electorate has changed since 2012. we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. washington journal is next. ♪ host: good morning to you. today is saturday, april 16. the deadline to file your taxes is monday. what would you do to revise the tax code? the presidential candidates have their own ideas. ted cruz and donald trump taxes by $9hing trillion of the next decade. bernie sanders suggesting raising them by $3 trillion. if you make between $30,000 and $50,000 a year, we want you to call 202-748-8001. between $51,000 and

$100,000 a year can call 202-748-8002. if you are making over $100,000 a year, 202-748-8003. you can find us on social media as well. each of the presidential candidates has released a tax proposal and they are dramatically different this year. the taxa chart from policy center that shows you just how different they are. ted cruz would create a flat tax of 10% on all income. by awould decrease revenue trillion dollars over a decade. over the decade. you can see donald trump has a similar plan, but his is lester dramatic. less

17.5%p 1% paying less, less than they are now. john kasich's plan is not fully fleshed out yet. sanders's tax plan would increase the taxes on the top 1% by 33.5%. everyone would be paying more. hillary clinton's plan is the least dramatic. --would cost the country 1.1 raise the taxes by $1.1 trillion over the decade. the impact on most people would be fairly minimal. how do americans feel about these tax proposals? a recent gallup poll shows that 63% of americans support

eliminating tax inductions and loopholes for the rich. in favor ofe most limiting text inductions and loopholes available to the very rich month eliminating the estate tax. , followed byich eliminating the estate tax. we will get right to your phone calls now. you can start filing in. our first color comes from new york. -- caller comes from new york. that is ralph. good morning to you. caller: thank you for c-span. i'm a uaw worker from upstate new york. only onee tax is the that goes up based on a person's ability to pay. i would add more brackets at the top to increase

revenue. host: we are taking your phone calls. if you make between $30,000 and $50,000 a year, 202-748-8001. call00 and $100,000, 202-748-8002. over $100,000, you can call 202-748-8003. if you are making less than $50,000 a year -- less than $30,000 a year, call 202-748-8000. matthew is on the line from philadelphia. how can we simplify the tax code? caller: good morning. to simplify it, i would basically lower the rates for middle-class people. i, our incomes are what it is.

my wife's entire income gets taxed at 25%. which, in my opinion, is totally ridiculous. we are in the northeast corridor , the most expensive area in the country to live. incomes less than $250,000 need a 15% tax rate. host: do you think those who make the most should pay more? caller: yes. , theyof all, with the irs need to increase funding for the irs. the need to restore money to the irs, raise the rates gradually. $500,000 on up,

incomes above $30 million, they should be taxed at 30%, 50%. the money has to come from somewhere. caller from green isle, minnesota. you are calling on the line for those making between $30,000 and $50,000 a year. how would you change the tax code? i would tell the people who work with the irs -- ask them how it could be made more fair. what is redundant could be cut out because they know what is fair and what is not because they answer our questions every day. host: have you filed yet? caller: yes. host: congratulations.

i would like to let our viewers know that irs commissioner did speak about the issue, what congress could do to help reform the tax code. [video clip] >> i always preface my answer by saying tax policy is the domain of the treasury department, the administration and the congress. we are involved in tax administration. having said that, the best thing you could do would be to simple if i the tax code -- simplify the tax code. it is beyond being i impenetrable. i don't know how anyone understands it. tax proposal last year said the irs code is longer than the bible and none of the goodness. -- good news.

taxpayers makes no sense the best thing congress , anything we could do to simple if i the tax code, we would be delighted to do. -- simplify the tax code, we would be delighted to do. host: you can see the proposals on your screen. 10 ways to simple if i the tax system. the heritage foundation has several suggestions as well. we are taking your phone calls. the next caller comes from fort mill, south carolina. blair calling on the line for those who make $100,000 a year. caller: the morning. my idea was proposed by herman cain. a combination of a flat tax and fair tax.

we would have a national sales tax of 9%. a capital gain tax of 9% and a federal income tax of 9%. i would start a transition to a system, something like our national parks would start charging a small fee to cover the cost and move that out of the general fund. other ideas would be to transition to some privatizations of some of the federal functions that our taxes pay for. blair from fort mill, south carolina. mark is up next from lake jackson, texas. you are calling on the line for over $100,000 a year as well. what do you think could be done about the tax code? caller: i think the government

already has all the information. they can pull all the information from all my forms already. so, why don't they just figure it out and send me the bill, send me an itemized bill and i can look over it? it's not a matter of simplifying the tax code, just simplifying the taxes. right now, it takes me about two hours to do my taxes. they could just send it to me and this would help everybody. host: shift the burden of compiling it and doing all the paperwork to the government instead of on individuals. caller: that is correct. host: next up is douglas from dorchester, wisconsin. good morning. caller: good morning. host: what are your thoughts?

caller: the best way would be to have all senators, representatives from all the people in government do their own taxes. they sit down and do their taxes. that way, they find out how complicated the system is an they would simplify it in a hurry. the only alternative is to go to a national sales tax and have no , noptions whatsoever exemptions for food, medical supplies and especially trading on wall street, that should be taxed also. host: senator bernie sanders did release his tax return yesterday. he said his wife is the one who puts it together. "reuters."ory from he had taxable income of $205,000 in 2014, putting him

almost in the top 5% of american earners. that figure was still far below the millions earned by his democratic rival in recent years. from johnstown, pennsylvania, roger is calling. you say you make less than $30,000 a year. how would you work to simplify or change the tax code? caller: hello.

i have a fairly well worked out system. combinations, flat slope and flat rate tax. a flat slope is a uniform and seamless, graduated tax of 10% per $100,000 up to $500,000, which would be 50%. after that, it would be a flat 50% to $20 million. 5% pert would increase $20 million. this system is fair and most equitable and most reasonable. in the simplest and most efficient. -- it is the simplest and most efficient. host: whose tax plan currently

do you think yours mirrors the closest? caller: to my model? really, none of them. better in do a bit terms of actually being more imaginative and creative and innovative. so far, i only hear conventional -- really nottale really interesting ideas. host: our next caller is also from pennsylvania, cranberry township. good morning, tom. caller: hello. host: we are here. go ahead. caller: the way i would think about it, everyone, if you are thinking about fair, everyone should pay the same.

if i go to a store and make $1 million a year, do i have to pay $50 for a loaf of bread? no. why not? other people would think, yes, you should. why should i pay more in taxes just because i make $1 million a year? flat tax.hould pay a put a percentage that equals the amount needed over everyone paying the same. host: are you a ted cruz a supporter, then? he suggested a flat tax of 10% on all income. no, just because he suggested a good idea doesn't make me a supporter. host: all right. i would caller is norman from cleveland, tennessee. you are calling on the line for those earning between $51,000

and $100,000 a year. what do you think? caller: i'm from north carolina. host: sorry about that. caller: that's ok. i, we arefe and retired. we have a limited income. had an ira account. she goes to withdraw $100,000 when she retired to pay off the house come all the bills. bills.house, all the to do that, she would have to pay $35,000 in taxes. the tax structure is really wrong. norman from north

carolina. a few of your comments from twitter. jim from clarksburg, west virginia is our next caller. what do you think? you make under $30,000 a year. how would you change the tax code? actually, i make under $20,000 a year. businesses should have to pay their fair share. it's not right. higherh should be taxed because us living in poverty

have to pay 25% tax. it is not right. that's why i'm going with bernie sanders. i believe in his plan. sanders'sr bernie plan and with the lowest earning americans would still pay a little bit more in taxes. next caller is cornelia from cottonwood, idaho. what are your thoughts? have you filed your taxes yet? caller: definitely. we are farmers. little.absolutely very depending on the year, because commodity prices go up and down. that we thinking is should either go to some sort of

fair tax and then have a national sales tax on luxury items that the wealthy by . that way, the wealthy would pay more into the general and theyal tax system -- if want to go out and buy a fancy boat or second home, there's mortgage deductions for your first home, which i think is fair. if you are buying a second, third, fourth home like the wealthy do and having private cabins up in the mountains and so on, they should have to have -- nothat since deductions for a second and third residence. i don't think we should have an income tax at all. our country did not have an income tax when we first started. when we passed the income tax

, we have this huge bureaucracy that is corrupt. has his taxesp audited every singly or, how many times has hillary clinton had her taxes audited? is there a candidate whose proposal you support? caller: for instance, dr. ben tax.n proposed a 10% flat i think something like that would be very good. i don't know for sure who i'm going to support it. best support yet. we definitely lean conservative. all these federal bureaucracies are becoming just huge spenders and they spend money on themselves at.

the head of the irs makes a huge salary. host: on thursday night, hillary clinton and bernie sanders appeared in a democratic debate on cnn. taxes came up. that was a big part of the argument between them. [video clip] >> the idea i'm bringing forth, i have to admit it, it was not my idea, it was barack obama's idea in 2008. that exact same idea. lifting the cap, which is now higher, starting at 250 and going on up. you can extend the life of social security for 58 years. you will significantly expand year forby $1300 a disabled vets. what is wrong with that?

>> i have supported it. we are in big race agreement here, senator. it is important to point out -- we are in vigorous agreement here, senator. about what the other side wants to do. they are calling social security a ponzi scheme. they still want to privatize it. their whole idea is to turn over the social security trust fund to wall street. something you and i would never let happen. >> if i hear you correctly, you are now coming out finally in favor of lifting the cap on taxable income and extending and expanding social security. if that is the case, welcome on

board. i'm glad you are here. host: that was hillary clinton and bernie sanders aspiring on thursday night -- inspiring on thursday night -- sparring on thursday night. we are taking your phone calls on how you with simple by the u.s. tax code -- simplify the u.s. tax code. next caller is from massachusetts. paul on the $51,000 to $100,000 annual income line. good morning to you. host: thank you for taking my call -- caller: thank you for taking my call. i think we ought to get rid of the 16th amendment to the constitution which is income tax , get rid of that completely, go to a national sales tax. the bill is already in the house, hr 25. anyone who wants to look it up can see it. it describes how the current tax system in this country is

ridiculous. it hurts our unemployment rate, hurts the economy, it is unfair. with a national sales tax, we would tax the underground economy, which has been getting away forever without paying any taxes we have people who work off the books, they never report anything. with a national sales tax, the wealthy people would spend more money, they will pay more. what do you say to the argument that a national sales tax unfairly hurts people who make low incomes because they spend more than they are able to put away? caller: bill has a provision in it for people under a certain the povertytiple of line, they will get a rebate. they will get a certain amount of money paid back to them because of their income level.

that is taking care of. you will not have to pay social security tax. you will not have to pay medicare tax. all of that is taken care of. the underground economy gets away with paying nothing. host: next up, mike is calling from everett, massachusetts. the you agree with the previous caller from your state? caller: i believe in a small flat tax on all income and a sales tax. ,ne thing i want to understand i make $200,000 a year. i just started making that from years and years of hard, hard work, long, long hours. a lot of people do not realize how many hours and how hard you have to work and how much you and how many hours and how much investments and how much money i have lost over the

years making investments and how many sleepless nights and how many times i had to sacrifice to benefit 20ion years down the road on investments i made 20 years ago. you have to look at someone plus history of taxes. i made nothing and now, i'm paying a high amount of taxes. when the market fell through eight years ago, there was years i had a hard time paying my bills. i understand my tax rate was lower back then. now, my tax rate is unbelievable. host: you feel people with high incomes and should not be penalized by paying higher taxes for being successful? you have to understand how hard it is.

i have a son in college, he is going to college and working a full-time job. and he gets out in 10 years he is making a large income, they don't realize he is putting 80 hours a week in to work and school. all through my 30's, i worked 100 hours a week. host: here is information from the irs on what we currently pay in federal taxes. ,he 2015 income tax bracket 10%, 15% going up to 39.6% for the highest earners. bracketo a higher tax does not mean that all your income will be taxed at a higher rate. only the money you earn within a particular tax bracket is subject to that particular tax rate.

jerry from tennessee. think? you caller i am retired now. massachusetts, i think he was right on the money when -- have youg that read the communist manifesto? you should read it. it's quite interesting. ae of their deals is graduated income tax. another one it says here, the proletariat will use supremacy raise capital for the words -- sounds like bernie,

doesn't it? if people want to tax the rich people more, ok. they are paying their fair share as we speak. called andy that said we ought to tax them more for luxury items, jimmy carter did that back in the 1970's. thousands of people lost their jobs building yachts, building nice motor homes, building really nice -- you name it. these people lost their jobs. it's amazing. the people that call themselves democrats -- is no democrats left. callere have another from tennessee.

we want to get donald in as well. what is the best way to simplify the tax code? caller: lord, i don't have any ways to change it, but i'm calling about simplifying it. million americans employed as cpas, attorneys, tax -- that is to percent of the employment force. -- 2% of the employment force. do you think it's going to be simplified and put people out of work? that is a fact that i rarely hear stated. host: the you do your taxes yourself -- do you do your taxes yourself? caller: i've done pretty good doing it myself over the years.

preparer do it once because they said i had a blunder. from cookeville, tennessee. wisconsin.sheboygan, you make between $51,000 and $100,000 a year. what do you make of all this? caller: i'm one of those tax professionals. now.emiretired right the guy who talked about the communist manifesto, there's another author out there that also recommended a progressive income tax, adam smith and wealth of nations -- in wealth of nations, the conservative bible. i guess adam smith and karl marx agree on that point. if you want a practical way to

make it more fair, one thing you be to go back to what ronald reagan did, make the ordinary rate and capital gains rate the same. that would eliminate -- like the carried interest advantage that mitt romney has an warren people, these kinds of they would be paying a lot more taxes than they are right now. a lot of these tax avoidance schemes rely on the difference between the capitals gains rate and the ordinary rate host:. can you explain what capital gains tax is? ,aller: the capital gains rate , up toery low earner

$70,000, the capital gains rate is zero. about that, it is 15%. for people making over $400,000, it is 20%. it is a deal. people come in with these low rates where all kinds of schemes are out there to convert ordinary income into capital gains. people talk about a flat tax. we have a flat tax right now called the alternative minimum tax. to disarm thewant tax system first without asking how much revenue we need to raise? g 5% across the

board will not pay for all the bombs and all the stuff we need to have for our military and all the rest. host: our next caller is from ohio. steve, good morning to you. caller: good morning. caller i think made a really good point in terms of what do we have to raise in terms of revenue. the social security tax is one of the better designed taxes because we know what we are paying and you know what you are going to be getting. at least you know what the taxes for. -- tax is poor. taxes should be designed as being targeted.

-- at least you know what the tax is for. all the corporate taxes should be replaced by a value added tax. that is used in a lot of other countries. it is a regressive tax because it is flat across the board. it is the same for all businesses, big or small. this is where all the corporations get into their bulk of all their deductions. it is a value added tax. it is very simple to administer. they call it the invoice method. this.'neill advocated i think they should replace the entire business tax with a value-added tax and use it to pay medicare and medicaid. our next caller is from

garden grove, california. bobby, good early morning to you. caller: good morning. , i agree that we need to start with proper accounting, accurate accounting and reporting. donenk it can be considering our banks are taking our purchases and our phones are keeping check of us and our purchases and activities. viableossible and a real dollar. to count each we need to make sure we are counting correctly, making sure things are priced correctly when the government makes purchases. host: to make sure that prices how would you-

change the way we are taxed on our purchases? caller: raising taxes on income is not proper at all. it is irrational to begin with. lives. our time is our it is undignified and i don't know how you can justify to say that one person's life is more important or worth more than another's. my bosses take to our lunches and i work all of my eight hours a day and yet, i worked to make them rich and i don't get time with my kids. more parenting more mothering. we can start right here by proper accounting and reporting -- it is abegin to

great discussion you are starting and we should all contribute to those. those that want to do real-time taxing our -- host: a few comments from our twitter followers. here is a poll from gallup showing americans's views on the tax burden of upper income americans. here is the question -- tell me if you think these groups are paying their fair share of taxes? 21% of americans and 26 and felt the wealthy were paying their in 1992.e, up from 16%

felt% of americans in 2016 the wealthy were paying their fair share come up from 16% in 1992. harold from cortez, florida. you are making between $30,000 and $50,000. you think there are ways we can reform and simple by the tax code? -- simplify the tax code? caller: i heard the guy talk about the national sales tax. that sounded like a good idea. i hear individuals saying that people who work hard and earn an honest living and make $1 million or $10 million, that taxedhould somehow be

outrageously, that is not fair. why should we fight them? they worked hard and did a good job. host: a lot of callers from florida. from tampa, deborah is calling. what do you think? you say you make over $100,000. do you think you pay your fair share? caller: absolutely. million undocumented workers in this country. who are not paying taxes and are absorbing all of our income. a lot of those people send their money overseas. as their tax them money is going back to the countries of the families they

income for here and not paying any taxes for in any way, shape or form. andi have to bust my butt pay my taxes fairly and on time -- it irks me to see there are 11 million people out there who e not paying any taxes and are using my roads that i pay taxes for. quite unfairly. host: a few more comments from twitter -- president obama and vice president joe biden have released their 2015 tax returns. here is a summary of what they paid.

the president and first lady filed their income tax returns jointly. they reported in adjusted gross $436,000. they paid $81,000 in total tax. they also reported donating to 34 different charities, the largest gift was $9,000 to the fisher house foundation. we have time for a few more calls. pat from sioux city, iowa. what do you think? caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i was going to comment -- the conversation about restructuring the tax code is well and good, but until we come up with a comprehensive plan on federal

spending, controlling growth in entitlement programs, it is an congress cannot get this job done. it will be left to our next generation as debt slavery. host: our last caller for this segment is martha from franklin, indiana. you have the last word. say, i lived truly at a time when we had surpluses. that was under president clinton because he continued the ronald one, thed george bush

way they set up the tax cut for us. by the time president clinton left office, we had surpluses. when you get surpluses, what happens? people get happy and want to give the money away instead of building on what we have come our surpluses. square all start back at one. there will be taxes no matter what. i only make around $30,000 a year. i am 53 years old, i live in indiana, my state taxes are the ones that are the ones people need to look at. host: we will have to leave it there because we are out of time.

in,ou did not get your call we will be revisiting this topic at the end of the show. to manuelwill speak "enones, the editor of the &e daily" to discuss the impact of fracking. bluhm will discuss the new york primaries. stay tuned. ♪ tonight at 10:00 eastern, a look back at president's giving their last speeches at the white house correspondents dinner, one of the key events each year in washington. >> i haven't even had time to

watch the oscars. i was a little disappointed in that movie "the last emperor." i thought it was going to be about don regan. [laughter] >> george w. bush has a brand spanking new campaign strategy. he's moving toward the political center, distancing himself from his own party, stealing ideas i'm soe other party -- glad the morris has finally found work again. [laughter] toma.will talk to steve and be tonight at 10:00 sure to tune in for our live coverage of this year's white house correspondents dinner on saturday, april 30 starting at 6:30 eastern on c-span. >>'s signature feature of

c-span2's book tv is our coverage of affairs and festivals across the country. fairs and festivals across the country. diane and her book "on my own." droneesident obama's warfare and military amateurism have imperiled america. weiner with his book "one man against the world." for ourw.c-span.org schedule.

>> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now is manuel quinones. he is here to talk about the fracking debate, which has become a major issue in the democratic presidential primary in new york. thank you for joining us this morning. guest: thank you for having me. host: explain to us, what exactly is fracking? how does it work? guest: it is a relatively old technique. we've been doing more of it in recent years. -- energying companies take a very deep well, usually under an aquifer, then they pump water, chemicals and a specialized sand into the well to crack open these rock thattions deep underground contain natural gas and oil deposits. instead of striking oil and gas,

it is getting at those harder to get deposits and cracks the concrete like rock. host: why is it so controversial right now? do it, themore we more controversy there is about whether it is safe, whether it pollutes drinking water, the weath whether it pollutes the a. even though opponents say there is lame dunk evidence, it is still very much up for debate as to how much it pollutes, when pollutes, what it pollutes. politicians are divided on the issue. host: this is an issue that has become a real controversial one, real dividing line with the new york. -- within new york. guest: new york is very different from its neighbor,

pennsylvania. centralania is at the -- at the center of the natural gas fracking boom. , even thoughshale pennsylvania has embraced the practice, new yorkers had a lot of argument about it and eventually come the governor decided we are not going to do it. they have a fracking van. host: is this the only state to have such a ban? guest: there are other states that have bands, moratorium like new jersey and maryland. it is all over the map. to ban or doecided a moratorium, they are not in the hotspots. the hotspots are still embracing the technology. host: you can join our

conversation with manuel daily.s from e&e republicans, your line is 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. we are also taking your comments on twitter. i would like to take a moment to just have you provide us a little more information about your &e daily."n, "e guest: we are part of a group of publications. we call ourselves the largest newsroom in the country. for covering energy and environmental issues, from the political agency legal campaign publication -- our

publication is focused on political developments, races around the country. host: here is a map from inside climate news that shows us where fracking is allowed, where it is active and where it is banned. the yellow states are places where fracking is active. yellow, where fracking could soon begin. it is banned in new york. these red dots where there is a local moratorium on the process. caller comes from massachusetts. janet on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking this call. manuel quinones, i'm curious,

why did you not speak about the very real possibility that fracking is causing earthquakes? it is not only a very real possibility, the consensus activities to related to fracking are helping cause earthquakes in different parts of the country. oklahoma has been a big hotspot. i say activities related to fracking because sometimes the industry likes to be very specific, it might not be the fracking causing it, but the injection of wastewater that happens to be associated with fracking. fracking generates a lot of wastewater. the have to do something with that water and there's injection wells that are regulated by the -- they have been connected to

causing earthquakes. the usgs released a study cementing this idea of man-made earthquakes. where do the presidential candidates stand on the issue of fracking? the new york primaries are coming up on tuesday. how have they been discussing this? guest: this has become a hot topic. a proxy to the broader frost fuel debate -- fossil fuel debate. says he is for a fracking van. ban.racking hillary clinton says she wants to add so many regulations that

it will make it hard for companies to frack anywhere. she wants to squeeze the industry out. recently during the debate said we need to recognize the natural gas is a less polluting fuel then coal. -- than coal. of thee have a clip exchange between bernie sanders and hillary clinton on fracking from thursday's democratic debate. [video clip] >> why have you changed your view on fracking? >> i don't think i have changed my view on what we need to do to go from where we are were the world is heavily dependent on coal and oil, but principally cold, to where we need to be come which is clean, renewable energy. one of the bridge fuels is natural gas. for environmental and economic strategic reasons, it was american policy to help countries get out from under the

constant use of coal, building coal plants all the time and get out from under come especially if they were in europe, the pressure from russia, which has been incredibly intense. we did say natural gas is a bridge. we want to cross that bridge as quickly as possible. to deal with climate change, we have to move as rapidly as we can. deploy half aus billion more solar panels by the and enoughirst term clean energy to provide electricity to every home in america within 10 years. i have bold goals, but i know to get from where we are where this world is still burning too much , were the world is still too intimidated by providers like russia, we have to make a firm but decisive move in the direction of clean energy. [applause]

>> here is a real difference. this is the difference between understanding that we have a consequencestorical , incrementalism and little steps are not enough. [applause] host: we are talking with manuel e daily." how "e& is that playing with voters? ,uest: we recently saw that saysthough hillary clinton she does not want to ban fracking, she has expressed support for different states that do it. she is aheadshow of senator sanders. in other places where the

has beendebate expected to be more assequential, has not been front and center. end, the republican one colorado and he is pro-fracking. host: james from mount holly, new jersey. republican line. good morning to you. caller: good morning. guest isnow if your from the fracking industry, but onsay the jury is out fracking pollutes is a miss concept. todon't know what they used pump into the ground. we don't know what they are.

people are able to set the water on fire out there fossett. focet. the water there is toxic and hurting the environment they live at. guest: no connection with the oil and gas industry. reporting the fracking issue is because people have seen video of these events. there are a lot of people who believe this is truly environmentally damaging on a wide scale. many studies show there have been and are examples of contamination related to fracking activities. however, not on the widespread

scale that many people tend to believe. every time a study comes out, we try to cover it and see what the truth is there. there are examples, many adverse effects. at the same time, the environmental protection agency said it's not as widespread as people would expect and the industry, you had an industry spokeswoman here, they would go through examples and try to say it's not them. yes, it's very much a heated subject. host: our next caller is from austin, it texas, estate where fracking has been booming. where do you stand on this issue? caller: two years ago, this eighth of texas had an epa report on the state of texas, republicans, said it would kill you.

when the environmental group released it, the republican da of san antonio sue those people. you just had a supreme court judge who died from fracking. summer i went to there in alpine and i was for today's the first time in three days the second time and both times i came back and i spent weeks in the hospital getting that garbage out of my lungs. i almost died twice. of housesg hundreds of dollars of hospital bills. they will give this greg abbott hundreds of thousands of dollars to lie and poisonous but they won't pay any money to get everybody in texas who does not have obamacare insurance. host: we hear you. guest: it's interesting to mention that texas has one

community where the fracking discussion was very heated and to enactunity decided a local moratorium and the state passed legislation that communities don't have the power to do this. that's the fight that's going on in other places. there are communities in colorado that say they don't want to do it but now there is litigation in the colorado supreme court as to whether they can and similar things have been happening across the country in those hotspot states where fracking is happening a lot. been have any local bans actually repealed? the ban islutely, gone in texas and colorado it's under dispute. there has been a back-and-forth the between communities. in colorado, for the past several years, we have been discussing whether ballot initiatives would make it into state or local ballots in her has been lobbying back and

forth. ohio rick from louisville, on the independent line. caller: this is the fracking capital of the midwest i'm in right now. tea partyd the literally took over the community and took over our radio and tv and took over our newspapers and presented all allies for fracking. oil is thed lifeblood of the south area and oklahoma, texas, louisiana, the chesapeake came over here and took over the whole county. the most incredible part of this costing is that it used to may be dollars to get oil out of the ground and oil companies could be profitable and now there is no more oil so they are forced into this insane process to get the oil out of the ground. what the federal reserve did

when bush took office, they lowered interest rates like 20 times. they got down to 0% and that means they are printing dollars to support $140 oil. when they quit quantitative easing, that took the federal reserve printing the dollars that support fracking and oil went to $25 for barrel and then what the central banks did two months ago was they went to negative interest rates. they printed more money to support the oil industry. host: we hear you. what about the impact of low oil prices and the drop we have seen lately? guest: it's affecting the industry big time. gas boomhad a natural because of fracking with so much being produced, natural gas prices are going down. that has long affected the

ability of these smaller companies to stay profitable. the oil price goes down. in north to kota because of fracking, there is a big oil boom. you can't get a hotel room or apartment and many people are moving in. that has receded because of the drop in oil prices. a lot of these companies that to natural gas and oil hydraulic fracturing are suffering big-time and are wondering how to can stay afloat. host: denver, colorado, another state where fracking is very much in the debate. william is calling on the republican line. are you are a supporter of fracking? caller: i knew very little about it until i heard a bbc story about a year ago that was very in depth on fracking and it completely changed my thinking.

tax backdrop, the bbc liberal and is a proponent of global warning. the report indicated that there was only one known earthquake caused by fracking. the boar was done on a known fault line. they said the amount of energy released from that earthquake was the equivalent of a city bus passing a person walking down the sidewalk. that was it. i think if fracking caused earthquakes as a matter of doing business that the world would know about it by now. es is right that fracking has been going on for 60 years and i know something about water because i am on the board of directors of my water bureau and it's not the fracking, it's the output that content is the water.

unless people get water directly from the aquifer, it goes through a purification process. it is heavily tested before it makes it to the consumer's home. that is no indication fracking contaminates water that is being distributed by a water district which is the way most americans get their water. the real wound and technology is in directional drilling. andcan drill one bore because of directional drilling, hit the posits, fuel and natural gas deposits, in about a two mile radius from the bore sight. comesng technology has such a long way that it actually reduces the number of wellheads that are needed to extract gas and oil from the ground. i think that's an important point that a lot of people don't understand. --i may para fives

paraphrase reagan's, it's not people areractivist not misleading the people so much it's just that they know a lot of things that are not true. guest: he said some interesting things, talking to colleagues -- we have a team looking at this. -- the process of pumping the water underground that can cause the contamination even though it's a well and that can lead to that but also the backwater the comes back. that has the possibility of leaching. there are other activities related to the overall industry. i want to mention he talked , it appears he is a supporter, the polls nationwide are pretty divided with a lot of people in the middle undecided as to what they believe about hydraulic fracturing.

side, it isratic divided by democrats are increasingly moving against it. is there a difference between the republican presidential candidates on this issue? republican side, it's pretty solidly in favor. ofalso see the industry bernie sanders and hillary clinton arguing about fracking and it is getting the most money tied to fossil fuels but it has increasingly in given to republicans. at this point, in the presidential race, where the nominees have not been decided, a lot of companies in the public donations have not made a choice. of misleading discussion out there. host: the next caller is from attleboro, vermont, on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning.

on democracy now, i heard an interesting fellow who is anfang investigative journalist for the intercept. he was reporting on the fact that when hillary clinton was secretary of state, she spent quite a bit of time pushing international fracking to all the countries she was visiting, wanting to get everybody on board with that. i just wish that bernie would investigate this and pick up on it because i think that's pretty serious. while i have you, i want to make a comment that i do not get cnn like the lady that called him a lowday because i have tier program and because i am low income. i think that is dreadfully unfair. i think all the debates in the

political campaign should be available to all people. guest: that's a very good point. we recently and were still having a challenge from russia. russia provides a lot of europe's natural gas. u.s. policymakers, she is correct and this former secretary of state clinton has admitted to this -- have been encouraging european countries to use techniques that we are using in the u.s. to try to find their own hard to get deposits so they don't have to rely so much on russian gas. there are efforts in the u k and spain to try to get at those deposits. of course, those have come with controversy. there has been pushed back in their own countries but it is true as a way to promote energy independence -- we talk about it

in the u.s. all the time. we have been promoting this for a long time. is our nextan caller on the democratic line, good morning. caller: originally, the natural gas enterprises were thought to be a boon to the industry. there is a direct supply between --l and oil in the ground between coal and oil in the ground. in fracking, and natural gas released larger than normal amounts of methane into the atmosphere. methane is between 30-50 times [indiscernible] we are digging a hole for ourselves with methane.

we are gaining ground with co2 but the methane is far worse. guest: that's interesting. when the fracking boom first started, we said we've got a lot of power plants switching from coal to natural gas and natural gas burns cleaner and that's a positive. the environmental community and regulars said it not -- you cannot only way the impact of natural gas become to greenhouse gas emissions at the point of burning. you have methane that's released at the wellhead. said it stillave natural gas as a whole is to a benefit. at the same time, the obama administration has moved swiftly toward cracking down on methane emissions. it's not clear how they can get done before the end of the administration but it ramped up very quickly. host: a few people on twitter have asked about this california

well leak. can you talk about that? guest: that's a different case and i'm not as familiar with it. aom my understanding, it's natural gas holding distribution center that leaked in california. now, there are debates on capitol hill for reauthorizing a pipeline and legislation when it comes to storage facilities so it's not necessarily tied to but the leakse, has caused the flurry of action. it seems that we hear that congress does not pass much these days but it seems something will happen because of the leak in california. host: montana on the independent line is our next caller. caller: yes, i would like to frackingthe subject of

causing earthquakes. what these so-called experts failed to tell people is that fracking along fault lines and drilling into the earth crust releases pressure and saves the area from the devastating and real bad earthquakes. propaganda is all part of obama's war on america. that's it. calleret's take another from springfield, illinois, on the independent line. disagreees, i totally with that last caller. is, whaton civilization or individual would poison their own drinking water or food supply? why are we trusting the fda? why are we trusting the epa?

up to the united states supreme court justice who was in a monsanto lawyer, these people about our a rats arse food or water supply. host: let's leave it there and keep the comments and questions clean. guest: it shows the heated nature of the debate. the environmental community has tried to make the argument that fossil fuel development in oferal has the benefits getting us to turn our lights on but it also has these downsides that are not just water contamination. and just a ripple effect that's why, at least on the left side of the political spectrum, there is an increasing push to move beyond and push renewable criticsof energy then

say. renewables have their own drawbacks. benefits and the downsides to a lot of these things. when you go to pennsylvania where fracking is going and coal mining used to happen and still is, you see people employed and making good money who are happy to have the industry. at the same time, you see traffic and roads not as good as they could he and industrial activity. sometimes folks like me who live near the u.s. capital are not used to that. when you go to these communities where it's ground zero, you see the positives and negatives. back towant to go emissions from oil and gas companies. this is a list of the top recipients in this presidential election cycle of donations from

the oil and gas industry. cruz, $1e is ted million received from the oil and gas industry. he is from texas where fracking is a big part of the state's economy. jeb bush was second and hillary clinton was fourth. bernie sanders is ninth. i want to play a clip of hillary clinton at a rally in new york confronting greenpeace activist who question the amount of money she received from these companies. [video clip] is money coming in to your campaign about climate change? >> i am so sick of campaigns lying about this. your thoughts on this interaction? guest: it has been a hard story to pin down. a few days before that interaction happened, i was looking at donations to hillary

clinton and bernie sanders. there has been this divide in the environmental community. groups aretablished supporting her and a more insurgent activist groups tend to favor him. it 50/50? are they getting the same amount of money from the environmental community? with thought she was getting the lion's share. -- we thought she was getting the lion's share and this came out and i started digging more. host: so she is receiving more money from oil and gas companies and environmental's? guest: that's what it seems. what comes to the fossil fuel money, there is more nuance. i was expecting more. what you find is a lot of executives and not all of them are top executives. sometimes it's a general manager. comes to corporate donations, it can come from the political action committee of the company or can come from one of the employees and is listed as being a -- attached to the

company. you have to look at which executive it is. in some cases, you're seeing some of the top executives. the secretary is talking about is not just those employees that these lobbyists fromay represent anything the garden foundation or something like that to some fossil fuel companies. lobbyistsying those together and have bundled money for hillary clinton. they say she has got money from the oil and gas industry. it's not a direct connection but she has not gotten it directly from fossil fuels all that much. host: next caller from nebraska, up next on the democratic line. caller: good morning.

on the fracking issue, i got a chance to drive a semi in wyoming. i got a personal look at what's going on. issues. environmental we had to do something in america to free our independence away from the middle east oil. years, they kind of had us pretty much captured. we needed to increase the united states oil production. fact that a the fracking well can take and000,000 gallons of water it does ruin the water you put down in there, all the chemicals and stuff. but it's very deep. are you saying that you feel that racking is a national

security issue? caller: it is. that we hadt like to go there but we maintained the oil revenue since the 1970's when we had our first oil crisis. businessmenans and led us. we should have been using our smarts. america can be the greatest education and teacher to the world. host: all right. that is a launchpad for an interesting look. for several decades, we have been talking about the need to promote energy independence. , like it or boom not, has helped to that. we have become a huge oil producer. passed legislation to lift the and on oil experts.

we can actually send it abroad. when it comes to the natural gas boom, we can produce electricity and power when it comes to natural gas. now that the independence issue has been taken care of, you have the other argument, moving away from fossil fuels and moving toward more renewable sources of energy. that is the big fight. the fossil fuel industry is saying we are still necessary. you have the renewable folks showing we are increasingly cheaper and increasingly viable. we are growing faster than many predictions thought we would grow. we have moved into a new era in our energy discussion. host: our next caller is on the independent line from fairfax, california. good morning. caller: hi, if i could make a

quick comment to the moderators of c-span -- there was a caller earlier who was expressing a personal story about their experience with fracking and how difficult it was an painful it was to live in an area where they had to drink this water. you cut this person off before they had a chance to tell their whole story. they were telling what it was the ground toyond experience what this is my did not get to tell their whole story and get into that. i live in california. i grew up in pittsburgh, pennsylvania, the center of the extractive energy industry in america. i left pittsburgh as a young man because the fuel industry failed. now we have a fracking boom. the usgs, united states geological survey, has been studying the relationship between fracking and earthquakes found a years and has

direct causal relationship. let's not deny that relationship nor deny the tremendous detrimental affects to help that fracking has on every community where it potentially occurs. we are trying to choose between money and health. that is the choice. it's the same kind of choice we made between any other extractive industry and the health of the planet. we have global warming going on. we have other huge environmental catastrophes going on. let's not create, keep creating another one. let's prioritize the health of our people before the bank accounts of the few. there are several

perspectives to that. a lot of policymakers would say they are not choosing money or energy and health on one side. there is how much we can put up with and how much it's damaging and what are the benefits. the obama administration has when it comesish to public health issues related to energy and global warming. at the same time, the fracking has been the wind of the sales of the obama administration be cause the obama administration came in and the energy landscape was so different, cutting greenhouse gases would have been harvard -- been hearted -- been harder. carbon emissions have been going down where the epa can we have this rule and we would like him

is to do this but it's not going to hurt them at much. the market is already in going in that direction. helping that revolution achieve a lot of the goals of the environmental community came in with. this is only happen last several years. host: our next caller is from tulsa, oklahoma, on the democratic line. caller: i wanted to comment about fracking and waste injection as causing earthquakes. in tulsama, i live which is the northeast part of the state. i feel earthquakes. is thefind that oklahoma most active earthquake region in statesire united and that exceeds california that's only been in the last 10 years. evereason is that when fracking is conducted, there is a tremendous amount of liquid injected into the substrata.

this comes back up and has to be put someplace. there are places where this wastewater is injected back into the earth and that has caused many earthquakes in oklahoma. we have hundreds and hundreds of earth wakes in oklahoma. boy,i was growing up as a i was born and raised here, we had hardly any earthquakes. there is no question that the fracking process causes earthquakes. some of them are destructive. we have had earthquakes equation occasionally and some of the 4.5 range and had one recently that approached five on the richter scale. we sit here in oklahoma waiting for this to happen and who knows when the big one will occur? host: here's a story in "the washington post "-

guest: oklahoma seems to have become ground zero when it comes to the earthquake discussion. oklahoma isip in very friendly to the oil and gas industry. it but they have been increasingly saying we need to find answers to the earthquake problem and make sure does not keep happening. the industry says that if we keep doing it, it will stay happening. the issue is how minor and how much we can put up with. we have seen examples of property damage. it is increasingly a concern.

they were wondering whether it was related to fracking and i was moving toward addressing this issue. danny fromup is asheville, north carolina, on the republican line, go ahead. statementu made a that it's not a big deal for the water getting contaminated for most people. they treat the water and every things ok. we've got millions of people on wells and they will get done in with the fracking. what you have to say about that? guest: that's a good point. i didn't say i agree there is no concern about water. promoting -- what we try to do is see what really is going on. there have been examples of well contamination and there have been studies found that wells have evidence of oil and gas activity having an impact on them.

the question is to what extent and where is it coming from. from the fracking process or the settling ponds or other leaks. that brings us to the other point that we talk a lot about fracking but a lot of these associated at tivoli's -- activities are associate with regular oil and gas production. fracking has become a proxy for this discussion. do you really mean conventional well development? it's not saying that we are dismissing concerns, it says that sometimes the concerns, there are caveats to the concerns and more information that needs to be gathered. host: our last caller for this segment will be robert from california on the independent line. caller: can you hear me ok?

host: loud and clear. caller: i have a question regarding environmental politics and fracking. the kinds ofwith programs they have going on out here in california regarding solar panels and the way they market them to homeowners. they go door to door telling you tothe company is offering put in free solar panels on your roof and all that. they're all also offering to take over your energy bill. it will be guaranteed to be a certain amount less. andou do the math out here they say your energy bill could be 40% less, through this new bill, you get directly from that company, but where also able to do the math on x amount of square feet of solar panels that generate x amount of kilowatt hours and they only put a 10%

dent in your usage. where did the other 30% come from? who is paying for that? are there subsidies the government is paying to the solar panel companies to get them on homeowners roofs that i had not heard about? in the house of representatives where they passed appropriations bill, was there ever a bill signed or past -- passed that allowed for subsidies for solar panels like that? host: we believe it there. i don't know the answer to your specific question about subsidies but there was latelation that passed last year that extended investment credits for solar. there is also discussion about extending other renewable tax credits.

there are some government incentives and different incentives at the state level. the big fight going on when it comes to solar is state by state. it's about how much states will mandate or utilities pay customers who self -- who sell power back to the grid. that's one of the benefits of solar. you use this amount and when you don't use it, you can sell it back to the grid. a lot of utilities have in pushing back and some states have been limiting the practice. revolutionizing or would have the effect of changing the current model. nevada recently moved forward with laws limiting that practice.

other states are also discussing that. there is a big fight when it comes to that. e&e: deputy editor of daily, thank you for joining us. up next, we will talk about the new york primaries with a new york pollster who will preview key primaries in the state and provide analysis of recent developments in these contests and then we will take more of your calls about taxes. ♪ ♪ 2016 busmpaign continues to travel to visit winners from this year's student camp competition. we visited spanish springs in sparks, nevada. there was a documentary on a wild horse population. our bus and crew headed to

california to meet with student can winners in that state including a visit to the middle school in san diego where congressman scott peters took part in the ceremony, recognizing the students. for their winning documentaries. also in california, congressman judy chu joined us to honor second prize winners. they had a winning documentary on social sick rarity. a special thanks to our cable for helping to coordinate these community visits. every weekday this month on c-span, be sure to watch one of the top 21 winning entries at 6:50 a.m. before "washington journal." he had a couple of meals and a steam shovel -- mules in a steam shovel. it's one of the other ironies because he was so rabidly

and owes hisnt entire fortune of the government. , sally dentont talks about her book the profiteers which takes a critical look at the bechtel corporation, one of the largest engineering and construction companies in the world. >> who else is the united states government going to get to do these projects throughout the world? tellfine for it to be back but if the american taxpayers paying for it, it was seen the american taxpayer should have aboutccess to information the contracts and the amount of ,oney and the workers safety the political relationships >>. sunday night at 8:00 eastern. madam secretary. give 72 of our

delegate votes to the next president of the united states. ♪ ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now from new the mi isckey blum, research director of baroque college in new york. -- baruch college in new york. she was the manager of polling operations at nbc news.

thank you so much for joining us. guest: thank you. host: you are here to discuss the state of the new york presidential campaign with the primaries on tuesday. it looks like donald trump and hillary clinton are in the lead in their respective primaries. how solid are they? guest: at the moment, they are both very solid. donald trump is really running away with it. he may not get the enormous margin we have been seeing in certainlyut he is winning by a substantial amount. he is winning among every single demographic group and all across the state. host: what about hillary clinton? guest: hillary clinton also has a solid lead. it is not as large as donald butp's lead over his rivals it's also a double-digit lead in

every poll. even if that were to tighten up somewhat, she still looks like a pretty safe bet for winning. and also winning across the state. have you seen their support change or evolve? has it changed over the past few weeks? did the debate thursday night make a difference at all? numbers have not seen since anything done since the debate. i don't know if it has had an effect. my guess is it probably did not. it may have solidified people on one side or the other. i don't think it probably changed a lot of mines. what we have seen all through the campaign and it's certainly true now is that among the democrats, the very young, the under 30's, are very solidly for bernie sanders.

older voters are very solidly for hillary clinton. that is not really changed. differencesother which have not changed much. bernie sanders had been trying to make inroads into the black community. and african-american voters hillary clinton really has a very solid lead among african-americans. host: tell us a little about new york primaries. how does it work? it is definitely a closed system. new york is a very closed system. not only do you have to be registered in the party, you have to have done that a long time ago. if you are going to change your party registration, you had to do that in 2015. you had to do that more than six months ago.

registrant andw this is your first time, you can register a month ahead. there is no same day registration. you must be registered in the party you're going to vote in that primary. we only have voting on primary day. we don't have early voting. will open up the phone lines to our callers as well. if you want to call in with your question or comment, you can call on these numbers -- we have a special phone line voters from new york. you can also find us on social

media. with mickey blum. you mentioned the new york system is a closed primary, one that requires early registration to vote. how does that affect the out come of the race on tuesday, do you think? guest: it certainly might affect the democratic outcome. many of the young voters, if they did not know to register a month ahead, if this was their maybe they are for bernie sanders but wilma be able to vote for him. -- but will not be able to vote for him. in other states, independents have been able to influence the vote on one side or the other what they really cannot in this election. they would have had two of figure that out and changed registration many months ago.

that usually helps hillary clinton when it is a closed primary. republican side, i don't know that it will make a huge difference. as i said, it's a landslide for donald trump. i don't think he will win by the same and arbors -- enormous margins we see in the polls. when people see there's a norm is margin, they don't feel quite as compelled to come out. nevertheless, he will win by a thatnd it won't matter it's a closed system. -- itht have mannered might have mattered if there were independents that chose to come in and vote against trump but they will not be able to. host: our first caller is from new york.

henry is on the democratic line. who do you support? caller: good morning, my question is two parts. appearsnt is that it that your data is predebate. that's an interesting thought, am i correct? guest: that's right. my question is, what percentage of new york democratic voters inhabit the southern tier of new york state? of those democratic voters, what do you project of those voting in this election? what is the percentage of u.s. registered them accredit voters voting and what percentage of them inhabit the southern tier? that's a simple question for a pollster. ever: it's not really terribly simple any primary to know how many will turn out.

the democratic registration in weighted toheavily the southern tier of new york. it is mostly the southern tier of new york. it's new york city and the suburbs. how many will turn out -- i think this will be a very large turnout for a democratic primary. it's been a long time since we have had one in new york. we have not had a presidential democratic primary in new york since 2008. turnout will probably be even heavier. hillary clinton beat barack obama at the time in the new york primaries. i think she is probably again

set to the bernie sanders. what percentage will turn out in that sector, i would be hesitant to say. i think it will be larger than what we usually see. primaries usually don't have people.ge roles of people vote in the general election and don't often vote in primaries. this is a much less common thing to do. however, this year, the primaries have gotten so much more attention. i think there will be a good turnout on both sides. is fromr next caller miami beach, florida on the independent line. go ahead. are you there? caller: yes. host: turn down your television of its on. caller: good morning.

[indiscernible] i have a question. [indiscernible] host: all right. guest: new york has an interesting system, a delegate system on the republican side. every state is somewhat different in how the delegates are given out at least on the republican side. in new york, in order for donald trump to win all of the ella gets in new york which, by the

way, mitt romney did in 2012, he would have to win more than 50% of the popular vote across the state. but he also would have to win more than 50% in each of the congressional districts. that is a lot harder because some of those are very large and some of those have really very few republicans. some are heavily democratic. winld trump would have to the republicans in each of those districts in that heavily whereatic southern tier there are small groups. i think ted cruz and john kasich campaigns have targeted specific district. to pick up a few delegates.

he should certainly when the overwhelming number of delegates even if he doesn't win all of them. he certainly has a chance to win all of them. on the democratic side, is proportional -- it is proportional. it's the same way all across the country in primaries. it's whatever the proportion is of the vote, that's how the delegates are given out. to -- there is not a winner take all system. kentucky, our next callers on the republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning. at how uneducated and out of touch the american people are about their politics. if they inc. their vote matters

in these things, it they are absolute crazy. the democrats and republicans act like they are enemies. they go back and forth in front of the tv but once they are off tv, they are colluding together to full the american people into thinking their vote really matters. knowowers that be already who the next president will be. people around the world are absolutely laughing at the american people and how obtuse they are an uneducated about their politics. guest: i want to make a comment on that. i don't think it's uneducated to believe that your vote counts. i think your vote does count. i think people should get out and express their opinions and their votes. believe in our system

that people should vote and their votes to count. that is how we elect. i don't think it is being done behind closed doors by someone. clinton has an ad targeting new york voters. here is a little bit of that. [video clip] he says we should punish women who have abortions. he says mexicans of come to america are rapists. and that we should ban muslims from coming here at all. donald trump says we can solve america's problems by turning against each other. it's wrong and it goes against everything new york and america stands for. >> with so much at stake, she is the one tough enough to stop trump. hillary clinton. host: our guest is mickey blum from baruch college.

what you think about this ad? becauset's interesting it is already targeting donald trump and targeting the general election and speaking about her as a general election candidate. one of the things in the polls that we see is that even though in many polls bernie sanders does slightly better in match thinkost voters actually she has a better chance to win. trying on the democratic side, for whom picking a candidate who can win in november are actually more likely to choose hillary clinton. that seems to be a part of what she is saying. plus, the very issues she is highlighting are truly important to democratic voters.

they are likely to motivate voters. the abortion issue is much more important in new york state. it's more important to democratic voters and republican voters. it is also true that the people who care most about abortion are more likely to be voting for hillary clinton. womenters a great deal to and women are pretty solidly supporting hillary clinton. issueso pointed out the about immigration and about muslims. those are issues in which new yorkers have perhaps different feelings from people in some other parts of the country. new york is filled with immigrants and new yorkers are

with what they think are anti-immigrant statements. at leastnot in favor new york democrats, of surveillance of muslims. issueshitting on the that we see in the polls which favor democrats and are strongly important specifically to her voters. she is helping to get out her own vote. next caller is from trenton, new jersey on the democratic line. caller: yes, thank you, good morning. i was curious about the way that you count newly registered voters in the state? they were maybe for00 new voters signing up the new york primary.

i'm wondering whether or not your estimates include those newly registered voters. can you say something about the methodology you use for counting voter preferences? guest: sure, thank you for asking. when we do our sampling, we doubt get it from earlier voter registration lists. we do random sampling so we can get everybody and anybody across the state. this is through land lines and cell phones and we do with live interviewers, no robo calling. about theire registration and ask them about their intention to vote. questions also about past voting. ting toome weigh

determine who we think will be the most likely voters. we give everybody a chance to be in it and we ask people if this is their first vote for they were too young to vote in the past and if there is a reason why they are registering or voting this time and have not in the past so we don't exclude them from the likely voters. we know there are people for whom this may be their first vote. it may be very important. we believe there is a reason they just shut up to register. that's because they really do intend to come out. host: our next caller also come from new york on the republican line. caller: hello. there are still republicans in new york state.

on like elizabeth warren, i am a native american. the democrats have turned my state into a cesspool. and thenpeople fleeing you go on this abortion issue. i am pro-life. to me, democrats are pro-death. it's just horrible. people do not let the democrats get any holding your state or you will ruin it like they ruined my state. host: who do you support in this election cycle? caller: i actually support john kasich area i would not vote for donald trump, he is a democrat. host: that's linda from new york. new york is a very strong sense of identity, a state identity.

is there something special in the way that candidates need to approach campaigning in new york? does new york wettability matter? matter?- credibility guest: i don't think i can remember a time when primaries were being dominated by people who don't have some connection to new york which both democratic candidates and a donald trump certainly have. i think that matters. that tedt mattered cruz made the comment he did about new york values. among newat hurt him yorkers and new york voters. on both sides. voter was a john kasich voter and john kasich is second in new york.

but he isfted second coming in -- he is a distant second but he is coming in second and all of the polls. ted cruz is the one not getting support. host: we have a clip of the ad that ted cruz played in iowa [video clip] >> i lived in new york city and manhattan all my life, so my views are different than if i lived in iowa. >> they are different, like on abortion. >> i am pro-choice in every respect. >> what does donald trump think of iowa? >> how stupid are the people of iowa. >> donald trump, new york values, not ours. approve thisruz, i message. host: was this a blunder by ted cruz?

guest: i think it was. at the time, perhaps it helped iowa. he was trying to show the ontrast with donald trump pointing ites, but, thats new york values, now is running in new york, he may not have thought at the time about needing support in new york. i think it is hurting him. a lot of new yorkers perceive the state,insult to the city, and its voters. even among republicans, we saw that the other night, when there was back dinner. he was sort of largely ignored. host: the next caller is coming

from new jersey, kevin on the independent line. could running to you. -- good morning to you. caller: my question is this. andunbound delegates superdelegates in 2016, although steve were before the first debates for either party. the republican or democratic people say, they are basically trying to take the candidate, rather than the voters. i would rather see sanders and candidates than any of these others because they are taking away the vote from the people. john kasich, to me, is the worst because he has no chance of

at a townnd he said hall, we will see at the convention how democracy works. that is not how democracy is supposed to work. the party is disenfranchising voters. guest: that is an interesting question. i don't think so. i think the party has the right to make the rules the way they are making them, the nomination. generalnot the election. the party decide for themselves delegates are and how are selected. onre are unbound delegates the republican side, and superdelegates on the democratic side. they're not the majority of delegates. they are a minority of delegates. point, for example, on

the democratic side, while the give hillary clinton take boost in her lead over senator sanders, she is still leading senator sanders, even just among the general delegates. the superdelegates have the right to shift, something that has happened in the past, and .id happen in 2008, for example oversuperdelegates changed to barack obama. they are unbound. they can be persuaded to go one way or the other. it is up to the party to decide they want some percentage. theparty, and how they run

primaries and caucuses, those things are decided state-by-state. there may be some rules, especially on the democratic side. we have seen on the republican side, there are very different rules state to state about how delegates are selected. that is a state issue. it is how we run our elections in general. our elections are run by the state. the fact you have to register by early,not by party, or when you get to vote, when is early voting, if there is. those are state decisions. that is our system. generaln we get to the election, we go state-by-state. elect what are called

, and don't just go .y the popular vote in 2000, george w. bush won the election, even though al gore won the popular vote. this is part of our system. we can, each of us, has a voice in our state and party to try to change things if we don't like it, but that is the system, and the way it has been for a while. host: we will take another call now from sam marcus, texas. what is your question or comment chuckle caller: i would like to say that i am from buffalo, new york, the other place in your,

but i live in texas. i'm wondering what the direct impact on the delicate count on the primary election in new york will be? it is really key on all sides to all of the candidates. he gets allrump, if the delegates, it gives him a much better chance getting to be 1237 that he needs to secure the nomination before the convention to avoid an open convention. tothe flipside, it matters ted cruz and john kasich that they try to keep him from doing delegates in new

york. , it has aocratic side huge number of delegates. the delegates to matter. a lot of what matters on the democratic side probablyas to with perception and moment to him, and whether or not bernie sanders can do better than expected or whether hillary just told son to her lead. host: there are a couple comments from twitter. new york and moment to requiring voters to register several months ago is a huge form of photo suppression.

a story says, new york election officials are bracing at the polls because they expect many bernie sanders up who cannotow vote. the deadline to change party affiliation was october 9, long before the up who election was r radar. what to expect to happen on tuesday chuckle guest: -- tuesday? i think that is true. i think most people have no idea that if they wanted to change the registration, they had to do that last fall. i can't imagine anyone would think they had to do it in the previous year. actually, itagree, is a form of voter suppression.

whatever the reason was for instituting it in the first place, whether was so people would not start changing at the last minute to somehow play games with other parties will, or for whatever reason -- party's vote, or for whatever reason, i think it is a really bad idea. am aolutely believe -- i strong believer in voting, and get outeryone should coul and be voting. i would like to see much more open system in new york and everywhere. host: this is joe from if the cut democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. you still there? host: we are still here. caller: i'm sitting and listening to the comments being made.

so far, what i don't hear from people calling in is a level of common sense. one just talking about, not realizing you had to change the thing in october. it was a nonissue then. it should still be a nonissue now. if it is a problem now, in the future, you should try to take care of it. to create it like it is a negative suppression, it is not a suppression if it was already in existence before. guest: ok. i think it is not as though the party decided to suppress the vote right now, and did this, or did this this year. these are not new rules. it is true that the new york system is unusual, and not just

closed, but in many ways, more closed than other systems because it is harder to make that shift, and should you want to. with more more people being independent, they may not realize that means not being able to vote in either of the primaries. host: betty from texas is up next. caller: gets. you are wanting me to go ahead chuckle host: go ahead, turned down your tv. caller: yes. i'm calling can in reference to donald trump. love my country. most people love their country, 99% of them.

told that if we do not cos cast our vote, we have o right to complain about who or what is in charge. -- there will be a upll of americans rising against this. we will have a protest from the american people that has not been seen in decades. donald trump may not have the experience as a politician, but that is exactly what we need at this time. host: all right. guest: interesting, i think there many voters who believe it

is good to have somebody from outside the system. what we saw in the poll is people who are for donald trump feel that if he does not get the nomination, the majority of new for republicans voting donald trump want him to run as a third-party candidate. it is not that they suddenly set the choice. run would like to see him as a third-party candidate is a feel he is being tonight the nomination. i think what you are hearing is that there are a lot of trump supporters who are very openrned that an convention will try to take away the nomination.

host: let's get in a few more callers in the final minutes. we will start with maria in new jersey on the independent line. go ahead. : yes. host: turn off your tv if it is on. caller: can i talk? host: you can talk. i am 78 -- i don't see that she is hearing me, she's hearing somebody else. host: go ahead. there is a delay. caller: i'm 78 years old and voted democratic all my life. it is not that i want to see a woman president. this time, i cannot vote for clinton. if we vote for clinton, we will have a world war iii. ok? that is where we are.

the system is rigged. everybody thinks that she will become president. i am for bernie sanders right now. i know they will not let him beat her. host: let's hear from our final color, and then you will get the final thoughts from mickey blum. john is calling. good morning. caller: after just a couple of quick points and a comment, the comment is on the show and a lot of previous c-span shows that i have watched on the topic, there seems to be some confusion. help cleared up. a previous caller asked why he cannot go to the supreme court about it being an unfairthat is.

the system, i have never seen anybody respond to the callers to donefy not just that it is on a state-by-state level, but the parties are private organizations, similar to a private business or any private entity. they are not part of the government. most people don't understand that the republican party, the democratic party, they are not part of the government. ?ost: mickey blum j guest: you are quite right. if you are not happy with what a party does, you're not required to vote for that party or be a member of that party. you can be a member of a party, whether it is the two major parties, a minor party, or starting a new party. the government does not run the

parties. the government does not run how primaries or caucuses are run. it is your choice to affiliate yourself with a party if you wish to, or not. the general election is completely different. that will be run by the government. it is run state-by-state, but will be run by the government. he will be able to vote in it if you are registered as a voter whether or not you are a member of any party. au cannot participate in party's election if you're not .art of the party if, in that state, the party chooses to have it as a closed system -- you are quite right,

these are private organizations, government.he host: that is all the time we have for the sake. we have been talking with mickey blum of baruch college and the city university of new york. she joins us from new york. think of much for your time. up next, we will be taking more of your phone calls and tweets on reforming the tax code, how you would simplify it. we will be getting your thoughts on that in just a moment. first, our guest on newsmakers this week will be jim jordan of ohio. the full interview will be on air tomorrow at 10:00. explains why he the freedom caucus is not supporting republican budget plans, and as a result, they're not enough republicans to pass a

budget for this deadline. [video clip] hit $19ebt just trillion. this year's annual deficit is going to be higher than expected. within that context, we said, look, maybe we should not spend $30 billion more, maybe we on spendingthe line . many times we have had to go to an unopposed, we may have to do that again. we understand that. what we have to do is what the freedom caucus is all about

which is standing up for the countless families who believe that washington has forgotten, we need to start controlling spending. >> you mentioned a continuing resolution, continuing the current budget level into the next fiscal year. argument coming from speaker brian's office is the senate will not support the numbers that you advocate, so the inevitable result is there will be a cr, which means continuing the level which is almost the same as the agreement struck last year. what is the point of what you are saying? >> the point is doing the right supportersg what our want us to do. the point is to do exactly what we told the voters we would do.

says, ifuse the senate you don't do it our way, we will take a football, and go home, that weoes not mean should abandon what we told her voters we would do. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are taking your phone calls now on how you would simplify the tax code. the deadline for filing your return is on monday. we want to know what you would do to reform the system. if you make under $30,000 a year, you can call in at (202) 748-8000. if you earn between $30,000 and $50,000, the number is (202) 748-8001. those earning between $51,000 and $100,000 per year, the number is (202) 745-8002. if you make over $100,000, the number to call is (202) 748-8003 . we are also on social media.

we will be taking your tweets and reading them. you can also leave a comment on our facebook page, facebook.com/cspan. we want to show you this cartoon from "the christian science " recently.quot is an overview of the presidential candidates positions -- candidates' positions on the tax code. this comes from the tax policy center. it shows that t ted cruz would institute of flat tax, reducing taxes for everyone in all income brackets, but reduce taxes the top 10%.those in the

would trump's tax plan reduce federal revenues by $9.5 trillion over the next decade. he proposes for tax brackets -- 4 tax brackets, reducing taxes for the wealthiest americans. bernie sanders would raise taxes. his plan would increase federal revenues by $15.3 trillion and everyone would end up paying more, particularly those in the top 1%. hillary clinton's plan is the least dramatic, her plan would increase taxes by $1.1 trillion, and only create marginal changes for people in each tax bracket. let's get to your phone calls. we will turn to west virginia,

ron is calling on the $30,000-$50,000 line. good morning to you. are you there? caller: i am here. host: go ahead with your thoughts. caller: if the government would wise up and do some third-grade arithmetic, it is all it needs to do. if they would issue a mandate and take half of everybody's money, billionaires, babies, and half ofy, take everybody's money today, tomorrow, cut the prices of everything in half, and the money they took and would double in value. that would be enough to distribute it among all the .ities that is how everybody has gotten in such good shape today because

of inflation. we have to change that. john the next caller is from virginia. what you think about the current system? taker: what i would do is account of the amount of corruption and hiding of taxes, and have a one time wealth tax which would be proportional, $2arting at 2 billion -- starting at 1% of the $1lth, and going up to billion and 10% of the wealth. it could go along with a flatter tax system. from next up peyton

kentucky, making under $30,000 per year. what are your thoughts? caller: good morning. i always wonder why we discussed the national debt without .ooking at national assets when most companies compare the assets and liabilities, i know you cannot really figure assets, but somebody has to have a ballpark number to see where we really stand. thank you. host: the gallup institute hol ntly hold -- polled americans. it found that 63% support closing loopholes for the rich, deductions for the rich

, and eliminating the estate tax. support less likely to sweeping proposals to cut income taxes for everyone or instill a flat tax program. washingtonay, on " journal" we spoke with tim right of the house ways and means committee, we asked why the tax code is so complicated. [video clip] incredibly complex. are people with vested interest in every single aspect of it. awayest example is doing what we need to do, in my opinion, is start at page one

in go to page 60,000, and look at why deductions were put into the code. some people called them loopholes. the truth is every single one of them were put in with the benefit the economy. if they are not relevant, they need to come out, and we need to do away with them. you need to move towards a flat tax system. everything we do, we will upset somebodies applecart -- somebody's applecart. host: we are taking a phone calls and want to hear your ideas on how you would simplify the tax code. carly, you say you make between $51,000 and $100,000 per year. what you see as the major issue? caller: my major issue is the despairing difference between $30,000 and $50,000.

i'm a little over $50,000. there is a difference between andng a little over $50,000 over $100,000. i think that category needs to be changed. i get slammed. there is a big huge difference between making a little over $50,000 and $100,000. overople who make a little $50,000, we suffer severely from the tax code. that is all i have to say. host: here is some information current tax on the system. there are currently seven tax brackets.

from the walkie, wisconsin, greg is calling on the under $30,000 line. what you think needs to be done? .aller: good morning, c-span let me see. first of all, i would get rid of every single tax credit on the books for businesses, individuals, and i would take that money and put it towards offnational debt, maybe pay that would be about it. host: watkins is on the line. litigation -- x

issue.ax code has that what is to be taxed, what is not to be taxed. there is a lot that the tax code could the improved by. simple vacation is not simply a red herring. host: all right. we are taking your phone calls on how we would simplify the tax code, and what you believe needs to be done. this weekend, the c-span cities to tuscaloosa,

alabama. that is the home of the university of alabama. history andure the literary life of the city. writer a clip of a local talking about growing up as a during thehe south civil rights era. [video clip] >> we do talk about the culture class that my family experience. argentina has a very rich culture, and my parents embraced a lot of it. coming to the u.s., you realize you are in a foreign land, you have different customs, and they were, to a great degree, resistant to many things. they wanted to keep the spanish-language alive for us, as kids, and yet, we were resisting because once we learned english, we did not really want to go round speaking

spanish, and has everybody stare at us because we sound funny to their years. that was one portion of it. host: jim is on the line. what do you think? caller: hello? host: good morning. caller: how are you? host: i am good. what is your thought on simplifying the tax code? caller: i freely believe from what i have read, since eisenhower left office, the tax on the wealthy has reduced dramatically.

it is absolutely unfair. there are people way above my tax bracket who are paying close to nothing. they were made for special interest to get over the tax code. i don't understand why the only one with a plan increasing taxes on the wealthy is sanders. is corrupt. if we went back to the tax plan that existed before kennedy was president, there would be no deficit, and no problem with the infrastructure. this is an extremely critical thing, american history is going backwards.

host: 61% of americans deal that wealthy americans are not paying their fair share of taxes. is down from the 1990's. mark is calling next from west virginia. what you think needs to be done? caller: it is joe. host: sorry about that. caller: he stole my thunder. are payinghe wealthy their share, and i feel that -- i am supporting sanders.

we will get a minimum increase taxes. you see a lot of increases on real estate from 2015-2014, dramatic differences. said,eve just what jim since eisenhower, the wealthy have got off. it is a corrupt system. any candidate but bernie sanders is preaching the truth. we need to tax the wealthy because they hide their money, and we are suffering. you look at west virginia. thesupport the western -- energy revolution with coal. on myably pay more tax an coaln west virginia the

companies holding 40,000-50,000 of acres of land. host: just to be clear, under bernie sanders, people at every income level would pay more. would you be willing to pay more if those at the very top were paying more than you were? caller: i think i would, to a certain percentage. if you look at his plan, the people who truly need the money will not pay that much more. the wealthy will pay a lot more. the health care system broke. unless you are filthy rich, if you have a medical problem, you will lose everything you have. west virginia is the number one tote for bankruptcy due medical care. i'm willing to pay a little more if we can fix this corrupt

system. go to washington, d.c., where lobbye at, and you try to , you can't get in the door as a citizen. sittingty, i have been in the office of a former state senator, and i wait for an hour while the coal industry took my appointment. from twitterment -- taxes are evaded whether income or consumption-based. eddie, you say you make over $100,000 per year, to think the tax code needs to be changed? caller: it probably does. i know the school taxes are high because schools are going up

left and right. we have to pay for acorn, planned parenthood, the v.a. i'm worried about my brothers. the corporate tax is the highest in the world. all of our major fear companies left, berger coul king left, noe pharmaceuticals are leaving. somebody needs to do something about that. host: the tax policy center put together a chart showing proposals for the corporate tax rate. ted cruz says he will for appeal the corporate income tax, and impose a one time 10% tax on repatriated earnings. would trump says he reduce the corporate tax rate to 15% and also has a one-time 10%

tax on corporate income held outside the u.s. john kasich has said he would cut the corporate tax rate to 25%. bernie sanders has said he would end the t the for all of foreign source income and and fossil fuel subsidies. lakeland says she would reform the tax code to discourage avoidance and fossil fuel subsidies. we are taking your phone calls on what you believe needs to be done to some five the tax code. chill from texas is next. what you say? from texas is next. what you say? caller: i agree that the rich need to pay more. i did a course several years

ago, and one of the points that was made is rupert murdoch, one of the richest men in the whole world, has paid no income tax in this country for several years. i found it to be outrageous. i think in order to simplify the code, we could begin by having brackets. a 10% bracket perhaps for those who are not wealthy, and the 20% bracket for the rich. about ted cruz, i think he has proposed to abolish the irs, and i believe that is an impossible task. i wonder why he has inserted himself into this campaign, he knows he is a foreigner, he was not born in this country, and yet, he has inserted himself into this system. he needs to get out.

host: our next caller comes from massachusetts. susan, what you think needs to be done? caller: two things. i did not hear what john kasich i cannot plan was -- read the chart. i would set the personal wage,ions at the minimum so that if the minimum wage is $12, that should be the personal exception, i think, for individuals. host: here is low more information for you about john kasich plan. the tax policy center said that lacks key details needed for a quiet tater analysis.

that is his plan. doc from connecticut, what needs to be done in your point of view? caller: it is something called the fair flat tax. 40-50lly, there had than congressman. it eliminates the irs, there would be no more lobbying in congress, you get no more love years -- lobbiers. the poor are taken care of under

the flat tax by something called prebate-debate, -- through the social security office. around goods an all thing. again, it is the fair flat tax, hr 25. host: all right. president obama and vice president joe biden released their tax returns yesterday. here is a summary from the white included.hat was the obama's paid about $81,000 in federal tax.

the president and first lady reportedly donated 14.7% of their income to 34 charities. the largest was to be fisher house foundation. thenew york times analyzed obama's tax returns and found a little more information in there. they found that mr. obama and his wife cashed out nearly $1 million in investments last year . the figures suggests that they are preparing to finance large purchases like a home purchase. we turn now to fairmont, west .irginia, george's on the line you say you make between $30,000 per year.0 what you think needs to be done?

caller: i agree with the last caller. .he irs must be abolished that should be the first thing on the agenda. put the fair consumption tax in place. look at what the mistress and has done in seven years. debthave put us in more than all the previous presidents combined. bernie sanders, whatever his name is, you better through the country away. host: all right. the next caller is from redford, michigan. martin is calling. you say you make over $100,000 per year, what do you think tackl?o be performed

caller: we pay more taxes than .nyone in the world host: the next caller comes from st. petersburg, florida, what to say? good morning to you. i am upset about this whole thing. market what he needs. ,e is totally getting dissed and i don't like it. i am a taxpayer. i work every day, 80 hours a week, and i can't nothing. a are giving it to everyone.

that upsets me. host: we are taking your phone calls for the last 10 minutes or so. you can call in, and express your thoughts. those making between $30,000 and $50,000 per year, your line is (202) 748-8001. andou make between $51,000 $100,000, the number is (202) 745-8002. those making over $100,000, the number is (202) 748-8003. we want to let you know about some programming coming up. travelingll continue to visit the winners of the student cam competition this

.ear the bus traveled to south dakota and minnesota to recognize in thoseam winners states. bernie sanders released some information about the amount of taxes he paid in 2014 yesterday. here is the story.

host: let's get back to your phone calls. we have time for several more. dre is our next caller. think the tax system is working for you? caller: we pay a significant amount of taxes. i really wanted to talk a little about how we need to reduce

corporate taxes to keep companies here in america and the states. it is important to recognize social security. if we could do something that is right for social security, this country will depend heavily, and it already does, on social security income. did you know that proximately 18% of the gross national product comes from social security benefits which are not entitlement dollars, they are dollars that people put in over all the years they work. i think they need to simplify the tax code to pay less than toy are now in from $100,000 $200,000, they pay a little more. you make it really simple, and

collect more than we are. one third of the debt is social security dollars that were taken out of the fund to fight wars. that is one third of the national debt that the government owes back to social security. we need people with common sense on capitol hill to take these them.ts, and solve the american people deserve it. oakland, california is next. you say you make less than $30,000 per year. what needs to be done to simplify the tax system? we never had taxes the 1940's.ntil taxed until world

war ii. they were supposed to be war becauseter the congress voted to go to war. they did not do it. we never had to pay, and only the corporations paid. why are we so eager now to be taxed? i know the money has been privatized, which makes it -- you have to pay taxes. by money is not owned congress anymore. this is why you are being charged for income tax. host: we will leave that there.

ben from texas is our next caller. go ahead with your thoughts. caller: i know everybody has ideas of how to simplify the tax code, but the conversation is with theen we compare european country. more than half of our budget goes to defending other countries and fighting wars overseas. i am of bernie sanders supporter

. until we get the defense strategy straight, and the policy of fighting foreign wars straight, nothing will be fixed with the tax code. that is my comments. barry is calling. what is your question or comment? caller: the bill has been distributed all wrong. loopholes. they keep citizens united in -- they sayk states it is one thing, but really it means another.

my thing is me and my wife $76,000.mazelike anyone making over $250,000 taxed at 90%, no other political campaign would. that money goes to pay the mess we are in. stop beating up on old port and start fixing this money. no more political campaigns. all right. a few more callers now. markets from pensacola, florida. what is your thoughts? caller: i would discard the president income barry tax syst. i would impose a 3% national

sales tax. host: three or 30? caller: 30. i'm an economist. i have been studies on this for years. we could run our country effectively and efficiently on a 30% national sales tax. i would also allow credits for education. there are many ways that we could fix the system, but imposing more taxes will only add to the problem. that is basically what i would do. host: all right. our last caller for the show today will be jim. what do you say? think the reason we are in debt is because we started two wars without raising taxes. i think the hardest part is no one wants to take a vote to pay for our spending. i think a progressive tax code,

where you have a mathematical formula that automatically adjust the tax code, while paying down a portion of national debt could probably solve everything. host: we will leave it there. that will conclude our chauffeur today. you can join us tomorrow. here is a sample of what we will be talking about. we will have sam baker on. he is a correspondent from "the national journal," he will preview the case, the united states versus texas. we will also speak with one juan williams, , andssing his new book also the 2016 campaign season. see you tomorrow. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪

>> next, a house oversight hearing on the challenges facing the the metro system. then, former president bill clinton at a new york rally for his wife, hillary clinton. after that, senator bernie sanders talks with reporters at vatican city. later, republican presidential candidate donald trump at a rally in hartford, connecticut. >> the new washington, d.c. metro faced tough questions wednesday from members of the house oversight and government