kaptur. later, a conversation on student loan debt. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. ♪ host: good morning, everyone. 2016ast estates of the lastating process -- the states of the 2060 nominating 16 nominating process are in. donald trump winning all states for republicans yesterday. but candidates turned their attention to the general election. we posed this question to all of

you this morning, could you switch parties in november? if you a democrat considering putting for donald trump, -- voting for donald trump, 202-748-8000. a republican considering switching to clinton, 202-748-8001. phone lines are open, let's take some calls here. while we are waiting for you to dial in, last night's primary results. we begin with montana. bernie sanders and scored a in that western state. in new mexico, hillary clinton .as a victory there new jersey, hillary clinton also with a win over bernie sanders.

in north dakota, bernie sanders wins another democratic caucus. in south dakota, the primary thee, hillary clinton with win. here is where the delegates stand right now if you go to our delegate tracker. 2497.y clinton with with 100 663. 1663. let's listen to the presumptive republican nominee from last night after his victory. say towhat he had to voters who had not supported him in the past. just a minute.

first bone colored emerson and indiana. a democrat. good morning to you. -- first phone call this morning. emerson in indiana. a democrat. good morning two. -- good morning to you. caller: my concern with donald , he sounds more secure in keeping the country safe. ash the constitution, as far -- you have to be born on u.s. land. he would handle the situation as , makinghe supreme court a definite decision on what will make you a citizen.

host: you are considering voting for donald trump for that reason? caller: yes, ma'am. host: who did you vote for in 2012 and 2008? caller: 2012, i voted for obama. 2008 -- and in 2008? caller: i was over in iraq. host: why switch parties now? is it solely this supreme court issue? caller: somebody needs to crack the whip. nothing is getting done and both sides aren't getting anything done. this is what brought donald trump up. neither side is getting things done. toneed to get something done stop the mess that is going on. in florida.e an

a republican. i will vote for hillary clinton. i am a republican. said is sotrump has many horrible, racist things. he cannot turn us around, no matter how presidential he tries to act now. hillary all the way. did you ever consider voting for donald trump? caller: at one time, i did. then, he started saying a lot of ugly things towards black people, mexican people, muslims, any race of people. handicapped people, women.

we don't need anyone like that to be president. he's saying a lot of dangerous things. he could get this country in a lot of trouble. host: can you believe that you are thinking about voting for hillary clinton? caller: yes, i can believe it. i'm 52 years old. i have seen a lot of things republicans have done and said -- i don't like racism against anybody. the republicans have been saying a lot of racist stuff. i'm black, i was republican. they don't understand racism and don't want to understand it. we have to get someone in to not be against people

of their race. host: janet is considering voting for hillary clinton. that's how we have divided the lines this money. if you're a democrat considering voting for donald trump, 202-748-8000. republicans considering voting for hillary clinton, 202-748-8001. donald trump issued a statement yesterday about the comments he has made about the latino judge who is presiding over the trump university case. he said this in a statement. "i'm friends with and employ thousands of people of mexican escent."anic diss

he goes on to say there are several important facts republicans know in the media has failed to report. if you're interested, you can read this lengthy statement put -- by the trump university these are just a few of literally thousands of positive surveys that have been done about trump university, all of which can be viewed on 98% 98percentom -- approval.com. could you switch parties?

both welcomed voters who had not supported them in the past. [video clip] donald trump: everyone who voted for me throughout this campaign, i want to thank you very much. [applause] to those who voted for someone else in either party, i will work hard to earn your support. to all of those bernie sanders iners who have been left out the cold, we welcome you with open arms. [applause] host: could you switch parties in november? hunter in haymarket, virginia. a democrat. you are considering voting for donald trump? caller: i'm not allowed to say, but i certainly would never vote for hillary clinton because of her vote on the iraq war.

that shehly unlikely is going to be the nominee because of her troubles with the personal server she used for her state department e-mails. i would be very surprised if she comes to philadelphia and is the nominee. host: jeff in south carolina. a republican. tv -- turn down the tv. mark in virginia. you are considering voting for donald trump? caller: i could. thatery important thing is there are three parties this election, if not four. there is a third that will be on the ballot in all 50 states. you're doing a disservice not to mention a libertarian. you have to former governors that are candidates.

it to thede governorship, these are serious individuals that should not be left out. all right, mark. what are you going to do this fall? caller: i'm thinking more so towards the libertarian party, myself. that the folksy listening to c-span are listening closely. is veryican public disinterested in the status quo. place we lookne in the morning. that is c-span.

no party can get the 10% and need if they get shut out of all the media outlets. host: today is one day. this is just how we are dividing the lines today. three high 65 days of the air, we are live taking your phone calls in the morning. year, we aref the live taking your phone calls in the morning. huffington post, their banner "hill yeah!"ning, her victory speech in brooklyn with her supporters close to where her new jersey headquarters are. [video clip] hillary clinton: this has been a hard-fought, deeply felt campaign.

whether you supported me or senator sanders or one of the republicans, we all need to keep working for a better come affair, stronger -- better, fairer, stronger america. it never feels good to put your behind a cause or candidate you believe in and come up shorthaired. i know that feeling very well. [laughter] host: hillary clinton reaching out to those who voted for bernie sanders in the primary fight. or republicans not satisfied with their present the nominee. switch and vote for the opposite party? if you are a democrat and think you could vote for donald trump, dial 202-748-8000. if hillary clinton has your vote

.s a republican, 202-748-8001 post piecefington this morning. president obama will meet with bernie sanders on thursday. the presumptive nominee officially reaching the number of delegates required for the nomination, president barack obama congratulated her on tuesday evening at signal that the campaign of bernie sanders might be coming to an end. both clintonith and sanders by phone following tuesday's primaries and caucuses and will be with senator sanders on thursday at his request. the presst put out by secretary at the white house .eads this way the president congratulated secondary clinton on securing the delegates necessary to clinch the nomination. -- secretary clinton on securing

the delegates necessary to clinch the nomination. the president could be endorsing hillary clinton as early as this week. mickey in milwaukee, wisconsin. a republican. you could vote for hillary clinton? caller: that is correct. this is the first time since 1992 that i have not been voting republican. when i look at all the things that donald trump has said, he never talks about policy. instead of talking about how we will overturn the affordable issues in theisil middle east or economic issues, he is talking about the judge -- i called speaker ryan on this.

i called his office here in wisconsin and i mentioned all these things about his racist remarks. i'm surprised how maybe 35% of the voting population was for him. i'm shocked. -- votes for him. he rented a place to walmart gaddafi. is who he hangs out with. he can say whatever he wants. he will destroy america and i have no choice but to vote for hillary. host: what do you think the republican party should do at this point? caller: it is too late. they should have axed out donald trump at the beginning.

the got scared of him and they ruined the party. it is all rights priebus'fault. entirehannel showed the third party convention from beginning to end? c-span. no other channel showed that. who has given time to johnson? only c-span. host: the speaker of the house a survey had that anti-poverty event in anacostia. he was asked about donald trump's comments on judge cur iel. it --g a person cannot do

saying a person cannot do a job because of his race is textbook racism. do i believe hillary clinton will be the answer to solving these problems? i do not. ground onre common the policy issues of the day and more likelihood of getting our policies enacted with him than we do with her. i do this about those comments. his comments. they are wrong. at the end of the day, this is about ideas . host: the speaker of the house yesterday about the judge comments. the weekly standard put this together online yesterday. trump's race problem is now the gop's. trump is making "

andfensible, and reasonable arguments. paul ryan echoed those sentiments at a press conference tuesday morning. senator bob corker sought to move beyond trump's racist comments about the judge. let's pause for a moment to appreciate the absurdity of these arguments. mitch mcconnell's comments come callingg -- comments, it unacceptable, then asking us to accept them. corker just wants to move on.

denunciation followed exhortationsy exit patie of party unity. mark -- caller: bernie sanders and donald trump are more nationalist than democratic socialists. donald trump is a nationalist. hillary clinton came out of the and i believe she was already picked to be the winner. bernie never got the media attention. donald trump is getting the media attention because he is saying what every middle-aged american male and woman in this country is saying in their private homes.

it may not sound politically , but thisnd it isn't is how america really feels. our best chances would happen with bernie because he knows the system, but donald trump will get job training. he is a nationalist. america has to pull back from the world. if we don't come of the world is going to explode. , the world is going to explode. host: you said bernie sanders would have. do you believe it is over for senator sanders? caller: i think the democratic him to be never allow the president of the united states. host: politico is tweeting this out --

he says he is carrying on. the district of columbia gets to vote next week. what the washington post has to say. superdelegates emerge as force.ts's polarizing this is what they report. -- then, there is this from "the new york times." confirming what politico reported. .anders plans to trim his staff laying off much of his campaign staff.

let's go to alicia in pennsylvania. had you supported bernie sanders? caller: no, i never supported bernie sanders. i did not know what line to call on because of always been a democrat until this year my changed. i will vote republican. i could never vote for hillary clinton. she should have been out with bush. we don't need a crook. she is just like her husband. why would the black people vote for her? he had the drugs brought in so keep them under control. what is wrong with the american people? don't they investigate before they vote? host: all along, even supporting donald trump?

-- you have been supporting donald trump? caller: sometimes, sometimes not. i know he is not a politician. we don't need a politician anymore. what is wrong with you, america? we don't need any more politicians. i'm 76. won't you listen to someone who's had experience? i'm voting for donald trump. i don't give a shit -- host: tom in new york. a democrat. good morning. you've always voted for democrats? caller: primarily democratic. ,he big thing for me with trump he is not a politician. i think politics will be the downfall of our country.

i understand that he says provocative things that time -- at times. nothing he says has been out of line or racist. it isn't just mexicans, it's all illegal immigrants that have to go. trump has been in the media view for over four years. why did it take us until now to label him a racist? i think it is mostly cnn, a.k.a. clinton news network. the only difference between trump and obama is that

obama never tried to make america great again. california, two democrats will face off for the u.s. senate seat being left open by senator barbara boxer who is retiring. california voters made history tuesday, sending two democrats to november runoff. the state attorney general won the largest share of the votes.

by the way, also on politico's website this morning come if you are following these primary races, they have put together the key primary results from yesterday's elections in california, new jersey, montana, etc. iowa as well. if you are interested, go to politico's website. an update on yesterday's program when we told you north dakota was voting -- north carolina was voting yesterday for congressional races. the second congressional pitting two republican incumbents against each other because of redistricting. ellmers lost that race.

back to calls. mike in miami. a republican. you are thinking of voting for hillary clinton. wanted to know, how much is she offering to folks?

her.s how i would vote for host: tammy in florida. a democrat. have you always supported donald trump or is this new? caller: i've given it some thought because i'm a democrat believe the, i democratic party needs big changes. left.n is more right than she is a war hawk. when she started campaigning lester, there was no mention of any of these issues that bernie brought up. i would like to see her speeches that she made on wall street. i cannot vote for trump. i will vote for jill stein of the green party. this is a sad situation.

it really is, when you don't like either candidate. hillary, i don't trust her, i don't like her. the e-mails were a travesty. host: have you always voted for democrats? are you still there? sanderssten to bernie last night. gave a speech last night after he had a couple victories. he vowed to continue fighting. [video clip] bernie sanders: next tuesday, we in the last fight primary and washington, d.c. [applause] and then we take our fight for social, economic, racial and environmental justice to philadelphia! [applause] host: senator sanders last

night. he plans to lay off half of his staff. he will meet with president obama on thursday. he talked with hillary clinton last night on the phone. said he got a gracious phone call from her. other hints that he will be ending his campaign. what is next? we will have to see what role he will play. many of his supporters turning their attention to the party platform. "the nation" putting up a piece last night talking about the impact that bernie sanders has had. we will find out what happens this week as the week goes on. district of columbia votes next week.

we are asking you if you have been supporting bernie sanders, are you thinking of voting for donald trump? if you've been supporting donald trump this full-time as a democrat, call in on that line. youou are a republican and are dissatisfied with your present nominee, are you thinking about voting for howard clinton? mark in kentucky. -- hillary clinton. mark in kentucky. you are on the air. caller: i been wanting donald trump -- he scares me. i voted for obama. when bush came in, i did not like him. i thought maybe trump would be different, but he scares me. he is too weird. hillary clinton come i don't know.

what other choices do we have? she's been doing good work. donald trump is too scary. manchesterin township, new jersey. a democrat. good morning. caller: i researched hillary and her daughter -- her daughter is a hedge fund manager. how is she going to crack down on wall street? she will pass the tpp, probably pass the pipeline. she will do whatever it takes to keep obama's policies going. trump says he will do away with all the trade deals. that will protect our children.

they don't want to unionize. they want right to work states all the way through. they deserve a donald trump. maybe he will fight against the trade thing. of whatat did you make he had to say about the judge and those comments last night where he said i will make the republican party proud? caller: what he said about the theral judge -- african-american statement was off-the-wall. i look out for the people under me. i am retired. these younger guys aren't going to have any good jobs out there like i had.

to have a decent job and put it isaside -- unbelievable. host: you can look past what he says? caller: i hate it. he says i'm a defendant, i'm being sued because i rip people , the judge orders the papers release and he says the judge doesn't like me because he's mexican. if it is a black judge, what is he going to say? he's from africa, he doesn't like me because i said obamas from africa. -- obama is from africa. i'm going from bernie sanders to trump or hillary? at least trump will do away with the trade guilds. they are horrible. -- trade deals. they are horrible.

host: donald trump sing his remarks about the judge have been -- saying his or marks about the judge have been misconstrued. [video clip] donald trump: i understand the responsibility of carrying the mantle. i will never, ever let you down. too much work, to me people, blood, sweat and tears. [applause] i will make you proud of your party and our movement and that is what it is, a movement. chairman tweeting this out -- others in the party did not agree with what the presumptive nominee had been saying. jeb bush tweeting out yesterday --

mark kirk from illinois unendorsed trump yesterday -- here is charlie savage's piece in "the new york times."

this piece written back in 2009. could you switch parties in november? patrick and carnegie, pennsylvania. a democrat. good morning to you. go ahead with your thoughts. am absolutely a trump supporter. i was a republican for 20 years, switched parties when bush ran for office. be supporting to donald trump. you, the maligned attitude of the media -- he just continues to receive a nonstop

avalanche of deceitful assaults. the latest is the issue of the mexican heritage judge. i totally agree with him. there is an issue when it comes to a person's heritage or political background, that a person should recuse themselves. i agree with what he said. when you look at the background , why isn'tclinton the media focusing on that? disingenuousness of hillary as a candidate when it , theseo intervention manufactured wars -- she said in

her own words that she takes her marching orders from the council on foreign relations. donald trump will take his marching orders from the citizens of the united states of america. that is quite the difference from what we are dealing with now in a political discourse that is being completely manipulated by a corporatized media system that has nothing to do with the will of the american people and is a global system in place, which the american people are wholly rejecting. host: you and others might be interested in the "wall street journal" editorial. no one ever expected mr. trump to change his personality, but they did figure he would adopt the message necessary to win a modern election.

charles and middleburg, florida. you are thinking of voting for hillary clinton. caller: yes, i am. , you have tostory look at donald trump's personal history here. he has problems with the way the establishment republican party treated him when they laughed at desperatee was in being related to the british -- this is his way of showing them that he knows how to manipulate the party. son and next to his said we love the uneducated people.

that say they% will hang in there and do anything for donald trump. this can amount to what is going on in the early 1940's in europe when beer garden speeches were being given and the press was more interested in access to the people giving the speeches then calling them out on the things they were doing. onthan calling them out the things they were doing. fascism started with economic suppression. ,hey were taking our jobs ruining the standard of living in our cities and we want them out. that was the beginning of were mored the press interested in access then an calling him out. why won't they stand up to the this guy?

it's amazing to me that no one has called it what it is. when were quick statement. -- one more quick statement. it's like being at a party and you have 10 friends there and jokes whenugh at the they know it's not funny but they left together collectively laught together -- together collectively. host: hillary clinton's triumph and now her burden. now comes the hard part for mrs. clinton. many say they do not trust her.

eleanor in alabama. a republican. good morning to you. -- what dou think you think about the parties in november? you are thinking of supporting hillary clinton? caller: i'm going that way. donald trump saying some things we want to hear. i know he's wrong. it's wrong to get on tv and say we can go back to the old times. we don't need to teach kids to hit nobody. it's like somebody went to a been out all

night, come on tv and talk crazy. we don't need to hit nobody. we don't got the right to hit nobody. a president that talk crazy all the time -- he saying the things we want to hear about the mexicans. i worked with them. host: i will move on and leave it there. one other quick story in "the associated press." a story about how this early nomination call for clinton by the ap sent the media scrambling. the chairman of nbc news was dining with matt lauer monday night when his phone rang.

we will take a break. when we come back,

representative scott garrett will join us to talk about proposed changes to dodd frank wall street legislation. ♪ >> on american history tv on c-span3, sunday morning, we simulcast c-span's "washington journal." with guest craig "reagan'suthor of revolution." nationalrepublican convention and a close race between gerald ford and ronald

reagan. see ford's acceptance speech. >> i believe the party has a platform of bold colors with no pale pastel shades. >> we visit the women's equality national monument in washington, d.c. and to the work of nina allender. >> you can see in this image, she is very slender. her skirt is above her ankles, which was also quite different at that time. her hands are on her hips. she throws her hat into the ring of politics. >> a political cartoonist for the national women's party from 1914-1927. saturday evening at 8:00 p.m. eastern on lectures and history.

they developed this notion, there were 9 million african-americans. 90% in the south. -- less than had 20,000 had a college degree. dubois. a series of nasa films. science reporter, food for space travelers coming sending the --blem of feeding astronauts food for space travelers, looking at the problem of feeding astronauts. plants and bacteria or a combination thereof.

you would have a small farm in space, a microcosm. you would produce your own food and regenerate oxygen. for the complete schedule, go to www.c-span.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with congressman scott garrett, republican of new jersey, the chairman of the capital markets subcommittee. let's talk about dodd frank. there are some changes being proposed. first, what is the dodd frank legislation? why does it need to be changed? guest: we have an hour to go into this? [laughter] host: don't take the full hour. guest: we could. about after the crisis in 2008 when the democrats controlled the house and the senate.

crisis.lems of the they did not deal with the underlying causes and they came up with an over 2000 page bill called the dodd frank legislation. it has had a disastrous impact upon the economy and wall street and main street. numbers, weat the are in the fallout of the dodd frank legislation. host: proposed changes to it by republicans? guest: we've been making changes bit by bit, acting mostly in a bipartisan matter. the financial services committee is bipartisan. we deal with much of the issues dealing with dodd frank. the majority of the legislation

is bipartisan. reforming dodd frank to fix it in areas we can agree with. the chairman was in manhattan. he was laying out the proposal for further reform of dodd frank to get the economy back on track. proposal, thest financial choice act. i want to read a bit for our viewers. encourages banks to raise more capital in exchange for less regulation. repeals the volcker rule. gives more oversight of the consumer financial protection enacts heftier fines for financial misconduct. what is the volcker rule? why does it need to be repealed?

guest: when they passed dodd frank, they took a collection of things the democrats had on the side they wanted to impose on the marketplace come on wall street and main street that they had been hoping for for a long time. one of them was the volcker rule . to basically put limitations on what banks could do. if you dig down into it, you realize the crisis of 2008 had nothing to do with proprietary trading, how banks make their money. that was not the problem. the problem was the real estate marketplace, mortgages. that is what push the economy over the edge. they put in all these other things. volcker come after the regulators try to say how do we implement this new cumbersome arcane rule, said this is not

what i intended. i did not intend for the banks to be restricted in this manner. that is what we do in this legislation, rollback that requirement, that restriction on the banks. banks to raises more funds in exchange for less regulation. guest: this is fundamental. sure theu help make doesn't get into this situation of having to bail out the banks text time? if you listen to the sponsors of the dodd frank legislation, they said we will not have any more bailouts. which is good. if you read the dodd frank legislation, you realize it did not publish that could test did not accomplish that. that's you realize it did not accomplish that.

elizabeth warren, democrats on our own committee realize dodd d the does not en potential bailout for the big banks. how can you prevent the next crisis being bailed out by taxpayers? say, banks, make sure you have enough equity capital in the ,ault so when things go wrong you can turn over here and know that you have enough capital available to stay afloat. that's what we do. raise the requirement for what they have to have sitting on the sidelines. host: let's listen to what elizabeth warren had to say about what the republicans are proposing. [video clip] >> he and his fellow republicans think the poor wall street banks

have suffered too much under the new rule and there is -- it is time for them to return to the good old days before the 2000 and crisis when these banks could run wild. i only have five minutes today, but let's look at the many problems with the wet kiss for the wall street banks. the first is the congressman's big tohat he can end too fail by repealing the financial stability oversight council's ability to designate huge financial firms as too big to extrand put restrictions on them. too big toou can end fail by stopping regulators from calling firms too big to fail. i don't think that's how it actually works. host: your response? guest: she and i agree that dodd

frank did not end too big to fail. i think she would agree that dodd frank did not solve the problem of banks being too large and the taxpayers could be there the next day to bail them out. so, what do you do about it? the current law has something about the financial stability oversight council which is supposed to sit back on high and look out across the entire horizon of the financial marketplace and say you are systemically risky and you are not and so on and so forth and make these designations. once they make that designation and set your bank is financially significant and systemically important, that label of too big to fail and if you do fail, what is going to happen?

comes inyer ultimately and will be bailing them out and that is what we want to end with the ability for the taxpayer to be called on again to bail out these big banks. host: gary is up first in pennsylvania. democrat. good morning to you. democratsu blame the for not going further with the dodd frank act. why don't we go back to glass-steagall? i want to know who dropped it. was a democrats or republicans? we need to go back to it. worked, and i'm not going to believe anything you --, because elizabeth warren is not running for anything, she is not trying to influence that thebut she said stock market is going to fail because the derivatives still was not taken care of back

whenever we changed it, back then. i'm interested to hear what you have to say. guest: i would disagree that she speaks the gospel. i would say she speaks partial truths and that is the part where she says the. frank -- back when they passed it, she and the rest of them said this would end too big to fail. now she realizes she was wrong. clip had went on, she would've agreed with us that we needed to take additional action. as far as the comments about derivatives and trading, derivatives had nothing to do with regard to the crisis. the crisis was credit rating agencies giving a plus ratings to mortgages that were thenulous, and

securitizing them in arrangement and putting them out there and at the end of the day, the government stepping in, saying these mortgages are good, because the taxpayer was also going to bail them out through freddie mac. dodd-frank does nothing about the underlying causes of the crisis, nothing about fannie mae and freddie mac and he should be asking elizabeth warren why she was so supportive of those and why not working with republicans to and these other government subsidies. i'm sure that taxpayer does not want his money to go to the big banks and that is what we are trying to do. thaty have some points on one as far as what is then and what was -- what is then and what is now. you look at what the banks --

what banks are failing. if we had last deal in place that then, we would've had a number of banks that would have still failed. guest: when you began talking about who was responsible or what happened in 2008, you started with the rating agencies, you did not include the banks. host: i only have 30 seconds. seconds. i only had 30 the rating agencies made mistakes, they were couple because they put the stamps on things that they should not have been doing. the government was responsible. the federal reserve stepped -- stepped in and said you could look at indicators such as

someone's income and their welfare payments and these other payments and still say that these people are legitimate people to be paying. the government with mentioned to fannie mae and freddie mac was saying we are going to buy up all of these securities, even though we, the gse, should have been smart enough to say this is garbage. these are mortgages with no documents, and we are putting taxpayer dollars at risk. in one sense, they were being told by the government what to do, go out and buy and increase your portfolio of mortgages in low income areas, but you can get one that is backstopped by the gse and the government.

a senses were, in pushed into it, but i would agree with your point that the responsible as far as the mortgage lenders at the time. now is should be doing trying to come up with legislation that addresses the and elizabeth warren would agree -- that addresses that and elizabeth warren would agree. i'm saying the way the republican look. they -- they said donald trump is good. thought trump has bad judgment.

-- [indiscernible] i'm disgusted with the democratic party. they said obama divided the country. they started billing him as a black president. a lot for the congressman to respond to. he said a couple of things, like we have a divided country. i think that is true. look at the maps of the presidential race. i agree with him on that. alongk the divide is more policy ideas. we all agree on what the

problems are -- well i think we do. we agree there are problems with the economy, that our kids are not able to get jobs. millennials are still living at home with their parents. what the problems are, the divide comes about because we have different solutions to the problems. on the areas that idea with, financial services, the democrat idea is all we need to do is pass one more law or regulation or maybe 2000 more pages, and that will solve the problem. the republican idea says we probably have enough laws on the books, let's try to figure out which ones are working and enforce those in which ones are not working and get rid of them and that is what we are doing with dodd-frank. doing it in ais

bipartisan manner. our committee has passed more bills than any other committee. 50 or so have gotten through the process and 30 have made it all the way through and gotten support from the white house, meaning that that does not happen if it is just republicans. that only happens if the democrats are on board. we are divided, but we can do some reform. host: i believe he said that donald trump has bad judgment. hillary clinton has said he is not fit to be president, that he does not have the temperament. guest: he certainly has a ,ifferent temperament than i do but he brings a different type of temperament to the white house. right now, he is for the first time in his life, in the political realm. he is making his way through

that and his temperament is that he is in a fight to get the presidency and he's going to show distinctions between himself and what hillary says about her position. he is in presidential race mode right now. if he was here, he would tell you that he has the temperament that will get him elected. host: do you believe he does? guest: my position has been that i will be supporting the republican nominee, and i think it would be good to have someone in the white house who would be addressing the issues that the previous caller was talking about, jobs and economy. we cannot have eight more years of abysmal economy. hillary says she just wants to do a continuation of what president obama has been doing on economic issues and they have

been a disaster for so many families for so long. primary, had your own yesterday. you will face a well-funded democrat in november. are you concerned that donald trump could hurt your chances? guest: i am focused on my race and what i am doing in washington and how the voters back home perceive me and appreciate or not appreciate what i do in washington. as far as the republican primary , i think i got the highest number of votes that i ever have as a candidate for congress. i think the voters are saying they are supportive of my slow growth economic reform ideas. donna -- don in michigan.

caller: hello. individualssales by has gotten wrapped up in the dodd-frank legislation. how privateerstand contracts between individuals has anything to do with wall street. eliminatinging at or reducing the regulations on individuals? don't see how limiting and private sales between individuals has anything to do with wall street. further,act goes limiting how many sales can take place. one thing we do in the reform is to say, this caller and all your other callers are

in a better position to decide how they want to run their lives as opposed to any bureaucrat in washington. reason, to address these issues, we look at something called the the consumer protection financial bureau which was a new entity created in the dodd-frank act. this was a new entity unlike anything else we have ever had in this country. you have one person, the the -- cfp the cfe b. he does not have a budget that goes through the appropriation process so that congress can say yes you can spend money here or no, you cannot. all he has to do is take out a cfpb tok and write

the tune of half $1 billion and it will be given to him from the federal reserve. i asked people from his agency, are you accountable to the house or senate? no. are you accountable to the president, the inspector general? no. are you accountable to anyone? one person can make all of these decisions and regulations unilaterally. outdirector can write regulations on credit cards, any financial you can think of and if he likes it, he can say we can have them but if he does not like it for whatever reason, he can say the american public, i don't think you should have that type of deal and you and i cannot have it. the consequences to callers like

this, like they might need installment sales, they may not have the wherewithal to pay craft -- pay cash or have a credit card. he can just knock them off and that is wrong, to have one person unelected that has so much power. in california, michael, independent. caller: good morning. with -- yousue cannot understand that you are dealing with a group of people who are rude lists, greedy and have no conscious morals. with roughly $600 trillion, i do not understand how you can stand up for corporations who are corrupt and expect to get bailed out again well main street and our children suffer and watch and learn that crime pays. guest: i agree.

wall street is greedy, and we need to have regulations on wall street. we have regulations on the street. we do not want to have bailouts for wall street, again. we do not want this caller or anyone else to use our art -- our hard-earned tax dollars to bail out wall street. bailouts,ainst the the democrats voted for the bailouts. the democrats were in favor of bailing them out, i voted no on the bailouts. democrats passed a bill called dodd-frank which put into law a bailnism to bail them out, out the greedy wall street people the next time we have a crisis and yes, there will always be a next time. what we are trying to do is to say no next time bailouts.

to the point of where we have agreement between republicans and democrats, republicans and democrats agree that dodd-frank did not end the bailouts, did not end the taxpayer being put on the hook. something needs to be done. we have put forward proposals to end it and we are getting some .emocrats to agree with us and youeet is greedy need to have regulations in place and laws. played out,that jeb we doubled the fines for bad acts by bad actors on wall street. i think we are on the same page. host: maryland, democrat. caller: good morning. representative garrick, good morning. andve been listening

waiting to get in and say to you, that the whole problem with the meltdown that we have had is because there have been laws on the books, but we have not had people in congress or the white house during the previous administration that was willing to enforce. they look the other way. i was so sick and tired of hearing that the poor people who wanted to experience a dream of homeownership were being maligned and saying that they were greedy and doing things that were wrong. i am a retired real estate agent. one of the first things i learned was how to qualify a person. if i could not get a person qualified, they did not get the loan. if they do not get the loan, then we do not have what happened. there was systemic corruption all the way up and down the chain. even lawrence summers wrote an op-ed in 2011 about how there were obvious illegalities that

went on. yet, nobody has gone to jail, and i agree with the gentleman that says wall street is greedy. they are always looking to take our money. host: no one has gone to jail, what about that? guest: that troubles me that you can have this crisis and how many leaders -- how many years later are we and nobody is responsible in a personal way. i have a question on that, as well. it, whatthink about the caller was saying, putting the pre--- blame on the previous administration, it would be this administration which would have been responsible to doing what the caller wanted to have happen which is to have someone in handcuffs going to jail.

this administration dropped the ball, and did not do what we would've liked them to do, find out who was responsible. host: has congress investigated? guest: we investigate, but if themxecutive branch, it is who is responsible for doing that and come to think of it, the previous attorney general made some comment like some people are too big to jail. comment. off the hand he was asked about it and he said maybe some of these wall street players are too big to arrest and sent to jail because they were just too big of players. that is a problem and i agree. caller, thatthe people dropped the ball during the previous administration, the

bush administration. you have to say who are those people who dropped the ball. forpeople responsible overseeing the banks and those financial institutions, all the regulators, these are actually in the banks on a daily basis. you have to ask the question, where were the regulators? how come they did not catch these problems beforehand? the regulators dropped the ball, but then you had dodd-frank come along and basically said to these regulators who did a lousy job, even though you did a lousy job, we will give you more authority and money and hope that you do a better job next time. of course we are seeing the results that these failed regulators of the past are failed regulators, now. host: talking about era 'suldrons -- eric holden

comments. -- eric holder's comments. you are quick, as far as finding that quote. he made the quote, he tried to walk it back, but here we are and the attorney general's office did not arrest anyone. where was eric holder during all of this? sally in new york, go ahead. caller: to answer your question of when they eliminated glaste el. that was under the clinton administration.

the artificially low interest that alan greenspan in place created a big bubble in the housing industry. the clinton administration wanted to increase homeownership , so it was the government that forced them to increase the mandate, to purchase subprime 55%.ages of 3% in 1970 to the problem was that president george w. bush continued the policy, even though he knew there was a problem, but he continued that because the housing industry was boosting up the economy and keeping things going, so he allowed that to continue, but it was not actually the mortgages themselves the created the

crisis, it was the derivatives that were based on the mortgages and wants the housing market collapsed, all of the derivatives -- the banks did not have enough collateral to cover all the losses, and that is what is required -- that is what required the bailout. democrats blamed george bush, but it started in the clinton administration, but george bush continued the policy. guest: that is a great history. i was not in congress when clinton was here, i was when bush was here. this caller is right on the mark, and the bush administration would come and say we see some concerns over here, we see concerns with fannie mae and ready back and i remember saying, you should probably make some changes to

the way you are dealing with those, but their response was no, that is not the executive's job, we want congress to do that. when we try to do that, when we had the house, the caller points out, the mortgage housing industrial complex pushed back and many things that i, ed royce and others try to do over those years -- will was that famous quote by barney frank who was chairman at the time? we were saying that they could potentially fail and when they histhere will be a crisis, response was let's roll the dice and see what happened. we roll the dice, we saw what happened. it collapsed like a house of cards and the results are a tragedy. independent.s, caller: good morning. about theo talk

movement of work out of our country. nafta was concocted by the republicans and signed by parties are so both guilty as far as the loss of work is concerned, and i understand that the ford company -- and i used to be a foreign buyer, but they are building another $2.5 billion plant in mexico. the american factory worker is just getting absolutely screwed and we are getting no protection from our government. in fact, our government is aiding in the situation. andave lost so much work out -- our severe problem with

the middle class is because so many jobs have left the country. guest: where were those middle-class jobs in my parent's generation and they were factory jobs, working for auto companies and the like. those with a great jobs you get out of high school and make a living, by a house, and do all the rest. going tos are now mexico, over to europe and the like. you have to step back a moment and say why are the ceos and boards of directors doing it? why are they picking up a good plant in the u.s. and moving it to these other countries? they're not just doing it willy-nilly. if you ask them, they say the taxes here in the u.s. are up here and i can go to europe or mexico or canada and the taxes will be here.

i will have more money to pay investors and stockholders and pension funds. the second is regulations. ,f i am a manufacturer of candy and there are tariffs with regard to the raw material that i use and regulations on sugar, i can make my candy at a price here, or i can go down to mexico were i do not have to deal with those regulations. it is natural for the board of directors to say they will move the plant down to these other places. is the government responsible for the moving? absolutely, but it is not just pushing the finger -- pointing the finger at nafta. problem isuse of the the driving force that is pushing jobs out of the country, high taxes, high regulations. thatryan makes the joke when he talks about companies moving overseas for lower tax rates because our taxes combined

overseas for0%, him is just over to canada, across the lake. if a company can move that quickly and save half their taxes, they will do that. we have to cut the taxes and keep those good paying jobs. host: bill in illinois, republican. you got real close to the problem, but we did not go back far enough. the gentleman from new york was on point and you put one of the names to the problem. if you go back to the clinton administration, they wanted to increase homeownership among the low income families. chris dodd and barney frank roburritos co individuals who were responsible for these low

interest mortgages, and it is still happening today and it will happen again. how fannieere asked and freddie were doing, everything was rosie. chrisaid barney frank and they had huge bank interest, so naturally they wanted to get the bills passed. host: could it happen again? will bebsolutely, there another economic crisis, that is the nature of the market. the question is, can government do anything to soften it or make sure it is not as devastating, and that is what we are trying to do with legislation and make sure that if there were losses to be paid for, that they are not paid for by the taxpayer, but by the people who decide to take the risk and go into this market. host: karen in pennsylvania, democrat. caller: i have a question about

credit defaults. i would like to know where they originated and if you can explain exactly what they are, and i need to know why they are still legal, why people are allowed to sabotage a financial sector and bet that it is going to fail and make money on that. it does not make money -- it does not make sense. guest: i will not be able to do justice, or explain credit default or why people are able to invest in something they think will fail. people do that all the time, any time, anytime you are investing in the stock market or any investment, you're making a decision that you think that the company or product that i'm investing in is going to do well in the ones i'm not investing in are not going to do well. they't know exactly when first credit default swap -- it was out there, but ultimately there aredo is

mechanisms to spread the risk around and head your bets so you do not put all of your investments into one basket because if you do that and is go wrong, then all of your investments are shot, so you byt to balance that out assuming these things may go up in the future and these things might go down, so you balance out your portfolio. that is good for the marketplace , as it provides liquidity and provides availability of credit in the marketplace. i was looking up michael lewis's book, the big short. if you are interested in finding out more about credit default swaps, you can watch that interview on c-span.org. guest: i would not necessarily just go to michael lewis. his book gives it one sort of

slant on the impact of credit default. who represents the best side or what is the other side? guest: the other side of it, as , you trying to allude to are trying to balance things always guesst just what is going to go up in the marketplace. you can sometimes just what is going to go the other way. host: doug in baltimore, independent. caller: just a comment on discussions of criminal activity in the housing crunch. had all street journal

article about a executive who was tarred and feathered but was exonerated and she knowledge that she had made mistakes and maybe even breached contract. from what i have read, i do not believe there was widespread fraud. good point.is a that goes to one of the earlier callers who was trying to find the purpose or who was doing it. i have to believe there was some criminal activity, whether it was from high level, mid-level or the lower level, people were misleading people into some of these products along the line. i have to believe that was going on. yes there is greed, but there is always greed, so i have to believe with the crisis that we had, that -- if you dig down a two dig down into it, this was probably part of the problem,

some people during this. period of time have gone to jail for their activity, but a report was done that said the type of people that went to jail or not in the board rooms, they were down here at the very lowest levels, the people -- not the realtors, but people who are doing some of the inspections or something like that, or people lenders.ocal mortgage those are the people the justice department went after, which is just wrong. goes back to eric holder's comments, some of these people were just too big to jail. host: blackwood, new jersey, jack, a republican. caller: good morning. this has to do with the 2014 federal spending bill and the last-minute writer -- rider

that win on the financial reform. -- this -- the spending bill was 1600 pages and a page and a half written by a citigroup lobbyist to overturn legislation that would have forced the banks to move its the new and most -- entities outside the parent firm that would not be giving teeth by taxpayer money. i believe it was sean patrick billey who cosponsored the and wall street lobbyists, which is your biggest fundraiser for congress, please respond. i was probably a no,

overall on that spending bill. i cannot speak with authority, but i vote no on a number of the larger on the best type spending on a number of the larger omnibus type spending bills. last-minute addition to the legislation, so often times, i vote no. things get put in, at the last minute, so you do not have the opportunity to really that the theslation -- really vet legislation. we are trying to do an to moveation process

bills the regular order's you do not get surprised and it moves through committee or on floor in the light of day. host: donald trump yesterday saying that his comments about the latino judge have been misconstrued. house speaker paul ryan said it was textbook racism. who do you agree with? guest: i have not heard what his definition of what he was saying , i guess i have been waiting to hear how he is now saying he means it to be construed to be. is that his litigant in the case, he has a right to complain about a judge that is handling a case, then i agree with him, you have a right to complain about the judge if the judge is not going your way.

people complain about judges all the time. if that is what he is now saying about the situation, if he is saying something different as far as what the judge's connections are and to whom his connections are, those i have not seen. host: he referred to the judge as shifty. is that appropriate? guest: i never saw the connecting of the dots for this argument that donald trump was making. the dots of the ethnicity affecting the particular case that he had, so maybe he is making a clarification as to where those connections are. he has done something where he went back to -- he linked to a comment -- when she was a for the court to be a justice, she made some sort of

comment that in her opinion, that your ethnicity and your sex -- she felt that those things affect the decisions that judges or justices make. my position is that a lot of those things should affect our position. ,ou become a judge on any level your background, your sex, your ethnicity should be left at the door, and when you sit down and put on those roads, but of those things should affect your decision, you should be looking at one thing, at the law that the elected legislative body in that jurisdiction has passed and you should be applying it impartially and equally to anyone that comes before it. she made those comments and i disagree with those comments and if he is making the comments

that he is making. host: that you disagree with him. have not been able to see how he is connecting the dots. host: it was this past weekend. guest: i have not seen where he says the ethnicity has relevance to the case that he has. the case that he has is on trump university. i am not sure where the connection is as far as the ethnicity issue on the trump university case. it has something to do with if people were getting the proper credit or education or classes that they were paying for, and it started out one way and ended up someplace else. i'm not sure i am following the dots between the ethnicity issue that he is asserting, by the judge and the particular case that he has. host: for our viewers, if you

want to go back to the speech that the congressman was referring to, it is linked to the website, we have it on c-span.org. you can listen to what the justice had to say. north carolina, democrat. caller: republicans really tried to pretend that this economy is the worst they have seen, and what i notice is that reporters do not question that when they say it. this president has created at least 14 million jobs without the help from congress by any means, and there are more jobs available now than ever. there are certain areas that are begging or employees, but they would get on tv that this is the worst economy that they have ever seen. office,sident bush left

800,000 jobs a month were being lost. there was no job creation. host: we will have you respond. just go by what i talk about with my neighbors and constituents at home. one third of millennials are still living at home and their parents basement. if you talk to those young people, they would say this is not an economy -- not a good economy. we have one of the highest levels ever of nonparticipation in the job market, over 90 some million people are sitting at home because they are not able to get a job. god bless this previous caller if she and the people in her neighborhood all have jobs and careers and they are doing what they want to do. i'm happy for her, but i know a lot of people are hurting, and i'm not judging between this administration and the other, i just know that people are

hurting and that we can do better and we should be doing better than this and we should not have economic growth under 1%. we should have economic growth at 2% or higher and we have not seen that in the last eight years. host: congressman gary, thank you for your time. up next, we talk with a democrat from ohio, about trade and she will respond to what she heard last week when we were in laredo, texas. later, our spotlight on a magazine series continues with the boston globe about student debt crisis. ♪

>> our c-span campaign 2016 bus continues to travel throughout the country to honor winners on this year's student camp competition. recently we stopped in maryland and washington, d.c. 41 students were presented with awards in front of classmates, teachers, parents and local elected officials for producing 14 winning videos, including the first prize documentary entitled driving forward. won $3000 for their documentary on infrastructure spending. we also made a stop at woodrow wilson high school in washington, d.c., where mark jackson -- both received honorable mention for their videos and were awarded $250 each.

-- one $750 for their winning videos on money in politics and poverty and homelessness in the united states. a special thanks to our cable partner, comcast cable for helping coordinate these visits in the community. you can view all of the winning documentaries at studentcam.or continues.on journal host: here to talk about trade is congresswoman marcy kaptur, democrat of ohio. -- joint meeting, of congress and 11:00 a.m. eastern time from the indian prime minister, part of what he will talk to lawmakers about is trade with his country. is that a good thing? guest: i'm glad he will talk about it, because the market into india has not been -- in india has not been open to our products.

we exact a $24 billion a year trade deficit. they put high tariffs on their items and i am interested in what he has to say. becausejobs every year of that continuing trade deficit with india. host: why does that exist? guest: our country over the last quarter-century has used prowess of our economic to gain favor in foreign countries. our national security council and the economic advisers to the president have selected certain and theys to outsource have friends on wall street who are willing to finance that. you say could it be that kind of collusion, maybe it is just a mutuality of interest. what we see are huge elements of

our economy being moved elsewhere in the world and our people losing jobs. every year, we have a $500 billion trade deficit. we'll he had 38,000 jobs created this past may, but if you look , every 2 million jobs billion dollars of trade deficit translates into 5000 lost jobs. basis, if you have a $500 billion trade deficit, that translates to over 2 million jobs lost every year, over 30 years. if you are trying to make india, or china or wherever, there may be some overriding foreign-policy goals we use our economic system to achieve, but it hurts americans.

visitingtrict, i was in ohio, we have a big steel industry that lost thousands of jobs, and i represent those workers. in the same morning, i had to stand with workers ever being pink slipped after doing everything they could to say that particular operation-i had to go to the port of cleveland and watch the first ship come in with imported steel. this is the dissonance we are dealing with in the economy. that is why it has become an issue. finally, jobs and trade. host: when the prime minister of india talks about trade, our viewers will be able to watch it on c-span. is this a counterbalance to trade with china? does the united states need to have trade with china in order

to counteract what is happening? guest: that is the thought. we have to have trade relations with all countries, but they have to be balanced. i have a bill that says if we do not have balanced trading counsel with all these different countries that we have a signed agreement -- that we have signed agreements with, the president has to come back and report to us how he is -- he or she is going to balance those trade accounts. the figures for china, we are deeply in debt. their markets are not open to us. it is not a system with a rule of law. i have had to argue for companies in my district that have not been paid for product delivered. we have many strategic geopolitical objectives, but at some point, the chickens come home to roost in districts across the country, and that is what the workers of this country are saying. not only have they lost their

jobs in many of these sectors, there are not replacement jobs that are paying a living wage. time, been happening over that is why portions of the population are distraught and radicalized, politically. i have a professor the top me that economics is not destiny, but it is 80% of it. host: i want to show viewers what you had to say to us when we were in laredo, texas. >> what i want to see is a fair, balanced trade. i can talk about what is happening here. other people can talk about michigan and illinois and other places. i represent this area and the united states, so when we do the trade agreement, we have to make sure that we have fair trade, but at the same time, there are adjustments that have to be done for certain workers that we provide the funding to help

those workers retrain and make sure they get assistance. we can either dig ourselves a hole and act like there is nothing happening outside that hole, or we can be the powerhouse that we are, not apologize for anybody, do what we do the best, make american products and export. texas is the number one exporting state we have. exports from cattle, agricultural products, computers. we produce in texas, and we understand the power of fair and balanced trade. at the same time, we cannot fear going outside the borders. we are americans and we need to act as americans and make sure that we understand that we can compete with anyone. see over the congressman shoulder, the northbound, southbound traffic that goes into mexico, often

referred to as nafta highway. places in the country like the region that the congressman represent do the actual movement of goods. since nafta was passed, there has not been a single year where we have met his goal of free and fair trade. the u.s. has never had balanced trade accounts with mexico. we have lost millions of jobs to mexico. i have gone down to mexico and written a report of all the companies in the u.s. that have moved down there where art -- where workers earn $2.50 an hour. we were promised the mexican standard of living will rise, what has happened is the u.s. standard of living has gone down. has lost millions of jobs to mexico, including in the automotive industry which i represent in the north were

people have earned a living wage with retirement benefits, health benefits, they fought for that for a century, to have a middle-class wage and the mexican people earn $2.50 an hour. the government will say they passed laws, but they do not enforce them. their environmental laws are not enforced. we are creating a very uneven economy in the americas. is that what these trade agreements are about? there are certain winners, the owners and executives of these companies. whove met many of them travel across the border but will not ever stay there. i visit where people live. i would not want that for anybody. in youry-powered bulb little hovel with no freshwater. i would invite the congressman to travel with me to where the workers actually live.

it is a kind -- continental sacrilege. host: let's get to some calls. john, democrat. ,aller: i would like to say that if you take the fact that 95% of customers are outside the u.s. border, why are we not training in enter partnership and exporting? [indsicernible] nafta -- nafta had a provision that said people adversely affected by these changes would get funding to go for retraining. many people have not got -- not gotten that.

the issue of why are we not retraining in exports because 95% of our customers will be overseas. host: thank you for calling. guest: i could spend 15 minutes answering your question. we have many countries that could export that are not. you cannot export to close markets. they won't let you in. you cannot export to control markets, china for example -- controlled markets, china for example. we are kept out with tariffs. there are all kinds of barriers and our country is kind of a pushover in terms of trying to open up these close markets. we have never had a balanced trade account in japan with -- with japan in my entire career. , we haveink about that

, andbed all of these hits it is the big underlying issue in this year's election because effective buying power has gone down in our country for a bass majority of people -- for a fast majority -- vast majority of people. many workers did not know there was a retraining program unless they were in a union. i had a cousin who want to to a company he worked in and there was a lock on the gate. he did not know there was anything like trade adjustment assistance. lots of people fall through the cracks. those programs expired. we were promised there would be a north american development bank and 90% of the money would go to districts for water and develop highways for intercontinental trade. in the north, we were promised

10% of the money. we got zero. the north american development bank disappeared. the promises that were made under nafta never came true. what you say about trading -- training and readjustment. the federal government really never did anything. the same thing happened with coal country. what has america done for coal country and all those workers who labored in those mind? did we help them develop a green energy economy? no, we spit them out and say the washington funded -- all those people, why are they voting the way they are? for many, it is desperation. host: john, democrat. caller: good morning. i have a question and a comment related to trade and this discussion coming up with india. i would first like to have a bone with -- bone to pick with c-span.

the last are presented of that was on repeatedly said that the democrats voted for the bailout and the publicans voted against it and 125 republicans voted for it.nd 121 voted against in other words, more republicans voted for it, and no one challenged him on that. of course, it was signed into law by a republican president. it was called the emergency -- the emergency economic stabilization act of 2008. representative captor was there and she can or what i was saying. my question about trade, people by and large are tired of the term free trade as opposed to fair trade. people think of trade in

terms of, we are selling of goods over there, and sell their goods over here, the what it has become is the problem is more about companies moving their operations over to other countries, particularly american countries -- companies that are now global corporations and moving operations to take advantage of either much lower regulation, usually much lower labor costs. there has to be an economic cost to doing that. -- that ist people what is really hurting us and what needs to be addressed in these trade agreements is, there is always going to be different conditions and a fair trade agreement is never going to guarantee that we are going to be selling just as much over there as we are, over here, but there needs to be opportunity to do so. guest: you are 100% correct and it seems to me that when y, forents really go awr

example in the korean trade agreement, we were promised that we would sell 50,000 cars over there. one of the more recent free-trade agreements, we've gone in the red. in0 billion a year cumulative trade deficit with various countries translates into millions of lost jobs in this country every year. the trade issue is not tangential, it is central to what is happening in this economy. you can look back to when the main figures came out, only 30,000 jobs were created. look at the trade deficit. the jobs are being created in korea, india, china, mexico. there has to be a reckoning. i hope that this potential

thatign will focus in on so we can repair the holes in the hull. host: here are the numbers you referenced, this is the deficit number, 16.8 billion dollar deficit with let's go to richard in minnesota. independent caller. becausei'm calling congress never takes any responsibility for what they do. they pass these things -- the republican party has done for solvingothing any of these jobs -- the congress has done absolutely nothing . they won't vote for anything with jobs. they're the ones that have been stalling everything for four years now.

guest: we've not only had stalling, we've had government remember a- i committee called appropriations. we pride ourselves on making sure that our country and our country's federal government is strong and stable. water the energy and committee. we have a very good bill that is bipartisan. because of certain amendments that had nothing to do with the substance of our bill, the bill ultimately failed and was brought down. that is a real indictment on this congress and our ability to get the work of the nation done so we can have contracting by the department of defense, department of transportation, department of education, nasa, all the organizations that have to function for this great country. bickering inthe

the current republican leadership -- they did not even pass a budget this year. how are we supposed to legislate without a budget? they have a lot to account for in this election. i hope the democratic party takes over. i hope we provide the leadership of the country is looking for, including job creation and balancing outright accounts. host: after last night's ,ictories for hillary clinton she has enough delegates, should sen. sanders: out of this race -- get out of this race? guest: i'm proud of my party but i'm proud that both secretary clinton and senator sanders conducted a race in my party that was constructive.

our platform will change as a result of the hard work that they did. i was proud of both of them. they did not lose their temper, they do not swear, they did not denigrate. mr. trump has been shocking to me in his language in his , and his diminishment of people in our country and elsewhere. i terms of senator sanders, will leave that decision up to him. i have great respect for him. i endorsed senator sanders. i think his work on trade speaks for itself. working on affordability for education for the next generation -- his issues may a real difference in what we will stand for in november and beyond. he trails clinton and

total delegates, pledged delegates, superdelegates, number of states won. hillary clinton finally broke through the glass ceiling. they could risk it all with a fight between the near left and far left. guest: he has been a mayor, in .umber -- a member of the house he conducted a great campaign. hillary clinton, she did not get the nomination in the prior cycle in 2008. you have to admire that fortitude. that positive energy. they were both senators. find anthey will

accommodation. 48 hours for the exhaustion they've experienced. i heard on the news this morning that the president will meet with senator sanders this week. there is a lot going on. i think the way our party has conducted itself is worthy-- host: nick in california. a republican. caller: good morning. thatld like to mention this representative is the first one i've heard or read about that sounds true about these glorious trade agreements -- it's a bunch of lies. the general public never gets any information that really means anything about most all the bills that are passed in congress because they do not want us to know about it. -- news media is controlled

controlling what we find out about. it owners, they don't want to be printed. we need more information about what is actually going on, like this representative has said today. you are correct that the not cover the trade issue thoroughly, the math is -- every billion dollars of deficit translates to a million lost jobs in this country. a loss of millions of american jobs every year. we have to face that directly.

we have to open close markets did japan's market has been closed, china's market has been closed. india's market has been closed. we have to insulate communities from this hemorrhage that happens because the national security council in certain powers that be here in -- theton the side outsourcing largely financed i wall street banks. -- by wall street banks. we have to have a real reckoning. -- forl that i proposed the next president come if we have more than $10 billion out of balance every year for three years with korea, with china, with mexico, with india, the list goes on, we need to figure out how we open those markets to our goods and not cause all

these problems that our exporters are having. we have to have a response here. whether it is tariffs on therted goods, slowing down admission of those goods into our country -- we don't want to create walls. we want to create open trade. would lift the incomes and likelihood of millions of americans across this country. we need a restructuring of our national security office. that advises the president on the economic side. host: edward in maryland. democrat. c-span.good morning, congresswoman, i'm very appreciative of your knowledge and your energy on the subject matter. there is something i would like for you to look into. i'm a phd african american scientist with nasa.

we are not protecting our knowledge base in this country. we have to here is for the high energy laser system that is not even made in this country. they are closing down industries in the u.s. we don't build systems in this country anymore. costd something called for accounting. stuff.to bid on myself, we have many scientists over here in this that are not native americans americans, they speak other languages. if not for nasa, we would be

further behind than we are right now. guest: thank you for calling in. would you have touched on is a very important issue for us. committee the defense as well as homeland security. i take a deep interest in the defense production act. and our defense industrial base and trying to plug the holes we see there, whether it is strategic metals or large systems, optics. have a free market, but sometimes the free market does not always act in the interest of the u.s. for these critical technologies, we have to pay special attention and believe me, my ears are open to you and others from around this country. i represent nasa brook park in the state of ohio.

they advised me on many levels regarding critical technology. i'm very grateful for your service to our country. and very concerned about critical technologies we could lose and critical materials that would not be accessible to us. please come if you have additional information, send it to me. host: bill in indiana. independent. i'm originally from youngstown, ohio. i consider myself one of the lucky ones. i worked 38 years at the gm plant. over the years that i worked there and lived in youngstown, it makes me sick to see what happened to that town. detroit and ini left skidmarks getting out of there. what was once a great city just went down the tubes. the only way i can see that things are going to change is if

the american people in general would decide to do everything they can to buy american products. some you can, some you cannot. products, but i refuse to buy a gm card not made not made in-- car the u.s. we were supposed to be able to ship them -- if they are not accepting it, i would stop korean cars from coming in. guest: thank you, bill. you are asking some of the critical questions we have to pay attention to here to get a balanced trade relationship. the fact that american incomes is a signal that so much has been outsourced -- you mentioned automotive parts.

which employ twice as many people in our country -- you can go to northern mexico and see these automotive companies. ohioave a street called s.d michigan avenue's we need to balance those trade accounts and open those closed markets. where that does not occur, we have to have action by the international trade commission in washington after three months , decisions that would benefit the american economy, not just lingering from a protracted decision-making. -- not just lingering, protracted decision-making. --t: you represent

guest: the entire south coast of lake erie, practically. host: the cochair of the whole employment caucus. tom in woodbridge, virginia. republican. caller: good morning. i can't tell you how much i appreciate c-span -- it is the most authoritative source of information in the u.s. today. i think the words we use are very important and they can be accidentally misleading. you keep saying there's $500 million in the trade deficit, which we cannot refuse. however, you also say that we lose millions of jobs every year. if it is the same amount, $500 billion every year, it is essentially the same millions of jobs every year that we don't have. by millionsing up

of jobs, it's the same millions of jobs we don't have. guest: they are cumulative. caller: i understand. there is a deficit. an employment deficit where we don't have those jobs, we are not losing those jobs and we are not going to gain them back. if anybody has studied the andory of economics industrial growth and industrialization will know, these manufacturing jobs are never going to come back to the u.s. again. guest: i don't know where the gentleman lives in virginia. i don't know if it is northern virginia or southern virginia. i represent a very large district. we've just had jobs from ford toor's return from mexico our region for the big trucks.

for a variety of reasons. we can make it more energy-efficient and our workforce is superb. i do not agree with the statement that they can never return. caller, the youngstown plant is now assembling the chevy cruz vehicle. who would have said 10 years ago this was even possible? but it is happening. i'm seeing a reverse and manufacturing across our region. if the obama administration had not helped us to refinance the automotive industry, all of ohio would have looked like youngstown used to look. youngstown is working very hard on the advanced manufacturing, try to advance the technology to help give rebirth to an area that has been very hammered by the outsourcing.

the steel industry in particular. virginia and north carolina. in north carolina. caller: i am a 100% trump supporter. trump is saying everything you are saying and he is a businessman. do you not think he would be the best person to take over this job since the last administration has done nothing and hillary would only be a third party of obama? guest: i tell you what, i doubt that i shall vote for him, but i'm grateful for him for including the jobs agenda in his platform. this is one of the issues that will be critical -- whether it

is secretary clinton or mr. trump, this will be a battleground. ,ichigan will be a battleground pennsylvania will be a battleground. if you look across our country where we have had a lot of lost jobs because we happen manufacturing -- happen beenacturing -- have manufacturing, this is part of who we are, it is in our dna. people in the technology industries the west are agreeing now that the so-called high-tech salvation might not happen if all those jobs are going to be done in india. these candidates will have to duke it out on which one will produce an economy that is more robust. i welcome that for our region. host: stephanie in california. look at.

-- democrat. caller: i have one question i have not heard an answer to. paying oure include american companies tax breaks to take our jobs overseas? guest: we should not be. we should not be rewarding outsourcing. thisf the issues in campaign for president and frankly for members of the house and senate should be what are you going to do to fix it. if there are benefits moving production abroad, we ought to plug those holes in a tax reform bill. we need to look at the tariff schedule. there are different things we can do -- i really think the next president needs a stellar set of advisors on the trade and tariff issues. beyond the entities currently set up.

i really think they need a much more sophisticated team with the objective of moving our trade accounts into balance and figuring out what does that mean for each of the countries with which we have had trade relations because they are not operating in our paper and the american people know something is wrong, but they rarely look at the trade deficit as an underlying huge hemorrhage. we have a budget deficit because we have a trade deficit because is not growing fast enough because we've have hemorrhaged soe many jobs. i think secretary clinton will need a much more robust set of advisors who are dedicated to income growth in this country,

as well as opening markets abroad. host: john is our last call for the congresswoman. independent. caller: thank you for c-span. i wanted to ask the congresswoman whether or not -- i am basically a libertarian. two active of a government, way too much agulation -- too active of government come away to much regulation. way too much, regulation. we are no longer and industrial nation. we are exporting huge amounts of this new technology to other countries in terms of services and products. it is a whole new world out there. guest: i don't think we should

put our eggs in one basket. we cannot import our national defense. we cannot import a lot of critical technology. we cannot always depend on others. the globe is changing. we have to be internally self-sufficient. i don't think you would want a country that could not feed itself. in terms of being a libertarian come i can tell you that i represent a particular company that was not paid by a firm in china. that company using every legal system we happen global entities -- we have an global entities could not get their money back until i went to congress and spoke about this and had to deal with the chinese embassy here in washington to try to get their money back for goods they had delivered.

the systems do not work perfectly. we need governmental structures just as wefer -- have a legal system that has a body of law so when companies disagree, we have a way of adjudicating and reaching a decision. many of these countries we trade with do not have robust systems like that. you need a system to stand behind you and that's why we are the most powerful country in the world, economically, militarily. the effort itpect took to get us there and not damage anything as we try to make reforms, some of which you would b suggested. host: senator sanders is vowing to stay through the d.c. primary next tuesday.

congresswoman, thank you for the conversation this morning. guest: thank you very much. host: when we come back, the college debt crisis is even worse than you think. that is the headline in the boston globe sunday magazine. we will be right back. ♪ >> this is an amazing family story. increased.is there are great love affairs. fathers kill their sons, wives have their husbands overthrown and murdered. it is a family unlike any other. simonday night on q&a, discusses his book "the romanovs ." the dynasty that ruled russia

for over 300 years. >> all the girls and all the children were wearing bizarre bulletproof vests. vests sewn with the romanoff diamonds, hundreds of diamonds so they could have money in case they escaped and needed to buy their way out. they spent months sewing these diamonds and. when the bullets came, tragically, they made their confusion and agony much longer because the bullets bounced off diamonds and they did not die. sunday night on c-span's q&a. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we've been focusing on recent magazine pieces. they, a recent edition of

boston globe sunday magazine, the college debt crisis is even worse than you think. joining us from boston this morning. why is it worse? , the: we look at college debt crisis and think this is hopeless and hard, but a big number, $1.2 trillion. when you get under the hood and look at what is happening with students, particularly low income students, they are being packages that are unsustainable from the start and they are not graduating. they are getting in the worst situation possible, getting the debt that comes with college without the degree because of financial issues and that means they do not have the extra earning power the degree would give them but have the extra burden of college debt. slice of this big crisis.

host: how many low income students are we talking about? what types of colleges are they going to and why? guest: this is a good question. generally, there is a sense -- most of us realize that college -- veryon portable unaffordable. aside from the affluent, college is a hard buy now. i focused on low income students because there is this sort of assumption we have in this country which is very dated when you look at the data now. people who are low income maybe they did not do so well in the birth lottery, but at least they do not have to pay for college. the stated assumptions about aid being sustainable for students. students are going to public

colleges and increasingly to private colleges because they public optionsof and there's a lot of private colleges that need to fill seats must so they go to students and attract students to come there. if you look at the packages they are getting, the aid packages, you can almost guarantee when many students start that they will not be able to finish financially. host: why is that? you talk about the expected family contribution. se how chelateso copulate it -- who calculates that? you bill out the fafsa form and the government will your family can

contribute to the cost of that education. was zero, the government determine the family could not provide resources to the student. and yet, when i look at the cackages for the zero ef students at many private colleges, the gap they were given was the entire family income for the year for the student. that was one year to fill the gap. beenis why the problem has largely underappreciated. those students are being saddled with lots of different loans. it looks on paper as if they can swing it. we have such a strong culture of aspiration around college in this country that most families

think come ahead, we want our children to do better, so we can make this happen. they work on smalltime horizons of can we make it work for this first year. colleges have done a disservice to students by not making them step back and say this is a four-year commitment. most students are not graduating in many places in four years. what is reasonable? a lot more honesty and clarity and transparency from the college end is needed to make sure students coming from first-generation immigrant mightes for whom english not be the first language, that they know exactly what they're getting into. we are talking about the student debt crisis, it has tripled. if it has been

calculated that the expected family contribution is zero and yet there is a gap between what they are provided for by the colleges and what the college actually costs more what kind of loans are they getting? represents their income for the are, how are the getting that loan? guest: that gets to the heart of what the problem is. there are options on the table and it looks like it might be the colleges know from experience that it is not doable. but, they're leading the student sign on to these plans. packages, you have a couple different varieties. stafford subsidized loans. the government is paying the interest while you are in school. there is stafford unsubsidized loans.

the interest is accruing while you are in school. you are responsible for that interest when you get out for you are out ofr college. interest rates are comparatively low, in the 4% range. there is something i find quite insidious, the parent plus loan. a lot of colleges encourage students to use to fill the gap. here's the interesting thing about plus loans. they are the only conventional loan on the planet that has no debt to income ratio. loan for thetake a entire cost of that college education for a year regardless of what their personal income is. they could be making $5,000 a

year as a single parent and theoretically take a $40,000 loan, plus loan. that is close to insanity and yet, that has been one of the drivers that has allowed students to get on this unsustainable path. there are private loans on top of that, which are often less favorable. some students are going around and scrambling to get relatives to cosign on loans. once they are in the system and , that'so stay in school when it gets tracy. -- gets dicey. start to suffer because the students cannot stay above water financially. that creates pressures academically.

many end up leaving. threecome students, out of every four are not graduating. host: our conversation with neil swidey from "boston globe." parents, 202-748-8000. college students, 202-748-8001. if you are still paying off your student loans, 202-748-8002. in the piece for the "boston globe" sunday magazine, the average price for tuition, fees and room and board at a private for your college was just shy of $3000 per year in 1971. david is a parent in cincinnati. caller: my name is david jones.

i think that colleges are not transferring enough courses from previous schools so that the student does not have to take as many courses to graduate. universities and waste a lot of money on unnecessary situations. they have too many graduation requirements. the first point is an excellent point and one i've been railing about because once again, you get under the hood and see these things that most people don't realize until you get under the hood. this transfer issue. we know that colleges are really expensive, putting an enormous economic strain on many families, regardless of their income. we know that most students at a four-year

college after high school and graduating for years later -- four years later. most students are leaving school, switching, swirling around trying to make it work and yet, our system is still based on those old assumptions of the traditional path. what happens is executive what david has said. students get into bines where they go and take courses at a community college to save money and then go to transfer them in the college they are going to will say we don't think these meet our requirements. they invalidate half the credits you took or more. a student told me the other day she was very pleased that the four-year college she transferred to from a commune to

had accepted 60% of her credits. college hadty accepted 60% of her credits. she wasted a lot of time and creditsying turn these -- trying to earn these credits and then they are kissed goodbye. ,t students go into a college maybe a private college and they run out of money three or four years into it before their degree and they have no choice , the student says i will transfer to a cheaper public university and get a degree. let me transfer these credits i've earned and paid for, by the way. colleges are not letting students carry balances from semester to semester.

when they get into financial trouble, it is that last semester. can i have myy official transcript so i can transfer to another cheaper college? , no.are told you cannot use those credits and convert them into something usable from even the you've already paid for them. you are on the hook for the loans. problems systematic that are making the financial student debt crisis much worse. yolanda, a parent in california. caller: i wanted to agree with that point. we have three young adults in college. two of them have graduated.

looking at the cost of schools, it would be nice if schools would lock you into the cost for the four years as an incentive. two of them getting out in four years and the cost was challenging. from which ra's allowed them to get a supplement on the living. guest: a great idea. some colleges are trying that. when i was asking college presidents to print on the award letter that comes with students can you print with the four-year expected minimum price is going to be so the family can have an idea?

this is the number we will have to wrestle with. mortgage, and on the last page it takes you what you will be paying over the 30 years -- tells you what you will be paying over the 30 years. if you can make this more manageable -- colleges with enough planning could do this. if students meet certain requirements, that price will not keep galloping ahead. host: david is a student. your next. -- you are next. caller: i've done student loans for the department of education and i'm a student and apparent. -- a parent. the low income student, these professors target them knowing they are borderline, they don't want them there and they make it hard for them to finish so they

fall out of the system first. loans -- wetudent preach status and being rich, there is also a problem with corruption and greed within the system. when the government subsidized education in the 1940's and 1950's, let's say you buy a product and the product says this costs $1500, the government --s i will subsidize that the greedy system will go up another $500 just to compensate knowing that you will be subsidized by the government. host: we will take your point. there is a really knotty mix ofnaught

factors involved with government-subsidized loans and colleges in college costs. -- and college costs. we are reaching the end of business as usual. reformseds to be some so people actually see -- we started to move toward even basic things. the government started this scorecard to say let's put out facts. let's let students look at what salary age median student who went to this college is making 10 years after enrolling. it is pretty illuminating in many cases. at some of the colleges i looked at with a 10 year alumni salary

-- the 10 year alumni salary was $30,000. those numbers do not add up. oakland,tri in california. still paying student loans. caller: here in oakland, in california, schools were funded through property tax. therefore, you did not have to when youour classes enrolled in school. until affirmative in the gop allowed minorities and women to go to theyl, all of a sudden will take it and put it into the

government when it is actually funded through property tax. the schools are not funded by the federal government. very: nationally, the is a mixed picture of student debt. that in many cases matches what the historic investment from -- theate has been states that have had robust state funding for their higher education systems generally don't have lots of private colleges. lesstudents tend to have debt than students in states where there's lots of private and less historic investment in their higher-end systems. that has left us with this patchwork. look at the $1.2 trillion of student debt, it looks different state-by-state. host: russell in the bronx. a student there. good morning.

caller: how are you doing? i am a student. i went to the art institute of year, twoia for one semesters. --that time, i cumulated accumulated $15,000 for one semester. that is low by their standards. at the time, i was not working. i retired from the phone company after 25 years. i was in the process of just try to start a new career in graphic design. after a year, i realized it was not worth it. at my age, i cannot afford to go not -- my income would

allow me any grants or anything from caps off, so i had to take the stafford loans. ie stafford loan meant once left school, i had to pay off this debt. i went one year and saw it was $15,000 i said, wait a minute -- host: i want to add on to what russell said -- the subtitle to , we tell students they need a bachelor's to get ahead, but for many, the numbers do not add up. guest: you crystallize the aspirational side of college. students are just doing what we told them, this is the most reliable route to climb the economic ladder in this country. up unlesss do not add the math makes sense for each

step and each year along that path and it has to make sense. in workinge colleges with the families to make sure you war game this out. costs, thee structure, and how is this going to change over the four year horizon? long, we left it at that aphorism of it is an investment in your future, so it must make sense. this is one part of your story. at mt. ida, nearly 50% of the freshman class that entered in 2012 had dropped out by the following fall.

guest: that is exactly right. when i was impressed with, when i found college administrators willing to confront these issues and institutions, now ida was mount ida was -- one where students fell into a trap where they came out with the debt and not the degree. what are you doing there? these existential questions are really important and yet, many college administrators recoil from having to do that because you've gone into higher education believing that it is a noble pathway. in many cases, it is. you want to believe in this idea that college will help low income students make sure their futures are better than their past. outhe math does not work

and college has to be a good financial fit, you are actually participating in college being not the great equalizer we've been led to believe, but a wide ner of the economic divide. you have to have college and miss raters willing to confront those difficult questions. host: joseph in new york. -- mary marry and then and then neil swidey will respond. mary in grand rapids, michigan. caller: my name is mary. i have three kids that have graduated from college. be career centers in the schools. if you don't get a job, you

shouldn't have to pay that loan unless they help you get a job. a career center should be put in each school before kids have to pay all this debt. a lot of kids are committing suicide over these loans. these loans are overwhelming them. what do you think, sir? guest: i think it is a good point. many colleges have career centers. asking to see those, not the new dining hall the college wants to show up, but see what is the college doing to prepare my child for this because we are investing a lot of money here we want to make sure there is some kind of output. career centers for a long time have been places where there were binders of resumes that you

could work on our college alumni networks. inre is an congruence -- in what thend wh corporate world needs and what the alumni networks provide them. jenny is still paying off her student loans. welcome to the conversation. caller: thank you so much. i am 67 years old. in 2001, when the economy had a ,uge downturn, i lost my job could not find another one for

over a year. and finally decided that trying to find a new job in that economy was like trying to buy the winning lottery ticket. i decided to go back to school for a profession that was in very high demand. the health care field. i had to go back to school in my 50's in order to be able to sustain myself. i've government does not invest in reeducating people when there is a big economic downturn or a huge demand in an industry that does not have a supply of bring inpeople, so we people from other countries. host: how much did you accrue in student loan strike to pursue this career? trying to pursue this

career? about $200,000. to get rid ofing all your belongings and try to move into a dorm. host: you took out loans to pay your mortgage -- caller: to pursue my education. today.nurse still, the payments are more than my house note. guest: i think that case illustrates the larger problem. what happens -- we saw it with the great recession here. by theare displaced economic disturbances in the country can often take that as a time to go back to school to get

a new career, new training for that. what you see is this paradox where a lot of particularly public colleges around the country during the great recession saw a swelling in their enrollment and at the same time sought cutbacks in state aid because that was a place where the state coffers were drying up. the public colleges are scrambling to make their payments. what you are seeing now, another disturbing national trend for public colleges because they have lost state aid and they are getting overrun with demand after the recession, they go out-of-state, affluent

students to build the class because the students that are closer to the pay full cost of education, that takes up slots for out-of-state students that would normally go to in-state students. they will come up with merit scholarships up at us dollars, -- to get affluent students from out of state to pay more. that creates even more difficulty. host: paul in virginia. a parent there. caller: good morning. have you actually looked at the reason the costs are going up? the federal government has gotten involved in it. whenever government gets involved, everything goes up. guest: i think the federal government is a piece of that.

there are a lot of unfounded mandates that require reporting commend new agencies, new demands on the colleges. those administrative structures get thicker and often don't get cut back during belt-tightening times. colleges -- once october 1 comes along, the student loans are dispersed from the federal universities get the money and the students are on the hook to pay those many years later. there is no connection between the colleges is making sure the students finish, between the money they get and making sure

the completion is there. host: another parent in virginia. caller: thank you for taking my call. the man is wrong -- the andnd outweighs the supply the costs go up. we ought to diverge people out of colleges. -- divert people out of colleges. i'm a graduate of law school and trade school and i think trade school is the right place for a lot of people that are wasting space in college. in atlanta, a georgia. paying loansbeen for a long time. to 2% anddropped down they would not allow you to refinance.

i would have paid that loan off a long time ago. how interest rates are affecting people's ability to pay back. guest: the first about trade low income students are done no favors by making only one path right. haveaspiration is great to a major students can pursue don't penalizeut students who are interested in a trade or some other program. they should be celebrated at their high school graduations. we should make sure the opportunity is there. jobs now, nearly half the are jobs that did not previously require a college degree. interest rates, that is an issue

that students should have flexibility to renegotiate a lot of these loans and refinancing new way that we can do that with the housing crisis that has not happened yet and it should. on theeil swidey's piece "boston globe's" website. a lengthy piece featuring several students. you can read it on the sunday magazine website. neil swidey, thank you for your time this morning. we appreciate it. guest: thank you. it was a pleasure. host: the house is about to gavel in print we bring you to the floor -- about to gavel in. to the floor. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its

caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable sallite corp. 2016] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c. june 8, 2016. i hereby appoint the honorable mike bost to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, prine, speaker of the house of representatives. -- paul d. ryan, speaker