Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal  CSPAN  May 27, 2014 7:00am-10:01am EDT

7:00 am
. been talking about the conservative political agenda. rivera on some of the middle east foreign-policy challenges facing the obama administration. join the conversation on facebook and twitter. ♪ host: good morning, everyone. the house is in session this week with legislation blowing to ensure the v.a. controversy. live coverage of the house here on c-span. the front page of wall street journal this month. the obama administration is set to announce new climate change proposal next week. cap and trade and renewable energy options. we will stick with the economy here this morning for the first part of today's washington journal. we want to hear from you. how is the job market for new college graduates? recent graduates, call us at
7:01 am
(202) 585-3880. business owners, (202) 585-3881. parents of recent graduates, (202) 585-3882. all others, call in at (202) 585-3883. facebook.ter or we will get your thoughts in just a second. let me show you a few articles on this. the boston globe's website. it job market for college grads better, but still weak. the government is offering a maddest -- a modest dose of good news for graduating seniors. work remains tough. many are settling for jobs outside of their fields of study or for less pay than they had hoped for. labor department said the
7:02 am
unemployment rate for 2013 college graduates was 10.9%. 13.3% in 2012from 2007.e lowest since unemployment for recent grads was still higher than the 9.6% rate for all americans ages 20-29. americans who have college degrees are far more likely to find jobs and earn more than those who don't. how is the job market for new college grads? we want to hear from college grads this year. business owners as well. what's it like for you trying to hire new employees, especially new college grads? what's it like for the parents? yourhone numbers are on
7:03 am
screen. another article from the l.a. times. in five college seniors don't have jobs lined up. more than four in five students graduate from college and do not have jobs lined up. those majoring in hot fields are having no better luck. that's the upshot of a new survey that demonstrates the difficulty that college seniors are experiencing as they try to enter the workforce in a still uncertain economy. among seniors will graduate over the next few years, 83% have not lined up a job as of last month. even though 73% were actively seeking one. year, 80% oflast seniors hadn't secured work. students who majored in marketable fields fared no
7:04 am
better. among those getting degrees in engineering, technology or math, 81.6% didn't have a job. business majors had no better luck with 85.1% still pounding the pavement. what is your job situation like? are you pounding the pavement or have you had to settle for a job that was not your dream job? the economic policy institute .ame out with a new study the class of 2014, the weak economy is idling too many young graduates. take a look at the highlights of this report that they put together. one million missing young americans -- young workers, the people who are not employed nor actively seeking work -- this one million missing young workers are not included in the overall unemployment rate.
7:05 am
the unemployment rate for these college graduates. 16.8% is the underemployment rate. settled orthey have taken a part-time job and are not getting paid what they thought. how is the job market for new college graduates? a lot of discussion on whether or not college is worth it. that has been in the papers lately. "is college still worth it?" college education has been viewed as mandatory for career success. as college costs soar, many people are left with years of crippling student loans act with high employment rates for recent graduates. all of which begs the question we asked 1500 people in college. more than one third of people say college just isn't worth the massive cost involved.
7:06 am
36% of people don't even work in a field related to their degree. education is important, but so on investment. some people are deciding higher education is not for them. comes to their children come 82% of parents want their kids to go to college. christine in alabama. what do you think? caller: the job market for college students is not as good as it once was. --t: what are you saying seeing in alabama? caller: the recent college graduates in our area are not getting the jobs that we needed these days. host: what kinds of jobs? caller: we have a lot of low-paying jobs around the area. host: who is in those jobs? young people or older people?
7:07 am
caller: a mixture of younger people and older people. host: do the younger people have college degrees? caller: most of them don't. host: when you say they are low-wage jobs, how low? what's the hourly wage? caller: the hourly wages between $5.50-$5.55 an hour. host: the college job market is good for those who accept low-paying jobs. here is a couple of tweets for you from members of congress. dick durbin tweeted this out. senate will soon take out -- take up to help students -- take up the bills to help students struggling with debt. durbin.from dick legislation from elizabeth born -- elizabeth
7:08 am
warren that deals with student loan debt. republicans tweeted this out. college costs have gone up far faster over the last five years than they were before president obama took office. what are your thoughts on this? how was the job market for new college graduates? what is it like in your community? we are using young people go for seeing where are you young people going for jobs? for education says the best degrees for more implement opportunities -- check out which five degrees could lead to better job security. people with a bachelors degree happen unemployment rate of just 5.4%. well below the national average of 9.1%.
7:09 am
what you study matters, too. politics,dy european your career options will most likely be rather dim. ,he number one degree bachelor's in business administration. a study found that the average starting salary for 2011 business administration degree , aduates rose to $44,000 2.2% increase from 2010. you will take courses in finance, management and marketing. this program generally takes about four years to complete. number two degree is bachelor's in information technology. a bachelor's in information technology has never been so relevant.
7:10 am
keep reading here. scott is up in new jersey. when did you graduate? yearr: i graduated last from thomas edison state college. with a bachelor's in business management. i have not been able to find a job. i've been out of work for five years and have not been able to find a job in five years. in the end higher time, including since getting my degree, i have not had any interviews. host: how old are you? caller: 52. host: you went back to school. caller: yes. i was an engineer prior to that. my plan was closed in 2009. host: how much were you getting paid? caller: $80,000 a year. tost: where did your plan
7:11 am
go? caller: it was due to competition from china. i went back to school because i received a lot of retraining and financial aid from the government. i don't know a lot of student loan debt. lot of my colleges paid for. still, has not got me a job. host: what kinds of jobs are you applying for? caller: everything, basically. rejection notice from the company very close to my house that i had put in for the most basic level job that they have. opening that was specifically labeled as entry-level. in the job requirements come of a specified they wanted someone
7:12 am
with at least two years of supervisory experience, which i thought was very -- i put in for it. host: how much was that job paying fo? caller: $12 an hour. now: how are you surviving that you were out of school and have not been employed for five years? caller: i'm spending my retirement. host: you want to go back to work. what our employees telling you -- employers telling you? caller: that is the other humorous part of the situation. they don't tell you. don't send you a detailed letter explaining why they did not hire you. the next time you answer a question about why you have not been employed, you are left grasping for that answer because the previous rejection did not specify. host: do you feel like that is
7:13 am
the biggest hurdle? the longer this goes on, the more difficult it becomes? caller: i guess so. i'm shooting in the dark. i am not an employer. in south carolina. good morning. unfortunately, just arefying what you we saying, we are seeing improvements that i don't think it's going to be a bunch of positions available. host: in which market? caller: for college graduates. a lot of people -- this is the sad thing -- you should go and search for what you would like to do. you really have to look for what
7:14 am
jobs, what fields are in high ,emand and it will be nursing technical fields. i see a lot of itt tech commercials. those are two fields that individuals should really push to. host: what companies are in north charleston? me, it's anly, for abundance of jobs. the problem is not getting the job here. adequateem is finding wages. we are in a red state. .hey oppose a lot of things there are not a lot of unions down here. whether you're educated, inducated, please be tough
7:15 am
negotiations when you get hired because depending on where you're at, if you are not protected by -- you may not even yearly raise. or it depends on who you're hired by. the constant of character in the individual that is seeking to employ. caller: richard in minneapolis. -- host: richard in minneapolis. business is a real estate development. , i have been watching this for quite a while other countries
7:16 am
such as germany and japan and other countries send their people to college to get the basic training, but the businesses take on much more of the training of the individual than they do in the united states. the corporations, the bigger corporations want everything done for free by the government. they don't want to pay any taxes. hear it day after day on this station. .he jobs are leaving america in my business, and real estate, people just don't have the money because they don't have the good jobs they used to have. is a terrible thing for our country. these politicians are bought and paid for by big business. thated some politicians
7:17 am
will listen to the people and work for the people instead of working for their own pocket. the politicians senators and representatives are just working for their own pocketbook. host: there has been some stories in the papers recently that the housing industry is struggling because younger buyers am a first-time buyers are not getting into the market. they don't have enough money, as you were saying. what do you see on that front? caller: that is exactly right. don't have enough money because jobsobs, the industrial are gone. ame of the jobs require from theducation employer. the college education is not needed in most of these jobs.
7:18 am
example, a lot of unions will put a ban on a college education for a certain job. the college education is not needed for the manual labor jobs. cannot get a college degree because of money or they .on't have the working attitude what are they going to do? go out and do some crime or something. it's just unforgivably, these politicians, what they are going. this is the front page of the washington post. all-cash deals changing the game and real estate. -- the game in real estate.
7:19 am
wealthy people, foreigners and retirees or transform markets -- are transforming these markets. is that true? caller: yes. they are having some big businesses do this as a business. the speculation, they will come in and flip houses and fix them up with some cosmetic improvements and flip the house in order to make a profit. the first-time homebuyer is out of the market. host: carlos is next in cleveland, ohio. a recent graduate. when did you graduate? caller: i graduated high school. are you planning to go to college? caller: yes.
7:20 am
host: where are you going to go? i don't know exactly which one i'm going to. what do you want to major in? probably engineering. host: why engineering? because i like --scaller: host: what is the job market for new college graduates? this is how we have divided the lines. if you have graduated from college recently, (202) 585-3880 . if you are a business owner, what's it like? (202) 585-3881. parents of recent college
7:21 am
graduates, what do you think about the degree that your kid chose and the price of college? have some of them return home to live with you? (202) 585-3882. 3.l others, (202) 585-388 president obama plans to issue next week new epa proposals. that is the front page of the wall street journal. the obama administration will unveil a cornerstone of its climate change initiative with a proposed rule and allowing states to use cap and trade systems and other measures to meet aggressive goals for reducing carbon emissions by existing power plants. energy companies will be watching for key details come including the percentage by which companies and states must reduce carbon emissions. the baseline year against which
7:22 am
those reductions are cap related will also be closely monitored. the proposal is designed to give states, which will administer the regulations, flexibility to meet the benchmarks as opposed to placing emissions limits on individual plants. central to the strategy of flexibility, the option to include a cap and trade component where a limited set on a missions and companies can trade allowances or credits for emissions. that is the wall street journal reported on this. the release is likely to reverberate across the nation's political, legal and .nvironmental policy landscape the epa scheduled to complete the rule by june 2015. states must submit their quotation plans the following year. ont is expected to come climate change from the front page of the wall street journal. the washington times on this subject, their front page,
7:23 am
sponsors of climate study to benefit from auction. those deeply involved in the climate change movement spearheaded an alarmist global warming report to ramp up spending on what it calls man-made problems. was issued not by a private advocacy group, but by a pentagon think tank the trumpets "absolute objectivity." that on the front page of the washington times. ray in colorado. a business owner. good morning to you. caller: i was talking to someone at the manufacturing plant other day. he says that they would like to hire some help.
7:24 am
the people make more money not working. they get giveaways from the government. host: are these recent college grads? caller: i can't say about that. they would like to hire some help. host: what kinds of jobs are these? caller: in the manufacturing plant. goodalld to be owned by . it was bought out by a japanese company. their baset complaint is. host: do you know how much they pay? caller: i don't know. but they pay a good wage to be competitive. host: do you see a lot of young college graduates in the area? caller: yeah. there are quite a few around here. i don't know exactly what the
7:25 am
conditions are for a job for them. i'm not up on that right now. people need help and they can't get help. host: james in akron, ohio. a parent of a recent graduate. tell us your story. caller: what i'm saying is that -- seeing is that -- i have one with a business degree and one with a degree in computer something. they are giving them part-time jobs. what i see is that the government has eliminated so many jobs that it's made the job market bad. little fromng very the government standpoint -- the government used to create a base
7:26 am
for if you cannot get anything, go to the government, get in and get some type of job there until you can find something. they give all of the when they say small business, that's up to 500 people. they give them tax breaks and everything. these kids don't have a chance. host: your children have degrees in computer science and business? are they getting jobs in those degrees but part-time? caller: yes, but the jobs are paying $12 an hour. they are not paying enough money for them to get out and be independent. host: are they living with you? caller: yes. that, they will be
7:27 am
able to make it. you can't make it on your own here unless you are making $17 an hour. host: what is their student loan situation like? caller: they are not in debt because i paid for it. host: how were you able to pay for it? caller: i'm in business for myself. i'm doing ok. at the same time, the kids are not. it's not just my kids. we are in a red state and i'm working at the red state. we are not a right to work state. it might as well be. host: what is your business and are you hiring recent grads? caller: no, i'm not. a college grad could help me but would not be able to help me. i have 12 people that have been with me now for 15 years.
7:28 am
i maintain. it's not what a lot of people think. people think you go to college and get a degree and you can get a job and it's not that way. these businesses in this country are not like they used to. they used to have entry level the and they would climb ladder. today, they're looking for any opportunity not to hire. i remember 5-6 years ago, a couple of fortune 500 companies right here said that they were not going to hire anybody until obama was out of office. that is anti-american. "going to college is not just get a job, but to create human beings of value to the nation and to themselves." another tweet from ray. government does not create employment, and hinders.
7:29 am
"we have inflated possible ."laries for careers for years on the veterans affair story, lots in the papers t today. obama out at arlington ceremony. after he participated in that ceremony, he went on to make a few comments. one of them is that more must be done to help our veterans and pledges to provide full benefits. pledges to provide full benefits for veterans. the front page of the washington times this morning. v.a. exec lies about masters degree. falsely claimed to have a masters degree in the official
7:30 am
records for years. the washington post has a profile piece this morning on eric shinseki. a clash of styles. his deliberate approach contrasts with young veterans urgencies. the editorial of the washington post weighs in the true v.a. scandal. agencies fundamental problem is shared across the federal government. this is not just a problem with the v.a. is a problem with congress and with the president. we have a civil service system in crisis. the front page of usa today.
7:31 am
vetsls to nine older care for years. -- the nine older vets care for years. ny older vets care for years. this is something that erupted over the weekend. veterans are firing back at the ranking republican of the senate. firing back in a letter that he had sent to veterans groups. it prompted a brutal war of promisencluding a that it will turn more combative. it carries risk for republicans because they could be left with
7:32 am
it politically difficult effort to privatize at least some veterans health care or to pump more money into a system covering 2.8 million veterans of the wars in iraq and afghanistan. demanding republican leaders -- demands that republican leaders have resisted. of beingsed the groups more interested in defending the status quo with the v.a. comer protecting their relationship within the agency. the groups fired back. of foreign wars hit back. for years, the vfw has come and we've heard the same old story.
7:33 am
the national president and executive director of the paralyzed veterans of america headed, "perhaps you should have shared with all veterans in your open letter that you cared so much about their health care that you were not actually present during the testimony that the representative provided and you did not ask a single question." we will go to robert in virginia beach. a recent graduate. what was your degree in? caller: i graduated in december of 2013 with a bachelor's in political science. host: you have a job? caller: i do. thinknder what i would would be a desirable salary. host: what are you making?
7:34 am
caller: nine dollars an hour. host: where are you working? caller: a call center. it's something to do for now. if i don't find something better by december, i'm looking at maybe a masters in public policy or going to law school. an hour at allars call center. what is the call center? caller: they sell those things to all people when they fall down and they hit the button so the ambulance shows up. host: what is your student loan situation like? caller: i owe about $30,000 or so. host: have you started paying? caller: no. they have not come for that yet. i'm glad. host: do you know what your monthly payment will be when they start collecting? caller: i have no idea.
7:35 am
we will go to vanessa in rockville, maryland. what is the job market like there? caller: i don't think it's very good. i worked in the capital. to be quite honest, a lot of ,rganizations here in the area this is supposed to be the best place for recent college graduates. if a person does not have concrete experience of one year or so, it's very difficult to break into an entry-level profession. recent college graduates have to understand that, the first job actually sets you up for the future earnings. that is something they have to understand. this is not a block against
7:36 am
working part-time at starbucks. fieldy can get into their , even at an entry-level --ition at $830,000 salary at a $30,000 salary, there is that one year of experience before being able to apply for a higher-level position. that is where it's at. and the student loan debt the job market, it is becoming more difficult for people to maintain a middle-class home. there is travel. retirement. all of these things are important. to and fromled colleges to interview students. unfortunately, i won't say which
7:37 am
agency i work for, but a lot of it is show. have the ability to place the students in these programs. when i go to the different colleges, i encourage the students to seek out all different types of employment within their field. sometimes even outside of their field just to get a sense that -- a lot of them, to be quite honest, they will go back to school to get an additional debte and incur a lot of to find out that they are in the same situation. i strongly endorse college. i am a college grad and i have my masters to greet. i graduated in 2001. -- i have my masters degree.
7:38 am
and i learned in graduate school. it's tough out there. i wish them the best of luck. host: do internships help? caller: internships are wonderful. if people can get the internship. the federal government hasn't the pathways program. the problem with the pathways re or somebodye people out there who have law s, people with a variety of different skill sets. when you say college graduate, i'm thinking undergrad. that person may be less competitive for a basic level internship. i don't want to be discouraging. for people to really be
7:39 am
restructure really your resume. work with a resume writer or coach. really try to get into your niche and find out how to best sell your skill set. don't be discouraged. caller: the upshot column in the new york times this morning. is college worth it? clearly, yes. this is what he writes. the decision to not attend college for fear that it's a bad deal is among the most economically irrationally decisions anybody could make in 2014. the much discussed cost of college does not change this fact. according to a paper by the journal of science, the true cost of a college degree is about negative $500,000. over the long run, college is then free.
7:40 am
free.aper than marion, tell us your story. caller: my daughter graduated in 2012 from ece with a bachelors in nursing. ecu with a bachelors in nursing. she got a job right away. she got on the floor at the rehab unit. -- didid she have that? she have debt? caller: she had some debt. not a tremendous amount. degree a liberal arts before and she used that to get host: did she have many options for jobs? for quite aapplied few jobs. she wanted to work at the hospital here because it serviced 30 counties and had a big trauma center.
7:41 am
host: what is she making? caller: pay wise? i'm not sure. around $26 an hour. she is on her own. now, she is volunteering at the doctors office. she is going back to school to apply for her nurse practitioners license. ladder.s to move up the she is 30 years old right now. host: do you think she chose well? caller: i was a nurse, too. was a paralegal technology degree. she did that for five years and decided she wanted to do something different.
7:42 am
this is her third degree. i have one other daughter that graduates this year. host: what is her degree in? caller: she will have a bachelors in anthropology and religion. host: what do you think the job prospects are for her? caller: she is taking her gre next semester. she will teach. host: does she know what her salary range will be? caller: i'm not sure. i think she wants to try to teach at ecu. caller: what ihost: what is yout situation like? caller: about $4700. she got two scholarships. a $3000 scholarship for each
7:43 am
semester. she has not had to borrow. the probably $13,000 for whole four years. million foreign-born workers in the u.s. labor force and went 13. -- in 2013. 25.3 million in the united states. here is the hill newspaper with ll texas give wi ron paul the boot? hall the boot? he's facing a hard fought runoff
7:44 am
challenge from radcliffe. he has stepped up his game since sleeping int sui the first round of voting. patrick in miami heard a business owner. -- hat trick in miami. a business owner. -- patrick in miami. caller: this is for everyone that is listening. if people think the government can do a lot, we actually can. the lady was talking about her daughter that went to nursing school. my mother is a nurse. there is a bit of a problem. we are bringing in too many people into the ad states that
7:45 am
already earned their degrees. -- into the united states. you can pay them less. hireould you want to someone from the united states? these people are coming over haveut debt and advanced degrees. own selves in our a detrimental situation. , the amount of people coming into the united aates of america on training visa. 210,000 people are here. that is 210,000 american students will not get hired.
7:46 am
the visa forate people coming in with advanced degrees to take these jobs, you can actually incentivize our children to go to school and have businesses pay the graduates that we have here a bit more money. the style section of the washington post this morning features -- he is making a lot of noise and few friends as he tries to root out corruption in afghanistan. he was just featured on q1 day this past sunday. .org. c-span -- he was just featured on q and a this past sunday. that is if our conversation here on the job market for new college graduates. coming up, we will talk about the second amendment with michael waldman.
7:47 am
romesh will be here to talk about the conservative agenda this year. we will be right back. ♪ >> if you go back and look at coolidge, he was a conservative hero in his time. tax rategold standard we saw in the 25% of the top rate. he fought like crazy. it started with wilson in the 70's. that was an epic battle. when you look at what all of the socialite said about coolidge in washington, how cold he was. they were probably also from families that endorsed different policies. especially alice who had a different model.
7:48 am
here was coolidge, cold and not giving out favors. she said he looked as though he leaned on a pickle. he was cultural, he was from new england. it was temperamental of temperament. he was a shy person. he had a political purpose. he knew if he did not talk a lot, people would stop talking. isresidential leader constantly bombarded by requests. his silence was his way of not giving in to special interest. she will take your calls, e-mails and tweets on taxes, .epression every preside 's book tv.
7:49 am
host: we're back with michael waldman. he is also the president of the center for justice. with where you begin in the book. what happened on april 18, 1977? how does that fit into the story of the second amendment biography? guest: i'm guessing you might mean april 18, 1775. which is patriots' day. that is the day of lexington and concorde. that is the day the american revolution began and it began the role of the well-regulated militia and the citizen soldiers that are at the heart of the debate over the second amendment. british soldiers and regulars went into the countryside
7:50 am
looking to capture arms and john hancock. and samuel adams. byy found that they were met the farmers and innkeepers and others in the town of lexington and the town of concorde who eventually repulsed them. this is the shot heard round the world. host: how was a militia defined back then? guest: in looking at this issue of the second amendment, we all know the phrase in the text of it. a well regulated militia. it is striking when you go back periodk at the colonial and after that. how important these militias were. was every man, adult man and eventually every adult white man.
7:51 am
a member for their entire adult life. they were in the military force, police force of the new states. these militia members were required to own a gun. they were required to have a military weapon and bring that weapon from home. when we understand the thinking of the folks then, going ownership was more of a duty that a right. saw the militias -- once the constitution was written, the constitution brought a much stronger central government. of alowed the creation standing army, which was something that many americans were very afraid of. they thought that would be a pool of tyranny. -- tool of tyranny. many americans were worried it
7:52 am
would crush the militias. something we to would not want to see. that great debate, that fear is what led to the second amendment. host: we showed our viewers the language of the second amendment. right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. what do they mean it out a well-regulated militia? mean: the phrase does not -- we think of it meaning something governmental. it meant well behaved or well run. note militias were individual vigilantes appeared they were woven into the fabric of colonial government and were based on citizen soldiers and
7:53 am
the idea that everyone was required to own a gun. it's such a completely different world than what we live in now. army,were no police, no no cities. things were very different. it's hard to draw direct lessons or parallels from that counting time. host: after patriots' day, what happens next? what you write about in this book that the fines, contributes amendment and the bill of rights? amst: during that war everybody paid oh my gosh to these militias. it was thehought democratic way to do things. they also did not work out so well. somebody like george washington was very skeptical. the other leaders of the revolution eventually realized this was not a way to build a continental war or a country.
7:54 am
they did convene the constitutional convention. there was a lot of debate in those secret deliberations which we know about among other things from the notes of james madison. there was a lot of debate about the militias and the army and who would gain control. when he read the constitution, there is a very elaborate section that we skip over that talks about military force. saying that there would still be militias, but the president could summon them into service and the federal government could set the rules for their officers and things like that. when the constitution was released, it was one of the great debates in american history and it was really fun to read about. moment whens this big issues of the role of government were debated and
7:55 am
and people were afraid of the centralized authority. some people were afraid of representation or taxation. this issue of the army was one of the things that people were fighting about. to get the constitution moving to the states, starting in massachusetts and moving on to virginia and new york, the constitution was ratified with a catch. people said, we need to have amendments. amendmentsozens of in, dealing with all kinds of issues, including the militia and the right to keep and bear arms and other things like that. mostly on other topics. the constitution got ratified. madeongressional race was a big difference. james madison who we revere as
7:56 am
the father of the constitution -- he thought the congress should be able to veto the laws of the states. he was for a much stronger central government then. madison was against the movement. --thought the constitution he ran for congress in that first election. it was a tough race. the swing votes were baptists. the religious minority. they said, we will vote for you if you support the bill of rights. madison did one of the great flip-flops. he vowed to pass amendments and went to congress and had to push amendments through the first congress and that is how we got the bill of rights. host: what was the debate like
7:57 am
in congress over the second amendment and bill of rights? guest: one of the things that is striking to me was how heated the debates are today, it is so embraced and waved as a banner by those who oppose stronger gun regulations. it's very controversial. it was not discussed a whole lot. it was not nearly as important in the minds of the framers as something like the religious freedom amendment. thedebate on the floor in house and congress was quite revealing about what they had in mind. yes, americans certainly had guns. on the frontier, people like two guns for all sorts of reasons. were gun laws. you cannot fire a gun in the
7:58 am
city of boston. you had all kinds of rules about where gunpowder could be kept. d. laws were prevalent in terms of the amendment, james madison's original gives us a good clue. it was a version of something like a well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state. religious issues with bearing arms, you don't have to do your military service in person. it was quite clear about the militia -- there were 12 congressmen on the floor of the house to talk about and participated in that debate. the entirety of it was about the militias. it was assumed that they were talking about this objector status. not the only thing that
7:59 am
was on their minds. it is telling as we try to understand what they were thinking. ispoint throughout the book that we can't find out what the second amendment means by traveling back in the time and tapping james madison on the shoulder and asking him. every generation interprets it, fights over it based on our notion of american values and our notion of the proper role of government and how to balance freedom and public good. we have been reinterpreting it over and over ever since. for two sentries, the second amendment received little notice. understood its provisions. lawyers rarely raised it in court. guest: isn't that hard to believe? it's true. the supreme court never ruled that the second amendment recognizes an individual right to gun ownership for the purpose
8:00 am
of anything other than militia service until 2008. it had ruled repeatedly otherwise in the previous two sentries. this was not something that people thought was all that relevant. it was rarely raised in court cases. guns and gunof laws and we fought about it in the legislatures and congress and ballot box. but we did host: so when is it that this debate happened. ? guest: there is a really clear demarcation line there. in the cities in the early 20th century, there was a federal gun law in the 1930's upheld by the same court.
8:01 am
by bonnie and clyde and other high profile bank robbers and hooligans over time. federal laws came into play. what happened was in the 1970's tom a there was a backlash to the liberalism in the 1960's. one of the places we saw that was at the national rifle association. the nra is a long-standing institution founded after the by officers of the union army who are worried the union soldiers did not have good marksmanship. it was to train people. they did that and it became known as a sportsman's organization. testing the interests of hunters. it was not a crusade against gun laws. it and when asked
8:02 am
if they thought the second amendment had been violated, they said they had not given that any thought. it1977, the nra indicated would move further from politics and move its headquarters to colorado. at its annual meeting in cincinnati, 1000 activists showed up and booted out the leadership of the organization thatacked new leadership is much more intense and much more dogmatic and really converted the organization to a crusade on the issue of the second amendment. lobbyys, if you go to the of the nra headquarters in virginia, you walk in and see the second amendment and it texts on the wall. out the partdited about the well-regulated militia
8:03 am
with the two little dots on the wall. the nra, we know now, is a few -- fierce and powerful organization. was focused on the second amendment but judges and scholars and the law and the courts still do not believe the focus and the purpose of the second amendment was about protecting individual gun ownership from gun laws. gun ownership for self protection and things like that. textbook legal campaign over three decks it -- decades to change the constitution. we have seen this many times in american history. it changed again with scholarship, with people who believed the second amendment reflected an individual right to
8:04 am
gun ownership looking back. i criticize some of that. some of it was valid but some of it i did not think was all that valid. it had a big impact. political system and public opinion. nowou look at polls, it is a widespread and extreme view. pastonly finally, over the decade or 15 years, did they go to court. and go to the supreme court. by that point, it fell like an apple to a tree. it is not a very surprising conclusion. we are talking with waldman. .e want to get your thoughts
8:05 am
-- has their own news channel, news radio station, news websites. on their company radio show last tuesday, the host had on its row graham nicholas johnson, professor of law, who has written a couple of books on this. he disagreed with your premise. >> we start out without a bill of rights. the idea of the bill of rights was that we would just have a limited number that would not impact the basic federalist structure that was designed in 1787. 1787, congress gets authority over the militia. the second amendment does not change that. seen inhe cases we have
8:06 am
the 20th century, where there is controversy about federal power over the militia, known was a even raising power. the other important point was the list of pre-existing, individual rights, the , to show whatever reason for the codification of the second amendment, that does the range of the right. the best affirmation you get comes from the great liberal justice whose name sits on the that waldman is operating in. here is what he said. rights,ing the bill of they build a form of government decidedly different from the british heritage. they wrote the bill of rights not to create rights but to prohibit government from
8:07 am
and theyg on rights confirmed the pre-existing residual in the ninth amendment. host: michael waldman, your response. he is basically right in what he is describing. the question is what they meant by the right to bear arms. in the, the right to be militia, have your gun, was very essential. it was a check on federal power. some of the things like the the firstdment, like two amendments, which never got ratified, were checks on congressional power. militia system as that kind of check. it was an individual right tolected in the constitution
8:08 am
be part of the duty to serve in the militia. it is hard for us to imagine get the framers would even the questions we are asking them assaultr for us about weapons in people's private hands, and background checks, and all the other things we are debating these days. if you go and look at the debates in congress or the constitutional convention or even the ratification conventions for the constitution, they certainly felt people had pre-existing rights. were talking, they about something more defined and narrow about that. certainly that right as applied to the public service. thinkl point is i do not theught to try to answer
8:09 am
challenges of today by imagining we can simply and only rely on the original intent of the framers in 1791. but it is very important, the country has evolved and the way we look at the constitution has evolved. how we look at the second amendment has evolved over time. it is a much more individually focused right now to us than it was in the foot -- with the framers in their era. it is a much more individually focused country. laws and haveun had them for two centuries. professor's colleagues, a historian of american gun laws, he makes the point this was not only the state government's responsibility. it is not quite the same as the national guard today. the rightivic right,
8:10 am
to participate, above all else, in the military protection of the country. class we will get calls here. don is in michigan. >> good morning. on the right to bear arms, in illinois, hehts in cannot carry a firearm. did theypreme court, pass a law stating that was an illegal law? do you have the right to bear arms? >> question. --guest: good question. we have different hits in the country and they have different gun laws or at some arbors -- more restrictive than others.
8:11 am
chicago, illinois, has among the strictest. the u.s. supreme court ruled the second amendment conferred individual right to own a handgun in your home to protect yourself and your family. if that was only applied to congress, the federal law area two years later, there was a case that was actually from chicago. in the mcdonald's case, the supreme court followed up pretty naturally from what they had done in the heller case and said, this also applies to the state, so the constitution, whatever else it means, means you have a right to own a handgun in your home. . to protect yourself and your family very that was the mcdonald's case. what happened was ever since the two cases the mothers of in court said, look, it is a right but not unlimited.
8:12 am
like all rights in the bill of rights and all right in the constitution, there are limits. limits dealing with the public good. we have to decide what those limits are. what are they? they were did not say. dozens of court cases all over the country since then have ofstled with the question what this new doctrine means. it has basically been a very interesting answer. almost all the existing gun laws of united dates were upheld. democratic and republican judges upheld the law, saying yes, there is an individual right. this law protects the public and is important enough that it overrides that right ear and basically, a federal judge struck down the gun laws of
8:13 am
illinois. they relate -- as they relate to carrying a gun outside the home. a federal judge said you cannot eliminate it altogether there you need to make it hostile for people to carry guns outside the home. that question and the legislature passed a new law to respond to the judge's ruling so when you go to chicago, one of the ink is you walk in and there are decals on the windows and establishments saying you cannot ring the gun here and that was to protect the property rights of the store owner to control whether people brought guns in. the question of whether the second amendment extends outside the home and whether you can carry a gun around thomas that is the hot question right now legally. we do not entirely know the answer. overwhelmingly, the court has upheld that. a court in california has held otherwise. republican caller.
8:14 am
good morning, robert. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: good morning. to, i would like for you talk a little about the prelude to the constitution. guest: sure. the constitution and the second grew out of the american revolution. we were fighting for our rights and independence and freedom against great written, one of the things that was to the americans of the day was an idea of a standing army. the idea that a king could command the army at will and pay the soldiers and it would the professional. they thought that was kind of tyranny in the making. citizenryht an armed
8:15 am
of farmers and ordinary people, was really the way to protect against that tierney. this played itself out during the american revolution. pretty soon, people like george others realized this would not be the only way to win. there was kind of a divide between people's heads and hearts when it came to how to set up the military force of the new government. militants laid other roles. they controlled the slave system and guarded. they patrolled the frontiers. but again, americans had guns. just ask alexander hamilton. there were guns than.
8:16 am
were expected to be able to continue to own guns. this is under common law. there are also them -- limitations. there are gun control laws all throughout american history, including that time. that thee right militias of the time in the comprisedary time, it of farmers and innkeepers that not only defended accounts but defined the republic idea of active and virtuous citizenship. of patriotisming -- is it still attached to the idea of the second amendment today? i wonder about that. they would say we have a duty. there is a level of governmental compulsion that we would find very unusual.
8:17 am
it was universal military service for an entire lifetime. of course the country has changed pretty quick we. that militia system vanished. people kind of stopped showing up. move west of the frontier and it was violent, but more individually focused. it is the case the civil war ended at her math more another , in that after the civil war, there was a low grade rilla warfare between the races in the south where the former slaves were terrorized by the clue is . oneand other vigilantes of the purposes of some of the people who were pushing the fourth amendment and who drafted it was to make sure the former slaves could get guns and defend the else. it was a different era.
8:18 am
it is not clear whether they meant they should be able to get guns on the same footing as life very even then, there were limitations on carrying guns in the public. from anuck by a architect -- archival frontier town. it looks like a movie that. it has got a dusty street and balloon doors. in the middle of the street is a says, "firearms prohibited. " host: felix writes in from north carolina, owning a firearm -- --
8:19 am
and on twitter -- guest: guns were so different then. the aim wasn't so great. and this -- and individual rights interpretations dollar of notedcond amendment, he part of the confusion we have now is that weapons are so much more powerful now than they were then. it is very hard to know what anybody would have thought of having an aar esteem, let alone a bazooka or a drone. there are other countries, including australia, that had done ultras where they did change their laws and did the
8:20 am
reductions in mass shootings. one of the things that seems to be the case is that the gun laws make a difference. rights.e have had done we have had strong gun laws. my research and the whole history of the way we looked at the second amendment over these two centuries is that there is no pristine way of understanding what that right to keep and bear arms means. it is always the roddick of a political fight, of persuading public noted part of the confusion we have opinion. since then and certainly since the nra has taken this up. the idea that the founders are wagging their fingers at us and telling us no one can ever have any gun law ever says that violates a sacred freedom, i think that would not necessarily be in keeping with the actual way this and any other of the tuition has been understood over the years.
8:21 am
in iowa, a republican caller. caller: i have a comment about c-span itself. why couldn't your first session cover whenever hearing or whatever you show just hired to the show coming on? anyway, i was an english major and a history not. is actuallyms" weapons of military value. why did they write the second amendment with the whiskey rebellion having just taken place? your caller is a history buff, i can see. as far as what they meant with
8:22 am
the right to keep and bear arms, we cannot really know for sure. it is interesting, if you go back and look at the library of congress, the six top founders online last year, adams, jefferson, washington, hamilton, franklin, madison. if you look up the use of the exceptions, a few it is almost entirely referring to military use. that is another clue that they at least thought that was some of the things they were focusing on. what your caller is asking about, is about shays rebellion. for people who might not have paid attention during that day in history class, shays was during the time after the revolution and before the cost tuition, which was just a couple of years. the time when the country was started to fall apart and heading toward a
8:23 am
failed state. really almost an anarchistic difficulty in dealing with the authority. rebel -- shays rebellion was in western massachusetts. whate do not want to pay the courts of massachusetts were ordering them to pay. they rebelled. it was very hard to put the rebellion down. in and theymarched took a vote and swiss side. the militia did not do well and fear over this kind of anarchy was part of what drove george washington to support the constitutional convention and drove a number of the people at the convention to say, we need a new kind of government that is that can really bring order.
8:24 am
the whiskey rebellion was a little later, in george washington's first term. people in western pennsylvania did not want to pay the new tax on whiskey, which was a way of storing grain by distilling it into alcohol. this time, george washington and his government sent in the troops and crush the rebellion and showed that if we were going to have a country, we were going to have love and it was not going to be up to everybody to decide what laws they were going to follow. are some of the things that were going on at the time that give us a little about what they might've been thinking about at that moment. host: on twitter --
8:25 am
caller: i own several guns. it --d not like it if there was a law or the government would take our guns away. it is too late for that. there are too many guns out here already. there are a lot of bad actors who have them. regardless of what the second amendment says, criminals will not follow them anyway. we need them for our own personal protection. host: we are running out of time so let's leave it there and respond to that part. he is right about that. we have between 270 and 300 million guns in the united states. nobody is advocating they be confiscated. after the brady bill and other in the 1990e passed
8:26 am
practice, there was no taking away of gun rights. one of the things people have said about how the decision will do is to say, you know what, there is an individual right. it is limited. no one will ever be able to take away all the guns. perhaps that will ease fears that gun laws really are always for a big some kind confiscation program. the supreme court would not let that happen here in i am not wild about the courts pretending it was just following original ofent, but maybe the outcome individual rights, clearly the ability to have limitations on those rights, some people at least think that will calm the waters politically. i do not that is really true because the courts beaks with a very loud voice and has not really slowed down what i would
8:27 am
call second amendment fundamentalism. host: a tweet -- guest: there are a all kinds of ideas like that and technology, such as ballistic staffing that marks bullets to make clear what gun they come from, or even smart guns, that only a smart owner -- the gun owner can use the gun. there are all kinds of ways to bring gun safety laws into this and what i am hoping, what i would prefer, is that we that all out those questions in the legislature and the about box without recourse to running to court, claiming an individual right and shutting of the like that down. we have managed to find a way to
8:28 am
make cars much safer than they were. next year, it looks like there will be more people killed by guns in the united they stand by automobiles. that is an amazing fact. that is because so much has begun to make cars safer. one would hope common sense solutions like what the caller is describing, i am not familiar with that proposal, but that kind of thing ought to evolve withoutught to evolve overheated claims about individual rights being threatened if we look at something like that. the nra radio show on that last tuesday with nicholas johnson talked about the role the nra played in the biography of the second amendment. this was his take.
8:29 am
>> a highlight to show that , most of theng very rich affirmations of the individual rights nature of the second amendment appear on the historical record long were the nra is formed. certainly long before the nra accident politics. in politics. andt: it is a free country he is entitled to his view. it is what it is in terms of what the framers said and thought in the history of the country. the chief justice of the in eyes dates, a really strong conservative appointed by richard nixon in that position, in 1990 one, he said he thought the idea of an individual right -- and unfettered individual right to gun ownership under the
8:30 am
on theamendment was public foster by special interest groups. if it were so obvious, i do not excel many people notice how obvious it was for the nra took this turn. i do not begrudge the nra and other gun rights advocates. it was not just the nra. i do not grudge them having done this. this is how constitutional change happens in america. it is not a static document. it has always in the product of we wantking and saying, a change in society and part of what we have to do is look at how we change the constitution. look at marriage equality over the last few years. another great example of how americans have taken it in their own hands. that is the right of the people as well, which is also in that amendment here in americans have taken it in their own hands to
8:31 am
say, this is how we ought to look at the constitution. the nra wouldwhy deny it. i have heard officials of the organization probably talk about how they waged this campaign. you know, i inc. folks are on the other side of the issue and want stronger gun laws, they will have to wage a campaign on ,cholarship, on jurist prudence law, public opinion, political power, just the way the nra did. that is the american way. host: here is a tweet from our viewer -- guest: i think we have such a different world now. we have police. i do not inc. as one of your
8:32 am
viewers wrote in, that a standing army is the greatest threat to our liberty. the united states army is a pretty important protector of our country and our liberty. it is many hundreds of thousands of people strong. that the way this provision in the constitution has evolved is both toward more individual rights, but also toward gun laws and protection and the one ring i do not makes sense is the idea that individuals waving their guns around, claiming they can decide when they want to follow the laws of the federal government, like clive and bundy, the rancher a few weeks ago, i do not think that honors the spirit of the founders or how the country has evolved, either. class one last phone call from virginia, democratic caller here you are on the air. focus on was going to
8:33 am
the militia. i think the constitution should be changed completely. i would like a comment from the .aller we are talking about a time. at the time the amendment was this very, but today, i do not thek that because we have stand in army and the reserve, that wenational guard, need this particular regulation at this time. i would like to have his comments on the time. we are discussing -- the time we are discussing. the caller obviously knows a lot of what he is talking about. we are at a very different era from that time. it is hard when you look at it
8:34 am
like using bleeding for medical care. there are a number of things that are just very different than now. as the caller says, we have the u.s. army and the reserve and the national guard and the police, and a very different evolved clinical system in many ways than what was the case then. just as john paul stevens, who inte one of the two dissents the heller case, he recently wrote a book in which he urged the second amendment actually be rewritten to make it clear they were only talking about service in the militia. i am not sure i necessarily think that is nessus area or right, because that is how the courts interpreted the amendment to recently. i just inc. we need to keep recognition that we can have gun safety, we can do things we need to do to protect ourselves as a country, that that can occur without
8:35 am
threatening people's writes, without threatening hunting or self protection or other legitimate rings that legitimate and law-abiding gun owners care about. and, above all else, we ought to be having these debates, i would say, in the legislatures and the congress, in the court of public opinion, rather than thinking the constitution will give us that answer. amendment viagra fee is really more than anything else about the question of how legal change happens in the united dates. happens based on what each generation thinks of the role of government and the constitution and how we fight for it. that is going to really eventually be the answer, as italy's has in. -- as it always has been. host: thank you for your time. up next, we will talk with the
8:36 am
national review senior at her on the conservative agenda for this year. then later, dan with cbs news and national course audit on the president posses challenges there at all that -- [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] day or thetoday one government used fighter jets to stop separatists from taking over the airport. the mayor says he people have been killed. a billionairet as claimed victory in sunday's posses presidential vote. he's as he hopes to negotiate a peace will and to the insurgency in the east where rebels have also seized government offices and fought ukrainian troops for more than a month. meanwhile, congress is stepping up rusher on the white house to confront russia over allegations it is cheating on a key new we're arms treaty, a face-off
8:37 am
could further restrain. the treaty is designed to eliminate an entire class of nuclear weapons. the issue has been simmering for a few years and republicans on capitol hill want president obama to address it head on. today, president obama focuses on science, technology, engineering, and math education as the host the white house science fair. you will announce new assistance to train teachers and expand education for low income students and create mentoring programs for several students in the country. the span is covering that event and you can hear it later on c-span radio. those are some of the latest headlines. book senaten's new 8:00, includes author malcolm gladwell. >> you write, you do not write in a calculating way. you cannot sit down to write a bestseller. that issuenot about
8:38 am
at all when you sit down to write. what you should do when you sit down to write is to write what you find interesting and to file -- follow your own curiosity. when i was writing "tipping point," i can honestly say i never for a moment try to imagine how well the book would sell. i just wanted to write something cool. i was interest in. i wanted to write something my friends would read, that my mother would like. conversationof our with malcolm gladwell and other interviews on c-span sundays at 8:00. washington journal continues. host: we want to welcome back to the table ramesh ponnuru. let me show you the headline
8:39 am
from the wall street journal on may 21. gop primaries taming the tea party. is that what happened? entireit does show the -- the entire primary season shows republicans are not in the middle of a civil war. the party has long-running and manageable actions. .e partiers are disorganized it is a tendency rather than a kind of organized faction area when folks affiliated with that faction are running credible candidates and smart campaigns to win as they did in nebraska, and when they are not, they do not win. what about the ones here who represent the tea party i'll be out -- ideology on capitol hill and the influence they have over the public policy debate? this --noticed that precisely because it is a disorganized movement, jessica ackley who belongs and who does
8:40 am
not shifts over time. a lot of the folks elected in 2010, some people say they are not he partiers anymore and they have abandoned the movement. other people say, they just never signed up for a particular interpretation of what the tea party means. i would say the general sense we need to have -- that we need to have a republican party more committed to shrinking government and spending and tackling long-term debt problems, those things are issues on which tea parties -- he partiers have had enormous success. the tea party as a whole has move in that direction. host: is tea party influence declining on capitol hill? guest: i would not say that. isould say the tea party being folded into the republican party generally. that is the sort of thing that is happening to the new group that tried to come into the republican party. it happened with the christian right in 0870's and 1980's.
8:41 am
there are some tensions when you have got a new group of people with slightly different priorities and different ideas, but overall, parties are very of vision. the political parties are very of agent at managing the problems and adjusting to them. class what does that mean for the agenda? what does it mean for the agenda heading into november, the general elections and after that as well? there is a question that cuts across the tea party divide. there are republicans who think we do not need to have a can of if agenda and the opposition to resident obama and his agenda will be enough to carry them through the election. that is probably a little bit more on the establishment side of things. there are folks on both sides who say, we need to have an alternative, we need to show people. this is where i'd identify
8:42 am
myself. we need to show not only that the presidential agenda is wrong for our country, but that there is a better way. mcconnell was recently at the american enterprise institute causes conservative metropolitan forum. after his i marry win. primary win. this is what he had to say on what the gop focus should be. >> it should also be admitted that our rush to defend the american entrepreneur from daily recommendations that pursues any enterprise that is profit making with suspicion. the average voter is not john -- it is a good impulse, to be sure. revolve around aging parents, long commutes, shrinking budgets, and obscenely high tuition bills, these homes to entrepreneurism are a practical
8:43 am
matter, largely irrelevant. the audience is probably a lot smaller than we think area -- think. i was there when senator mcconnell made those remarks and i thought they were spot on. the story of the heroic entrepreneur who is stifled by regulations and taxes is very important. it is a story the free market party has to tell. conservatives need to do -- to be aware it is not a story that identifyost americans with. we heard in the convention in 2012 a lot of talk about job creators. that is fine. most americans are not job creators. they are jobholders. in recent years, they have been job seekers. host: there is a headline. may 21. "conservative jeff manifesto help republicans draft republican voters."
8:44 am
-- middle-class voters." in that tax overhaul that benefits middle-class parent, modified student loans system, opposed immigration overhaul, borders only secure, opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion. what you think of the manifesto and is this the right focus? guest: the manifesto he was writing about recently is something i have been deeply involved in. is about reforms that could limit the government and help the middle-class. the idea of the book is to show that conservative ideas are not just philosophically sound, something conservatives spent a great deal of time doing. it is also to show that applying conservative ideas would use -- yield practical benefits on a range of issues. we actually do
8:45 am
not like so much about the immigration question, for example, in this, the conservators to the book have different views on the issue. i certainly have my own views on it. the main idea is that we cannot keep feeding these large areas to the left,ll see making policies more -- a liberal concern and we will not advance ideas on it or think or how to do this. apply insight to the way higher education policy is run, you can the it is an area ripe for arm. -- reform. host: we're talking with ramesh ponnuru. weigh in with your comments. steve, you are on the air. theer: i want to ask gentleman about the theo conservatives.
8:46 am
i discover them recently and found out they may be a cerebral alternative to the new right. i deliberately did not even joke evangelical new right. i did like mitch mcconnell's view on john. i will hang up. i believe the caller was referring to theo conservatives, a term that has sometimes used to describe religious conservatives, essentially. folks whoseong been conservatism is deeply influenced either religion. there are different degrees of emphasis and they are part of a larger conservative coalition. host: does the manifesto address their concerns? onst: speaking for myself these issues, the issues that tend to come up are things like the right to life. i am a strong lifenent of the right to
8:47 am
of unborn children. the republican party and conservative movement are generally in the right place on those issues. the book is contemplating on. -- concentrating on areas where we need some filling in of the gaps. issue is same-sex marriage. polls show is popular with the american people. gallup, same-sex marriage support reaches a new high of 55%. is the party into and with the american public? guest: there is no question that support for same-sex marriage has been rising rapidly in the last few years. i do think there is a tendency on the part of a lot of people to overestimate the extent to which the republican party's political problems are a result of social issues. people lump them in together when there is no evidence that abortion is moving in the same direction as insect marriage. if anything, the public have moving in a more pro-life direction in the last 20 years. i do not think the main problem for the republican party has
8:48 am
been same-sex marriage. obviously, as public opinion changes, politicians stanch his -- stances will change. that is the way things work. the big problem for the republican party is that it is perceived as being exclusively about promoting the interest of big this is an rich people and is not seen as advancing the economic interest of most people. that is the problem most needs tackling. host: on the issue of abortion, here is gallup again here at u.s. is split on abortion. 47% pro-choice, 46% pro-life. that is right. i believe that gallup found the number of people who prioritize that issue, more are pro-life and fewer are pro-choice ear that is very consistent finding. the question about the parity they found between pro-lifers and pro-choicers, that is a recent development. if you go back to 1995, 56% of the public would have said
8:49 am
pro-choice and 33% would have said pro-life. there has been a movement toward pro-life. host: on twitter -- there are 330 million people in this country and two major political parties and political tendencies. parties and both major philosophical tendencies will be coalitional in nature. askins -- ofnk conservatism as a disposition toward traditionalism and ethics, free markets and economics, a kind of natural -- national interest-based of foreign policy. different people will have different degrees of embassies on these things. to the extent i think there is an umbrella idea, i think it is that we want to conserve the political inheritance we have received from the founding fathers, which is actually the subject of my chapter of the book we are talking about.
8:50 am
on twitter -- people think about it differently. after the primary kentucky, they supported mitch mcconnell saying , "the principal challenge is to -- guest: that is the sort of thing that people who launch in the primaries often say. i think what happened in kentucky illustrates what i was talking about in terms of the disorganized nature of the tea party movement and the fact that the only spokesman for it are the self-appointed postman. whatever anyone thinks about groups, that i think charlie do a lot of great work, they
8:51 am
created this candidacy as the tea party candidate, but i think it is clear most republican voters who think of themselves that's -- that, mitch mcconnell. host: independent caller in north carolina. caller: thank you for taking my call. this conservative, i do not understand how the demo has let these republicans it away with it. about, they hate the government, they would like to cut government and spending. as soon as they get in office, you look at george bush. he blew government bigger than any other president and created a homeless or the department and all this other stuff. hundreds of audience -- he spent all this money, nondiscretionary ending, and once they get into office, they're worse than the democrats.
8:52 am
are notople conservatives, especially the tea party. they do not want to conserve what we have now, but they want to go back to the old days. host: give me an example. caller: look at the voting rights. they do not want to extend that. they claim they are very conservative on spending, but when it comes to -- i will give you an example. the american people do not want to have unemployment benefit. a lot of people are out of work. conservatives did not want to do it. income -- iney got trouble, what do they do? john mccain -- the first minute or so of timothy's comment was something that actually a lot of tea partiers complain about -- he complains about agree with.
8:53 am
republicans have spent too much money when they were in power. then he turns around and wants them to spend more money. on the question about going back, i would say that on the voting rights act, where a lot of republicans are, it is not about going back there it it is about recognizing that times have changed and that emergency provision from 1965 may not be propria today. an issue in this in court case, treatedurisdictions be differently that because of 1965 or should we update those as? colorado, republican caller. caller: i am from illinois. sorry about that.
8:54 am
is the attempt of this party by jeb bush called the new republicans. these newer brand. how do we see the new brand as we continue on in the nude election -- the new elections? host: do you like it? caller: i think it is something else. you need to focus on neoconservatism and paleo conservatism. right now, conservatism indianized aids, the mainstream idea is that neoconservatism, which is very much what george
8:55 am
w. bush and his administration were showing. guest: when people talk about rebranding, it sounds to me like slapping a fresh coat of eight on the same product. i think what we need are new ideas. a conservative philosophy, but addressing the problems of today. of the problem with conservatism politically over the last four years is there agenda, that we stuck with the agenda of the late 1970's and early 1980's, without recognizing the world has changed, partly because the agenda was successful area host: going -- successful. host: going back to the manifesto, it is labeled to help middle-class voters. is that a problem?
8:56 am
guest: that was the new york times description. it is a big thing. 85% of the country considers itself to be middle-class. the problem is something you have seen very start we. the political problem. you see it in the x the old dirt in the last event selections, there have in a variance in the election. in both cases, president obama has done much better than republican candidates. and that is a deep-seated problem, whether the republican with the rich. host: what do you do to change the perception? guest: you make the case that your agenda will help all it is not just an
8:57 am
indirect way. we are going to help your wages rise faster with the health care solutions, that we are going to provide tax relief for families three spend and tax that it, that we are going to make higher education more -- when you have enough of those sorts of ideas, you can chip away at that perception. looking forward to 2016, a news poll had a question for those at the polls. the 2016 republican primary caucus in your state was being held today, for whom would you vote? 14% jeb bush. 11% paul ryan. a -- 10% chris christie. guest: a lot of them have bits
8:58 am
and pieces of it. none of them have the whole package. it is a wide open primary race. i do not think it is important to pick out one of these people and make them the candidate for the new agenda. what is important is to influence the entire party and the entire country for more of them to take the agenda forward in that fashion. caller: i would like to mention -- many tea party members they do not remember ronald reagan saying we are moving away from a -- moving toward a service-based economy. that is where america started going down the tubes. we lost our manufacturing base. we lost our tax revenue for that and income taxes for that.
8:59 am
people lost their jobs because of that. that was surveyed it is a conservative tenet that was pushed out. i've recently seen joe scarborough on his shows they outsourcing -- the wait it was supposed to. these people backtrack ideas they push, promote, and then they fail miserably for our country and then they try to act track -- backtrack. host: democrats have done the same when it comes to trade. caller: yes, president clinton did sign but that was a republican bill that was pushed. -- he was a business friendly democrat, trying to appease his. -- business. host: do you push for the transpacific partnership? caller: i do not. we should be taking care of america and american jobs and i think it is, if they had any
9:00 am
sense of loyalty, would feel the same way. before you let me go, i would ann to say and coulter -- coulter was the one who was coming around with a statement that immigrants were doing the jobs americans do notthat was se chamber of commerce, cheap labor, wages for everyone else. that was something republicans were saying all the time. i recently heard, and it really made me upset -- i heard a guest just last week, out and say democrats are the ones saying we want immigrant labor because they are doing the jobs americans do not want to do. that was ann coulter running around saying that 15 years ago, and i think conservatives pushed tenets that fail and they backtrack from them all the time. host: all right, david.
9:01 am
go to and watch the interviews we have done with tom richmond gutierrez on the issue of immigration, -- with congressman gutierrez on the issue of immigration. concern isour manufacturing, the problem has not been trade. the problem is we have gotten so much production -- so much more productive at it. manufacturing employment is down because fewer people can produce more things. that to me is not something that government policy can or should try to change. on immigration, i don't believe that the phrase he is talking about originates with ann coulter, who is a pretty strong opponent of increasing legislation that we are talking about. contrary to what the caller said, you will find proponents of what is called comprehensive immigration reform in both parties who will say the exact phrase he is complaining about,
9:02 am
that these are jobs americans will not do. i take it he is coming from a place where he does not like the idea of this increased immigration, and i have some sympathy for that. i don't see the point of doubling immigration levels the way the administration has projected to do. i don't see the right problem to which that is a solution. host: we go to georgia, democratic caller. things thee of the gentleman from michigan had to say -- i kind of agree with his statements. however, i am calling because of the abortion issue. you recently stated that a poll thoseit is kind of even, who are not in favor of abortion. but if you ask that same if youn another way -- agree to a woman's right to choose -- then the results are totally different.
9:03 am
everybody is not pro-abortion. no one wants to kill a baby. however, there is a point in time where a woman does have the andt to choose what she can cannot do with her body. host: ok, claire, we will leave it there go. -- we will leave it there who. yes, there is a sensitivity to the way that question is worded, or suggesting there are conflicting impulses, that there is a great deal of ambivalence. it is certainly true that you have a strong majority -- 60% to 70% of the country -- that does not want a flat national ban on abortion. it is also true -- i think gallup does the best job of this -- always, never, rarely, under richard him since his. usually 60% of the country say never or richard of stanzas -- --it, and they smote
9:04 am
say never or circumstantially allow it. a tweet, "what can the gop do to woo back women voters?" guest: i think political analysts pay too much attention to gender as a basis for political decision-making. race ofean -- the somebody, the degree of religion, whether they are a regular attender of church or synagogue, their income, all of these things make a much bigger difference in whether -- in how people vote than gender does. campaignave a winning with a 10-point gender cap -- gender gap, or a losing campaign. host: is that true even when it comes to the debate over equal pay? guest: that is something where i
9:05 am
think republicans need to say we are in favor of equal pay, we are in favor of the legislation that is already on the books on this issue, and we are in favor of increased enforcement of it if there is some evidence that that has fallen down. but the fundamental idea that $.77 on the dollar is what women make thanks to employer discrimination -- you look at the data, that is not the case. host: what about minimum-wage? "the detroit free press" -- voters want to raise minimum wage but they do not agree on how much or how to make it happen. this is an issue where it is not really a -- guest: this is an issue where not everybody is -- except for me. i think it is a mistake. when you have a weak labor market, raising the minimum wage by 40% would be a mistake.
9:06 am
it would suppress job growth. that does not mean we should just stand pat. we should look at alternative ways of increasing wages across the board, and not just the minimum wage but everywhere. we have had a wage stagnation for a long time in this country, and we need to tackle it with a number of steps him and one of them is taking greater measures to keep health care costs from rising than we have so far. host: rainbow city, alabama. republican, are you there? caller: yes. my comment is i would like to see a president that says once he gets a bill, to mark everything with a yellow marker
9:07 am
that is pork, completely pork. send it back to congress and say i will not sign a bill that has pork. host: mr. potter wrote? -- mr. ponnuru? ivan, i'm sorry, go ahead. caller: get it back to them until they clean everything because there is so much pork. going to usere not pork and stuff like that, but they still use pork. guest: the trouble with that is that if a legislator or president supports it, they will say it is not pork. but that kind of thing -- earmarking -- has really declined over the last few years because of popular opposition to it. the problem in my mind is i think we focus a little too much on that because the fundamental causes are spending problems -- the difference between our spending commitments and -- that is not a pork problem, that is a
9:08 am
problem that has to do with how socialnd how fast security and medicare and medicaid are growing. a fight is happening in public between senator richard burr, the ranking republican on the senate veterans affairs committee, and some veterans groups. the senator sent an open letter to the veterans groups saying, why aren't you getting tougher on the administration and the leadership of general shinseki? but this poses a danger for republicans. the veterans groups tend to view the v.a. as sort of there's, and that is one of the reasons it never gets reform, because they are just completely vested in the way things are. and when people make barely minor efforts at reform, they tend to -- even reforms that would help most veterans -- they
9:09 am
tend to squeal about it and raise a lot of opposition. whatnot imagine, even with senator byrd is saying, that it to be a senator versus veterans groups. i am pessimistic that there will be any great structural reform coming out of this. >> in the new york times this morning, they say republicans in the house are pushing for -- will introduce legislation this week to get any better unable to obtain ava appointment within 30 days option to go outside the system at the department's expense. this is something the administration announced over the weekend. they are open to the idea in the short term as well. guest: i think it is a good idea. i would like to see eventually a more sweeping form of the v.a., but i am not holding my breath. --t: mapleton, in illinois
9:10 am
independent. caller: something you said earlier as it relates to immigration and minorities. i am an american-born mexican from california him and one of the bigger mistakes conservatives make is they lack the sincerity. there's nothing worse, condescending or insulting, to act like you're somebody else or you know what their issues are when you do not. it is very easy to spot, and i want to caution you that cubans, mexicans, and for reagan's -- and puerto ricans are different people. we make up a different block. you need to understand and have people on the ground who really know latino people rather than act like you know. that was just a bit of advice. and i do want to read your manifesto to see if that will be the same kind of evaluation of people when you do not really know something and you act like you do. , where it is immigration reform rank for you on your priority list?
9:11 am
caller: i have a very unique experience. my mother actually divorced our father and married a mexican national. he was a fieldworker, so i saw him and his whole family come in in the 1960's, so i saw firsthand -- i went into law enforcement and was arresting those people and soon we'd --pped deporting them under what we have here, california, if you know anybody in california, it has been completely taken over. it is moving eastward, so it is something that is going to happen and people are going to have to look at it and they will have to realize you cannot go back. that train left the station a long time ago. host: so where does it rank on your priority list? ahead of jobs, the economy, spending cuts? caller: i am an american, so i
9:12 am
always look out for my own people, and i think we should have stopped immigration many years ago, secure the borders. guest: i think his opening comment is well taken, that we do tend to sort of blend in people from very different backgrounds under one group, and it is not just hispanics. we were talking about mexican-americans, human americans, what am alone americans, but also asians. differences, different histories, different religions, different languages, and people do tend to lump them all together, or us all together, i should say. from twitter, "how can the republican party have an agenda in 2016 when the party is fractured?" guest: that is a perennial problem for the opposition party, a party that does not have the white house and has no formal leader under the party.
9:13 am
100 you need to have is the flowers bloom and have different people promoting different ideas and see what sticks. we are trying to host: start that process up. to startwe are trying that process up. brenda, you are up. caller: republicans do believe in choice. however, if the question were phrased, "you you want your tax dollars to pay for others' abortions or anybody's abortions ," it would be a whole different issue. with equal rights being so important, ask yourself, what about the rights of the father's choice to protect his unborn child? there are all kinds of policy questions surrounding abortion where there are pro-life majorities. late term abortion is one, taxpayer funding, but whether
9:14 am
there should be some sort of parental consent. those are issues where there is a majority. on the other side, there is a pro-choice majority of the question is going to be, should people have been raped, be able to have an abortion. both sides of the debate can run into the trouble with public opinion. lucie, florida, democratic caller. good morning, bob. morning.ood i love watching your show. i have learned so much from it. thank you for being able to listen to my viewpoint. ,y wife is -- immigration wise she feels everybody is a new citizen, and she loves it.
9:15 am
most is whenme the , and wee over illegally have to stop it. have them go through the .aperwork father was in world war ii, my grandfather in world war i. make him go into the military for so many years, and then give them citizenship. -- america is still the greatest country in the world. one last thing, i really wish we would go after the funds that are owed to us by russia during world war ii. host: we will leave it there and stick to immigration. guest: it is funny that the book we are talking about does not deal with abortion and immigration, and this -- these
9:16 am
are patent issues where a lot of callers have opinions. i think were immigration -- i think immigration has been a good thing for this country, so i disagree with the previous caller who said we should stop it. it is more important to move basis forskills immigration, and it is very important to encourage assimilation. until i have a neighbor -- and immigration policy -- that is both the interest of the people already here and the interests of the immigrants themselves, because we want people to be able to come here and fully participate in american politics, the economy, and culture and think of themselves and be thought of by others as americans. it seems to me you group be selecting for a that might be more likely to be economically successful, and you should encourage them to learn english and so forth, and the same time you have two -- it is hard to assimilate. host: "the wall street journal"
9:17 am
put this chart together, looking at the primaries that are coming , june 20 four, august 5. what are you watching for here? guest: on the republican side, the chief senate primary that is still outstanding under the income and challenges, is senator cochran. the statem and senator, chris mcdaniel. , thank youh ponnuru for your time this morning. thank you for talking to our viewers. guest: you are welcome. host: coming up, we will talk about foreign-policy challenges. we will talk with dan raviv, cbs news national correspondent. right after this news update from c-span radio. >> the commerce department says orders for u.s. factories for long lasting many fractured
9:18 am
goods rose for a third month in april, but most of the demand came from military aircraft. orders for durable manufacturing .8% after a three point 6% gain in march. an associated press a call are pay study finds the median pay package for a ceo rose above eight figures for the first time last year, propelled by a soaring stock market. ahead of a typical large public 10 pointarned a record $5 million, an increase of 8.8%, from $9.6 million in 2012. this exclusive from politico playbook. they say the initial printing of hillary clinton's hard choices was one million books, and is sold out after the publisher give both a mother's day excerpt. she tweets than in her new book
9:19 am
she is proud of what we accomplished at the state department. that book will be released on june 10. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. can now take c-span with you wherever you go with our pp for smartphone or tablet. listen to all three c-span tv channels, listen to c-span radio anytime. you can tune in where you want. play broadcasts of recent shows from our signature programs, ike after words, the communicators, and q&a. download your free app online for your iphone, android, or blackberry. >> for over 35 years, c-span brings public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings am a white house events, and conferences.
9:20 am
offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house, all as a public service of private industry. we are c-span, created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago, brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite or buyer. watch us in hd, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with dan raviv , cbs news' national correspondent, talking about middle east foreign policy challenges for the president. is there trouble ahead? why are there challenges? guest: isn't there always? the big topics right now are russia's move into ukraine, grabbing crimea, still pressuring with a lot of violence. what else comes to mind echo the middle east. the u.s. was trying to mediate between the uas -- between the israelis and palestinians. it fell apart two weeks ago, and i don't think secretary john
9:21 am
state kerry is willing to put his prestige into it again. so the u.s. lost two points there. the syrian civil war treasury, were the u.s. is not absolutely what side it is on -- not absolutely sure what side it is on and who we favor. we feel challenged by china, and then we get these occasional crises like the u.s. wants to -- theyd the could net kidnapped schoolgirls in nigeria. barack obama i am sure wakes up to a basket load of foreign issues every moment -- every morning. host: egypt, too. guest: since the overthrow of hosni mubarak come in who was an ally of the u.s. -- maybe not a nice guy, a dictator -- but since then the u.s. has not been sure about what it wants in egypt. we had a muslim brotherhood government. now we have a military led
9:22 am
government, almost for sure. the u.s. has to decide what the attitude is. we are a major source of aid to egypt. will we use our clout? how can we effect that important country. host: the financial times this morning -- "trouble abroad. u.s. foreign-policy barack obama is accused of timidity oversight. a he still seems to be in tune with the republic mr. obama faces, but now the accusation that there is too little. even john kerry seemed to this international perception in a speech last week. we cannot allow a hangover from the excessive interventionism of
9:23 am
the last decade to lead now to access of isolationism -- to in excess of isolationism." [applause] almost everybody in the past few years has been saying, what is the united states what is with the united states? is it possible that president obama wants the u.s. to take a small role? there are some signs of that. derisively, as this described as the white house leading from behind. that is terrific. -- other countries begin pitch in. we don't have to put men and women in uniform at risk. there is that big? then maybe that is what mr. obama wanted. we will speak tomorrow about the international agenda. guest: a reset on some topics, all those that you and i just mentioned, i think the president touched on that last point.
9:24 am
host: what does he need to say to the sources you're talking about, the sources saying what is going on with the united states? guest: i expect president obama will say the united states is still a leader. ent like "get a statem we are the beacon of hope." some people who are now in the obama administration say the previous administrations did far too much, starting with the war in iraq, which they say was not necessary. after that, afghanistan, which was mishandled. the pendulum always swings too far, so i can see the criticism that the obama administration so much did not want to be george w. bush and dick cheney, that perhaps they have swung too far the other way. speech thathat we will have tomorrow sound like
9:25 am
past speeches? guest: remember mad libs, where you had to fill in words, etc.? the theme of the united states in general supporting general freedom does not change much. -- you current topics have to say something about the syrian civil war, something about russia's challenge in ukraine and perhaps elsewhere, so there are recurring topics. this is closely watched around the world, so, yes, i think obama foreign-policy is important. it affects where countries invest. will foreigners buy our bonds? are they interested in american stock market? will they build new factories in this country? raviv is our guest this morning. we are talking about foreign-policy challenges in the middle east. raviv, the front page of "the new york times" yesterday shows this picture of pope francis taking an unscheduled
9:26 am
stop sunday at the concrete barrier separating bethlehem from jerusalem. he has gotten both sides to agree to come to the vatican for a prayer session. what does this do to the efforts from the united states for mideast peace? what does it say about the challenges there? i don't think there will be much lasting impact. thes nice that the pope got president and the 90-year-old former president, share on -- sharon peres. it is a nice thing, and believe me, there are israelis and palestinians to definitely want him to get along, want to avoid violence. it is just that their leaders and negotiators cannot seem to come to terms for the future shape of a palestinian state, and what rights would be. was the sovereignty would or would not be through the army,
9:27 am
things like that. always saying it is about security. the palestinians wanting dignity and a decent independent nation. i don't think we have gotten any .loser with that com with the israelis say about the wall in bethlehem -- and it runs really as a fence or a wall for many miles, separating the west tank from israel. the israelis say it prevents is suicide bombers from getting through, and there have been hardly any since this ugly barrier was put up. so netanyahu got to say to the pope yesterday that is while though wall is there. and he asked the pope for a matching visit celebrating the wall in jerusalem. the pope getting rehabilitated. one person went to that wall to, again, showing in even had -- and he preached to both sides -- please, let's go toward peace.
9:28 am
do not misuse religion for violence. why is this being put on the forefront by the pope? what does this mean in the broader area of the middle east? guest: i am not sure the israeli-palestinian issue is an issue for the pope. for christians around the world, jerusalem is a holy city. anything in the holy land and jerusalem is always important, it is always there. when the pope got on his plane and was questioned by reporters, the headline shifted to the suspect -- to the subject of abuse, of young people by priests. that became the headline. the pope got back to regular business. he was asked by reporters about scandal having to do with vatican financing. it seems all the leaders in the world -- yes, even pope francis -- they spend a little time on the israeli-palestinian dispute.
9:29 am
they have spent nine months on it, but also our fingers are burned. we do not make any progress, and we back off for a while. host: what is going on with iran and our allegations toward nuclear power? guest: the u.s. is part of six and they reached an interim deal last november and now there is another clock ticking. according to the clock, by late july, we are supposed to reach a furnace single or extend the talks for another six months or so. is notd is, iran going to stop the iraqi heavy water reactor. it can be used to build plutonium bombs. wants to stopwest that, but iran says it is all for peaceful purposes. but i have this feeling it has
9:30 am
to go one way or the other by july. either we will make a breakthrough, the in agreement. the west, including the u.s., would cancel many of the ironic sanctions. that is what the a rainy and we get. we might return to the armed military threat. there might be a strike on iran's nuclear facilities during host host: hi, jeffrey. you are on the air. good morning. comment is i am sick and tired people talking about what president obama is not doing. why don't they get together and work for this country and try to do something that we can benefit
9:31 am
and try helping him instead of trying to bring down and destroyed him western mark --? that he have to mention won the nobel peace prize in his first year in office during around the world, there was surprise at that. it was the hope that he would be very different. that he would not be george w. bush. that is in part why we hear disappointment around the world. he will tell you that european alliances are better than ever despite big bumps in the road the the nsa being caught by snowden lakes having eavesdropped on the german chancellor's phone calls and all sorts of other spying. are tripsell you that are good. he is improved rations -- relations.
9:32 am
one thing that the caller should remember is that we are in an election year. electionsidterm coming up, we are going to hear a lot of criticism that says it has been a failure. taken all in balance. host: this is a tweet from one of our viewers. how important is it for the white house to state their policy to the world? it is not always one-size-fits-all. there are various parts of the world where we have taken the side of an authoritarian government that we might not like. that was true in egypt for years. obama administration is not proud when it is linked with authoritarian rulers, but maybe you have to. the u.s. military is helping in the search for the kidnapped
9:33 am
schoolgirls in nigeria. it has the other day been hard to deal with the military because the units are accused of human rights violations. you can't just say one thing that is going to work everywhere. area -- the miami herald reports that the girls have been located. i usually work on the radio. the chief military officer of nigeria announces that we know where they are. it was a heated encounter. a lot of protesters of gone to the capital. another crowd of came out to support the government on this issue. is the army doing enough to find the girls? he gave a speech.
9:34 am
he said we know where the girls are. we can't yet them up. you don't want us to go in because they might kill the girls. we are taking action. i have heard this from other officials about the military in nigeria, they are not necessarily reliable. don't believe everything they say. i haven't gotten any confirmation that the girls have been located. the it was reported or assumed that they have been broken up into small groups. in,: richard rogers tweets too many countries are holding america's jacket. guest: that has changed. we had members of nato taking part of afghanistan. i still feel the united states is making it clearer than ever that if we intervene in a situation and we try to help,
9:35 am
there might be a civil war in south sudan that is suffering horrible violence, the u.s. supports the african union or another group. sound a littleto bit like we are holding the coat and giving them a lot of money and advice and hoping that the local forces will take care of it. host: at this point, the pope is a better the amount -- diplomat. i am wondering why nobody mentions that israel has 500 nuclear warheads? howt: my book talks about they developed a nuclear arsenal. secret.his is in
9:36 am
the general take is that if anybody has these weapons, we have to after what happened during world war ii and the holocaust. never again can we be defenseless. what do you do with nuclear weapons? your phone call is fascinating. they are not going to use it to solve the palestinian issue or protect the borders or stop terrorists from crossing and attacking israelis. nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, what do you do on the ground? where do you need police roadblocks and checkpoints? can you set up a palestinian state that will live side-by-side in peace? i am still hopeful that it will happen. host: what about the numbers question mark --? you're going to think
9:37 am
that they keep building more. you replacending is or renovate. by can be the strategist, there is no reason that they meet -- need more than 200 nuclear weapons. they can put them on missiles or submarines. i think offer the israelis don't mind the leaks that make some of their neighbors afraid of them. host: we will go to michael in california. caller: i am trying to clarify some terms. interventionalism include the incineration of 3000 americans.
9:38 am
is that the prize your warden for not liberating 56 million souls? i will take your answer off the phone. guest: george w. bush did some terrific things. he responded to 9/11 in a way that the american people wanted. were being sheltered in afghanistan. we are overthrowing the taliban and we will get al qaeda on the run. in part because of the decision to also invade iraq, a lot of the pressure was listed in afghanistan. osama bin laden got away. the bush administration incredibly, wonderfully helped with various health programs fighting aids in africa. african countries are very grateful to the united states. in every administration, there is good and bad. i take your point.
9:39 am
host: we have a caller in las vegas. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. the president's forms -- foreign policy. i agree with everything he is saferas far as being a nation and safer world. nations of the world, we are being more of a leader at .ome guest: i will answer that.
9:40 am
c-span always has a great mix. i will put it in the foreign-policy basket. the obama administration does see as its main duty to keep americans safe around the world. especially here in the 50 states. that means counterterrorism. you may see barack obama as a liberal and wonder why he would support the nsa. why would they need all that metadata from phone calls? as president sees his duty keeping americans safe from terrorism. people ask if we are safer before 9/11 and i would say yes. obviously, what those hijackers that is not going to happen. they might attack us in different ways and the administration is aware of that.
9:41 am
host: we have a democratic color in philadelphia. caller: i just wanted to say that my personal opinion is we as americans don't have ourselves together. we can keep ourselves protected. overseas. involved here.e too many issues i feel like we need to get ourselves together first and then we can lend a helping hand where it is needed. into everyed to jump single situation that arises. they can't handle their own situations. everyone has to go through something in order to get somewhere.
9:42 am
if it has an with us, i can see that. maybe we are protecting our interests in countries or a region. wrong there is nothing with that. nations do do that. i sympathize and empathize with the the caller is saying, i would be concerned if we hold back. the whole world still looks to the u.s. to find out what we think and what we will do. we are big and we have a responsibility from the in big. chew gum at the same time. we can work on our domestic priorities. we can improve education and our inner cities and pass a farm bill and at the same time have an effective foreign-policy.
9:43 am
foreign-policy is very little. it is less than one percent of the federal budget. it gives us clout when we decide to use it. host: janet is a republican caller in west virginia. caller: i want to talk about the palestinians and israel. that will never happen. they do not want peace. they have a little country over there. why don't they leave them alone? they can't let their guard down. they will according to the bible and that will be too late. when you said they, you meant israel? caller: yes. guest: there you are. we are hearing hope and i don't want to be presumptuous, but
9:44 am
that could be faith-based hope. there are a lot of churches. american jews are only two percent of the population who care about israel. a lot of evangelical christians care about the holy land. they usually take israel's side. they are being stubborn about security. they have tried to help the palestinians. they make a point that israel is so concerned about security that there are too many checkpoints and roadblocks that keep women from getting to the hospital when they are pregnant. they add up to a situation. you can see why kerry wants to change it last year. he could not get them to agree. you can see why everyone is concerned. we would like peace there. what is happening just to the
9:45 am
north with 160,000 people killed in three years of civil war with 2 million refugees, it is far worse. there we are just confused and we are not helping at much and russia is pouring weapons into the assad government. that is going on and on with more killing. host: let's take a look inside iran. iranianst of a young because of the happy video. what is the story. there is a battle in iran between hard-liners and moderates. the hardliner is the supreme leader of the country. the president who was elected for more is our hope moderation. some cynics may say that they can't be moderate.
9:46 am
he certainly wanted to appear moderate. he visited new york and found himself chatting on the phone with barack obama. what a breakthrough considering the hostage crisis that we lived through. there's a chance of better relations. the hard-liners don't want it here and some young people when in an videoed themselves and put it on youtube of them dancing. it all looked happy to pharrell williams song. they were arrested and they are to be prosecuted. that is the warning that they don't want to be western. that can affect the nuclear issue. that can affect iran as an oil exporter. it can affect them as a supporter of hezbollah. would a moderate government be easier to get along with? probably.
9:47 am
the hard-liners chant "death to america." of theirt do they make moderate president and the things he says and does? prolific tweeter. tweets, he hired an agency to do that. an agency and in english some people say it is in the u.s. and some people say it is in london. he tweets himself in farsi. he believes in communication. if you can't beat them, join them. streetember the demonstrations. they were using youtube and twitter. the government is saying we can use it to. host: we have a democratic
9:48 am
color. in order to understand what is going on in the middle east, a couple of things have to be taken into account. israeli plan and the byer is the clean break plan people at the brookings institute and the other washington think tanks. the intent is to change the world in the middle east to israel's liking. host: what evidence do you have of that? i have been and tetley studying this issue. guest: wesley clark has written
9:49 am
a book and cited seven states that were targets of these plans. book pretextd's for war. there is a sentiment and i have heard that reference before to wesley clark. guest: i am going to have to check out that book. other books begin with an animus toward the state of israel. state wasewish established in 1948 after world war ii, there was a lot of sympathy around the world including in the united states. 6 million jews had just been murdered by the not sees. israel was a small, growing economy. they were likable. the six-day war happened in 1967 and at first, that was cheered.
9:50 am
israel defend itself i all of the surrounding arab countries and defeat them in six days. that has been an albatross for the israelis. gaza is still a problem. they did pull out in 2005. the golan heights, syria demanded back. the west bank is what we are really talking about. this is where we have problems. there is this feeling of humiliation. settlers say they have a right that goes back to the biblical years to be there. the west bank and jerusalem are the real problems. reading on having covered israel for decades is that it security,a search for
9:51 am
that concerned that its back is against the wall. it is the real israeli viewpoint. they have to have spies all over the region. i have written about espionage a lot. that drives the israelis. i don't think they want to dominate the region. they believe they have real reason to be concerned that there arab neighbors to not accept them. they're still searching for full acceptance. ben is a democratic color. caller: i have a question about the changing dynamic of the conflict in the middle east. this is something that has diminished the role of a formal negotiations as a way to resolve conflict. to news given way
9:52 am
approaches. this is something commentators don't mention things like the boycott and sanctions movement that has the israelis very concerned. things such as the reliance on the palestinian's on international law. in especially through the u.n. the pope is referring to the state of palestine. society and civil the churches, especially in europe but increasingly in the united states. the churches are starting to play a role a little bit reminiscent of the abolitionists and the civil rights movement. this is generally on the
9:53 am
palestinian side. guest: the government of israel is concerned about these things and believes the boycott movement could be a danger. see it to their credibility and acceptance. that has always been there concerned. now, the rest of the world is questioning whether or not there should be a jewish state. what secretary of state kerry told the israelis is if you don't reach an agreement with , thislestinian government is going to go on and on and palestinians are going to have more children and they might outnumber you. you could wind up with an
9:54 am
apartheid situation. you are ruling over a majority that you are not giving full rights to. carry with through the term apartheid. toe factions of israel want move quickly toward peace. netanyahu and his cabinet are very cautious and reluctant to make concessions. what about international law? palestinianses the a sense that they have more credibility. that means a lot. they have a seat in the u.n. general assembly. they want their credibility. the is a theme in much of arab world and islamic countries. we should recognize that. people's dignity should be respected. they also won their rights. arab was never a state of palestine before 1967.
9:55 am
achievedtinians have peoplehood. everybody seems to agree there should be two states, israel and palestine. host: marie is in reno, nevada. caller: can you hear me? my question is why do we keep giving billions of dollars to israel when we could bring that money back to the u.s. infrastructure and start having loans and grants so we can start manufacturing? guest: there are a few reasons. we are very close to the capital. it is a very small percentage of foreign aid. israel has been a top recipient
9:56 am
of u.s. foreign aid. host: it is not anymore? it is afghanistan, but that has probably been scaled back. we're only talking about two or $3 billion a year. aid, it is being reduced as well. it is not financial aid, it is military aid. usually there are strings attached. the aid ino spend the u.s. and buy american products. u.s. defenser the industry to have foreign customers. israel tried out the weapons. their technology is top notch. they give feedback as to how these things work. host: elite u.s. troops are
9:57 am
helping africans combat terror. special operations are forming elite counterterrorist organizations. guest: if you were to meet someone who is on leave from the whereif you asked them they have been lately they might tell you unbelievable places. in military is giving advice small teams and all sorts of countries that have a terrorism threat.
9:58 am
it is often from some al qaeda affiliate. in africa, there are several. that is potent. there are others, even in nigeria where they kidnapped the schoolgirls. n al qaeda affiliate. we think it is important to keep an eye on them. occasionally we will send local -- military teams to train the locals to be more effective. have countries in africa that could be taken over if we are not vigilant. an independent scholar in lynchburg, virginia. my question is, in 1948
9:59 am
,hen israel was established that was the geneva conference. [inaudible]erence, we're going to have to let you go. it is difficult to hear. commentyou just made a that prior to 1967, there was no palestinian state. jordan controlled the west bank and egypt controlled gaza. why did they call for a palestinian state? when people referred to palestinians, they were talking about jews. put the toothpaste
10:00 am
back in the tube. good luck with your book. guest: that is a strong point in the end. you can't reverse history. the palestinians have achieved a sense of april hood. -- peoplehood. you cannot reverse that. i was pointing out that it changed a lot since 1867. some of it was achieved by the late yasser arafat. byput the plo on the map carrying out tell of -- terrorism. it has been a weird 50 years. a time magazine graphic that was put together. this is from march of this year.