the civil rights activist carmichael. as always, we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. "washington journal" is next. host: good morning. it's the "washington journal" for june 5. donald trump is lending his voice to support north carolina republican renee elmers in her race for congress. a series of robo calls began yesterday. it's the first time donald trump has supported a congressional candidate. hillary clinton is reportedly won the virgin islands primary, california, and five other states hold their primary on tuesday. former president bill clinton expected to speak at muhammad ali's funeral later this week, also reportedly going to attend the funeral senator orrin hatch, republican of utah, a long-time friend of the boxing legend. the senate is expected to take up a $600 billion bill that

will set funding levels for defense department programs. two legislators argue this increase is needed to help fix a readiness gap, as it's known, they believe the military is operating under. in our first 45 minutes, we want to get your thoughts on the size. u.s. military and if you think the size should increase, decrease, or stay the same. here's how you can make your thoughts known. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents, 202-748-8002. you can share your thoughts on @cspanwj, and go to our facebook page. now, when talking size of the u.s. military, you could think of it in terms of man power orie quiment. there's a breakdown in a story asking the question if america's military is the number one fighting force in the world, and they give statistics about the military so far when it comes to spending. the u.s. is on top. as of 2014, $600 billion spent.

compare that to china, about $216 billion n. russia, about $84 billion on its military. when it comes to man power, the u.s., according to these statistics, comes in third, about $1.5 million personnel in the armed forces for 2013. compare that to china, about three billion, and india, about 2.7 billion. nuclear warheads, russia has about 6,000. the u.s., about the same, 6,300. when it comes to aircraft carriers, it's the united states that has the lead when it comes to aircraft carriers, 19 aircraft carriers, according to the statistics, followed by france with four, japan with three, and italy and india with two. again, if you want to share your thoughts on the size of the u.s. military, maybe you think increases or decreases are needed within the man power or the equipment that we spend, later on this week the senate is expected to take up a defense budget bill, taking a

look at personnel and other issues. $600 billion-plus is that price tag, but we want to get your thoughts. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. and 202-748-8002 for independents. you can also share your thoughts on twitter, @cspanwj, nd on our facebook page at facebook.com/cspan. president obama last week while he was speaking in colorado talked about the strength of the u.s. military in its current form. here's a little bit of what he had to say. president obama: our military is, by a mile, the strongest in the world. [applause] after two major ground wars in afghanistan and iraq, we're drawing down the size of our armed forces, which is natural

and necessary. and we have to keep improving readiness and modernizing our force. but it is undeniable, our military is the most capable fighting force on the planet. it's not close. our soldiers are the best trained, best equipped land force, tested by years of combat, able to sustain power anywhere in the globe. host: talking about the spending bill for the defense department, there was an op-eding recently by two house members from michigan. here's part of what they had to say. they say the reality of the situation is our military is currently suffering from a readiness gap. for example, of the 271 strike aircraft in the marine corps, only 46 are available for flight operations. we must do better, and we need to make sure our troops have the tools and equipment needed to plan, execute, and complete their missions. this year's nbaa makes specific investments in the critical programs identified by our

military leaders to improve readiness and close this readiness gap that president obama chose to ignore. again, the lines will be on the screen about your thoughts on the u.s. military. should it increase? should it decrease or stay the same? on twitter, there's a few people posting this morning. one says when it comes to the size of the military, they should decrease the size and budget of the military. it's time to help build a better world, not destroy it. we'll start with clark in pennsylvania. clark, thanks for calling. what do you think about the current size, and what do you think should happen to it? caller: oh, definitely should be increased. definitely should be increased. host: why so? caller: well, my opinion is one of the reasons we've been able to keep things safe around the world is the fact that we've had a strong military, and just from having known people personally in the military, they're using deficient equipment, and i think it's a military on st the

the seas and so on, but it's the ground military equipment that needs to be improved. host: so it's not only a military thing, but it's actually personnel as well. you would increase everything across the board? caller: oh, definitely. host: are you comfortable in the fact that if we were to engage in another type of large-scale conflict we'd be ready? aller: not at all. i don't think the present administration's allowed for that to happen. st: 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents, 202-748-8002. dallas did a poll, asked the question about money for national defense and military purpose. they asked if the spending specifically, is it too little or just about the right amount or too much. those who responded, 37% said that the spending for military was too little.

32% saying it was too much. 27% of those responded -- this was february of this year -- said it was just about right when it comes to levels of spending for the u.s. military. from the virgin islands, this is lloyd in our independent line. hello. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i think that we're asking the wrong question. in every situation, we spend more money fighting the last war, rather than the next war. so what i believe we should be doing is looking at the amount in raduates china has engineering as opposed to the u.s., and they outnumber us. engineering graduates by a great amount. so what we need to spend money is helping our young people get degrees in engineering so we can keep up for the future, because what they're doing is

they're stealing the plans for our advanced aircraft, our advanced weapons systems with cyberwarfare, and so what they've done -- and their upgrades have been -- the quality of their upgrades have -- their eat that the advances are happening so quickly that we have to be looking towards the future and making sure that we can keep our edge. host: that's lloyd in the virgin islands. before we let you go, did you participate in your island's primary process? caller: no, i did not. host: hillary clinton reportedly won that, so that's why i asked. caller: i will be voting in the fall, and i will be voting democrat because i'm concerned about the stableness of our leaders. host: gotcha. back to the question on the

military, increase the size, decrease it, or stay the same. philadelphia, pennsylvania, democrats line. matthew, you are up next. hello. caller: good morning, pedro. i think it should be decreased. i think this is completely and utterly ridiculous, the amount we're spending. i mean, we have a military that's based on world war ii, where we're going to fight a two-front war, so we have, you now, a pacific fleet, we have, you know, an atlanta army. we have a pacific army. you know, the next war is going to be fought in space, cyberspace and outer space. that's where it's going to be fought. because the other countries in the world can't keep up with us. and when the russians had their skirmishes with estonia, they knocked down their internet. if you ever saw that movie "gravity," where the russians basically released a killer satellite to knock out all the

communications, that's the way the world is going to go for the next war. host: focus it more on cyber and other things rather than the hard military ships and planes and things like that. caller: exactly. the russians and chinese are going fight the next world war against us, if it is that, they're going to fight it on the cheap, and here we are spending all this money, and the chinese are spending all their money on, you know, on their infrastructure, and here we are spending all this money on a weapons systems we're never going to use. host: ok. let's hear from martin, pennsylvania, i understand pen line. caller: yes, good morning, thank you, "washington journal," c-span. given the role of the role in the world as an imperial power, we're facing a situation where "star wars" is coming home. what we need to do is to begin

to adjust our role in the world. we need to stop provoking russia and china. we need to stop trying to surround them and determine how they will live and what they will do. the choice is not whether we increase the military. the choice is whether we establish a political system that represents peaceful aspirations and that seeks to address the needs of its people. we have people in this country starving. we have people in this country not being educated. we have people in this country and the the services goods that we are producing, and instead, we go round the world projecting our power through the military, and it's time that changes. we lost vietnam. we lost every war we've been involved in, because we don't

care about the people that we're bombing with our military, and we just want to project that we're number one, we're the big dog, and that's got to change. that's got to change. people forget vietnam because it's a new generation, but vietnam lives with a lot of people, you know, the baby boomers. host: let's hear from lindsey, florida, democrats line. caller: yes, i was just curious as to why a republican politician would announce to the world our marine aircraft readiness. at the moment, isis is in retreat, and other nations around the world are building up their militaries in efforts to try and match the american military, which is obviously very far ahead. but why would they seek to

publicize our aircraft readiness? i don't understand. they're paid very handsome salaries to conduct these situations, these talks in congress. they're the ones that appropriate the money if they want the aircraft to fly. they're going to have to appropriate money for the care and upkeep. but i just didn't understand that aspect of them announcing publicly the readiness of u.s. aircraft. host: so as far as the current size of the military, what would you do with it? caller: i think our military is in fine shape. i don't advocate increasing it inflation rate. i think we're well ahead of our nations. i think we're in good shape. and as i said, other nations are increasing their expenditures in order to try to meet us.

they're way behind us. but i don't understand this political effort to announce to the nation our readiness. host: republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. for independents, 202-748-8002. should the military increase in size or decrease, or should it stay the same? national defense, the publication writes about this week's work in the senate about a defense policy bill that would be historic in its reach, and it also mentions senator john mccain, the senate armed services chairman, and his ability to push through legislation that touches on virtually every aspect of the defense business. reforming the pentagon has been a long-time goal of the senator, the story says, and the committee's version of the national authorization act does that in ways few people in washington comprehend. this is from the government affairs attorney near washington, the former general counsel for the house armed

services committee saying that it's a massive bill. i don't think people have fully absorbed what the reforms are. senator mccain likely will not get everything he wants when the bill moves to the senate floor the week of june 6, and committee leaders may have to compromise on some of the most controversial positions, such as those that roll back military benefits and disband the office of the undersecretary of defense for acquisition. broadly speaking, the reforms of the 2017 bill, which is known as the ndaa, will be con convince yal for years to come. wesley in maryland from silver spring, maryland, on our independent line. caller: good morning. thank you so much for taking my call. so my thoughts are that the military budget, it should either stay the same or decrease. the purpose of the military is to be a deterrent to other nations from attacking that country. what we've seen, though, is that we've been embroiled in two wars, and yet we've still seen the budget increase. i feel that the budget could go

-- the money allocated should go toward more preemptive units within the military, such as the nay seals, and stopping these wars from even starting. you know, targeting high-value targets and going on specific personnel, from outside forces. now, the other thing is that the money needs to be -- there needs to be more -- more of an oversight as to how the money is being spent. what the military is really guilty of is a lot of fraud, waste, and abuse. there have been previous investigations, where billions of dollars has been wasted. so i feel that that's -- the military should understand that. host: jim is up next from mel rose, massachusetts, democrats line. caller: good morning, pedro. host: good morning. caller: i have a few thoughts. regarding the d.o.d. not having an audit after all these years,

it's hard to understand. secondly, the figure of 19 carriers, they include some in moth balls so-called. i think sequester was a good thing, because it forced acquisition people to order what they need, not what they might like to have. of course, i'm strong for an adequately equipped military and one that is, shall we say, ok for readiness. host: do you think at the current stage we're ok for readiness? caller: [laughter] that's a great question. it's above my pay grade, sir. i hope so. host: so, as far as -- so let me ask you this. increase, decrease, or stay the same? caller: probably decrease, because, for example, there are 700,000 civilian employees backing up d.o.d. i question where that many is

needed. host: also on twitter this morning, this is a viewer saying that until we can audit defense spending, no, it seems to me with all the technology military costs should come down. we'll hear from dennis up next. dennis is from minnesota, hi. caller: actually that's maine, pedro. host: sorry about that, go ahead. caller: that's ok. i think we should increase our military. everyone sounds like apiecers this morning. i'm really stunned. -- sounds like appeasers this morning. i'm really stunned. that's brand-new military equipment, and most of our stuff is quite old. host: so you say definite increases are needed? caller: definitely increases are needed. host: go ahead. caller: no, no, you go ahead. host: is it just in terms of hardware, weapon systems, etc.? is it man power? are there specific things you

would want to see increases in, but everything else stay the same? what does that break down for you like? caller: well, you definitely have to increase the air power, ok? you look at the report that was on cnn or fox, how they're basically stealing from one plane, from one jet fighter, to fly another. i mean, the pilots, they're only getting four to five hours a week flight time. that's not good. you know, it's like a baseball team. the more you practice, the better you get, right? host: that's dennis with his thoughts on the size of the u.s. military. some have said that they should decrease, some have called for increases, some say that it stays the same. that's how we're breaking it down this morning and see where you fall on those lines. maybe you have another category altogether. let's hear from bruce, maryland, independent line. hi there. caller: yeah, good morning. host: good morning. caller: i would say it's important to increase our

military spending because the current regime and because our president, barack obama, showed his weakness to deal with some of the problems all over the world. our ships are apparently from what i understand, the navy has the smallest amount of ships for decades, for quite a long time. the world is a dangerous place. it would be nice if it would be peace. it would be nice if things weren't the way they were. but unfortunately, china is doing an awful lot of sabre rattling in the south china seas, so is north korea, so is the soviet union. some of these people that talk peace, that's a great idea, but the bottom line is unless we prove our power, unless we show our strength, we're not going to be table influence what's going on around the world and have any power to stop some of the problems that are going on.

it's unbelievable. i listen to some of these liberals and democrats that are completely uninformed, unaware, and ignorant of what's happening. i support the military. i've never been in the military , but realize how important it is. john kennedy, when he talked , out how important it was about we'll do whatever it was to defend our allies, i'm paraphrasing, but i'm sick and tired of this president, these incompetent incident, he's delusional. host: james is up next, arizona, independent line. caller: hello. host: hi, you're on. caller: hello. host: you're on, sir. go ahead. caller: yes, i'm military retired. i have seen the last seven years, or 7 1/2 years of what's

been going on in this military, and i'm appalled at how incompetent incident that the leadership of this country is right now. i believe in a very strong military, because the thing is, without it, then everybody can do whatever the hell they want to do, if i can say it that way on the air. and, you know, the thing is, without a strong military, we don't have a country. host: james giving us his thoughts this morning. the last viewer mentioned instances -- or events going on in the south china sea. "the wall street journal" talks about how beijing is hitting back against the u.s. over comments about what's happening in the south china sea, saying a senior chinese naval commander sunday delivered a forceful defense of the territorial disputes in the china sea, criticizing what he condemned as u.s. interference in asian security issues.

the admiral, a deputy chief of the china's joint staff department, used a speech at a security conference to reject u.s. allegation that is beijing risked isolating itself with its mary time claims in the south china sea, "we were not isolated in the past, we are not isolated now, and we will not be isolated in the future," the admiral said in a gathering of officials. instead he criticized other countries for retang a cold war mental knit dealing with with china, saying they may only end up isolating themselves. "wall street journal" has that story. also on the pages of the "wall street journal," a recent story taking a look at germany and its plans for its military, saying that increases are on the way. this is saying that germany will increase the size of its armed forces for the first time since the end of the cold war. the country's top defense official said that tuesday, as fears sabre rattling

prod europe to beef up the military. they add personnel to the forces on top of a current upper limit of 241,000 is unlikely to satisfy allies who have been calling on germany and other western european countries to boost military spending sharply. but it carries symbolic importance in germany, which has been shrinking its armed forces since the early 1990's, where world war ii left a deep legacy of passivism. todd up next in south carolina. we're asking viewers to give the u.s. hts on military, if it should increase, decrease, or stay the same when it comes to size. todd is on our democrats line. good morning, todd. caller: hi, good morning. the spending should either stay the same or decrease, but there's actually two budget items, because there has to be an audit to find out where the money is going, first of all. but second of all, before we deploy anyone, we have to make sure that the troops are being taken care of when they come home. there should not be an issue. when you send people to war to end conflict, they have to be taken care of, regardless of

politics, right? that's the main thing. but if you cannot have an audit, you cannot have any more money. it's that simple. host: expand your thoughts on stay the same or increase on spending where. do you see those cuts occurring if they should occur? where would you like see change? caller: change in how the money is spent in terms of weaponry, because it has to do with foreign aid. when you hear foreign aid, what foreign aid really means is we give other countries our military weapons to use. it's not as simple as it looks. so that's the first place to start. because when they say foreign aid, they're not talking about food. they're talking about weapons. thank you. host: columbia, missouri, independent line. dean up next. hello. caller: hello. good morning to you. my comment is, one, we pretty much probably had no choice but to increase our military, because everyone is saying how mr. obama was weak. a lot of people are forgetting

ow bush did what he did. i get on from and say, well, obama, he weakened us, but see, bush put us into it. he pked a fight, and now sobe having to finish the fight. the sad part about it -- i don't agree with everything mr. obama did, you know, so much as some of the other stuff, but what i really mean to say is this, we have no choice but to increase because of some of the foolish mistakes that the other president made. now, this president, they're saying that he's weak, but he's showing compassion where bush went in and showed brute. we had no business over there. we have no choice but to increase our military, and then they're talking about spending. they need to quit doing all this foreign aid and taking care of america first. take care of your first country. you know, you can't take care of your own country if you're trying to spread out to everybody else. we have to be strong enough to

help someone else, but we've got people doing underhanded things, so hopefully we can get this thing straightened out. host: that's jean in columbia, maryland. if you go to "the washington post" this morning, there's a long piece on charles coke of the coke brothers. here's one bit of that article this morning, saying that mr. koch also professed several beliefs. he expressed concern over class stagnation and why this reflects rich people benefiting from government favoritism. he criticized business leaders, whom he cast as more interested in protecting profits than promoting competitive markets, and he said the nation must cut back on entitlements for the wealthy before it considers any serious changes to social security or medicare. he said students should study marx and that they'd be open to funding marxist research, although there are no apparent examples of him doing so. koch has built a network of conservative nonprofit groups that has set a goal of spending

$900 million during this election cycle. it's led democrats to accuse the kochs of buying elections. that's part of a long piece this morning in "the washington post," if you want to read it online. brett from indianapolis, indiana, republican line. good morning. what do you think about the size of the military? caller: hello, pedro. how are you? host: fine, thanks. caller: we all forget that china and russia are allies now, and they have joint war games. we are forgetting that obama administration has destroyed our military, and when i say destroyed our military, i mean shrunk the size of our troops, drawback on all military improvement on our weaponry. our men and our aircraft carrier and our aircraft, they

have four hours a month ractice. now, if things go down, and i'm talking across the board, cyberspace, the whole nine yards, across the board, we need to improve our military without a shadow of a doubt it has been destroyed. last time i seen it destroyed this much was under the carter administration. we have to improve our military. don't forget everybody. if you snooze, you lose. don't forget that. host: new jersey, this is kevin, democrats line. kevin, good morning. caller: good morning. how you doing today? host: fine, thanks. caller: great. yeah, i'm all for a strong military, but i think we have to look at some facts. i mean, one thing that bernie sanders always comments on is that our military budget is larger than the next eight military budget, of the next

eight countries defined. so if we can't sit and have a strong and efficient military using that amount of money compared to the rest of the world, we're in trouble. i think we have to start spend and utilizes its funding. host: in terms of what? looking at cutting back? we shipping money to other priorities? what would you advocate for? caller: there is a large stash you are talking about the koch brothers, how they influence our budget. the military-industrial complex is a huge influence as far as wasteful spending, spending on budgets that go way over , keeps increasing the end of goals every 5, 10 years, of a 30 year project.

then it will increase from the original estimates 10 times. then it is a useless project anyway. things like that. more --ave to be in a there needs to be more accountability in the military. like i said, if we are spending more than the next eight countries combined, i mean, we should be able to maintain our superiority, you know, at that level. "ost: the "washington post highlights a story in the hillary clinton e-mail story. attorneys for technology judge atts asks u.s. the central bar, a video recording of the deposition originally planned for monday.

the group is seeking to have kegley otto questioned under oath. the judge did not rule on the recording on the session. he directed both sides to address by june 13. massachusetts, hello, this is lloyd. say, wei just wanted to have no idea if we should sit -- if we should spend more or less. get free health care. we are never going to stop pursuing the code after the shiites. host: that is about it. victory, texas, on a

republican line. caller: good morning, c-span. i want to tell the people who want to increase the military budget more and more. look at corruption, look at the wasteful spending. pump fillingto station in iraq that cost the taxpayer $50 million. and nobody investigated it. nobody cares. and i can't understand you just keep throwing money at something and you don't investigate it, it is always dropped. got vehicles over there that can only drive 600 miles then they have to replace the trucks. bulldozers.and-new they left them there. people don't just understand. they have to redesign the wheel

every so often and kick the stuff.up on the dang wake up, america! we are going into a buried deep hold. this country is going to go to heck if people don't wake up and hold washington accountable for what the heck they do. i hate to say it, wake up! let's make them accountable for something. andk you very much, c-span y'all have a good day. host: gary from north carolina. go ahead. caller: yes sir. says redesign the wheel, and the u.s., that is what we do. as far as a military, i hope we keep doing what we are doing. we are way ahead of the rest of the world and we will be further

ahead tomorrow. in new space shuttles zealand with dinosaur bones. i remember when we had that argument about the iran deal. we were going to give them $150 billion and they would buy parts from north korea or russia and get a rocket that might go 1200 miles. israel was only 600 miles. someday, they might have won that contract the east coast or dwell, there were other things in the paper that day. russian jet blows up in saudi arabia. -- there was a mid-air explosion that happened explanation.

the russians didn't know it until it hit the ground. the same day, we were taking close-up pictures of pluto. did areas -- did any serious person think we would run off? we are great. we are the united states of america. host: that was gary north carolina. donald trump making it is first congressional endorsement in a backing of that state renee ellmers. he made a personal appeal to voters to back renee ellmers saying she was the first congresswoman to represent -- --this the first time this this is the first time that donald trump is picked side in a congressional race.

rode gets it. -- rene gets it. five other states in the primaries this tuesday. a paper out of california. this is a story on the hill this morning. telling theaper is tellingo union tribune voters -- the principles of the party of ronald reagan are relevant as ever. stable border and economic policy focusing on taxes and limited regulation. those are not principles of trump who promises to build a wall, recommends torturing families and reneging on debt. he does not deserve the party's mandate.

fort in ronald reagan president. maybe trump will get the message. don is up next on the republican line. caller: good morning. i am a 30 year army veteran. i served in combat in 1965 and desert storm. our military is inadequate at this point in time and the american people are ignorant of that fact. i have two sons on active duty. is being drawn down dangerously. our numbers are worse than they ever been since before world war ii. money forhave the maintenance. we do not have proper evident capability. airlift not have proper capability.

it is destroying our capabilities. especially in personnel. we are drawing down on personnel. a large percentage of the money we are paying out is for personnel. if we do not maintain our strength, we are in a weekend position. kened are in a wea position. we have so many redlined vehicles and aircraft being cannibalized. knowsworry, our enemy what rick of the they have spies. host: that is john from the louisiana.

doug from oklahoma. your next. caller: i was agreeing with a couple of fellows from earlier. saidk back at what: powell when he was -- i look back at what colin powell said when he was secretary of state. we need to get a stronger economy. that is about as important as a strong military. i agree that we should maintain good redness with our military. good readiness with our military.

we get involved with things we shouldn't. that is been our history. -- that his been our history throughout the last 50 years, maybe more than that. we don't need to keep getting involved in those things every there -- with those things over there. jordan, etc., etc.. it has been going on since the beginning. need to keep our military and our nation out of the conflicts. that is all i had to comment on. int: let's hear from joe south carolina, independents line. caller: two callers ago -- we have to stay on top of everybody else. in terms of research and development, we cannot lag with the rest of the world. -- my comment is

the calls associated, specifically to the procurement process. my god, you don't know the paperwork involved. spending isdefense on the discretionary side. when bill clinton became the president, you might remember, he rolled that forklift with all of that paper on the white house lawn and said we are going to reinvent this. someone isnk god, going to make things simpler. it is completely swung the other way. people are finding more complicated ways to do things to reach the same end. the procurement process is a nightmare. agencies are loaded with six-figure income high grades.

get a job, they are trying to get a name for themselves. there was a time when they had a purchase card program for people who went out on projects and for items that cost less than $2500, if they needed a cable to go into a system, they could go to a local supply house and by the thing. you now have to call your home agency and go through a processes,f costly approval to get that one cable and get it shipped. if we are in charleston and we have people in hawaii working, it costs literally thousands of dollars and manpower. host: george is up next. caller: good morning. eisenhower was right when he said we were in a military

complex. i worked for the government and i seen it. your high-ranking officers that are working up in the pentagon are working with contractors. they give these military budgets in and everything. they work with the contractors. put get the weapons systems .n the papers that they need when they retire, they go to work for the complex and they make the bucks. they are not only making money from the government on retirement, but now they are working for the weapons systems contractors and making big money from them. hands and watch my back deal.

they need to do away with that. once you retire from the military, you don't to go work for the weapons systems that you were promoting host:. that is georgia in philadelphia. if you go to the pages of the salt lake tribune, their website , it talks about the effects muhammed ali had with orrin hatch. pagesn find that on the of the "salt lake tribune" this morning. derek is the last call on this democrats'ryland, line. caller: good morning. i spent my whole career in defense programs. the guy a couple of calls ago .alked about where i worked he nailed it, he nailed it, he nailed it.

we need to continue to show the numbers we are spending on defense, ok? forceslity is our armed are the greatest in history. we are lacking professional ground soldiers. they're the best that we ever had. we had a federal ban on any stealth related fighters. republicans might want to know that there was a contract of f 35 to be given to israel. but we need to maintain that number, that $600 billion. that needs to be out there that we will continue to spend it. we have the finest military fleets that sailed the seven seas. we can control airspace anywhere in the world. you put stealth unmanned fighters in russia. -- they will be -- host: ok.

that is derek in maryland talking about the size of the military. he is the last call on the topic. coming up, we are going to take a look at the november elections focusing on the congressional races. this november will show what party controls the senate and the house. it stuart rothenberg anything but solace will join us -- stuart rothenberg and nathan gonzales will join us. if you turn to the "associated on our newsmakers program with the air force secretary, one of the elements coming out of the story was a support for draft registration for women. that full interview takes place today right after this program. here is a little bit of that

interview with the airport secretary debra lee james talking about it women should be required to register for selective service. womenmy opinion, i think should register for the selective service. i see no reason not to. this is a timely debate and reasonable people have differences of opinion. there are people who say, we don't need a selective service approach at all. it has been years since the draft. literally, my vote as an american, my opinion, is that women, we should have a selective service. it is an insurance policy for the united states and women should register. >> any sense of what congress will do? >> it is early days in too close to call. it is in play in both houses of congress. we will have to wait a bit longer and see how it goes. >> i would like to follow up on

another policy -- you spoke that you believe transgender troops should serve openly in the military. that policy has been in development inside the pentagon. can you tell us when you will expect that policy will be approved, and then withdraw? >> i think the review on the transgender policy should be complete within the next few months, that would be my best guess. proceeding complex issues. by the way, i am certain that the policy is going to change. i am certain that transgender's will be allowed to serve in a more open way. some of theg to get particulars figured out, some of us the civic policy matters underneath that umbrella policy matter so we do it correctly and roll it out correct. if there is training required, we had that in place every we explain to commanders and the

rest of the troops how we are going to proceed in the future. i expected within the next few months. host: that full interview with deborah lee james, the air force secretary, can be seen on our news makers program at 10:00 in the morning right after this program. if you miss it, you can catch it on seized at 6:00 this evening. you can also catch it on www.c-span.org. we are taking a look at congressional races with two guests joining us. and nathanenberg gonzales editor and publisher of the the report. thank you for joining us. let's start with the condition of the senate. rothenberg, what happens comes this november to the senate in your estimation? guest: there is a bit question mark in terms of turnout and what the election is going to be about.

the senate class is overwhelmingly republican. this class was elected six years ago, 2010, a very good year for republicans. they elected republicans and those republicans are in a presidential year. can the democrats net the four or five seats to maintain control of the senate? it depends on if they win the white house. the senate is up for grabs. there is differences of opinion. some people think the democrats have a slight advantage. i would argue that. the senate is in play and questions about the presidential race and donald trump's appeal and hillary clinton's appeal, it is something of a jump off. host: nathan gonzales, if it is four or five, what should people

be focused on if there is a change going on? backwards, senator from illinois followed by ron would have the open seat in florida. the only vulnerable democratic senate seat right now is harry reid's. the rest are offering opportunities for democrats. rob -- new hampshire, we are waiting for, does the playing field grow even more? roy blunt of missouri. trump -- does trump inspire

hispanic voters remark -- this talk inspire hispanic voters? i agree with nathan. but the seven states nathan mentioned is most competitive. varied states that are competitive in a presidential election. there is and what overlap. -- there is an overlap. it is going to have some affect on how the democrats are doing. host: how prepared are these incumbents? guest: the incumbents are doing everything in their control to be ready for reelection.

they are putting campaign infrastructure in place. volunteer programs will be in place to utilize volunteers going into the fall. is, what happens that is not within their control? how offended will some voters be because of donald trump? all of them have to form a coalition that includes supporters of donald trump and people who are offended by donald trump because they are in these competitive states where they can afford to lose republicans and can't come out blasting donald trump. but they also can't embrace him because they will turn off -- guest: two or three of the states are states that donald trump has a scenario on how people improve republican turnout, particularly wisconsin and pennsylvania. nathan is exactly right. trump bringnt does

in new voters? then the question is will they continue to vote republican? --t: some of the voters guest: the key voters to watch are the never trump voters. if they come out and they say, i can't vote for hillary or donald trump but i'm still going to vote for the senate, both for the house, republicans may have a bad night. it but if they don't vote at all, their impact will be tremendous. clinton could get every voter -- every republican voter. she needs democrats to get over the top. this we will talk about further. our guest stuart rothenberg and nathan gonzales joining us.

you can as the gentleman questions. 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8001 four republicans. for independents. will theseve campaigns be even if there are no real connections to be made? guest: that is one of the key things we are watching. democrats are going to couple everything a republican with donald trump. pat toomey is a donald trump republican. they have a loose enough connection, both running as republicans in the cycle, that is enough to put in a campaign ad and bring up questions. democrats still have work to do.

pat toomey must agree with everything donald trump says. democrats have to make that case. republicans have to be further independent. this is a standard playbook. republicans do it when there is republicans do it when there is a democrat in the white house. democrats do it when there is a republican in the white house. large number of senate seats. most of those kinds of elections occur in midterm elections nonpresidential years. in the midterm, the president is not on the ballot. the only way to express your dissatisfaction is to vote against his party's candidate for the house and senate. presidential years are different. voters have two votes. you can decide donald trump not vote for him, but you can like rob portman in ohio and vote for him. buthave more flexibility

you are exactly right. but we are seeing this time, democrats trying to attach donald trump to every republican in the senate. it is somewhere between them using and sad. host: the democratic congressional campaign committee put out it -- put out an ad. leche the adding get your thoughts. [video clip] donald trump and republicans in congress are built from the same reckless policies. uprepublicans must hold broader abortion restrictions. aswe are not going to fund long as you have the abortions going on in planned parenthood. when mexico since its people, we are bringing drugs, crime, rapists. >> for every valedictorian,

40 ken 700other 100 pounds of marijuana. we have too many mosques in this country. i am for traditional marriage. banhe house voted to same-sex marriage. >> donald trump and the house built from the same reckless policies. host: your thoughts on the ad? guest: it is fair that they are making a linkage and it is up to the voter to decide if they accept it. what is interesting about it is it is all donald trump soundbites. and is a donald trump ad it takes advantage that the republican party.

the party has a poor standing with the voters. donald trumponnect and the republicans in the house, you bring up issues like abortions, mexican's coming across the border with marijuana, this is the kind of thing that could build up in a democratic way. see: mr. gonzales, can you an affect on specific campaigns? caller: with this type of it can unify. anti-trump message covelli democrats up and down the ballot . advertisement -- the

party's ability to target voters online is only increasing. their ability to focus on different groups with messages. message --is type of they will be dozens of this iteration depending on who you are, where you live, and what issues you care about. host: taking your calls. tommy, you are on with both of our guests. caller: good morning. . understand want anying we don't illegal immigrants. what is wrong with not wanting illegal immigrants? you have to take a stand sometimes. you have to screen who is coming in and who is not. what is wrong with that? hillary is a liar.

she has been a liar from day one. she twists everyone's words around. i don't know how anyone could vote for the democrats. all they do is tax. every year, social security send you the thing on how you are working. i am 57 years old. i am down from 35 years of working. spent the last eight years with democrats has had the most tax taking out of my pay all they know how to do is tax and get handouts to the people who don't want to work. it host: tommy, thank you. take that as you will for the campaign. to tommy'st of all, point, there is a distinction between legal and illegal immigration. it is up to the republicans to make that case. the burden is on them to convince voters there is that distinction and that they favor

one, but not the other. that is what politics is about. as to the second point, tommy reflects what we see is a deep distrust among republicans. that is part of the polarization. guest: tommy sounds like the type of person that trumped's message -- that trump's message can resonate. there are people who believe that the economy is not working in their favor. i keep coming back to a house race in downstate illinois where a democratic congressman was running for reelection. there was a republican named mike boss running. they have footage of him on the floor screaming and throwing papers in the air. democrats thought, this is perfect.

we have video that republicans are crazy. but mike ended up winning. -- you can explain it away. it shows now that that message resonated. voterss angry, but the in downstate illinois were angry. it was helping him. [laughter] remindert is a humble that this message -- donald trump's message will resonate. host: kokomo, indiana. independent line. at ar: i am a senior university. i am barry interest in the midterm election. -- i am very interested in the midterm election. this is something my fellow students talk about is why do we

frame the elections in terms of democrats and republicans instead of really hitting on the from a in particular business student. it is about sustainability. i don't care who it is if it's democrat or republican. i want to see problems solved and an end to the gridlock. guest: i think the reason why we frame those with democrats and republicans because that is the form of government we have. it is a party system dominated by the two parties. it is difficult for third parties to get on the ballot. my don't members get something done? why don't they work together? i don't know that voters are incentivizing the compromise to

break gridlock. if there is a republican member compromising with democrats, they are going to get voted out in a primary by a candidate that says, we don't know someone coming to washington to work together, we need someone standing up for the constitution and the president. --hink in some ways, members they have frustration with members getting something done in washington. it is that these members are doing what they were sent her to do. guest: that is an important point. polarization and washington d.c. certainly exists. in these primaries, you can't go to your own voters and elect me and i will work with hillary clinton. or if you are a democrat, i will find a work -- i will find a way to work with donald trump. voters don't want to hear that.

calls all the time and speak to people, why can't they get along? there are americans out there that do one negotiation and compromise in dealing with the big issues. not dealing with the big issues is not moving the country forward. but, boy, people -- way. that is the problem. host: here is troy new york, democrats line. caller: good morning, gentlemen. how are you? i've elected like to say one thing. i am blind. i am a democrat. and i am a workaholic. i want to get my own things. i am not looking for handouts. i would like to know how many democrats do we need to retake the senate, the house, please? guest: democrats need 30 seats to take the house. that might not sound like a lot, 30 out of 435. but 30 out of a universe of 30, 40, maybe 50 that are

competitive is a lots of seats. democrats are trying to do their best to get candidates in place to take advantage of and anti-trump -- an anti-trump wave. they came up short in a couple of key suburban, like in pittsburgh. they had a candidate dropout in michigan state in the before an alternative. -- and looking for an alternative. input your life on hold order to run for congress is a difficult, a big step. it is easy to say why didn't democrats get someone to run here or there? you're asking for someone to sacrifice a lot for really know certain victory at the end. guest: just one quick point. take metropolitan new york city area that includes districts in the boroughs.

let's include the island as well. seat.t an open you have the first district at the end of the aisle and suffix county. those are competitive seats. state toto go way up get a number of competitive districts. that is a good example. there are a lot of district out there. that they are so partisan one way or the other that the other party can't compete. host: when it comes to house races coming talked about the house tea party. americans for prosperity working against her and now donald trump making robo calls. explain what happened? guest: there are a lot of moving parts. a teaellmers came in with

party reputation. a lot of conservatives have turned it back on her. their backs on her. it was the same day the annual march for life can turn -- for life happen. she has tried to cozy up to donald trump and now has its robo call. the other factor is there is a new congressional map. her congressional was pulled out from underneath her. it was a court ordered legislature to withdraw the district. she represents 50% to two -- he works -- she represents 15% to 16% of the district. candidatelso a third who just lost the senate race in 2014. lost this race in 2016.

what is going to happen, one republican member of congress is going to lose this primary. i think it will be viewed as anti-incumbent. guest: can i address that first part of your assessment of that renee ellmers assessment, which is correct? she was not the only one of these tea party antiestablishment republicans. nathan and i remember talking to some of these leaders after that. a lot of these people elected in 2010 ran against washington and continued to beat up on washington and continue to undermine republican legislative leadership. howrs decided, oh, this is congress works. you have to negotiate and trade-off. renee ellmers was cited to me, to both of us as i recall, as a perfect example of someone who ran against washington.

but a lightbulb went off. this is how we get things done and pass legislation. for some people, that is a positive transformation. for others, that the problem -- that is the problem. rothenberg & gonzales political report. stuart rothenberg and nathan gonzales joining us. morningfrom utah, good on the independent line. you are on with our guests. caller: thank you, good morning, gentlemen. what a great topic. i have been wondering in talking with my friends. still have a couple of questions, particularly about the down ballot races. about nothing being done with the exception of

the first year of president obama's presidency. and the republicans literally digging in their heels saying, no to everything and no compromise. it has been frustrating. it seems like the tea party did ushered in an era of antigovernment, and they were in the republican party. it did grab a certain amount of the anger, the trump movement has grabbed an uglier part. strategy, if any of the democrats are planning on using that reasoning to the american regarding, and then specifically regarding the gerrymandering that is gone on with the house district? toutah, we went from three, four -- three years ago, our

last democrat was considered a blue dog democrat like bill orton. way in the 1990's, we have not had a democrat for a long time. they did well because and utah, to survive as a democrat, they have to work, compromise with both parties. they were well-liked until a big republican issue came up and boom come out they went. host: colleen, you put a lot out there. thank you. go ahead. guest: on the obstruction other republicans are extracting. a lot of the republican members leave they have been sent to washington to obstruct. they might use a different word, but they believe that is what the voters in their district want and there are large pockets of voters around the country who do want to approach the president on anything he does -- oppose the president on anything he does.

they are going to talk about republican obstructionism, the senate, not giving merrick , thend a fair hearing hearing and the vote he deserves. but democrats will focus on republican obstructionism and try to use that against the incumbents. -- i wantill respond to point out that the republicans could be criticized over the last two years. just want to stop everything that president obama wants to do. nathan is right. growinge is also a movement on the democratic side like that. the whole bernie sanders message is we have compromised too much and have not been progressing far enough, fast enough. so the kind of bernie sanders that comes to washington seeks a compromise. as far as redistricting, some states are trying to go to a

nonpartisan situation. you have the fair districts in florida. there is some effort to this, but we put the politicians in charge and we -- and they don't want to give the power up. not just about how the lines are drawn. there is a broader issue of where people live. people live within communities where you are surrounded by people who agree with things. ,rizona with a nonpartisan map still all but one of the republican members of the arizona delegation are members of the house freedom conference. only sally is not a member. redistricting does not guarantee members who are more moderate mainstream. salinas,y from california, republican line. caller: hi. i am listening to your two

guess. either i am a dummy or your two guess our for hillary and the democrats. the republican party has consolidated already. trump has indiana, been getting record turnout for votes. they are voting for him because there is nobody in the race. was a phantomp that did not exist. democrat voting is down. it is down across the board. there is a civil war going on between hillary and bernie that your guests have not even touched on that fact. all i have been hearing is how bad trump is and how bad republicans are. and i don't really appreciate that.

i want your guests to start talking about the democratic side of the election and why they are looking at -- they are looking at losing seats in the senate. and looking at losing seats in the congress. host: tom, thank you. are talking about republican turnout. republican turnout has been up. i don't think all of those republican voters are supporting donald trump. there is some concern that donald trump might be the nominee. piece by harry and looked at the last six presidential elections where they had open primaries on both sides at the presidential level and look at turnout. out of the six races, three of them -- half of them, the party that have a higher primary turnout won the popular vote. i don't think turnout -- turnout is not a good indicator of what is to come in a general election.

well, tom, you are allowed your own preferences, but not allowed your own facts. they are not going to lose senate and house seats. .hey have all the opportunities the public and partly -- the republican party has hardly any. you would get the same response if you talk to microchannel -- mike mcconnell in the senate. the republican have high water marks in the house and senate and vulnerable seats. the republicans won democratic seats and swung democratic seats in 2012. that is a fundamental of politics. it does not mean republicans are worse. it doesn't mean we like hillary clinton. that is a reality. no, it is point is interesting you say republicans have coalesced around donald

trump in that the last two presidents, republican presidents of the united states have not endorsed in significantly. he is getting criticism from high profile writers and , so, to just dismiss this and say the republicans have coalesced, trump is getting 80% of republicans. he needs to get 90% to 92%. he may get there. we are not prejudging it one way or the other. we are looking at what the data say. in terms of the democrats, of course they are divided. we have not brought it up because it has not come up. it does not mean we are ignoring it or intentionally avoiding appeared i am glad you brought it up. the democrats are divided at the moment and it is keeping hillary clinton's ballot test down. 'f you as bernie sanders supporters who are they going to

vote for in the general election, hillary clinton or donald trump? they say they are not making that choice because it is going to be bernie sanders. you or i may think that is wrong, but as long as they think that way, it will affect how they answer the survey questions. of course the democrats are divided. but i believe on the basis of doing this for 35 years, and trust me, i have been wrong before, but on the basis of my knowledge in my experience, i believe the democrats will rally behind hillary clinton here it i think donald trump will help them do that. but the clinton folks in the sanders folks, they have differences in terms of legislative tactics. unless they do that, you will see a race where donald trump is a few points behind. then the question is, can he turn out enough voters and attract independent voters and nonvoters to overtake hillary clinton? that is an "no. the national senate

committee took to an ad connecting the senators to hillary clinton. [video clip] >> democrats need to act themselves a question -- can they really support hillary clinton? she is a living history of scandals, lies, and fibs. travel date, china gate -- she politically attacked sexual harassment victims and pretended she landed under sniper fire. investigations, ruthless, fake packed. hillary clinton, she is the living embodiment of everything people hate about politics.

democrat candidates, she is your burden to bear. [laughter] >> i am a real person. host: mr. gonzales, what do you think? guest: that was there he subtle. [laughter] i think subtlety was lost on that. 'sthink that hillary clinton the shining light for the republican party in this election. that is the one thing keeping republicans were having a disaster because she is not popular. she is not quite as unpopular as donald trump, but her favorability numbers are upside down, means that they are unfavorable particularly in competitive states. we talked about democrats trying to tie republicans to donald trump. this is what republicans are going to do because she is not going to bring voters across the line because of hope and change some of the things we saw in 2008. this is going to be the standard republican attack this year. guest: i would simply add that

her problem is not the democrats. they generally like her. thatroblem is republicans feel what the nra see feels in the ad. republican voters do not trust her. -- he is a professional politician. she is a professional politician. is a relatively weak candidate. the republicans have maybe nominated the one person who can't beat her. no, i don't think she is the ideal candidate for the democratic party. she is what they gave themselves. connecticut,en, thank you for waiting. caller: hi. delauro is a pretty

good candidate and we have two good senate candidates in connecticut. i think we are going to do ok in the selection. guest: we don't expect connecticut to be a hot election cycle. blumenthal is a for reelection and kind of struggled against linda mcmahon. but he is going to be fine this year. august wolf, there is a story where he has come under fire for alleged sexual harassment. so democrats will be fine. guest: connecticut is a good example of how the country has changed. or at least new england has changed. and went in new york to graduate school at the university of connecticut. i am familiar with the state politics. 40 years ago, 50 years ago, 60 years ago -- there were a number

of parts of connecticut that were swing a republican. fairfield county portion, vary republican. -- very republican. i remember when a candidate won the new haven district. was at one time a competitive state and voted for liberal republicans. vary -- very reliably democratic. host: from ashland, massachusetts, this is wayne, independent line. caller: good morning, gentlemen, how are you? thank you for c-span and programming like this because it makes it worthwhile turning on the tv on sunday mornings. i have a question -- what percentage of the electorate will vote strictly not

traditionally, not republican, not democrat going with libertarian or alternative parties in the election cycle? hadt: i believe the returns 1% of the vote and the greens got a third of the percentage, something like .36%. there were a handful of write ins. i expect those two parties to get a higher percentage of the vote because the to major party nominees, i will use the word to describe them, controversial. there are going to be democrats -- hillary is too close to corporate america. i am want to look for somebody whoconveys my sense complements find social economic justice issues and i will go green. there will be some people who are more free market republicans that support donald trump, his

positions on trade come his positions on things like social security and medicare and entitlements. i can't support him. so they will go libertarian. i would not be surprised to see those votes double, which seems to me to be a pretty big change. 10%, 20%ey could get of the vote -- i don't see it. there have been early poll showing gary johnson getting a higher percentage. if they were to get 2% or 3%, i could see it. in any case, these nonmajor parties are hoping to make some ground little by little to become major parties. guest: the one thing i can foresee happening, that the media gets wrong, is the assumption that every libertarian voter is coming out of the republican's pocket or every democrat is coming out of the or -- or every green voters

coming out of the democrat's pocket. and we are doing the math the monday morning quarterbacking, you don't dismiss and say the third-party voters belong here. i think it is wrong. were third parties could make an impact is the united states and races. in new hampshire, there will be libertarian on the ballot. i expect that to be a close race between those senators. nationally, the third parties may not make up the difference, but it could have an impact on the fight for the senate. 202-748-8001 four republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8002 for independents. host: hello. i don't want anybody to think i was faking a party. [laughter]

as a conservative republican, i really love the ad in the that democratic house and senate races in the reasons are that all the issues that democrats think our winners for them, we conservatives think are losers because there's was emphasizing republicans against immigration. of course, code word for a limit will -- for illegal immigration. the anti-muslim was code word for terrorists coming across with the obama bringing in syrians. theave evidence recently at mexican border of actual terrorists coming in on the watch list. one, and was the big the reason i would rate

republicans low in congress is land parenthood funding -- pla nned parenthood funding. the reasons show in this ad, republicans and christians are mainly against killing babies that planned parenthood and abortion and all of those factors are the hot button issues for causing us republicans and conservatives to turn out and vote against the democrats because the democrats support the illegal voting. they support bringing all that in. therek the two guests need to look at the analysis of what really are the issues in this race. big government come out of control spending -- big government, out of control spending. guest: i like the call because it is a window into what the election is about.

caller said all the issues that they, meaning the democrats, think our winners, we think are losers for them. that is what this issue is going to be about. who is right on this? who is on the right side of the issue is with the voters? particularly with swing voters. i know how conservative republican think and i know what liberal democratic voters think, but it is the swing voters that will decide who is right on the issues. the second question is, is each party touching the right issues to bring up voters, to energize voters, and to attract swing voters? it is about which issues are winners for who and is the lesson going to be about minimum wage and trade, or is it going to be about planned parenthood funding? that is what we look at.

i hope we don't begin with a preconceived notion of this. we want to see what the voters think. guest: planned parenthood and donald trump isn' a fascinating example of how difficult this election is to put into a box. donald trump deviously throughout the campaign said, i don't like abortion, but planned parenthood does good things. am sure does not sit well with coleman, but the part about abortion does sit well. donald trump, you cannot put him in a box are. it shows people are projecting on donald trump what they want. his supporters tend to ignore some statements he has made and things they disagree with and focus on what they agree with. host: stuart rothenberg an nathan gonzales -- and nathan

gonzales of the rothenberg & gonzales political report. tell us about this report. guest: it goes back to the 1980's. we always covered house and senate campaigns in details. we need 150 to 200 candidates election cycle, and the usually come in for an hour. we start with dana birth, what you do for a living, what was her up reading like, where did you go to to -- what was your up bringing like, where did you go to school? we go through all of these things. how much money did you race? what are your positions on issues? at the end of the hour, we get a good idea of who these strong candidates are and who the week candidates are. we have been doing that for many many years. host: you look at all of these races as well. guest: we focus on the ones that

are most competitive, but we are constantly evaluating how safe or vulnerable they are. we get into this notion thetimes that ratings in year or spring, early summer that they are seconds set in st. and theycle goes on date up with us in a specific position, we change our ratings and overall projection. websiteu can go to the if you're interested in seeing the work of these two gentlemen. from charlotte, good morning. caller: yes, good morning. i am calling in reference to the actual context of what the race for the 2016 messaging will be for the presidency and for the 2016 senate races. i think thatdent, where we are in the country is

the need for an investment. i think that for a person such as myself, my husband, and many of my family members, we are black. we are highly educated. we have a good family structure. we believe in volunteer and philanthropy. withtechnology coupled also i think an intersection of society that we now live in. i heard the german from texas speak about --gentlemen from the abortionbout issue did not come for them, the gay-rights did not come for them, and yet they have somehow blamed the immigrant. they have somehow blamed regulations. high-tech invest in a

manufacturing infrastructure that will bring the job, that will bring back and create new and better jobs that were lost from just a technological and innovative change. host: charlotte, thank you very much. we will let our guests respond. guest: i am not sure yet what the election messaging will be xcept that we- e will get the usual knee-jerk red meat. the democrats are for higher taxes, more spending, changing the culture of the country. that will come from the republicans. from the democrats, it will be the republicans want to kind of or eliminate the games of the last eight years -- gains of the last eight years. they will point to the job

growth of the last few years and talk about obamacare as a huge step in the right direction. we will get the red meat kind of stuff, but it seems to me that charlotte's call with demand a more thoughtful approach by the parties -- would demand a more thoughtful approach by the parties. i am afraid, charlotte, you are not going to get that kind of election. you are going to get a lot of name-calling, a lot of red meat, a lot of personal attacks on donald trump and hillary clinton. you may not like that, but you are looking for a more serious discussion, and you will have to work long and hard to weave your way through all of the red meat out there to find out what the parties i really stand fo . what is this election

about in messaging, that the news in the day will help dictate what this election is about. early summer, late fall, are we talking about foreign policy? are there terrorist attacks here or overseas? how is the economy doing? what is on the evening news is going to force the candidates and the nominees to answer to those things. that is hard to predict what that news is going to be. the candidates will have their prepackaged messages, but the news will push them in a certain direction. host: california and other states have their primary on tuesday. a profile looking at the attorney general against loretta sanchez. talk about this contest but also that this is known as an open primary system and what difference it might make as far as who ends up the victor. 2012, before the

california moved into a top two primary system. all candidates are running together, republicans and democrats. the top two finishers move on november. the field is so weak that there is a high chance harris and sanchez finish in the top two and you have to democrats on the ballot -- two democrats on the ballot. proponents of the system will say this is an upper that will force the democrats to appeal to republican voters who don't have a candidate, and that will force the moderation. i don't know that the california election results have seen a more moderate delegation, but that is the goal of proponents. others will say republicans are disenfranchised and they will not even vote in that election. the bottom line is the senate seats will stay democratic. here is is the front runner, but

it is not completely guaranteed. guest: i think nagin is right. i have not seen compelling signs that the system has produced members who are more pragmatic or bipartisan or less partisan, but that is what the goal is, to for sanchez and harris in this case in the runoff assuming they are both on the ballot for november to appeal to the republican voters. presumably to do that, they have to move to the center. the question is, do they do that during the campaign and then after the election, returned to their normal position or not. host: good morning to john. caller: thanks for taking my call. i wanted to ask mr. stuart rothenberg a question because . the republican vote, is there a chance democrats can win this

seat? also these seats in new hampshire. maybe the democrats may take it over. overall, i have been in this country for a long time, and i can tell you as a republican, they have lost everything that they stand for because what usually to me, it is talk show hosts like rush limbaugh or sean hannity took over the republicans, and this is the consequences that the republicans used to stand. i got to this country in 1980. i remember ronald reagan used to stand for something, but what we see today, it is amazing that a republican cannot even say something about donald trump, which is every time that he speaks, he is insulting the people. now what makes me so angry most of it is when he is attacking this judge just because he is spanish.

there is a lot of republicans who have a great idea in this country, but i don't know what is going to happen really. i don't think they will exist anymore because the way that he gets away -- you see what happened with the reporter that she is insulting the reporter and everybody is not saying anything. donald trump, one thing i noticed is he cannot take the real questions. the reporters are seeing that, and they don't follow up the questions that they are supposed to follow up. host: john, thank you. i think he called you old. [laughter] right.and john is i can't do anything about that. i wish i could. if you come up with something to reverse the aging process, i would be grateful. let me deal with pennsylvania first and then maybe new hampshire. nathan has written about pennsylvania extensively. it is a good one to look at because it is one of those states that donald trump says he can over perform.

you can take a competitive state the republicans always have to talk to and then always lose it in presidential races over the last 20 years, but he can change that by bringing in white working-class voters, whites who have no college degrees, and he will bring them to the republican party, and they will vote for him and presumably pat toomey, who is being challenged by katie mckinsey. she is the favorite of the establishment. extensive background in the environment and community in the state and nationally. ok, so donald trump's theory is he can appeal to voters in northern pennsylvania. westernlking to and he can bring out new republican voters, and they will vote for him. he will carry the state and they

will presumably vote for pat toomey. i guess we are waiting to see whether that works aror not. pat toomey is a different republican in that he knows what state he is in. virginia on west the issue of guns and ammunition to moreng to reach out swing democratic voters in the southeastern corner of the state. we will see if that works, if that substance is image -- so ftens his image. hear donaldmay trump said this, what do you have to say? that is difficult because he wants to talk about what he wants to talk about, not what donald trump is talking about. a tossup. whatever you think it is a competitive race. donald trump will have some impact on this. host: there is a story about

katie mckinsey about her college career. can you explain that as well? guest: sure. republicans are going after her on how she has characterized her college career. she is one of 10 children depending on the event and situation, republicans have evidence that she said she was the first in her family to attend college. they are bringing that now. she said we meet with candidates all the time. we met with her on january 26 this year before the primary. i looked back at my notes to see what she told us, and she told us that she was the first in her family to attend a four-year college, which is a distinction the campaign is not trying to make. what you told us in our private largely off the record meeting this similar to what we are seeing quickly, but there is enough evidence out there for republicans to make hay that she was not as clear in that. that her iould add

is on the record. it is always on the record. guest: we have the notes to tell us to go back and look. will this make a difference in the race? probably not, but it is i think a that's katie mcginty has to show she is written for prime time. this is a much bigger stage and she has never been on before. there will be more scrutiny. i am sure this is not the only thing republicans will attack her for. we have five months to go. if i can point to one more thing john said, he was talking about the lack of criticism, like a republicans criticizing donald trump, and i think this is important. right now, the republican grassroots is upset with the establishment for not listening to them. now you have these republican officials where they come out

and denounced donald trump, and they will be accused of not listening to republican primary voters who are now on the way to nominating him, and so i think these republican officials were leaders are in this tough bind where personally they are offended by donald trump but they are listening to voters. host: mike from houston, texas, republican line. caller: thank you. we heard how donald trump is insulting people, let's talk about how democrats insult people. superdelegates. superdelegates is a form of insulting the average voter. number two, the public education system is a government-run monopoly. tell me what city, what major city is a case study for how inner-city schools are run? visit baltimore -- is it baltimore? i have two siblings who are

teachers and they cannot breathe because they are teachers. guest: i will take the superdelegates. of the get to the end democratic nomination process, hillary clinton will have received more votes, more pledged or elected delegates, and more superdelegates that bernie sanders. even if you were to take superdelegates out of the system, she would hav still be e nominee. superdelegates are a point of contention and frustration with bernie sanders supporters, but she is winning no matter what kind of metric you use. she is winning. guest: to the other point about education, i would say this. we ares tell people that at the bottom of the political food chain. handicappers. we are trying to figure out who is winning, losing, what races are competitive, what races you should bother to watch if they are not serious contests or serious threats.

i understand you feel strongly about education. everybody who calls in here feels strongly about the issues, republican or democrat. our job is not to tell you you are right or wrong of the issues. we don't take positions on the. we just try to figure out who is going to win. one thing you need to consider and the democrats who call in need to consider is who is going to decide each election, and what do they think? republicans, i know you think, and i know what a liberal democrat thinks, by they going to decide the election? in texas, the republicans are going to decide the election, so you are in good shape. in other states, it may be the independents. that is all we are saying. kim: texas, democrats line, is next. caller: hi. i don't want to ramble. is that the

nuts and bolts of this between republicans and democrats, and at the expense of sounding rude, i don't want to be rude, but everybody knows you only get one little sound burst to say what is on your mind. is aging topoint of this 55 years old and we are not going to use our mental debate?s like having a you don't know how democrats feel, and you don't know how republicans feel. old on. those issues we have been waging war on since the 1980's after reagan came in and screwed a lot of stuff up, but that is in the past. hold on. what is at the heart of this is a biblical fight over protestants and catholics. if people would get online and read a book, go back to the beginning, and look at the history. y'all manipulated the politics. finger.am pointing my

pursuing injustice, you become in justice sometimes . host: thank you. guest: several night owls out there. a viewer from twitter asked about your success rate as far as predictions. what has been your history as far as how you have done? guest: senate races, we have been really well. our last but in 2010, vision for the house was a republican gain of 55-65, was it? people don't we were nuts. republicans gained 62 or 63 seats. on individual races, did we miss? yes. we thought heidi was going to lose in north dakota, but she won narrowly in north dakota. our election numbers for the house, it would probably be 95%, but somewhat? any idiot can get 95%. all you have to do is pick incumbents.

we are looking at the competitive races. we never tallied up the numbers, but you can go back and look. we do well. guest: some of the value we produce is bringing who are the challenges, whether people running an open seas, who will be the future lawmakers? the ratings get the most attention and are the sexiest of this, but in some ways, there is so much polling. it is less helpful information. the off your analysis in trying to get the voters an idea of where this race is headed, where are the fundamentals is where we are most o helpful. host: stuart rothenberg and nathan gonzales. thank you. guest: thank you. host: coming up, antibiotics help fight off disease, but can't use make it impossible to fight off future illness. joining us next, dr. ezekiel emanuel. we will talk about that topic.

later, we will hear about the black power movement. it is the 50th anniversary of the movement. he comes to us from the university of texas at austin. all weekend long, we will be looking at the literary history of las vegas, nevada. the things you will see is a visit to the center of gaming research. it was there that the director, david schwartz, shows items collected in relation to gambling in the history of los las vegas. >> there is a lot of thoughts about why gambling is so polarizing. some talk about it being a shortcut to grace and the antithesis of the managerial work ethic and working hard and getting ahead. say people who win money gambling did not earn it so i think that is why it is polarizing. you can lose a lot of money doing it so it can be very dangerous financially. >gaveling in las vegas goes back

to the very beginnings of las vegas. las vegas was established by what is now the union pacific railroad. then, it was the salt lake los angeles and san pedro railroad. they bought a ranch from helen stewart and decided they would lay a town out here. this is the original map from that option. people can say i want to buy land on block 22. i want this land. that is what is map is generated by the railroad. it was divided into 40 blocks. they needed a place for what they call vice, which was a classic wireless device. drinking, gambling, prostitution. you could not have it on fremont street, which was the main street. they call block 16 the red light comes toso if a man las vegas with their family, they can stay on fremont street

and have a wholesome time. if he comes by himself and wants to see a little bit of the world, you make a left and walk down there to block 16. host: that is the history of las vegas. also, some of the literary work as part of our programming on american history tv and the tv. -- book tv. joining us now is dr. ezekiel emanuel with the university of pennsylvania. he is a medical ethics and health care policy chair and their former health care share advisor of the obama administration. good morning. guest: great to be here. host: thank you. the topic is superbugs. what do we mean by that? guest: they are not insects. they are bacteria and viruses. they are the development of resistance to antibiotics. we the last 70, 80 years,

have had very effective antibiotics against bacteria, but we know that because of the use, bacteria a ball to be resistant -- evolved to be resistant to this. the consequence is we need to develop new antibiotics or combined antibiotics. it is faster than we develop antibiotics, and we are in the situation now that we have all the elements for a bacteria that is a very noxious bacteria that is really resistant of all of our antibiotics. host: what is the potential damage? guest: the potential damage is to go back to the 1800s, where people died very commonly of infected because we do not have a way of treating simple infections. i will give you a personal story. my father's brother, who i never knew, died before i was born. a bullet ricocheted off the ground, scraped his knee.

did not answer, because they wound, and the balloon got infected and he ended up dying because we did not have any antibiotics. that is the air we are going back to if we don't do a better job of controlling our antibiotics and not reading so much resistance -- breeding so much resistance. we are getting poor grades on both of those things. host: it is hard for a doctor in this day and age cannot prescribe antibiotics? guest: it is funny. after i wrote the op-ed in the ," i got an post"," lot of people saying i am part of the problem. we should not be doing that. doctors should be resisting. the patient should not be requesting antibiotics. viral.fections are

that is caused by a virus, which is different than a bacteria, and they will not be cured by antibiotics. people take them and feel better after a few days. they would have felt better without the antibiotics because it is the natural process of the immune system responding, and they attribute it to the antibiotics, and next time, they want it for a sore throat, runny nose, ear infection, what have you. that is a serious problem because that breeds antibiotic resistance. the other thing is they take the antibiotics for a few days, feel better, and they stop instead of taking the whole seven or 10 days. that also breeds antibiotic resistant bacteria, and it is dangerous. we have a serious problem on the patient side. on the doctors are currently prescribed antibiotics 20% to 50% of the time. it is inappropriate and unnecessary. host: our guest is with us to talk about superbugs, the prescription of antibiotics, and his call for changes.

we divided the lines different today. if you are a medical professional 202-748-8000. all others, the call to resist or limit the amount, you said you are getting home calls on that. is there some kind of effort within the government, capitol hill, an effort to say, we need to pull back? program oncdc has antibiotics, and that is using antibiotics appropriately. it is a multi step program. it begins with the necessary leadership in the hospital, having a pharmacist in charge of the antibiotic use, informing doctors about how they use antibiotics, when it is and isn't appropriate, and that is a very important program. it is voluntary and hospitals to not have to pl