tv Washington Journal CSPAN April 30, 2011 7:00am-10:00am EDT
economy then ed mierzwinski talks about republican efforts to change a reform bill and later sharon washington, executive director of the national briting project talks about the impact of funding cuts to her group and what they could mean to education. "washington journal" is next. host: in the papers this morning, vice president joe biden will make with henpecked house and senate leaders to work and a deficit reduction compromise. a new pentagon report reports claims of progress in afghanistan, saying that while violence remains high, the taliban strongholds are losing influence within the country. bloomberg is reported this morning that the federal trade commission is looking to probe the google dominance in the search engine industry. members of the president's c cabinet will travel to alabama
to assess tornado damage. they are looking to fema for aid and assistance. for the first 40 minutes, we want to get your thoughts on the aftermath of the tornado and other instances like flooding. your confidence in the federal government in their effort into disaster relief. we have divided our phone lines originally this morning. if you live in the eastern and central time zone, 202-737-0001. is the number. 202-737-0002 if you live in the mountains and pacific time zone. your thoughts on disaster relief and relief efforts by the federal government. we want to telephone in with your comments, you can also twitter at twitter.com and our reliable e-mail address,
firstname.lastname@example.org. this is the white house memo showing the members of the cabinet that will be traveling on sunday to alabama and mississippi. they include janet napolitano, craig fugate, tom vilsack, sean donovan, and caramels, but mr. for the u.s. small business association. they are traveling on sunday to alabama and mississippi. they will meet with families affected by the storms and will also meet with state and local officials while viewing damage and assessing the initial recovery efforts that are under way. the president was traveling yesterday to alabama to see for himself firsthand. the headline of "the washington post" --
they spoke with residents trying to sell their belongings in the aftermath -- the aftermath of the twister. this is video of the motorcade tour in the damage in tuscaloosa, alabama. this is much of what the president saw yesterday. he also had a chance to make comments. here is a little bit of what he had to say. >> the governor has done an extraordinary job with his team in making sure that the resources of the state are mobilized and have been brought in here.
i am very pleased that we've got a fema direct your in craig fugate who is as responsible as anyone to respond to a disaster of this magnitude. we already provided the disaster designations that are required to make sure that the maximum federal help comes here as quickly as possible. craig is working with the teams on the ground to make sure that we are seamlessly coordinating between the state, local, and federal governments. i want to make a commitment to the committees here that we will do everything we can to help these communities rebuild. we cannot bring those who have been lost back. they are alongside got at this point. --god at this point.
we got the town is dealing with a loss one at this point. the damage was extensive is something we can do something about th. host: want to get your thoughts on disaster relief and your confidence in the federal government doing management of disaster relief. the numbers to dial are broken up regionally. you could join us on twitter and email@example.com. we'll start with upper marlboro, maryland. what are your thoughts on disaster relief by this administration. caller: first and foremost, let me thank cspan. thank god for cspan. i want to send out my thoughts and prayers to the thousands of
people down there that need our help. i hope that america will come together and send what ever is needed to the red cross. thirdly, i want to say host: guwhat is your confidence in the government response to these efforts? caller: i think they responded excellently under this administration. you could see the difference between president bush's response and president obama. after a president -- after our president has gone through all of these attacks on not being born here or what ever, god as a way of reminding us that we are all americans. host: we will show you a video that has been offloaded to
youtube. these are areas that have been affected. we will surely you that as we continue on and get your comments on your confidence on the government disaster relief. california, good morning. go ahead caller: i think this is one of the pluses for this administration. katrina was a catastrophe. this is a plus for this administration, god bless you. host: there are photographs in the newspaper this morning were the president was yesterday. this photo was by todd sherman. it shows an emergency responders in the wreck in smithsville. that took place on wednesday. we will continue on with calls.
florida, michael, go ahead. caller: i think after a disaster like this, it is an example in which many might agree where we need a strong federal government. we need a federal government that is prepared to assist and do well by its people. i would also like to add that the states that have their hands out right away are the ultra- republicans. these are the kind of places that have continually tried to strip back our federal government. they always criticize smaller government, smaller government, but there is -- but they are the first to want assistance but of course they need it. it really annoys me that it is expected of this administration to respond so positively and favorably to them in the light
of this disaster after a day actually continued to lambaste and the little this administration. host: dallas, texas, good morning. caller: i think the gentleman a few minutes ago spoke quite eloquently. the president of the united states, he is the president of all the people. i am sure he will do the correct thing. i am really upset because most americans, republicans or whatever, they always say smaller government and they want him out of their business. now, they want his assistants. they expect -- they attacked obama and his character. republicans, you could have the tea party and government but help your own constituents in this disaster. that is my comment. thank you and have a great today. host: this is the president and alabama.
-- in alabama. here he is walking along and taking in the damage for himself. colorado springs, colorado is next, go ahead caller: thank you. everyone else is saying the same thing i was thinking. the poor people down there need help also, the republicans cut back or try to cut back on so much.. private people will not come forward and help these people down there. i think they need to give obama a lot of credit for his evenhanded treatment. i think he is doing a wonderful job. thank you so much. host: there is a historical perspective looking at flooding. you are looking at a motorcade. flooding in the mississippi prompted writers in "the wall street journal" to take a look
at some of the big floods. this goes to 1937 in cincinnati. this is a roller coaster in the background. you can see the level of flooding that has almost engulfed this whole roller coaster. filling sandbags in st. louis, another photograph this morning, and then it goes to 2011 out of missouri. a series of homes almost completely surrounded by water. that gives you a perspective of some of the damage. we are trying to get assessments of your confidence level and the federal government to meet these disaster situations. you can do so this morning by giving us a call. glendale, calif., a bill, good morning. caller: i just want to say that
i am very hopeful that now with obama in office, we want have any katrina-type affair like we had with his predecessor. host: what do you think of the reaction and response so far bike fema and other agencies? caller: if obama is true to his office, he will make sure that the people that he sends to be a disaster areas, he will make sure they do their jobs and the response is appropriate to the need. host: off of twitter this morning -- des moines, iowa, good morning.
caller: you this morning? host: and well. caller: what other corporations donations to this disaster? they complain about big government. where are they in the picture? host: what do you think of a government response so far? caller: i think it is great. they have been doing an excellent job. they are on top of it right now. host: what it are you most impressed with? caller: the quick response and their concern about how serious the matter is. host: new york city, go ahead. caller: thank you for cspan. my heart goes out to the people who lost loved ones and are going through all this catastrophe. i have a different twist.
the scale of the damage is so great. why do we have to rebuild all the time? after katrina, and after this economic bubble with housing prices and the crash, if i am one of those people who are upside down on a mortgage and something like this happens, may be rebuilding is not always the answer. there are so many homes involved. why can't people take the insurance money, resolve their sorry, mysues, i'm heart goes out to the people, but isn't there a way -- some of the families may want of doing that. employes is like new orleans where we lost all of these -- in places like new orleans where we lost all of these homes.
why can't people just take the insurance money, resolve their mortgages, and maybe do more purred and financial things for themselves and relocate to? host: off of twitter -- michigan, go ahead. caller: good morning, i feel that japan was a horrific and horrible disaster but i feel that the u.s. a should stick with the u.s. and help out with the american people here. host: are you confident in what we can do as far as really is concerned? caller: in the past, no, but hopefully yes.
bring in the food and housing and the relief that is needed. before, the government has been so stripped down that relief has been so long in coming. there is no money. people need to pay their fair share of taxes. host: of twittery jig -- illinois, go ahead. caller: i would like to know how is the government going to help this situation because we are broke. what kind of help can the government give? they say they want smaller government, smaller government and now that they have a disaster, everybody wants the
government to help them. the government should help. we pay the taxes on everything that the government wants us to pay. when we need help, the government should extend a helping hand. host: the vice president is pictured today in the pages of "the wall street journal." next week, he will sit down with various house and senate leaders.
appropriations chairman daniel in a way of a wide warned against taking further cuts in discretionary spending. we will look at other political stories as we go along. we've mainly want to get your thoughts on the confidence in disaster relief. we look at the after effects and what the government is doing. chicago, illinois, go ahead caller: our you doing this morning? host: i am well this morning. caller: this will sound pretty harsh. this is where i am at. i really hope that the whole place, alabama, mississippi, kentucky be destroyed.
i really don't care about that. they are ignorant, nasty racists. it is a hypocrisy upon the nation. i want them destroyed. host: will leave it right there. st. louis, missouri, go ahead caller: our you doing? thank you for hanging up on the other caller. our airport was almost destroyed but now it is back up and functioning again. the ex-first lady bush was in st. louis. she did not take time to visit any of the devastated areas here. she caught a glimpse of them as she flew over it when i read that, it reminded me of how they
treated the katrina disaster. they took a glimpse of that. i am so proud of this administration. i am proud of our president. he hit the ground running. without a doubt, he will find the money and put it where it needs to be and everyone will be happy with the way he handles the situation. i am proud of him. i will stand by him and do whatever i can do to help in this situation. we need to applaud this guy. he did not take a back seat at all. he hit the ground running and he is still going. that is all i want to say. we are grateful for the government and thank you very much h. host: tupelo, mississippi, go ahead caller: i am right in the middle of all this stuff going on and i would like for all the people who have been calling in
and talking about the government helping us, in the south, we help ourselves. the grocery stores are donating food. the people are donating money. the ordinary people are going to help the volunteer fire departments. we are not waiting for president obama to help us. we are hepping ourselves. i am disturbed about the attitude that people have about the south. we are not sitting and waiting while the government is coming in and hepping us. we hepp ourselves. i am planning on giving money and clothes. they will take those close and give them to everybody that needs close. the money will be donated and neighbors will help neighbors. host: what is the right role of
government in this instance? caller: i don't have any idea. i have worked and supported my daughter and educated her. she is a teacher. i never took one penny from the government. i believe i was raised that washep themselves. host: i wanted to show you this story from " the new york times." it shows a picture of ovid lamontaine andy is a key picture in new hampshire holding house parties for republicans. he is an affable conservative lawyer and potential candidates are rushing to be friend him. he and his wife are obliging by throwing house party for any serious candidate. house parties are hardly a new concept in new hampshire.
dozens will be held between now and next year's primary. i want to point to to our " newsmakers" program after this show tomorrow. we talked with the republican party chairman of new hampshire and the republican party chairman of iowa. we talked about their efforts to maintain the caucus and primary respectively while florida and other states are considering moving earlier in the season. >> could we see a christmas holiday iowa caucus or primary? >> i hope not. >> i can tell you, for myself and my wife, we don't want to be wrapping gifts and answering the door to candidates. i have been very clear with my colleagues on the rnc and iowa republicans that at the end of the day, the order will not
change. it will be iowa, new hampshire, north carolina, nevada. the other states are out of compliance and there is time for them to get into compliance. i really do hold the german as were that he is working with those states and they understand the consequences. as the father of three young kids, i am constantly reminding that there are consequences to your actions. florida doesn't get in line, that is something we need to remind them as well. host: our "news makers" program tomorrow. that is at 10:00 tomorrow on c- span. seattle, washington, you are up next. we are asking you to gauge a comment on your confidence in government disaster relief. caller: thank you. i think the people there who suffer from this natural
disaster have been traumatized. they need our support. many of them have lost loved ones. their homes have been destroyed. i am sure they must be in shock. i think the response of our government has been right so far. i like the fact that the president has gone down there, taken his team with them to assess what the needs are. it is up to the apparatus of government to do what is necessary at a time of disaster to help them. i will say that i hope that people realize that when there are disasters, not just like a natural disaster from weather, but if our economy crashes and people in the automobile industry or are losing their jobs, if there is widespread
unemployment because our economy crashes, the government needs to step in and help. we need to recognize, not just when people have a tornado or something, the government has a role and certainly can be helpful. host: members of the president's team will travel to the disaster site on sunday. those team members include janet napolitano, a homeland security secretary, they also include he is the manager for fema and tom vilsack. sean donovan with housing and urban development will be there as well. they are traveling sunday to assess damage for themselves. illinois, go ahead caller: i was
calling about the fellow who called in and asked a question earlier were made a statement that all the people who were in upside down mortgages should take the insurance money and settle up with a bag and go build somewhere else or -- settle up with the bank and go built somewhere else. i want to let everyone know that is not the way homeowners insurance works. i did not realize this either until i had to make a homeowners claim for our house being struck by lightning. a couple of years ago. you only get a percentage of the amounts that is indicated by the amount of your claim. for example, if your house is insured for $1 million and it burns to the ground, everything is a total loss, they don't write you a check for $1 million and handed to you and say have a nice day. they give you may be $300,000
and the other $700,000 is held in abeyance until you actually start construction and start to use the money to rebuild the house. you can rebuild it in a different place if you want, but you don't just get all the money right up front. that is for a number of reasons. i suspect probably primarily so that everybody does not just burn their house to the ground. what most people who are up side down in their mortgages would do. caller: i'm amazed by the amount of people that have so much confidence in this government. obama hasn't closed guantanamo bay. he has no idea how the balance the budget or reduce the national debt. he hasn't created jobs. host: and what that means for
you? caller: and you should have another line there from the people that suffered from the gulf of mexico the giant oil spill. he did virtually nothing for those people. so you should have avenue third line for the people who suffered from the giant oil spill in the gulf of mexico. you know, it was a nice photo-op. he walked around and got his picture taken. let's see what gets accomplished, ok? >> we have two lines the divided regionally. we have 10 minutes on your confidence in the government's response to the disaster relief. kentucky? go ahead. caller: yes. this morning i'm hearing a lot of hate. especially from the right wing nuts in this country. you know, seems like to me the
president's doing a good job. and the governor in alabama, everybody is praising him. and it's tough. this caller from illinois and one that hopes the town is destroyed, things like that, i just got a couple words to say about that. hey, buddy, i live right across the border from you. you know? i mean, we're in the midwest, basically. host: what do you think about the response so far? caller: i think it's been good. our governor has been great this year. i think he's done a great job. seem hike just a lot of hate. even fox news this morning said obama wasn't emotional enough. what kind of talk is that? he wasn't emotional enough? host: now rating upon efforts
against the taliban one writing the level of violence in afghanistan remains high. the number of weekly attacks hit a peak at the end of the fighting season. the number of attacks, the period of time covered by a new report was higher than a number corresponding a year ago but violence usually declines in winter. the port argues that the complex attacks are down. the final fwoit add as far as the cost of putting this report together says it was required by congress and cost -- to produce and robert gates mandated the cost of production
be disclosed. caller: i wanted to make a program suggestion. it seems a lot of folks out there don't understand what the role of the federal government is. we're asking this question this morning and we have that caller from mist pist with his talk about people down south -- well, fortunately for the south, the governor allows companies like target and wal-mart to write off the donations given to the community whether it's water or diapers or whatever it is those people need. the salvation army receives federal funding to provide support when it comes to emergency situations as well as the red cross. i'm sure the red cross is spread out in these devastated areas, trying to help the community get back on its feet.
they receive federal funds. so all of this talk about we doing it a on our own, it's just ignorant. speaking of someone on the west coast, we need our seven brothers to understand that when there's an emergency whether it's the economy or whether it's a tornado, we need stand together. stop talking about we stand on our own. we're tired of hearing it. >> a subject in bloomberg saying the commission is alerting high-tech companies to prepare for the investigation of the google search industry saying the agency said it manslaughter to
>> oregon, david, go ahead, please. caller: well, thanks. you know, we didn't have fema until 1979, and even with fema, it -- progress -- the it's still the local government's job to start out and then the state and then they would go to the federal after that. and prior to 1979, we did have disasters in this country for a couple hundred years. and you know, it always got fixed one way or the other, and it wasn't the federal government doing it.
in fact in 1,900 galveston island went under water from a hurricane. half the people were killed. and it was worse than this disaster at the time. and there wasn't one federal dollar that went there. and a year later, the whole island was rebuilt better than it was before it was destroyed. host: off of twitter. adding this, as bad as this tornado onslaught is, it is incomparable to that of hurricane katrina. melanie? caller: yes. the government i think has done well in helping. but what it needs to do is make sure the money goes to the people. fema gave the governor of louisiana $30 million to help the university down here. in new orleans.
it's still up in trailers and he has taken money and wants to incorporate it in -- the other money that -- some of it has still not gotten to the people in new orleans. if the government is going to give money, it needs to make sure that it goes to the people. because once it gets to the state, the state does whatever it wants to do with the money. that's my comment. host: here's the headline of the tusk loosea news. i've never seen destruction like this, a principal at the school. this is t president calling the devastation heartbreaking and the birmingham news along the same line, obama offers hope and comfort to survivors and shows the president walking
with the governor in alabama to assess the damage there. good morning. caller: yes. i was just calling because basically i worked in disaster areas such as south florida after andrew and mississippi in that area after hurricane katrina. and i just want to put out there that yes, there's a lot of public-private partnership money that's involved in the recoverry. one of the programs the republicans have targeted for cuts is an outfit called americorps, and these kids working for college credit and working to get this experience as is spare on the's purse, the baptist disaster relief squads
that they send down, the men nights. yes, there's a lot of stuff that people do. and you know, you can't -- to thin this out somewhat, i'm not a native-born, but i've been here all my life, you know, don't mistake the force by one-three. there's a lot of good people here. there's a lot of love for the country and some of us may be misdecided to think they can do it all on their own but they are in shock, a lot of us are. but all of us southerners are going to do everything we can but we do need the government to respond. and i got to tell you, the americorps guys, that's a hell of a program, and i sure hope they don't cut it. host: there's a story in "the new york times" talking about the u.s. in terms of shrinking
according to the u.s. census that was taken. the population in land area. it said according to the census bureau the land area peaked in 1940 at 3,554,000. by 199 it declined to 3,500 but they estimate the land has shrunk by about 5,500 square miles. not worry, though, the nation's jiographers say most is because of improved satellite imagery and things that can better distinguish land from water and give a more precise definition of what constant constitutes each.
alan, good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, sir. caller: i just want to say i think president obama has been doing a good job for all he's going through. i mean, he inherited this from bush. host: what does that mean in terms of disaster relief? caller: well, he's got a lot to look at, and we're helping all these other countries and giving foreign aid to every other country. you know, i just can't understand the republicans wanting to cut all these programs to help. host: poke atella, idaho. caller: yes. i thought the president clearly showed -- he can't raise the goods but he can help the grieving. and he can help the survivors get more stuff and that what it boils down to. they lost their stuff.
host: is a vana, georgia? go ahead. caller: yes, i'm here. i want to make a statement concerning the president going to the disaster area. i think he has done a good job, because he is somewhat concerned about what has happened in that particular area. i am glad he did -- so he can readily go back with his fema director and correct things that will help that particular area. i give him an a-plus for going there and putting in the forces that need to be put in that particular area. host: and we'll leave the calls and comments at that for our first 45 minutes. here's what's coming up later in the program. we are going to take a look at the efforts that were made
along the passage of the dodd-frank bill that enacted a number of laws that had to deal with the financial front. we have ed mierzwinski from the u.s. public interest research group. before we did let you go, wanted to let you see the coverage of tonight's correspondent's dinner. this is a yearly event we cover here at c-span starting 6:45 tonight you can see the red carpet arrivals then the president and first lady are scheduled to arrive at 8:00 p.m. tonight. we will show you past dinners to give you a accepts of what you'll experience, and then president obama and "saturday night live" comedian seth myers will both be making comments starting around 10:5.
you can see all that live on c-span. i also want to invite you to our separate c-span correspondent's page white house correspondents' association dinner webpage. and because of twitter, we will be able to post tweets from the dinner. to give you a bit of a peek into what is going on. that is part of our c-span coverage of the dinner. coming up next, we're going to change gears and talk about the impact of what's known commonly as green energy on the u.s. economy. a couple of things coming into play, a hint is it deals with light bulbs. nicolas loris will talk with us about these issues when we come back.
>> this weekend on book tv on c-span 2. panels on science, american history, climate change and the constitution and call-ins with larry flynt, sally pipes and walter mosley, just a few highlights from the "los angeles times" festival of books. get the entire schedule online at book tv.org and sign up for book the alert. -- for booknotes alert. -- for book tv alerts. >> the advancements made by the north and south. former senator and presidential candidate bob dole looks back at his political career during the nixon administration and the disputed -- election between ruther ford b. hagse
and. go to c-span.org/history and press the c-span alert button and have our schedules emailed to you. >> what i try to do is tell a story with visuals instead of words, so i'm basically writing paragraphs. they just happen to be with images. >> with four pulitzer prizes, carol guzy has won the award more than anybody. >> i think we get to experience so many parts of the human condition on so many levels. >> she eel talk more about her craft tonight on company's "q&a." go to c-span.org/podcast for more. like today, the white house correspondents' annual black tie dinner starts with red carpet roifls at 6:45.
follow along featuring polls, social media comments and live h.d. video. "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now on the screen, nicolas loris of the heritage foundation. he studies politics that could lead to energy. guest: i hold in my hand an incandescent lightbulb. host: it was mentioned there were going to be changes to this lightbulb. what changes will we see? guest: you won't see them in your department stores and home depots anymore. they are replacing them with complex fluorescent bulbs. the traditional incandescent
bulbs will not be on the market very much longer. host: what's the argument for replacing these types of bulbs? guest: mostly that we need to switch to more efficiency. it was because of a bill that was supposed to start in twelve and in 2012 and end in 2013. these bulbs are more energy efficient and more expensive. some say the energy savings isn't as great with you turning them on and off frequently and use them in areas that you don't use very often. host: now both of these changes came with legislation under the bush administration? >> yes. guest: and a whole host of bad energy ideas came under the
bush administration. host: but what legislation dealt with these? guest: this is the 2007 energy efficient security act and they put in a whole different set of energy standards for appliances and lighting including phasing out of the incandescent bulbs. host: one argument was why they are inefficient is because when you light them they produce more heat than light. guest: true. 10 you're using your air-conditioning less in time. that is true. c.f.l.'s use less heat then you're using your heating more in the winter time. so there's a tradeoff there. host: in terms of other lightbulbs that are coming to margaret, what should we know about the other types coming out? >> there's the l.e.d. emitting that could potentially compete with the curly q bulbs.
these are primarily replacing the incandescents and there's concern about the mercury problem. the e.p.a. has a laundry list of precautions to take if you drop a c.s.l. bulb. host: it's minimal, though, right? guest: yes. but they say you have to avoid the room for five minutes, turn off your central air. i think the real issue is consumer choice here. host: why is that? guest: i think consumers ultimately have a vested interest in saving money. so they have an interest in buying energy efficient products. if they find c.s.l.'s to be more energy efficient they can make that choice on their own. there are unintended consequences. generally you see a lot of appliances having quality
defects and higher sticker prices. host: so as far as the future, there's other things to consider, halogen bulbs that use 30% less energy than an incandescent and less expensive than the c.s.l.'s. there's light emitting -- they last longer and the cost is about $40 per bulb and then the b.u. one bulb using technology comparable to the price of c.f.l.'s and l.e.d.'s. so all these will cost more initially. >> yes. and when they test these on efficiency they are tested under optimal conditions and what we've seen with some of the results with retesting and independent testing is the energy savings isn't as much as the government purported it to be and when you do turn them on and off frequently, it reduces
the life span of that bulb. host: and while you're spending more initially over cost time you'll save more as far as the actual cost to use the bulb. do you follow that argument? guest: no. i use c.f.l. bulbs and i think it makes stones use them where lights are on consistently such as offices. maybe it's a better idea to use an incandescent in a clost, though, where it might take a long time to recover that cost of the higher price initially. so i think, again, this boils down to consumer choices. if they want to buy c.f.l. bulbs then that's good but if an incandescent saves them they don't have need government telling them to doso. host: so when do we see the
fadeout? guest: it begins in 2012 starting with the 100 watt bulb then by 2014 the 40 watt bulb will be off the market too. host: ultimately what does this mean? guest: that they are switching to more expensive prices and they may again save that energy later, but i think really it suggests the government can control what they buy at the market, and that's the scariest portion for me. so you see a lot of consumers hoarding the incandescent bulbs and they like 4 light and they give off, the cheaper ones and they like how cheap they are. host: you can call on our republican line 202-737-0001. or our democrats line at
202-737-0002. or independent's line at 202-628-0205. caller: i would like to see what this gentleman has reported this morning. since the republicans have won, they have muted this energy bill. and so we still have a choice of which bulbs we would like to buy. and i would suggest that he check again on what he is reporting and let us know, because the republicans have muted this bill. and particularly regarding the lightbulbs. we are still able to buy them. so thank you, sir, for letting me comment. host: mr. loris? guest: yes. we are allowed to buy them now. the phasing kicks in in 2012. and there's a suggestion to repeal it but so far it's still
in place. host: and the heritage foundation should love the new bulbs. they pushed it. guest: we do love free markets and profits and energy savings, too, and love becoming more energy efficient and we see private sector doing that all the time when it comes to saving and earning more profits. that's why c.f.l.'s and all the other ones replacing the incandescent is fine. but to me the fact that consumers are hoarding incandescents suggests a strong demand still for them and the phase out should occur organically and not be driven by government mandates. host: democrats line, go ahead. caller: good morning, sir. my comment is everybody knows the united states -- that you need energy. and the cost of energy is going up and up and up. now just think, back in the
1970's after the oil embargo, i am 40 years old and i watched my parents go to the gas pump on odd and even days. this takes realal efficiency. real stuff. and the government forced the car industry in it. they wouldn't be paying $4 in gasoline today. you'd have other technologies because everybody wants to live in a cave. but just think, it only takes one tree to go down on a power line and there goes the whole grid for a whole state. when are you going to wake up to that? guest: i think we do have energy steps, again, my an important assessment for an automobile is miles per gallon. and we have been very much improving fuel efficiency when it comes to vehicles. so i would argue consumers do
want to save and conservative energy but the price of oil and gasoline has little to do with the amount that people save when it comes to energy. host: fairfax, virginia. rich, go ahead. caller: good morning. thanks for taking our call. we have our electrical lighting system. we do a lot of decorative lighting and the whole idea of the c.f.l.'s, at first everybody thought it was such a great thing. but a lot of those bulbs are made the china and many customers say a bulb for $9 that lasts less than 30 days is not good then the compatible -- compatibility issue. if you have lighting that is not compatible with them then
you have this mess on your hands. you have customers that don't want to use them to begin with. so i'm not saying the government shouldn't come down with something, but it's something that hasn't had a lot of thought put into it and it's going to be forced down people's throat and all it's going to do is make people upset. guest: there were people hoarding them and then them not being available. host: is this something you've heard of in our industry? caller: no. you can get them. i'm not going to beat on lowes or home de beau but they are buying the cheapest stuff and the largest quantity, and the quality is abhorrent. you have one bulb that will last a year and another that will last a day.
what's your recourse? there's just a lot of -- like the guy you have on there saying -- these unintended consequences. just real quick, and i'll get off the line. jio thermal. we've talked about it. that's where you're going to get really energy efficiency and the poor people down in tuscaloosa, here's the perfect opportunity for the government say when you guys rebuild all your homes here's a great big tax credit for using alternative energy. that's the type of stuff that the american people should respond to but we're just not getting that. have a great day. god bhess you guys. i love your show. i really do. take care. guest: i think he hit the nail on the head when he said the government didn't necessarily think this through. this is a point i made before but that's a process for the market fo to let this work organically, because sometimes
when the government sets these mandatory dates they put the cart before the horse and they tried to put l.e.d. lights in trafficking lights and in the north because of the winter, they froze and people couldn't see the lights and it resulted in accidents so again unintended accidents, i think the market has a better way of sorting these things out than the government does. host: there was asked the question is there any floof saves on electric bills? >> sometimes with dimmer switches it doesn't work well and it can cause them to burn out quickly. but where the producer comes in, the producer of the c.f.l. bulbs should be the one advertising. just like they do with laundry machines and other mineses where saving money is what it's going to do if you're willing to pay a higher price.
but that's not where the government's role should be. host: as far as the government what do you make overall on the green energy products? guest: again, washing machines is a great example. consumer reports came out that consumers were actually washing their clothes twice because the government put the technology cart before the horse and the quality wasn't good so you were paying a higher sticker price and you were having to wash your clothes twice and then that would make you use more energy than before with the less energy efficient machine. sometimes they do work, but again, a lot of these are tested in optimal conditions with the c.f.l. bulbs, the statistics on the department of
energy's web site thad had -- website stated them as they were under the optimal conditions. we have the government policy, and they are more efficient and there haven't been a lot of complaints about the quality of frirgs. >> again, i think that's the role of the producer not the government. i think they have an snofe make the most efficient machine, because if they can save, they
can have a competitive advantage over the competition. so i think they are already driven by that just as automobile manufacturers are driven to produce cars with the best miles per gallon, because that's a high priority for consumers, especially in lieu of gas prices. host: our guest is nick nick -- nicolas loris with the heritage foundation. caller: i've got a couple of points. number one, i can't believe these c.f.l. bulbs suddenly became politically correct. mercury is one of the heaviest metals to be used and i've broken many bulbs just trying to get them out of the socket, and the e.p.a. has totally turned their backs on this.
obama said in order for his program to go through, our energy would necessarily have to skyrocket for his plan to come through. i don't think any of this stuff is well thought out. it's all just plitical correctness. host: mr. loris? guest: well, the e.p.a. does detail extensively on how to deal with these bulbs but whether or not the consumer follows through with the instructions is up to them. i don't think the e.p.a. would let a product on to the market that would have huge health concerns for the american public but getting back to his point about the green economy, i think that's a very valued point. when enyou limit energy prices that restricts the ability for it to grow.
if you take them off the market and replace them with pricier energy sources that's what could put us back into a double dip recession. economists are already predicting higher gas prices and as a result higher food prices are really what could bring this economy back down. host: so if that's based on petroleum, what has to change for us to make us less dependant on it? guest: well, i don't think drill here, drill now is necessarily the answer but it's a result of increased demand over the past year, and as countries are coming out of their respective recessions such as china and japan, they are using more oil. host: there's an editorial in the "washington post" having to deal with nuclear power. it makes a long argument but says america may never get as
much electricity from nuclear as france but if it is serious about cutting carbon emissions, the united states should keep nuclear on the table. guest: i think they should, too, if it makes economic sense to do so. i don't think they should make plans to build 100 new reactors in so many years but look and make sure we can permit these new license applications and get them on loin rather than having them held up in years of regulatory obstacles. so i think that is really part of the problem we should allow them to move forward such as windmills and solar panels but we shouldn't do it with mandatory dates or subsidies. host: on that, are there viable subsidies? guest: are you talking wind and solar? host: i was thinking nuclear.
guest: i think it is a viable alternative, not necessarily to oil, because that's a transportation fuel, and we only get 1% of our electricity from oil, but to increase our electricity supply, certainly i think nuclear is viable. if producers can build windmills and solar panels at competitive rates and provide low-cost electricity, i think that's better for consumers, but it shouldn't be done through government subsidies, because then you're just doing a price your -- host: how would you rate earths to date? guest: not great. the reason being is that he assumes that money comes from santa claus or the sky. and when you take money and taxpayers' money and subsidize green jobs, that money could have gone elsewhere into the economy into more productive
use. so subsidizing green jobs was misallocateding it from more competitive uses. so not only are you misallocating labor and capital to build these but also forcing pricier electricity on the consumers right now. host: so should green jobs remain in the private sect center guest: yes. the more the government gets out of the way, and again, for all energy sources, the more it allows these resources to be moved more productive use and promotes competition and benefits the consumer through lower prices and that's how we can rebuild our economy. host: waldorf, maryland. caller: here's what i don't understand. the heritage foundation is so -- government subsidies for
alternative energy sources. but we have subsidized the airline industry. we subsidized the ag industry. we subsidized the pharmaceutical industry. we subsidize our highways, you know, our airport construction. we subsidize the energy companies. all of our big businesses have been subsidized. and you know, states like colorado, montana, that have low population bases, if there had not been government subsidies they wouldn't have them because they could not afford them as a state. i'm thinking along the appalachians when we subsidized the electricity and you know you know we brought lower-cost
cable, because it was in the interest of the cable companies to get concessions in rural areas, because they didn't have the population base, and it was more expensive. so here's what i don't understand. here's the air damage organization. they are subsidized, the heritage foundation, they are subsidized by anonymous big, big donors with special interests, so i would like to know why it's so important for him for this one area alternative energy not to receive any subsidies? and thank you, and i'll take your answer off-line. guest: well, we have 700,000 paying dues members, so it's not just a few big donors who drive our program. maybe roads are a different story because they are a public good. but we are not supportive of supporting subsidies for nuclear or gas either. we think, again, this is where
we want the market to compete and the government innovate and so it's not just that we're picking alternative energy. but there have been a lot of subsidies given to alternative energy through this legislation. a lot for ethanol and biofuels that we just fundamentally don't agree with. host: chuck on our erepublican line. how are you? caller: good morning, ped. i have been in the service station business for years. one point i want to make on the before i get to the energy thing, two things affect the price of gasoline and also the consumption of gasoline. one, people don't realize that the revapor pressure, which is lower in the summertime and higher in the winter time because of carbon emissions, you fill up your tank april
through october, you're losing 2.5 to 3 miles per gallon because of the revapor pressure. also it goes up between nine and 14 cents per gallon because it's more expense i to produce this gasoline in the summertime. think about the number of miles how much we're paying for this revapor pressure lower emissions gasoline in the summertime, think about what that's doing as far as the cost per gas lynn per trip for the average consumer. the second thing people don't realize is between march and the first part of april, all the refineries are doing maintenance and having to take and make sure they get all the winter gases out of their tanks. all these thanks have to have turnover by the end of april or else the octane levels won't be correct for the department of energy who go out and test all these tanks to make sure they
meet spessifications for the octane readings. my first point is the first thing that came out of the mouth on this program this morning was that these lightbulbs were passed under the bush administration. let's remember in 2007 congress was taken over by the democrats. and they are the ones that passed that law with these bulbs back in 2007 for this energy efficient sifment host: mr. loris? guest: true. and president bush did sign it into law. he does make a good point that refineries have to switch from twoirnt summer tanks it adds a lot of factors that you can attribute to higher prices. host: winter haven, california. patty, independent line. caller: hi. boy, so many things to sy as
i've been waiting here. first of all, the last republican talking, he doesn't have -- he does have his expertise but what i heard is -- we need to get away from cars as our only source of transportation. we need many sources of transportation, and as long as we keep trying to piddle with the car, we're passing up other opportunities. that's my real point. and the lady before that hit the nail on the head. these days right now especially, there is so much propaganda and out and out lies being told to people. and i think people really need to start looking at things for themselves and not just listening to what somebody says, because there are actual lies being told. and -- can i finish my accident
in host: we are trying to get some other callers. caller: my question is you were saying the independent studies show they are not as efficient. i would like to know what those studies are. guest: i don't remember off the top of my head. i can certainly have them put on the website. but, you know, this is you know, part of the problem with the government mandatory dates is that they rush them in and put them into place too quickly. and do we need transition away from cars? i think we do when the market tells us to. there's a lot of infrastructure and money being allocated towards high-speed rail. they say that change things and we point china and them doing things and china's rail has been a huge cost overrun and debacle even when it's been largely controlled and subsidized by the government. and i'm fearful if we're trying
to get off cars, something similar could happen here and we waste taxpayers dollars. i think there's some oversight. we do need to make sure our nuclear plants are operating safely. i think there's less for the government to be done in terms of what we should build and why. and they are trying to do a lot with electric vehicles and subsidize consumption with electric vehicles. there's a tax credit for natural gas vehicles. i don't think that's the way to go because it's a misallocation of funds and makes these things artificially cheaper to build. host: so you're saying electric vehicles don't work? guest: not right now, because they are not cheap enough to
build. when they are cheap enough to compete with the internal combustion engine and whatever entrepreneur figures out how the make an economically vyible alternative to the regular internal combustion motor, they are going to make a lot of money. they are not going to need subsidizing from the government. caller: one of your previous callers made similar remarks -- there are certain installations where c.f.l. bulbs cannot be used. they are known to cause fair tos or be a fair to hazard. and speaking of quality control, there was a
manufacturer i believe called globe, ironically, that sent out a bunch of bulbs. they actually shorted out and basically exploded. and here we have the mercury concern again. we talk about mercury from all these other places, and now we're bringing it in our homes. you also addressed halogen. and i think anybody can tell you halogen bulbs are a terrible fair to hazard. -- a terrible fire hazard. i got out of my chair, and the lamp swung around. it didn't start burning. but you know, smoking actually. i looked in there, and ran in
there and moved it real quick, and there was a nice burn mark on the chair. fortunately, chair was fire retowardn't. host: we'll leave it there, caller. caller: he just provided a few -- guest: and again, he just provided unintended consequences and those suffering from especially leaptic seizures reportedly suffer more seizures because of the different lighting it emitts. one of the first lessons of economics is beware of unintended consequences. and we're seeing it first hand. host: reno, nevada. caller: good morning. i'm an electrician. and i'm wondering if the nuclear waste becomes property
of -- if you're getting subsidies why are we subsidizing nuclear energy? it's an inefficient process. here we are subsidizing those while private interest is making profits. first off, if you, you know, put them in clock-wise and take them out counterclock-wise carefully, you're not going to break them. is everybody concerned about all the other fluorescent bulbs in most businesses? and they are recycleible. and when you go back to the coal plants which powers most of the electricity in the united states, how much mercury output do we save there by using these bulbs. guest: you're right. nuclear waste is a huge problem and our position is we should
remove the government control of the waste and put it into the private sector's hands but they have been paying the government a certain rate. there was a law that said the government was supposed to take title of this waste. they have not even though private industry has built into the cost they stride rate payers, noun collect that waste. so it's not a subsidy paid by the government. it's basically the rate payers or consumers are paying it to the government. they have not done anything with the nuclear waste and as a result these companies sued the government and won so we're losing out on a few areas which is all the reason to put it into the hands of the private sector and let that determine what should we do with the waste? host: why are we in this environmental mess if you stay
premarket -- is the solution? guest: i look out here and see trees and clean skies. the result of economic prosperity and the result of this working has made america one of the cleanest nations in the world. talking about greenhouse gas emissions, that's a whole other story. but that's a byproduct of economic activity and i don't necessarily see -- i see america having a -- places like china have real economic and environmental concerns and i look at our country as being an opportunity and area where other countries should strive to be like our environment. host: we have about seven more minutes with our guest. martinsville, west virginia. karl is on our independent line.
go ahead. caller: good morning, gentlemen. we switched to c.f.l.'s in our home about three years ago, and they do save energy. it cut our electric bill approximately in half. however, these c.f.l.'s do not work outside in the cold. my second statement, how does the heritage foundation feel about the $30 billion president obama is going to give the nuclear industry? guest: and again, that's a very important point. c.f.l.'s saved those consumers money but to not use them outside is a personal choice. i have problem with the government telling me which to choose. we feel that the government poses a real risk on the nuclear power and a result -- it was a government-imposed -- we're not imposed of an
expansion of loan guarantees. there's some already in place from the 2005 energy bill. we don't think they should be expanded by any means, because it is a subsidy. host: vancouver, washington. republican line. michael? caller: yes. this is mike mcmahon. i wanted to comment a concern with the new hybrid cars. i think it's become a great idea. as far as electric cars we have a problem, especially when we bet these disasters happening where you're not going to have the terminal feed to go to and be able to get out of town to the point where if you have to go over a certain amount of mileage. that's my comment today. guest: yes. a lot of tech in a logical challenges with the electric vehicle and they might make -- again, we should have a choice
when it comes to which kind of vehicle we want to buy as well, and for that reason. when the government subsidizes one industry over another, it chooses that we should go down that route when it might not be the best idea. we see that with natural gas vehicles, things of that nature. i guess that's why we support the government getting out of the way and allowing the consumers to decide which vehicle they want to use and why and where? host: billy, democrat line. caller: yes. in 1982 the county of los angeles had an energy conservation project which started which i was a supervisor for crew that mapped and redid light fixtures in the county of los angeles. in the first year it saved over $30,000 on the energy bill at the administration and then it expanded all over the county of
los angeles. and it saved millions in the long run in energy conservation. with the cleaning up of light fixtures and no left illumination. there was only one office that was not changed, and they kept warm white lamps. and that was the supervisor. and we won a national county's award that year. guest: well, that's great and a great testament that energy efficiency savings that can be gotten from these products and again, i'm not denying the fact that these bulbs are more efficient than traditional incandescents. i just have a problem with the government telling me which ones to buy. >> some complain when they have wells outside the incandescents
helped them from freezing but now they have to buy a heater in addition to the c.f.l. bulbs. host: jim hinds says this morning that a cleaner environment today is the result of efforts and standards implemented years ago. nature ain't a light switch. guest: yes. we've had laws in place for decades and the e.p.a. and clean air act has been around for a long time. but if you look at the trends of your traditional air pa luten'ts, they have been decreasing over time before these laws and regulations were in place. again, energy efficiency and profits are not usually exclusive. you see water bottles have smaller plastic caps now.
nobody provided a mandate saying they should have smaller plastic caps. yes, they use less plastic and it's probably better for the voirlt and that's where things work. host: could you make an argument that's the argument to prevent further regulation upon an industry and they enacted their own standards because they didn't want regulation to come down the line? guest: maybe. but wal-mart is an example where they implement changes that because it saves them money but not for near of regulation or standards. i was in wal-mart and the lights were a little duller in the freezers until i opened them and then they became brighter. so again, that's not a driver of a regulation or that they
necessarily want to save energy. it's the fact that they are saving energy, because it saves them money, and that helps, because the consumers can then benefit through lower product prices. host: jim on our republican line, go ahead. caller: yes. it's very important. people have to industrialize importance of the old lightbulb. every mobile home had a well and a pressure switch on it. and you needed to put a metal bucket with a lightbulb down there to make enough heat on it so it wouldn't freeze, the pressure switch wouldn't freeze. that was one example. in places we put a lightbulb where a pipe was exposed and you couldn't get insulation. also people that had homes that the older homes, if you had a fish tank in an area where say it was and some of these people
>> president obama has announced a number of changes to his national security team with current c.i.a. director leon panetta replacing robert gates as defense secretary and general petraeus to head the scray. track their careers on line. search, watch, clip and share. it's washington your way. >> now available, c-span's congressional directory, a complete guide to the first session of the 112th congress. inside, new and returning house and senate members with contact information including twitter addresses, district map and committee assignments and information on the white house, supreme court justices and governors. order on line. >> as promised, our guest of the u.s. public interest group.
their sclsurem advocate. last year, a lot was made with the passage of dodd-frank the financial reform bill that went into law that was signed by the president. what's the status of that law as the certain elements are concerned? >> well, congress is scomplplementing the new law which was passed after in 2008 of course the economy collapsed. worst collapse since the banks caused one in 1929. and the law is very complex. it deals with too big to fail banks, with the safety of banks, with investor protection and it creates new consumer protections. so it's being set up by the regulators. parts have taken effect, parts are being set up right now. >> the parts that have taken effect include? >> well, as of the day the law passed on july 21, some of the requirements that banks have certain capital standards, some of the issues have taken effect. but most of the law requires the regulators to impose new --
issue new regulations. and so there have been hearings from industry and consumer groups and others about how those regulations should take effect. probably the most important part of the law from the stand point of consumers is that one reason the economy collapsed is banks had engaged in predatory practices, credit rates that were unfair, tricks and traps, predatory mortgages, putting people into mortgages that were really unfair to them and that they qualified for something better. and even on your deposit account banks had overdraft fees that were gouging consumers. and so congress established a new consumer financial protection bureau but it doesn't open for business until july 21, and so starting from nothing they've already hired 200 people and they're preparing for the rollout of the full agency on july 21. it's the first federal agency that has only one job, protecting consumers. the other bank regulators protect the banks as well.
>> and the person who is heading up that effort? >> elizabeth warren, a professor from harvard who has devoted her entire career to investigating the effects of unfair practices on the middle class came up with the idea and is setting it up for the president. >> as far as where it is due to come on line, is that still the case or is there going to be delays? >> well, if we had our way, if things go as planned it will take effect on july 21. but congress is considering delaying the agency, defunding the agency, and weakening the agency and there will be votes this week in a subcommittee on some just incredibly outrageous proposals to take one of the best ideas in years and tear it apart. >> before we go on to the meat of those proposals, ms. warren was on the daily show this past week talking about those efforts and was asked about the pending legislation. here's how she put it. >> right now there are bills
pending in congress to delay the agency, to defund the agency, to defang the agency, make it toothless so it won't get anything done. and bills in both the house and the senate to kill the agency outright before it is ever able to take one step on behalf of the middle class families. >> and one ofert efforts, if i -- efforts, if i understand it correctly is leadership. it comes down to one person. that could change into a board of people? >> the original idea was that there be a -- congress passed the law that created it as a director which makes it equivalent to the big regulator that imposes safety and soundness rules on the banks. you have the occ has one director and we wanted this age stoy have one director. the situation is one proposal would dilute it down to a commission. now, we're getting read dwroy start up.
we're 83 days from july 21, and they're meddling with its entire structure. that's the problem. >> as far as the proposal who is spear heading this effort? >> i think the unbelievable thing is that the big banks that caused the wall street crisis are all supporting the effort. the chamber of commerce is supporting the effort. the effort to change it to a commission is being pushed by the chair of the house financial services committee mr. spencer baucus of alabama. and there are other bills in his committee as well. they'll consider them all in votes. >> why the concern over a committee rather than one person? >> i think the concern is that you are taking the agency and changing its structure right as it's getting rolling. it is trying to get set up. we would have the president have to nominate five people. they would have to get through senate. and they would have to get started. it would delay the agency even further. if this were done back when the bill was being considered -- and it was discussed while the bill was being considered, and
it was ultimately rejected, it might have worked because then there would have been some planning. but we need a strong director to compete with the occ, the agency that failed us. but we also don't need the agency to be wrecked while it's still being built. so there's two issues. >> as far as the director should elizabeth warren be that director? >> absolutely. i don't think there's any leader of any civil rights or consumer or labor group in the country that doesn't think that professor elizabeth warren is the first and the best choice. it is going to be a fight in the senate if that fight is waged in public with the people of the united states participating, i think she has a very good chance to win. but she has not yet been nominated. no one has. >> does she have supporters or strong supporters within the white house and democrats on capitol hill? >> well, i think she does. i think the president has been a strong supporter. the secretary said some very positive things about her the other day on capitol hill. she has many friends.
she has some people that say they would never stand for her. but we think that she has the best chance. and she would be the best director. >> as far as the vote is concerned, that's scheduled for next week? >> the vote on the director is not scheduled because no one has been nominated. the votes on whether the -- before a director is even nominate, they want to change it to a commission. before a director is even nominated, they want to kill the agency. they want to make it easier for the other regulators to take away the agency's consumer protection rules. so there are a lot of votes. but the vote on the director won't occur until someone is nominated. >> our guest, mr. wins ski of the public research group with us until 9:15. if you want to talk to him about the financial reform law the votes pending that could change things. if you want to give us a call, the numbers are on the bottom of your screen.
also you can send us an e-mail and twitter. one more thing. something next week concerning a company and how much they have to disclose as far as c.e.o. pape. pay. >> the banks and other big companies in the united states are also pushing a vote that will occur in tuesday on the house financial services committee to weaken another provision of the wall street reform act. the law says that a company will have to disclose the ratio between the c.e.o.'s pay and the middle employee's pay. half make more, half make less. they're claiming this is a bureaucratic nightmare. it's ridiculous. they simply don't want to report what i calculated with one spreadsheet calculation this week was that chase bank's jamie diamond makes $19 million a year.
the average american makes $49,000. he makes 424 times what the average person in this country makes and companies don't want to report what their average -- what their median employee makes compared to their c.e.o. it's a piece of information that tax parse, investors, and consumers should have. ? >> because? >> because it makes a difference in the way that a company is looked at. if you don't know how much you're paying this guy or this woman, you don't have any real idea of how it compares with other companies. it's a very simplele way to say here's a company that's doing well that's only paying its executive 50 times what it is paying its median employee. here's another company that's not doing so well. why are they paying their chief executive 600 times? it's a very important and easy way for investors to make choices about where to put their money. >> is the disclosure to the investing public at large?
>> it will be reported for public companies. but anybody will be able to get access to it. >> isn't it more important for the shareholders? >> it is absolutely important for the share holders. but i think that shoppers will also want to look at it. they may not want to invest in a company that is paying some fat cat 600 times what they're paying their basic worker. >> that's basically it. i think it's important to everybody. >> who introduced this amendment and the vote on tuesday? >> the vote on tuesday is a new representative, nan hayworth of new york, wood stock, i believe. and the original proposal i believe was by senator robert menendez to insert this into the wall street legislation. and it's supported by again labor groups, consumer groups and investor protection groups of all sorts. >> our first call for you comes from hilton head, south carolina, republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning.
host: go ahead and mute your television. caller: good morning. i had a question about frank and d.o.d. weren't they the ones that started fannie mae and freddie mac and the procedures for them to evolve to have the meltdown that we had? and then now they're going to run, and they're running the regulations with the new law that they've put into congress and why now -- why trust those people at this point? you know, since they let it get to the level that it was at to begin with. and the rest of the country is -- you know, it's just in turmoil because of their regulations. because their laws are going to go in effect today. and i don't quite understand that. thanks. >> well, there's a new narrative being pushed by a number of opponents of wall street reform and they're claiming that fannie and freddie, the housing operations
that provided liquidity and were partially government regulated, partially government backed, and partially investor operations, they had a very complex relationship, they're blaming them only for the crisis. and most people think that's just a false analysis. by the way, senator dodd is no longer a senator but mr. frank is the ranking member of the house financial services committee. >> host: st. joseph, missouri. you're on with our guest. democrat's line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. under the dodd frank, isn't that law that's going to take effect on july 21, doesn't that make the banks now not too big to fail? also, doesn't it deal with speculators getting in there and jacking the prices up and also elizabeth warren is the right choice for that job and i know she's a democrat.
thank you. guest: i think the caller is exactly right. the wall street reform act addresses a number of issues including preventing too big to fail, including trying to end speculation in the markets that raises prices of oil, it raises the prices of food, and it also as we've discussed creates the consumer financial protection bureau an idea of professor elizabeth warrens. >> georgia, you are next. howard, independent line. caller: yes, sir. for years i was heavily blaming the democratic party and i'm part of a growing number of people that are equally disgusted with both the republicans and the democratic party. i have a question. the people that bum bled these mortgages and gambled them away on the stock market, i have not heard anything about one of them being prosecuted for this
stuff. why are these people not held accountable for the disaster that they have created? guest: i think that's a very good question by the caller. and i think that anybody would agree with him that there needs to be a much more aggressive posture towards bringing these people to justice. there are some real problems, however, with securities fraud and these cases, and matters of proof. the business lobby, the chamber of commerce has gamed the system for so many years, it is very difficult today to bring these people to justice. they've also taken away the rights of consumers. this week, the supreme court made it much, much harder for consumers to band together to protect themselves when a company like a banks or a cell phone company takes small amounts of money from each of them. so you have to look at what's been happening in washington with all these vast amounts of corporate money they have
changed the laws so that you don't make -- it's just not easy to put the bad guys in jail any more. host: the huffington post has this. guest: i think that mr. frank is right that it's taking a little longer for the agencies. but they're doing and thorough and thoughtful job and they're doing it with less money than they thought they would have. other agencies that are under the congressional appropriations process haven't gotten enough money. the securities and exchange
commission, the new derivatives rules will be under an agency called the commodities futures trading commission, and they've had their budgets weakened not as much as we would like but they're working hard and that's really the step. in terms of the consumer bureau, i have to tell you i'm over there visiting and making suggestions to them as are other consumer advocates from americans for financial reform which is our coalition, on a regular basis. i look at them like a new peace corps, or something like that. the division or the work that they're doing, the ideas that they have over there, it's just tremendous how hard the agencies are working to combhplement these laws. >> host: if these various things in the house go on and get passed, what's the likelihood in the senate? or guest: i think the senate is a place that will slow things down. chairman of the banking committee has made some very strong statements theapts to protect wall street reform an he said that some members of
the senate and the house want to let wall street run wild all over again. i agree with senator johnson on that and he will work hard. other leaders of the senate i think will work hard. but believe it or not, we have over 20 senators, are sponsors of a bill to absolutely repeal the entire law. it's astonishing. they haven't forgotten what happened, pedro. they reject that the banks were responsible for destroying the company, which is absurd host: i ghess what i'm asking if they pass in the house is it a dead issue because it goes to the senate? guest: the senate will probably kill it but it's astonishing that it will even get that far. but what happens in the house is part of a strategy to for them to try to win later on, later on. they're hoping to win in 2012 and they're hoping that after 120e they'll be able to pass it in the senate. host: los angeles, california. republican line. john. caller: my big concern in all
of this is for the average saver. now, interest rates on savings accounts and money market funds are well below 1% and in addition to paying people nothing, this sort of gives them a reason to search out higher risk in hopes of getting a higher return. so that puts them back in the stock market perhaps for a lot of people don't belong. now, three years ago -- it's been three years since the federal reserve took the interest rates pretty much down to zero for companies to borrow money at next to nothing. so they're not going to do anything to help. should there be perhaps a rise like a government subsidized u.s. savings bond or something where small savorers, say under 100,000 or under a million can get a decent return on their money without having to put it in very risky things? guest: i think the caller
raises a very good question, and there's no question that monetary policy of the federal reserve is part of the issue here. it's not only regulation. it's monetary policy as well. i think it's an interesting proposal. it's one that should be looked at. people should also understand that if you're chasing just better rates on deposit accounts, that there are a lot of questionable offers out there. i mean, if a deal sounds too good to be true even if it is insured it may be too good to be true. it may be from an institution that is looking for fast cash because it may be in trouble. host: this goes back to our discussion about c.e.o. pay. the twitter comments says guest: how much money you're allowed to earn? host: i guess this goes back to c.e.o. o pay. >> it's a
>> very good point. but nothing in the law caps how much they can earn. there are other provisions of the law that do say that executive compensation has to be reviewed by the government for financial firms. but nothing in the law prohibits a sports star or a corporate executive from making a lot. but shouldn't it be disclosed if the company is publicly trade snd and particularly if the company is under the government's safety net. host: orlando, florida. good morning mark. democrat's line. caller: hi. this is mark. as i understand it, d.o.d.-frank, one of the main portions of dodd-fwranchinge is that they're supposed to put in regulations to regulate on exchanges the derivatives market. and anybody that's been a student of this like i have been has seen that these black box markets that are completely
unregulated were largely the cause of this cascade of failures that nearly brought down the financial system. now, as i understand it, dodd frank is supposed to address it and put the ctsc in charge of regulating these markets and there is some sort of time line for that. do you know anything about that, please? guest: it's a very good question. and what we had in the financial system is we had the regulated banks that were making risky decisions and they were investing in an unregulated derivatives market. and the commodities future trading commission, an agency most people may not have heard of, was gin new responsibilities to take all of those trades and put them on regulated exchanges. we think there's a lot of loop holes. we think there are a lot of issues. with you we do think overall the provisions was very, very positive. but i can tell you that around the corner here from the studio
there are probably some industry lobbyists waiting in line to get into the building on monday morning -- i'm kidding of course but they'll be there monday morning, who want to weaken what congress has done. so derivatives reform prevents the banks from investing in shadow markets. the shadow markets where where dwivetives used to be traded. they should be traded on open exchanges. if you have transparency, you have accountability you have the ability to track prices, prices will be lower and products will be safer. host: one more aspect of this, off of time magazine. could you further explain.
guest: yes. the visa and mastercard on behalf of the biggest banks primarily get a 2 cent tax on every dollar that you spend with plastic. so when you go to the store or go to the pump, you are paying 2 cents to visa and master card through the prices that you pay. let me say it another way. the merchants pay so much to the banks. they can't negotiate it. they pushed for a provision in dodd frank that allows the federal reserve to regulate just the debit card part of the interchange fees that they pay. they think that consumers will ultimately benefit because right now cash customers at the store or at the pump subsidize rewards customers who are arguably much better income people. so there's a fierce fight going on if you ride the metro you see the ads, the banks are trying to push back and kill this. the banks claim they're all
about providing fairly cost services to low income people and this will take away that opportunity. the banks have never been about providing fairly costed services to people. it's absurd. i think the marchents will be forced to pass along the savings that banks have not passed along because march nt business is very, very competitive. you go to retail, you see a gas station and it's got one price. you see one on the other side of the street. it's got another price. you go to the lower price. they lower on a daily basis. visa and master card haven't lowered their prices for years and they haven't innovated. and i think they're in trouble by the way because we've got these new cell phone payments coming in that might cut in. but right now they're making money. 2 cents on every plastic dollar. the merchants pass it on to the customers. host: if i'm a consumer, i have to pay visa 12 cents or
something like that? guest: the merchant does but he passes along the cost to you. think about it this way. if you have half of your customers using plastic, that means their costs to the merchant are 2 cents per dollar higher. that means he has to raise his prices to everybody 1 cent. host: is there an effort to change this? guest: that's what i'm saying the. the visa and mastercard and the big banks are trying to roll back a provision of dodd frank that requires the federal reserve to limit the interchange on debit cards. host: pittsburgh, pennsylvania. jackie, republican line. caller: you know, i'm watching all this dodd frank stuff and all these regulations and it really bothers me that people actually think that it's going to do any good. i moon, the government is trying to regulate the banks. who is going to protect us from the government? i mean, when you have a government that's borrowing $189 million an hour, it's
absolutely insane to me to think this is going to do any good. in fact, i've heard mr. frank said, i don't know, a few years ago that freddie and fannie were great. and then it crashed. perhaps when i see freddie and fannie taken care of, and the government starts cutting a limb spending, york we need any new agencies. i think we've got plenty. host: guest: all i can say is that three years ago the u.s. economy collapsed because banks were involved in risky derivatives practices and they were piling on profits based on predatory mortgage lnding, predatory deposit account, overdraft practices. we had an era of unregulation. millions of families are without jobs, millions lost their homes and trillions in retirement savings were lost. and as part of something else that congress did, congress has basically stopped fannie and
freddie. they've put them under government receivership and they are dealing with the problem, which is not a democrat-only problem. fannie and freddie was a congressional problem. and who watches over the government? the public does. but more and more, with decisions of the supreme court saying that money equals speech, the public, you and me, have less power than the powerful corporations do. and that's why we need to change the law. that's why we need to fight back and that's why the public needs to watch congress. congress needs to watch the regulators. . .
they didn't do that job of protecting has. who does the director report to it? the director the consumer financial protection bureau is nominated and reports to the president. host: how does it exist as a physical entity? guest: the implementation team is part of the department until july 21st. after that it becomes an independent bureau of the federal reserve board. it is in the federal reserve but not under them. the federal reserve board members cannot meddle with the
cfpb. there is a circle -- a separate report regulators that can mess with them and it would make it easier for those regulators to overturn the consumer decisions of the cfpb. the americans for financial reform also oppose the bill. host: who is on that board that could overturn that decision? guest: all by nature regulators have won a seat, so the fdic, the federal reserve, the occ and other regulators as well. host: to overturn would just be a majority vote? guest: currently is it a two- thirds vote with a high standard that the rules must threaten the economy, threaten the financial system. we think that is reasonable. we do not want any individual
regulator at the beck and call of a regulated business being able to influence a simple majority. and no other bank regulator has a veto override. no other bank regulator has a cap on their budget. all of the bank regulators get their budgets from fees from the banks. the consumer bureau gets their budget from the front row reserve. their budget has a ceiling. none of the others do. it is already very well regulated. host: a few more minutes from our guest. next caller, go ahead. >> you may recall the country by iceland had a healthy economy while they had a private-public banking. after going to the privatization, but it went rapidly down the toilet. i was wondering if you had an opinion as to whether or not
there will ever be a public drinking in the united states, we maintain the private banking system that allowed competition from a government bank. guest: in very interesting point. north dakota has a state-run bank. i'm not familiar with the details, but it provides one option. the caller mentioned iceland. the economy award winning movie "the inside job" which talks about the crisis, leads with iceland which was based on the fact that they got into a lot of leveraged financial products like the derivatives and others the same way many cities, communities, states in the united states and other public investments -- german bonds also got stuck in that mess. mr. baucus, the chairman of the committee, is supporting
weakening the derivatives even though the county from which he is elected representative in congress is nearly bankrupt because they financed their sewers with wall street derivatives. host: from michigan, on the republican line. go ahead. caller: my main question is i'm watching a gentleman who has never made an honest dollar in his life telling me what the government should and should not read doing for me. i am 52 years old and the banks have refused me at times, my fault not theirs. summerlike you, who has never worked on a straw in your life, you have never produced anything. why should be listened to be wasting our time darks guest: all we want to do is let the banks that are trading consumers fairly have a fair shot in the
marketplace against the banks, not just the banks but the payday lenders and others who are treating people. you are fortunate that you always gotten a good deal. chase bank, they just paid $57 million in penalties for cheating service members, military families, breaking the law. we have banks that are breaking the law in the army military families which is why the new regulator has a special role in protecting military families. the wife of general petraeus is working for the bureau because she believes that the banks, payday lenders, car dealers, and others have treated these families have unfairly. senior citizens have been treated unfairly. millions of consumers paid to much for mortgages because they were cheated by a system that was on regulated. i will keep doing what i do because i believe in in host:. albany, new york. you are next from the democratic line. caller: thinking for c-span.
it is the most amazing and honest window into how we think as a nation. i applaud that. the previous caller, i sympathize with how he feels, but it amazes me how people are willing to vote against their own interests, but on to the main point here. in the original savings and loan meltdown, a bunch of guys had gotten together to put together an internal controls structure that informed everyone in the banking industry that you should be alert when things happen and risk managers became people of the interest in all of these financial institutions. once these rules were set up in
the previous iterations when we had the bank fallout, the ceo's were telling the risk managers and their internal control officers to bypass laws and a lie to their customers in do these things deliberately in order to maintain their profit margins. if they did not know what was coming down the line, then they should not have been sitting in those offices in the first place. guest: after 1929, congress established the fdic which established the securities and exchange commission. it worked very well for 50, 60, 70 years. the deregulation in the 1980 party led to this climate in the savings and loan industry was run by people who are putting money in their friends pockets and doing "wink, wink, nudge,
nudge." in 1999, congress deregulated again which led to the current crisis. we are hoping that this reform, which is more like they did after 1929 will work to protect the public. host: does the set of of the consumer protection board change at any of the other entities in government that the with banks such as the fdic? guest:no, and they will all be working together. the problem with the old regulators as they did not work well with the states. the way that the new law is structured, the state attorney general's regain a lot of the authority taken away by the figure -- federal regulators years ago that contributed to the crisis. the consumer financial protection bureau sets the rules for the entire financial system. banks and both non-banks.
smaller banks and credit unions will continue to be regulated on the basis of those rules by their existing regulator and allow the big banks and the mortgage companies, the payday lenders, and particularly someone who has never been regulated, the gatekeeper credit bureaus will all be regulated by the cfpb. it will be the consumer police. it is all on the web that consumerfinance.gov. host: you are one with ed mierzwinski. go ahead. caller: you spoke about ceo pay. what about congress men and women pay? they make $175,000 above their constituents they come. annuals of people in the administration not paying taxes. guest: of public interest courage in washington supported
health care via a congressional pay. i would urge you to look fervor in looking to the pay of all the law street lobbyists down here in washington look at the chamber of commerce and how much they are investing in the campaigns of members of congress, and how much money they spend on lobbying. the supreme court opened up a floodgate last year with the decision to basically allow corporations to spend millions and millions of dollars on influence peddling in washington. that is a mess that needs to be cleaned up as well. host: eden, ga., on the republican line. caller: i heard him say who that we went through an era of deregulation of deregulation and arlington noem who is the chairman of the financial service committees during that time? who is now? he changed the regulations
starks -- a few changes the regulations? guest: the majority was under president george bush in the early part of the 2000's. his head of the sec had a voluntary risk program for big companies. the regulators in charge of the banks were mostly nominated by him you can say that he was in charge. under president obama and chairman frank of the house financial services committee and former chairman chris dodd, we enacted comprehensive wall street reform last summer. now the senate is still under the control of a difference senate banking chairman, mr. johnson, but the house has switched parties and the people currently in charge in the house, mr. baucus from alabama, his subcommittee chair is from west virginia, and many others
are trying to weaken many of the protections that were put in place to make sure that what happened because of wall street never happens again. the people have changed, but the deregulation is clearly under george bush. host: austin, texas, on the independent line. caller: and that a particular problem for over 35 years. it concerns student loans. student loans in the united states has more deficit than credit cards, which is why understanding. it a person gets a student loan, for $2,500, then the banks are holding at laurell go into bankruptcy -- space that are holding my loan go into bankruptcy, they report to the department of the treasury. they do not do anything.
for 25 years, i have no comments, no messages, no dating from the department treasury, then the next thing i know, i get hit with a $25,000 loan on $2,500 which is an immense amount of money. what is going to happen about the regulations with all of this in the future? guest: every good question and is subject for an entire other show which our student loans. the cfpb is gaining authority over private student loans. the caller mentioned a particular issue that is almost impossible to do with a student loan problem but there has been a mistake. the collection of student loans goes on much longer than the collection of other loans. they appear on your credit reporting statements. it is a real problem. the cfpb will be the new cops on
the beat, particularly for private loans. in addition to the private bonn -- private loans made by the bank which are different than the pell grants. you also have the for-profit schools making unregulated loans and causing a disaster for consumers. the department of education has fought back very hard against the for-profits goals and of their and their loans. count on the cfpb to be the student loan, born the be as well. host: last call from florida on the democratic line. concerned,far as i'm tomorrow would not be too soon for the agency to go online. i think the first thing they should address would be the speculators and what they're doing to the price of oil. what i would like to know is how a week, consumers, fights to
get this agency online and you can make contact? who can -- what can we do? guest: 81 elizabeth warren to be the director, urged your elected officials to nominate her. do you wanted to have your representative? call him or her today and say that they needed to oppose any attempts to weaken the consumer bureau, a particularly the ones going on in the financial committee that will defund and delay it. host: looking to the consumer board, how would you gauge them successful? what standards bejeweled them to until this is a board that works for you. guest: it is going to work for consumers, it is going to make markets work better. it will not impose stacks of
rules on the industry, but it will make things more streamlined. it will align the interests of consumers and loan companies, banks, and others, so that the incentives are the same for both. the incentive for a bank is to hit you with overdraft fees. it should be to help you build assets. the pay the lender is going to tricky. they should help you. i would gauge their success on whether it is the people's agency and whether it helps markets work better. we've never had our own consumer police and we look forward to it. host: ed mierzwinski. guest: uspig.org, safety, all kinds of things. host: thank you for joining as today. in our last segment, we take a
look at education, specifically programs being proposed as cuts for the government. sharon washington is the executive director of the national writing project and whether the programs that could get cut. we will talk to her specifically about the cuts when we return. we will be right back. >> what i tried to do is tell a story with the visuals instead of words. i am writing paragraphs. >> with four political prizes, she has won the award of more than any other journalist. >> the great thing about being a journalist is the variety that we get to experience so many parts of the human condition on so many levels. >> she will talk more about her craft tonight and c-span's "q&a ." is available online on c-span
.org/podcasts. like today, the white house correspondents annual black-tie dinner starting with the red carpet arrivals at 6:45 in later remarks from president obama and seth myers. your comments from facebook and schroeder, live on c-span. all along with our interactive video player featuring a photo gallery, video clips from the social media comments and live hd video. congratulations again to all of the winners in this year's student documentary contest. you can view all of the winning videos on our website, studentcam.org. if you would like an early start on next year's competition, the theme is the u.s. constitution. select any portion and create a video about why it is important to you. you can see the gel starting
august 1st. -- you can see details starting august 1st. >> university of scranton professor on medical science during the war and advancements made it on the north and south. bob dole looks back at his political career during the nixon administration and examination of the disputed presidential election of 1876 between rutherford b. hayes and samuel j. tilden. the complete weekend schedule e.d c-span.org/scheduling host: in this final segment, we're joined by sharron washington, the executive director for the national writing project. guest: it is a network of the people anchored at colleges and
universities in all 50 states, frederico, and the virgin islands. is not just professional development for teachers of english or english language arts, but content areas as well. what does it mean to be righter in social studies? mathematics? host: is your organization private? guest: it is a non-profit. host: what is the importance of teaching writing to the people that you speak to? guest: we actually do not go to the sites, because it is co directed by a university teacher site.l as a k-12 we do not believe in bringing in an expert because we really understand that teachers who
are in the classroom every day her a lot of knowledge and we want to leverage the knowledge of our teachers across the nation. host: how are you finance? guest: with finance ourselves up in the past. with that support from universities, colleges, local school districts, and private foundations. host: you have about $25.60 million in 2010. in the little less than $1 million from other sources. guest: they know that they are matching. they're required to match the federal dollars that we get after that. we see that there are no federal dollars to match, universities and colleges that absolutely are feeling their own economic
constraints right now will have to be able to make very tough decisions. can they match something that no longer has a match? what does it mean when they might be able to leverage them better someplace else? host: what happened to funding for 2011? guest: it was eliminated earlier this month in the final cr. it eliminated funding not only for the national writing project but all other projects that had been receiving funding. host: who made the ultimate decision? it was behind it? legislators, the president? guest: we have always had congressional support, so it is difficult to say. there has been quite a bit of a push from congress to decrease the deficit. and me got caught up in the idea of earmarks. we are an authorized program that received direct funding and not what people think about when they think about an earmarked. traditionally, they think of it
as something that goes to localities, one state, or one specific region. the direct funding we receive it falls under the category of an earmark, but it comes to the national writing project but then goes to every single state. it is not the traditional bridge to nowhere, because it is a bridge to the future. it is truly about our education system and how we support young people to gain the skills to become effective writers, which we now makes a difference. host: what happens now that you do not give federal funding? guest: it decreases what we do, because without the federal dollars that really build this program, we will not be able to deliver as many programs. the local sites are struggling right now and they're struggling to say, well what does this mean going forward? we had to increase -- decrease the amount of dollars this
summer so we could just monitor it is rewarded a major rewrite spending our last dollars and not monitoring were reported to the department of education. and did result in a 25% reduction in the current budget that they're going for this summer. some of them have had to cancel programs. some have had to decrease the number of teachers they could bring in to their summer institutes which are professional development programs. host: are you optimistic about funding for 2012? guest: for us, we run on this and fiscal calendar as the federal government. starting on october 1st, we want no federal funding. when i think about what this means for fiscal year 2012, which they are debating right now, it is hard to say. one thing that is been a glimmer of hope in really seeing support from congress has been that they did not set aside in terms of
dollars it would be available to national programs. host: as far as the future of education programs, what would you say to those at home who say if the program does not get become self-sufficient that maybe it is better for the programs, yours and others, overall to become more self- sufficient. guest: certainly we need to be a bit more entrepreneurial, but when they think about being self-sufficient, this is about education coming of people having the skills that they need to be as successful in their academics. i would really argue against that and i would say that we may need to be march burner of them have been, but whether or not we need to be self-sufficient is not the case. we really do need the support of the federal government's host:. our guest is with us until 10:00 and if you address questions better programmer education, here is how you can do so.
we have four lines. you can reach us on twitter if you want to send this. firstname.lastname@example.org. how did you come to this? guest: my mother was a teacher. i decided maybe i would want to do this, too. i was one of those people who loved staying in school. i ended up getting a my ph.d. and i taught at a number of institutions. as i was moving through and became an active administrator, i tried to think about what i wanted to do next. at that point, the national writing project rigwrote on my door. host: how do think these
programs do with the senate -- with the subject of writing and how to make better arguments, coherent thoughts, etc.? guest: one thing we do not about a teacher preparation is that we actually teach them how to teach writing. we do not -- we teach them how to teach reading. you have a lot of skills and knowledge of any going to cause remained you do not have the skills to teach writing. we know that writing is the second part of the equation in literacy, reading and writing. when teachers come to us, they often tell us when they leave one of our programs that when it is one of our lager invitational institute said it is the most meaningful of rational development have ever had.
they really feel valued and they've shown that they do have something. they know what works in the classroom and what does not work. we really help hundred figure out that if something is not working, how can we make it better? helping teachers really learned the skills and help these students become writers and have authentic audiences. understanding the difference between a persuasive s.a. and scientific experiments is very different than each other. what does it mean to be able to write down your thoughts about what you know about mathematics. host: our first call for sharron washington is from north carolina. go ahead. caller: i have two questions. first, why is it better for the
government to fund these programs than to require the colleges and the institutions that teach our teachers that teach the programs to start with? my second question is what is the top salary range for organization? i have noticed in the past that many of the people who run these programs make really high salaries and a lot of times, that is why they are involved in the programs, i feel like. those arrested questions. thank you. -- those are my two questions. guest: why we need the federal government to fund the program is leveraging. we are able to meet the federal investment dollar for dollar and we think that is an efficient program. when it comes to why our colleges are not able to help
teachers learn what it means to be a teacher including writing is that there is so much information that they're being asked to do in a relatively short period of time. in the same way we do not want our positions to learn the -- learn everything in the medical school, we are hardly talking about professional development that is similar to a residency or an internship, something that goes on. host: how much of the budget is made up of salaries and administration costs? guest: 40% of federal dollars go towards salary and that is because we do entire host of programs across the country to support the network and provide technical assistance, and website, online programs to be able to not only find content and resources but also to be able to network said they can
connect to each other. i feel like we are a fairly modest organization when it comes to the amount that we spend on maintain the infrastructure that supports the network of 200 sites across the country. host: jasper, alabama, on the independent line. caller: i have a short comment. i agree with the caller from north carolina, but i have noticed from marching c-span faithfully, but this morning, it has been like they are helping the president campaigned. you are -- you are not, but people are coming on that are just helping and really trying to get what he wants out there. also, i am in an area that has been affected down here, and small time -- small towns do not see any help from fema. host: i do not know that is on
the topic we're dealing with this morning. houston, texas. caller: first the law, the federal government is one of the main problems with education. they should not be involved. we should be involved locally and all of the money should be spent locally. we should not get federal dollars and that is my opinion. guest: when the wonderful things about the national writing project is that there to begin to develop the kind of professional development they need in their own communities. it is a combination of federal laws allows local dollars that fund the program and the teachers there determine what their community needs. this is not being driven by national mandate. it is actually a grassroots program that comes from the bottom up that also invest as federal dollars. host: guest: churchill, tenn. -- host: churchill, tenn.
caller: the first caller really expressed my questions mentioned the guests did not answer. how much does she make per year? and what is your expense account amount per year? guest: expense accounts, i am a little confused about the question. we do have a budget that we operate our of. i would say that my compensation is certainly, i think, adequate, and i know that during this recent elimination of federal dollars that not only myself and the entire senior staff has taken a pay cut. host: six figures? guest: it is. host: trenton, new jersey, on the democratic line. caller: dr. washington, i
appreciate the kind of work that you do and i know how important it is for kids to learn how to ride. i learned how to write in the ninth grade when i learned how to diagram a sentence. i probably standout among my co- workers because they do right fairly well. why did they not teach diagramming anymore in the schools? guest: sometimes, there are teachers who still teaches diagramming, but sometimes that is not the thing to help his students to become comfortable with writing. we believe in format of writing and students riding properly, but we tried to think about hostage right in different contexts and understanding that casual writing is one way of expressing yourself in academics. it is really trying to think about how do you change your speaking with in a different
environments and i think it is important for people to always be able express themselves clearly in a way for them to be understood. the way that i became a fairly accomplished writer and i probably did diagraming sentences for one year? i was in school in the 60's and 1970's and it had lost some of its a glow around that time. i know that i did not receive that and i still became accomplished writer host:. from kansas, next on a republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. host: caller, go ahead. caller: i am a retired teacher. i am 85 years old, so my teaching goes back earlier. i have noticed with my great- grandchildren in elementary school that cursive writing is
touched upon in the second and third grades and the sentence structure that they end up with, that they do not going to grammar, although the last person was talking about diagramming, and there is none of it. these are in third-sixth grade, but they should have had it away back. do you have an organization in kansas? guest: we do have at least one of not maybe two different local sites in kansas. thank you for being a teacher. my mother is 88, so i know that the time. when you were in the classroom. one thing i was surprised about is i have a young niece who is now five and she is beginning to tackle cursive writing and i had to ask questions in terms of why they are learning that so early. they say is actually easier for students not to have to pick up
a pencil or their pen. that does not address the question in grammar and diagramming. i believe students are getting back, but it comes in later. i will say that as we really try to think about what young people need in writing, i think it is important for us to think about how we tackle this. when is it too early? when is it too late? host: in this age of textile and working on the computer, how does that affect writing a? guest: vertex thing and the mailing, now we note that they think he mailing is for old people and they are writing more. their rights more than i do when i grew up because we had the telephone. we did not have cell phones. writing and expressing is agood thing. they need to learn the difference between text
language. in the same way they learn to speak differently to adults or in the workplace, but sometimes they slip. they can do that when writing. through school, they can make those mistakes and get feedback. i really thing it is about audience, code switching, being more fluid. host: redmond, ore., on our independent line. go ahead. caller: thank you, ms. washington. i sit here and grind my teeth. the things you are talking about are things that used to be the basics like how to tlak to yo -- talk to your parents.
fluidity and flexibility can also be a problem in that you have a tendency to drift away from basics. children do not seem to have much demand put on them. texting, all of that, it aborts language. it perverts. some people do not have a spell correctly because of different influences in the culture. we notice of our elite universities and talk to students on campus, and if i was apparent than that paid for that kind of education i would be up in arms. i tell you what. i would be so enraged.
it seems like what they pick up is certain opinions and most of them are liberal. the basics of language, shakespeare, and as far as being able to diagram a debate. guest: i think it is important for students to be able write well and express themselves. if i felt that a student graduated and they did not have an understanding of how to be a critical thinker or how to express themselves, to have a sense about history, literature, i know that language is constantly shifting even the dictionary that i grew up with 20 years ago is different now. it has new words in it because language is always changing. there was a time when the pencil
was considered high technology. our language, our technology, the tools that we is it to shift over time. that does not mean that there is still not a place for standard english in a way that really conveys something then maybe slang. host: james on our democratic line. go ahead. caller: i am a retired person and the new hampshire. in sentence construction, [unintelligible] i was interested because it really addressed the need for teaching children how to properly constructed their sentences to make them coherence but it also led me to believe that it is effective than if you
talk to children who only have 8000 or 10,000 words to compete with society's world they may have a a harvard capability. how you become competitive in a society where there is a limited capability, and limited vocabulary, eliminated -- a limited ability to communicate versus those who have attained three or four times that level? guest: you make a good point and there is no doubt that having a large vocabulary does help. it is important that you early and too often. the more you write and do it often, you're able to have your
thoughts in a coherent manner. host: on the democratic line. caller: i have two points. i realize that your role is basically dependent on federal spending, your model. you depend on this idea that the more we spend, the more results we will get. i just went to bring it to attention that the bush administration, federal spending increased 50% compared to the clinton administration and we have seen the results. we can debate a child that he and -- no child left behind up and down. and of us can generally affects the skywriting a check. -- none of us can generally fixed this by writing a check. i am not try to call everyone out here with a broad approach, but i have a daughter in school.
i amazing go bother with custody. i am responsible -- i am a single father with custody. when i was raised, they put a very large and this is on reading or writing. whether it was comic books, something simple, and then i moved up and now most of my political,g is economical. it started with my parents. parents these days, there is no cracking of the whip. it does not matter if there are one coveted them, or whatever. if you basically generic kids -- technology, a video game, a computer, that is all they know. in the urban centers, you are
exposed to rap music and what not, which i am guilty of as well, but music which kids are listening to, the language is terrible. guest: i do not feel like i really equipped to speak about a parent's role in education, because i am not a parent. i will say that in terms of the federal investment that this is something that congress has supported since 1991. we were much smaller back then and there were interested in becoming a national organization in terms of serving the whole country. it has always been bipartisan. the support that we receive currently has been under a
variety of administrations. host: should it be that if you get a teaching degree you automatically know how to teach good writing skills? guest: people do think that. curriculum is packed with all these requirements that it is very difficult. i thought that i was a good teacher and that i knew how to write. in the classroom, i would grade grammar and but on how bad it was. i would think they just needed to write more so ever assigned more papers. then i had to struggle with grading work papers. it was not until much later when i was teaching at intensive writing class is a it was not until i gained additional skills that allowed me to understand that i could do more than just a sign writing and grade grammar, i could actually figure out how to support my students and learn
what they are writing about, create an outline, make a coherent argument, learn had be persuasive. that is very different than what i believe i was doing. i was modeling what i was shown all the way through my graduate program. i had never had the kind of writing instruction i see our teachers providing. host: if i were a teacher in your program, what would i go through and get as a result? guest: in a summer institute, you would do all three things. we would be looking in your practice, what you thought was your most effective practices are lesson plans, demonstrate that, get feedback in terms of what works, why does work, why does not work, students that you reach, and to begin to unpack that and it does that apply to your own setting and you look to see.
we will look at your own riding. you would write every day. you get a sense of what it means to share your writing. you had to write and share every day, it was scary. i have to show this to someone else? it was frightening. that is what the students go through. it helps make the teachers better. host: how many teachers, during the year? guest: anywhere between 3000- 3300 teachers in the four economic institutes that happens in all 50 states and we have 200 of those running. then we deserve another 130,000 from the school year during after school programs, local conferences, state conferences,
or at national programs. out of that number, there are some people who do come again. host: in the summer program, do i have to pay to come to that? guest: that depends on the local site. they are able to take the dollars that come from the university that are matching grants and they are able to make it free to teachers. sometimes they can do that and provide graduate credit. sometimes the teacher may have to pay a modest fee to attend, but it depends on the local sites and how they use their grants. host: miami, fla., on the independent line. thank you for waiting. caller: thank you to c-span for this great topic. i had a comment on the third or fourth caller who said, "why should the program the federal unfunded"? roads, bridges, and highways are partially federally funded and i
think this should be, too. thank you. host: camden, new jersey, on the democratic line. caller: i am calling because i would like to know that wide all of the parents who went to school already and the younger teachers tell us not to teach our kids the "old way" by teaching them the new way. we do not know the new wave. how do we deal with that? guest: it is important of the in the conversation with schools and your student's teachers. there are some values in did things that may be considered "old ways." i do not think we should throw all of them out. host: sugarland, texas. caller: i am from a suburb of houston. i have taught in a lame houston and the urban areas in the early
1990's and i have a couple of quick points. thank you for c-span. i am a parent of two. in some ways, i am disillusioned that we have politics driving the conversation about schools because we change presidents during the years and our kids need continuity. in kindergarten, a kid macy karcher presidents so i think it is disappointing. -- a kid may see 4 presidents. in texas, we do not respect the president. with the respect, some parents are not as a quipped. federal funding is very important and it is really hard to make a distinction between the states doing their own thing, like texas with textbooks, and most jobs will
not keep you and in the same turn all your life, so we're not preparing our children for a future. we are crippling them educationally by keeping them in their own range, within their own ethnicity, and there is still abject poverty and some schools did not even have computers. guest: the fact that our schools do not have similar resources with some students at a disadvantage and it is not even just those in urban schools, but also those in rural communities as well. the point that you make in terms of not living their life in the same community or even the same state, i think that is one reason why we really try to think about what it means to have an education that someone can take anywhere in the country, not just in one community. those are really important
questions to be grappling with. host: georgia on the independent line. caller: i just went to tell you that i am proud you are doing the work that you were doing. the people that are calling in and attacking you do not understand. keep up the good work, sister. you are a shining star. that is all i have to say. guest: thank you. host: could schools adopt a lot of what you are teaching or what your philosophy is in their own curriculum and in essence do they need you now any more? as someone who comes along side them, they would rather have that being taught in the school themselves. guest: some schools are taking do not have the local sites working as intensely
with them. by having the teachers come in, we build capacity locally. if you have two, three, or six teachers from one school who have been through the writing project, then you will see that they would begin to make a difference in terms of student achievement. we have done research comparing students in classrooms and teachers to have been to the project verses those who have not and we do see a difference in the achievement. student writing is scored nationally so people do not know the papers that they are scoring, only the grade level. in smaller communities where we have been for a number of years, we are beginning to see no difference. we believe that it has been embedded into the culture of the school because it is not really a set curriculum as it is so much about a set of practices. host: echo valley, tenn.
caller: what we need to do is make the curriculum in college for teachers harder. my ex-husband was a teacher. his football coach said it you change the education, you sit on the front row, you ask any questions, and you have no problems. we need to make sure the teacher knows something when they get out of college. the caller from maryland about arguing with republicans, scully was a democrat and was outed at the correspondents' dinner that is denied. host: last call from new york on the democratic line. caller: i would like to know why the schools and cannot teach penmanship. we used to have penmanship awards and you had to learn
to write. all they can do is print. host: penmanship? guest: these days, they do a lot of writing on the computers or personal devices. they need to use a pencil or a pen to write legibly, but we will not be moving away from digital tools and students need to be able to have the tools to do that as well in the future. host: is there a web site to get more information? guest: nwp.org. host: sharon washington, the executive director. the white house correspondents' dinner coverage does happen tonight on c-span starting at 6:45 p.m. with the red carpet rivals. president obama and the first lady arrived at 8:00 p.m. the main event is at 10:15 with
president obama and seth myers from "snl." if you go to the home page, c- span.org, you can find the white house correspondents association dinner hub and the can see what happens starting at 6:45 p.m. in hd. you can get archives of past dinner and as the dinner goes on, we will feature certain tweets from those in attendance. tomorrow on the program, we will continue on the conversation of politics. at 7:45, we will talk with "the washington examiner" about congress coming back next week and the things they will be facing in terms of budget, deficit, and things of that nature. at 8:30, a discussion of politics with michael bocian and politics with michael bocian and matt