the right to choose because we are talking about a spectrum of nine months of pregnancy, all kinds of different development of the unborn baby going on, and all kinds of different factors and outcomes that can crop up off of that, like selling body parts for profit afterwards. i get a little impatient with a lot of the word games coming

from planned parenthood or their allies because i don't think it is very honest. host: jenny is in tallahassee, florida, democrats line. caller: yes. i have a proposal that is a middle ground proposal and also a question for you. order toal is that in make all of this argument moot, why don't we enact a law that we identify the fathers of each of these children that women are pregnant with? that the fathers will be required to pay half of the medical costs and the cost of while theythe women are carrying these babies, that they pay half of the cost of raising these children.

and the children be required to be raised at the same level the men and women are living. they also are required to take care of any medical costs and costs of anything that involve most children while they are -- those children while they are growing up. and also, my question to you is, do you have any children out there that you are not taking care of? host: that was jenny in tallahassee. mr. daleiden. guest: that is a great comment and question. i think her proposal is excellent from a policy standpoint. i think it is something people could creatively build on. as to the question, i don't have any children.

i think the broader take away from her question and comment, it is interesting to me that if you insist on making abortion only a women's issue, you're kind of making unintended pregnancy only a woman's problem and obviating any kind of male responsibility for those situations even though there is a lot of mail responsibility for those situations, or maybe we should say irresponsibility. host: have you ever had a friend who wanted to get an abortion? did you accompany her? did she talk to you about it? do you know anybody who has had an abortion? guest: i know a lot of people who have lots of different expense of abortion in their lives. people who are survivors of abortion, people who have had abortions themselves, people who have considered abortion. definitely. i have yet to meet someone who this really honestly say was a happy part of my life and

something i grew up wanting to do. nobody treats it that way. i think that says something about what it really is. host: the path you have taken in this professional path you have taken, what has it done to you in a personal way? take that question and see what you can do with it. know, i say you sometimes i am the product of the public school system in the state of california, which my kind of surprised people. gravew up learning about human rights injustices of the past, slavery, the holocaust, and also the brave people who fought against them in the civil rights movement and the underground railroad. i remember always thinking, wouldn't you want to be one of the people? if you lived in a time like that when something like that was going on, wouldn't you want to be one of the people who stood up and said this was wrong and

shout it from the rooftops -- shouted from the rooftops? if you realized it was going on today, wouldn't you want to be one of those people who is different? that kind of brings me to now. is in aransas pass, texas, republican line. please go ahead with your question or comment for david daleiden from the center for medical progress. caller: yeah. it has been my experience that no matter what i believe, the truth had the power to change what i believed. every time i have run into the truth with a powerful belief, i got knocked down hard. i want to ask you, is there any aborted babies that will be children brought to jesus? host: a religious issue for him, a christian issue for him. guest: i guess i am not sure if i know how to answer or that i'm

qualified to answer. i am not a priest, and i am not a spiritual authority. i don't know that i can make that judgment. every singlek aborted child, and i have encountered aborted children in planned parenthood's we visited, it is a really different, moving experience. some planned parenthood medical directors have written about it themselves and that is something we share in common with them. every single one of them is someone who was a human being, who was valuable exactly as they were. we would have loved them whoever they would have been. she tweets into you that you even stall someone's miscarriage video pretending it was from planned parenthood. guest: that is not true. i think she is referring to some b roll footage filmed of a born alive infant at approximately a

19-week abortion. one of the interesting things i learned in the course of the undercover work we did, talking with lots of planned parenthood medical directors, lots of different abortion providers, is that in the practice of second trimester abortion, it is not unheard of and not uncommon that you sometimes, depending on the patient's individual characteristics and how they respond to the procedures, it is not uncommon you might have a precipitous delivery before the procedure begins and have the fetus come out intact and you have a born alive infant on your hands. it does not happen every day or every time. it is something that is not unusual. i think that argues for a lot more strict oversight and scrutiny for the abortion industry. host: last call for david daleiden comes from todd in beachwood, ohio, independent line. caller: i would like to know if

you would consider this as a possible alternative to people even getting into this -- the situation of being in an unplanned pregnancy. if the government and planned parenthood in your group worked to build and intensify programs in the taxpayer-funded neighborhood public schools that taught the actual cost of bringing a child -- bringing a pregnancy from conception all the way up to the year 18 in various counties. for includes medical costs going through the pregnancy, the cost of raising a child in the different areas where the individual may be, and giving them incentive to learn what it to get the kids in the schools to understand that as well. our country is built on the strength of our families. our country is built on the strength of the direction of our families.

if you want to keep people from getting abortions, ideally you want to keep them from getting into unplanned pregnancies. that is the best way -- host: i think we got the idea. guest: i think that is an excellent proposal. i think you might have difficulty getting planned parenthood on board with that because the model does not encourage a lot of communication about those issues and strengthening of social ties. planned parenthood is about breaking down social ties and seeing people as individual automatons whether or not those connections. it does remind me of a talking point some people put out to say planned parenthood does more than any other organization to prevent unintended pregnancies because it puts out so much contraception or birth control. if you look at planned parenthood's own numbers in their annual report, according to their own estimates, the number of abortions they prevent per year is around 200,000. but they do over 300,000 abortions every year.

planned parenthood does more abortions than they prevent every year. host: david daleiden, are you participating in the march for life today? guest: weather permitting. host: we have about 40 minutes left in this friday's edition of "washington journal." we are going to return to the question we asked earlier. are you an angry voter? whether or not you felt angry as a voter. 202 is the area code for all of our numbers. you can also contact us via or ourmedia on facebook twitter handle. on sunday is our "newsmakers" program. yesterday, senator jeanne shaheen was in our studios to tape an interview talking about

the new hampshire primary. here is senator shaheen. [video clip] what i thought: was interesting about the recent poll on the democratic side is fully 49% of people said they had not firmly made up their mind about who they were going to support. that is a very big number. 2008,w if we look at everybody predicted obama by more than 10 points and hillary won on election day. i think we just don't know where voters are going to go. that is why i think hillary is working so hard. she is continuing to come back to new hampshire. she is going to be there tomorrow. she is listening to all of the voters. she is responding to their questions. she is doing the same hard work she has been doing throughout this campaign. i think we are seeing that from all of the candidates. host: one thing we should make clear for the audience is new

hampshire voters can vote in either primary. it has always been an x factor in the new hampshire primary. how do you see independents playing out? clearr shaheen: i'm not what they will do because they can have influence on either side depending on where they go. i can tell you historically, independents in new hampshire have tended to vote more republican than democrat. i know that because i know what has happened in my races. we do know that is where they have often been in the past. where they will be this year is anybody's guess. again, as we said, the fluctuation is not only on the democratic side in terms of polling but on the republican side as well. announcer: "washington journal" continues. for this last segment, we are going to return to the question we asked at the beginning of "washington journal." are you an angry voter? we are asking this question because of some polls and candidates talking about it.

some polls showing americans are cycle, andelection they are voting in that way. we have got a lot of information. more importantly, we want to hear your voices when it comes to this issue. we are going to share a couple of quick things with you so we can get right here calls. this is the new rasmussen poll showing 2/3 of americans consider themselves to be angry or very angry when it comes to some of the political issues and policies of the federal government. that is from rasmussen. this is a brand-new poll out. there is a new poll out by nbc and the "wall street journal" talking about some of the anger issues the american electorate has today. i think you get the idea of what we are talking about. we will show you some of the candidates as we go on today.

let's take your calls. let's hear your voices. this is anthony in st. paul, democrats line. do you consider yourself to be an angry voter? caller: yes, i do. moreover, i consider myself an angry american. politiciansour don't take us seriously. they lie to us and spread things that are not true and fear. a lot of people are voting out of fear. to me, it is like in a country with 350 million guns and 350 million people, we are sitting up scared of 35,000 people in another country. we need to be taking care of our people here so we don't have kids become radicalized over here when they cannot get a job. that is the thing people need to be thinking about more than worrying about isis as much as they do. they are a problem. the bigger problem is when you

have all of our kids in different colors not being able to get anywhere in this country. host: that is anthony in st. paul. what is the solution for you? how do we change what you view as the issue? atler: i think if you look ,he way our defense is set up we spend as much as the next 10 countries. why can't we spend 5% of that, cut it in half, and use that money for infrastructure and helping our kids? what i have noticed about republicans is they don't want to pay for anything, just like the guy you had on a few minutes ago. you have these kids. but if you don't have any financial way to take care of them, you're not doing nothing but putting a child into poverty. it is different ways to look at it. i don't understand it. another thing i wanted to say is they say the separation of

church and state. it is not that because they are constantly saying you have to be a catholic or you cannot be muslim. there is no separation at all. host: william is in silverdale, washington, on our independent line. william, are you an angry voter? caller: absolutely. host: why? caller: i find without going of things previous caller's have said, the only difference at the leadership level between the parties is one is in and the other is out. one believes to borrow and spend, the other leaves tax and spend. ted cruz and others have good tax plans. huckabee had the fair tax, which everyone should read, consumption-based tax with the value added. they keep throwing value-added to scare people. right now the only thing i see is we have trump and cruz, although divide and conquer -- host: before you go through the

analysis of all the candidates, why are you angry? you identified as an angry voter. caller: i don't believe we are being represented by our elected officials. host: mary judith in danville, virginia, republican line. caller: thank you so much, sir, and "washington journal" in general for having the last guest on. i am not just angry. i am furious. i am a lifelong dem. i have always fought for racial justice, for social justice. but now i find i must fight for the last oppressed class, those tiny babies being murdered and chopped apart. i have become a republican. somehow, it is an easy place for and an easy place

for me to be because i was a democrat for so many years. we had ropey weight hoisted on us in 1973 -- we had ropey wade hoisted on us in 1973 by the supreme court. the only way to change it is to elect a president who will put in judges who are strict constructionists so it can be overturned. that is the thing that makes me the angriest. voters of good faith elect officials who are also antiabortion. they put laws in. they regularly get put to the supreme court and knocked down, anything limiting abortion. host: mary judith in virginia.

bernie sanders addressed the anger issue in an interview. [video clip] bernie sanders: a lot of people in this country are angry. they are angry because jobs went abroad. they don't have money to take care of their family. they don't know why things in their lives are going badly. there was a study recently. from page of the "new york times." white working-class families, men and women, are seeing a decline in their life expectancy , their mortality rates are going up. unemployment is high. they are doing drugs, suicide, serious problem. this is the white community, not the black community. people are angry and frustrated. comes alonge trump and says you are angry and frustrated? .t is that black guy > hill" has reported

sanders has overtaken hillary clinton in iowa. new poll, 51-43%. california on the democrats line, do you consider yourself to be an angry voter? caller: yes, i am. caller: or i disgusted with the way things go on in washington d c. the republicans don't want to work with obama. they are disgraceful with way they treat him. he is trying to do a lot for the country. he's tried to bring the black community up. i'm angry with republicans because i don't think they care about other people. of reparations, i think they need to get on board. they need to put money into help

black community. aboutoncerned and angry the way the campaign is being run by trump. he makes me very uncomfortable. chance thatonderful he is going to put us in harms way. i just don't trust him at all. his judgment is very poor. i think he doesn't want to talk about how he really feels. us a game plan. that is tim in california. against voter anger.

tommy is in that tennessee. you are on the washington journal. caller: good morning. i think this process and the way our government is run is nothing

but a scam to make money. $3 government things in trillion. we have a national debt. somebody is taking the money and they are going out of the country with it. it's time we put people that will say no to big business. is once destroying the as long as we've got schools in washington dc, i'm talking about people in that capital building that make money off the hard-working people of this country, we are never going to be better. host: edward a perkins tweets and.

eddie is in massachusetts. caller: high. $19 trillion in deficit. how about the interest on it. ,ver since the 2006 elections subprime, we get this recession. it's depressing. host: hey, eddy? you start by saying of course you are angry. are you more motivated to vote when you're angry? caller: of kos i'm going to vote. host: who do you like right now?

tacky but hee the dropped out. it's probably john kasich right now. host: that is ready in massachusetts. republicans have talked about the anger issue as well. >> our country is being run horribly. i would gladly accept the mantle of anger. our military is a disaster. obamacare, we are going to replace it. angry and scared because this president has created a condition where our national security has weakened it. americans are feeling

frustrated and scared and angry when we have a president who refuses to acknowledge the threat we face and ask as an apologist. >> i've encountered so many americans who are discouraged and angry as they watch our security slipway. from north carolina, do you consider yourself angry western mark -- western mark --? caller: i am angry. these right wing republicans talk about obama and nancy pelosi. give me a break. ist i am really angry about we bust our behind getting votes out and you wind up with republicans switching the votes. , it'st these people

gotten all screwed up. what is the solution to your anger issues? if the republicans would stop blaming obama for everything. tell us what they want to do. i'm tired of hearing it sarah obama is the about cause of her son beating up his girlfriend. give me a break. they can't say this is what we are going to do for the country. host: this is front page of the new york times this morning. ainton's aid speeches are line of attack.

at a series of campaign appearances, -- front page of the new york times. front page of the washington followingw purpose

1990 arrest. that summer marks a turning

point for him. gary is in north carolina. are you and angry voter western --? guess? caller: i don't know where to start. put thehe way the rich poor under their boot. one thing i can say is the politicians tell you something and it turns out to be a lie. charge them with perjury.

but his asks in jail. they made all these millions of dollars. i don't know how they sleep tonight. this should be run by a non-profit. they kill us with gas prices. they don't do anything to the people that steel legally. that's a major problem. host: what is the situation at weather-wise in north carolina? we got a lot of calls in north carolina. i wonder if everybody is staying home today. there is some ice on the car.

thank you for your time this morning. this is an article called the mobile minister.

paula is in pennsylvania. thank you for holding. caller: i absolute we do. the main reason is i can go for each party and just go on for ever. is nobody isg thinking about america first. you are supposed to sacrifice for your rather in. you are supposed to have some common sense that of this digging it to the

lowest common denominator. why don't people think about america first. if everybody thinks about america first, we will all be better off. i hate to see guys get laid off. i love the two dollar gas. i would be willing to pay $.20 more it would people back to work. people don't think that way in america anymore. it's all for themselves. it's all selfish ambition. it's tearing our country apart. that's only the beginning of why i am angry. host: will tweets in. chan says

victorino is on the democrat line. are you and angry voter? caller: i am a concern to voter. i am concerned that people are not going to be able to have what i had it. i have a great pension. i have a wonderful health plan. union asa professional a registered nurse. i am concerned that there is an attitude about i got mine, the hell with everyone else. saying thatealthy people are overpaid and we can't compete. people should be able to live on $7.25 an hour. obamacare is terrible. i have seen so much good come out of obamacare. the other lady talked about pain more. care more for my health

versus some business that gets subsidies from the government. they don't need money. out herrbara bush put first video for her son. a very goodeen father. he is a hard worker. shove, peoples to are going to realize he has real solutions. he is doing it because he sees huge need and it's not being filled i anybody. he seems to be the one who could solve the problem. i think he will be a great president. from our next call comes georgia. good morning to you. are you and angry voter? caller: i am an angry voter.

i just discovered c-span a few months ago. i get a true view. have anybodylike i to vote for. i am a conservative person. why don't we pass a balanced budget. the other thing is i want them to stay out of my pocket. i want them to stay out of our bedrooms. peoples uteruses. morality, but it's not the government's place to tell us what we can or can't do in our own homes or lives at that level. host: what do you do? welcome to c-span. i.t. consultant.

i was looking for many years. i voted for obama the first time. i did not vote for him the second time. hillary started change for health care 20 years ago. where is the republican solution. they have had 20 years to think something up. i know people who were helped by obamacare. i was one of them. i had a life-saving surgery because of obamacare. where is the republican solution? think -- i hear the other side say giveaway programs. why can't we have a balanced budget amendment? why can't we do something about our debt? host: that is allen in georgia.

good morning. caller: yes. i would like to thank c-span for the good job you do. it's encouraging to hear other people speak and find out what other people think. i am 73 yearsause old. i used to be a democrat. i have gone republican for the reason that the democrats used to be for something. they have a lady that is running for president that is an outright liar. lies everyt party time. obama with all the things that never showed up. i am angry because we need a balanced budget. i don't know why we don't all

back to the gold standard. host: what do you do out in las vegas? caller: i am retired. i was a maintenance mechanic. host: shirley is an island. -- iowa. host: have the candidates come through western mark --? caller: not much. i would like to tell why i am angry. almost all of our allies are democratic socialist. in this country, most people don't know that our european allies all have health care. single-payer, which

costs less in the wrong one. they have college paid for. my computer tells me there are several thousand americans in germany because they get college for free. i think we should know more about what's going on in other countries. australia find out in minimum wage is $15 per hour and for kids is seven dollars. what the worldt we live in. we will all be better off. use your computers for research. shirley, tell us about yourself. caller: i am a very old lady. forve been following c-span 30 years.

i'm very interested in politics. i used to write letters. what else would you like to know? host: what kind of work did you do western mark -- do? are you supporting a candidate this year? caller: i am supporting bernie sanders. what kind of businesses did you have? caller: we had to businesses in my family when i was younger. my husband i started a construction company. later on, we were in the drainage business. may we ask how old is? late 80's.m in my they say a woman should tell her age.

thank you. rexx is in a walnut. live early next week. we will be live from iowa up be at theuary 1. will caucuses. if you want to see some inside stick with us on c-span. we are heading up there later this week. rexx is in north carolina. caller: i would like to thank you for c-span. people complain about what the democrats have done.

then the republicans got control and they've done nothing. none of them want to do nothing for the people. people need to get out vote. they need to get both. they are just in there for the money. they don't care about the people. caller: that is rexx in walnut cove. cynthia tweets in.

if you can't get through on the phone lines in the next five minutes, i suggest you can join the conversation on facebook and have a very lively conversation going on her facebook page. larry is in littleton colorado. are you angry? caller: yes. a variety of things. never accepts. mitch mcconnell said are mission is to make sure that obama is a one term president. i guess it goes the other way. these people are supposed to

represent the people. this seems to me very. that's where i stand on that candidate't see any running this year except for bernie sanders who has a sincere interest in representing the will of the people. elected, that's probably not the will of the people. both parties should accept the will of the people and support the president area -- president. to the abortion it seems like there is too much rationalization to come up with answers that are not

honest answers from the pro-death advocates. they say it's not a human person. -- i don'treligious think it's a religious issue. host: we want to get a lot of voices in here. are you an angry voter? caller: my concern is i don't like way the system is run. i am a bernie sanders fan. i am not changing my mind. ,he only way he can win gerrymandering and delegates. he ought to stress about climate change being the main focus in his talk. how it will affect the economy

and weird doomed if you don't put those two together. climate change has a lot to do with the economy. we won't have any economy of that is not in perspective. people don't have to worry about these changes. quote from a song question mark --? host: we are out of time. angry at these single issue right to life or antiabortion people who keep installing these carpetbagger republicans. they've done nothing but mess of our government. i am fed up with it. there are so anymore important rings that need to be on the table. host: thanks for calling in.

thanks for everybody who participated. we will be on the air tomorrow even though snowmen get in is happening here. it's going to be wild around here. we will be on the air. you will be able to talk with greta tomorrow during the snowstorm. remember that the tv is on c-span two. that is every weekend. this weekend you will hear from , theyschle and trent lott have cowritten up together and they will be interviewed by former congressman jc watts. that is what we've got. we have some campaign rallies live today.

>> tim kaine will be campaigning for hillary clinton and i will. you have live coverage of his appearance in davenport. up tomorrow, the third day of road to the white house coverage with a towll