unprepared," which says that the use in the nation are on the pair for the workforce. he will also discuss the recommendations outlined in the report. ♪ host: on this date in 1787, the u.s. constitution was signed in philadelphia. it is saturday, september 17, 2016. welcome to "washington journal." the news yesterday that libertarian presidential candidate gary johnson, green party candidate jill stein, will not be invited to that debate. they did not meet the qualifying standards. we will talk about that and presidential politics. here is how to join the conversation. (202)party supporters use

748-8000. if you support hillary clinton, use (202) 748-8001. donald trump supporters use (202) 748-8002. all others use (202) 748-8003. you can always send us a tweet @cspanwj. and we welcome your comments on our facebook page. the news yesterday from the commission on presidential debates, the independent organization that has been generalthat presidential debates since 1988 announcing the news yesterday. they had to meet basic qualifying standards. here is hard whether commission lays out. of toucheo because newly eligible to be president. they had to achieve ballot access in sufficient states to win a theoretical el toro electoral college

majority. gary johnson's team the past. and they had to have at least ,5% of the national electorate using the average of five selected polling organizations' most recent publicly reported results. that is the sticking news -- that is the sticking point. the board determined that the polling averages called for in the third criteria are as follows -- hillary clinton, 43%. donald trump, 40.4%. gary johnson, 8.4%. and jill stein, 3.2%. andrdingly, hillary clinton her running mate, tim kaine, and donald trump and his running mate, mike pence, qualified to participate in the temper 26 presidential debate and the october 4 vice presidential debate perspective way. no other candidates satisfy the criteria. the criteria will be re-applied to all candidates in the second

and third presidential debates. that is from the commission on presidential debates. you can imagine the reaction shortly afterwards. press release that came from gary johnson's campaign. he said that "i would say that i am surprised that the commission on presidential debates has chosen to exclude me from the first debate, but i am not. after all, the commission is a private organization created 30 years ago by the republican and democratic parties for the clear purpose of taking control of the only nationally televised presidential debates voters will see." he told us on "newsmakers" last month about what the absence will mean. [video clip] >> the projected audience for the first presidential debate will exceed that of the super bowl. there is no way we have any chance of winning if we are not in that game, meaning the presidential debate. host: gary johnson and jill

stein out of the presidential debates. let's hear your thoughts. we go to rob in new york city, hillary clinton supporter. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you to c-span. it is really ridiculous and a disgrace that we do not allow the independents to appear at the debate and express themselves and to speak their mind and to advance the debates. i also want to say quickly that r.i.m in new york city. i know new york city. donald trump -- that i am in new york city. the of city. donald trump is a new york city slicker of the worst kind peewee have the right talking about donald trump as a regular guy. he is the furthest thing. he drives around in limos. -- he iskirt chasing

scared chasing young girls. who knows what he was doing in those limits. he is not presidential material. any words that come out of his mouth have no meaning except to further his own cause. host: he will go to a donald trump reporter. -- donald trump supporter. al. what do you think of this? am completely on the other side of the spectrum against bernie sanders, but the dnc ripped him off. the establishment has now ripped off gary johnson as well. those are establishment issues. until you can change a lot of the political arc, we will not get a lot of change in this country. one of the things that need to be looked at -- a lot of people were saying that donald trump was the originator of the birther controversy. sidney blumenthal, who works with the clintons, went to numerous news agencies and asked

them to check into obama's circumstances of birth. i am not a birther, but it is a shame that they are now blaming it on trump. it is just the incumbent elite class. that is why i am for trump. host: al talking about the that camenjure see out yesterday. the "washington post" headline that the nominee admits obama was born in the u.s. here is what donald trump had to say yesterday morning. [video clip] clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy. i finished it.

i finished it. you know what i mean. president barack obama was born in the united states, period. to get back tot making america a strong and great again. host: donald trump yesterday. here is the front page of the "new york times" analysis. " trump gives up a line but refuses to repent," writing it was not true in 2011, when trump mischievously began to question president obama's birthplace allowed in television interviews." " i am starting to think he was theborn here" he said at time. it was not true in 2012 when he took to twitter to declare" an extremely credible source" called his office to inform him

that mr. obama's birth certificate was a fraud. it was not true in 2014 when mr. trump invited hackers to hack obama is college records and check place of birth. any of it.r true, yet it took mr. trump five years of dodging, linking, and joking finallynder to reality on friday after a remarkable campaign of relentless deception that try to undermine the legitimacy of the president. the first presidential debate coming up in new york. we will have live coverage on c-span. the exclusion of jill stein and gary johnson. we will hear from jill stein supporter sheila in connecticut. good morning. caller: good morning. i am very upset. am astein supporter -- i deal stein supporter. i refuse to watch the debates unless she is included.

journal," "washington that the public and president obama has to insist change the rules so that candidates get free airtime. look at her on the screen with her hair do now. they are doing a disservice on msnbc and the other stations -- not your station, not c-span, think god for that -- by showing her with a refined hairstyle. and on other stations, they are showing her with a hairstyle that is very unfair for her. she also advertised she has a website that says "jill 2016.com," so people can sign up to open up the debates. why is this not happening with everyone else out there?

i am very disappointed. i was a bernie supported. and i think -- my friends told me -- when he was called in to talk to president obama, and he decided to back hillary, i think something happened in that meeting. very unfair. so i am just thoroughly disgusted and will not watch the debates, because it is going to be very boring. way.for jill stein all the she is a smart cookie. she knows what she is talking about. and i love to listen to her. host: we appreciate your call. dr. jill stein was on this program a couple of times. we showed you some of gary johnson's reaction. this is a tweet from jill stein with some video included. 76% of the u.s. want open rnc tryyet the dnc and to silence our voices.

[video clip] >> there are a lot of everyday human beings>> getting marginalized by our very corrupt medical system. when you have two political parties funded by predatory ands and fossil fuel giants war profiteers, we have a problem. >> i am building a wall, ok? [laughter] >> i do not know why that is funny. >> i will do very well with the hispanics. >> i represented wall street eyes a senator from new york. >> you know what they would do to guys like that? they would carry him out on a stretcher. i would like to punch him in the face. ♪ >> if you look at what polls show, 60% are calling for an

independent third-party because democrats and republicans do not represent ordinary people. to surrender control to the foldout political parties is to say this is ok. ♪ host: video from the jill stein campaign. news yesterday that jill stein and gary johnson, the libertarian candidate, excluded from the first presidential debate, and their running mates excluded from the vp debate october 4. a press release from jill stein says join us at half there to -- hofstra to protest the presidential debates. we are escalating our reaction

barak, her and running into the debates. let's go to missouri. caller: thank you. i am a middle-aged white guy. christian. ex marine. and i am a democrat. the only thing i agree with the republicans are is i am thoroughly disgusted with obama. that on a child is not the answer. i cannot believe these christian republicans would be so naive to vote for him. he is a nazi. he is doing the same thing adolf hitler did when he came to power. it will come down to either hillary or donald trump -- host: when you call him a "not see," what do you mean by that? caller: he wants to rule with an iron fist. he looks up to putin.

him, heisagree with will kill you. he says he wants to be the law in order president -- that means martial law. there are so many issues. but it comes down to hillary or donald trump. host: a mention of russia on our topic on presidential debates. saying how is this different than russia, what rush is doing, when they exclude opposition and we do too? another donald trump supporter from florida. what do you think about the news from the commission on presidential debates? caller: this stuff about trump is getting hilarious. but to directly answer your question -- and i would like to make a comment about the birther issue, since you brought it up -- look at how many people were there during the primaries. let them on the stage. did of the primary people

not even register 1%, and they were able to get at least on the secondary. maybe that is the answer. maybe there should be a secondary debate, like they did with the republicans. but you brought up the birther issue. papers to ato bring grade school to enroll your child into elementary school, shouldn't you have your papers you try to run for the highest office in the land? hisck obama had to have birth certificate reissued. re-issued. document.brand-new that is not an original. it had to be made for him. ownthere were reports his family had said, mistakenly, probably, that he was born in kenya. so you cannot ignore this stuff. just think of the embarrassment

of our nation if we actually did birth.ck on this man's and it turns out he was not even born in the united states and got elected president. host: have you ever had to get any official records we issued? -- re-issued? caller: yes. college transcripts get lost. all kinds of different records have to be reissued. fine. that is paul in fort lauderdale. we are focusing on the news yesterday that the presidential debates, the first one monday the 26th, gary johnson and jill stein will not be included. a big audience expected. you heard gary johnson's expectation of a super bowl sized audience. bloomberg writes that the first obama-romney debate generated more than 10 million posts on twitter, making it the most

tweeted u.s. political event. in reagan-carter spar pulled 81 million viewers. 114 millionon, super bowl.2015 jill stein reporter, ralph. good morning. caller: yes. -- jill stein supporter, ralph. good morning. caller: yes. i am so tired of the republicans and democrats. democrats say they support the little guy, but they let in 11 million illegal immigrants. white-collaracing guys, and you wonder why they are angry. then you have her advocating tpp. on the other side, republicans say they will control the

borders and the house and senate and presidency, but they did nothing. , am not an abortion advocate but we need some limitations. lies. are getting is the media's feeding the lines, and our politicians are owned. you're telling me somehow these bankers are stupid and can contribute 200 -- $200,000 to hillary's campaign but do not expect a return on investment. host: let's go to a hillary clinton supporter. this is lee. caller: good morning. i support her because of her caliber. and she always reports to be fair with everybody. i do feel she would not eject jill stein -- i feel she would

not object jill stein and gary johnson from participating in the debate. i feel the green party should have a platform. but i support hillary clinton. ever since hillary was in college, while donald trump was fighting against blacks entering into their apartment complex, hillary was down in alabama, fighting racism against the public schools of alabama not admitting black children into integrated schools. hass so unfair how hillary been treated all these years. when i hear people talking about ed she iset -- crook and how unfair she is and the things she has done, i know they are uneducated. they do not know anything about her. they have not read about the history. otherrealize there are

women here in alabama that were angry with her when she was going through the experience accusedl, when he was white house,n the and she stood by her husband. most women do not leave their husband just because they have had an action marital affair. affair.tramarital wet: we want to let you know will be covering hillary clinton tonight, who will be in washington, d.c. at 7:30 eastern . we will have live coverage here. the "wall street journal" has a support among them people. "young voters cool to clinton," it writes. they write that hillary clinton's once commanding lead among young voters has collapsed , a factor making the presidential race much closer in recent weeks and prompting the

clinton campaign to move quickly to keep a core democratic constituency in the fold. in its most visible response, the campaign has begun sending the party's most popular stars to college campuses to urge students not to sit out the election or back third-party candidates. "elections are not just about who votes but who does not vote, and that is especially true for young people like you," first lady michelle obama said. vermont senator bernie sanders will campaign for hillary clinton, they write. and massachusetts senator elizabeth warren a liberal icon, will attend events this weekend at two ohio universities. let's hear from a gary johnson report -- a gary johnson supporter. eileen, how are you? caller: how are you? host: doing fine, thank you.

caller: yes. i am really angry. my right to hear my candidate of choice has been taken away from been taken away from jill stein's people. they want to hear what she has to say. the nation wants to hear what they have to say. both of them. it is vitally important. harry johnson is on all of the ballots -- gary johnson is on all of the ballots. we do not want what is coming up, especially if it is trump. man onhe most dangerous the planet, as far as i am concerned. i want everyone to check your ballot. make sure you vote for someone other than the two top guys. host: this is part of the statement from gary johnson after the news yesterday. cpd may scoffhe

at it together enjoys only 9% or 10%, even nine percents -- year voters,sents 13 million more than the total population of ohio and other states. americans are tired of rate systems and the monopoly on debates created by the cpd is a skillfully executed example. let's hear from cary, north carolina. jim, good morning. donald trump supporter. caller: good morning. how are you? host: doing fine. caller: wonderful. i am curious. the previous caller -- even though i lean towards trump, i just show hisould taxes if he is serious to the for showing asked all of your papers if you want to be president of the united states. what about trump showing his taxes?

if he is really serious and has nothing to hide. i believe he should do that. thank you. host: thank you. oklahoma city is next. cindy, hillary clinton supporter. go ahead. caller: good morning. thanks for taking our call. it is important for us americans to have a voice about our country. and i appreciate the opportunity , just as the opportunity should be provided for those people who have put themselves, immersed themselves, in the effort to become a leader of this country. they have gone through the homework. they have done the groundwork. they got people really for them, because they are for what they are saying. they should have a voice. on our major news channels. so we can hear what mrs. hillary clinton and donald trump have to

say to these other people. i think there should be a combination of these. and i do support mrs. clinton. i think she has been through a lot in her life and will be a wonderful leader of our country, if voted in as president. in the meantime, i feel like we all need to pray for our country, so that the best indidate will be chosen, jesus' name. host: do you think it is fair to exclude jill stein or gary johnson from the first debate? caller: of course not. people should absolutely be given a voice. they have put in effort. they have raised a mass of supporters.

why s let's see what people are saying on twitter. this oneh says competition is healthy. independentouldn't they? host:s should be on the debate -- independents should be on the debate stage. this one says we are a two-party system, unlike in europe. they have not gone through rigorous primary, only serve as spoilers -- talking about the independents. will thecircumstances debate commission allow any third party candidates into their presidential debate's. firsts just about the presidential debate on september 26. will have live coverage on c-span and c-span radio. we go to maryland. hillary clinton supporter. caller: good morning. my opinion is mr. johnson and mistimed -- and ms. stein should be included in the first debate. host: are you worried, being a hillary clinton supporter, another horse on the stage could minister impact of hillary clinton? caller: i am aware that, but we

live in america. , lastion is un-american time i checked. i do not think it and handsets our -- i don't think it electoral system. it is not american to exclude anybody. we do not want to make a mockery of our electoral system. individuals will make the decisions for the american people. if they're going to make decisions for the american people, we are looking at the decisions they are making now. and the decision to exclude individuals whose voice we should be wanting to hear should be problematic for any american. it is an example of how they may execute their power. i do not care about taxes or .-mails

we are all imperfect people. but i need us all to push greater america. america has integrity is at stake. america's future is at stake. talking about the presidential debate commission made by the commission yesterday to not invite gary johnson or jill stein, the libertarian and green party disrespect italy -- respectively. we welcome your calls. a02) 748-8000 if you are third-party supporter, jill stein or gary johnson, or others. if you support hillary clinton, (202) 748-8001. donald trump supporters, (202) 748-8002. for all others, (202) 748-8003. back to the other presidential campaign story about the birth or comments yesterday by donald trump here in washington. the "washington post," trump

admits obama was born in the u.s. but falsely blames clinton for rumors. he even garnered some reaction from the first lady, who was on the campaign trail yesterday in george mason in northern virginia. [video clip] >> back then, people had all kind of questions about what kind of president barack would be. things like "does he understand us?" us?" he protect and then there are those who question and continue to question, for the past eight years, up to this very day, if my husband was even born in this country. [boos] well, during his time in office, i think barack has answer those questions with the example he sat. by going high when they go low. [cheers]

and he has answer these questions with the progress we have achieved together. progress like bringing health care to 20 million people. creating 15 million private sector jobs. millions of young people, like all of you, afford college. ts anding lgbt righ marriage equality. equality is now the law of the land. and we just learned that, last year, the typical household income rose by $2800. which, by the way, is the largest one-year job on record. [cheers] 3.5 million people were lifted out of poverty. the biggest one-year decrease in poverty in nearly 50 years. [cheers]

you hear me? host: back to your comments and calls on the presidential commission decision. a tweet from terry, who says "gary johnson is on the ballot in 50 states and is supported by millions. he needs to be on that stage." this one says the media dissects every word trump says, not hillary's. trump's manager conway, and told her she was pure evil. up ins pamela and california. a hillary clinton supporter. good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for taking me, i appreciate it. two or three months ago, i would have said no, i think it is too late in the race for having new people come in.

i think gary johnson and jill stein, however, are really worth something. experience,eshing just to sit back and listen to her. but i do believe this is a free country. we have to reach out to these people. approaching and asking us to allow them on the later than any rule or regulation states. that is not a proper for me. host: let's hear from a gary johnson supported in massachusetts. this is paul. caller: the time has finally come to recognize our two-party system is broken. and the need for greater participation is a must. thereto current candidates -- the two current candidates,

leading candidates, are totally inadequate. i cannot bring myself to vote for either one, no matter how hard i tried. i think the country needs greater options. said that have before. now i will say it. we need other options. host: what makes a gary johnson supporter? caller: he is the only one else available to me. the jill stein is too far and in different direction. gary johnson is not the one i want, but he is the closest i see sitting in the oval. i could not imagine that bombastic trump in there. and hillary clinton, who i do not have a lot of trust for. so gary johnson is the only real option available. press has created

this monster by only focusing on the two leading candidates, democrat and republican. they are not giving them the amount of time. if he had the amount of time trump has had, he would have the higher percentages the commission requests. host: donald trump was in washington and in miami. the headline in the washington says that theump bodyguards assigned to his rival should "disarm immediately" and see what happens. "she goes around with armed bodyguards like you have never seen before. i think that her bodyguards should drop all weapons. they should disarm. right?" " i think they should disarm immediately. what do you think? yes? she does not want guns.

let's see what happens to her. take their guns away, ok? it would be very dangerous." that his" describes comments came after he described the violence in inner-city neighborhoods as far more dangerous than afghanistan. he said that clinton lives behind gates and walls and guards. we go to a clinton supporter in fort lauderdale. good morning. caller: how are you? host: i'm fine, thanks. caller: yes. trouble in the election. know why thiso election should be -- host: say it again? caller: why the election should

be like that. it is the first year i have seen the election like that. why the trouble? host: ok. let's go to nancy, a donald trump supporter in ohio. good morning. caller: hi. you want to know if i think that all four candidates should be on the debate? host: yes, what do you think? caller: i think why not? for one thing, gary johnson does not know anything that has not already been proven. had a very hard surgery. i have been unable to do anything for a long time. i have been watching all channels. .nd i am for trump we finally found somebody that and cares for us. as far as obamacare, i know

there are a lot of people who would rather pay the fine, because they cannot afford the insurance. i think donald trump has shown he can hold his own. is straightforward to the truth. with thee no problem and libertarians joining right in. host: donald trump will be in houston tonight. he is speaking to families of victims of illegal immigrants in houston this afternoon. our coverage here on c-span 1:00 p.m.derway at eastern. live coverage on c-span. a few more minutes of your calls and comments about your news yesterday. gary johnson and jill stein to be excluded from the first presidential debate, which is coming up monday night, the

26th. here is a hillary clinton supporter in the nation's cap ital. i came to the united trip. on a business no illegal immigration here. although americans expect a lot from the future candidate of the country, i want to let them know what is going on outside. america always has this beautiful reputation as the best country in the world. het donald trump is doing -- does not have america's image outside. and many countries, people are afraid to come here, because the american dream that has made america great is getting killed who is of one candidate a really bad things about opening up to the world.

he focuses on differences instead of common goals. in four americans who are working and living outside of america. host: what country are you from? caller: i am from rocco -- i am from morocco. i came for the our ocean conference. host: the one here in washington. thanks, we appreciate your comments. and some lawmakers here are working over the weekend on the continuing funding resolution as ends september6 30. headline says "weekend talks loom for negotiators dickering over 10 week cr." republican and democratic leaders are exchanging proposals and anti-zika funding for planned parenthood

clinics in puerto rico remains a sore spot. being led byare senators. the senate is back monday on c-span. a couple more calls. we go to baltimore, maryland. donald trump supporter. caller: hello. joy to get opinions from real people. my comment is simply this -- i originally a ben carson supporter. ross perot supporter. when ben went over to trump, he said trump is the best people picker he has ever seen in his life. that is what we need. we need not just the president,

but we need a complete cabinet of people who know how to the force and glory of this united states. i am also a world war ii veteran. i am 89 years old. and i like it here. it is a great country. and we can be great, the way we were in the 60's -- in the 1960's through the 1980's. ust: glad to have you join this morning. news from philadelphia. this from the "philadelphia inquirer." police sergeant and second officer shot in an apparent ambush. they say a gunman ambushed abel tapia police sergeant friday night, firing more than a dozen four civiliansot and a university of pennsylvania police officer before he was cornered and taken down by police. now i go to indianapolis, hillary clinton supporter.

good morning, go ahead. caller: yes. i would like to know if any of the candidates will take our social security and mess it up like the last republican president did? host: without the your question for the candidates? caller: yes. i want to know if they will take our social security and mess it up, like the last republican president did. host: how old are you? caller: i am 58. host: so you're getting close. caller: i am with the baby boomers. who will beot of us coming out, looking for our money. we work for a long time, and we would like to have it. host: are you still working? caller: yes. appreciate your input.

we get one more call. call from a gary johnson supported in oklahoma. mary, hi. caller: yes. i am not understanding why if someone has worked to get on the ballot in all 50 states, why they cannot be part of the debates so we can hear what they have to say. it seems like we are in or in a voice that we should be able to hear. your input.reciate a completely opposite viewpoint on twitter. did not meet they professional than they are just a distraction. we appreciate your comments and calls. a travel update on this theme of campaign 2016 from the campaign 2016 bus. it made stops in indiana and ohio as part of our road to the white house tour. we visited autobahn university, where close to have -- where

close to 200 students, educators, and others learn more , all archived on c-span.org. plus visitors share their thoughts on the election. you can follow the bus on @cspanbus. and a special thank you to charter for cord knitting visits. next week, the bus will be in upstate new york as it makes its way to posture university -- hofstra university for the first presidential debate. c-span.org. more "washington journal" ahead with reports of two health insurance companies pulling out of the affordable care act exchanges. louise radnofsky of the "wall .treet journal" will join us

and then later on, what type of health care is being received by federal inmate at privately run from seth prisons freed wessler. he will be with us later on to discuss it. tour takespan cities on the road as we explore grand rapids, michigan. today at noon on book tv, we will talk to local authors, including a stop at the home of richard north smith as he works on his biography of president ford. his apartment overlooks the ford and thetial museum gravesites of the president and first lady betty ford. >> this is what a book looks like before it is a book, basically. these are the tip of the iceberg.

this is research material for the next six months to nine months. ral histories said by themselves. but there is a whole section -- several piles dealing with his congressional career. to the a pile devoted contest in which he became house republicans leader in 1965. people are menaces from who were in managing that campaign. working on will allow me to, basically, re-create the ford presidency in something close to real time. a little over two years or so. that, -- i am living with in a kind of unique

intimacy that any biographer has with his or her subject. they are never far from your thoughts. this is sony and national museum of african american history and culture opens its doors to the public for the first time saturday, september 24. american history tv will be live from the national mall leading up to the outdoor dedication ceremony. speakers include president obama , the founding museum director, first lady michelle obama, former president george w. bush, and laura bush, congressman john lewis, and smithsonian secretary live on 8:00 a.m. eastern september 24. "washington journal" continues. host: louise radnofsky is the

health policy reporter for the "wall street journal," here to from the the news withdrawal of providers. we are hearing this week on capitol hill. first of all, in terms of health care providers who are no longer participating, what did we learn? guest: we have had a couple of high-profile withdrawals from the marketplace. those best known for their brand names. united health care pulling out. they are not necessarily the biggest insurers that people who buy insurance on their own use. now these people have the option, when they go online in november when open and woman starts, perhaps just one carrier. different products but one insurer to choose from. host: one of your pieces in the carterek, "u.s. health

acese was held law force critical year." guest: the turbulence of the first couple of years of the law is showing up in premium increases. state regulators have had no choice to a -- approve these, because health insurers need them to keep afloat, essentially. deter and prices roman healthy people. it is what health experts fear as a death spiral, where prices spiral and the situation compounds itself. the obama administration does not think we are there. they think we are in transition. but people looking at this critically think it is the beginning of the end. host: the president did meet with insurance officials earlier. guest: the message communicated

to the insurers, and he also took the externalized up of sending a letter to every insurer on the exchange, was acknowledgment of their participation, and expression of , recognition that things are going through a tough time, and a request to hold the line, if you will. that the administration believes this can be solved, they can get through it together, they are taking steps to do things i have been asking for. host: if we go back to the passage of the law, what were they projecting? what was the administration hoping for five or six years ago, and how they met that point yet? guest: several things have changed about the law. but the idea of its core focus was this group of people who did not have enough coverage through their jobs or government program who had to buy on their own and

were grappling with a market with serious problems. some of his sweeping changes came into effect. everyone should buy health insurance at relatively equal price. but the price changes we are seeing is a erect consequence of that. i do not think people thought it would take the health insurers as long to get used to that. and we have also not seen the kind of enrollment we had expected, was because people are moving to single market and they are not signing up with the numbers and enthusiasm we expected. radnofsky talking about the news of their withdrawal from the exchange by several providers. we want to hear what your experience has been. here's how we are breaking up are the numbers this morning for our part of a conversation. if you get your insurance through the affordable care act, use (202) 748-8000. if you get insurance through your employer, (202) 748-8001.

for all uninsured, that is (202) 748-8002. if you do not fit into those categories, (202) 748-8003. the good news for the administration, the headline in the "wall street journal," the percentage of those uninsured low. record. health insurance in 2016, the number of people without health insurance was at 9.1%. people who have health insurance for all or part of the year was nearly 91%. 67% had private health insurance. 37% had some sort of coverage. -- how does the administration see maintaining that with the provider pool shrinking? guest: the health law has a historic impact on reducing the number of people uninsured. notstates that have

expanded eligibility to medicare, there is still an uptick in enrollment, though there are still millions who are eligible who are not enrolled. the dynamic and reducing the rate of uninsured -- what critics would say is it does not necessarily have the impact that it could have for the amount of effort expended on it. of course it brought down the rate of those uninsured, that is what it was trying to do most. host: of those states who have not taken the option to expand medicare, what is the primary argument? .uest: it is partly about money and the difference between medicaid and medicare. the states are concerned about the parts they have to pay, which is relatively small compared to the federal government. in addition, they are concerned about the long-term obligations of the federal government. they think it is an insufficient

program right now, and they are concerned about growing it. host: on the political side, doesn't part of what hillary clinton has proposed expand medicare? guest: he would like to give extended -- host: we have calls waiting period we go to brad in michigan, who gets his insurance through his employer. caller: i saw this coming. republicans did not sign off on it and it is all democrats who pushed it. i heard there is also a $6,000 deductible on these policies. is that true? if that is true, how can they call the health insurance? i cannot afford to pay $6,000 a year plus how many family members you have. host: among higher deductibles, is that indeed a fact? are people having to pay more

for having to hit a higher mark for the deductible? guest: there are a range of products offered, even on a single ensure, on h ealthcare.gov and state equivalents. but there's always a trade-off. we think we have seen shoppers have gotten more savvy about this. they are aware that a lower premium comes with this trade off. we also see from some people who have remained uninsured by choice, as far as a look at the options, is the height of the vote is a real reason for them to stay away. they do not see the point in finding the money to pay what is a hefty premium for them, which would then come with a high deductible. who stayt of those uninsured have to pay that tax at the end of the year. what does that typically average? guest: it has gone up.

when people file their 2017 taxes, pretty much the maximum for 2016 going uninsured. go up.inues to there are a lot of people who have exemptions to that penalty and do not have to pay it. what we are seeing from people who are not insured is even if they anticipate the penalty, comparing it to what they may have pay if they do not get a subsidy and deciding they are still better off where they are, that is a problem. likely tof person make this decision is someone will not payy and the premium. a person likely to buy insurance is someone who need care. host: let's hear what one of those uninsured people is experiencing. troy, ohio. welcome. i am 56. i have no insurance. only because of what i am hearing. this't afford to have

insurance. besides that, is there not something in the cause of sushi that states government cannot force commerce on the populace? they are forcing us to have it, then fining us if we do not have it. is that not unconstitutional? that to this conversation about the taxi mentioned, at the end of the year, for some of those who remain uninsured. there is this penalty. it is something people have to bear in mind, like they bear in mind it at the polls and premiums. on the constitutionality of the law and whether there is any legal argument that it should beene in place, that has well aired in washington. there are members of the supreme court may take that position. the majority have not. that is why it is what it is now. " thisthe "new york times

week -- workers pay more. health insurance exchanges are in turmoil. but it seems like a bastion of pay they say that an analysis by the kaiser family foundation released wednesday shows that the share of employers offering remains steady and because of premiums for health plans remain unchanged in the employ around. is that true? it is clear we have seen the spread of higher deductible plans in the employ around. they are not as high as they are on health care.gov or the equivalent. it is certainly something they noticed. we think it is very interesting. we have seen consumer start to act accordingly. epi-penhe pen -- the controversy stems from people seeing the full price of what they have to purchase.

over that,rh recently see a lot more emphasis -- having seen that, recently we see a lot more emphasis on that. mylan, the company that makes the epi-pen, what is congress want to hear? guest: committees want to see the pricing strategy, and other committees want to see what the government can do to increase competition. it is a life-saving emergency allergy treatment used by children. it has a lot of elements for this to be the right area for lawmakers to be involved in. and they are hearing from the constituents, because they have been paying it themselves because of the deductibles. host: look for coverage this week on the c-span networks on that hearing. we go to john in cleveland, who gets insurance through the affordable care act.

health care was supposed to be universal and fair to all. i have a question about that. people living in nashville county, ohio live -- in a sheville county, the deductible is 1500 higher. how is that fair and hoy is that ek tabble? >> i can't tell you but i can tell you how it's possible. that is that the health law allows insurers to, to go by a few factors. one is by the age of the person. they can't charge young people more than three times less than older people. but also something called geographic or community ratings. so within a state you can divide

up if you are an insurer various areas, regions, rating areas and the state regulator will allow you to choorge different prices. the idea is that health care costs are typically higher in certain areas. or health care needs are certainly higher in those areas. so they are doing this. individuals aren't charged based on their history. communities could be. >> followup question. go ahead. caller: so when the deductibles are so high. i'll not going to get an operation because my deductible is almost $7,000. so all these people with these deductibles are going to wait until they turn 65. it is going to impact medicare to the it might bankrupt medicare. they aren't getting it because they can't pay the deductible. everybody says quhen i go to medicare i'm going to walk in the door and start the process of going to the doctor, of

getting better and costing the medical community. zoo how close are you to medicare age to being 65? caller: i am 61 years old. if you ask people out there, they're not getting their medication. they're not getting their operations. they're going to wait until 65 because medicare and the government, has your guest considered any of this? >> i have considered this. this is part of the health care cost con ungrum more generally. if people delay care. if you're looking at this purely from an economic perspective. this is personal on a personal level and i don't mean to take away from that. if you look at this from an economic perspective there is a debate. when people delay care does that cost more? certainly for some conditions. there's a hospital bill bigger than a prescription drug bill.

sometimes when people cut back on care they may be saving the system money and that over time never really brings the bill to the government. we see people's behavior in response to deductibles having potentially unknown effects up up up what it is they prefer doing and whether later that procedure if they choose to have it is going to be more expensive. zoo this week on the affordable care act looking at a couple of ifferent things. we have had historic reductions in the number of uninsured people. the c.d.c. reported last week that the uninsured rate is at an historic low. the lowest that we've had in four decades. that's an accomplishment. since the passage of the aca, 20 million previously uninsured americans now have coverage.

this includes millions of young adults who can now stay on their parents' plans until age 26. i just want to interject a personal note here. my daughter, who everybody on this committee knows just graduated from college. she's 22 years old. she is also a type 1 diabetic. she just let to go teach in madrid for a year. she's on my insurance. and because of the affordable care act she can't get thrown off of my insurance because she has hah preexisting condition or because she's over 21. and further more we were able to get her a year's worth of diabetic supplies before she left for madrid. there are thousands of families in the united states who are benefiting in the way my family has. and i am going to fight until the end to make sure that they can keep these benefits and that we can keep expanding it so that every american has high quality health insurance. host: focusing just on that age

26 thing. a couple years experience of this now. congresswoman de get mentioned her daughter is on her plan. what sort of evidence, what sort of data have we seen in terms of kids hanging on their parents plan through that critical time period? guest: 32 really interesting types of data. this is one of the single most popular provisions. one that got bipartisan support at various times when the act has been on the table for repeal certain members wanted to repeal it still wanted to find a way to preserve or restore the provision. really popular. on its cost, it's still a little unclear but we've seen some interesting signs. an employer-sponsored fund that allows people to keep their young adults dependents on until the age of 26 generally seems to be stable. doesn't seem to take a big price hit because people continue to buy family plans for longer than they would have anyway and that more or less

evans out the additional claims that would have been incurred. sometimes the premiums are different if you have additional members on it employers structure this differently. two provisions. the third thing is 26-34 is the highest rate of uninsurance. host: they're not on their parents plans. guest: and what the act needs for people on the individual market is the 26 to 34-year-olds are signing up. host: let's hear from kenny in kansas. good morning. caller: i'm an insured and i have two kids. i'm a single dad. i work for a body shop. low-wage, standard $25,000 a year. and boy, what i've seen with it's about uctible,

$506 a month for family. but boy, for me, for what i make, there's no way that i can do that so i just end up, when i do my tax return last year, when the tax returns coming up this year, i was already told by the tax preparer that it's already written down where for us three, my two teen aged kids and me, it's going to be $1390 penalty. so if you take 500 times 12, that's a lot more than 1290 penalty. i 'm -- i just thought would tell you what i'm going to be facing. host: appreciate you sharing that. what do you think? guest: this brings up a couple of issues in the affordable care act that i think supporters had hoped to

address. one is that there are tax credits to offset the cost of premiums for people who fall into certain income brackets and from the sounds of what the caller was saying he and his children may do that. there's also expanded funding for programs such as medicaid and the children's health insurance program that may again help insure certain members of his family. there's also tax preparers who are obviously, who at hr block in particular have been through the front lines because they see them every single year. what the penalty is, whether they're exempt, which is an important thing for people to consider. and if they're not, whether it makes financial sense for them to sign up in addition to whether they can get the premiums. that might change the pricing. >> clearly he's done the math and he's figured it's cheaper to pay that penalty. guest: and what we've seen is people don't always know about the trax credit but when they

learn they don't necessarily always change their minds. host: what are his exchange options in kansas? do they participate? do they have a state exchange? guest: kansas uses health care.gov along with a dozen other states. generally what we've seen is there isn't a significant difference related to a state's decision to use health care.gov and what's available to people. it's more preexisting scenarios that haven't changed quickly. so kansas has the market that it has not necessarily changed by this. medicaid is not expandd in that particular state. so eligibility is where it was at, which historicically has been very low for a single man but with children things change. host: he mentioned his premiums rising. ere's a tweet.

guest: do you know what tate? host: he doesn't state what state. the anonymity of twitter. is that a making a big difference with an organization like blue cross blue shield? guest: in many states are really the backbone of the exchange. they are big plans that people have known for a time. they're often the dominant insurer. so what they've been is considerable concerns and we look to this and other market leaders to see what's happening with the majority of people. what we've seen is double digits price increases. again the regulators have signed off on. host: let's hear from bill in louisville, kentucky who gets his insurance through his employer. welcome. caller: good morning. i'm thinking that it seems like everybody has forgotten how it used to be prior to the aca. i've got two questions because

before if you had a preexisting condition you couldn't get insurance. and if you had insurance and you were pregnant or a woman you had different criteria. my question is, had those insurance premiums under -- since the aca been in effect compared to how insurance premiums were increasing on the rate prior to that insurance company was just taking upon themselves to give to us? and secondly, the question is, if all the states had initially gone with the aca and tried to work to make it available to everybody rather than fight it the way it was fought over 50, 60 times would the premiums have been considerably less by now? thank you so much. host: that could be the $64,000 question.

guest: the second question, it's hard to tell because the number of states didn't see their insurance market change overnight from what they've been regardless of what they did or didn't do. a lot of the blue states very supportive had other issues that also didn't change overnight with their insurance markets. premiums certainly were turbulent before the affordable care act. this year they're turbulent in a way that really stands out. but the way insurance has changed has really been considerable and makes compares ngs hard. premiums are much higher than they used to be. plans are much more generous. they cover more, a set range of benefits under more mandates thaven they used to. insurance is available to everyone ypreegsly they were able to keep premiums low because they didn't insure people for certain conditions or at all. so the pregnant woman is a cost example. insurance used to cost more for

women because precisely knew they were going to have higher claims. now, it doesn't. everybody pay it is same regardless of gender. we see it in balance more women have signed up and that's one of the reason whice premiums sometimes are going up more than expected because insurers have the first couple of years in getting equal numbers. host: historicically are women more likely to use their health care coverage than men? guest: certainly insurers and their actuaries have thought so. the assumptions they made. generally they've got money on the line so you sort of want to bear that in mind when you're looking at the numbers that they produce. they have an incentive to get them right. people have called them on it and said i think you're wrong about this. and sometimes the insurers admitted that too. >> employer provided health care. caller: listening to your show i appreciate you taking my call. the gentleman who called earlier questioning the

constitutionality of the affordable care act. i don't see any place in the constitution that even talks about health care nor gives the federal government the right to do anything with respect to it. -- what good is insurance if you sign up and can't use it? some of these deductibles, just astronomcal. and some of the people that have the insurance will never be able to meet that deductible. so you really don't have insurance. and the reason we have a crisis in health care is because of government involvement. we don't have a crisis in computer electronics, in buying shoes or clothing. we was a crisis in health care, ie, the cost is too high because the government involvement, regulation, the restriction of doctors which drives the price up.

and so forth. my parents grew up in the 30s and 50s doctors made house calls. host: all right. we'll get a response. guest: one of the thing it is supreme court considered was whether health care was a product like shoes or like anything else. and one of the arguments that people certainly make is that health insurance or health coverage or health care had certain differences but also yes it changed a lot in the last few decades. things have really -- a broad debate about what health insurance should be for. a lot of variation among candidates. nsurance really big claims catastrophic events should that be encouraged? after, say a ok 27-year-old if they get into a catastrophic vehicle or accident?

or should insurance be for day to day to pay for health care for them usually coming with a higher up front premium but that people often on a day to day basis don't have catastrophic. what you see in the affordable care act is a combination of both the few things covered up front to preventative care without copays or provisions the law was designed to insure that people did have access to that. and then the big stuff. there's no lifetime limit. this will certainly kick in for that. but what people are seeing is that bit in the middle that in some cases host: that caller mentioned medical costs. in the "washington post" reporting about a labor department study.

guest: we've seen health costs be all over in the last few years. they were at growth historic rate between 2000 and 2009 -- it was very high and alarmed people. then from 2010 went to an historic low. d the question was whether this was ling aftereffects of the economic downturn. whether after things got better for them health costs would start roaring back. we haven't been far enough down the line to tell for sure. host: ed, good morning. getting his insurance through the aca. caller: good morning. i have a question for your guest but also a comment for you. one of the critical things is

the pool. they're not encouraging enough young people to get into that pool and your guest mentioned a moment ago, i'm impressed with her knowledge. but are you encouraging young people who don't have any health issues right now to get into the pool? i think it would make it a lot more attractive. and also bring down the cost. i'm retired and i'm comparing it with that i have already. and i think it would be much better. and another thing is too much olitical in things like -- these are health things that are frightening young people. really, what do you do to try to encourage? and are you in charge to get --

encouraging them to get into the pool? host: ok. you had a question for us here at c-span? caller: what are you doing to try to encourage that? i think the pool needs to be expanded. host: appreciate your comments. guest: this has been something that the administration supporters have considered for a couple of years. what can they do to encourage young people to sign up. they've tried out various messages. we've seen that strategy evolve. we've seen emphasis on the penalties than we did in the first year. after folks on the ground notice that had the penalty. even if it wasn't popular. what the administration is struggling with is data to suggest that it's difficult to persuade people who feel that they're cash strapped. they would like to fix their car this month. they have certain obligation that is to them are more

pressing and outweigh the need to get health insurance to protect the assets they don't have. maybe that car is what they would lose if they had a big medical bill and they feel they're trying to keep the car either way. they have this dynamic that is not easily resolved by messaging or a single sort of argument the administration or supporters of law can make to them to get them to sign up for health coverage. some of the other proposals people consider are what can be done do make health insurance cheaper for young people which i think also comes with a trade-off because they're -- there are always tradeoffs. do you have a -- so you have a lot of competing interests. it's a tough question. no one so far, as far as i can tell, has figured out what an answer actually is that would make people want to sign up in large numbers. if they had it they would use it. if you find it, you should call me. host: tying in an earlier caller from kansas and the comments we played from

representative deget, a tweet here. congressman tim murphy was concerned republican tim murphy concerned about the rise in premiums. here's what he had to say. >> you had mentioned in your testimony that premiums have gone down in actuality or they've gone -- they're less than what cbo estimated. >> i think what i said is after the second -- after 2016, so current premiums, are between and 20% lower than in going estimates. >> than -- lower than estimates? >> lower than estimated. i can get you -- >> i want to deal with reality. because cbo is not held in the

highest -- >> cbo. >> but estimates. have you shared this information with aetna, united and humana? because the fact they bailed out of the market saying this is out of control, maybe you have a breakthrough that all these companies haven't seen. it's amazing to me health care costs have gone up. they've gone up about 69%. insurance premiums have gone up. so there's less selection. people enroll then disenroll when they're well. copays and deductibles are so high. so i hope you can show us the source of this. host: what is getting at here? guest: insurers did price lower than perhaps was expected for 2014 and 2015. the premiums didn't quite go down. but if you think about all the changes going on, some people had worries that the jump would have been higher. so what you saw heading into

2016 and now 2017 is insurers adjusting their expectations. they priced low in part because they didn't know what to expect. and in part because they were optimistic and they wanted to give people an incrntive to buy coverage and comby with them. and you're seeing now some of those early enthusiastic insurers, in which aetna was one pulling back. united health is a different animal. its pull backs represents more what was expected. but aetna was overly enthusiastic. host: for viewers, what is the window for signing up? guest: the next open enrollment period starts november 1. t finishes january 2017. there are some life events that qualify for individuals to sign up outside of the open enrollment period. usually to do with losing a job. those have been perhaps wider

opportunities in the past than insurers have been very concerned about what the congressman was saying about the potential for people to game the system. host: let's hear from tony in tennessee. caller: good morning. i have a couple of questions and a statement. you hear people saying about the deductibles. well, i have -- on social security and i know people that have a $6,000 deductible. and to save $30. they have a plan but nobody's interested because on tv it's nothing but hmo's. this and that. if they really checked google which one's the best it would come out plan a. but the other thing is that everybody, insurance companies also have to pay the doctors. and that's -- i know of one

parent in las vegas, all the doctors that were taking care of pregnant women were quit being doctors because their surance was so high they would make more money being something else. host: we haven't touched on the liability insurance area. the other side of this coin in 2er78s of medical professionals, doctors in particular. guest: well, we certainly hear it could bring down health care costs in general and premiums next. certainly it's a popular idea among republicans. less of a popular idea among democrats. it's hard to tell since nobody's really gone down that path. but there doesn't seem to be a sign that that alone would resolve the issues that the people are facing. certainly supporters argue that it couldn't hurt. host: the census bureau figures for the uninsured looking across eight years back to 2008 and the ark of the uninsured obviously falling well

downward, especially since the passage of the affordable care act to 2015 or now just a little over 8% uninsured in the united states. guest: 8.6% of the respondents said they were without coverage , and what we saw for the 2015 rate overall was 9.1%. we heard that their shift over time wasn't significantly significant. not necessarily in itself. everything but what you're seeing is a trend that points to health insurance coverage rates high. >> is there another big road mark landmark coming up for the implementation? these dates that come up where pieces of the act get enforced. what is next coming up or do we know? guest: not as much. it's true my reporting life has been marked by these mile

stones and there aren't so many now. the biggest would be certain presidential and congressional elections coming up. that's the next life event in the law which has had plenty of life events to date. a couple of supreme court cases. a couple elections. three open enrollment periods. host: here's lexington, north carolina. caller: hi. my biggest issue is being in north carolina one of the toughest places to get insurance. and i'm 28 years old. at the end of the -- with two kids and having issues, i went through in north carolina the insured and they keep -- i was overwhelmed. and with obama care kicking in i was a manager and people lost hours due to affordable care act. and it has caused more issues

that think it has resolved them. me having problems at that and taking care of two children, what are they going to do for north carolina? host: north carolinaance have to use health care.gov. guest: they do. and it's one of the states that looks like it will have one insurer. there may be different options in different areas. but certainly the blue plan there is the big one. so people have to look and see what they can do. host: let's start with the figures from the kaiser family foundation on the health care coverage.

are more workers choosing these? guest: yes. what we see in some employer scenarios is that the incentives for the employee to make that choice are very firm indeed in terms of premiums. so there's some steering by companies. i think overall the employers were affected by the affordable care act but the ways in which they were affected most sharply haven't panned down. a tax has been delayed until 2020 and may be delayed again. i don't think anybody expects to see the cadillac tax really coming back. but employers try to prepare for that. and don't necessarily feel inclined to turn back from that approach. the hours question that the caller raises is really

interesting, too. the affordable care act requires coverage of employeing who work 30 hours a week or more and it doesn't require coverage of employees who do not. so what we did see and clearly are still seeing has been some companies are cutting back. they weren't necessarily converting full-time jobs to part-time jobs but for employees that were on the cusp, 29, hours, companies wanted to keep them below that 30 threshhold to reduce their coverage. so you saw people losing hours around that mark in particular. host: pennsylvania, good morning. barry. caller: first, i wish c-span would get involved in the debates. i feel it would be more fair. i appreciate what you do.

i don't think -- does anyone remember all over the united states when people didn't have health coverage? and they were neglected because of that? it's -- if my health coverage went up one year before obamacare. i don't know if that's the reason because they knew they were going on the amount of people involved in the plan. i think it's wrong. there is no affordable coverage for people today. i understand -- who has thousands of dollars to put out? and what really gripes me is these people that say the government. it's the insurance companies. the government takes over looking the insurance companies and it's not the government's fault. it's the republicans that did not want us to have health coverage. host: on the insurance companies guest: the caller suggested that americans were roughly divided between who they

trusted more or who they trusted less to run their health plan between the government and the insurance. so this tension has been part of the debate ever since. it's never been resolved. people feel more strongly inclined to one or the other. without that, the likelihood of consensus needs to be a little bit slow. the clinics that the caller mentioned are also very interesting. it appears that six years into the affordable care act there's still a significant gray market in health care. people who are uninsured do not necessarily go without care. they might go without all the care they want. they find extraordinary ways to get it. they pay cash, barter, use the charity system. they're very creative. and because it's possible to do that often there's a disconnect between them and policy makers who assume that everybody has to have insurance and that everybody wants insurance. people who aren't insured explain they're able to get care. so they save their money so they can pay cash. and then the problem becomes very sticky for growing the

insurance pool if that's the direction the government wants to go in for the policy makers in charge of doing that. host: you were educated at oxford your journalism degree at columbia. you work for the guardian in the u.k. how different is covering the united states health care system from the british system? guest: i never covered it. i just looked at it for a number of years. and i would just say they're very different situations. the british health system came out of a different time and history. maybe that's what lawmakers had in mind in 2010 but what we've seen the circumstances weren't the same. so you have these very different cultures. certainly interesting looking at them. host: connecticut. richard. good morning. caller: good morning. actually i'm calling for a little different reason. a couple of years ago i did a

recording called obamacare revisited. in there i said obama looked north to canada and the government controlled single pair system and explained this is a quote. we cannot achieve a single payer system in the united states in one step. the american people will never ookssept it. we must move slowly and step by step to achieve a government run single payer system. that's what obamacare is all about. the government has spent billions and billions of dollars on this farce just to get to a single payer system. i also have gone and say the requirements in obamacare will make individual and group medical insurance prohibittively expensive. for individuals host: to be clear, are you getting your coverage through medicare? do you have other insurance that augustments that?

caller: yes. and this, the fellow who called earlier about waiting for medicare, by the time he's 65 they're going to be taken out two, three, four hundred dollars to cover plan b. host: we haven't touched on the cost of medicare. give us a snapshot of that. how that program is working. caller: medicare has in some ways been influenced by the general health care costs spending trends and so premiums have been -- there have been some increases and there have been some stable years in the people -- six health insurance we could say is a -- in temps of its policy implications. because people have strong feelings about their health insurance that may or may not connect to what's going on on the national level but they bring that experience there. it's personal, it's political.

the consumer issue. it has fascinating ingredients but also drives these very complicated feelings that people have. then you see every couple of years don't get fully captured. host: a product when you need it you need it ifment guest: and also people like to complain about it constantly. and they have very thought out reasons for doing that. it's unclear to me always whether that -- how that then trance lates into policy demands or people have feelings about what they would prefer. host: louisville, kentucky. go ahead. first thing when i had health insurance, so i went through the doctors office and he v.a. and turned out medication, [inaudible]

i quit taking it. , 106.- blood pressure then they took my medication and my blood pressure went high. and then they tell me that they only carry two pills. go to v.a. they only care about seven or ability pills. this is what obamacare is going to do for you. if i go on medicare i'm not going have a pension i'm going to pay three fourths of my pension. so i'm going to be in the poor house. host: let's hear from jane in georgia. caller: good morning. i just wanted do make a comment. this health insurance -- this ealth insurance price.

host: i think we lost her. sorry. e'll go to bill in michigan. i lost both of them. jane, are you there? aller: this is bill. from michigan. i want to say thanks for c-span as usual. prior to the aca i had my health insurance through my mployer. and i can see why the aca is in trouble why the insurance companies are in trouble because i'm a diabetic and i just got my prescription yesterday. in the last two years it's gone

says - i get a thing that your insurance saves you, it used to be 400. the three prescriptions i got yesterday my insurance saved me 1600. something has to be done about these high prescription prices. because the insurance companies can't can go on paying these inflated prescription price. thank god i had insurance. i couldn't afford to pay it. host: high price of prescriptions. a number of people have been interested in changing health care costs though they didn't necessarily have a large constituency of individuals rallying behind them. employees were worried, people

weren't because they weren't seeing the bills. people feel strongly about high deductibles. one of the unintended consequences, perhaps a happy for some, we do see people are paying more attention to their bills in part because they are on the hook. but also because they're just looking at them and asking questions about drug pricing. so there's a range of policy proposals on the table and they really do span the spectrum. but the lawmakers see suddenly that they do have folks anxious in having that conversation perhaps in larger numbers or more further than they did before. host: next, new york city on the line for those who get their inslurens through their employer. welcome. caller: good morning. when this started it was about people wanted to have coverage. so my idea was the people who were covered already should have just left them aloning an

try to work out something for people who didn't have coverage. but what they did was take from people who had coverage to give to people who didn't because now the people who have coverage all their plans, the policies were went up, the deductibles went up. people who didn't pay now had to pay a certain amount every month lost their coverage. so these are supposed to be all the graduates of these people. it's common sense. they should have left everyone alone. now, the people who had it, half of them lost their coverage so they gave to half the people who didn't have the coverage so you're right back where you started. it's ridiculous. it's the stupidest thing i've ever heard. they destroyed it more than the health care system. they should have left everyone alone, worked on getting coverage for people who didn't have it. host: i appreciate your comments. some final thoughts guest: we talked earlier about

people having strong feelings. because health care to people feels quite accurately like it's life or death in some circumstances. but you also have people who remember their previous insurance plan. so it's complicated stuff even for very smart people not necessarily something that they can predict in advance. but i think the interesting question is when the affordable care act was passed it was about people who didn't have coverage also about the quality of insurance sold to people who did have it. i sense your insurance was going up, certainly in the eyes of people arguing for the law but not nofsely there when you need i had it. so what supporters wanted to do was make insurance more substantial, more robust. of course in the course of doing so they raised the plannings. some were canceled and you had a turbulent time. but essentially you had policy makers trying to get more people covered and improve the quality of coverage available to people who had it. and the reaction in various

unforeseen consequences that got us where we are right now. host: louise, with the "wall street journal." follow her on twitter. thanks for being with us. "washington journal" ahead here on c-span this week. or recently. the obama administration announced a change in policy in the use of for 46 profit prisons. -- for-profit prisons. a new report later on on young people in the u.s. and how they're being adequately or inadequately prepared to become better citizens. retired rear admiral for the council for strong america. this week c-span's "newsmakers" interviewed the top democrat intelligence committee talks about the hacking of election system in arizona and illinois.

>> as i think very concerning here is that these activities go beyond simply hacking. that is, sbli gaining foreign intelligence. and i can only discuss the public course but for example if the public reports from two states are accurate or that they've been alerted by the federal government that a foreign government may be hacking into their data bases, that's not for the purpose of foreign intelligence gathering. why would you hack a state data base? that's something you do if you're laying the foundation potentially for interfering or disrupting an election. and i think it's very important obviously to make sure that we are prepared. it's why every state ought to urging that been for years. some states don't have that in all cases. but they ought to be taking

every precaution. they ought to be on notice now that they need to make sure that they're well guarded. host: a quick follow up on that. do you think we're going to hear of any other states that this has breached? >> i can't comment on everything i may have learned through the committee. but i can say that i don't think that if these public reports are accurate about these two states there's any reason to believe those two states are somehow unique. i would imagine that if a foreign entity was acting they would have an interest in more than just those two. so i think it stands to reason that every state ought to take precautions. obviously the most at-risk are any systems that are plugged into the internet. but even beyond that, states that allow kwl verting of members of the military overseas or that may communicate election results

electronically, or where you can have tampering with a voter registration data base such that people who go to vote there's no record of them at the polls or they have to contest it. anything that would call into question legitimacy of the election would be highly disruptive and very, very serious. host: joining us this morning from new york city, seth with the investigative fund who has written a number of pieces in the nation and elsewhere. investigations into the health care administered in prisons. these are private prisons federal prisoners kept in private prisons across the united states. let me ask you first, you worked for the invest gative fund. tell us about that organization and the type of issues you look into. guest: the investigative fund, which my reporting is

independent investigative news reporting incubator from basically the nation institute. i work on stories about federal law enforcement, immigration enforcement, federal prisons, inequality. mostly investigative work. and this story has been a year-long investigation of something few people really know about. federal government for now nearly two decades has privatized the subset of federal prisons that it's used almost exclusively to hold noncitizen convicted of federal crimes. so if you're a noncitizen and you're convicted of a federal crime and considered a low security prisonner, you're likely to go to a different kind of prison than a citizen convicted of the same crime would be sent. so this subsystem of about a dozen federal prisons are operating now, for the better

part of two decades, and the announcement from the department of justice last month will force the bureau of prisons to start shutting down those private prisons. the department of justice said they simply don't operate up to par. host: let's look at the numbers how many people are kept in those privately run federal prisons. again, 192,000 total federal inmates, 21,000 are held in privately managed facilities that we're talking about, and 14,000 held in other facilities. one of your pieces in the nation is -- has the headline, federal officials ignored internal warnings about deaths at private prisons. what prompted your interest in this? guest: several years ago now i got a call from a woman as i do often reporting that her brother had suffered pretty

significant neglect inside of a federal prison in a place called the adams county correctional center. when i began looking into this prison, it turns out that it was this privately run federal prison run by the corrections corporation of america. and that her brother had actually died after being held in that facility. i began to dig into the details of her claims and other dynamic that is i had to started to observe, including a number of repeated riots that were breaking out in these for-profit federal prisons used to hold noncitizens. riots are pretty rare in federal prisons. especially low security federal prisons. but in these if a sits, they continued to break out. and i wanted to know why. so i filed a freedom of information act request and then because i didn't get anything back from the bureau of prisons actually ended up suing the bureau of prisons

which led to the release of 30,000 pages of zockments. the first story i worked on earlier this year, i reported ong dozens of deaths of prisoners held inside of this group of a dozen federal private prisons, deaths that were the result following deeply and disturbingly negligent medical care. people who were complaining for weeks and months sometimes more than a year of significant illness and pain and receiving nearly no substantive care at all. in fact, never seeing a doctor. being relegated to low level medical workers who didn't have the training to really provide the care that these people needed and many of these folks ended up dying as a result. i asked a team of doctors to review 9,000 pages of medical files that i obtained through

this open records request. medical files of 103 men who died in these prisons. and those doctors, their reviews of these files, the doctors agreed that in a third of the case that is they could review, negligent or scomb standard 34edcal care very likely contributed to premature deaths. and i tell the stories in my reporting of some of these men -- men who were locked up in federal prison and then died unnecessarily. had they received better care they may well be alive. the more recent story that i worked on that you mentioned relied on 20,000 more pages of documents that i obtained. in fact, the federal government's own monitoring report of these facilities. and what i found was that since the beginning, since these facilities first started operating in the late 90s, the federal government has been documenting those very problems monitors have been going into these facilities sending

monitoring reports back to washington raising flags about serious deficiencies in medical care and things have not changed in some cases prisons have gotten worse, prisoners have died and the problems that led to those deaths haven't been fixed. host: our guest, reporter with the investigative fund talking about the health care or lack thereof at some -- at privately run federal prisons. we invite you to join the conversation. your headline they nude omething was going on. -- knew something was going on. why was the health care so bad? guest: well, sort of a

fundamental difference between private prisons and prisons rung by government is that say we spend $70 a day on a prisonner. well, in a publicly run facility, that $70 goes to the operations of the prison. in a privately run facility, some of that $07 that the , ernment pays contractors some of that money gets pulled off and becomes profit. one of the easiest ways to pull off some of the costs to make a profit is to lower staffing costs. that tends to be the most expensive part of running a prison. so what we see over and over again is not just understaffing, which is rampant in these facilities, but also the use of really undertrained or poorly trained medical workers asked to do things

outside of their scope of practice. outside of what they are trained to do. in the monitoring reports that i obtained from the federal government, monitors who are trained to go and look at what's happening in these facilities and to report whether the companies are performing as the contract requires, those government monitors who went into those facilities in ten of the prisons documented that nurses were breaking the state nursing practice laws that regulated their performance, were working outside of their scope of practice. that was systemic and leading to really troubling things including medical negligence and in some cases death. monitors were asking for officials in washington, contracting officials in washington to impose fines on these companies, to in some cases close down federal prisons. but officials in washington, my sources former officials say

they refused to allow that to happen. and so these facilities stayed open, continued to operate with these deficiencies. and just last month after my own report together nation and reveal news, the office of inspector general of the department of justice put out a report that found that these prisons don't operate up to par, rally don't save significantly on money which is the whole purpose of privatization in the first place, and significantly degrade the quality of operations. and the inspector general found that the bureau of prisons hasn't set up an effective system to enforce changes when these prisons are failing. specifically in the area of medical care. host: we have calls. this one from georgia. independent line. caller: thank you for being

here. i want to commend your guest on the very good work he's doing. my thoughts on private prisons, obviously to my knowledge of history -- and i'm a student of history -- i also surmise they use these people for slave labor or go out for days. and going how deep and dark, may be a source of human organs on the black market. thank you for c-span. host: any comment? guest: i don't have any indication that people are being -- that people who are housed in these facilities are being used for labor outside of these facilities. people who are held in private federal prisons, like people held in government-run federal prisons, are very often do work and work for pennies on the

dollar sometimes doing basic operating basic functions of the prison. these prisons in particular rely on inmates to clean the premises, to mow the lawn, to work in the kitchen. they really do rely on nearly unpaid labor to run these prisons. host: you mentioned that this is a particular subset of prisoners, mostly immigrants, you said, from -- in these prisons. so is there much effort at rehabilitation in these private prisons or are they readying some of these prisoners for either trial or deportation or both? guest: these are prisoners who have been through trial, they've been convicted. and this is a note that half of the people held in these facilities are held there for a crime called illegal reentry, which is the criminal offense attached to crossing back over the border after deportation.

so if one returns after they've been deported, that can be a felony offense. that's pretty new crime essentially as 20 years ago, several hundred people were convicted. last year 70,000. now makes up about half of all federal prosecutions, these border crossing crimes. so hats a huge part of who is held in these facilities. the federal government has said that these private facilities are an ideal place for noncitizens to be held, and they have said that's because noncitizens convictsed of federal crimes will later be transferred to civil immigration authorities and deported so don't have to be provided the same kind of rehabilitative or reentry service that is citizens in the federal bureau of prisons are supposed to be provided. so these are explicitly stripped-down facilities.

and one way is that the hundreds of rules that the bureau of prisons over decades has developed to guide the operation of its own prisons those rules called program statements simply aren't applied to these private prisons. the private prisons are supposed to innovate to save costs and figure out new ways to operate their prisons and what that's pracktid is a significant diminishing of the quality of operations in general and in particular of medical care. what's provided to people housed inside. host: joseph, florida, republican line. caller: what i want to say is you're doing 100% a job where none of us who are normal silingts sentence know anything about it. -- citizens know anything about it. i wish him all the luck in the world so he can look more deeply into these things. and if i had my own way and i

had people support behind me we would close down all those and have one prison controlled by the government with no franchise or any sort whatsoever. a prisonner is a prisonner. he's a human being. and i maintained that if we had one prison system, we would not have this trouble at all. host: a supporter on twitter at for-profit prisons came to life because a citizen dared to file a freedom of information act form and sue. guest: one of the things prisons -- you know, and general separates people from their communities, and in some ways disappears people from their life. prisons are, by design, removed

from the view of most of us. these prisoners are sort of tripoli disappeared. they are in prison, behind bars. in private prisons that do not have the same kinds of public accountability or openness that public prisons have. many of these prisoners, their families are not in the united states. for them, the first line advocate, the people who would make a phone call if things are going wrong, it becomes very difficult for them to even do that basic level of advocacy. these prisoners, these men held in prisons completely disappear and have been largely outside of the broader conversation of criminal justice reform because sits a strange intersection of the criminal

justice system. these prisons are hard to get our head around. there has been little discussion about the people inside. until recently, with my reporting and the decision by the department of justice to begin a process of closing down these facilities. year, the number of people held in these prisons the next, and over five years, as these prison contracts come to an end, the federal bureau of prisons is expected to terminate those contracts and move people to other publicly run prisons. in the next five years, the number of federal for profit prisons will be cleared out. other agencies continue to use private prisons. most significantly, immigrations .nd customs enforcement

privateontinue to use prisons as well to hold state prisoners. this is certainly not the end of private prisons. but, the federal bureau of prisons as it is looked at as a kind of model or example for in fact, thees -- obama mr. should has ordered immigrations and customs enforcement to do a review of the use of private prisons. that is expected out in november. the announcement looks to be sweeping into other agencies and may lead to other changes. host: calls are waiting. we go now to joe. believe that we should have absolutely no private for-profit prisons of any kind. there is a disconnect. the disconnect is between the

families. we are relying on someone to bring foul play. it is not going to happen no connection.ve ago, work many years in a prison. if you knew how they were run, you would run in horror. whether you are republican, democrat, or independent, someone ends up always in a prison. you would not want your loved ones to go there. if something happens to you, unless someone wants to come up , it is yourf money unlucky day. host: joan in maryland.

to many people held in these prisons. they talk about the terrible conditions inside. i also talked to people who work prisons. physicians assistant to work employed by private contractors inside the facilities. those people, those whose livelihood relied on these the conditionse are very troubling. physicians and nurses told me basically cannot perform adequate medical care. a doctor in texas from the big , a 3500 person facility on a decommissioned

military base, told me he is not able to perform medical care as he believes it should be performed because his corporate bosses were demanding he cut cost and refusing to transfer prisoners who need higher levels of care out of the facility to a hospital. he was told he needed to cut down on the number of emergency room calls wendy prisoners were sick because it costs too much money. he was seriously could not perform medicine, as medicine is supposed to be performed. these are people who work in the facility. not advocates outside, but people whose livelihoods depend on working there. he told me that after years --

he has been held in other and after years and years, he landed and big spring. he said it was the worst place he had been he said conditions dirty, people were not being provided the .edical care they would expect his spirits were really falling. the experience of being held in one of these facilities is marginally different from being held in the government run facility. prisons can be terrible places to be across the board. these prisons can be particularly awful places to be held. host: we go now to pat in iowa. caller: i was just wondering fund.the investigative

how do you get money -- for example, when they die? is anything like the clinton foundation? how big is it? to do have enough money your investigations? it must have cost a lot of money to do what you do. host: we will find out. your source of money for the fund. has a uniquend entity. it funds journalists like me to be able to do this kind of work. this is not a profession that makes people rich. and the kindssion of work that there is less and less support for. the investigative fund has made that possible for me, certainly, and many other journalists to do public accounting of --

accountability work and look into how companies are operating to hold them accountable to citizens. possible for me to do this kind of work. host: how does it raise its money? how do they get donations? andt: i think foundations individual donations, but i get grants for particular projects. host: let's hear from frank, from nashville. good morning. c-spani want to think and also your guest with regards to this matter. very informative. the question i have is prisons used to be run by government agencies. all of a sudden there is a desire for prisons to be run by

businesses who sold desire is to make profit. i was wondering, do know what party is responsible for pushing this desire to privatize prisons? and to take that responsibility from the federal government? guest: the decision by the bureau of prisons to privatize prisons came in the mid-1990's. it was a bipartisan decision. it was during the clinton administration when there was a significantatize portions of federal services and programs. the sort of government 2.0 language. the white house proposed privatizing a few federal prisons. congress republican approved a pilot project to see how it went. that prison opened, it was supposed to be study, how it

operated, but before the study was released, the bureau of prisons itself decided to open a group of federal prisons that were privatized exclusively to hold noncitizens convicted of federal crime. the origin of prison privatization in the bureau of prisons was bipartisan. it was a democratic white house, a republican congress that moved to begin this process a privatizing federal prisons. there have been signs since the beginning that these prisons were not working and do not save on cost, there is no real mina meaningful savings to taxpayers and the quality has been degraded. by the time the surveys were released, the prisons have become an integral part of the carceralystem -- system.

this was at a time when the prison population was growing genetically, both due to the war on drugs and those crossing the border. theneed for beds grew prison system in general. the white house of time said they would not expand the size of the federal workforce, but the same time the prison system was expanding. , andwas a way to do both time the prisons have continued to grow. host: we welcome your comments on twitter. this one says, private prisons represent political corruption and such radical direction that

we are headed. also, jodi says, private prisons are doing it for the money, not to punish and rehabilitate, it is sounding more like torturer. "the washington writing: host: your reaction? guest: this is the system that has been operating for two decades. my reporting suggests that this performance based incentivized system of awards, fees, and

finds, based on performance, has not worked to support quality operations. even when these facilities are told to fix problems, those have not been fixed. the federal government has not been exerting its full .nforcement muscle it has left sailing facilities open. we have had two decades of trying this out and got into a place where the federal government has finally decided it is simply not working. it is certainly the case that a big part of these failures rest of the government, on failed oversight. there is a robust system of oversight in place with dozens of employees employed to oversee these facilities. the muscle is not there.

infrastructure has not forced them to perform the way they are supposed to. we have come to a place where the system is not working. ,ost: let's go to albuquerque new mexico to anthony on the republican line. caller: i was wondering, are some of these systems privatized? guest: many states use private prisons to hold their own prisoners. around half ofd their prisoners in private facilities, others just a few percentage of prisoners. entirelytes run almost

privately run prisons. state prisons have gotten a lot of attention over the years for similar kinds of failures. medical care that is negligent, understaffing, squalid conditions inside. high rates of violence. the same kinds of issues that emerge in state facilities as well. first toing is the look at the federal government use of private prisons, the subset that has been privatized and to look at what happened behind those bars. those are the federal private s that the department of justice ordered. host: one of those reported on .his week the ride about the privately

operated mississippi prison that a judge once concluded was effectively run by gangs, closed on thursday, the prisoners transferred to other facilities. the conditions were deemed so substandard by a judge, he wrote, in 2012, it paints a picture of such court and should civilizedzed in any world. i know you did not report on this, but why would it take so long to shut down a place like that? guest: there is sort of institutional drag that happens. everybody knows that these prisons are failing, but they remain open. a person that i reported on, the adams county facility, also in mississippi, has been failing for years. it opened in 2009.

they have been documenting problems inside. in 2012, the prison of active in a massive right. a prison guard was killed in that right. that, minders who the federal government hires to watch over the facility proposed the contract be ended with corporate corporations of america. the contract was extended twice after that. year thatd 2015, the martyrs looked at, after the right and the attempt to close jumpy prison, monitors found that five prisoners had died in the wake of substandard or negligent medical care. the contract was renewed once again. it is of for renewal one more

time in 2017. we will see if the federal government walks away from the contract in 2017 or lose it open until 2019 when the tenure contract comes to an end. thatis one of the prisons the department of justice order be closed in the next five years. host: let's see if we can get one more call from judy. go ahead. caller: good morning. to say there is another type of prison that is overlooked. it is under the guise of a nursing home. i'm really appalled at the substandard care in nursing homes. i had a brother that was in one for a little bit. he was quadriplegic. i went in to check on him and was stillakfast tray there. it is really sad they don't hire

enough people to cover the patient's in the nursing home. it is all a for-profit thing. i think there should be a really good investigation on these nursing homes. the only crime they have committed is they are old or disabled. host: do you see any parallels between the health care world of nursing homes, as she talked about and federal prisons. been: certainly there has a lot of reporting, and i've heard stories from people who lived in for-profit nursing yes, where, in fact, similar dynamics emerge. the vast understaffing of workers and the use of trainedned practically nurses and assistance being asked to do things that there's something not equipped to do.

the people living in those facilities are suffering significantly as the caller described. not so different, similar kinds of profit pressures are at play, and similar suffering emerges, as a result. host: you can read his reporting, some of his articles nation.com. thank you for being with us this morning. guest: thank you for having me. host: more ahead on "the washington journal." it is the anniversary of the signing of the constitution. it seems like a good time to ask the question, are kids in the be goodng taught to citizens? first, we wanted to show you a ceremony for prisoners of war that took place yesterday at the pentagon.

this is a retired captain who was held for seven years in vietnam. [video clip] >> when you knew the man in the cell next to was down and hurting, his feet locked in cuffs and his hands tightly behind him, and he it been like that for one week or one month, you get up to the wall and tap to him, gb. bless, that meant god and also, be tough, i'm praying for you. week,in the future, in a or month, he would be up on his wall, to encourage you, in the same way. for example, on the p.o.w. flag, never forget.

e-v-e-r f-o-r-g-e-t never forget. the prison out of experience stronger men. in some ways it was like cramming a doctor's degree into the years and prison. i would like to leave you this morning with a p.o.w. message. at the end of every day, we sign off and say good night. g-n for good night.

gba, god bless america. >> "washington journal" continues. host: the counsel for stronger america has come out with a report on what it means to be citizen ready. we are joined by retired admiral besal, here to talk about the report. tell us a bit about your organization, counsel for a stronger america. how did it begin? guest: it is comprised of five different segments of our society. retired military leaders, pastors, and organization of coaches and athletes, business leaders, and law enforcement officials. all this are united in trying to

solve a common problem or proposed solutions, and that is young americans are having difficulty moving into what we call citizen ready ranks. that is, ready to become productive members of society. they may be physiologically adults, but not societally adults. host: how often do you do the report? guest: this is the first report. old.ociety is 20 years this is the first readiness index that we assembled with data that is out there that provides us insights into behaviors of young america and where they fall short of the mark. just a snapshot of what some of the report says about

being citizen ready, your report of athat more than tway 5% tool to have in the rest record. you say that 70% cannot qualify for military service because of obesity, drug abuse, or crime. just some ideas that came out of .he report host: a tall order of recommendations. if you had your choice, would you think is the number one issue to address is? if i were to focus from the admission readiness

perspective, we are focused on national security. while all of these things contribute to the national security problems that we will have, i think i would place it right nowsity issue with seven out of 10 americans being obese. it has a dramatic effect on our ability to recruit talent for the future armed services. it did not happen this way overnight. the department of defense spends $1.5 million annually on obesity

.elated diseases as we move people into retiree status, those costs will likely continue. as society as large, it adds tremendous burdens to the health care system. host: we will open up the phone might tear calls. under748-8000 for those the age of 30. (202) 748-8001 31 to 49. 50 and over, (202) 745-8002. going back to your recommendations, it talks about boosting headstart, improving or for physicalunds education programs in the state. what you see as the role of parents in preparing this age group for citizenship? isst: i think the role

paramount, particularly when it comes to fitness and diet. there are behavioral things, of .ourse, that parents provide in my home state of south carolina, one in five children is born to a single-parent mother -- a very tough family issue -- and many are coming from underprivileged, poverty or near poverty levels. they are grappling with tremendous challenges to provide for their children. we believe some focus on that, helping them. there are programs that we support to help those challenge mothers that we know, based on outcomes to provide down the road, particularly when they finish their education years. host: here to talk about being prepared, robert besal of the

counsel for stronger america. we go to john from new york, on the 50 and older line. caller: how you doing? i don't know if you know about this amendment, but they -- ntly put it in host: we lost john. we have a treat for you, maybe the tone of the day. a viewer or listener tweets, and world war ii, 19 groups were storming the beach of normandy, now they are seeking a safe space from scary words -- talking about the controversy on college campuses on the issue of bullying and other issues of free speech. it is kind of an offhand comments, but if you looked at a 19-year-old today and a 19-year-old in world war ii, how

were their worlds different? what were they facing? guest: i think the societal challenges of health, fitness, abuse may beor greater. it is interesting, the person who submitted that may no the very first school nutrition programs where an outcome of world war ii when general hershey recognize, at the end of the war, a huge number of those who were physically disqualified from the draft and world war ii were due to malnutrition that took place years earlier in the great depression. it was general hershey, who, with general truman, got the first school lunch program going.

at the same time, we have a little different problem with the school lunch program, which we tried to solve in 2010 with the passage of the act that provided school lunch programs. we have a new set of standards that have been put into place. for program is up reauthorization this year. diet,ieve so standards of particularly food contents, are worth observing. it has only been six years since those have been in place. in order for us to see an improvement in the numbers, we need to reauthorize that and uphold the standards. it will not happen overnight. it is something we have to be in for the long call. we have a little bit of a

different dynamic that we did in the 1940's. this is a citizen readiness index and the report saying too many americans are not citizen ready. help us out here on this map. a state like pennsylvania and like iowad the state and vermont. these are all color-coded. what are the states that are getting a's, doing right, and b'ssts -- the h bee

doing wrong? guest: we looked at a number of factors. are not contributing productively to society. woulwe look at those not eligibe for the numbers and we took a involved in the justice system in a wrong way. from those three factors, through mathematic calculus, we were able to come up with a grade for each state. there are only three states that are a.

that is massachusetts, vermont, and hawaii. better scores. not to mend his sleep better, but enough that we were able to see a big difference. my home state got one of the lowest grade out there. that has us very concerned. host: another one of those states is nevada. james is on the 50 and older line. go ahead. caller: i would like to comment on the fact that it is inescapable to recognize that our economy has not been very worker friendly for many years now. unions are in decline. of -- re huge number growing number of single parents in this country who have to struggle, and make decisions.

then, to the have the time to prepare a meal? i think it huge part of this is the fact that the economy has become so corporate friendly. to comedize businesses here and open business and then provide less than a living wage to do so. this is absolutely at the root of the problem, in my opinion. i'm a vietnam veteran and my brother is a vietnam war veteran. my grandfather served in world war i when they came to her from ireland and wales. his brothers and my brothers suffered from posttraumatic stress issues. host: the role of the economy? workforce? guest: it does play in effect

for those particularly at poverty and near poverty levels. we are advocating for investment in those young people that are struggling with those issues, and to help their parents make better choices for them. i don't think there is a parent out there that does not hope their child has a better tomorrow than we had. we focus on these programs targeted towards youth. haveuth carolina, we required physical education for first grade and kindergarten. it is only about 2.5 hours per week. seniors in high school, while the have to take a course about surgical education -- physical education and the benefits, thely are not getting

activity that we got. it is the iphone, and so forth. meals,e, with the promoting healthy meals in school, we believe will have a long-standing effect on the betterment, just learning to eat better. they are receiving probably half of their caloric intake at schools. we want to make sure that those are healthy choices and healthy calories that they get. host: we set aside aligned to targeted in the report, under 30. we go to jack. caller: i'm a longtime viewer,

first-time caller. it used to be that when the kid got in trouble, they would be to jail ortion to go the military. you think that is still something that could work? it seemed to work for the military and for a lot of members of my family. you think that is a policy that should be overturned or something we should move towards , giving someone who is in the system the option of going into the military? guest: i know people offered that very choice from a judge. they can walked on the hall or to the recruiting station. the military has changed so dramatically since i joined 40 years ago. it is extremely technologically

oriented. we need people who have those mathematic skills that are good communicators. even the rifle re-men. up a more than lining site. he has to handle sophisticated communications equipment, targeting equipment, and as much as that might have helped a lot of people out, the role of the drill instructor is not necessarily to reinforce or change behavioral habits. it did work in some cases, but times have changed now. what keeps a strong is the smart people in the military. the equipment and the battle plans are almost secondary to the caliber of people we have in the military. one of my colleagues retired and

that ireat quote enjoyed. it poses the question that is not fit to go into the military, what else are they not fit for? is civilian sector at large fishing in the same waters that we do for recruits. that leaves us nationally at 29% of the young population, those that are eligible. young three quarters of americans are not qualified to serve. they keep their businesses of success, the communities alive, and we think, to keep the nation strong. caller: this is brenda from columbia heights. host: you are on, go ahead. up in the 1970's

and now i teach middle school. a big difference, being ready to be a citizen, not just physically, but often, mentally. what i'm saying, with all of the technology today, which is wonderful, the students that i teach have grown up with very little physical activity and also very little creative play. everything has been provided for them. we would create these whole imaginary worlds using sticks and rocks. whatever play they have grown up with has been all out of the box ofin a virtual world technology. on tv to watch. it has affected them not just physically, but mentally.

they come into school and do not ore creative thinking problem-solving skills. host: a similar theme on twitter. of there been insight correlation between technology use leading to sedentary malaise? guest: there is plenty of research that tells us between birth and five years of age, the brain develops tremendously. targeting students, particularly those who would not be at risk between three and four years of age, engaging them in a creative benefits down the world.

the long-term effects are you have higher graduation rates, better success in school, you tend to keep kids away from orgs and the court system police record. the outcome is they have a broad array of options for themselves, once they finished the high school years. they can go on to secondary education if college is what they would like, or two-year secondary education and get the skills that are necessary to be a productive member of society. while we did not correlate that information, the technology that keeps them sedentary, i think it is easy to draw that conclusion. i had an of bringing -- up ringing similar to brenda, , i i am a believer in it

think we can agree that what you say is right. "the a headline from hill," "too many young people are not citizens ready." we welcome your comments. ,et's go to marry in potomac maryland. caller: i love watching your show, and i try to do it every day. just about one week ago, i heard on tv that the u.s. gave $89 billion to israel. i said to myself, every child in 90% ofis better off than our children here, and that is what our country is spending money on? why do we have to bow down to

israel when we need the money here? thank you. host: in terms of the funding recommendations that you have, you laid out increasing headstart and other issues. how big is the federal government's role in preparing this age group for citizenship? tost: i think the role is provide for national defense. that includes a pool of citizens who will be physically and mentally capable of handling those challenges of defending the country. take issue our side against or for. if we can keep a child drug-free and out of criminal activity, without criminal record, we save tremendous amounts of money. there are studies that show

early childhood education reads on the order of $30,000 per student and cost avoidance. for someone who does not graduate and ends up with the use of drugs record and is incarcerated, becomes a criminal, we spend $2.5 million on that person over their lifetime. it becomes, pay me a little bit now, or a lot later. that is why we are advocating for stronger family conditions through programs, healthier and more active schools, and early childhood education to help our folks become the successes that we want them to be. host: in addition to physical fitness, we will talk about -- you will be writing about the microbes.

get dirty, eat better, and stop overusing antibiotics. we go to heather. good morning. caller: god bless. is about the taxes. i'm honored to talk to you. i really respect to you. carolina, marcus. go ahead. caller: good morning. i'm from south carolina. my question is in regards to the possible changes that would a possibility to

theviate some issues with personnel. guest: i assume you are referring to something that i know as the body mass index, or physical fitness requirement. i do not know that i necessarily side with the argument that we should lessen the standards. we have not reached the critical tipping point yet, where we need to do something like that yet. one of the concerns we have is one of the biggest cost of the military is manpower. both currently active and those who are retired, on pensions, or otherwise, disabled. we need to keep that force as healthy as possible for as long as we can. we wind up incurring treatment costs for things that we really

have better equipment that we need to get. there are better uses of things that are relatively scarce. host: part of your report recommends for federal support for voluntary home visiting and at risk families. a look here at the website of the maternal and child health program. what is the commitment of the federal government right now? why is this so important? voluntary visiting mentorsis where we have , a lot of the times, nurses. there will be a partnership where the nurse goes into the home, particularly of those who are younger or possibly

single-parent families. this is all new to them, parenting, so they have not developed skills yet. this mentor helps them understand the benefits of school, of keeping a child there , the benefits of good nutrition. there are evidence-based great outcomes that come out of that. in south carolina, we have a program there. of the reach about 4% young mothers. what we find out is three quarters of them have decided to postpone or delay, until they are more mature, having another child. again, to get their skills under way. we find lower cases of child neglect, child abuse, and both

of those contribute to generally less than optimum outcomes down the road. go next to heather. good morning. caller: good morning. you have mentioned several times that we effectively can be getting low on recruits. my question is, what happens to america as a superpower and to our security if we don't have enough people to protect us? i think the answer is pretty clear. loan numbers are going to have to make is lower our standards. we still need bodies to fill all of those slots. it is not something that the military would like to do. again, given the technology and advancements that are being n made now and will be made. likewise, i don't think the

civilian sector will appreciate the lowering of those standards. we are all targeting right now that very small recruiting pool. week, in washington, there was a discussion here in the capital, one of our members from memphis talked about availability right now. in000 open high-tech jobs memphis. they just do not have the people who are literate, have to necessary skills, have necessary post secondary education to fill those jobs. those are open. there is another study that shows that in the next four years, there will be 3 million technology jobs open nationwide. they just do not have the candidates. steve.e go now to

remember everybody talking about jfk's program a long time ago, why doesn't the united states have a program like that? guest: i'm not exactly sure. i can tell you, we need a moonshot program that is similar to what the president advocated when he said, in 10 years, we will put a man on the moon. we would hope that those who are listing today take the opportunity, get this report, take a look at it, and make where wenions known on can improve. in 10 years, we can see a change in this index so that we have, instead of 39 of 50 states with a grade of c or below, we can see movement in the a and b

categories. it will take a long term, dedicated effort like this. host: our viewers and listeners can find that report online. here is new jersey, nancy. caller: good morning. i think we, and i mean the older folks, need to start connecting the dots, the dots that we created and some of the policies that maket in place young people prepared to be good citizens. policies such as welfare reform or the war on drugs, which is also known as how many black people can meet lockup? and generally, the notion of whites of jersey -- whites of privacy. you reap what you think are some of the policies that we can change or turn around that can make young people more ready? guest: thank you.

our childn continuing nutrition program through better .eals in schools again, where children are receiving 50% of their caloric intake. we think that is important. they may not be giving it at home. we certainly advocate for admission vagueness and all the member organizations under the council for a stronger america advocate teaching children the ill effects of drugs, the outcomes, both physically and societally of winding up in the criminal justice system. are not particularly advocating a change in the law there. retiredmembers, generals and admirals, looked at

this and said, you are right, we need to convince elected officials that there are steps they can take. we have looked at these three as the places we want to now, and we right want congress to do the same. we want this elevated in the presidential election also. to war on to turn terror, trade, we have some issues here, and we would like to hear what the presidential candidates have to say also. presence of a election year. yesterday we saw a number of retired military officials supporting donald trump, lighting up behind donald trump. what do you, as a retired military officer, think of the

role of retired military officials in campaigns? guest: for many years, i think at the military officers admiral or general level, or higher levels, remained silent. i certainly understand right now, the bond of being quiet is listed. certainly it is their right to be able to talk about that. i, and some others, because we are a nonpartisan organization, and we work on both sides of the aisle i to everybody about our children, and their importance in the future of america, we have decided, i have personally decided, it would not be productive for me to do that, given the opportunity i have to

play a role in admission readiness. i have taken a bite on that for now. host: let's hear from mike in new jersey. thank you, admiral, for your service. i would just like to say, the thetest generation was also luckiest. after world war ii, they came home, and they could where the uniforms. in theinto the 50's 60's. you have to have most people working to pull through, to survive raising this family,

which loses the home structure. having the month at home did not make a big difference, raising children. there's only so many jobs at the top. in the job, getting to the top to not support raising the family. host: last that? guest: i have sympathy and understand what you are saying. i do not know this is necessarily my personal opinion every young american needs to go to college. there is certainly opportunities out there, and they are what you make of them to move ahead, whether you start a new company -- going back to a two-year technica