so now if their goal is to what a compliment for somebody who's used to falling short of his own expectations. looks like money might not be able to buy love after all it's been over a week now and the answer us protests are still flaring up across. all this while the american government continues to funnel money into the region ahead a critical look at the cash flow. we will want to see that candidate whom we can trust will just inherently instinctively turn right always err on the side of conservatism the age old question of the media's influence over politics might have finally been solved at least in a box news case coming up we'll tell you about

a new study that accuses the cable giant of pushing conservatives even farther to the right. and put down that corn cob turns out that genetically modified corn is causing massive tumors and rats so before you launch down on your daily dose of vegetables stick around for this report. it's thursday september twentieth four pm here in washington d.c. i'm liz wahl and you're watching r t well as anti-american protests persists in the middle east some lawmakers are asking a critical question is it time to slash funding for aid overseas or maybe we should first ask why do why exactly do we give aid according to the u.s. the idea quote we provide economic development and humanitarian assistance in support of the foreign policy goals of the united states but some say the recent

protests as evidence the u.s. is falling short of these goals now senator rand paul is raising this question in congress. we need to have a debate in our country about whether we should send u.s. taxpayer money to countries that cannot or will not protect our embassy and i personally think that until we can be assured that they can protect our embassies and we will we should send him another penny he wants lawmakers to vote on a measure that would cut aid to pakistan egypt and libya. these are countries where we've seen some of the most brutal anti-american protests probably not the foreign policy goals usa id had in mind but beyond the nation cited in paul's bill the u.s. provides a to several other countries that have also seen an american protests meanwhile the aid the u.s. doled out makes up a said significant part of their budget let's take

a look afghanistan the u.s. gave two point three two billion dollars in foreign aid to the country in two thousand and twelve afghanistan's budget is estimated by the cia to be at three point three billion dollars in other words we provided over seventy percent of their budget other countries provide less stark but still notable examples of u.s. aid influence pakistan for example the country got over two billion dollars of aid from there from the u.s. their total budget is thirty nine point nine billion dollars so the u.s. contributed over five percent kenya got six hundred twenty five million dollars seven point four four five percent of its eight point four million dollars in expert enters ethiopia got five hundred eighty million dollars so they can thank the u.s. for almost ten percent of their five point nine billion dollar budget so the question we have now is just americans keep funding countries abroad that are

biting the hand that feeds them. well it turns out that members of congress are affected by media bias this is confirmed by a study that came out recently by vanderbilt university that takes a look at how the following coverage has influenced lawmakers there's a problem here where that's what obama does that's what the left does they don't want to the wealthy the job creators they. play class warfare games all the time she thinks that iran is a serious threat he's been talking about this throughout the campaign right now i'm going to go shopping now does that mean that if you're here in florida you may not like the other guys with the crazy but then i don't know if i'm on your way you're going to go do your job your job in a romney telling supporters that a large portion of the american population is dependent on government and most likely will not vote for him here's my question why is that controversial that's true. of

a study shows that the rise of fox news has pulled members of congress to the right it takes a look at the political positions of congress after fox news came to their districts fox launched in one thousand nine hundred six and this study takes a look at the stances of our elected leaders between that time and the year two thousand study face quote representatives from districts where fox news begins broadcasting becomes slightly more conservative relative to similar representatives in other districts where fox news is not present given the distinctive ideological content of fox news the effect is probably predictably largest among more liberal members. so as the media becomes less objective and more biased how will that continue to impact the way lawmakers and the american the way american people think to discuss i'm joined now by our t.v. producer rachel rachel nice to have you here yeah good to be here so there is proof now fox is making its mark on the mindset of those we elect into congress should be

him should americans be concerned about this a little bit yes especially considering that fox has been the number one in terms of ratings for broadcast news for the past ten years it's clear eddie that fox has a huge impact on the way that our political discourse is run now seeing that that discourse is actually trickled up in a sense to the elected officials themselves considering how many flaws we've seen that you personally pointed out in your reporting in terms of fox's biases i think that this is definitely something that should concern us especially if we're looking at media as a way to provide some sort of objective truth or help us figure out how our country is run now this study looks exclusively at fox news so it looks like the network is being singled out absolutely and the reason why it's being singled out in particular is for the methodology of the settee so fox launched in one thousand nine hundred six but it didn't launch nationally in one thousand nine hundred six it started in some major markets and kind of worked its way out it rippled out to

the rest of the country so this provided these researchers with a really excellent opportunity to have a control for their study figure it's difficult to determine who is having an effect on who is of the legislators that are affecting the media or vice versa so this give them an opportunity to say ok this congress person is in a district that has fox news in it and they're voting this way as compared to say the way they voted in one thousand nine hundred five now let's compare them to someone who doesn't have fox news in their district and what they were able to find is that there was actually a difference between the two of them statistically different enough to actually change the way they voted and the to make it publishable report by you know interesting you know fox. blames that they are just leveling the playing field that they are just bringing the voice to a their voice to a media landscape that is typically slanted toward the left what do you think about that argument well you know regardless of whether they're there more right then the other media sources i think that what we should think about is that this is

a study done on fox that actually we should apply to the other media sources as well right m.s.m. b.c. and c.n.n. also have an effect on the audiences who watch them on the legislators who watch them the only thing is that it was more difficult to do that study because they didn't have this unique opportunity of those. of those broadcast networks launching over time geographically in distinct locations so we should really be concerned about is thinking ok what's going on here is that when the mainstream media has these very clear biases bias cedes we see towards the military industrial complex fear of actually countering. you know state sources like the state department or the white house for fear of then losing their establishment ties that this is something that truly does affect the way that legislation is done in congress and on capitol hill it's interesting we should point out though that on fox republicans are still fair game for scrutiny. box news in fact they ask some important

questions about them let's take a listen. when he was governor of massachusetts he was known as a centrist he's conservative enough we will want to see that candidate whom we can trust will just inherently instinctively turn right the obituaries be written too early as it turns out for the tea party maybe the correct obituary should be written for the party establishment within the republican party or party centrists some important questions they're asking there so can fox news actually make people that are already on the right or that way on more conservative definitely i think there's a reason why we've heard the term rhino republican in name only come out more frequently it's because the party is becoming kind of more interested in a witch hunt of its own members that might be interested in compromising with people on the left or even just being more moderate in general and that's something that fox news has played a huge part in the shaming people towards becoming further and further to the right

and we saw during the debates it was almost like a race of who can be more conservative and we actually got one of our correspondents to the white house excuse me to congress today to ask the reaction from lawmakers to this study let's take a listen to what they said. it's absurd. you don't think there's an m s n b c decides how democratic lawmakers will do more or less than any other news media newspapers and radio and all the other outlets that are out there they all have a role to play in providing information to voters and and then having voters contact their legislators on their positions on issues i do watch fox news but i take everything into consideration and that's not the only news outlet that i get information from you know i think i think very highly of fox and the reporting that they're doing it generally is very fair and balanced. ok so they won't admit that they're personally being affected by the coverage of fox news so i guess but what we're seeing that this study is saying the contrary is it then happening on more of

a subconscious level is that is fair to say that i mean that it's certainly possible and we also have to remember that these legislators as you just saw there are people right in there already tons of studies out that show how media actually changes the way that people think when they're talking about issues even though they're in that hallowed hall in the beltway they're still just people at the end of the day watching news to try and make more informed decisions i guess we're all human right rachel some of us have more power than others that is that is true really great to have you here to weigh and that was our t.v. producer rachel carson yes thanks for having me liz. well here is a story that will make your stomach churn a french study that was just released finds rats are that are fed genetically engineered corn suffered from tumors and severe organ damage this is in the wake of a battle going down in california over big agribusiness just like monsanto and proponents of food labeling proposition thirty seven would require all foods that contain genetically modified organisms or g.m.

owes as they're known to be labeled such a move could have a major impact on what food people buy and eat to discuss i'm joined now by alexis baden meyer political director of the organic consumers association alexis is also part of the california right to know campaign that is fighting to label g.m.o. foods alexis welcome thank you so we see what's happening to rats being fed g m o's is this what can happen to humans absolutely we're seeing a huge uptick in cancer among our population diet related diseases gastrointestinal disorders allergies among kids autism all of these things could be related to genetically modified foods the studies need to be done but is there any study connecting the ailments that you just listed specifically to g m o's well the study that came out yesterday is a very important one this is the first study that's looking at the effects on rats of eating to that if we modified foods over their lifetimes human beings in the

united states are also part of the study the way the study was connected conducted they gave the rats the genetically modified corn they gave them the genetically modified corn with the herbicide that the corn is used with and they also gave the rats water that has levels of the herbicide and that are the same as levels permissible in the united states we are looking at the study exactly what has happened to these rats you can clearly see the use of fairly large tumors especially the parent. and to the side of the rats so i me and even though it hasn't been. that there aren't clear conclusive results on humans we can only presume that we would there would be a similar result in humans yet the rats had tumors in their memory glands we have a huge rate of breast cancer in this country why are we having a rate of cancer that subjecting about half of us to cancer in our lifetimes is probably because of our diet and very well may likely be related to genetically

modified foods scary stuff there and this is all going down amid a battle in california over proposition thirty seven which would require labeling of g.m.o. food and those for or against or splurging on funding this measure i want to pull up this chart here it shows the funding on both sides of those that want food labeling and you can see mostly health and organic food companies they raised three point eight million dollars but giant agro corporations like monsanto bayer nestle and coca-cola they outspent. the those against this measure drastically they raised over thirty two million dollars so i mean alexis to proposition thirty seven stand a chance when you're looking at huge spending on lobbying against it but we expect to be outspent about ten to one and we're not going to have the money that they'll have to put up a lot of television ads we're relying on the consumers who care about this issue to

spread our television radio ads via e-mail via social networks to tell their friends to engage in our phone bank we're organizing a phone bank all around the country to call california voters so we need volunteers and we need the small contributions to put out this campaign and give us up and give ourselves a chance but i think we're going to win nine out of ten people support labeling and so no matter what lies they hear even of the other side is able to drop that so. court significantly i still think that we can beat them so i hope everyone will get involved because nine out of ten people support labeling i mean that's a huge majority there why is there such a fight against getting labels on the food that we're putting into our bodies well as you mentioned it's all about money in a race like this the voters get to choose but politicians are a lot more susceptible i believe to the influence of large corporations when their

campaigns depend on raising money from companies like monsanto so congress hasn't been able to stand up to months out of but i think the voters of california can now let's say this does pass and we do get labeling on our food what do you think the consequences of that be of that will be and how will that affect the types of food we see in our grocery stores and ultimately what the american people eat. well we already see people choosing or janick whenever they can when it's available and when they can afford it so i think we'll continue to see organic growth as it already has but in europe a lot of the companies rather than labeling their food as containing genetically modified ingredients chose to take those ingredients out that would be the best case scenario and i hope that the companies work with their consciences and want to serve say food to the public so let's say this does pass in california do you think that will have a ripple effect on other states absolutely california is the seventh largest economy in the world and ten percent of grocery stores are in california so i can't really imagine companies labeling things differently for the california market than

they do for the rest of the country and let me just want to ask you to put into context how widespread g.m.o. is are how can you describe when somebody goes to the grocery store and we're looking at aisle upon i love how much of those that food actually contains g.m.o. about eighty percent of all processed foods contain genetically modified ingredients and that's according to the grocery manufacturers association and they're one of the the groups that is opposing our right to know about genetically modified foods so they admit that it's in there the difficulty is figuring out which ingredients but what i tell folks is if you avoid the worst ingredients if you're avoiding trans fats high fructose corn syrup you're going to be cutting out to most of your diet but you know it's just overwhelming than that of products that contain these ingredients absolutely and this study just came out that shows that i guess that proves or doesn't prove because of course when you buy organic

it's more expensive and a study just came out that says that just because it's organic doesn't necessarily mean that it's healthier what do you think about that claim well an apple that's raised organically and an apple that has pesticides sprayed on it is not surprising if you're again. isn't a lot more nutritious for you is still just an apple but you're avoiding all of these toxins that are probably giving us cancer and creating a whole raft of diseases so wouldn't you still to the organic apple even if you weren't convinced that it might have more vitamins and i mean pesticides and chemicals certainly don't seem to doesn't sound healthy rather keep those that out of my body of possible alexis very interesting thank you so much for coming on the show that was alexis baden mayor political director of the organic consumers association. well the biggest names in the internet are joining forces to form

a lobby we're talking google facebook and amazon to name a few of the fourteen members the internet giants are banding together to form the internet association the lobby says it's focused on internet freedom so should americans have faith that they will do just that want to discuss i'm joined now by web producer andrew blake andrew nice to see you as always a pleasure is mine you have this new law be joining forces internet associate internet and so you hear shouts of us all this jazz of yesterday as i work in and if there are. just as of yesterday on the books right down the street working in washington so because there are certain we really aren't too sure exactly how things are going to happen we're going to speculate we have to look at the records of the places involved to really see what's going to happen but it is simply a new thing there's not a lot of information out right up that's why i'm here that's that's where that's why we're glad to have you here do you think that this is a good thing for internet users i don't know it should be they're saying it's going to be the internet association is made up of fourteen different so far fourteen

different groups that are pretty much a who's who of world wide web and talking facebook google amazon e-bay a yahoo monster linked in pretty much every big name has some sort of employer in this lobbying organization what they say is that they want to take their influence and they want to take it to capitol hill and they want to make sure that we can continue to have the great friendly open internet that everyone can enjoy and to keep everything nice and great who doesn't want a great nice friendly all those adjectives that you just used and that's what they're saying they're going to promote they're not they are lobby though and a lobby does promote their own interest as we expect that or is there a danger that their interests can clash with the interests of internet users as a whole absolutely so we have of google and facebook for example or on arguably the biggest names involved here. millions of dollars every single year on lobbying on their own part so when you take lobbyist from these groups and you put them

together you're combining these millions of millions of dollars and sure i'm sure they're going to go ahead and going to rally for internet freedoms hopefully will be successful i'm absolutely rooting for them but when you look at their track record on the hill and you see what these companies have done before in and out of washington it raises some questions like for example both facebook and google have to a degree. they were failing for the cyber intelligence sharing probe protection act which you know has failed but isn't that great of a legislation if we go back to earlier and we're talking about it what that would have done was a cyber security solution that would have let the government pretty much go into the servers of third parties and take private in information from users like i mean you and give incentives to those companies for sharing and pretty much you let them go in and see everything that you're doing so while they're going to go ahead and fight for internet freedoms these are companies who've also. kind of wanted to take

away the privacy online and so that raises a whole other cold whole bunch of questions your enemies at the same company is that the flipside they did take part in that internet blackout that didn't pose i also. they were totally against those which is awesome and they are a lot people were in awesome to me but yeah exactly what really are they going to do after here and you have to look at what they've done in the past like google and facebook they they're not known for being like the the best most welcoming a heartwarming lovely entity is that there are they've done some questionable things in the past there's been like as you see investigations into google so when they're taking all this money they're combining with other money they're going on the hill and that there are lobbying for like you said to protect their own interests what are those interests you know that they're already rallying for three legged. solution that is bad for the public so are they going to start putting

those millions and billions of dollars into that we don't know it's only day two so far of the internet association so i guess we'll have to wait and see but what we do know is that these are the biggest players on the enter net where a lot of power and joining together how much power exactly do you think they'll have in influencing legislation hell of a lot i mean this is google and this is facebook google did this up for you someone to homework so let's go over this real fast facebook this year alone gave five hundred thousand dollars in contributions they includes fifty k. to obama itself ok and we go down there and google. they often given where he way way way more but if you look at the relationship between the money that they have and where they put that money and who is using that money it raises a lot of questions so google has one hundred eight lobbyists right now more than eighty of them have previously had government jobs yahoo twenty two out of twenty six of the lobbyists have had jobs boldly go where they've given money to romney

and if you give money to obama who both have major conflicting ideas about how the internet should or shouldn't be regulated so where are they going to put this money in the also when you go in look at other connections for example we have myth who actually sponsored. stop online privacy act it's also railing through the foreign intelligence surveillance act or knew all of that he and he held shares of google so obviously he's going to be wanting them to do one thing and we already know what he wants to do. i'd also raises another good question if you go back and look at who google and facebook have given money to the paper trail shows a lot of politicians have been favored by these companies who have done some other things even as recently as last week which are too favorable for online rights like that the face amendment so we're just talking about google has handed out. five thousand dollars apiece to several congressmen who have voted to reauthorize that

legislation which in turn will let the government go and continue to snoop through all of your e-mails and phone calls so might be good for internet freedoms might not be too good for privacy of like a so we're really only on day two so we're going to just wait and see i guess all right so i guess we can kind of take a look at their past actions and predict what they're going to do in the future in way to educate and i guess in a way i can't really that's what you're best at that's why we have you here i'm sure they're well intentioned the inner sort of solution seems like they're actually trying to fight a good fight but when you take money and you put it into politics i think a lot of people argue that doesn't times that can be a dangerous slippery and they have a lot of a lot of money they have to have more money than god yes. that's that's a lot of money what about cyber security what about it how do you think that they will act in terms of cybersecurity and influencing legislation on cyber secure i personally i don't think it's going to be good like i said we already know that google and facebook were opposed or i'm sorry they were supporting cybersecurity

legislation which is damaging to the public's privacy outline. and through other legislation has been passed around on the hill so if they're going to go ahead and put their money. back towards you know whatever's going to be good for them are they going to go ahead and continue to ramp up donations to these people to try to get those issues moving along i don't think is going to that good we really are going after with we're going to have to wait and see there is one thing that i do know for sure that you are going to be keeping a close eye on them i'm going to be writing all about it on the web i wouldn't be too sure of you know some flash usa that's me follow and you're blake and you're great to have you on that was the web producer here at our team thanks to a capital account is up next on our table at check in with lauren lyster to see what is on today's agenda lauren what you working on over there hi there live you know well the u.s. might be launching q e three percy of the federal reserve would you believe that japan. another country in the developed world is on cue eight oh wow that's

a lot more q.e. they've been they've been at it since two thousand and one get that far behind you know i really hope not live and so that's what we're going to talk about today how much leeway the u.s. really does have if it's following japan as a model which so many people do compare the u.s. situation to so given that what does that mean about the u.s. debt situation is this something that needs to be tackled immediately or else we may be facing a u.s. debt crisis or given the model that we see in some other countries such as japan can the u.s. keep muddling through this for much longer without having a day of reckoning so to speak we have a really exciting show live because not only is jim rickards best selling author of currency wars going to be my guest co-host today but we're also going to interview investor and best selling author john malden who is a very big name who hasn't been on the capital account show yet so it's going to be a good show lauren thanks for that update and that is all coming up next on the council account with laura lister that's going to do it for the news for more on

the stories we covered check out our you tube channel you tube dot com slash our team america you can also check out our web site that addresses our dot com slash usa and can also follow me on twitter liz wahl we'll be back here in a half hour. commission free critic ation free in-store charges free. range mims free risk free stew type free. download free broadcast quality video for your media projects and free media and on to our teeth on tom. wealthy british science.

market why not. come to. find out what's really happening to the global economy with max cause or for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into kinds a report on our.