-- mark leverson. ♪ it is december 20, 2016. you are looking at a live shot of the white house. this will be the scene of plenty of activity one month from today on inauguration day. preparations continue for the ceremony and festivities of january 20, donald trump took another step towards the white house by officially securing the electoral vote yesterday. we will get to that this morning. we begin our program in the wake of the deadly attacks overseas in turkey. a lone gunman shot until the russian ambassador in a scene

described as the assault on diplomacy and diplomatic security. in berlin, 12 people were killed and scores were wounded in an apparent terrorist attack on an outdoor christmas market. we are getting your reaction and how concerned you are about attacks in the u.s.. you that the are incoming administration can protect from similar attacks in the future. as special line this morning for thatgn service personnel, number is 202-748-8003. republicans can call in at 202-748-8001, democrats 202-748-8000, independents, 202-748-8002. twitter and us on on facebook. a very good tuesday morning to you. we begin talking about those

attacks overseas. anday's attacks in turkey berlin premiere asking how concerned you are about those attacks. the front into the new york times this morning, side-by-side, the first one, russian envoy done down by loan turk. don't forget aleppo he shouts. , 12 dead in berlin as truck strikes holiday crowd. the carnage evokes chat -- the attacks in nice, france. the white house called the crash and apparent terrorist attack. the front page of the washington times noting what this could mean looking ahead to the donald trump administration. the christmas market attack coming a day when the russian ambassador to turkey was assassinated. this is a stark reminder of the threat of international terrorism and the security challenges awaiting president-elect donald trump.

we want to hear from you this morning as we talk about those attacks as we look ahead. we want to hear what you think the incoming president can do to protect u.s. personnel overseas and the u.s. homeland against these attacks. a separate line for foreign service personnel. 202-748-8003. one story that may have gotten lost amid all of the headlines from yesterday was this story that is also an the washington times. hours after the russian ambassador turkey was assassinated in and kara -- in ankara, there was a man with a weapon outside the nearby u.s. embassy. the unidentified man was arrested after firing shots into the air and shouting a warning at the u.s. embassy. i swear to god, do not play with us, the man yelled.

lockdown untilon the arrest. no indications that anyone was hurt. with all of that happening yesterday, we want to get your thoughts. republicans, 202, 7 48 --- 202-748-8001, democrats 202-748-8000, independents 202-748-8002. the berlin attack is recalled apparent terrorist attack by u.s. officials. tradition and a challenge to protect the story at a time when-- terrorist acts and become all too familiar, public spaces are not presumed to be safe. that includes the markets across europe that are active at this time of year. at least twice this year islamic extremism is -- extremist of use

vehicles to kill people in large public spaces. the story noting a reason state department warning to american citizens traveling overseas and specifically to europe, noting there was some doubt there is any activity in europe that was safe other than visiting friends and families in their homes or the countryside. they said citizenship expand vigilance and frequent in of worship, restaurants and hotels etc., be aware of the immediate surroundings and avoid bars and crowds when possible. it mentioned the islamic state and al qaeda has focused on the holiday season. that came on november 21, about one month ago. the wake of yesterday's attack in berlin and that attack on the russian ambassador in turkey, we want to hear from our viewers of that -- about how concerned you are.

sheridan, in columbus ohio. i'm a koreanler: old and in, 87 years grope with a president who said the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. blind, unreasoning fear. that's what they're trying to get us into, blind, unreasonable fear. that is my comment. host: how should the media cover these type of offense? i assume you're talking but the wall-to-wall coverage whenever these things happen and that it only increases fear. caller: say it happened. edward r -- we don't have edward r mario.

they covered things that didn't get people in blind fear. i'm currently reading an of eric sever right, not so loudly dream. look into those guys. they were covering it the way it was. host: when you say they covered it right, what do you mean? caller: they say this is what happened. we suspect it was terrorists. that is fine. they just keep bringing it up. august use watch the news. you don't get coverage on that. thank you for taking my call and thank you for c-span. host: from the u.s. department of state, a statement from john kerry. specifically about the attack on the russian ambassador.

john kerry saying we stand ready to offer assistance to russia and turkey as they investigate this despicable attack which is also an assault on the right of all diplomats to safely and securely advance and represent their nation around the world. that is one of the reasons why we have a special line for foreign service personnel, current and foreign person -- service personnel. take onto hear your weurity issues overseas would love to hear from you this morning. 22, 748 8000 --202-748-8003. john, good morning. caller: i'm not surprised. i'm not surprised at all. i'm saddened. the mostpeople some of misinformed people about our foreign policy in the middle east and who is selling weapons and how they've been used

inappropriately here all we do is talk about on the news when nothing is really done. take a look at what saudi arabia is doing in yemen. they are talking about the iranians and how much terror they do, it's no big -- bigger sponsor of terror than this country. i'm not surprised. we take a look at how stable area was before republicans and the generals went into iraq. we went to libya and a stable but area. we have all this blowback and we look at television, to get the american people not being informed on what's really taking place throughout military and teams, the cia the delta berets, all ofen those guys are over there in the middle east and they are doing all kinds of things. those drones, do we really

expect these people to just get slaughtered and butchered and they don't have any blowback -- and then not have any blowback at all? anybody that comes over here and , they cannotg up conquer this country like the last caller said about the fear. it's fear mongering. with themybody listen with good common sense and walk away totally informed. cnn is not any better. you have to listen to foreign news to get with this country is doing in the middle east as far as those people. this is all blowback. host: kelly is in daytona beach, florida, a democrat. caller: good morning. people seem to forget before we went into iraq, my husband and i protested strongly with millions of people. there were foreign-policy experts who said we would's destabilize the entire middle east and there was no al qaeda

in iraq. our cia said that months after we went in. us going into iraq is what caused the destabilization. bush's people destabilizing the sunni army, getting rid of them. they promised before we went in that we would take care of them. the sunni army was only a bunch of young men that were in the army because of the salary. bush came on tv and eminem looking right in the screen saying put down your guns. don't fire honor soldiers and we will help you and your families. at that time, even the ambassador from saudi arabia said give them $20 million. at least it will keep the peace. let's look ahead to the incoming trumpet -- host: let's look at the upcoming trump administration.

are you comment is a problem he can solve? -- confident this is a problem he consult? caller: some -- he is a lot of generals. i am not pleased. i don't trust trump at all. host: donald trump of a statement yesterday in the wake of the berlin attack, saying our hearts and prayers are with the loved ones of the victims here it is horrifying terror attack in berlin. isis and other islamic terrorists continually slaughter christians in their communities and places of worship as part of the global jihad. and regionalsts and worldwide networks must be eradicated from the face of the earth -- face of your. a mission we will carry out with all her freedom loving partners. from the obama administration, a statement put out by president

obama's national security council spokesperson. here is a statement on the terror attacks in germany. he uses that term terrorist attack. the united states condemns what appears to be a terrorist attack on a christmas market in berlin which has killed and injured dozens. we send our thoughts and personally loved ones of those killed. we wish a speedy recovery for all of those. we extend our hearts and condolences for people in the government of germany. we stand ready to provide assistance as they recover from the incident. germany is one of our closest partners and strongest allies and we stand together with berlin in the fight against all those who target our way of life and threaten our society. a statement from the current and incoming administration. showing you some pictures of the carnage from that attack in berlin. jonathan in tennessee, and independent. good morning. caller: good morning.

host: go ahead, sir. caller: i wasn't sure if we were still on. i am operating on my first cup of coffee. to those people in germany -- if we didn't open up -- if they didn't open up the borders, they would get run over. would get on the microphone and tell us that they are better cut it out. that is my comments for this morning. ennis from texas, a republican. caller: i appreciate your program. i watch it every morning. i think it is great. people i think feel like the governments don't

respond to their concerns and i think this whole radical our people --are people will lost faith in government. if you look around the world, the governments don't really respond to the people in those countries. even in america, we are just going deeper and deeper and deeper in debt and we are trying to solve the problems of the whole world. there is nobody smart enough to do that. really need toit work together. we should work with russia. someussia has done terrible things, bombing innocent citizens in syria, that is horrible. john kerry says he wants to do everything in a world to work with russia. i think there should be condemnation when russia invades

the ukraine or russia bombs people or supports rebel -- whoever -- government. ad and his father have killed over half a million people. it is inconceivable. you cannot wrap your brain around these things. hope that these foreign ambassadors have more protection when a going to these countries. i wish they would give the more protection. it seems to me like everybody wants to harm somebody else, especially leaders of the countries. that's all i have to say, thank you very much for c-span. host: if there is not more protection, would you want to pull back some of those ambassadors? or should we not send them to some of these places?

what do you think this does to diplomacy efforts around the world? you have to communicate with other countries. you've got to do that. i wish they would give these investors more protection. look at ambassador stevens in libya. he begged the government for more protection, but he didn't get it. help anou can't emissivity and the attack. basicou should have just -- this russian diplomat was in an art gallery. the guy just walked up behind him and killed him. that is not protection. host: the photo that is getting a lot of attention as well as the video because that assassination was caught on video.

.ere is a photo the associated press has this.er there is a russian ambassador and there behind him, a little autofocus is the man who killed him. the gunmen who was later killed by police. the gunman was a turkish police officer, he was shot by special forces. the associated press photographer continue to take pictures after the shooting began and he wrote a first-person account that has also been receiving attention about continuing to take photos .f the shooting a little bit from his peas, he said the event seems routine. the opening of an exhibit, a russia.ph of what i managed art sued anti-pulled out a gun, i was stunned and thought it was a theatrical flourish. the photographer went on to say it was a fully calculated assassination of unfolding in

front of me and others scramble terrified for cover as the trimmed man with short hair gone down the russian ambassador. the gunshots were allowed in the art gallery. pandemonium interrupted. people hid behind tables. i was afraid and confused, i found partial cover behind you all and my job, taking photographs. one of those photographs is the one that leads that story, the shooter after killing the russian ambassador, they are holding up his gun and shouting. michael is up next in fairfax, virginia. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. my comment is that this current administration has completely failed in sending a clear message about how we stand completely against terrorism. i disagree with the very first that weho mentioned

have nothing to fear but fear itself. not fearing what's happening is a formula for denial. if we completely choose to close our eyes and not watch it -- watch what is happening. one of the very first things his or foruld change an -- foreign policy were fighting against terrorists. if you look at the middle east for instance, look at egypt. maybe the second biggest ally in the middle east after israel for the u.s.. this administration has completely neglected egypt. injured is fighting a fierce war. -- egypt is fighting a fierce war. said in the media. the president of egypt is a very popular guy, he is loved. no support whatsoever. on the other hand you look at the turkish administration, this

guy in power is really a very close form to a dictator than a president. he is changing it to appoint himself a -- one term after and he is power supported by the administration. i understand he is a nato ally, but we need to be clear about where we stand, how we are. host: do you think president donald trump can be clear in that? caller: i hope so. night orweeted last earlier this morning that islamic terrorists should be blamed for what happened. this current administration for years refused to say the word islamic terrorist. cleareve he will be more that we are not tolerating this and i really wish this country the best. host: speaking of

president-elect donald trump. those who watch c-span yesterday note yet no problems in -- when the electrode college met in voted yesterday. donald trump is easily from the winner of the 2016 election after the electoral college met his state capitals across the country, ending at the -- a last-ditch attempt by activists from both parties to deny him the presidency. in terms of those faceless electors that some were looking at to change the outcome of the election, hillary clinton ended up having more faceless electors -- here's the chart that goes along. hillary clinton with five so-called faceless electors who did not cast their vote for her in the electoral -- when electoral college met. donald trump with two. one of those was the electorate from texas who appeared on this program -- faithless elector.

bruce is up next. caller: an independent. good morning. good morning america. i ended it as i grew the last individual said. it is ridiculous. unfortunately a lot of people want to placate some of the terrorists. , the same it again thing the same guy before me was saying. this administration, barack obama, is a total failure on foreign policy. unbelievable. i cannot believe how bad he is. so now they are claiming there a publicans and george bush. he could apostle made some mistakes, but this is not the doing of george bush, this is weakness of our current president. i did vote for donald trump. i hope there will be some major president,t just for

mr. john is in over his league. he is totally incompetent. you can't placate these terrorist. there are a lot of problems with illegal immigrants and refugees coming over the border and coming into this country that aren't being properly vetted. go, can i askou you, you said that john kerry is in over his head, a man who is been in government service for a long time. what do you think about rex tillerson, donald's nominee for secretary of state? do you think he is somebody who can handle these issues and challenges that put john kerry over his head? caller: first thing's first, just because he has been in public service, doesn't mean he , or an effective representative of this country. as far as mr. tillerson, the truth is i don't know enough

about him to comment. anything's got to be better than what is going on now. it is a joke, it is terrible. merry christmas everyone. one tweets that came out onterday was from senator the foreign relations committee in response to the attack of the russian ambassador. condolences to the russian people and the family of the russian ambassador. such attacks in the diplomatic wholly unacceptable. that's one of the reasons why we want your from foreign service pennell -- service personnel. we want to hear your thoughts on diplomatic security overseas. your experiences overseas and what you think this assassination of his russian forssador could mean depomed security overseas. that number for foreign personnel is 202-748-8003. derek is in maryland, a democrat.

go ahead. caller: it is the same as it ever was. with the president getting ready to comment has a big mouth and he is going to find out that people who he thinks he is bigger than he is not. we will just wait and see. i cannot wait to see how trump does. things ared out harder than he thinks they are. host: tony from district heights, maryland, and independent. caller: good morning. i cannot believe what i'm hearing. have turned into nothing more than a complaint board. i cannot understand it. what we need is his investigative journalists. we need to know, and i don't

understand, i can see it every day on every issue, republicans with this issue, all republicans callers will claim that we should kill everybody and all the democrats will call in and say it is all fear mongering. it is the same thing with every issue. let me tell you something, how somebody isow that religious when they kill somebody? they don't know they are islamic terrorists, they could just be terrorist the don't believe in that. or they could be in white people that claim they are muslims, it could be anybody. we need investigative journalist. this has gone on too far into long. terrorism is nothing more than a form of war. it is business. people are making money from this. we don't know where these weapons are coming from overseas. they are made in the usa. host: there is certainly a lot -- caller: let me say this.

this is important and i can see this unfold myself. another terrorist attack is going to happen and donald trump want to start a war, probably in syria or in iran. i can see it coming. this country has lost its mind for this moneymaking scheme called terrorism. host: what makes you an independent? --ler: i don't even agree you have to be independent, everybody should does how can you blindly follow one party? i don't even agree with one everything -- with every my family says. i can't agree with everything one party says. if you're in one party and you believe everything they say, you are stupid. they should be independent. host: have you always been independent? caller: everybody should always be independent. how can you just say you believe

everything one party says? what kind of dumb question is that? host: interested in your background, your strong feelings about republicans and democrats in your calling in on the independent line. it's problems like these with is irrelevant, stupid questions. maria, new jersey, also an independent. good morning. caller: good morning, john. problem here is we have not gone back to our founders who were wise and gave is that wisdom. we should not have any foreign entanglements. for whatever reason, we voted to take britain's place in the world and we are playing the great game again. these are reruns. we have to go back to being an example to other people, using private charities and bringing our troops home and bringing them to our borders. is ank the united nations

farce, it's a criminal enterprise. they are thinking about sending monitors to a place where thousands of people have died. come home,havei think we have o have a family discussion about what our families are and bring the trillions of dollars home. wants to change the capital of israel to jerusalem. that is another war in the making. we should disengage ourselves and not have special friends or enemies. why arming giving israel the money and our newest weapons when they are the third largest arms dealer? .e have to look at that i pray that americans will influence congress and get us out of all of the foreign entanglements, get all of the foreigners out of our country. and merry christmas to you, john. minutes left in this segment, we are talking about

monday's attack in germany and in turkey. do youcerned are you, think the incoming administration is ready to handle these issues, how do you think they will handle these issues? phone lines are open. some other news going on around the country and here in washington, d.c.. yesterday, president obama issued 78 hardens and commuted the sentences of 133 prisoners. the largest use of presidential power to show mercy in the nation's history.

the story toxic process by which the people were pardoned, and the future as well of pardons and clemency. it is unclear whether president-elect donald trump will continue the practice of using pardons and commutations to address the sentencing issue. that is in "the new york times" if you want to read today. another story getting out today, the bathroom law in north carolina may be getting repealed. a city ordinance that ultimately led to north carolina's the torilla spatter bill has been repealed on monday.

back to the phones, talking about yesterday's attack, wondering how concerned you are. jasper in memphis, tennessee. democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to know whether this is a terrorist attack or not. i heard the guy a couple callers -- guess who is coming to dinner?

george bush invited them when he came over there. now people over here in these gated communities separated by races all your life, they must be attacking the minorities and poor people. i understand why you are scared. you are kind of inviting them. when you say germany has their stuff together over there, what are they doing different than the united states? don't show racism, they live together as communities, they work together, they do everything in harmony. ,t is not like over here for-profit, everything about racism. it is just a better country to live in. i lived in germany as a serviceman. the united states, it is a problem. the angry white man and his profit as ruined this world.

nobody can eat profit. people just want to raise a family and live. host: john is next, republican line. retiredi am a intelligence agency worker. i have dual citizenship in israel and the united states. think about it for a minute. erect, no, going to weapons of mass destruction. we caused instability in the middle east. then we overthrow libya, and then you have the uprising in egypt. we have all of this chaos. the end result, the matter which ,olitical party is in power continues with barack obama and hopefully with trump.

he wants to get us out of this war and not be involved over there, whatever you want call it, protectionism. dwight eisenhower, a great military general, and others , we shouldou this get out of the military industrial complex. ,t's all about selling weapons even to our enemies. boeing wants to sell these jets to israel. they found records and it was on the news that they used passenger jets to fly weapons to syria or wherever they wanted. it is there in the record. we are trading with our enemies. even hillary clinton sold uranium to the russians even though she said they have to our system, i will not get into that. ,t is all about selling weapons

ammunition's, and it will never end. we are just going to cause chaos and instruction. , mostroud israeli citizen of the intelligence agency of israel has the best intelligence. i will not say that they knew about 9/11 before hand, but nothing happens without israel knowing first. host: robert is in mesa, arizona. an independent. caller: good morning. this question of security around the world because of terrorism figuring onnot going into any of these countries. we have had 20, 30 years going into countries trying to change culture, trying to change people's religion. they have had tribal wars for hundreds of years. change thoseing to

countries or people, they were born that way. going in there with our troops and sacrificing lives, it doesn't matter if you are a republican, democrat, or independent. we are not going to change their way of living. they have had tribal war forever and they will continue to do the same thing over and over, killing each other. they will kill you if you are a christian, they will kill you if you are an infidel, and they will kill each other. us thinking because we are the united states, and our ,orefathers off for freedom freedom of religion, freedom for everything -- those people have no idea what that is about. they were raised in a culture of religion and we will not change that. you can be republican, you can have a republican leader, you

can have democratic leaders. we don't trust our leaders. that is why there are so many people becoming independent. we are not going to change the world. they are trying to change us. host: robert in arizona. a few tweets as we're having this discussion. stephen says you have to be concerned with the incoming president insults races, religion, foreign and domestic. says, why are we following in their footsteps? west virginia. good morning. just like told say, i have been listening to the previous callers, i agree with parts of what all of them have said. i have also been in the defense intelligence industry a few years ago. -- very much.

i think people should take a deep breath, give a chance-elect trump to deploy his cabinet, see where it a chance to deploy his cabinet, see where it goes. hopefully, we will be very pleasantly surprised with the outcome. to agree on one thing, the current administration is inadequate and incompetent. take a deep breath and relax. don't let your emotions guide you. host: you said you weren't in the defense intelligence agency. i wonder what your thoughts are on the assassination of an ambassador, what happened yesterday, what that does for diplomatic relations, diplomatic security around the world? caller: i think it is furtherate and it proves my point about people letting their emotions rule them. things are going bad in aleppo.

you can understand how people are getting terribly emotional but we cannot let our emotions rule us. we have to use our intellect. charlotte. new orleans, louisiana, an independent. caller: good morning. i want to let you know i was a democrat all my life until about eight months ago. i am very concerned because of what this administration has left on the plate of the new administration that is about to come in. years thate past two obama was trying to overthrow the country, and it has crossed my mind about it. i was also concerned when he had a one-on-one meeting with james comey that nothing would happen to hillary, and low and behold, it happened.

nothing happen to hillary clinton for what she did. she was incapable of being a secretary of state, had no knowledge of it, but was just listening to what other people was telling her what to do. yes, i'm concerned about this country, where we are headed to. thank god, hopefully, donald and takel stand strong the right path. from all of his choosing's of the cabinet -- in terms of things being left on the plate for donald trump, as you put it, one of those issues will be the remaining guantanamo bay detainees. a story about that in today's "new york times." administration

intends to transfer 17 or 18 more detainees. plan, that will leave 41 or 42 prisoners in guantanamo for donald trump's administration. the story noting prisoner levels in that complex. the bush administration brought 780 men to guantanamo after the september 11 attacks. president george w. bush started to close the prison in his second term and bequeath to hundred 40 detainees. in those proposed transfers go through, there would be 41 or 42 left for a donald trump administration. one other issue that will be on the plate of president-elect donald trump is energy

development in this country, some news today out of "the new york times" on what president obama is expected to do before he leaves office. he is expected to announce as soon as today that he will use executive authority to permit a claim ban offshore drilling in parts of the atlantic coast and arctic ocean, according to people familiar with the decision. we will look for that today. maggie is in san mateo, california. democrat. go ahead. caller: hi. i'm deeply concerned. you have mentioned so many

issues on the program today. online,ading an article i can't remember what magazine it was in, but it drew some parallels between what happened in germany and in italy with , and how and hitler demagoguery and dictatorship and propaganda was normalized and accepted. they are like, just give him a chance, a b he will improve things, the trains will run on time, the economy will improve. donald trump is not an intelligent man. i suspect he does not have a very high iq. he has no intellectual curiosity. it is not attending the security briefings. he does not care. i think he did this whole thing as a lark because he likes to win.

, he ist he has won really not interested in governing. -- thet understand people he has put in place in his cabinet are people that are .oing to destroy those agencies i am frightened, i am depressed. i am worried that he is going to get us into a war because he has no filter, he doesn't need to know how to be even polite, let alone diplomatic, or as they .ay, presidential i was born in 1960, i had a wonderful public education here in california public schools, and we were taught in civics how .o be good citizens people seem to have forgotten this. it is like nobody knows how to be a good citizen anymore. here is the leader of our

country and he is a terrible citizen. host: that is maggie, san mateo, california. bynext, we will be joined usa today investigative reporter laura ungar to discuss a recent investigation into the drinking water systems of small communities across the nation. later, our authors week continues. we are joined by mark levinson, author of "an extraordinary time." first, today, as we noted, one month until inauguration day, and preparations are underway at both ends of pennsylvania avenue. this morning, we have a camera outside the white house for some live sights and sounds from 1600 pennsylvania avenue.

those are some of the preparation taking place ahead of inauguration day. 20 month from today, january , we will be showing you live sights and sounds. ,ow we turn to laura ungar joining us from louisville, kentucky, and investigative health reporter from usa today. found ifer colleagues you live in a small water utility, your chances of having toxic chemicals in your water increase significantly. there is the headline. 4 million americans could be jerking toxic water. laura ungar, who are these 4 million americans, where do they live, and why are they particularly impacted? guest: first of all, thanks for having me. a lot of these folks are people that live in remote communities, poor communities, rural communities, a lot of

disadvantaged folks who already face a lot of difficulties, poverty, that sort of thing. this is one other problem on top of that for them. a lot of these people are very disadvantaged. host: when we talk about toxic water, we are talking mostly about lead in water. correct? guest: we focused on lead in water but we also focused on were nottems that testing properly, either skipped testing or were not testing properly. a lot of times you just don't know what is in the water because it is untested. we focused on lead in the series of stories. host: give us some of the numbers you came up with, how many water systems did you look into, what did you find? we looked at basically all the water systems in the united states but focused on the smaller systems which are more than 90% are small.

we focused on those small .ystems we are talking about many 9000 smallalmost , thats that we looked at had testing issues, that sort of thing. host: 100,000 people getting their drinking water from utilities that discovered high lead but failed to treat the water and remove it. i think that number will concern a lot of people. once this lead is found, why are some of these mueller water systems unable to remove it? guest: a lot of times, they are very resource poor. you are talking about poor communities, and a lot of times they don't have the resources. sometimes it is lack of knowledge about what to do in these sorts of situations. some of the people running these water systems are amateurs, , in the very small

system. there are many reasons why this doesn't happen. those are just a couple. host: in this segment, we split our lines of regionally. if you live in eastern or central time zones in this , if you (202) 748-8000 want to talk about this report. mountain and pacific regions, (202) 748-8001 is the number for you. there talking about some of smaller water systems in the united states. from thisstat investigation that laura ungar and her colleagues put together. if you live in a water utility community that serves a less than 3300 customers, your chances of having led in your drinking water go up significantly. 9.8%ng done shows about a of those communities had led in

their water for those systems that serve greater than 100,000 people, that number decreases to about 3.9%. laura ungar, talk about the testing systems here and why there seems to be different tiers for what is allowed and for a bigt allowed utility versus a little utility. guest: the justification i have heard because of the rules is the resource systems. these systems have vast resources comparatively. they may have hundreds of ,ull-time staff, phd operators so you are talking about that versus these small systems with maybe an amateur person running .t as a part-time venture someone who may be did not get that much training. that is kind of the rationale with the testing differences.

there are some requirements that are different for small systems. for example, they do not have to treat for corrosion to prevent lead coming out of corrosive , if theyo the water have had to the view of ofsecutive six-month periods blood below the federal limit. the larger systems always have to be treating for the corrosion to prevent lead from leaching into the water. cities youf the focused on in your story was ranger, texas. of today produced a video some of the residents and officials talking about this problem when they discovered it and how they dealt with it here is a little bit from that video. struggles to provide water that it citizens can trust.

it's unusual to find people that drink the tap water here, unusual to find anyone who isn't frustrated at four years their city has racked up citations for breaking water quality loss. >> i have been here in ranger almost 10 years. we don't drink the water. we have two by water to drink and cook with as well. the community does. >> it scares us. we didn't have the issue until we moved to ranger. ranger, wee to didn't get no notice until this year. we have been here since november. with my son's blood lead levels. we would make kool-aid and we would have to dilute his juices because he is off of formula. just drinking water to keep him hydrated. >> ranger, once home to 30,000 people, has a population of 2500

now. the low areas low income and shrinking tax rolls have made it difficult to keep up with the aging infrastructure. >> stuff in the ground, stop is a challenge. money,ot have a lot of so we have a pretty thin budget. we try to work and do what we can with the small amount of money we do have. want to see the full video, it's available on the usa today website, alongside this story, 4 million americans could be drinking toxic water. what struck me in the video is the mother of the child talking about when she was informed about the lead in her water. is there some sort of her carmen about informing these people in the systems, how many of them do you think know about the lead in the water versus those who are drinking the water and may not know it?

guest: there are different requirements. wasexample, if your tap tested, you are supposed to be notified of the results within 30 days of the results coming out. the rest of the community, the rest of those served by a water system that finds high lead, are supposed we notified within 60 days. , the customer base supposed to be notified as well. there are various notification requirements. in this particular case with this family, they did not know about the citywide problem of lead until september, when the a communitywide letter describing some of the water problems over the past few years. aboutctually did not know the results of their own test, which were especially high,

until i told them, in november. host: you are there in louisville, kentucky right now. can you compare the infrastructure, the size of the louisville water system, a number of people who work on it, to the community in ranger, texas, to give a sense of what you are doing with here? guest: i guy said, they have hundreds of employees. here in louisville, more than 400 full-time employees. you have people with phd's running the system, working on water quality, whereas in places like ranger, texas, you have less than 10 public works employees who may have other jobs within the public works departments. it is a really different expertise level in small communities versus large communities. host: we are talking with laura ungar of usa today about her

story on the broken water systems trapping those in rural areas in this country with ,oisoned or untested water their investigation into systems around the country. we want to hear from you this morning. eastern time zones, (202) 748-8000. mountain or pacific regions, (202) 748-8001. we begin with fred, cherry hill, new jersey. caller: thank you for taking my call. it seems to be part of the problem is decision makers in this country are divorced from this problem because they buy all of their water in bottles. when they ok something like fracking, which contaminates groundwater, in addition to other negative consequences, they feel it does not affect them. tap water is for poor people. it is like jared diamond said in , civilizations decline

when the people at the top, i believe that is what is happening in this country. host: laura ungar, is that of factor, the decision-makers being disconnected to the ground? guest: from the people's perspective. i heard it again and again. one kind of phrase repeated is we are forgotten. we are the forgotten people. stated does not care about us. the federal government does not care about us. a lot of people in rural america feel like that. host: bill in sebastian, florida. good morning. caller: morning. yes, i agree wholeheartedly what the last call, fred, i believe

his name is. the middle class and lower class getting stiffed on more or less --ause of lack of bill, lack of, what? investigatingf the fracking and what it is doing to our environment and the corporations endorsing the 4s -- fracking, which would be no doubt nestle which is taking the water for one penny a gallon from a michigan and selling debt for one dollar a gallon. what the heck? .t belongs to the people the water belongs to the people, not corporations and not the people fracking and they are deluding everything.

ungar, can you pick up on that and fracking and its impact? guest: we do not really look into the fracking the issue. it is not really something i can look into. back into water is a necessity for everyone and i heard that again and again from everyone i spoke with. this is a necessity. this is not something that depends on class or how much income you have. it is basic life. water is life. people needed no matter what their income or where they live. it is a universal need. host: this chart in "usa today" showing the percentage of each small water utility customers who draw water from the system failed to test the lead since 2010. the darker states, the states in a black, more than 20% of the

smaller water utility companies a draw from systems that have .ailed to properly test the darker the color on the map, the higher the percentage of those smaller water utility customers drawing from those kind of systems. laura ungar, is there money from the federal government to pay for this testing? to fix this problem? money available. there are loan programs, there are grant programs. the experts say it is not enough because of the need is so large. loan programs can be difficult for a lot of very small water systems because of they cannot pay them back. they have situations where they may be eligible but they cannot afford to pay back the loans so they cannot get them. also, again, they may not know where the money is, where to

turn for it. and again, not enough out there according to everyone i spoke with. and the federal government acknowledges that, the amount of money to help with these systems is not enough to actually helping them and all of the ways of they need help. dollars sign on it. infrastructure needs with total $64.5 billion over 20 years, the revolving fund from the epa, 2016 allocation for systems of that all was less than sizes was less than $1 billion. taking to your questions and comments for the next half hour. james. caller: thank you for taking my call. we should get used to this because trump is going to

destroy the epa. more pollution in the water. i am glad that you showed poor white people in a bound texas with their problems and because most conservatives believe it is just i minority problem in a minority never hurts. in michigan, they still will not fix the pipes. out of plenty of money tax cuts but we cannot fix it. i do not buy it. it is something we are going to see much more now that trump is in charge. he is putting in a guy that does not want to the epa in existence. i do not see how it will get better anytime soon. host: laura ungar, i will let you respond. guest: from an activist i spoke with a it is going to be a tough thing to solve because there are a lot of issues here. , it isng the caller said

not just people in urban america. it is people in rural america and we found across this country, pb just people are vulnerable to this. it is not just ranger, texas. is a lot of these small flint,ties, as well as michigan, which everybody knows about. epa, i have heard from environmental activists do morehe epa needs to 24th of this. the states need to do more to the existing water safety. -- the epa means to do more to enforce this. i heard there needs to be as well.water rules host: you mention flint, michigan. select with about 100,000 residents. peopleory found 100,000

in the small systems around this country get to their drinking water from utilities that discovered high lead ball failed to treat the water and remove it. tell us about a place called cold mountain, west virginia. guest: it is a very remote community in west virginia and wyoming county. you have to really travel of a mountain to get a there. it is far away from everywhere else. it is hard to connect to existing water systems. well, theey have is a wellhead is in the shed new or a church in the cup -- near a church in a very small community. there is no owner or operator of that. one of the residents tries to treat it every once in a while, which we learned from other residents who used to do that. that's pretty much what their

.ater system consists of obviously, go back to louisville earlier, we have professionals in a very large water system and are they have no one in charge. a neighbor trying to do what he can to help. the need for good water is the name here like one states away. host: with finding of august is the, bringing prosecutions, would that have any impact in trying to make the systems better? talked with state officials about that issue. in that the source cases, especially difficult in cases ise cold mountain where it an orphan system, they dubbed it an orphan system. do youheard is, who prosecute because there is no owner or operator. you have a difficult situation and there. , if you shut it

down, which is another option from state officials talked about it, you can shut them down, but what happens to the people, they do not have water. it is a very tough situation. host: laura ungar from "usa today" with us for about 25 minutes. go ahead. caller: good morning. bloatedjust is bureaucracy. they have not done anything for the people. finally, an administration that will cut them back, trimmed them up a you will get more help from trump. i think he will be one of the greatest presidents we have ever had in a very long time. people need to cool down and relax and give the man a chance. have well water myself.

i've had it tested about five years ago. it is in good shape. host: ok. david is a lake city, utah. good morning. caller: i spend most of my time in rural counties with their own wealth like the menus 02 -- spokelike the man you to. there is some testing sometimes but they are managed by this septic tank companies. i do not know -- i guess my question is, how many people in the united states on the single well systems at home? that?can you take guest: i do not have the answer. they are not subjected to the same rules. these are public water systems we wrote about. you do not have the same rules that you have to abide by.

but, i certainly have talked to people, it is important to test your water if you do have well water, know what is in it. host: in terms of rules that public water systems have to twitter, they said -- guest: yes, they do. that is the requirement. i believe it is annual they have to do that. if they find something, if they find a lead, they have other notification requirements, but, yes, they have to give you what is in the water on a regular basis. host: both large and small systems? is there percent -- penalty for missing the notifications? guest: there are penalties. it is a complicated system of yes,us penalties, but,

those are the requirements no matter the size of the system. host: carol is waiting in massachusetts. caller: good morning. happy holidays. i listen to the people speaking today and one of the things i wanted to point out, the sequester cut a lot of money out of the epa and they have not been able to keep up with all of the oil spill's. but at the same time, i think about this. wese are our tax dollars on the people. i go to the fact that we have an epidemic of autistic children. now, people talk about ikeda bywater -- i can buy water to 80%k, but we have taken

water when we take a shower or bath. that the bathwater is still going at your system what you know it or not. the body can only take so much lead without getting sick. it will fight it off but it is hard to remove metals out of your system. i worry about all of america and we deserve it because we pay a lot of taxes. i want to washington and the rest of them to know that the services of this country needs to remain as high as they brag we are the richest country in the world. fix it. when it comes to the people, it should be nothing we should not have in this country. otherwise, stop calling us the riches. we are moving toward a third world country if we lead a lead and sicknesses that come behind it. and i send that message to republicans and democrats.

host: carol call again. she was talking about intakes of lead. remind us what the health risks of for having led in water. guest: there are a lot of risks for ingesting lead. ,specially children and infants they can have a brain damage, irreversible brain damage from ingesting too much lead and having high blood lead levels. thedults also suffer various issues, kidney issues and other things. we are talking about with children, you can lose iq points, language delays, developmental issues. there is an array of problems that can result from high lead. host: a chart at the bottom of your story talking about lead in the drinking water. perepa's goal is zero parts billion. the maximum food and drug

administration allowable limit for lead in the bottle water is five-part her one billion. your chart goes through some of the well-known lead incidents in this country and the testing waternumbers on lead in for the flint water crisis. it was found there was between 104 and 13,200 parts per billion found in various testing that occurred in flint, michigan for the family, the walton family in ranger, texas. the testing at their home found -- again, the maximum allowable under fda is five parts per billion. that is the walton family. camden, connecticut. you are on was a laura ungar. caller: good morning. states in thatse

andh you showed are black how many of those states are republican states and how many are democratic states? because it seems as a republican states seems to have a lot more going on in the tragedy department compared to the democrats. thank you. host: is there a correlation here? guest: we did not look at that. one thing that is clear when you look at numbers of rural areas and impoverished areas, there is a correlation there. when you talk about rural and impoverished, those folks are at higher risk of having a small water system that has problems. i know texas is one that stands out and they do have a lot of remote, rural areas with small water systems. ohio, mike is waiting.

caller: yes, good morning to you and good morning ms. ungar. as an investigative reporter with the comic and, ebola be a dying breed -- coming administration, you will be a dying breed. i am a retired operating engineer. i worked for various excavating contractors throughout the cleveland, ohio area, northern ohio. i cannot tell you how we have ignored our infrastructure in this country. in at then it myself cleveland area, i have dug around a large water main up to 36 inches diameter and a larger. these things were put in and installed in the late 1800s. to cleveland.nes

i can tell you all of the joints that connect the pipes together have led. i have installed them myself into the late 1970's with lead joints and this is certainly contaminating the water and we have ignored it. is but, terrible health problem as can be seen in flint, michigan. it really is sad to see what is happened here. these people, especially and was virginia and areas like that -- and west virginia, they are considered throwaway people. these are our citizens. to poison your own people, think about it. the people in flint devoted in a governor because he was a businessman and he will run the government as a business. as we know, most businesses are to have early sociopathic --

inherently sociopathic, their main concern is a money, not at the people. a government's function is to take care of their people, not to worry about the money. the money certainly have to come from somewhere, but ignore our infrastructure is a horrible thing. ,e have known about the lead even reading history books about the roman empire. they used a sprinkle lead on their food as a seasoning. and as reading just any history will tell you, what the damage it did to the roman empire because lead affects the brain. host: laura ungar, i will let you pick up. guest: the questions you raise about the infrastructure, i heard about it over and over.

the water infrastructure has been there almost 100 years, so if you're talking about possibly lead pipes, lead solder that can reach into the water and corrosive pipes there are old. and certainly, i talked to congress people after the story came out to that the reaction and find out what is happening in congress on these issues. what i heard again and again is we need to maintain our infrastructure in this country. people think of infrastructure as roads and bridges, but it is also the underground, water infrastructure and to not forget that. to remember infrastructure is not just rolled and bridges, it is the water infrastructure. host: when a lead get into drinking water, where is the most likely to happen? mean? what do you

host: in terms of the system, the water system, at one point along the way is it likely to get into your water into your pipes? guest: it can come from the distribution system. the pipes run by a water system like a small water system with very old pipes. it could be from that. it could be from the pipes into a person's house. the homeowner would be in charge of. there could also be led hikes as well. anyplace along that distribution line. -- there could also be led pipes as well. that is a major way it gets into the water. in westme of the pipes virginia water system. , picture along with the story a small shed housing component of the water system for cold mountain. one of the residents pours

bleach into the system to try to keep it clean. jim is in north carolina. go ahead. caller: i lived in the suburbs of d.c. in the 1970's and i saw the epa do very good job in cleaning up the water and of the air around washington in the 1970's. and also with regard to the ,ingle well systems for a house my understanding is if you test it, you must disclose that when you sell it so people do not get it tested, so they do not reduce their property values. i wonder if ms. laura ungar can comment on that? guest: i really do not know much about that. my understanding is the same thing, but i did not really look at the single well systems.

we looked at the public water systems and the small public water systems in particular. that is outside of what we researched. host: how many communities did you research and how long did it take to research? guest: we started looking at the issue of public water systems and a lead in water at the beginning of the year. this story is one of three big stories and a lunch of sidebars for -- a bunch of sidebars. that in march, we did two major stories on the issue of lead in water. and one of them looks as schools and daycare's for a sample and ,nother looked and beyond flint that is about 2000 the water systems with high levels of lead. this was sort of the third part of that, third major piece and it took many months. we pretty much looked at this

all year while juggling our other assignments. a long-term project. host: lead in your water, and investigation is what this series of stories is called. the double-page spread from the december 14 in addition of "usa today" and you can read it online. betty from mount pleasant, texas. caller: has a happy holidays, first off. the idea you had to have a phd to run these water districts . the engineer that spoke earlier, he talked about putting lead in the water system or around the pipes of them in the system. as an engineer, he should've known better. that proves you do not have to be a degreed engineer to foul

something up. ,e have such a blow to the epa it reminds me of sandel working on the water pipes and -- it reminds me of seeing people work on the water pipes and there is not a lot of people actually doing anything. that is where our tax dollars are getting spent. host: have you run into epa workers in mount pleasant, texas? caller: know, your city maintenance or anything like that. you see five guys standing there and use the one guy digging the ditch or whatever. my point is, if you compare that on a small scale to a bigger scale of the epa, it is bloated. up, you have a lot of people that are there there

are getting pay but not doing anything. host: maybe you can pick up on this. you could talk about the epa and resources it devotes to water issues. how many people out in the states versus in washington, d.c.? guest: i do not have those numbers off handfuls i know they say it is an important priority for them. -- numbers offhand. -- i know they say it is an important priority for them. they are saying this is a priority for them and they do care about making sure that the water is safe for citizens. back to the issue of the phd's, i was using that as a way to compare with the resources of some of these large water .ystems i do not mean to imply you need a phd to run a small water

system. that is not the case and no one was say it is. i do not want to leave that impression. host: when did we wake up to the dangers of lead in water? like somebody said earlier, we have known for centuries that led is a problem. as far as a factor that led in water is a real issue, certainly in the 1970's, a lot of this stuff came to light and in the 1990's, there was a lot of focus on the need to keep people safe from led -- lead. it has been known from centuries that lead is harmful and we should not be ingesting get a it should not be in our drinking water. it is a matter of how do you get it out? how do you reduce it in the system? host: tim is waiting.

caller: good morning. people who run these systems do not know what to they are doing. i have been running a system of and theye for 25 years epa director for ohio started a new program where they were calling it an operator professionals were before they were operators. the education system for umm,tors needs to be, brought to the forefront. the other thing gets, we're looking at a $1.3 billion water system plant. we have never had a planned before. in 2010, we put in a system. get 17%d out engineers of what the project cost is. they put in a four foot exhaust

fan in a building with one world and a mirror in the bathroom that is three foot by four foot. all of this was to extend the cost of the project so the engineer could make more money. , anyll system has to pay wage whether they are using workers are not. that cost is about 300,000 on top of that project. the union's and the engineers are just running this ridiculous. host: thank you. stay on the line. questionsr may have for somebody is manages the systems. laura ungar, go ahead. there is great managers of small systems out there. some of these cases we looked at , they were more vulnerable to having issues because of they

were so small and in some cases, did not have operators or operators may be trying hard to do a good job, but doing it on the side. we found one guy whose full-time job is a farmer and rancher and he also runs a water system in his spare time and really try to do a good job and is doing as good a job as he can. he is struggling because it is not a full-time thing for him. you know, we are just basically smallg these places, the systems are more vulnerable to doing issues because they not necessarily have the resources. some do. some are able to find the resources and the operators are doing a really good job. host: are you seeing some of that in a baltic, ohio? are you forced to wear multiple hats because of the smaller size

of the system? caller: well, yeah. i was superintendent -- i'm superintendent of the water system, of the sewer system, i -- the zoning inspector and i mean if there are numerous things i have to do. probably the biggest i see is leadership. in ohio, they came up with hard cap. they give you a free education and the leadership in the waterboard, public affairs people, mayors, all of this is free, but nobody goes to it. nobody takes the time to get involved in it. -- the state has not set up has set up the anybody can go to it, but they do not take the time or effort to do it. big problem that people are not educated in what is going on.

host: thank you. time for one or two more calls before we lose laura ungar from louisville. go ahead. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i was wondering, laura, have you done any investigating down in corbin, kentucky? guest: i have not. we have a look at some places in kentucky. what should i look at? we -- we get to this report every year that says our water is safe. i have been here for about 18 years now. and every time i go to get a drink of water, it is ok if you drink it right away but if you leave it at room temperature, it tastes like tar. it is continually giving us the report was the year -- once a year that our water is safe.

everybody i talk to and i live in a complex, everybody i talk to says the water tastes like tar. i was interested if you ever done any investigative studies down here in corbin. also, another question. why can't some of these larger communities, such as louisville and lexington, why can't they go out to the rural communities with their education and help some of these small communities? host: laura ungar? guest: the other caller mentioned educational programs. a lot of states have these educational programs and the epa has online education, so there is education available for these folks running the small water systems. as of the other caller also said, it can be tough to first all know about it and have the time. there are resources, if you

look. i have not heard of folks from larger companies of going out to notsmaller areas, i am saying it does not happen, but it could happen. that is an interesting idea for our. host: for somebody concerned, what can they do? can they request testing from the company? guest: yes, they can. they can test of their own tap water. there is a lot of avenues they can take. yes, they can request their system do a test or request information from the water system. host: we want to thank laura ungar. 4 million americans could be drinking toxic water on "usa today." you can follow her on twitter. thanks for your time. guest: you are welcome. thank you. continues.rs week

we will be joined by mark levinson, author of "an extraordinary time." but first, as we said today, is one month until inauguration day. we have been shown to some size and sounds of the work -- sights and sounds of the work going on there.

host: that's the scene outside the white house as preparations continue for inauguration day,

one month from today. back here in the studio, it is authors week and we are joined by mark levinson, a former editor. and author of the book, "an extraordinary time. the end of the postwar boom and the return of the ordinary economy." it is an economic history of the world since world war ii. you argue that history can be divided into two parts. what are they? guest: the quarter-century after 1973 war ii from 1948 to was a time of very rapid economic growth, perhaps of the fastest in world history. a lot of people all over the world became a very prosperous, very quickly. that had political ramifications. andle felt things were good their children would have a better life than they did.

and then after 1973, things slowed down around the world and quite remarkable fashion. growth, the era of slow slow productivity improvement, a feeling that maybe our kids will not have it so good. that is still with us today. i still think we have the memories of the good times as the golden age, 1948 to 1973 period. we are a time of slower economic growth. golden age, what made it so different from past bones? guest: we had remarkable productivity growth. productivity is the key ingredient behind how economies grow. productivity means essentially using resources, labor, natural resources more efficiently. and in the postwar period, we had four variety of reasons, fast productivity.

this was helped by the fact we had a lot of underutilized resources. in the united states, we had 3 million mules on farms after world war ii. millions of people were walking behind mules. those workers could mold into industry doing much more high productivity work with the modern equipment and produce a great deal more wealth. we had a pretty awful land transportation system after world war ii. we invest heavily in the interstate highways. transport costs became more reasonable and more practical to ship goods across the country. workers could commute longer distances to find better jobs. that helps productivity. around much of the world, we had low education levels at the time of world war ii. in the years after the war, most

of the what economies spent heavily on education and this had great gains in productivity. you can think of this as low hanging fruit, once the things have been done, you cannot do them again. we can still continue to improve education, but giving people an year ofw months or a education does not have the same effect as taking people who had a fifth-grade education and raising the education level to everybody to high school. building a new exit does not have the same effect on the economy as building the interstate in the same place. proto-timothy growth does productivity growth has slowed down and all of the industrial economies since 1973. host: in that golden age, as you call it, from after world war ii to 1973, it lasted for so long. you write your book economic

miracles do happen, but in most times and most places, economies grow slowly punctuated by sudden bursts of euphoria. this went on for a quarter century. why did it last so long? guest: that is a remarkable thing. we had a number of countries that went for more than 25 years without a single recession. even in countries where there were recessions, they were quite a mild. we had it expanding welfare state in most countries that gay families, average families, a greater sense of security. -- that a day for families, average families, a greater sense of security. it went on year after year. and no one was particularly paying attention that we had exhausted those options, the easy productivity growth came to an abrupt halt and that's what make a time after 1973 so

different than before. host: we are talking about both of those times as we talked to marc levinson, author of "an extraordinary time. the end of the postwar boom and the return of the ordinary economy." inviting our viewers to join the discussion as well as we talk about this economic history of the world. republicans can call (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. mark levinson, what happened in 1973? what was the turning point? is not what people thought the turning point was. it was the year the first oil crisis. we had in the beginning of the war in the middle east, the arab oil producers launched an effort to raise the price of oil and embargoed oil shipments to the

united states, the netherlands and several other countries seen as supportive of israel. we had an energy crisis here and around the world. the price of oil went up a lot. people naturally associated the oil crisis with the economic slump that followed. but it turned out the oil crisis was really just a masking more fundamental problems. that was we started getting these easier productivity gains by 1973, education in most levels had gotten pretty high. universities had been expanded. there were improvements that coming more slowly. by 90's after three, most of the farmworkers workers had moved into industry. , most of the form workers had moved into industry. we had trade liberalization significantly during the 19th these and 1960's which improved

-- 1950's and 1960's which improved productivity. force companies to become more efficient. all of these things went on and we got into the end of that by 1973. underlying the oil crisis, which everybody was paying attention, was a productivity slump which people were not paying so much attention and that her doctor be the cause of slower growth. host: as countries tried to counter this slower growth, different market proved better than a planned economy are more interventionalists government? guest: one of the fascinating things, it took a few years after 1973 before people realized it was not another garden-variety recession and we moved to slower growth path around the world. and -- voters were not happy

about this. we saw in one country after another, people coming forth with alternative solutions. between 1948riod and the early 1970's, most countries were run by what i would call liberal or social democratic types of governments. countries that believed in a market economy but an activist state having a very important role in developing the economy. we start to see two different people got frustrated with the inability of this model to continue to deliver economic growth in the 1970's. one was we saw in france, a big turn to the left. a socialist government than nationalized a lot of industry, promising it would accelerate growth. that do not work out very well in france. other countries, great britain, the united states, germany, sweden, japan

and several others turned to the right were politicians came in a if we have smaller government, more deregulation, that will bring us faster productivity growth and that will stimulate the economy and raise living standards. the track record of that was not very good either. where a situation in people were desperate for solutions. they knew the previous model of a big, activist government with a free market base was not working out as they try different things to speed up economy. basically, none of the proved successful. host: people still looking for solutions today to some of the problems. we're talking about the golden age. today's economy. what was the difference with marc levinson, author of the book, "an extraordinary time."

we will be talking about the economic history of the world the next 45 minutes. a democrat, go ahead. caller: how is everybody doing? well, it is more of a comment. being in the mid-to late 1970's and science and mathematics is --t we can learn because i the information i receive from my parents is another reference instead of reading it in a book or going to the computer, these are eyewitness account. i really hope, even though i do not agree with election, that the president-elect will start if lament the building of -- will start to implement the building of infrastructure. maybe it could help resurrect a faster growth in a.

host: appreciate that. i want marc levinson to pick up that with investments in infrastructure and how they have created to the economic booms or stop the slow times. guest: we had in the 1950's and 19 this is investment in infrastructure and the united days and around the world that invested in the economy. it was poor and we had to build airports. there were a lot of two lane roads that were slow and it could take a week or more to drive across the country then. the infrastructure investment had a substantial in fact -- impact and improve productivity in our country and others. if we were to spend a lot of money on infrastructure today, it might have positive impact on productivity. would be less than in the 1950's and 1960's because

our basic transportation system is in much better shape so we will have much smaller gains. it does not say it's a bad things to do, but we have to be more realistic in terms of the impact. host: rick. go ahead. caller: i am an economist. i think your book has been long overdue. i really appreciate hearing all of this. can i add one thinks -- one thing, in the late 1960's, there was an enormous amount of inflation. we had the economic war and johnson increasing fiscal spending without any balance at all and the inflation had taken off. 1973, recession began in recovery.dent of the

the point is, when it happened, the federal reserve did not really have tools anymore to stop because we had run away inflation, along with a substantial decline in gross national product. bit?ou comment on that a guest: one of the interesting things as a historian is to put yourself back into the mindset of the time. in those times, we had a very difficult -- different understanding of inflation than today. people would say inflation has to do with the monetary policy and the federal reserve's job is to deal with inflation. back then, the discussion was quite different and very complicated public policy. called crossing push inflation. that businesses were raising prices and that was causing inflation.

how did you deal with that? if you were a president or prime minister, you would tell labor raise they should not wages. you would tell business they should not raise prices. we tried that. all of those things were meant -- priceff christ push push inflation. and we had some ink where the idea was demand inflation was due to companies borrowing too much to invest too much in their businesses. you made credit hard to get and that was the solution. these were treated as different beasts at the monetary inflation. you had all of these policies and would think of as bizarre today. i did i think any president today would stand here and lecture a labor union saying you need to ask for smaller wage

increase because you are what the cause inflation. that's what we had in the 1960's and 1970's. today, we haven't entered that data we have an understanding that inflation is caused by monetary policy and something the federal reserve or other central banks can you deal with. we are not expecting the other central banks to do miraculous things that are beyond their power which is something we expected in the 1960's. host: marc levinson has been writing about these issues. he was the former director at "economist" and author of five books, including the one we are talking about, "an extraordinary time." and "the box." steve, republican, go ahead. caller: my name is dave. question, i am not an economist. i have financial background.

i understand the concept. i would like to see if you have another book that put something in that would say about how does it really affect the average individual? i know you have probably heard it for many cases from somebody who does not have an economic background. in other factors will change our economy in the 1970's. we started moving in a four-way economy. governmentwith the became more argumentative. republicans and democrats did not work as well together certainly in the last 15 or 20 years. when you have a throwaway economy, you are thrown away resort -- you are throwing away resources and tried to replicate, it will take something out of it as an individual trying to live with a certain standard. productivity can go up, but if you do not have the jobs anymore

and people cannot afford the wages that they are getting paid and with the technology, computers and robots, it duck tales into productivity. wherekinds of things is the rubber meets the road for the average consumer. our economy is a large percentage of consumer, how do we get out of this and focus on productivity and not recognizing how we are wasting resources and we are buying adult toys there really the necessities of life? guest: he has raised an important point. the productivity growth underlies the overall performance of the economy, if he does not have much to do with the distribution of income. one of the trends we have seen since the 1970's is that the distribution of income has changed in almost every country of the world. the 1950's and 1960's and early 1970's were unusual that the

productivity gains were shared through the economies. not just a few people felt they were getting better off, everybody felt they were getting better all. in more recent times, the productivity gains have really benefited a few were people in the economy. you can do the math yourself and see the problem. if the economy is growing at say 5% per year, some people are going to do better than that and do worse thanll that. every body will end up feeling better at the end of the year. if the chronic -- if the economy is growing 1.5%-2%, it is likely some people are going to be below zero. and they will fill dirt living will feel-- and they that their living standards are slipping. the distribution of income produced is very significant, but we have to look at that against the background of a

national income just growing much more slowly than it was it the 1950's and 1960's. i do want to touch of one other point. a comment about the u.s. government basically becoming, he do not use the word but or argumentative is what he said. these underlying trends about slower economic growth and some of the distributional issues are worldwide problems. trendsre not simply u.s. . i think one of the things that happens in the united states and in most other countries as people look at their neighbor. they say we have this problem and it is due to something happening here. if you look the trend toward slower productivity growth, it happened in every one of the advanced economies. that tells you there is something more going on here

than what congress is or is not doing or some federal government regulation. some underlying economic issue at stake here. host: one of those viewers --ching and tweeting guest: productivity, we had a very good growth in the 1960's and early 1970's. it turned out the 1973 was at the peak year for productivity growth, economic growth and the entire world. host: back to the calls. david and like charles, louisiana. caller: thank you for taking my call. mr. levinson, in the listening to you, i noticed you do not bring up the three recessions we

had and 25 years -- in 25 years. eisenhower gave us the freeway system. that, it was not that much work. i was a carpenter. i had just finished high school in 1952. i was a carpenter. , it was not that great and louisiana. -- in louisiana. the recession i am talking about was during eisenhower's for the end of his term at the beginning of his term, i am not sure. probably levinson can tell us for sure. guest: we did have a recession. there were a couple during eisenhower were'-- during

eisenhower. they were schaller -- shallow compared to later. they were quite brief. the economy went to pretty rapid growth thereafter. things changed dramatically after 1973. we had a pretty deep recession in 1974, 1975. the economyas over, did not get back to where it had been before. not in the united states or in any other major country around the world. this is important. if you consider something like the unemployment rate just to give you an example, one of our germany, hadomies, an unemployment rate the began with a 0% in 1970's. close to3, never came an unemployment rate and it went up to 7% and stayed there.

we saw much of the same in france, unemployment rising in the u.k.. none of the countries around the world were able to regain the level of prosperity they had in the previous period. host: with 40 years of perspective, can we look back had been done s ifferently, the golden age could continue for more year? guest: i have a quote from alice revlon, head of the budget late for a while in the

'70's, she made the comment that say we didn't do a good job, but you can't say what we have done differently. i think that is the conclusion a lot of people have reached as have taken a look at economic history. were trying ntries different things, people with advancing ideas were solutions to the productivity solution as ways to bring faster growth.c none of thement achieved very much. so i think that suggests that simply an issue of a bad economic policy in one it's really other, more fundamental economic forces don't have nkly we any solutions. i've got to say, this is a conclusion that makes many uncomfortable. it's bipartisan discomfort. certainly hear from democrats saying, well, this is not good, we have a lot people unemployed, the

economy has to grow faster and put these people to work. hear from people who are republicans who say, well, you and if we had lower taxes fewer regulations that would solve the problems and put people to work. -- there is bipartisan agreement that somehow the faster can grow a lot than it has grown. and i'm dubious about that, i is a limited amount we can do to juice up economic long. for very host: you're right. perhaps most important thing hat vanished along with the golden age was faith in future. for quarter century, average wealthy country and poor ones felt their lives getting better. age became a memory and an era of good times for all. viewers think f that. edward is waiting in essex, democrats.ine for go ahead, edward. caller: yes, i have two questions. author c-span, russian

said the gdp of the soviet union thang that era was greater the united states. and he didn't really go into to buy he said, have you the book to find out why. and elizabeth warren's book, she distribution of new productivity over approximately period and how middle class was getting approximately and then, my rationale is that with the 1% or 2% growth, long as we're getting some of warren says we stopped getting any, any growth, any benefit from new productivity, so those are my two questions. levinson. guest: okay, to the question about economic growth in russia, russia, i expert in think it is important to point

period in which the russian economy grew very quickly. necessarily good for most russian citizens, russia resources and forced them into industry. which t huge industries, had very large output. it very good at producing things that consumers actually wanted? russia was pretty miserable failure in the '60s or periods, as well. but if you take a look at simply terms of theput in numbers of tons of steel or the meters of quare sizeable ussia built industries. and at a certain point in time, that shows up as strong economic growth. translate at all into benefit for russian consumers. that is an important point to make. the russians were good at one

an ct of this, building industry, they were terrible at another aspect of this, which is people actually wanted to buy, which you have to o in a market economy and didn't have to do in a communist economy. host: in terms of the comment from elizabeth warren about productivity growth. guest: the point as i understand it, vinot read her book, the u.s. the fruits of productivity growth haven't been shared evenly, that is a fair point. is accurate. this is a question for our political system. point out, as i aid earlier, that this gets much tougher when productivity growth is slow and economic growth is slow. economic growth is fast, there is plenty for me and lenty for and you we can all share. when economic growth is slow, if i'm going to get mine, maybe there is not so much there for that is really more the situation we've been in the last

few years. california, rudy is a democrat, thanks for washingtonwith us on journal. caller: thank you, john. mr. levinson, your book is so when the sun coming up in california, i gallon buy it. to find out if you believe and this is a question coming backjobs are to the united states? just plain and simple. they going to come back to the united states? thank you. guest: rudy, i don't think that "coming back," is a helpful phrase because i don't think that describes the way economies work. at this point a low unemployment rate in the united people here have been able to find jobs. he question is, will future jobs be developed in the united tates or developed in other countries? i think there is some reasons to

be pretty optimistic about what in oing to happen to jobs the united states. people, thing, i think the viewers of this program, i'm a e, are aware we've had large development in automation and this is continuing. more robots a lot in industry. we're seeing a lot of jobs that an be done by computers effectively and this has of inated the advantage cheap labor in many countries. necessary no longer to take many kind of products abroad to get cheaper labor and provide many services from abroad to get cheaper labor because technology let's us do sort of things in a relatively high wage country in the united states. the u.s. has some advantage in these things, ssuming we can keep our education system on the leading edge and continue to have force. work

if you're thinking about you're oing to see somebody announce they're closing their factory in some other country and moving factory to the united states here fthat is what you mean by "coming back," i don't think we'll see much of hat, that is usually not the way economic change occurs. host: sally, wellington, ohio, sally, good morning. caller: good morning. my question is, have you studied ceo's have made fortunes s-'80s, way the '70 over what they used to make. the money out of instead of building more things, more vital things for people where they can find jobs, comfortable, very comfortable salaries for themselves, even if they are fired, they get a buy-out plan or something. hat, i think, to me, is not

what i like to see in our country. want to lly, i don't disagree with that, i want to ceot out that the trends in pay have been different in different countries around the world. the have done better in united states than a number of other countries, but we see the in terms of slower economic growth, slower productivity growth and around the world. so while the ceo pay may be an may and you may think it need to be more equitable, that robably does not have a huge effect on productivity growth in our economy or on the over tlt all rate of economic growth, guess.ould be my host: florida, clysta is waiting, independent. christa. caller: hi. host: hi, go ahead. okay, my question -- or my comment is this. refugees from communist country and i also a lot of people that are

from communist countries and i think that is very hard to predict what is to us because of hackedt our election was and, you know, we have been as a nation the lectoral process has been compromised my communists and hat communism is also pretty high on the list of a lot of cabinet members. closely withy work thing.nd that sort of for us to say what is going to happen, we don't know. levinson, perhaps cutalk about russia's economy today and the trends they are in.g guest: i'm hesitant to go there, i'm not an expert on russia's economy today. think the underlying issues that are not within the scope of terms of k in

automation and in terms of the nd of large-scale factory employment and these things are facing many economies around the world. are, again, level trends. host: one thing you touch on is of environmental regulations and the push for ine environmental regulation the '70s. barkway on twitter says, one fruits ion gets all the of post-war industrialization and the next generation to ollow gets all the environmental fall out. can you touch on that? guest: i think there is to that. excuse me. e have in the post-war period, environmental regulation. we had rapid industrialization environmental ve effects, no question about it. those things generally don't in the economic statistics, those aren't part of.

go -- gdp, but they are real. since the growth '70s because countries put money into environmental work. are spending money on on ution cleanup, environmental control systems, e're spending money on better disposal of hazardous waste and all those things divert money investments nds of that might stimulate gdp, which oesn't mean they are bad investments, they are investments for the health of world. that is important to remind we measure economic growth, but economic growth, the way we measure it isn't everything. dp doesn't really capture how healthy we are and how happy we are there is important values. host: the bobby kennedy speech. guest: environmentalism is one

of the values, important to have a clean environment, even if hat doesn't show up in the national income account. good carol, democrat, morning. caller: yes, you mentioned around the world executives are maybe less money, but be e doesn't seem to appreciable difference in the way the economies are going. european countries, they have better safety net, they have national health insurance what impact, on the middle class and the have if we would ere to adopt some of those safety nets that they have in economies?n guest: that's a great question. i want to point out that the

safety net in many european economies have grown weaker over time. this tends to get lost in the discussion in the united states. but, for example, if you are a young person coming into the job spain or italy or sometimes even in france or be any, you're likely to offered temporary job, you're ot likely to be offered a career. ou may be in the temporary job for a good while. you may have to change temporary jobs. those temporary jobs tend to have fairly poor pay, they tend to have fairly poor benefits, so the regular job in economy, if i can use that word, become employee of a big company in europe, you're doing pretty well. if you're doing one of the jobs, mini-job as they call them in some countries, very well.doing you are struggling and have no security at all. praise what isto go og in europe, but to point ut europeans are dealing with many same underlying economic with.s we're dealing how do you stimulate the economy

at a time of slow growth? things like basically reducing wages, which is what happens when you make go into temporary kinds of jobs. you weaken the safety net in various ways. we're seeing number of european economy necessary which going up, ages are places in which the health benefits become less generous, are similar trends to the united states. western n balance europe still has better social safety net than the united states has, but the same issues that we have in terms of sustaining social safety net are evident in europe. host: 15 minutes left with marc western talking about his book, europe still has better social safety net than the united states has, but "an extraordinary time," the end of the post-war boom and return of the ordinary economy. kingwood, texas, a republican, go ahead, bob. aller: yeah, mr. levinson, i get your comment on i

think you had mentioned unemployment was down. president obama did take advantage of that in his last press conference, but he said that unemployment was down. in fact, jobs are part-time not and a lot of people who are working are not working very much and their pay is the first thing. the second thing is with low zero st rates, with interest in the interest rates, of't that a false impression what our gdp is? for the last eight years we've interest rate and the economy can't do anything. o what are your comments on that? guest: we've had in this in try, serious growth full-time jobs. there's still plenty of people who say they would like a full-time job and they're working part time or they're out the labor force because they

can't -- they think they can't job. a full-time we've had a very good growth in employment. rate for oyment college educated people begins with a two, it's really quite standards.orical lesser people with educati education, many parts of the country, you see signs of labor country parts of the i've driven through and seen help wanted posters all over the place. we have seen improvement in the labor market. hat doesn't mean there aren't further gains to be had there, it would be great if more people in the laboraren't the laborld come into market. i think that will happen because we've seen wages starting to go up after a long period in which didn't. in terms of the connection between zero interest rates and i'm not sure what that

is. clearly we've had interest rates quite low, but again, going back to my comments earlier about i think most people now understand that the federal job is to fight inflation. if there's no inflation in the economy, then there is not a reason to worry about what interest rates are. the feds see signs inflation is starting to pick up, it has to respond to that and encourage interest rates to rise. i think we've started to see that. gradual adjustment of interest rates here to what levels by ore normal historical standards f. that happen necessary fairly gradual way, it will not hurt a lot of people, but this really depends on how the fed reads inflation. i don't think that there is really a connection between the

whether rest rates and real.owth is real or not host: independent, go ahead. marc.r: good morning, guest: morning. caller: like you to comment on couple quick points. the word "capitalism" does not appear in the united states constitution, however tis very clear in the preamble, it is the government's constitutional duty o promote the general welfare of the people. correlate top 10 of 1% than 300 million americans. together and ese peak on those, what the pope "devil's dung," capitalism. guest: i don't want to pretend to be a constitutional scholar. is a fair reading we have economy mixed in a

lot of ways. the government has important private sector has important role. purists tell you this is not cap tappism, some tell you it is too much capitalism. what we've seen around the world we've got fairly similar to what most other economies have, there is a mixed with significant rule for government. the question we and many other economies are facing, what government ole for be and a question that i discuss book, "an gth in my extraordinary time," whether making government smaller actual faster economic growth, leads growth.r productivity the evidence based on what we've seen in various economies around last 40 years e is there is not necessarily a connection. economies in which government has a larger role and

they have grown faster than government which has a smaller role. vice versa. i don't think that one can make statement about this based simply on ideology. is a messy place and different economies have had ifferent rates of success, not necessarily related to the question of how big or how small is government host: clayton, north carolina, up. is go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. tell mr. ke to i actually lived n soviet union in the '60s and am a -- historian and i would like to tell him that it was a at that time in soviet it was actually comparable with the united

america. like in some r journals, in magazines and comparison we had with what we could buy for one buy for what we could ne dollar and it was exactly the same. would like to tell him that of le were buying lots things just like in the united states states, t.v. sets and efrigerators, everything was novelty. refrigerator, g t.v. sets and also in soviet hel free housing and hat they have free education and free healthcare and food was

subsidized. host: ann's view from inside the soviet union. ann, i thank you, appreciate that, i'm sure the viewers here will appreciate soviet economy. host: california, lou, is a republican, go ahead. caller: hi. thanks for taking my call. this country started out, you land with a few rich white owners and they had slaves and free, they had to they weren't free. what do we have today? a few rich corporations that all they want to do is pay wages equal to or less than food and housing. are we as working class of america now slaves to the apropriations? guest: i think, lou, what we've the world and united his is not just

states story. in recent decade, a larger share creates has conomy gone to owners of capital, labor.than owners of i discuss this issue at length n my book, what we refer to as labor share, a piece of the pie gone oes to workers, has down in most economies. due to this may be factors specific to the united tates, for example, this woman who called earlier mentioned ceo there may be things here in the united states that contribute to this, but there world-wide o be trends that contribute to this. one is clearly that workers have bargaining power. this is due in part to technology. okay. may offer you a job in the united states, if you want

more of a wage than they are illing to pay, may shift that job to another country. okay. technology has made this ossible and perhaps reduced your bargaining power as an individual because it is no longer stuck with just the local labor market, the company now may have a global labor mark xet if it can't get goods and services it wants at a price here tcan go to a different city them equally get well. i think this is one factor that decline in ead to labor share around the world. question is whether this starts to change. we've had evidence in the united in the last couple of years that maybe the labor share stabilizing oris even starting to rise a little bit f. that starts to happen in countries, it would be a very beneficial trend. kingston, new york, democrat, good morning. good morning.

thank you for c-span. i want to ask mr. levinson, direct correlation of energy consumption and how it relates gdp?ffects of for example fwe produced more actuallyan consume, we eliminate our financial dependence on resources. for the healthy environment and also the communities to do renewable energy. want him to explain how energy drives area economic struct and you are if people are allowed to can also ergy, they improve the economic structure of our communities and our world. ost: all right mrchlt -- mr. levinson. guest: in the period i'm writing bout in my book, we had a lengthy discussion of independent independence, it was word in the evidence in the late '70s and '80s for we're our own energy, not impocket energy anymore into

the united states. number of y that a other countries followed similar strategies. it turned out that energy wasn't a smart strategy. it was often cheap tore import energy from other places than to in the united states. of her factor is that many the ways in which we tried to fairly energy here were inefficient, heavily subsidized. fossil fuels and nuclear energy. these were not necessarily invest frment economic point of view. i would not agree with the energy is somehow a special part of the economy that needs special treatment, different treatment from everything else. and i don't think the problem we

xperienced with energy in the 1973-74 period with the oil boycott really had much to do down in economic growth that followed. host: time for one or two more calls. rich in marion, ohio. republican, go ahead. caller: yeah. questions there. don't we pay certain amount of energy for depending saudi countries in er the numbers? ther question is, if we have longer session like for three hit us olid square that really hard, would a lot of eople's benefits they would no longer be considered unemployed, wouldn't correct benefits in essence have zero unemployment everyone would be out of work. hangup and listen to the answers, thanks. guest: to the question whether

are subsidizing oil by protecting saudi arabia, this is outside my expertise and i don't want to pretend to give you an respect to your second question, the answer is no. unemployment rate is not related to whether or not people unemployment benefits. the question that people are asked when the department of surveys every month about have ment is whether you done work in the previous week and if not, whether you are able, available and ready for work. someone says that they have been looking for work and they are ready to take work, count as unemployed whether or not they are receiving unemployment benefits. about a minute left, talking about "extreme makeover" makeover" -- extraordinary age, that you studied in your book. optimistic or pessimistic

are you that we will see the golden age again? hard thing is a very for many people, i think this is something beyond our control, the fantasies we've had that since the 1950s is the government really had the ability to control this sort of thing. productivity growth comes mostly out of private sector and mostly in very unpredictable ways tshows up when we don't expect it and goes away. so if you look around the world today, you say, where is the next spurt of productivity growth coming from? see technologies, artificial intelligence, virtual others. many right now, these don't have much economy. the could they have? could they lead to a whole range of changes in business and overnment that increase productivity? absolutely. when will that happen? don't think anyone can tell you. that is the conundrum, we saw a

or four years of rapid economic growth in this country in the 1990s, early 2000s due to invest nment computeing and communication we years earlier.40 suddenly it changed the way business did business and it had great economic benefit. that may happen again. that.'t think we can know i'm not pessimistic, not in the no growth camp at all. say, this isn't something a president or prime can order up, we can't predict this will happen next year tis really beyond our control.to host: if our viewers want to "an more about it, extraordinary time", marc levinson is the author, we this iate your time morning. we will end our program today by time magazine op ed that came out yesterday, the global merican leadership is over and here is

what comes next is what ian bremmer write necessary his piece. we are asking, do you think the ra of american global leadership is over? the time about magazine piece and you can start in, republicans 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. the u.s., outside 202-748-8003. get to your calls in a moment. 1600l take you back to near pennsylvania avenue, where construction continues ahead of day.guration month january 20, one from today and preparation for the festivities and the ceremonies continue in washington, d.c. the sights and sounds from outside the white house this morning.

host: that's just outside the white house this morning on been lvania avenue, showing sights and sounds. one month to inauguration day. we'll end our "washington journal" program today by came ng on one op ed that out yesterday by ian bremmey, in era of azine, the american global leadership is comes nextre is what as we take you through the story, reminder, you can join the conversation. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. the u.s., outside 202-748-8003. writes, american

international leadership, 1945, will end with the presidential inauguration of donald j. trump 2017.uary 20, not because trump is bound to fail where his predecessors have succeeded, given rise to shrug of u.s. pressure and ability smaller power to punch above heir weight in cyber space, this moment was inevitable. america will remain the super power for the foreseeable only the u.s. can project military muscle, economic clout and cultural influence into every region of world. the trump election marks rreversible break with the past, one with global implication. trump's america first approach changes the world. trump agrees with leaders of political parties, u.s. is exceptional nation, but insists country can't real estate

main exceptional if it keeps stumbling down the path that former republicans, including republicans and democrats followed since world war ii. ambition to play the role of indispensable power treat u.s. s to taxpayers like chumps. it er to build a "what's in approach" for the world. his is a wild card, instead of super power that wants to impose stability and value on fractuous nd vowel global, international uncertainty. bremmer begins the piece noting the era of american global leadership is over. do re asking the viewers, you think the era of american global leadership is over. talk s a call and we'll for about 25 minutes. illinois, icago, democrat. keith, good morning. caller: yeah, good morning. say, let's not left s this in terms of

and right. are young, a young old.on, just over 230 years every country, every nation, has period of dominance. achieved ours very quickly be it was never going to sustainable. going into the asian, more asians on the planet than us. e're going into the asian century. we just have to accept that. we can focus on america. host: anything the u.s. should -- can do or should do? something we should relinquish leadership position? caller: yeah, first of all, it to us, we ly given assumed that authority much like britain did and in the 19th

century, america did it in the th century. before that, it was spain and france. so america, what we have to do is stop with the exceptional, we no more exceptional than any the world ever. we're the youngest world power in the world. e are all from the old world countries. we have to be realistic. t is not right/left thing, it is ridiculous for our media and to say, oliticians nation except us, that's superiority. host: keith in illinois. joshua, go ahead. caller: well, i mean, the one the i might say is in article he seems to say small smaller es for countries, the game has changed, they have cyber space, can punch

more ways to shrug off u.s. pressure. the thing is the dynamic might have changed, but the principle hasn hasn't. japan punched up. afghanistan forced largest ways retreat from o straggling to guy a half-dead horse. these things stay true. the way i see it, it is not that much of a change of the equation it is a change of the appearance of the equation. how i see it. host: joshua, let me take the viewers more through ian bremmer's piece in time magazine, it came out yesterday. the december in 26th century of time magazine, in print, it is available online.

ian bremmer, if you don't know his work, president and founder eurasia consummiting firm. his piece in time magazine we focusing on. he writes, for at least the next four years america's interaction with other nations will be conviction that the u.s. leadership is good for america and the world, but by donald trump's transactional approach, this will force foes to question every assumption about washington and what washington will and will not do. adding more assertive china and russia to greater willingness of u.s. alleys to hedge their bets reached turning point. trump is not isolationist, but unilateralist and proudly selfish one. if he wanted to engage the g-7, g-8, to get things done, and he tis obvious the transition toward a leaderless

world is complete. bremmer predict side writes.on us, he no matter how long trump remains in the white house, crucial line has been crossed. the fal out will outlive his presidency. tens of millions of americans like his idea. -- in woodstock, via virginia. go ahead, mike. my er: thank you for taking call. i have called a number of times nd i appreciate c-span providing service to not only world.lic, but the my comments are these. lincoln and gettysburg addresses we should be government for the people, by the people and of the people. nfortunately, it is my view, now with this inauguration, where the multi national already had so much influence over the world, that

increased.y if we take a look at cabinet i believe that points that way. in terms of exceptionalism, our still exceptional. part need to embrace that of it, but the innovation, the science that we still produce and folks from all world come to go to our niversities and to be to the environment where that innovation can flourish, i think embrace,ing we need to but we put so much of our reasure all over the world where we still haven't adequate fertilized, if you will, our wn people, the own sxoil our own country and i think the people have to be more active to congressional leaders are doing where that

helps to lead we the people rchlt trump, i hope he will be successful, that means our country is more successful, but is evenerned that there more -- not only our country, over e rest of the world multi national corporational influence. thank you for taking my comment. host: mike, before you go, sounds like you agree with the america first approach. whatever that means that, is something you agree with; correct? to a certain degree. my ancestors came from switzerland, 1733 to lan caster, pennsylvania, on my father's side. moving r's from that boundary germany-poland around same time. immigrants nation of and we have to embrace that all the way back. people of faith, many

begins at ng care home, the charity begins at home just the personal responsibility of we taking care of our homes and our families, years old, i was an it contractor for a long time for he government, my father was naval intelligence, foreign disclosure officer, my brother foreman, we've been around the world and been exposed to a ot of other cultures, but within the context of not only trying ting america and to look after american security, but embracing those thoughts, that are necessary for we, not only in our homes, communities and our states, and n our country certainly, if we aren't care attention to, take of your family, take care of your community, ask leaders to country and your

then certainly we have others that are less fortunate. we have people in america that fortunate.uch less mike.got your point, juliana is waiting on the line for independents. go ahead. to say that t america assumed the leadership war and second world flat and else actually too weak to do it. of the cold war this, era is over. that ship is not anything you in the world. also you want to, you must want to have it because it is a lot of work and effort. and i think what should happen --this election is americans evel of, you know, the family

of your own economic situation and your own experience and your everyday life. in the morning, everybody wakes with your world leadership and it doesn't always work. sometimes it does and sometimes doesn't. , th this very serious changes attitude of oks, countries, politics and can thing else, these just be taught and unpredictable to america s position for right now. bremmer lian, ian writes, while donald trump asn't taken office yet, the incoming president and trumpism have begun to create turmoil new d n. europe, the president's full embrace of

breakfast, sets teeth on edge in his friendly and approach to russia leaves scrambling ernment for alternatives to nato. reached lowestas level and attitude toward china will bolster ties with japan and have long-term reason to resist china rise, but made harder to manage washington's relations with beijing, most relationship for the global economy. it will complicate any bid by the u.s. and china to work together or in parallel when north korea becomes a red alert which it almost certainly will. bremmer argues era of american leadership is over in his piece for time magazine came out yesterday on the web. we're asking you, is the era of american global leadership over? murph, what do you think, line for republican? aller: thank you for taking this call.

i don't know if the american the world is nd completely over. 4, 1776, a whole new exceptional era came into being. after 1945, ford spoke, we were left standing and assumed that position every since. be a swoon, it appears that america is still bubbling the 200 something years, gentleman we've elected to the high sxofs chief magistrate of has definitely the experience dealing with businesses and deal making," so it is and weteresting question had discussed this when i was teaching school, as to whether united states of america

as still the big kid on the block and students i had for 20 years seem to agree we are still if there a ecause crisis, first thing the president will ask is where are and people will ook to us for leadership and protection, so it is like a goes ss cycle, comes and and maybe we may have to step reevaluate, we will be the country that people look for o help find solutions to problems because -- host: thanks for the call. burke write its is hard to be intepgzal when the company revenue on rds of unpredictive retired people. alvin from -- al from alvin, texas. al, go ahead. yeah, thank you for the call. eraomment is no, the global is not over, in fact, huge

brand-new for us, beginning, an opportunity for america to once again shine. i believe america became great our commitment to quality of ork that craftsmanship, we were a nation immigrants coming from everywhere and joined together our skills and forces. we've lost track of that over the years and i believe with administration, we're retouch that, going to retouch our skills, we're going to reach in and grasp from the bottom again. rather than standing in line waiting for the clock to tick, we'll work that job again. host: edward, douglasville, georgia. line for democrats. go ahead. not a yes, i'm historian, one thing isretouch retouch our skills, we're going to reach in and grasp from for sure, america got a lot of

people and greedy because the one important issue warming f. we don't have humanitarian party to come then we're done as a nation. so if the major problem in this world as far as existing has got to be preserving the earth. and donald trump is not for he does not believe in global warming. so forget as a nation. power bout the because we all got to be in a the tute manner all over world. host: all right, stanley, jacksonville, florida, independent. go ahead. caller: yes, as far as america concerned, when the education -- l fell below as far as is ation in the world, that when america fell below where it need to be is for being very productive in every area of life.

it is education that make the world, not n the has ary power and america very -- big problem with are not , they addressing that. thank you. host: talking about the story, he column by ian bremmer, it comes out in the december 26 issue of time magazine, but available on tlt line. the american global leadership is over. is author of the book "super power," which came out in may of 2016. bremmer in "super power" laid three choices for america at leadership global there is independent america, which he says argues it is time declare ngton to independence to solve everyone else's problem. america should lead by example invest in america's enormous untapped potential. america ball acknowledges we can't manage

every international challenge, we must defend u.s. interest where they are threatened, that america looks beyond phony arguments about american exceptionalism with a clear-eyed assessment of strength and limitation there is indispensable america. can promote on value on which global stability increasingly dependos hyper turning inward with threatened american is what and prosperity that segment of america argues. that is from the book super column is out, went tlt line on time magazine. time for calls, david in flemmington, new jersey, democrat. go ahead, david. caller: thank you. i believe leadership is ntangible, like goodness or love or strength. it is never set or fixed. sees when the world it looks at us and how we're each other.

it is commensurate and parallels degree to which we treat each within our own country in terms of our freedoms and the ability of people to realize potential and to bring out the best in each other. so the more powerful that example of how we all behave country, not what we do externally, determines our to the world. host: that is the shining city on the hill, david? well, i'm not really one for phrases, i think it is like an individual, you -- nothing really good about you or is ing really bad about you ever permanently solved. it rises and it falls. new chance, i don't really see it as some type of achieve and it just stays that way. it is always in flux, too difficult not to be. host: flemmington, new jersey, tweets from viewers, matt

smith says america has been slowly move intoing multi sometime.or what agenda will we fight for, barkway says we are number one eyes, i suspect we are not viewed the same globally and globale, hope our era of leadership is over, it is way too expensive. cufollow along at c-span wj, if you want to conversation. tyler in south carolina, republican, go ahead. sir.er: yes, i'm 19 years old, just to give you background about myself. i didn't vote for donald trump myself. however, i disagree with ian the era of sertion global leadership is over. i don't agree with necessarily that donald trump is going to try to take this era of but to say the american global leadership is over and all the facets that go i definitely t, disagree with that. look at economic power, our well as just , as

he social magnitude that american culture has, it will take more than presidential to change that. host: and why is that, tyler? because the system is so strong? because it is about more than one person? caller: i truly believe in the american people. old, isaid, i'm 19 years interact with lots of people everyday at work and through church. i just see the good in the world don't think that one nmy wrong presidential election is going to change the of the american spirit, the american dream. if you look at how far we've

come, what we've overcome, great depression, civil rights, civil war, this is not going to be the end of american dmroebal leadership. host: tyler buford, 19 years old, appreciate the call. jeffrey in clifton, come, what we've overcome, great depression, civil rights, civil jeffrey, good morning. caller: good morning, sir. out to thee to point viewers, we are not a country of we are a country of citizens. go we realize that, we can ahead and lead the world like we are doing now. host: ian bremmer, in his column, notes, tonight expect tlt makers to provide traditional set of checks and the new as we move into future. it is not just that the gives the president great power to conduct foreign policy, it is donald trump succeeded politically where arty establishment has continually failed. as long as he remains popular ith the party voters many junior lawmakers will answer to the president rather than capitol hill. ask trump to use the bully vengeance to set

new rule and rally faith to feel follow his lead. what he write necessary his column, era of american dmroebal leadership is over. kingland, ga -- georgia, morning. caller: how you doing? theguys doing great job, by way, before i go on. host: appreciate that. i think global leadership is just beginning. here with t happens syria, syria was a beautiful ountry, it might have been muslim, but it was under control and when you went there, you saw that went back centuries, thousands of years. look at lepo.day, see is this. from germany, very rich company or any of the help ans or nato, and no

from us to solve this problem ilitary, i know we had young men over there. ut they were pulled out and we left people in civil war to itself. who was left? russia's it is on door step and now we're trying to make a big deal about russia involved, but i don't blame them, they couldn't let that go on. read history. do you think this leadership role is about to begin? a guy that when i was standing in my living room, -- and i whoed to my wife and said was this fellow that was just speaking and she said let's turn up the radio, and they signed

off with a guy named donald trump. i told her that is exactly how i speak and feel. personou think he is a you feel like can lead america into this new role? caller: i think so. will noto things, he pay attention to what other people are saying. he can let it roll off his back. most people are pretty thin-skinned, but this leadership thing that he did, calling people into trump tower, bring them up on an elevator so tv, was be seen by the brilliant because i could see who was going up to talk to him. media, whave the