tv Washington Journal CSPAN June 12, 2016 7:00am-10:01am EDT
7:00 am
agreement. shirleyuthor craig discusses the 1976 republican convention and how the outcome set the stage for ronald reagan's election four years later. >> good morning, the debate on capitol hill. trail, donaldn trump expected to make his case against hillary clinton. we will have coverage of his remarks and hillary clinton is heading to one of the key battleground states. her first visit to ohio since securing the democratic nomination. on wednesday, the president will join mrs. clinton in wisconsin. thes sunday morning, june 12th.
7:01 am
we will begin with your calls and comments in the first half hour of today's program. later, we will turn our attention to property in america and the iranian nuclear deal, one year later. we will also look back at the 1976 republican convention. one of the most contentious in political history. our line for republicans. and for democrats. you can begin dialing now. tell us what is on your mind this sunday morning. also, our line for independence. we can hear from you as well on our twitter account and social media accounts. thank you very much for being with us. let us begin with some of the news from cnbc and the debate going on in great britain and in europe as the brexit endangers the u.k.. that statement from prime
7:02 am
minister cameron aced on an interview in the london observer. the state pension increases and a spending would be in danger if voters choose brexit. that is from prime minister cameron. polls showing the majority of british citizens are in favor of leaving the european union. the cold to face reality of the austerity that would be required if the u.k. were outside the european union. he referred to the research from the national institute for economic and social policy. the brexit would create a black hole. the front page story this morning, politics and the washington post. hillary clinton or donald trump. one nation is perplexed. this story is cowritten.
7:03 am
hillary clinton and donald trump being the presumptive nominees of their parties. the voters are more focused on the negatives than the positives. that is begin though with your calls and comments this sunday morning. first, on the democrat line, victor. i would -- i have a couple of comments. i have a question -- donald trump has been giving this federal judge hell. i want to know why this judge has not had him arrested and thrown in jail. i would certainly think that was contempt of court. host: ok. this is from inside the new york times magazine. donald trump promises to bring a business acumen to washington but his resume reveals more than
7:04 am
what he intends. let us go now to james out of seattle also on our democrat line. [indiscernible] these are the voters, voting today. they believe what donald trump is actually saying because this is what they want to do. they want to impose the laws on other people. they want to restrict people, lock people up in jail. they want to spend money on these things to hurt people. it is not to help people. [indiscernible]
7:05 am
7:06 am
1:51 a.m. eastern standard time. online at cbsble news.com. there has been a tragic shooting in orlando. orlando.ing of another mass shooting last night in orlando, ing florida. the night club where it took know of no gun control of any kind. carl of west ind, virgin your mind hat's on this sunday morning? pessimistic ery about this country now. election, and i think about obama blocking the what-- hillary clinton's --
7:07 am
do you call it, indictment. e will block the indictment of hillary clinton, just like he thing, and that's oing to create a heck of a uproar in this country. i see this country turning into third-world country. secede ates wanting to from the union. i see many civil wars, and people coming in this country urning the american flag and flying their own flags like mexicans do. i don't have much hope for this country. i really do believe in the future, you will see separate stat states, you will see states wanting to secede from the union and will set up their own government, and that will be the end of the united states of america. host: carl, who is your candidate?
7:08 am
caller: well, gosh, i don't have one now. i'm telling you, i'll have to for trump, i'll vote for i think hillary clinton is absolutely a crook. she has used the state department to fill her coffers. made money off of that like you will never know. it will all come out. it will come u, out by how much money she has department. state her husband, she made it so she could make a lot of money. host: thank you very much for the call. we have a lot of people waiting, from west virginia. you mentioned donald trump. from the new york times, an xpensive piece on his casinos in atlantic city. it's hard to read it, but this start of the trump sign mahah. taj
7:09 am
how trump failed in his casinos. ankrupting an empire but pocketing millions. the piece points out mr. trump empire by is borrowing money at such high rates.st the business had almost no chance to succeed. time ade four trips each to accept -- and returned to the courts for protection from lenders. escaping owly financial ruin in the 1990s, mr. trump avoided a second crisis by taking the casino's public and the risk to stockho stockholders. mr. trump lagged, posting huge losses year after year. bondholders lost more than $1.5 billion. next, lafayette,
7:10 am
indiana. democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am a democrat woman. ldren who are i educated, worked like dogs. work the same. when donald trump in virginia war in speech on cold pocahonas, and the people in the udience gave war cries, i was never incensed in my life. obody in this world, and no group of poem that -- people hat donald trump will not insult? what kind of people vote for man and wait until he gets president and start he don't ebody that like. sweden, finland. he just has to do it. he just has to do it, because they hit him first.
7:11 am
thank you. host: grace from indiana. recruiting in the battle ground state of florida, recruiting yesterday. he went after mitt romney addressing the crowd at the convention center. he called hillary clinton -- this is what the trump calls for unity. the party has got to get their come together d to win. he slams those opposing y.eir candidac aisy in yonkers new york, democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. this year's election cycle has joke.othing short of a the choices this year, i sit political person that has always been involved in politics, my community, and the local level, and i'm just vexed.
7:12 am
choeices? the two these are the best we can get? a nation would get, perplexed. there's a green party candidate. johnson is the libertarian candidate. those?you vote for any of caller: i am actually to idering going green just exercise my sacred right of voting. he other choice is to stay home. donald trump may get in. told, hillary clinton scares me more. i'm a new yorker. 've seen trump'sa antics for many years and it's almost like we're voting for the lesser of evils. it's a shame that this is the forward? ca can put
7:13 am
there has to be other people and we're just going to have to go avenues, not just skip this election cycle but start looking. we have to start looking for other people. host: thank you, daisy. in a couple of streets. one viewer saying, what has - ing war on poke poke -- pocahonas, another demoffended. hey, no matter, you will never guns.ur .ood morning freddie, go ahead. turn the volume down. otherwise we'll have a lot of feedback. us? : you with caller: yes. host: go ahead. aller: i truly believe that
7:14 am
. is man host: i think we lost you. steve from virginia, good morning, republican line. caller: yes, about three years langshi fan med you can process where burn any carbon you want to without co 2. 2 en wants to sequester co back in the ground. and if you go to prince william county, ben lowman park, i built lands.0 constructive wet so we can build constructive wet lands. space e limited to that between the north pole and the south pole so we really don't any environmental problems are. what we have is a bunch of politicians who want to take $1.5 trillion out of the economy
7:15 am
every year for like these wind west upon mount storm virginia, you go up there and look at them. it takes about two hours to get up there. what it is is about 10% of them are locked up. crane u have to take a that runs on diesel fuel. mills, put them on a mexico so them to there's no big place that repire devices like that, fix them up in mexico repair them and put them up on the poles. so we really don't have any green alternatives. the mirrors in las vegas burst recently because they haven't quite figured out that the earth rotates. to move mirrors. host: thank you for the call. from the new york times. to get's better perspective on illary clinton, you need to go
7:16 am
back 34 years. 1984. 19fema senators. emocratic but a look at one's cand dannies and what it means for the democrats. bobby is next. fitzgerald georgia, independent morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i just wanted to say that i am voting for trump only and as of the choices far as one of the previous callers, why would anyone vote for him? look at hillary. has her own, when she was secretary of state, $55 million funneled to an online college where bill was an honorary chancellor. she received escape $16 million.
7:17 am
the details will come out. i want the new york post to give coverage.ind of trump has been out there for years like hillary has been out years.if people pretty much know who they are. my primary coverage, is like the media, it's time for a woman again like it was time for a black again. that can always weigh in people's minds and nothing wrong with that. but when they get on that and getst as a major theme, it obnoxious for me. trump are.o vote for when he speaks, i wish he was more omposed and articulate. has many tely hillary skeletons in her closet. mind-set ow what her is, but i just don't trust her. for ould anybody vote
7:18 am
trump? my question is, why would anybody vote for hillary? bobby from fitzgerald, georgia. to third place among independence voters. took a umptive nominee eating in the latest fox news poll finishing behind gary johnson. the former new mexico of governor, 23%. hillary clinton at 22%. more details available online at ny post.com. open at lines are 202-748-8001. 202-748-8000 for democrats. jesse. caller: yes. public has done the ation as disservice to have donald trump as their candidate. i relate him back to the cabbage doll. at one time, the cabbage patch
7:19 am
doll, also traditional dolls and michael jordan. of this is s ridiculous. from the's go to chuck republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. richlandump was at the richland.f va you have to be knowledgeable of are. you say and where you within 30 miles of richmopped or richmond, is in honas, right here virginia, he actually insulted indiana have several communities. anyways. a misnomer
7:20 am
you should be saying native americans. insulted many native american groups here. virginias, they don't know their own history. they actually allow it. you're to know what saying when you don't go places. people like the indigenous people right here in virginia. host: so you're a republican, charles. who are you going to vote for? we don't have y, anybody to vote for. i'm sorry you asked that, think, is al ryan, i great guy. over here in virginia, all again, the tea party movement erie cand der.
7:21 am
and paul ryan would be in run for candidate. it's extremely odd what has can ened to the republi party. host: charles from the republican party. likened donald trump to fascist. aeo of hewlett packard, at event sponsored in 2012 by metromney. itt romney saying he cannot support donald trump because the president needs to be a role model, somebody respected, but good reason so many will vote for him. mitt romney saying he will vote libertarian candidate gary johnson. he may vote for gary johnson. he just hasn't decided.
7:22 am
let's go to shirley in new orleans. democrat lines. good morning. caller: good morning. shirley.d morning, caller: this is she. know, i'mcalling. you kind of perturbed with people that just call in and just say things. they say anything. like that man that says hillary crook because she has a school. where did he get that from? yes yes, i see people -- where does from? ome and that man that says only do you can something between the north and the south pole. mean, these people are too ignorant. learned person. i'm not stupid people. these people go on and on and on about really lies. lies.ust tell lies and
7:23 am
and then the other people who republicans who call on the democratic line, i was a egistered independent, but i always call on the democratic line because i will never in for a republican at this stage and time. that caller voted there, because he was really a gentleman. but uh-uh, i'm really sick of steve. oodbye, host: shirley from new orleans. another report from political.com. urious g.o.p. donors stew over donald trump and donald trump was at the faith and freedom forum on friday. say about the republican party and his race ahead. donald trump: hillary clinton's wall street agenda will crush working families. ats, not t bureaucr parents, in charge of our lives, education, ldrens'
7:24 am
can't have it. he'll be trapping kids in failing schools. she'll plunge our inner cities deeper poverty, if that's possible. hillary's agenda of taxation, and she wants to raise your taxes big league, folks. big league. get used to it. your she wants to raise taxes tremendous. regulation, bureaucracy, government control and open borders have economically destroyed our inner cities. er policies will be a crushing blow to all poor people in this country. her education policies, her economic policies, her immigration policies, and her our policies would plunge poor african-american hispanic turmoil and nto dispair. en into
7:25 am
host: he will be in manchester new hampshire, tomorrow. speech. be covering his he hillary clinton on the campaign trail in cleveland, ohio, and we will have that as well. one of our viewers saying, quote, hey, if republican they s are furious and don't like mr. trump, they else. do 98 to should be or invest their money in something productive. what happened to the funds they collected. davis from the independent line, good morning. caller: good morning. i'm looking for c-span to lead new tools we he have in social media a little bit more maybe so we can audit representatives to the wills constituents. and on the tax programs, i'd like to see a flat sales tax. and i don't mind paying tax, if i get the proper securities and
7:26 am
don't have deal with the third party. host: david, thank you. let's go to greenland maryland. hat's on your meaned this -- mind this morning? caller: thanks for taking my call? i am a life long republican and party line since reagan and i can't do it. i can't vote for trump. what can estion is, the media do to push at least libertarian into the debate to bible to be there? understand there's a 15% cap and i don't know that they're going to get the 15% without some coverage. host: ian, thank you for the call. the front page of the new york times. staying in n favor the e.u. but they are not big on voting. carla young us.
7:27 am
thank you for joining the progr program. caller: i drank the clinton but after the '90s they left office i realize how did. damage their policies i doubt if the clintons have ever seen the inside of the church if ever. and they're very callous and i honestly ord very because when bill clinton was addressed by a black lives matter group, and they were calling him out and hillary on addicts he young predators and clinton said, he said, well, you know, it was aaddicts that were killing black lives. i thought, 13 years old is a child. the next day, he said, i almost apologized. are you kidding me? hillary was on hard ball with chris matthews and about a month
7:28 am
ago, he asked her point blank, are you a war hawk? he said, no, i believe in diplomacy. he said, what about libya. said, no one died. and what about the ambassador chris stevens who never got the security he needed and he died. and there was a man in the audience, an african-american had been on death row for 30 years, he stood up and sked her a question about criminal justice and hillary went on and on about how we're so much with legal assistance and blah blah blah. and had been there on death row almost 30 years and died. he never addressed it. host: the breaking story overnight, the horrific shooting that took place in an orlando night club. toll may be as high as
tv-commercial
7:29 am
20, as well as 42 others injured shooting.lando details coming to us just within 15-20 minutes on the magnitude on what has happened orlando.ght club in the headline is, the mass shooting, in which the suspect is also dead but again, as many dead and le confirmed 42 injured. early reports coming from the orlando, florida. turning back to politics. his is the story from dan in utah. looking at three republicans. scott walker and house speaker the different views on donald trump and the republican nominee. illary clinton out with a new web video over the weekend taking aim at trump. >> is world-famous from making a fortune.
7:30 am
from being famous or having a fortune. ow, you too can be a source of wealth with trump university. ust follow these three easy steps. >> sign up for trump university. >> step 2. at up for the university the amazing price of everything you had. >> the courses encouraged people o pay for everything with multiple credit cards. >> step 3 -- there is no step 3. you won't actually learn anything. it's that easy. entire operation was set scheme. not a school, but a scheme. >> it's straight up fraud. people working inside the group saying their tactics were unscrewedulous. >> misleading, fraud. separate a scheme to the elderly from their money. >> we'll guarantee you'll give
7:31 am
trump university a glowing review, because we'll make you. on't miss this once in a lifetime chance to give your alleged ed money to an billionai billionaire. call now! in this what's to come campaign from hillary clinton.com. we earlier heard from donald go to john in massachusetts. morning. nt line, good caller: yes, good morning. i want to make a comment about media. if we don't do something about breaking up the corporate media, gotten h can never be out to the people. most people have are a piece of one can put d no the puzzle together. there are so many -- the ultimate corporate take-over the media is not talking about the transpacific
7:32 am
partnership which is bad for the working class people. they're not talking about the european trade agreement going on. the truth has not been gotten out to the people. unless that happens, nothing is going to change. it's pretty sad when we have the choice that we have is the best or the worst for the president of this country. that's all i'm going to say. host: this is from a call. the caller brings up a good point. and will a war hawk send our soldiers into harm's way and leave them hanging. charles, republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. we're 20 trillion in debt and you're asking people different things, about the budget. 80% of the budget has already been allocated. you're at about 20%. the only way you're going to do anything about the budget is there's going to be a heck of a
7:33 am
lot more business. and i'll tell you, if you people worried about somebody pocahontas.ebody person asn't the first who did it. the reason he did it is because of her cheek bones. she said she had high cheek bones so she could get into school. i don't care. mitt romney and john mccain, i will never wins this andlary e have a supreme court that stacks by hillary, they will go down in history, and all the people that are upset, do you ealize that the people that voted for trump, there were more than any other time in the history of the republican that got off their can and
7:34 am
went out and voted. and i guarantee you, as far as the old regime of the republican party, they're down. i will never ever ever, as far as who's in there now, they have spent money like crazy, they thingst the president do that he legally shouldn't have had to do because they sat on their hands. so basically, as far as the name calling, i don't care. but i do care about my children and my grandchildren, and what you people are calling in and talking about is absolutely ridiculous. point.final go ahead, charles. charles, thank you. thank you for your calls and comments. in the program, we'll turn our attention to ryan details ul
7:35 am
what he thinks the agenda should be regarding poverty. deal, the iran nuclear one year later and what's it making. and the newsmaker "washington journal." xavier democratic chair vicera. le ticket. an all-fema here's a portion of that conversation that airs after. >> would be hillary clinton as vice president. what do you think is the idea of ticket.n all-woman is america ready for two women presidential ticket or would secretary clinton have someone serve another presidency hispanic. >> she would have great options from.ose
7:36 am
you add someone like senator another dimension dynamism. it would be an effective one-two punch. my thoughts are she would have -- have the decision, her decision would be like many decisions, just a wonderful one people. > your name has been floated for v.p. do you want the job? >> democrats have an opportunity the majority. i've been working for that quite i've worked with secretary clinton. fortunate if i could see democrats reclaim the majority in the house and the senate. working with a president clinton, i would be looking forward to working with her as a
7:37 am
member of congress hopefully in a leadership position. but let me tell you. that we all tunity look forward to, having a good november. important thing is a good november. where i am, my thinking is i'll effective member in the house of representatives work for. what i'll ation with onvers congressman visera. e is the chair of the house democratic caucus. you can watch it at 10:00 eastern time. you on the se of west coast. oining us here at the table is rebecca valez, the center for merican process, serving as managing director from poverty prosperity program and ctor, a senior fellow with policies. thank you. are hone lines
7:38 am
202-748-8000. if your income is $25,000 or less. and for all others, 202-748-8001. of course, we're talking about oferty in large part because the speech by house speaker paul ryan. he wants e items that the g.o.p. to run on. herself a portion of his speech this past week in washington d.c. 1, reward number work. umber 2, tailor benefits to people's specific needs. number 3, demand results. hold each other accountable. number 4, improve skills and schools. number 5, help people save and plan for their future so people have their own horizon they're shooting for. this is how you create poverty. this is how you create opportunity. people moveyou help
7:39 am
on ward and upward. host: paul ryan this week. robert, you've read the speech and read the agenda items the spoo speaker is putting forth. are they workable. guest: they are workable but the general ideas are good ones but he needs to go forward. he's very accurate in telling he general public we're spending over a trillion dollars a year on cash, food and medical poor and low income americans. f you look, for example, at families with children that are low income, that comes to around family.per large spending. he's accurate in saying when we assistance, what we do is require able-bodied people work or ssistance to prepare for work, about 90% of the american public agree with that, but none of our welfare huge crisis hat. a
7:40 am
in the collapse of families in low-income communities and says we shouldn't be penalizing low income parents who choose to marry. we should be encourage ing that rather than discouraging it. he talks about getting rid of excess benefits and fraud. strategy. od host: rebecca, what about spending from 1996, and now increasing to over a trillion ollars on means testing benefits. so clearly, we are spending more results. etting the caller: that's something i'm glad we're starting off there. peaker paul ryan's favorite talking point when it comes to overty is that the war on poverty allegedly failed. in order to arrive at that conclusion, what i have to do is math.agic in particular, it doesn't count those nce, many of which
7:41 am
types of programs put in place by the war on poverty or expanded by it doesn't count or food stamps, for example, for 't count tax credits working families. he looks at the poverty rate in 1967 and the poverty that doesn't even count the on poverty. look, it barely budged. it isn't working. at the measure of poverty that takes into account hose types of programs, what you found is that poverty was cut by 40% between 1967 and today and if not for those vital programs like social security, assistance, our poverty rate today would be twice as high as it is. back the reality. those are the numbers. for that ryan, paul ryan earned pinocchios.
7:42 am
host: let's look at the numbers. are listed as le in poverty. that is a 15% poverty rate. 7% of the population or 21 million people are described as living in deep poverty or 43% of or over 5 million poverty. ve in close guest: i would believe those numbers are garbage. but ecause of paul ryan it's because of the way the big government agenda is set up in washington. when we go out to measure whether a family is poor, we say is your income below a certain amount but of that trillion spending.f welfare only about 5% of that is income spending. like someone coming up, i would you feedy, my kids and you give them $200 come back the next day
7:43 am
i don't have any money, would you feed my kids. $200 we gave you? that.'t count deep poverty is zero and regular sick% lower lose to than what is said there. the underlying issue is if you poverty in terms of sobrieufficiency. lyndonr ryan is correct, johnson said when he started the poverty. he said i don't want to put more people on welfare. i want them to support themselves. causes of efeat the poverty. is at sense, speaker ryan
7:44 am
correct. host: robert rector, earned his hopkins.from johns mily learned her law degree from the virginia school of law. let's hear from those earning less than $25,000 a year. james in westboro, georgia. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i'm just wondering, what's the from mitt of a person romney's caliber that has money. excuse me? yes, go ahead. caller: what's the difference between a man like mitt romney and has millions of dollars a person that's on welfare that a s an extra $50 or $100 month in food stamps? she's lied on her application to stamps but for somebody like mitt romney, isn't he lying about the money he has
7:45 am
and not paying taxes? they're both stealing from the government. what's the difference. guest: what the call her has in on is because one of the major goals unfortunately of conservatives in how they characterize poor people in this country, by focusing on what they characterize as high rates of abuse, what and that's really about is about scape-goating individuals who are struggling in this country causes of g the root poverty. robert and i actually agree, should be doing is having a conversation about the root causes and robert is right that unfortunately, americans have not actually increased in to be self-is s h self-sufisient. the movement is in the wrong direction. what we've seen over the last decades is income equality
7:46 am
at historic sites. families are working harder and harder than ever and falling behind. and further as a result, because of stagnant wages and minimum wage in this has become country a poverty wage and lost more of its purchasing power in the '60s, more families are working turn to programs like nutrition assistance and keep food order to on the table. that's the conversation we hould be having. how can we all get behind raising minimum to be families are able sufficient. but paul ryan claims he wants to push wages up. minimum wage increase the bar at the level of people earning a living income.
7:47 am
raise what it would do is the advantage for poem to get jobs. if you take a single mom, for example, with two kids who's working full time at the minimum $14,000 a arns about year after taxes. where the normal poverty is. oh, she can't possibly support a family like that. that's because we hide the entire welfare state. in addition to that, that woman being g to be get $12-13,000 a year from programs earned income tax credit, the additional child tax credit, from food stamps. she'll be getting medicaid. full pical mother working time at minimum wage actually as earnings and welfare combined around $37,000 a year. f she's in housing, she'll be getting around $47,000 a year. that is always hidden and obscured in this discussion.
7:48 am
e have a very are very generous welfare system for supporting low-wage parents and i don't object to that. i do object to some of the excess in it. we don't need to pay $47,000 a year, but we need to recognize the massive contribution that makingpayers are already to support these families, and n most government statistics, that's ignored. in fact, if you raise the that mother, all hat's going to happen is that the number of jobs available for the least-skilled workers is going to go down. that's going to push people back into poverty because our welfare is designed to encourage work and to supplement wages of eople who can't support their families if they're low skill and low wage. compassionate approach and we spend a ton on it and we eed to give the taxpayers the
7:49 am
credit due for the amount of money we're already spending to families. ese host: quickly following up, this republican rebecca vallez. 1996 when the president signed welfare reform. those receiving welfare 1996 and the ough relatively sharp decline through 2014. your reaction? guest: so i think it's really about nt to have a kvkz laws did 996 welfare and how it impacted america. unfortunately conservatives and his speaker ryan colleagues who put out this plan the abor under misapprehensive that tanf has wild success. of in reality, that could not be farther from the truth. the reality is that by converting that program into a
7:50 am
flat-funded block grant, it's now lost a third of its value since 1996. precious few families are helped by that program as a result. in four families with children today actually tanf andassistance from able to getare they family above the poverty line. n mississippi it's a couple of hundred dollars for a family of three. i would have to take issue with obert's characterization of assistance in this country being or how too generous excessive. tell that to the 6 million income is hose only food stamps. tell that to the millions of decades longare on wait list waiting for housing 80, stance and paying 70, 90% of their income towards utilities.d tell that to the one in three nd four jobless workers who
7:51 am
don't qualify for unemployment insurance. that's the reality of our safety net today, incredibly effective as it is, as reducing poverty, it, additional holes, whereas -- which is what really would like o do, is not a strategy for addressing poverty in america. it's more of a strategy for people. ing poor host: our round table with americanallez from the center for progress and robert. the census bureau breaking down lines.y on ethnic african-americans, 26%. hispani 24%.nics, poverty, whites 10% and 21% of all children, 15.5 million live in poverty. 1 in 5 approximately children. bert from detroit. good morning. conversation.
7:52 am
caller: good morning. how are you today? you. fine, thank caller: great. i've got a couple of quick to the s and comments welfare that the gentleman is talking about. to address corporate welfare or the corporate tax loopholes that's allowing all these taxes to be hidden away from the american people and the theory.-down economics that's why we're in some of this overty situation as it is now because republicans are so bent on protecting the wealthy and not letting them pay their fair share of taxes. rector. ert guest: i agree we have welfare lead in trying to remove unfair benefits that certain corporations get. but if we could go back to the larger issue of poverty, ms. -- vawell, es and i agreed
7:53 am
that a lot of theedz policy numbers are erroneous because trillion dollar welfare state. they ignore the $40,000 in cash, housing medical benefits that we give to each low income family with children in the united states. ll the statistics she cites later go back to that same error benefits. the overty rate, none of that includes the current welfare estate. what you see is that after reform, real poverty measured by the actual income people get that dropped dramatically for families with children, and it dropped to an historic lows for lack families with children because of what welfare reform ago.0 years
7:54 am
e don't want to set at home to collect welfare state. we want to you get a job. official a drop in poverty and real poverty and poverty rate l when you measure what they actually get from earnings as dramatically re is lower than it was 20 years ago, had a really 've bad record for families with last eight r the years under the obama recession. this poverty has gone up during that period. it went down very consistently due toyears before that, welfare reform. because what we want is a system, not a welfare system that pays people a check withay home and do nothing their lives. we want a welfare system that as pushes people did toward employment, pushes people toward marriage, but if they still can't support themselves,
7:55 am
we will supplement that income very generous elfare system, but you have to count these things accurately and honestly in order to see achieved. host: what is poverty? for an individual, $12,000 year less. for two people, $15,000. $19,000., for a family of four $25,000 and a yeare members, $29,000 or less, courtesy of the census bureau. joining us from tennessee. good morning. us. ks for being with caller: thanks for having me. yes, my question is, if somebody is making over 25,000 a year, income taxes should that person pay? guest: if it's a family with kids, they don't pay anything
7:56 am
back. they get a check back in the mail through earned mechanic $5,000.worth about they get many generous benefits. when we talk about, for example, there are about 50 million people who are poor in the united states. according to the government's data, the typical family that's, quote, poor, the average house or apartment larger than a a pooran and german, not frenchman and german, these individuals typically have air conditioning, a computer, a wide screen hd tv. they have internet access, if ask them, were you hungry 80% of n a single day, them say no, i wasn't even hungry. they have wide screen tv, satellite cable tv. that's what poverty means in the united states and when you the way poor ibe
7:57 am
people live, most of the american public say no, these people clearly aren't poor. it's an illusion, because you're least, - at the very you're hiding the welfare state, hiding re also probably a lot of earnings that are going on. that's a good thing. thing but we need to be honest about hoich we welfare state and the consequences of that. r exaggerate poverty in orde enforce greater welfare spending year after year. ost: you can see it is particularly higher in the south and southwest. it is about 17% in the darker, oranger, red areas. t is below 11% in states like new hampshire and in maryland, in west virginia, is particularly high. kentucky is particularly high and the midlevels in 13 and 15% kansas,s like illinois,
7:58 am
south dakota. uest: i think our agreement ended about 15 minutes ago. i'm going to have to take issue with what you just said and i think most people who are watching this program would also take issue with it and find it quite offensive. so to say that neither benefits too is country are somehow generous is about as much of a that tale as it is to say wages are too high, which is something that the republican presumptive nominee said on the campaign trail, showing how out campaign e is on the trail with everyday americans. tell that to the family who runs out of food stamps the third week of the month which is the orm for people receiving nutrition assistance and i alarmingly fore the low numbers of people who receive help from these programs. i know you painted it as everybody is getting every type of assistance but that's just
7:59 am
not the case and that's because thesestic underfunding of kinds of program ares. we really need to take this conversation back to where i was hoping that paul ryan and his colleagues were going to go with this document. a really an gave powerful speech. his first major speech as we need to push wages up and get people off the sidelines and went on and on points and what we've seen is that better lip neveron the same page has been more apt a cliche than it is this week, instead of seeing a real agenda that would actually move the needle on poverty in this country and we see more unity, of the same. we see slashing effective programs, wanting to send them to the states to go some the record b when as shown woiz with tanf and
8:00 am
and ding with medicaid other financial interests. and what we saw with his budgets. and i think the most brazen policy we see in the entire document is that the house legalize bad financial advice. they actually proposed rolling administration's fiduciary role, which is critical to make sure that advisors don't have conflicts of interests trying to fatten their pay checks at the expense of everyone's retirement retirement. that's the proposal they're putting forth as opposed to an agenda that would create jobs, and boost wages that would ensure sick leave and paid leave, policies that families they can make ends meet and get ahead in this country. host: better.gop, it's the outline of the better way, house
8:01 am
speaker paul ryan put together this week, one of six issues putting ns hope to be on this year. vales. rector and rebecca from go to joanna waiting damascus, maryland, good morning. caller: good morning. to the to direct this gentleman from the heritage association, please. you can't have it both ways. here's the problem i see with republican policy. they object to minimum wage, period. they always vote against raising minimum wage. the argument is that it discourages jobs, which means hat more people would be working for even less money and at the same time, they vote for to cut the budget for safety net programs. ways.an't have it both but that's what republicans want to do. uest: well, the budget for safety net programs hasn't been cut for 25 years and as i a lained to you, if you take
8:02 am
single mother with two children wage, thatthe minimum oman, in addition, that she gets about $14,000 a year from arnings but she also gets another $12,000 a year in cash, food, housing and roughly $10,000 a year in benefits. condemning out by paul ryan because he used conventional statistic that is stated the entire welfare and she spent the entire next 30 minutes doing that exact same thing. i would simply ask a very basic question here. spend $1.1 trillion a year providing cash, food, housing and a small amount of social services to low income americans. that's $50,000 for each person that's officially poor so where in the world does that money go? do we ship it off to bermuda or something like that? no, in reality, that money goes
8:03 am
to an extremely generous, where, ve welfare system as i said, a person working at an mum wage, actually has income of over $35,000 a year, when you have these benefits, they do get these benefits. for example, the earned income 50% redit, there are about more people getting that credit to get it, gible okay. e have american families get ing that benefit but it doesn't show up in the statistics your trying to use or the sob stories. it's not true. where does the $1.1 trillion go? does it go to argentina or poor people? a reaction. et guest: we're taking the gloves off, aren't we, robert. unfortunately, one of the things you skew in those kinds of are health insurance and public education. you can't pay your rent. on the table food
8:04 am
because you have health insurance. you can't use your health nsurance card to make ends meet. what it does is prevent low-income people from dying in they had s because some basic access to a doctor nd preventive care, if they're lucky enough to live in a state that's expanded medicaid. pay the rent or gas or electric bill because the child election. to i think you have to be clear about the numbers. take the medical assistance out, which is half of the aid, medical assistance, you end up with $20,000-25,000 in benefits and housing for every poor american and we oth agree these numbers are garbage because we don't count any of that, and how can you possibly say, when we're spending $25,000 for each poor american that these benefits are meager? are we throwing these benefits -- i don't know, do we throw them in the ocean?
8:05 am
they go to poor people and you pretend that aid doesn't exist hysteria togenerate try to raise the spending even more. guest: robert, you're asking a really good question, which is where do these benefits go? one of the things that gets ignored by conservatives most of a lot e is the fact that of what we're actually doing is wages.iidizing low the study by folks out of berkeley two weeks ago found doing is we're actually spending $152 billion a subsidizing low wages, because workers who are working million at ard, 7 last count, are putting together to make ends meet. those people are needing to earn assistance, to tax assistance and medicaid because they can't make ends meet on alone.
8:06 am
that money is going into wal-mart and other companies refusing to pay a minimum yees as wage. you can attribute this as to a to story but we have remember the tragic story of the fernandez, which is face of poverty in america. she died a couple of days ago in her car in a parking lot outside donuts trying to sleep in between her four jobs she had taken to try to support family. that is the reality of what struggling in america looks like. fairy tale. host: i've got to jump in because people have been waiting. let's go to jackson in baton rouge, louisiana. good morning, jackson. caller: good morning. wo alling because i am a worker, and my income is under $25,000 a year. we became under
8:07 am
$25,000 a year because of the in ive government layoffs louisiana. i worked for the louisiana state overnment almost 20 years and parish for a government. i don't agree with, what is it, in theinition of poverty united states. what poverty are is here compared to what another on is in country. overty actually exists in the united states when you cannot make ends meet. poverty. meaning that you cannot live if you areor live as supposed to live responsibly as in the united states. compareefore, we cannot poverty with destitution in another country.
8:08 am
therefore, a person can eat every day and still live in poverty. host: thanks for the call. robert. guest: we can go back -- that's fine, that you can go beyond and as i said, poor american has a tv, one or nternet, two cars and so forth. mother who works full ime at minimum wage, most who work full time more than minimum wage. benefits? she get in when you look at the benefits, combined income in earnings and benefits that's close to $37,000 a year. you have to reconcile that. if that's not true, where does all the money go? spending $40,000 on cash, food, housing and
8:09 am
medical benefits for each low income children in the united states. that's 10 million families. do they not get that money? is it thrown away somehow? e have a shell game here where we go out and pretend that there re all these desperate conditions, and we do that by not counting all the welfare out there and ask for even more of which isght, all based on which you acknowledged at the beginning of the program condemned data, you paul ryan for mentioning that playing the same game. what is the full mom when you she getr benefits, does the earned income tax credit? she does. the additional tax credit? she does. the additional food stamps, yes. she hen you add it, does get medicare and med caid? yes. when you add them together, what's it worth? it's about $37,000 a year. if she gets housing and a do, er of single mothers
8:10 am
now you're up to $50,000 a year that the taxpayers are mostly paying and you're pretend pretending that -- that none of that exists. where does it go? n the middle of the atlantic ocean? host: good morning from our caller. morning.good what both callers have mentioned and the gentleman from heritage case for, is talking about the sources of the issues here, and a lot of these things, almost every one of them i can see. you ask me a question and i'll give you my view. it's government intervention and almost everything we've looked at, federal government, and the is, i think, more legitimate. the federal government intervention and all of this stuff. the issue, for example, of getting your health benefit from work having super high tax rates at the end of world war ii. people started offering benefits. there's another thing. but the thing from the woman, i'm sorry, the name, i apologize.
8:11 am
vales.t's okay. rebecca go ahead. caller: i think you have maybe good intentions, but i want to be honest with you. i think a lot of people in your solve y don't want to this. i think your job and a lot of jobs are so tied to the welfare industry you really don't want to. government doesn't want to. hey have a nice cadre of voters. what you tell me as a person -- i ran out of money in week.ddle of the third i have a job. i have my own business. do i get to take from somebody else. here's my last thing. talk time i listen to this about the welfare system. reminded of steve martin's character, waiting to walk up to the line of the atm and also a line of people waiting to hold them up. view but you my
8:12 am
threaten us, for example, if you our emergency room visits, we'll take it from you somewhere else. benefits 't give us now, we'll take it some other way. the liberal thing -- host: eric, i get the point. we only have a few minutes left. thank you for the call. guest: i am sympathetic to what eric just said is that there are working people not able to make out ofet who are running food by the third week and wages at any sing job have to be the conversation. it's not just having a conversation about safety net programs which is what onservatives often make it sound, that progressives are trying to do. but i think it's also important to respond to the previous caller who made a really mportant point about how our official poverty statistics don't capture poverty in america and robert, we're in agreement
8:13 am
on this. and i'm not trashing speaker ryan for using that statistic. issue am doing is taking with his trying to have it both ways by use ing that say that to to programs doesn't count aren't working. so that previous caller, what she mentioned was you can eat every day and still be poor. you know what, i would take it one step farther and say the measure we should be using of ardship in this country is about whether you're able to make ends meet and get by. from recent found by the nonpartisan federal reserve board. 1 in 5 americans by that measure america.ggling in that is the reality of hardship. when you look longer term over the course of someone's life, what you find is that it's not milliongnant clan of 47 americans living behind some poverty line we take issue with.
8:14 am
half of americans are going to xperience at least one year of being poor or near poor, brinking on the financial rises to being employed. guest: and don't count the existing welfare system which is the largest and most expensive in the world. of course if you don't count the you can pretend they're in desperate situations. flaming the ling taxpayer when you do that. family you're talking about as being in distress has air conditioning, cable tv, satellite tv. to they have to struggle make ends meet and i sympathize they're . but struggling at a higher level han what you think of in poverty. they're struggling to pay the cable tv and air conditioning
8:15 am
ask rent on a fairly large house to make ends meet. them but you ith have to be honest. guest: at that level of income. tried to live on minimum wage? have you taken the living wage challenge? guest: when a mother earns the living wage, what does she get? she doesn't get $15,000 a year. she gets close to $37,000 a year. you refuse to answer that it would ecause destroy your argument. how much does a single mother works at ids who minimum wage, when you count all these welfare benefits which you told us was important at the beginning of the show. i asked you a few minutes ago and you're not answering. $40,000.close to 37 to host: is that accurate? guest: the reason i don't want to speak to that, i don't want to take seriously something that is magic math. numbers en using these
8:16 am
for years. if you want me to follow up with why rces through twitter those numbers aren't accurate, i'm happy to do that. math, where's magic does all the money go? o we throw it down the middle of the atlantic ocean? with spending $40,000 every low income person. 11 million families. it's close to $400 million a year. go? does that money some conservatives have a myth welfare bureaucracy. it goes out the door. even if you take the medical care out, you have $25,000 a for cash food and housing every low income family with children in the united states. if you're saying those numbers are magic and a sham, you're also saying there must be some because assive fraud this money, in fact, does not go to poor people. go to donald trump, i
8:17 am
suppose? it's ridiculous. taxpayer by g the hiding the welfare state. augusta, ph from georgia, good morning. caller: yes, i would like to response from both parties, especially the gentleman there. about the substantives that poor people get, but who work there, about $6 ized by a year because they don't want to pay their wage. ees a livable guest: i think that's very important and i think i'm going -- answer an intr that may surprise you. what i'm saying and what the normal conservative position is, that to have individuals to get jobs in the united states. wage, we bs are lower
8:18 am
have a welfare system to boost those wages up. why the largest welfare program. the earned income credit, a cash check in the mail when you're a working parent and you get up to $7500 a year out of that. i don't object to that, okay. what i don't want to do is artificially boost those wages cut the number of jobs available to low-skill americans, because that's actually harmful. you're going to push people into poverty by doing that. and we're not recognizing what the actual conservative position allow a which is to larger government welfare system n order to maximize the number of jobs that are available to americans because it's far system o have a welfare that's based on work rather than having people sit at home with a welfare check. let's help people get into the labor market. let's say on all our
8:19 am
welfare programs, you don't get a check in the mail. you have to work or prepare for work. once once you're into the labor showing, we're going to give you 10, 20, government ar in benefits to top off the wages get from wal-mart. that's a much better system than destroying jobs from raising wages too higher. hard, why nk it's don't we require everyone to make $40,000 a year or $50,000 a year but we all recognize that would kill off jobs. jobs.n't want to kill off we want to say get people into the labor market. we can have a generous system nce you're in the labor market but we have to be honest about what we give you. time. i'll give you equal
8:20 am
andy. caller: it's got to do with the caller who called in before about corporate welfare. i'd like to know what corporate welfare is. corporations basically do not pay taxes. they collect taxes from their mployees, their customers and stockholders. cy y're a tax collection agen for the government. if we eliminated corporate tacks, they could pay higher taxes and the government would taxes. let's eliminate corporate taxes. the stockholders would get more they're paying taxes on the higher rate we would get and why can't we do something like that. you.: thank rebecca. guest: one of the favorite talking points of paul ryan and his colleagues that somehow raising minimum wage will jobs. there is a tremendous amount of research looking at increases in the federal minimum wage as well
8:21 am
as state and local. they find that raising the minimum wage boostsem out of poverty, their wages and does not actually reduce the number of available jobs. i think we need to be straight about what the literature says. we also need to be honest abouts what the safety net in this country looks like and who is receiving assistance from it. robert, you've repeated more than a few times this morning the fox newsi call conception of poverty, which is hat persons sitting at home collecting the welfare check. the reality when you look at the more than 90% of people in this country who are of iving some form assistance are elderly, disabled r are in a working household where wages are simply not enough. f you keep asking and i keep answering, where is this money going, it's going to subsidize low wages. it's going to employers who public wage.
8:22 am
why not embrace raising the minimum wage which research by the center of american progress -- we were to raise the federal minimum wage an hour, we would see $50 billion in reduced food stamps which is more than $40 billion house republicans have roposed as the last round of negotiations in snap cuts. so that's a proven way to reduce spending on these programs. i think what i've heard from you this morning is that you would that. t doing guest: actually, i wouldn't, because you actually will push by doing o poverty that. guest: not what the evidence shows. guest: let's do that. i'll take ow that challenge. you want to raise the minimum wage like that, you agree to in clear concrete terms cut welfare spending by $53 billion a year. you're not going to do that.
8:23 am
you're going to engage in some kind of shell game where you pretend the welfare spending gone own where it has not any appreciable year.ear after the reality is, you play the game you started with. in ou acknowledge that, fact -- you just said most of the spending going to subsidize families that work. fine. that's exactly what i've been saying all along. i'm saying that's a better system, when you actually count t, these families are nowhere near poor. they have incomes way over the poverty level and that's okay. that's better than destroying jobs by arbitrarily raising the minimum wage. ut if you want to say let's raise the minimum wage and spending welfare which you absolutely don't mean, by all means, don't do that, but
8:24 am
the cuts have are to be real. guest: democrats have put a bill forward, and it is sponsored by patty murray and bobby scott. guest: she has concrete cuts. you just told me -- let me finisht to the sentence. it would raise the federal minimum wage to $12 an hour by 20-20 and the consequence of what thet, and this is numbers show and i'm happy to send you this paper so you can scrutinize it. as a consequence of having igher wages, $53 billion in savings in snap because people would be able to afford to live. guest: we would spend more and save money. we do it all the time, don't we? host: more information available at heritage.org and american progress.org. rector and rebecca vales, to both of you, thank you for a lively conversation. we appreciate it. of course, we are keeping track of the story developing
8:25 am
overnight in orlando, florida. the death toll reported at 20 and more than 40 injured in a shooting being billed as an act at a night club early this morning at oral, florida. details just coming in. the death toll amount is at 20 n the shooting that took place at a night club in downtown orlando. e're going to turn our ttention to the iran nuclear deal. barbara slaten will be joining us. of the most one contentious inventions in modern history. the 1976 republican convention and craig shirley. you're watching and listening to c-span this sunday morning. we're back in a moment.
8:26 am
41 students were presented awards in front of classmates, parents, teachers, and local officials for producing 14 winning videos, including the first prize documentary. $3000 for their document tree on infrastructure spending. our best also made a stop at one woodrow wilson high school in d.c., where they were awarded $250 each. and they won $750 on their winning videos on money and politics and poverty and
8:27 am
homelessness in the united states. a special thanks to our cable partner for helping to coordinate these visits in the community. you can view all the winning document trees at studentcam.org. >> monday night, christopher shelton, discusses the union's recent strike against verizon. the also covers -- he also covers the position on trans-pacific trade and broadband expansion. landmine in the voice -- landline in the voice world may go away. but you need broadband. people more and more want to have broadband capability. all over the united states, it is a big fight. the fcc is backing giving companies money to build up broadband in rural communities.
8:28 am
my members do broadband. that is a big part of what we do. i think it is going to become an even bigger part of what we do. >> watch monday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. ast: we want to welcome back great c-span friend, barbara slaven, who spent the last five years at the atlantic council. before that, at the u.s. institute of peace and "usa today." the iran nuclear deal almost a year old. the p5-plus-1 that worked out the arrangements, the countries involved were? the five members of the u.n. security council. the united states, britain, france, russia, china, and germany. a lot of questions whether we can trust iran. nearly a nearly later, what is the answer? guest: they have carried out all their obligations under the
8:29 am
nuclear deal. i think the problem and confusion comes from the fact that there are other issues we disagree with the iranians about. opponents of the deal are focused on those areas and you hear less about the show -- actual nuclear aspect. the headline says the inspectors are stretched. who is involved in the inspection and how do we quantify iran is living up to its agreement? guest: this deal has unprecedented verification and monitoring mechanisms. the international atomic agency is responsible for the monitoring. contributestates over $200 million a year to this organization. they have people on the ground 20 47 monitoring all the runs declared nuclear facilities -- iran's declared nuclear facilities. centrifuge factories, sites were enrichment is continuing.
8:30 am
it is a lot of work, but this is not your grandfather's iaea. there are a lot of mechanisms available now that were not available 10 years ago. there are remote cameras, digital sensors that would let you know if there is a radioactive material in a place it should not be. they are stretched. there are 17 facilities they have to check. but they also have a lot of help now from technology. host: this is from the director general of the international saying- atomic agency reaching agreement was important but making it sustainable requires a lot of effort. you indicated how they could catch iran if they are cheating. what do the inspectors look for? guest: they look for radioactive material where it should not be. they monitored to make sure iran does not have more than 300 kilograms of low enriched uranium. less, 98% less than
8:31 am
before the deal. 300 kilograms, you cannot make a bomb out of that even if you were to enrich it, he still would not have enough. i think it is 1/4 of what you would need to make a bomb. they check the levels to make iran never goes about this, that it does not have access heavy water. that there are only 5600 centrifuges spinning, these kinds of things they do on a regular basis to make sure iran is not cheating. that, the united states, israel, other countries are monitoring the program from satellites, through other means. it is not as though we just rely on the iaea, but they are a good source of information about the program. host: what does iran get out of the deal? guest: iran gets relief of many
8:32 am
but not all sanctions. this has been a surprise. you may remember the debate last summer in congress over whether iran was going to get a windfall of resources out of the deal. in fact, it has been a slow process. even getting access to their own oil revenues, something like $150 billion which were frozen in foreign bank accounts for been a years, it has much slower process. it turns out form countries and banks are still very wary of getting involved of getting in the -- involved with iran because of other issues i mentioned. iran has not gotten a windfall from the deal but is abiding by the nuclear aspects, which means for the next 15 years it would be almost impossible for iran to build a nuclear weapon. host: our phone lines are open. the line for republicans,
8:33 am
democrats. we will get to your calls in a moment. send us a tweet. may not have it until 2025 or so. beyond that, are rebuilding potential threats down the road? guest: you could argue 15 years is a great amount of time to push it down the road because in 15 years, the political situation in iran could be different than today. we don't know. there are other safeguards built in. there are aspects of the deal to go on for 20 years, 25 years. aan is the signatory -- signatory of the nonproliferation treaty. it would have to withdraw from that treaty if it were going to build a weapon. that could bring down upon its had all sorts of sanctions again. of course, the u.s. has reserved the military option. other countries as well if iran were to try to build a bomb.
8:34 am
the concern is iran in 15 years will somehow be wealthier, will have ballistic missiles that are better, and would be better equipped to go forward and do this. but you get the deal you can get. this deal was a pretty good deal. those who argued for more restrictions i think were being unrealistic. this was the maximum iran was willing to accept. and we should now with the time we have built a better relationship with iranians so we can deal with other issues. and also try to build in perhaps new safeguards. maybe get a missile deal so iran would not be in a position in 15 years to rapidly build a deployable nuclear weapon. host: our guest is an expert on the region. she is the acting director of the future of iran initiative. she also covered the region for many years with " usa today." let's charles in fort collins,
8:35 am
colorado. good morning. caller: good morning. in this issue, i think a big part of it is the people of iran . if my math is right, over 80% of the people who live in iran are under 30 years old. they want democracy. they want freedom. they want to work with the west. over, he wastook in the iranians' eyes a very moderate person who wanted to move towards these things. deal, it gaves him a lot of power against the supreme council which is going to fade someday. this deal was a great boost for him and the people of iran. host: thank you. key points. guest: thank you for raising those points. that is kind of what i was alluding to the when i -- to
8:36 am
when ice adjusted in 15 years things might be different in iran. to 70% of the population is under 30. most do not remember the revolution. most of them have grown up wishing they could have a better relationship with the united states and blaming their own government in many cases they don't have that relationship. i have been privileged to go to iran nine times. each time i go, i am amazed how far the society has moved. i would say the society is here, and the government is here. even those in the government realize they cannot let the gap continue to get bigger and bigger because it undermines their own legitimacy. you mentioned president rouhani. he is a pragmatist. i don't know that i would call him a moderate. but he is very pragmatic. he is a pillar of the system. he has been part of this government since its inception.
8:37 am
and he understands iran cannot economicallynation or in any other way if it is isolated from the west. so he was determined when he came in to get the nuclear deal done. in fact, he named very pragmatic individuals who negotiated with the p5-plus-1 who got the deal. i think it is very important in our own rhetoric in the united states we are aware we are addressing not just the iranian government, but we are addressing the iranian people and we don't do things to alienate them if at all possible. host: we are focusing on this because the iranian nuclear deal is about your old. barbara slavin is at the table. jeff is joining us from tennessee, republican line. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. say the northo korean nuclear deal worked out really well, didn't it? now we have a dictator with nuclear weapons who hates the united states and everything
8:38 am
about the west. i would think you could argue the same thing for the iranian nuclear deal. anything -- anybody naïve enough to think iran does not want nuclear weapons is living in a fantasy world. host: do you want to respond to that? guest: absolutely. i'm glad you brought up north korea because the north korean agreement was very different from the iranian agreement. that was an agreement just between the u.s. and north korea. it did not have the buy-in from the international community. it was not backed up by these incredible economic sanctions, which have finally been placed on north korea late in the game. also, the north korean agreement fell apart under the george w. bush and administration. the bush administration responded to allegations the north koreans were cheating by stopping the delivery of heavy fuel oil to north korea. north korea then pulled out of the nonproliferation treaty,
8:39 am
kicked out the inspectors, and started on a path to build nuclear weapons. that happened under the bush administration, not the obama administration. the two countries are as different as you could possibly imagine. iran is a major nation that needs to trade to survive, well integrated -- wants to be well integrated in the international economy. north korea is a tiny country, isolated, relies almost completely on china. it is the chinese that have the ability to collapse that economy, and we have to work closely with the chinese to get this program rained in. i do agree with the color that north korea is the big proliferation threat now. , we have stated off that threat now for at least 15 years. host: maria on the independent line. caller: i happen to be a c-span junkie.
8:40 am
i watched the congressional hearings. fact the american are giving a little over $1 million a year for the theirns to self inspect secret military sites. let me stop you. we are giving $200 million to the international atomic energy organization which is inspecting 24/7 with hundreds of inspectors and elaborate equipment. iran is not self-respecting. i am afraid your information is not correct. host: do you want to follow up? caller: absolutely. i watched those hearings so i know what was in that deal. i know that provision is in there, so you're incorrect.
8:41 am
guest: you are referring to a place that was a military base in dispute, whether iran had conducted testing their related to possibly related to nuclear weapons. there was a deal reached with the international atomic agency where iran took samples at the site and gave them to the iaea. that is the only reference i am aware of two so-called self inspection. i would advise you to read the joint, comprehensive plan of action. you can google it and read all of the monitoring and verification provisions in the deal and see for yourself. host: does iran get any u.s. dollars? guest: directly? absolutely not. it gets access to its own oil revenues which had been frozen. funds -- there were a number of claims and counterclaims resolved in the course of the nuclear deal.
8:42 am
there was some money paid to iran in compensation for weapons the shah ordered were never delivered after the iranian revolution. think we have seen some references to that, so they did get some compensation for that. otherwise, they are not getting any u.s. money. host: let's go to richard on the republican line. caller: good morning. good morning? this is richard. i would like to know how many inspections we have made in the last year on this rainy and nuclear deal. -- iranian nuclear deal. guest: i don't know the exact number. i would have to refer you to the international atomic agency in vienna. as i mentioned, they are being on a daily basis. the iaea puts out reports. they have put out two reports since the deal was implement it in january.
8:43 am
the last one came out in late may and states clearly iran has not exceeded the limits of low .nriched uranium, 300 kilograms you can read the whole thing. they have not exceeded the number of centrifuges they are supposed to have spinning. and they have provided all the excess that has been required. our guest, barbara slavin, served as assistant managing editor at "the washington times." also senior diplomatic reporter for "usa today." she is also written as a public policy scholar and senior fellow at the u.s. institute of peace. now she is with the atlantic council. robert is joining us from line.is, republican good morning. caller: good morning. love c-span. two questions about inroads --
8:44 am
rhodes and what he did or did not do. what percentage of the iranians america"ng, "death to "death to israel"? guest: he was instrumental in getting the deal through congress. in terms of all of us who were working on the issue, his role was kind of peripheral. there were a number of organizations that came together, nonproliferation groups, think tank experts on iran, a variety of people who supported the deal for a number of reasons. mostly because we believe it will keep iran from developing nuclear weapons for at least 15 years and give us time and space to address the other issues we have with iran. with the middle east literally in flames, you want to take at
8:45 am
least one terrifying issue off the table as long as you can. a lot of us were very surprised at the article. i don't know that he was able to determine how this thing was constructed. but the notion the deal had to be marketed from the white house, i think is kind of incorrect. so many people worked on this. somany experts like myself, people at arms control organizations, so many people on capitol hill. i would argue nancy pelosi was more important when it comes to holding the line on this. it was a cast of thousands. many of us have been working -- i have been working on iran 20 years on a consistent basis while ben rhodes was still in short pants. it was kind of amusing and caused a kerfuffle in
8:46 am
washington, but i don't get is that important. in terms of people chanting tinyh to america," it is a portion of the population. they have events were people are blessed in and told to chant this stuff -- they have events sed inpeople are bus and told to chant this stuff. most people are well disposed towards the united states and the west. we should pay more attention to them and less to the rhetoric of the iranian government. host: doug, massachusetts, democrats line. good morning. caller: three quick questions. why should israel have a nuclear monopoly in the area? what is the signing to an amendment?- simonton why does it not apply to israel? thanks very much. guest: israel has 200 nuclear weapons. it does have a nuclear monopoly in the middle east.
8:47 am
people are always talking about other countries and concerned about other countries, but they don't talk about israel. the reason israel is not sanctioned for this in any way is because it does not admit it has nuclear weapons. it has a policy of what it calls nuclear opacity. everybody knows it, but nobody talks about it. if there is going to be real nonproliferation at some point, one would hope israel would also reduce or would also get rid of nuclear weapons. obviously, that is not going to happen with the chaos in the region. the act from 1961 says what? guest: you will have to tell me. host: it banned u.s. assistance and export credits to come -- countries that require nuclear enrichment technology when they do not comply with iaea
8:48 am
regulations and inspections. guest: obviously, israel has nuclear weapons. i don't know how that would fit with that. they developed nuclear weapons after the provision was put in. as far as i know, israel does not proliferate. it does not send the stuff around. that is a very good question. the caller should ask his congressman and senators to explain. host: thank you for that call. joining us from plainview, new york, on our republican line for barbara slavin, good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to know why the iranians are allowed to take their own soil samples to get to nuclear inspectors. there is evidence the site was cleaned up. there was previous nuclear activity. also, you mentioned your hopeful in 15 years things will change. there was a green revolution.
8:49 am
it was not supported by the united states, and that revolution was snuffed. so i don't know why you are so optimistic. they have already tested ballistic missiles, and nothing was done about that. host: thank you for the call. back to the soil samples. guest: i referred to this earlier. the place in question is a military base where there are credible allegations there were tests that could pertain to a nuclear program. the caller is right. the iranians have cleansed the site completely. on the other hand, it is very hard to hide evidence of radioactivity. but a deal was reached with the iaea where the iranians did take the samples under the observation of cameras beaming this to the iaea in my time. the iaea said they were
8:50 am
satisfied with the procedure. iranians insist they did not have a weapons program. the entire rest of the world believes they did have a weapons program. the question is, do you let that be an impediment to a deal which does block nuclear weapons for 15 years or literally blow it up over the fact that 15 years ago they had a program which involved testing that could have helped them in terms of building a bomb? host: if it is proven they hide something, if there is a violation -- guest: a new violation of the agreement, then there are procedures for snapping back sanctions. the deal is not one to fall apart over old violations of their obligations. that file was closed on the old allegations last december. in terms of my optimism about the future, i base this on my visits to iran, my conversations
8:51 am
with iranian people, particularly young people who are increasingly moving into positions of authority in that country when the current leadership passes from the scene. the green movement was a reference to the protests that took place after the 2009 presidential elections where there were credible allegations of fraud. millions of people did protest. that protest movement was brutally suppressed. i am not sure the united states could have prevented what happened. the u.s. was not going to go in with its own military at that time and intervene to save those people. we were already putting iran under sanctions. in fact, sanctions increased. i would argue 2009 was pivotal in convincing europeans to impose sanctions post on human rights and helped build the case for crippling sanctions against iran that ultimately led to the nuclear deal.
8:52 am
on ballistic missiles, the united states has designated more individuals and entities for sanctions because of those ballistic missile tests. so it is not accurate to say the u.s. did not. host: we welcome our listeners on c-span radio. our topic is the iran nuclear deal a year later. barbara slavin is joining us from the atlantic council. phil is joining us on the independent line. good morning. thanks for waiting. caller: no problem. i have a couple of quick questions. i would like to know how many americans are involved in the inspections. and if there are any, why there are not any involved. you may have commented a little while ago about there is only a handful of people in iran that chance "death to america." it was about 15 years ago a e calledof peopl isis in the taliban were doing the same thing.
8:53 am
15 years later, there is no change. what makes you think iran is going to change? there are no americans physically on the ground, but there are many americans advising iaea on inspections and evaluating results. the reason there are no americans physically on the ground is we don't have diplomatic relations with iran and have not since 1980, so they will not permit americans to physically be there. but there are europeans and asians and plenty of people qualified to do this work. our national laboratories provide assistance. we have people in vienna involved. america,"f" death to this is a slogan that has been around since the iranian revolution. that does not reflect the sentiments of the iranian people. it is propaganda. it is not like isis. isis really wants death to
8:54 am
america. there are a million iranian americans. they go back and forth and see their relatives. iranians admire the united states, respect us for our academic and scientific achievements, love our culture, love our movies, love our fashion. it is something the government the restoration of diplomatic relations, which the government fears because they fear that would undermine them and all of the other aspects of the so-called islamic revolution would wither away. most of the other aspects of that revolution have withered away. iran is one of the most secular countries in the middle east. it is 90% literate, and that includes women. women make up 2/3 of university students. revolution died a long time ago. all that is left are the slogans. host: you have been there nine
8:55 am
times. let's go to thomas in texas, democrats line. caller: good morning. when the inspectors advised the bush administration there was no weapons, why did the invasion take place? [indiscernible] guest: i did not catch the last one. host: iraq. we are talking about iran, not iraq. caller: that is why we are in iran now because they were fighting direct, so i think -- fighting iraq, so i think it all plays into the middle east. guest: i would be happy to comment on that because there were no weapons of mass destruction in iraq. the bush administration insisted on invading and getting rid of saddam hussein. as a result, the shia majority in iraq has taken power, including many groups and individuals that are very close to iran, which is a shia muslim
8:56 am
nation. the bush administration upset the balance of power in the region and gave enormous increased influence to the iranians. host: a quick follow-up to your earlier point. why is it the islamist supreme leader has the final say? guest: the supreme leader of the country under their system does have the final say on all to do withecisions foreign or domestic policy. they also have an elected president and cabinet. they also have an elected parliament. so there is quite a robust ,ystem of checks and balances even more difficult to penetrate than our own. but the supreme leader does not make decisions in isolation. he has a council of advisors. he is sensitive to public opinion. that is why he supported the nuclear deal and negotiators,
8:57 am
even though there are still some elements in iran that oppose the deal and think iran was cheated. host: the p5 plus one includes china, france, russia, the u.k., the united states, and germany. countries involved in negotiating the agreement. john is joining us from illinois. good morning. caller: yes, i would like to know if iran has a use for its fuel grade uranium that it is processing. does it have a nuclear power station? does it export uranium? why is it? is it just national pride the continued to produce uranium fuel? is there a purpose? guest: that is a really good question. right now, iran has one nuclear power plant. the fuel is provided by russia. iran does not yet know how to
8:58 am
fabricate its own fuel for this reactor, although it may seek to learn how to do that perhaps from the russians. and irogram clearly -- have to say the nuclear program began under the shah. itsed states gave iran first reactor under the eisenhower administration. there was also the idea they could divert it and build weapons from the inception. it has been true under the islamic republic. you could call it a hedge. the program was dormant for a while after the revolution. that started up again in the late 1980's when the iraqi regime of saddam hussein was weaponsng with chemical and he knew they were building chemical weapon -- nuclear weapons. they started the program as a deterrent against the iraqis.
8:59 am
they do not need a deterrent against iraq because saddam hussein is gone. real purpose of the program in many ways was gone. but i think there is still an element of national pride. billions of dollars into the program, endured economic sanctions for all the shares because of the program. as a face saver, i think they could not let it all go. they are still enriching some uranium to a low amount of the isotope you need to build nuclear weapons. they are continuing to do that. they sent out their access to russia. russia can turn that into fuel, send it back. but it is a face saver. host: barbara slavin, thank you for being with us. guest: thank you very much. host: when we come back, 1976, the republican convention in kansas city. it involved two key republican leaders. president gerald ford and former governor ronald reagan.
9:00 am
craig shirley is joining us to look back at the 1976 convention. are there lessons 40 years later? "washington journal" continues in a moment. ♪ >> it is amazing for the family empire hase the increased to a great love affair, but it is also where fathers killed their sons, wives have their husbands murdered. any other --y like unlike any other. >> tonight, the discussion of the book "the romanoff's," about
9:01 am
the dynasty that ruled russia for over 300 years. >> all the girls, the children basically, where rearing their , sewnllet-proof vests with the romanoff diamond. hundreds and hundreds had been sowed into their underwear in case they needed to escape and they spent months selling the diamonds in, so when the bullets tragically, it made the execution and agony much, much longer because diamond, the substance known to man, and they did not die. q&a. c-span's >> "washington journal" continues. host: we want to welcome craig shirley, the author of a number of books, including "reagan's revolution."
9:02 am
was 1976 and we went to begin with talking about rule 16c. we want to welcome our viewers on c-span3's american history tv. coming up, a look back, courtesy the remarkabled coverage that led to president ford's, nation in 1976. here is a portion. the republican party is here to nominate a presidential candidate for 1976 and an incumbent president for the first time since 1912 aces a serious challenge from within his own party. that presidential balloting comes tomorrow night. be settled outd on the floor of this convention in kemper arena tonight. and wills acknowledge test their strength, which could make or break their candidate.
9:03 am
it will be on a change in the party rule, 16c, the number of the new role, proposed by the reagan sighed to enforce president ford to name his vice presidential running mate by tomorrow morning. 12 hours before the presidential balloting is scheduled to begin. 16c, we should point 16c was designed to do what? guest: to force president ford to name his running mate ahead of the ballot for the nomination of president of the united states. host: politically why? fractured,, it was they were outsiders, insiders, and lots of dollar fracture, too, and reagan's campaign manager reason that anybody would contact denies certain ofcentage of the delegation
9:04 am
the nominated convention, and hopefully prevent him from winning -- the whole goal was to prevent gerald ford from winning the nomination. a lot of delegates in states like north carolina and kentucky were mandated to vote for gerald ford on the first ballot and would be free to open or vote for whom they wanted to in the second ballot and there was reason that if they could get forward to name a running mate, it would suppress his clothes and he could not get the first ballot nomination. host: why is this important today? following "today, all republicans are reagan republicans, and reagan's definition of maximum freedom is consistent with law and order and has become the basis of the party's philosophy. furthermore, reagan unleash the most vigorous debates over the role of government in american daily lives.
9:05 am
since the founding of the republic. these debates and the ensuing translation of the republican party started with reagan's seemingly quixotic but most important campaign: his failed 1976 presidential campaign." guest: some things never change. ford's operation so he was advising john kasich and he was involved spencergan and 1976 and is still around, he was advising john kasich and was reagan's campaign, to factor campaign manager, so a lot of people who were around 40 years ago are still around today. host: if you look back at this convention, you have a sitting republican president and this led to the watergate investigation and the resignation of richard nixon, the first and only appointed vice president that became president, but a real division between the gop, more business
9:06 am
chamber of commerce and more conservative and ideological link led by ronald reagan. guest: it is interesting that as action as the republican party 1974, whenaugust, nick's and resigned, only 18% of the american people claimed allegiance to the republican party. voters under 30 years of age, had allegiance to the republican party. it was operationally dead. there was on the one state that had republicans in the legislative and that was kansas. there were states in the south that did not have elected republicans in office. republicans in the senate were so they cannotrs stop legislation. house,re at 143 in the so the republican party of august 1974 was for all
9:07 am
intensive purposes, in debt in the party. host: what are the moments you account in your book and it was not scripted. as gerald ford secured the nomination, he called on ronald reagan and nancy reagan took come down. let's watch, courtesy of cbs news. ♪ [video clip] ♪ >> i ask ronald reagan to come down and join me. reagan is still signing on the grass. -- signing autographs. he is shouting into the microphone. would you come down? come on down. they just delivered the alabama to reagan and the arizona standard.
9:08 am
he is walking down stairs and he comes to the podium. that is such a classic moment in american history. guest: it is all drama. talkingwhat reagan was about, a lot of drama. a single your -- the singular moment in american politics because he gives a speech live before 17,000 republicans that what, and that really is american politics is about -- drama. host: coming up in the next hour, a chance to watch on c-span3's american history tv, some of that remarkable coverage that did provide ample coverage of the proceedings. you mentioned a moment as reagan makes his way down to the podium and his impromptu remarks. [video clip]
9:09 am
someone asked me to write a letter for a time capsule that will be opened in los angeles 100 years from now. it sounded like an easy assignment. they suggested i write something about the problems and issues of the day and i said that to do so, writing down the blue pacific on one site and the mountains on the other and i could not help but wonder if it would be that beautiful 100 years from now as it was on that summer day. as i tried to write, let your own minds turn to that task. you are going to write for people 100 years from now who know all about us, we know nothing about them. we do not know what kind of world they will be living in, and suddenly, i thought to myself, if i write of the problems, they will be domestic problems of which the president spoke it tonight. the challenges confronting us,
9:10 am
the erosion of freedom that has taken place in the democratic role in this country, the invasion of private rights that control the restrictions on the metallic the of the great entry economy that we enjoy. these are our challenges that we must meet. and then there is the challenge of which he spoke between limited world and of which the great powers have poised and aimed at each other, horrible missiles of distraction, nuclear weapons that can in the matter of minutes to arrive in each other's country and destroy. , thosey it dawned on me who agrees this letter 100 readers are now -- those who would read this letter 100 years from now, they would know whether those missiles were fired, whether we met our challenge, whether they have the freedoms that we have known up until now will depend on what we do here. , ronaldaig shirley
9:11 am
reagan back in 1976. no teleprompter. he did not appear that speech. why? aest: he wasn't going to give speech that night. he was in the skybox. he was overlooking kemper arena and he was not going to give a speech that night. he was asked by tom brokaw. he said, no. ford knows he is the nominee of a broken and divided party. he needs a unified party and the best way to do that is bring reagan down to the podium this big to the crowd and hopefully endorsed and unify the party willse unifying the party win in the fall and divided parties will lose in the fall. think about when republicans are 1976, democrats divided in 1968, soaking you that if he had a chance against gerald ford, at this -- i mean,
9:12 am
jimmy carter because at this point, jimmy carter is 30 points ahead in the national polls of 1976. but ford reagan down, had also spoken and given arguably the best speech he ever gave, so they want reagan to tok a little bit less shiny his followers and make forward look better. and wanted reagan to endorse forward but not look too good or do too well, so that is part of the agenda, too, but still, tremendous animosity between the factions. went 1976 the last time we into convention without knowing who the nominee would be. 40 years later, are the lessons to the republicans and democrats? phone lines are open. (202)-748-8001 line for republicans. (202)-748-8000 for democrats. send us a tweet @cspanwj.
9:13 am
you were not there but your wife was there. guest: my wife was there and they had to group of beautiful supporters for gerald ford called presidential's. they were organized by the ford campaign, and whenever he made a public appearance in a crowd with tv cameras, the presidential's would appear and cheer and applaud, you know, encourage the presidents of the united states. she was there as a presidential in 1976. if": this is a "what question, if he had been the nominee, do you think you would have been jimmy carter? guest: i have talked with a number of people about this and i think, yes, he would have. he would have brought in the reagan democrats currently, so ,tates like mississippi, ohio and out of 4 million votes, it
9:14 am
was covered by 6000 votes and texas is just as close. i think reagan would have swung both the state to his side. secondly, i doubt reagan would have made a hash out of the presidential debates the way forward to did. you remember the second debate where he effectively stopped his rising in the polls catching up to carter and he froze five days to seven days before he apologized and started rising again, but he did not catch jimmy carter in time. i think it is quite possible that reagan would have won. states like michigan are open to question because they went heavily for ford, and i don't know, but it was a tremendously close election. hawaii, which is like 2000 votes for jimmy carter and ohio only went by 6000 votes, you would have had a deadlock because there was one
9:15 am
fateful election that year from washington state who voted for gerald ford, so you would have been to 69 and 26 the ninth and it would have put it in the house of representatives. who knows at that point because gerald ford had a lot of friends there and jimmy carter was open and running a campaign hostile to washington. no one knows what would have happened. host: ted is joining us, democrat, you are on the phone with craig shirley author of how many books now? guest: seven. caller: good morning. i am going to today's politics and the republican party and i was wondering if he could comment on michael reagan's comments about whether his father would support from an -- support from, and even ronald reagan, it concurs with whether reagan would approve of a nominee like trump. host: thank you.
9:16 am
guest: mike and ron knew their father, his thinking. whether or not they could speculate reagan would support from is another matter. reagan did support the nominee of his party even though he disagreed with him. it is interesting to note that 1964 when goldwater was controversial nominee of the all of themarty, fled during goldwater, mitt scranton,ather, bill they all fled. the only two people that stood by goldwater work richard nixon and ronald reagan and both ended up becoming president of the united states, so there is something to be set up loyalty. host: a viewer said, how did break and finally beat the gop hisblishment and create "big tent" at the same time? guest: reagan never coined "they
9:17 am
tent," but a lot of the primaries were open primaries so that democrats and independents could come and vote for the candidate of their choice. reagan would have lost the wisconsin primary arguably to then ambassador george bush because so many reagan democrats turned out to vote for ronald reagan and interestingly, they were not called reagan democrats until after the 1980 election. they were simple conservative democrats were democrats supporting ronald reagan. and a lot of key states, were for ronald reagan, so he repositioned to the republican party toward the more populist outside party by basically running against the establishment. when he ran in 1976, he held the national press conference and he invades against the district, labor, lobbyists, upon it was
9:18 am
anti-bigness. populist activity in illinois at the time. he was born in kentucky, grew up in the 1930's, so he did so in a way that he did so also by talking about freedom and toortunity and talking primary voters and the general election voters in a way that republicans have not talked before. host: our guest is craig shirley , one of facebook books "reagan's revolution," which is what we are focusing on. we are also airing this program on c-span3 american history tv and on that network, a chance to watch about 4.5 coverage from cbs news of august 1976. it is fascinating. margaret, chapel hill,
9:19 am
tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to kind of say that i disagree with him saying reagan would have been carter in those days. i do not believe that the country was ready for another republican. read "the presidents club" to find out what really happened behind-the-scenes. it is very interesting. thank you. host: thank you. guest: i read "the president's club." it was a very good book. it was strictly a speculative question but i do think it was possible. nobody knows, but it is possible reagan would have brought a different campaign and gerald ford would have. gerald ford was tied to watergate and reagan would not have been tied to watergate and he would have run a different campaign. continuation of the next and
9:20 am
administration would not have been an issue had reagan been the nominee as opposed to gerald ford. host: when you see this tweet from a senator in a tech reelection battle in illinois and he said, even my military experience, donald trump does not have the temperament to command our military or our nuclear arsenal. the reaction? in the state of the republican party today. guest: i won't say disaster, but i really do think it is open to the question of how the party with a merge. there is no doubt that a skid exists, there are the populists in terms of outsiders and there is the establishment corporate, big government republican insiders. 43was coined during the bush republicanson, so argued for what i call high parties, which of the government dictating programs and arthur
9:21 am
initiatives -- and other initiatives to the people. path is founders and framers and what they intended, which is power flows ofard to the people instead downward, and that is the great debate inside the republican party. where does power reside? visit reside with elites, in washington, with new york, or does it reside among the many american people? the party has not decided which path it will follow. host: john is next for massachusetts on the line for independents morning. caller: good morning. i did not know what line to call in for. democrat,ow republican or independent, but i wanted to talk about the 1976 convention. i was working in massachusetts
9:22 am
for the and republicans and kind of amazing people like hugh hewitt, but he was working on the campaign back then. more interesting to me was the dole at theobert convention, he was kind of the rising star that convention, and just in the timeframe that you have been up and all the things that have gone on in the past with jimmy carter and operation cyclone and yadda, yadda, and all the rhetoric and things that happened that watergate compared to kind of what is going on now, it seems like it is quite [indiscernible] what are your comments on that? host: thank you. history does repeat
9:23 am
itself sometimes with divisions inside the republican party by the goldwater campaign and watergate and with george romney and nelson rockefeller and others in the theme is repeated today. we know what the outcome was for the goldwater campaign and we for thed the foundation nomination ronald reagan in 1976 and 1980. a party in many ways rejected reagan and embraced bushism, although, now it is hand-to-hand combat over what path it will follow. host: they say this, there is nothing wrong with the gop view, the people, only in the eyes of what they call "the dinosaur elite" that will not conform. guest: i think he has a fair point.
9:24 am
when is the last time the republican party proposed shaking government? i am talking about washington politicians, when was the last time the proposed eliminating the department of education, energy or downsizing in any way, shape or form of shrinking the power and control of authority of the national government and sending it back to the state's and localities where it belongs? therein lies this the the disagreements inside the party thinkbecause the people one thing and the elites think something different. host: let's go to new york city, democrat line. caller: good morning. ?that does the fact hillary have the temperament she questions inald trump's temper -- question the fact that does hillary have the temperament? she questions donald trump's temperament, but she went to iraq and has dismembered the
9:25 am
entire arab union over there. she is the lender should be held accountable. we should not be rewarding her with the presidency when she did that awful mistake. you just don't say, whoops, i made a mistake. clinton'smrs. defense, almost everybody except to going into iraq and that was a natural reaction to 9/11. also have their divisions, too, and that is part of the fuel for bernie sanders' hindsight is 2020 and it remains to be seen whether this issue will dog mrs. clinton or not. host: first, why did gerald ford decide not to run for a full term and then change his mind? guest: you did your homework. he wrote a piece after he became vice president and shortly after
9:26 am
he became president, after nick was out of office in 1974, i think he got bad advice -- after nixon was out of the office in 1974, think he got bad advice. do not forget that the country was in very sad shape as of august 1974 as your celeb were with vietnam, we on the losing rates,vietnam, interest gas lines, arab oil embargo's, and in every way, shape and form, consumer, people's attitudes, it was not in good shape in august 1974. i think he got the way to heal the country would to say that he is not going to run for election and then he will govern as president of all the people and not the republican party. he immediately creates questions concert to terms and if
9:27 am
he cannot serve a full four years of his own, why should he be there to terms? -- why should he be there two terms? there were personal insults aimed at ronald reagan that generated from gerald ford's white house. this election of nelson rockefeller as vice president, was that the defining moment for ford and reagan? i interviewed vice president cheney about this and nelson that they chose rockefeller for reason of stature. they wanted to bring someone into the administration who was seen as having stature in american politics and the world affairs. gerald ford was a one term congressman from michigan, who was not seen as a world leader,
9:28 am
not even as an american leader, thethey wanted to bulk up authority, the magistrate of the executive office and branch, so that is why they threw rockefeller in. it did not help. in fact, it hurts because it fueled proceeds of conservatives breaking forward which led to eventually reagan's challenger. host: we will have a couple more minutes from the cbs coverage, including gerald ford and a conversation with senator bob dole, forward's running mate. as go to matt in minnesota on their republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question for mr. shirley. in minnesota, we had an election with the establishment with komen for governor and skip humphrey and the republican democrat and we had a wrestler, who won the governorship here.
9:29 am
i'm wondering if you can draw some parallels and see how assibly electing an outsider trump, as we might, could be a big mistake, which was, in my opinion, i don't think jesse forure have the temperament governor. he did some things ok, but he was mostly kind of a nothing. i am curious of what you think about that. host: thank you. guest: benjamin rush was one of the founders. fire. paine was the power by that, he meant that american is that it succeed must always be in perpetual
9:30 am
state of the revolution. you must always question authority, status quo and how the season that eventually became the republican party. they have been anti-status quo. teddy roosevelt was anti-status quo. so was dwight eisenhower. dominated america and washington for years since the end of world war ii. quo, and oftatus course, ronald reagan was the very definition of anti-status quo. you never think of what reagan is going to be as part of washington because he came for eight years and he constantly challenged the reigning authority and status quo. conversation,
9:31 am
(202)-748-8001 for republicans. (202)-748-8000 for democrats. the 1976k back at convention that pitted president gerald ford and former governor ronald reagan. general ford -- gerald ford delivering these remarks after getting the nomination. [video clip] ford: to whom the overwhelming the power had twice been shattered, losing faith in the word of their elected leaders and americans want some of their faith in their own selves. again, let's look at the records of august 1974. the start, my administration has been open, candid, forthright. [applause] while my entire public and private life was under searching examination for the vice
9:32 am
presidency, i reaffirmed my lifelong conviction that truth is the glue that holds government together, not only government, with civilization itself. [applause] i have demanded honesty, decency and personal integrity from everybody in that executive branch of the government, the house, senate have the same duty. [applause] the american people will not accept the double standard in the united states congress. [applause] as you look at that speech, how did forward do -- how did ford do?
9:33 am
guest: he did very well. it was certainly the best local speech of his life. he was not known as being a good speech maker and one commentator said ford could see the sleep in the second paragraph and reagan could not get a standing ovation -- and reagan could get a standing ovation from a graveyard. he helped write the speech and how to practice in front of the teleprompter. ronald reagan was arguably the best speech maker and america, he and jesse jackson probably the best speech makers in 1976, so he has got to do something about this. arguably the best speech is ever given in his life. host: the kemper arena in kansas city, missouri, i mention that because stephen is from there. is the arena still there? caller: yes, it is. is, how did the
9:34 am
republicans go from eisenhower through george bush having a strong america and not always having the gop establishment win, but they were never nationalist like trump. how did they go to get one elected like this? guest: i will try to answer this. parties involved, they change over time because the issues change. men and women change and the attitudes for the american people change. the republican party has changed since the time of reagan. inple forget jimmy carter 1976 ran against the washington establishment. it was pretty good on issues [indiscernible] in many ways as a conservative optimist outside contradictory to
9:35 am
what the democratic party had been since the time of franklin d. roosevelt, when they put more faith in the government. the ability of the government to protect resident kennedy or martin luther king jr. or bobby kennedy junior, so the government by the 1976 is at an all-time low and it illustrates my point that parties change because issues change because people change. host: the relationship between ronald reagan and gerald ford was -- guest: [laughter] difficult, complicated. one of ford's speechwriters wrote that the could barely be in the same room together and cannot stand they each other, which is unusual because reagan's were very affable and got along with just about everybody. host: why didn't forward ask as deagan f -- why didn't for
9:36 am
asked reagan to serve as his running mate? to geraldy had gone ford several weeks before and they were armed with polling ford'shat said that best choice in 1976 would be reagan to reach out to democrats in key states like michigan, pennsylvania, texas, mississippi , but reagan considerably did not want to be, so he told john sears to talk to cheney that when he meets a ford after the battle, regardless it he wins the nomination, that i do not want him to embarrass the president of the united states by telling him, no, i do not want to be his running mate, so to be myo not tell him
9:37 am
running mate, so they delivered the message to dick cheney to ford's white house chief of staff. they met the night that ford won the nomination but ford did not ask reagan to be his running mate because reagan did argue said he did not want to be his running mate. host: and john sears is still alive today. guest: still alive. talks aboutook something missing these days, the silly hats from 1976. fromll listen to chad north carolina on the republican line. caller: i heard the comment about jesse ventura and he was i think what our founding fathers wanted. he had been in navy seal, which less than 1% of military becomes. thatw what he thought was
9:38 am
needed fixing. in my opinion, i grew up in georgia. presidentot another who built houses. he still teaches sunday school in 90 years old and i think reagan was a powerful speaker and he was kind of -- people trusted reagan, probably the best figurehead country has ever had. that is just my opinion. last act, the final years and emerging legacy of ronald reagan. guest: yes, i believe that card or -- i believe that he has defined the role for former presidents. most presidents went [indiscernible] en president would
9:39 am
call, they would go back to private citizens and not engage in work through a corridor has -- the way carter has. he was very, very helpful. host: mark joining us from new york. frank, good morning? i will try one more time for frank in new york. let me ask you about this reagan'swho was ronald running mate in 1976. why did that backfire? guest: it did not backfire. it worked brilliantly. host: they said they were upset. but he supported it. they were upset, but he supported it. it was a risk, which according to [indiscernible] something to do because it was three weeks out from the convention, and they
9:40 am
had the most respected operation in america, egg, massive, well-funded. looking athad been numbers, jim baker held a press conference saying reagan had 1157 and they would hold a dueling press conference saying, no, and nobody knew what the actual count was. in this fraud machine to keep their candidate's chances alive until kansas city. kansas city is the first time republicans did not know who the nominated party is going to be since 1952, the first time when they didn't know if it would be dwight eisenhower or the senator from ohio. it is the first time trying to gain psychological advantage, so cbs says, we will just count everybody ourselves, so they -- they startout
9:41 am
calling everyone around the country. and if all 55 share to contact said it, you could bank on it and it was true, the most trusted man in america. to announce, prepared to announce that gerald ford has secured enough beforees, three weeks the convention, if he does this and goes on national television and makes the announcement, reagan's campaign is dead in the water. the storyo change line. the way to do it was for reagan to do something unprecedented, which was to choose his running mate the head of the convention. they chose them brilliantly. reagan was a well, modern conservative from pennsylvania who was ironically afford fordate -- ironically a
9:42 am
delegate. conservative on pro-life, vaccinations, the second amendment, national defense and he had been vetted by the media, was married to a wonderful woman and never any scandals associated with him. all, it will kill the cbs story because it will create doubt about pennsylvania and new york and other state delegate counts, so that part of it works brilliantly, which is to kill the cbs story. they keep reagan's campaign alive until the convention and was part ofy -- it a three-part strategy by sears, first was the campaign, second ford to nameing
9:43 am
their running mate, and the third part was to get the motion on the floor that both tickets have to address the convention and that is what terrified ford forces, they do not ronald reagan addressing the convention. he was this close to a runaway convention and they were terrified. reagan spoke to the national we saw, andas people and have said, i do not care what the rules say, i am voting for reagan for president of the united states. at least one delegate turned into a ford supporter and she turns to reagan field manager and says, oh, my god, we have nominated the wrong man. host: let's go to black in georgia. -- let's go to buck in georgia. you particular
9:44 am
call. great conversation by the way. i am wondering how these outsiders or if these outsiders are an indispensable, if unintentional sort of antiseptic to the flow of power? i am not sure was designed this way but it really sounds like it in the air of the conversation that these people are more than indispensable. guest: they are more than indispensable. , you know, iton says we the people, not we the leaves or with the corporate elites, but we the people. you take the literal meaning of the framers and founders, it is that this is a government of all the people and not just the elites, so we had a great tension going on and sometimes more. during the great depression and
9:45 am
world war ii, we are far more united as a country than we are today. formere will hear from senator bob dole in the moment. why did gerald ford select him? guest: the night that reagan and ford met alone at the alameda hotel, after ford secured the that ford handed reagan a list of about six candidates to run. dole knew he was on the short list and he asked an old friend, look, if president ford asks governor reagan about me, we do ask governor reagan to say something nice? so he said, yes and he tells this to reagan and if ford asked you about dole, say something nice, so reagan was looking at
9:46 am
handed himat ford and he speaks favorably for bob dole, which is part of the dole. why ford chose he was a conservative, 19 76, war hero, well thought of, they thought he would be a good combative campaign there and take the fight to corridor in 1976 and that he would be a good debater and you would help unify the convention. he was not a stand-in for reagan but acceptable. host: we had a conversation with bob dole, not only about his role as gerald ford's running mate, but this question -- did ronald reagan do enough in 1976 to unite the republican party? [video clip] you about that moment where ronald reagan came down and you are standing off to the side with resident ford.
9:47 am
do you think at that point that he did enough to unite the republican party in 1976? dole: no, i would have to say probably not. i mean the reagan people were reagan people. candidatesonderful and he did not get the nomination. i think there are thousands and thousands of republicans, reagan republicans and reagan democrats , who did not support ford. i was the one who met with reagan a couple of times, once in new hampshire, and i cannot remember the second place. we try to bring him around and
9:48 am
get him to support wholeheartedly, if that is the word. and is very good to me, think it was attempted endorsement, i am not certain how he said it, but it was not very long. i think he could have made a afference and talked about very close election. this was a very close election. was he right about that? guest: probably. you have to put yourself back in 1976. reagan has just lost by the narrowest of margins.
9:49 am
he has lost because of shenanigans and hanky-panky in some delegations like in new york, mississippi and others. he has also been the brunt of personal attacks gerald ford and the former white house for two years. he has gone through grueling campaigns, so he is angry. time, he did not do a lot of campaigning f for theord -- campaigning for the ford ticket. ford did not call and ask reagan for his help until one month after the kansas city convention and the election of 1976 was very complex. the national election was until november 2, the early sin has been held in 100 years. from let's go to ari georgia. caller: who did ronald reagan
9:50 am
send to iran before the election in 1980 to negotiate with them about holding onto the hostages? guest: nobody. there has never been any credible -- the october surprise got flipped on its head because it was referring to carter possibly getting the hostages out before the november election and the american people were in gratitude with reelection in november of 1980, so there is far more evidence that the hostages were manipulated for political gain and there is some didence with jimmy carter such as the morning of the wisconsin primary, when he goes on national television to announce a major breakthrough that has occurred in the hostage negotiations, thereby, he picks up his voters and supporters in
9:51 am
wisconsin in 1980 and ends up winning the primary there. the wonderful political reporter for "the washington post" noted several long detailed stories in 1980 about how president carter had politicized and used and manipulated the hostage crisis to his advantage in 1980, so there is far more evidence coming from many more sources that carter politicized the hostage crisis and actually, on the sidelines throughout 1980. the summer of 1980 when carter attempted the rescue, which failed, reporters caught up with reagan and he said, this is the day for two words in many prayers and that is pretty much it. host: in about 10 minutes, coverage from 1976 cbs news.
9:52 am
you can watch it on c-span3's american history to be as you look at the convention in kansas city. a lot of great moments, including this one under the direction of walter kwok right -- walter cronkite. he makes a reference to the former governor of new york. [video clip] walter: could you stand up for a moment? the phone people are here connecting it. you have the disconnected phone. governor: it was the greatest efficiency and they are tremendous with speed, right on the job. i have to give it back so they can put it in. walter: good for the fund company. -- good for the phone company. mr. vice president, what happened? what did you see? who did it and what happened? know and we just
9:53 am
told nick rosenbaum that if he did not get that sign back, -- walter: what sign was that? take a sign from another man, a reagan sign. >> he held it as i went by. walter: and then he came back to get the reagan sign back. >> it was a man from utah. walter: ok. -- a little on the light side. walter: ok. >> i am trying to get out but i cannot get out. walter: vice president wants to get out of here and he cannot unless we get out of here. there he goes, secret service helping him. from 1976, vice president nelson rockefeller and a classic moment. guest: total spontaneity.
9:54 am
conventions were so scripted and we expected to be less scripted this time, but this was complete spontaneity. that is the vice president of the united states, but that was part of 1976. what happened was that rockefeller for a sign that was holding up that said reagan for president and rockefeller ripped it out of the delegate's hand and tore it up and the utah delegates on what was happening and he took the sign away from nelson rockefeller and gave it back to the north carolina delegate. he agitated the whole situation and it was from rockefeller. host: hector from san diego. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. -- the last comment answered my question in terms of security for the 1976 convention. host: what about security?
9:55 am
guest: there was secret service, but that would never happen in a million years, they would not viceallow dick cheney or presidents for now or nominees to go on for today, even with all of the technology and all the other security. they would never allow the vice president or president to mingle with the delegates, except in the most controlled and limited circumstances. host: i say this with a smile on my face, look at the hair from 1976. john from philadelphia on the republican line. where the democrats will meet this time. caller: good morning. thank you for having me. my daughter is working the democratic convention as an electrician down there. wasmember back when reagan
9:56 am
about to come in office. i was really young and did not understand a lot of things about politics, but what i thought was that they carved away from the a shoo-ina that was for reagan to become president. that was known before he was elected that that was what he was going to do. iran contra was run by h and became an issue in 1987, but i don't see the connection. host: lessons for republicans in 2016 as you look back? guest: faith in the american people. isresentative government derived term republic and the
9:57 am
public is derived from christian values, which is that the apublican party should be moral, anti-corrupt and anti-insider party. concentrationsth , personal freedoms, and the best way for the republican party to perceive or to proceed forward in the country, especially with the people, is not the question of ideology but practicality. country a big, fast is the best way to govern is to send power out to the american people, the localities individuals -- localities, individuals and let them decide. host: as someone who spent his entire life falling republican politics, i want to share with you the passing of the former senator who began in cleveland,
9:58 am
ohio, as the mayor, and he was 79 years old. his legacy. --st: george point of h vich was a pioneer of new republican style in the midwest, which can about after eisenhower, which was ideological compared to wild ronald reagan, but he wanted a break from the past of the republicans that brought a lot of performing party politics. your new book on newt gingrich will come out when? guest: next spring. host: thank you for being with us. we appreciate your time. guest: thank you very much. host: we will continue the conversation at 7:00 a.m. eastern time, 4:00 on the western coast and our guests tomorrow include the president
9:59 am
and ceo david and the co-author of the book on hillary clinton. she will be here to talk about the clinton campaign now that they're moving into the general election and marilyn thompson, a writer for "the atlantic magazine," will be focused on the presidential election fund, will happen to the money. "newsmakers" is coming up next. if you are watching c-span3, coverage from 1976 courtesy of cbs news and day two of the republican convention. that the rate over -- the debate over 16 c that led to the nomination of gerald ford. enjoy the rest of your weekend. have a great weekend. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute,
10:00 am
which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> next, "newsmakers" with thenessman xavier becerra, hillary clinton's speech at planned parenthood, followed by bernie sanders remarks and washington, d.c. after that, donald trump speaks at the faith and freedom coalition conference. greta: this week, we want to welcome congressman xavier becerra, thank you for being here. we also have christina marcos with "the hill," and erika warner, reporter, and erika will kick us off. thank you for being with us. hillary clinton wra u
489 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
CSPAN Television Archive The Chin Grimes TV News Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on