Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal  CSPAN  July 14, 2013 7:00am-10:01am EDT

7:00 am
debating the advantages and disadvantages of delaying its implementation. then former ambassador to morocco marc ginsberg discusses recent events in egypt and the u.s. response so far. ♪ good morning. it is sunday, july 14th, 2013. you will spend the first 45 minutes or so looking at items thehe majors -- in newsprint late last night in sanford, florida, the jury found george zimmerman not guilty of manslaughter and murder charges in the shooting death of trayvon martin. we will read stories and comments on that. we will spend the first 45 minutes on a question about immigration. we are asking you about economic growth rate how important is immigration reform to economic growth?
7:01 am
the numbers to use you can also reach us on twitter. we are @cspanwj. we have posted the question this morning on facebook. you can always e-mail us at we will get to your phone calls momentarily. go ahead and dial in. we are talking about immigration reform and economic growth. in cq weekly, they talk about the program called either a fight which is part -- e-verify which is part of the senate legislation. they write
7:02 am
we will pull back and show you also a graphic look at who is using e-verify. it has been growing. if we look at the chart the idea of immigration reform and economic growth is part of president obama's weekly radio address. here's what he had to say. [video clip] >> here in america, we have
7:03 am
always been a nation of immigrants. that is what has kept our workforce dynamic, our business is on the cutting edge, and our economy the strongest in the world. under the current system, too many smart, hard-working immigrants are prevented from contributing. the migration reform would make easier for highly skilled immigrants and those who study at our colleges and universities to start businesses and create jobs in america. foreign companies would be more likely to invest here. the demand for goods and services would go up, creating more jobs for american workers. every worker and business would be required to pay their fair share in taxes, reducing our deficit i nearly $850 billion over the next two decades. portion ofnd a large those taxes towards retirement programs and millions of americans depend on them. social security would get over the long term, adding two years to the life of the program's trust fund. that is what immigration reform
7:04 am
would mean for our economy. it only if we act. if we do not do anything, our workforce will continue to shrink as baby boomers -- baby boomers retire. american workers will have to make do with lower wages and fewer protections. without more immigrants and businesses paying their taxes, our deficit will be higher and programs like social security will be under more strain. obama's weekly address to our question for you is about immigration reform and how important is it to economic growth -- we have a line for business owners -- a quick look at facebook. this is from kurt who writes see a lot of economic growth. george says --
7:05 am
let's go to phones. norristown, pennsylvania. caller: good morning. peopleno problem with seeking their families, but it has to be fair across the board. what about all of these people that have no jobs now? what do you do about all of them? they will keep coming and coming, and where are we going to get jobs from? from, they do not hire blacks. they only hire within their community. host: where are you in pennsylvania? caller: norristown, pennsylvania. our town has been overwhelmed with them. host: in what kind of jobs? theer: all the job sprint
7:06 am
illegals have taken all of our jobs. we have young black woman -- black men and white men not working. landlords are letting mexicans pile in. that way they can pay their rent. there are blacks and whites who cannot do that. host: let's go to east orange, new jersey. caller: good morning. i agree with the last caller. i work for a moving and storage company. i worked down at the shore. when i am on my way to work or on the bus, it is 16 immigrants and just to blacks or maybe a white will get on or an indian will get on. i have no problem with immigration. but illegal immigration, i'm getting paid $8.50 an hour. i am busting my but. -- my butt. we do not even have jobs.
7:07 am
need on thiss later. host: have you found yourself losing out a job and immigrant? caller: absolutely. i went back to school for medical -- i went back to the er. i was told that they wanted somebody bilingual. in the hospital. ?hy should i have been denied i'm doing everything i'm supposed to do. yet i am denied. the construction. it is not only the blacks but the white guys. they do not even have construction job sprint -- jobs. they have 7-eleven. he did not even understand english good how did he fill out an application? host: let's hear from a business
7:08 am
owner in new jersey. otis, go ahead. caller: good morning. wrong about it is them letting the 11 million people come in to the legal citizens because first of all, -- they camely, here illegally, and they are taking our funds. my son is going to college, and i have to pay this money out of hock for him to go to college. , and they arele giving them free education. host: what kind of business do you own? caller: a construction company. host: what kind of people do you hire, recent immigrants for example? caller: if they do not have their social security card for birth certificate and driver's
7:09 am
license, i do not hire them. ok? they come to my site. i hired last year to guys to do a job -- two guys to do a job. later, it wasays like four or five of them coming for more jobs. they told me that they will work for less. they do not have any green cards. me as a legitimate business owner, what am i supposed to do? am i supposed to report them or what? it is very unfair. like somebody i know, they were going for social security benefits because they were hurt. when they were in the social security office, it was a guy next to them from africa, and they were telling him about when he would receive money and
7:10 am
everything like that, but on the other hand, they were giving him a hard time for trying to get his. host: otis is on our line for business owners. he's expressing concern over verification. we started the program looking at e-verify. in cq weekly, they write that small business owners worry about errors. next up a caller from pennsylvania, a republican caller. caller: the only thing that we all agree on -- i want to start
7:11 am
off with a hypothetical -- let's theree if 25 years ago were a few million and maybe begin to build 11-15,000,000 really poor, starving like and what people, they broke into mexico over 20 years and disappeared into the shadows of mexico, and mexico had a thriving economy, and we said we were bringing diversity to the homogenous population. we began to take their jobs. we began to march in the streets with american flags demanding english-language signs in hardware stores and english- language ballots and free medical coverage and amnesty. what with the mexican people do? would they be convinced we were enriching them with diversity? no, they would have our army -- their army opened fire. we all know that. the question on
7:12 am
economic growth, how important is it for us to reconcile 11 million undocumented workers in the country? how important is that for overall economic growth? ca: i agree with the lady from norristown. i grew up for a from that. most of the immigrants have come over the last 25 years. it was the work ethic of the black-and-white people together. it is our only chance to secure the border. we have been together for 400 years. we are still a family. ofs is a biracial nation about 95% white with a small black minority. area,f these jobs in this there are like 50 people up for one job at nine dollars per hour. the meatpacking packs around
7:13 am
here brought in mexicans about 25 years ago. and room what people here making a living wage 25 or 30 years ago. they were putting their kids through college with neat packing jobs. there were always people to do that job. some of these small meatpacking plants pay eight dollars an hour. it has driven wages downgrade even people like steve king who comes from iowa. to say, whatever you hear john mccain or george bush or barack obama say that these people are doing jobs the american people do not do, remember to insert something -- it is the job that they never had to do. they do not really have a clue but what is going on. host: that was j in pennsylvania. a couple more face -- facebook comments on how important immigration reform is to economic growth
7:14 am
jasmine in arkansas, good morning. sayer: i just wanted to that i agree with the last color. i am 19 and in college. that we need some sort of immigration reform going on. [indiscernible] everyone,eel that blacks and whites, i do not feel like anybody should discriminate towards anybody as long as you have a job, do not complain. do you know what i mean? there are people here, and we have to do with it.
7:15 am
there are people here. we have to do things to keep an overflow of people coming in. jasmine, has the influx of immigrants in arkansas caused any economic growth or harm to you? caller: i live in southeast arkansas. i feel like the jobs they do take are the jobs we usually do not consider taking anyway. i feel that the jobs that they have, they are not high-level jobs. they're mostly agricultural jobs. they worked in the tomato fields. they cannot get regular jobs. most of the time they cannot get those jobs. see -- i do not workingllegal immigrant in a fancy restaurant or in a grocery store or anything like
7:16 am
that. i do not understand. i feel like these are preconceived ideas about immigrants. call.we appreciate your we have set aside a call for business owners. jimmy is in tennessee, in a more astounded, tennessee. good morning. -- morris town, tennessee. good morning. are you there? lakeland, florida. good morning on our independent line. caller: thank you for c-span. i just want to reiterate on what the gentleman said about the business owners -- it is true. i am in lakeland, florida. there are a lot of panhandlers out here who would love to have a job in the low income range. to what obama said, he is talking about having immigrants
7:17 am
starting businesses in the united states to put american workers to work. do you know what? how about all the businesses that took off and are putting americans out of work? i do not agree with what he said. they are taking our jobs. i have been doing construction all my life. i'm a $22 an hour up north. i moved to florida because my mom passed away. i inherited the house. now i am stuck here. there is no work for anybody in the construction industry unless you are an immigrant. host: when you show up to a construction site, give us an example -- your side-by-side with somebody who is an immigrant, legal or whatever -- what is that experience like? how do they choose between somebody like you who has experience and somebody else? caller: they can hire three of them for one of me. for the experience i have. up north, i trained brazilians. they are very hard-working.
7:18 am
you are right. they do not work me. they worked their way debts -- way. these are guys overstaying their visas prayed i understand they want to be here. pay they catch up to your -- i do notrageous even know what else to say. i want to reiterate on what the guy said. it is blacks and whites standing together. we are a nation of blacks and whites pretty much going against what is going on in this country. big business, they want to take a business where it is cheaper. a are integrating all of the immigrants here to take over jobs that are left over. there is nothing left for the american people. in florida, there certainly must be plenty of hispanic legal workers. caller: of course, but there are a lot more illegals i bet you. host: that was armand and
7:19 am
florida. the news from sanford, florida, the front page of the "washington post" -- our question this morning is about immigration and economic growth -- it will also be part of our discussion on "newsmakers" with representative bob goodlatte. or is part of what he had to
7:20 am
say. [video clip] if the president tries to drive this issue either by threatening to do what you described or by trying to jam something down the throats of the american people and their representatives in the house that they do not want, that that will have a negative impact on the process and will not allow us to get to where we need to in terms of trying to solve the problem of our broken immigration system. for example, when we talk about senator marco rubio, somebody who i admire, i do not agree with his bill. i've had the opportunity to discuss with him. there are things he would like to change grade i agree with him when he says that we have de facto amnesty, we have a lack of enforcement of our laws today. we are missing a great opportunity to grow our economy by having legal immigration programs that work to help create economic growth. with regard to the president's children whohe
7:21 am
were brought here illegally by their parents, that he is doing this deferred prosecution, that kind of discretion was nearly -- clearly written into the law on a case-by-case basis. when you do it for hundreds of thousands of people, he's building tremendous mistrust. you saw that in a bill passed a few weeks ago here in the house, all but six republicans voted to cut off the funding to allow that to be done. why? that is the prerogative of the congress, not the president. while we can find and look for common ground about what to do with those people, those children that were brought here, when he tries to say that the executive has the authority to do things that are clearly set forth in the constitution as the prerogative of the congress, he is inviting both problems for his administration and inviting disaster for the effort to bring about immigration reform. our conversation
7:22 am
with bob goodlatte this morning on "newsmakers" at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. your comments about how important economic growth is for immigration reform -- we set aside a line for business owners which is let's hear from jimmy in tennessee. did i get you? caller: i am here. host: what kind of business do you own? host: heating and air -- caller: heating and air. it is not the fact that they come in -- the majority of the business, they work as subcontractors to other businesses. i have been doing this for 30 years. anybody doing concrete, they are, finishing,
7:23 am
working people out of a job. i started off poor working when i was young. restaurant, ain a place to get some experience and go. those jobs are not there anymore. if you look in the back s, it is all mexicans. it is what it has come to. i also work in other areas where there are other people that check on this for benefits. the government has them set up where they cannot ask questions. if you ask a question, then you are discriminating against them. you let them bend the rules around their finger. are those mostly state
7:24 am
officials or federal officials? caller: they work for state offices. hear from another business owner, david in georgia. good morning. caller: good morning. host: what kind of business do you have? --ller: i am an independent [indiscernible] i can address what goes on in trucking where you have three or four mexican drivers in a route, but the real answers to a lot of this are profound. our government wants to play politics. that is about 90% of what the problem is. system used the e-verify as it was intended to be used, fund it and use it, this problem would disappear. they want to play politics. host: do you have any confidence
7:25 am
that they will fully fund it if they pass an immigration bill? caller: no, because the money they are getting from the people who are using these immigrants for cheap wages funds their campaigns. this is a profound problem throughout our american system. until it is addressed, we are going to have this problem. they use politics to scare people, to get more money for this campaigns, to keep unresolved issue in motion to make themselves look like they are actually doing something. oft: about 20 more minutes your calls and comments on how important you think immigration reform is to admit -- to economic growth. let's check twitter
7:26 am
alan is next up on our democrats line. new haven, connecticut. caller: i just want to say new haven is a sanctuary city, and typically we always have the same liberal lies and propaganda. in order to grow the economy, you must bring back manufacturing. in the 1980szation destroy this country. we have these politicians it about they hire their own before they hire anybody else.
7:27 am
we of college students graduating by the thousands grade what jobs are going to be for these kids? his college even worth it? as it relates to low-wage jobs, we have a particular demographic in america that needs these jobs. they call it the uneducated. not need immigration reform. we need immigration enforcement. host: a piece from douglas holtz director, former cbo and he wrote a piece about immigration reform and economic growth. he wrote
7:28 am
here is gilbert in tulsa, oklahoma. he is on our independent line. caller: good morning. first and foremost, let me say this -- either you have immigration laws that we follow through or we don't. if they cross our southern
7:29 am
border, illegally, and the northern border and people flying in and not leaving, then we need law enforcement. secondly and more importantly, my grandkids when they go in to the entry-level jobs such as working at these fast food restaurants, they cannot get them anymore. they have immigrants who speak nothing but spanish. 40, 50, 60 years old working in the back. i want to say this really quick. i do not want to be cut off. if you want to see what illegal immigration is going to do to this country, watch any baseball game. turn the volume up and listen to the names. a few years ago, i was watching a baseball game, and i saw a whole game and never heard an anglo name. importantly, they hire people from mexico, but they
7:30 am
cannot hire brothers and sisters coming out of the penal system that have served their time in this country. they should be, their rights should be restored because they have paid their dues to society. host: an attack kills seven. a gunman ambushed the united nations peacekeeping team --
7:31 am
also, in africa today, a report from the world section of "the washington post," about nigeria -- a business owner in connecticut and a form business owner, go ahead. caller: i used to be in the roofing business. i paid my employees a eason
7:32 am
salary so they could live, $23 an hour. onn you pay workers comp roofing it is a high rate. that is 30% of what you paid people. above all that. we got run out of business because other people are hiring people from foreign countries .or seven dollars an hour if i had to do a roofing job it would be seven or eight job rejig -- seven or eight hollers, they would do it for five. ,f you remember grapes of wrath they had oklahoma people come to california. they started paying a dollar per hour and when too many people came over they paid $.50 per hour. can you take a complaint
7:33 am
to state or immigration officials? caller: what good does it do? i have to squeal on everybody. i know they are hiring illegal aliens but what am i going to do about it? the problem is this country, the establishment, they want cheap labor. host: let us go to harrisburg pennsylvania. joe is on our republican line. good morning. caller: there is quite a bit of discussion around what happens. if you look at the demographics with the immigrants, if most of them are going to vote they are going to vote in the democratic party. the economic side of it is cheap
7:34 am
labor. if they no longer have that cheap imported labor, that lettuce is going to go to three dollars per head. emigrationenforce laws, terminate the ev goals rather than grant amnesty. s rathernate the illegal than grant amnesty. from a consumer standpoint, are we willing to pay higher prices for things like that? not right now because as the imports come in, the -- thees pay lower wages wages have decreased. it is just a round robin.
7:35 am
if you play employees more they can afford to buy more. will go caller: to our democrats line. caller:thank you for taking my call. i had an epiphany watching you today. i am a white anglo-saxon protestant who learned to speak spanish. by the time i graduated i had jobs in construction. -- inted to move to miami wanted to move to miami to utilize my talents to the fullest. i was told if i speak spanish to continue a conversation in spanish. he was really surprised and told me to call back tomorrow. i did. call he acted like he did not know me.
7:36 am
"i have to tell you, they want somebody who is cuban ." they violated the law but i let it go. i wanted to move into sales but could never move up. a fellow walked in i saw his name and predicted he would get the job off of a jewish name. and he did. the situation up where you get what you can from the people who know you and like you. host: those sorts of situations
7:37 am
are discrimination laws that are on the book. you could have theoretically pressed that case with florida officials. caller: at the same time, you mentioned that, a fellow that came into apply for that job. dropping off the application he walked out and the jewish guy took his application and tore it to pieces. he was indian or pakistani. it turns out he forgot something like a briefcase, and he walked in to my manager tearing up the application. by law you have to keep that on file for 30 days. host: thank you for sharing your story. a few more minutes on immigration reform. it all comes back to the develop in legislation -- to the developing legislation on capitol hill. here is a piece of that this morning, the headline --
7:38 am
7:39 am
john is next on our republican line. hello. caller: c-span has taken over the same narrative that most it is not media -- immigration. backe talking -- you go to the stories of 2006 and 2007,
7:40 am
they used the word illegal. dream children used to be called anchor babies. host: what term would you use instead of immigration? caller: we are talking about the illegals. immigrating is when you come here legally. we allow nearly one million people every year to come here legally. the trouble is we are trying to deal with the people that have come here illegally. we cannot allow 20 million people to come here legally every single year. , the spanish took over the west and had california, colorado, arizona. host: thank you. the headline in "the miami
7:41 am
herald," -- headlin chris is next up, a business owner in louisiana. good morning. what kind of work do you do you do you do?- i work in installation. host: what is your experience working with immigrants? theer: it is messing with money we can do her square feet because the labor is getting cheaper. what i have here in louisiana is, i have been in this business for a while and every time i go
7:42 am
to the bank i am not allowed to get a small business loan but yet i see immigrants coming in and getting small business loans and getting big trucks. i am trying to figure it out. inas born and raised here this country and i do not have the same thing they have access to. host: why do they say they cannot give you a small business loan? enough there is not capital invested, not enough labor, not enough ability to provide. by the loans. host: thank you for your call. independent line -- >caller: thank you.
7:43 am
this whole thing is purely economical. when the mexican invasion came during the 90s we could make $20 per hour doing various construction jobs. now you are lucky if you can get eight dollars per hour and you have to speak spanish. work want to work and we hard and we do a good job. but for eight dollars an hour it is very hard to do. those are 1980s wages. the people that aren't there want to work at the immigrants -- the most permanent damage is that wages are still so low. they haven't recovered and i do not think they are going to recover. and iame here illegally do not believe they should be allowed to stay if they came here illegally. if they are illegal immigrants they are american and deserve all the rights and benefits of being a host: member of this
7:44 am
great nation. host:checking a couple of tweets on the subject, here is one from ron who says rejig -- from ron who says -- an unrelated story on the front page of the new york times this morning --
7:45 am
one more call on the issue of immigration. lewis, hello. with the laste caller that came in. as long as the immigrants go through due process of being legalized there is nothing wrong with that. do it islegal people an issue. than at is no different form of slavery. the economy continues to increase. we are expected to live off of low wages. we have a difficult time getting jobs and all of these people making these decisions, it seems like they turned their head.
7:46 am
the element of we the people has been taken out. we do not have a voice anymore. host: thank you for all of your calls. your conversation continues online. coming up next on c-span's "washington journal," we will -- and later on dean clancy will host part of a roundtable discussion on that very same issue. that is all coming up here on "washington journal." a look ahead at the sunday shows on c-span radio. >> on today's sunday talk shows, topics include changing senate
7:47 am
filibuster rules, immigration reform, and the situation in egypt. c-span rate io read airs the program beginning with nbc's "meet the press." today's guest include harry lee -- terry reed and mitch mcconnell. , abc's "this week," with oklahoma republican representative tom cole, republican senator warned, and democratic senator amy klobuchar. at 2 p.m. it is "fox news sunday." guests include steve king and new york democratic representative steve israel. then michael mccaul, chairman of the homeland security committee. cnn "state of the union" follows at 3 p.m..
7:48 am
been jealous, the president of the naacp. bob schieffer talks was israel he prime minister benjamin netanyahu. -- and the pennsylvania republican congress and mike kelly. the sunday network tv talk shows are brought to you as a public service by the networks and c- span. c-span radio rebroadcasts shows getting at noon eastern with nbc's "meet the press." 1:00, abc's "this week." at 3 p.m., cnn "state of the union." "t 4 p.m. "face the nation with cbs. you can listen across the nation on xm satellite radio channel 119. or you can listen online at c-
7:49 am >> it is anachronistic to say he is a household name but he came pretty close. in the years leading immediately up to the revolution his name was better known in washington or franklin. john dickinson wrote many of the state's first papers and many of the highest level policy documents, constitution, legislation, but he also wrote many more things for ordinary american people. he spoke to them in a way that very few other leaders did. these included newspaper articles, columns, and america 's first patriotic song. my interest in john dixons -- in john dickinson came from early american political theory and religion. i started studying quakerism in the colonial.
7:50 am
and when i cut the revelation his name started coming up. when i try to research him i could not find anything about him. seemed to understand his actions. >> learn more about continental congressman john dickinson next weekend as booktv in american history tv look at the life of delaware. washington journal continues. host: with us is a staff writer on "the hill," focusing articular on the health care act and the individual employee mandate. why is the issue of obama care, the healthcare, back in the news and back on the floor next week? guest: the administration decided to delay a key mandate in the affordable care act,
7:51 am
which is that larger employers provide health insurance to their workers if they have more than 50 workers. whourprised all of us covered the fourth of july week. it turned out they were going to delay this major regulation. the house is going to vote next week to delay that only the employer mandate as the administration already has but the individual mandate, which is a provision that has received so much debate. host: is it not enough of an executive order for the president to say we are only going for a number years? guest: some would argue that president obama does not have the legal authority to do what he did. if the mandate is going to be delayed we cannot expect individuals to carry health and sure it's because through that provision they would have received it. the affordable care act is designed to provide a team of coverage -- a lot of coverage to
7:52 am
a team of people. a lot of people are going to be receiving coverage so it is not a big enough deal for them to carry it. they are going to hold this vote. , repeal,ng to the fund or replace parts of obamacare. if the individual mandate were to go through what would be the effect on individual americans? guest: most americans will be required to carry health insurance or pay a fine if they do not. the fine is about $100 for an individual. if you continue to not health -- to not have health insurance they could rise to $600. the first year people do not have health insurance the fine will probably be less than the cost of covering -- less than the cost of purchasing health
7:53 am
coverage. our topic is the implementation of the health care act and what is is going on next week with the vote. here is how you can join the conversation. the individual mandate, first of all you mentioned that it caught all of you by surprise. what was the reasoning behind it? why did it happen so it was arguedt:
7:54 am
they needed more time to comply with this key mandate because it had been delayed in much of the lawmaking. the administration has many rules to propose to work through the process and to finalize. businesses said they were not going to have time before january 1 next year to develop a topic hated system they are going to have to maintain in order to comply. -- to develop the complicated system they are going to have to maintain in order to comply. theydministration said are going to provide more flexibility. what this did not mention was that the lawmaking was going to be delayed. exchangessurance launch next october and they have a lot on their plate. the colleague wrote about
7:55 am
services delaying the final rules for obamacare, saying the finalized rules were released and will help people make sense of their options. what are these navigators? what they are is something equivalent to an insurance agent. they are not paid for by a certain company. the navigator is supposed to go under service communities in order to help people who may not be familiar with health insurance, understand their options under the law. these new insurance exchanges could offer a variety of new plants that people will be able to comparison shop and -- to comparison shop. senator mike kinsey republicann his
7:56 am
address talked about the republican's call for delaying the implementation of healthcare. [video clip] >> where do we find this authority to pick and choose? alikeicans and democrats are asking how the administration can possibly justify this decision. 20,000l answer is after pages and still adding new regulations and over 100 the new bureaucratic agencies, boards, and programs, they still have not figured out what is in the law or how to make it work. which is why we need to permanently delay the implementation of the law. it appears in the cracks want to help -- so we would be forced into single-payer government one one-size-fits-all healthcare. show the train wreck that this law was destined to be. some of the law's biggest
7:57 am
supporters and even some of authors admit that the law is a mess and will only get worse. still, many of the laws authors, whether because of pride, politics, or genuine belief that the government knows best, stubbornly cling to this law that is so massive, burdensome, bureaucratic, and confusing that it is collapsing under its own weight. we could get the veiled law's proponents out. we could start by dismantling the worst parts of the law first and replacing them with reforms that actually work. int: wyoming senator mike nz the republican address yesterday. what is the senate trying to do with equal measure in the house or delayed parts of the healthcare bill? guest: senate republicans are in the minority so it is going to be hard for them to do anything like this. we did see a press conference for critics of the health-care law this week, where they said they are going to do everything
7:58 am
they can to mirror what the houses going to do. one attempt happened in the appropriations committee markup this week, which i covered. the senate appropriators are working on a pill that will eventually be passed by the full senate. you were republican senators that were proposing amendments to the build that would cut off funding to obamacare. those were all of rejected by the committee, which is dominated by democrats. senators will have a harder time dealing -- knowing what the house is doing. democratic caller from massachusetts. caller: good morning. when i saw the senators beat, it is indicative of what is happening with the republicans. -- to wish they would do the viewing public that are republicans, i ask you to take stock of your family.
7:59 am
you could ask each one of their family members if they are on health care. you will find a whole bunch of them do not have access to healthcare. when they are being lied to by most of these elected representatives, it is a shame. in the military i had children and one of my sons turned 21, i received a letter. my son at that point in time was going to be dropped from the insurance company if he did not go to school. if and when he does go to school military at in the
8:00 am
that time. so, i had a son who has certify palsy deter certiebral palsy and once i retired my his ages are kept and handicap is covered. host: joe, we will get a response. guest: a lot of the criticism joe are common to many democrats. he is saying that we really need and fully law work implemented before we can criticize it. a fair that is possibly point. but i think republicans would the law's idence of delays means it is not going to work. we are seeing the administration struggle so much to merely implement it, how is it possible that it could be functional when comes in effect? host: he talked about his two sons. the part the delay law that would allow young people to is stay on their up through age 26?
8:01 am
guest: no, that is not being affected. family has benefited from that provision. it means parents with employer allowed erage will be to carry their children on their plans until age 26. host: here is norman, oklahoma, robert, independent line. because i calling have a question that nobody has this law ofsuant to obama care. affect obama care ccess to alternative medicine exercise [inaudible]? forve been under homeopathy 61 years and in the hands of a homeopath it works and saves a patient a lot of the chamber procedures and the side effects. originally in
8:02 am
mexi mexico. mexico is a headache but one super good is homeopaths. law : the healthcare doesn't have anything to do with ho homeopathy. anyone be difficult for on the new insurance exchanges unless there's a unique plan that offers coverage procedures.inds of host: back to the votes next week in the house and it will be next week, correct? yes.: host: politico writes that even he administration admits it is unworkable. boehner junction it posed the businesses essures and individuals will place if one mandate is delayed and epublicans are questioning whether the treasury had the heal authority to say it was not going to enforce a portion of health law for a year. what are they trying to get at? i think anyone in washington knows regulators have discretion for enforcing
8:03 am
laws. certain regulations have been and in is legal debate about whether the administration can delay things that way. there is a technicality that the administration says they relied on to delay. what boehner is saying is that employees can't be carry health insurance if their employers are required to offer it. that is why we will have the two-pronged next week delaying the employer plan date which is groups want and republicans are allies of business groups in many cases the hey will delay individual mandate to make sure people who wouldn't be receiving of it won't be penalized. host: you have been the delaying date which yee plan the administration wants. so theoretically democrats could because that is what the president wants. guest: i think we will still see line vote.
8:04 am
i think democrats see the move almost an s as attempt to thwart the affordable care act. i don't think democrats will support it. host: even though the administration wants it? guest: yes. saw that in committee this week. there were certain amendment otes where you would think it would break out and democrats would support what the administration did but they didn't. there is from california. jerry on the republican line. jeri.r: my name is i'm on a precursor type of .rogram in california hospital, the county which is arrowhead. they are being put n the spot because this is a precursor program, and i will not you the doctor -- it is
8:05 am
even a doctor that i have up here. it is a p.a. nd since i have been on this program, it took me one month to antibiotics because it has arrowhead.m -- i had to get on the phone and track my medicine down. me a month to get antibiotics. host: you said that you have a and not a doctor. that is a physician's assistant? to another place, but how am i going to get there if i drive?ave money to there are no options. but i'm telling you, i have been ill, and this p.a., i
8:06 am
--rantee you, i can show you host: jeri, thank you. situation?or her guest: i'm familiar with that area of california and it is a remote that lake arrowhead hospital if it is the of. i'm thinking many in rural areas struggle to get the health coverage they have access to the care and services they want. an united states faces enormous doctor shortage as jeri age and it means the population in general so more people aer physician ved by assistants and nurses. in the "washington post" written the
8:07 am
headline was question what do and a-potties, coffee cups airlines have in common obama care. in connecticut it involves airplane banners on a neighborhood in washington it could get intimate they are interesting in portable toilets at concerts underlying how states to try almost anything to make their pitch in the face of a poorly informed politically divided public with 82 days until the insurance businesses opens for public awareness is low and most polling data show few americans the affordable care act works or even that it exists. the does that say about administration's outreach efforts so far? uest: that was fascinating to look at how different states are rying to serve their populations. in passionate for example the idea of putting advertisements the new insurance exchanges
8:08 am
in port-a-potties at a concert out to ey are reaching young people and young people will be essential for the arketplaces to work plus younger people tend to be healthier and not take up as much healthcare and will balance price increase forced by more senior people. are willingt states to go the extra mile to ensure the marketplaces work. a call from florida on the independent line is next. hello. you are on the air. realistically this is ridiculous. so severe tion is nobody understands what is going on. i don't know anybody who can sort of afford this thing. my partner is finishing up her she is saying they don't understand and don't have a concept of how this will work. nobody can afford this. why can't we have national healthcare? nonsense about
8:09 am
canada and england. i have been in the canadian it was lovely. i don't see why we can't be realistic and intelligent about and handle it problem from a perspective of care for the individual rather than economics corporation. thank you and have a very nice day. the : that is precisely argument we hear from democratic for a some advocating phmore overreaching system rath care which ordable is complicated and the public doesn't understand it. we never should have passed this but nationalize health care but that never would right.own with the host: we have a response to some comments.zi's host: there was at one time talk on capitol hill but repeal and
8:10 am
replace. where are republicans in terms of developing healthcare legislation that they would like implement? guest: probably at the early stages. legislative een language or strong proposals in republics particularly the house that would do something akin to what the affordable care act does in expanding healthcare access. some of the republicans' ideas selling insurance across state lines and minor adjustments to the markets like that. the don't think republicans would support anything remotely close to the terms of care act in government provided healthcare or sanctioned healthcare for the american people. california now and san diego this time, george on t the democratic line. i'm from san diego, california. , biggest concern about this everybody talks about an
8:11 am
you will be able to purchase your insurance. but every time i talk about they look at me like i'm from outer space. where does one find out about this? guest: that is a great question. he exchange is to launch on october 1. we will see more education campaigns and information about the i know the administration has many campaigns planned, as does california, which is running its own insurance exchange contrary to other decided to cede that to the federal government. ut people are very confused by the law and feel like they have not received enough information. feel like they can't navigate it. the administration hopes they can rectify that the next three or so. host: this is a call from maine, on the democratic line. caller: i would like to say i don't hear anybody talking about consequences to the
8:12 am
employees. 53, my husband is 58. e have lost during the recession our jobs and we are living on a quarter of our income. worker who is e and ed 1,000 hours a year by a big sband is hired box store. cut down to eek is 29 hours a week and we are make $24,500 last year as a couple and now that has been rought down because of the affordable care act where we have lost over $80 a week due to his losing hours. i don't know whether or not we eligible for any of these benefits that are coming bitwhether we make a little too much but not enough to be able to afford healthcare.
8:13 am
sick and unable to see doctors or go to the hospit hospital. stabilize you and send you on your way and you get a $2,000 bill. difficult to pay. guest: are you currently insured? caller: no. between a rock and a hard place. not a place we want to be. hard workers but the we r workers are, you know, have -- it is difficult. -- : did you say that maine will they have an insurance exchange? they will. host: thank you for your call. guest: it sounds like denise and would both be eligible for tax subsidies on the exchange based on the income she cited. host: that is part of the law? guest: that is is part of the law. if they didw income qualify for an expanded medicaid -- i can't remember whether
8:14 am
their as expanded medicaid program. i would ask denise to look at that because she could be this.le for if they have not, she will be eligible for a tax subsidy on exchanges in e order to purchase coverage and she will have plans that she can hoose from cheaper to more expensive. so they should be able to find help with the insurance exchange. it will open october 1 and coverage kicks in january 1. the debate returns to capitol hill, it returns to the airwaves with ads from action and or americans for prosperity. here is the ad from the group the healthcare act. >> my daughter had her first chefs art surgery when only 15 hours old. handing her over for surgery is thing i ever had to do. before obama care insurance ompanies could put lifetime caps on your insurance. once you hit it, they don't pay
8:15 am
any more. we were halfway to it before her birthday. thanks to obama care we can and d the care she needs -- satcher i'm paying more attention now. i asked professionals about care. if we can't pick our own doctor getdo i know my family will the care i need? and what am i getting in exchange for higher premiums and paycheck? can i trust the folks in washington with my family's health care? we all deserve some answers. a $1 million campaign by americans for prosperity and other supporting healthcare act by organizing for action. todd is in richmond, virginia,
8:16 am
independent lin. aller: thank you for taking my call. as a 45-year-old man i haven't had insurance for the past five years years. i was out of work over a year as a maintenance te tech. the housing industry i work funded apartment complex. i went through a 10% pay cut to very low for whether i was doing. that time the owner was receiving more than plenty money from that location. my deal is, now that you are not make the corporations insurance, you are going to come after the guy sitting pay trying to struggle to child support and all the bills, crisis, everything that i have to pay up. and now you are going to tell me
8:17 am
$100, i didn't get was -- $100 per week, a month guest: a year. caller: that is not bad. coming after the guy here in the middle? host: thank you for your call. comments?r guest: absolutely. that is the argument that republicans have made in announcement.his if employers are not going to be required to offer insurance, shouldn't be penalized for the not carrying it. but employers will understood the current delay be required to of the this provision law starting in a year. host: one more call, philadelphi philadelphia, donald on the republican line. caller: good morning. have been out of gainful employment for about five years. he jobs i'm able to land are temporary jobs and paying for health insurance out of pocket
8:18 am
is absurd. money, i did make more i'm too smart to pay into a system like obama care. that healthcare should be privatized. factor is we key need to make cuts to the budget. larger ing the budget isn't going to help us. there is no trickle down effect up. there is only trickle that is my reply. host: last question to you about votes coming up next week, when will we see them and will up a couple days or done in one day? uest: i think it could be wednesday or thursday, possibly tuesday. e saw the legislative language last week so they are ready to have this go. i know the news cycle will dominated by these folks because many democrats timesay this is almost 40 the house republicans have tried to do something like this and he bills don't move in the senate. so some would say this is a waste of time.
8:19 am
however it is important for the that they feel a lot of momentum right now with its delay and it fuels their affordable care act. for elise viebeck writes the hill covering this and you can read her reporting at the we continue on healthcare laws nd implementation next with dean clancy and lori lodes who will join us for a roundtable discussion. "washington journal" we will hear from the former advisor to the presiden president. all of that is ahead on "washington journal." stay with us.
8:20 am
with the tion begins beginning of cinema. 1891.arliest film is from this is a camera test that was by the thomas edison company. it is part of a series of his iments that edison and the early ngaged in 1890's. the collection relevance begins with films that were registered for copyright. exposed the negative on strips of photographic contact them to a ffixed cardboard backing and sent it in o the library to be registered as a photograph. you have to think about this for
8:21 am
moment. the paper print collection as it in this sense n really was an historical accide accident. we are very grateful for bureaucrat rary decided that it would be ok to as a photograph. >> see more at 7:00 p.m. eastern easte eastern. part of american history tv on c-span 3. bit an knack tle chronostic to say he was a household name but he came close. in the years leading up to the betterion his name feels known than washington or franklin. wrote many of on the american first state papers and many of the highest level documents, policy documents,
8:22 am
constitutions, legislation. wrote many more things for ordinary american people. spoke to them in a way that very few other leaders did. these include newspaper articles, poems and american's song.patriotic my interest in john dickinson earlyut of my interest in american political theory and religion. i started out studying quakers quakerism in the colonial period. when i got to the revolution his coming up. when i tried to research limit i could find very little about him there was very conflicted and nobody seemed to be able to understand his actions. >> learn more about continental congressman john dickinson next book tv and american history tv look at the history life of dover, delawa delaware. "washington journal" continues.
8:23 am
the house ontes in possibly delaying the implementation of the individual businessman dates we thought we would spend the next 45 minutes or so talking about healthcare ot the law should be delayed. a couple of guests lori lodes is the senior vice president with center for american progress. and we are joined by dean clancy works vice president for public policy. thanks for joining us. the last guest mentioned the media was caught by surprise ith the president's announcement of delaying the business machiman date. move?at a good guest: we are talking about 96% businesses have less than 50 employees so it doesn't effect them. for mostns very little employers and most employees. to get ives us a year the reporting requirement
8:24 am
simplified and give business as more flexibility. there was a little bit of confusion over the last six what the law bout would mean for businesses and how they would comply. is the have seen administration listened to the businesses and tried to take nto account where they were coming from and set up a latform to make it simpler for businesses to comply. ost: dean, was the white house listening to businesses or just not ready? guest: i think it is a little i think what us they are doing is trying to tilt playing field so people end up in government run exchanges. delay, the employer mandate, is a big deal because he law requires the mandate to take place. the president is acting for a ly in waiving it year. and by doing this he is creating terrible unfairness because the individual mandate still applies.
8:25 am
so the mandate will be waived business but remain for you and me. that is up fair and illegal and a larger plan to try to get employers to dump their employees into the run exchanges so they can try to make the exchanges ook like they are successful, popular and working through the 2014 election. in : what does this mean terms of getting more people plans?e government run guest: the good thing for individuals is the marketplace october 1. for those employees whose employers wouldn't have been start offering insurance now they can go on to the exchange and get the nsurance they need starting october 1. depending on how much money they make they will be eligible for a offered to make healthcare more affordable. another point dean raises that important, he said it is illegal. experts are egal saying that is not true, that
8:26 am
rests with t ecretary to implement this law in the way that works. they say ou have is is nothing new. george w. bush did this with the clean air act. actually put in some of the regulations under the clean air act. nothing new. it is the administration trying to figure out how best to make laws work. host: the delay also is an advantage for states in terms of them being able to implement parts of the health care law? states being s of employers themselves i suppose it is some relief for them. to struggleo trying with whether to set up exchanges. two-theurb tkar two-thirds have declined to set up a state based exchange. that is partly the result of a grassroots campaign by groups
8:27 am
block eedom works to exchanges to help reverse the washington takeover. the states also have to struggle whether to go along with .bama care's medicaid expansion half the states have said no thanks to that because it would buster for them in the long run. i think that the thing to with this employer mandate is despite what lori the it is illegal because mandate takes effect january 1 and the president is obligated to enforce it. only flexibility is when to collect the penalty payment. to aid i'm just not going collect the penalty payment. step back from that, we think unfairness of this fully justifies the house to repeal at least dual mandate for a year so it is a level business.ield with big host: we will bring our viewers in the conversation. and dean lori lodes clancy. should the health care law be
8:28 am
delayed? to be usedhe numbers on the screen. the house is going to vote this bill that would delay the individual mandate. agging along with the businessman date being delayed. would it be a good thing to of the e implementation individual mandate? guest: absolutely not. his move by republicans is another attempt to sabotage the law and repeal the law. time the the 38th house voted to essentially repeal the law. is individual mandate extremely important. crux of the y the law and marketplaces that will be set up. will only mean premiums increase for people. based on what dean says and worried about e the cost. but if they are worried about the cost they would be
8:29 am
upporting the individuals mandate because that helps bring the cost down. guest: on the contrary it raises. obama care is full of mandates the cost of insurance. it forces people particularly 20's and ple in there 30's to pay for insurance that is more expensive than it is worth to them. that is what obama care is. it is like a military draft. e are going to draft medical lennials to pay for the health care of other people. works has freedom been pushing a new campaign we call burn your obama care card. to young people especially but all americans draft, pay healthcare the minor user fee fine rather than buying the overpriced obama insurance. host: how much does that user fee fine come to? $95.: that is much less than any of policies will re cost you in the exchange.
8:30 am
ost: let's hear from the callers. we go to romeo, michigan, mark on the independent line. morning.good i want to say since this has been passed my premium has gone from $227 a $491 a month, which is since i'm igh retired. i'm fortunate enough to have a care i believe this whole thing is andgned to frustrate people confuse them to maybe a one-payer system. thought.y host: mark, thank you. guest: i happen to agree with that. i think the ultimate goal of obama care is to get rid of private health insurance and put the government in charge of the entire healthcare system. admitted obama in 2008 he is for single payer government run system and what delaying the by employer mandate and also verificationincome
8:31 am
requirement so people could lie about their income to get the taxpayer subsidies in the exchanges. the point of the exchanges is to tilt the playing field so more r are forced into the government so they can try to keep this thing afloat. healthy ough young people go into the exchanges, then the premiums will spiral up of people will go down and it will collapse. host: back to his comment about his premiums going up, is there correlation with the implementation of obama care? guest: i'm not sure there is. we have been seeing for years is premiums not cketing and people really getting anything more for their money. startingmark might see january 1 is being able to get subsidies to make that ealthcare even more affordable for him. he said he's retired.
8:32 am
sphaoure how he is getting his insurance now if on the individual market but we will see more competition and choices for people moving forward. host: we will look at a couple of key dates as the conversation is understood way with lori lodes and dean clancy. ctober 1 the open enrollment tkpweupblgs. anuary 1, 2014, the skhraeupexs begin. there are 17 state based exchanges. defaulting to the federal exchange. and seven partnership exchanges, facts and figures from the kaiser family foundation. orange, texas, we go to joyce on the republican line. think that the healthcare law should be repealed in its entirety. it is time that washington get realize together and that everything that they do is , themselves ryone
8:33 am
included. sort of i lodes, what political risk did the obama administration consider before aking this decision on the employee mandate? guest: i think there's a lot of considered. what businesses were experiencing and what feedback and were getting from them what we need to have happen. as dean pointed out, we need to join the exchanges and we needs this process to go as and for as possible people to understand that the law is working and that it is to continue to work. the problem is republicans have in waging a campaign freedom works over the past few a lot of eally spread misinformation so people like joyce might not actually understand what the law will for them. million een over $400 spent on ads just telling lies nd have truths about what the law will do. we have to cut through that
8:34 am
during the coming months for see that the law can mean a lot for them. guest: the obama administration going to be e spending $500 million at least and national nts enrollment campaign, putting ads airplanes tties and over beaches. they are doing everything they can. is a desperation and grim determination to get people to basically a hat is raw deal for most people. f you look at the three to one community rating rule in obama care, that one mandate, that young people to pay too much and some people will see their insurance costs go down. see a 13% decrease for people in their early 60's. millennials have to ask themselves why would i do this? some kinds of patriotic feeling?
8:35 am
he fact is a lot of people are uninsured, two-thirds of the under 40. are it costs too much because of government policies that we repealing rather than imposing more government. interest groups including americans for prosperity calling for the repeal of healthcare. [video clip] two years ago caleb began having seizures. the care he had was the world. attention and i have questions about obama care. if we can't pick our own doctor know my family will get the care we need. why where they getting an premiums andhigher smaller paycheck? can i trust the folks in my family's th healthcare? i think we all deserve answers. to calls. tennessee on the democrat line.
8:36 am
first of all, for the imple dark -- simple-minded person such as myself i would like to hear some answers that .re understandable to me i'm just going to give you the and tion that we are in then i want a simplified from you who know going on about i presently am insured. social security. i'm retired. our fe has taken over business and the business itself just about gone to the point that it looks like we are going bankruptcy.ake he has never had any type of insurance at all.
8:37 am
, where does this lan of action that is proceeding going to take her? to acquire some insurance? ands getting on up in years it is time now for her to have insurance. for the question. guest: dennis, you can go to health care health ca ealth and your wife can answer a few simple questions, not long forms but three pages of questions. able to find be the plan that works for her. considerations to consider. the cost, what sort of benefits wants. and one of the important things s depending on how much money your family makes, you may be eligible for subsidies to bring down emium cost even further. so, there really will not be
8:38 am
overburden of premium costs that some people, like dean, are saying there will be. so, i really think the important hing is will have the information you and others need to find out how they get insured. you can go there right now and start answering some of those questions. i don't know the call in line but the government set up a call center. for those who don't want to use actually call and be walked through the process and what it is going to mean. host: dean clancy, what does on?edom works take if the plan date was delayed and bama care was overturned what is freedom work's solution for a national health care policy? guest: patient centered care. we think patients and doctors freely in a her free marketplace can produce a much better health care system what we have. we didn't have patient centered
8:39 am
we about of obama care and need to reinstitute it after we care.l obama we know healthcare can work in the market place. eye surgery laser where there is no insurance or government involvement prices are always going down and up.ity we know that from cosmetic surgery. there is a surgery center, surgery, in oklahoma that just started posting its prices. the result was a bidding war hospitals in that area to try to reduce the cost of surgery. market forces work. people pay out of pocket, for example, instead of relying n insurance companies or the government, that tends to start brings us circle that down prices and improves quality. we needs to change some federal to make that happen and encourage health savings accounts and other market oriented solutions. by doing those things we can have a patient centered healthcare system. your organization think about patient centered healthcare?
8:40 am
guest: i'm not sure what that thing you se one didn't hear dean mention is patients. childhood the preexisting conditions or senior for prescription drugs or the 25-year-old who can because of nsurance his parents and that is where it .s interesting first of all, the republicans haven't offered a plan to runninganything despite on it. and when they do they use uzzwords lake patient centered care but the patient is not at the center of any of that. the democrats on the left patient center means the government is at the center in control. preexisting conditions is a real and serious problem and one the republicans needs to deal with not adequately addressed it. we have been critical of them for that. preexistingeal with conditions is to provide targeted assistance through your or through ment charity that helps people afford
8:41 am
insurance e health rather than creating expensive verpriced bureaucratically managed health insurance. host: with the debate in the organizing for action supporting the administration and opposing the bill is ublican organizing for action in particular their ad looks at the the healthcare law and its elimination of lifetime caps. here is a look at that ad. [video clip] >> my daughter had her first surgery when chefs olds.5 hours handing her over for surgery was hard. obama care companies could puts lifetime caps on the insurance then they don't pay more. she was halfway to the cap birthday. first >> obama care ended lifetime caps. >> thanks to obama care we can zoe needs and for her that is a life saver.
8:42 am
host: some of the effort ahead. texas with a call, good morning to tom. caller: good morning. have looked at all the insurance companies all over the world and the governmental plans and it comes orld back to one item that sticks out for everybody, employe employers, retired people, who have a small usiness, people who have low insurance and high insurance. tricare. ricare is what would lower everything and increase everything as far as services nd there is not a doctor who doesn't know about tricare. another thing. with the tricare, you would also increase the availability to ilitary services by lowering their rates and therefore you
8:43 am
ould still have, one, a government agency and you don't mandate because in of the doctors out here everyday land know about and how tricare system. i would like to hear comments about that. host: who wants to take a stab at that? providedat is employer information for pentagon employees and families. think it is fairly popular with them. it may have some problems. ut in general it works better than obama care is likely to do. insurance ovided works pretty well. in fact, congress has the best employer provided insurance in country, it is the gold standard and we discovered olitico reported recently congress, which is required by the obama care law, the republican amendment to that go into the exchanges, they are trying to keep that
8:44 am
old plated health insurance from their employer even though the rest of us who ends up in won't have that subsidy. host: we have a couple of questions on twitter. from guest: well, that is what insurance is. that is fine. but when you start putting all lori se mandates -- referenced preexisting conditions and how about the mandate? to adds $100 to $400 everybody's premiums each year. don't mandate these things. let market forces work. will happen is more people will voluntarily pay for insurance because it is for them. those young let's people that the obama administration is to drag kicking and screaming into the exchanges, they will sign up voluntarily insurance that might be a little more enomical than what folks on the left want them to
8:45 am
system will work. more people will have the need.hcare they guest: this question gets to the heart of dean's criticism as well. dean says that people should tear up their obama care cards health se to get insurance. that is really why we got here it begin with because people did get insurance and they passed on those costs to everybody else. that is about $1,300 people have for years because uninsureds go it hospital to get care. people insured now so they are not waiting illness t catastrophic or until they are so injured healthcaret much the system can do for them. that will help bring the cost down. i need to respond to lori's points. to peoplee are saying don't buy health insurance. that is not accurate.
8:46 am
e are saying pay the fine rather than buy the overpriced obama care compliant insurance. you can buy the insurance in the individual market that may not have the mandates of obama care technically be in violation of the law but you health ill have insurance. get a health savings account, by much of ay for as healthcare in cash as you can afford to do and you will probably be a lot better off care.n obama host: a question for you on twitt twitter. is he talking about without price caps and caps on, for use of health me insurance? guest: the important thing about is doinghealthcare law is gotten rid of a lot of those caps. zoe, that we heard in the "organizing for action" ad there
8:47 am
caps across etime the board for everyone. fortunately, most people never had to bump up against them they have been fortunate enough to not have a serious accident. be in an but lifting those caps gives people freedom. helps people know that they are going to have healthcare no matter what, no sick they get or if they change jobs or if they go out and start their own small business. there's going to be a foundation of security that right now exist.t host: in the past if they bumped p against the caps is medicaid the next step that most people who hit the caps? it depends. sometimes there is not that option because of how much money they make and their situation. the problem. there was not any sort of security with our healthcare for those that did get injured or had a serious illness. host: next call is hollywood, florida, mike on the independent
8:48 am
line. caller: good morning. i have two quick questions. for the ust curious who funds freed freedomwor freedomworks? for both folkso, n the panel, any idea what the large insurance company lobbyis lobbyists, whether they are for or against it? guest: can i answer? funding of the don't take , we corporate donations and not funded by the insurance industry pharmaceutical industry. we have about 80,000 small onors mostly, a few wealthy individuals, and all of that is because they agree with what we are doing. we take some odd stands, we sometimes.blicans
8:49 am
we are primarily republicans. and their emocrats policies. we are right of center but we believe in individual liberty limited itutionally government and we stand for that on principle, not out of any interest. host: dean mentioned his opinion washington times". burn your obama care card ationwide draft resistance could defeat compulsory coverage without premium payments by adults of young understood 40 obama care can't work. young americans make up the bulk uninsured because health insurance costs too much relative to their needs. if they don't obey the plan date premiums will be higher than will be and people cycle away and a vicious will set in. draft ere health care resist e the ters we could hasten collapse and paver the way for a
8:50 am
patient system. next caller. caller: it is not a fair system finehe simple fact that it is only $750 per employee. it is cheaper to pay the fine it is to get health care for the employees. it is only a $750 fine. save quite a bit of oney by not giving them health insurance. so is it fair to the employee? about $2,000 to 3,000 per employee but you raise a good point will employers actually provide for employees. but we know right now the majority of businesses already for de health insurance employees. we are really only talking about 0,000 businesses who are right now not providing that healthcare coverage.
8:51 am
we need is responsibility, not only from employers and from individuals all of us coming together and realizing we have o make this work and we really do need healthcare for employees and individuals. host: dean, has there been any businesses rms of having to cut staff or in terms to meet the requirements of the hourly workers or number of workers have in order to meet the requirements of the law?hcare guest: the employer mandate equires every firm with 50 or more employees to provide affordable insurance as defined y the government to their employees and also that is for full-time employees. , while a lot of firms have been cutting back on 30 hours a week to people are part-time there's
8:52 am
slowdown in hiring among the small businesses so they employee that 50th and trip this expensive mandate on themselves. said employees are being responsible by offering health nsurance yet the president has basically said the next year you don't have to do that. that is part of his machine to plan to make it easier for employers to dump their employees into the exchanges. to and i didn't answer the seconds question about the insurance and where they stand on the mandate. hey strongly support the mandate, the healthcare draft because that means more customers for them. host: the other caller asked lobbyists and whether they support healthcare law. sure.: i'm not i know the american medical association who represents doctors across the country, they support the healthcare law. like dean said, insurance do, wall greens, blue
8:53 am
a ss/blue shield to provide platform. you are seeing a lot of between different corporations and different interests, doctors and health nsurance companies and pharmaceutical -- or pharmacists -- who are trying to work a way to o figure out make sure we are actually explaining the law in a way people get coverage. to dean's point because it really is -- it is funny dean and others complain in the employer mandate because it doesn't go up against what they have been saying the past few years. for so long they have been saying it was rammed through need to slow e down, now they are saying we need to go quicker. there is this tension between the two positions which really to the number one thing they are trying to do is to say rooting for this law to fail. o, when you hear all of these
8:54 am
that is what they are trying to do. guest: it is a bad idea. there to shift some of the costs to the government program on to employers. the law is passed and hard to implement the administration is saying let's get more th that and performance into the exchanges and they are still impose being t imposing the mandate on the rest of us. a call from new york republican lane. caller: i'm a big fan of c-span i would like to make several kphopbt comments. one, i don't see how authorize a law that they didn't know whether it. in according to nancy pelosi, we have to find out what is in it afterwards. when you have a contract you read the contract first and if it is a good contract you sign
8:55 am
it. i onds -- second of all doubt anybody read the 2,800 your panelists. they exempted themselves from a anybody read the 2,800 pages including your panelists. they exempted themselves from a read the 2,800 pages including your panelists. they exempted themselves from a law they didn't know about. i think if laws apply to betters they would write laws so they would be part of the system. people need health but i was wondering if lori is going to sign up for the or does she have private insurance? cadillac playing in the future from what little i know themare going to be taxing 40%. thank you very much. of the ell, i'm one lucky ones because i do have
8:56 am
health insurance through my right now i'm ok and that could change. or if i do change positions lose my job i will be able to get health insurance. want tosaid something i get to. the reality is congress is -- the be required to be on health exchange just like you or exchange.else on the congress didn't exempt themselves from the law. in fact they put themselves of it.nto the middle guest: but wait until october. he office of personnel management, the h.r. department for the federal government, they are supposed to issue a ruling members of congress and staff get it keep their gold-plated subsidy on top of exchange which would put them in a unique position relative to the rest of population. host: 20 more minutes with our clancy and lori lodes asking about the care.mentation of health awrenceville, georgia, next on
8:57 am
independent line. caller: theron. have to admit that i'm confused by both of these folks. they are both engaging in obfuscation. lean libertarian so i toward free market solutions but realist to ugh of a understand that medicine is a you e bit unique and that need it -- people who need it those e the elderly and who can least afford it. a different ducing factor that the free markets is t easily deal w. here what i'm confused about. i know the lady on the left to fail so they an have a single player plan but i see clancy promoting failure by having the young people not participate and burden on the system. i'm having a hard time
8:58 am
positions.those two host: we will see if we can get some clarity. guest: let me say i'm doing everything i can to make sure law succeeds because i believe it is what is right for the country and is the law of the land. i want to be clear that i'm not pushing for any other system although ie have now do believe that there are improvements that can be made the republican side wanted to come to the table there are tweaks we can make and improve it. i'm here is a law that happy that it is the law of the land and i'm trying to try to sure it succeeds. guest: it is select teufrpl get to a larger goal. i will take lori at her word but e want to see it defeated because we believe there is a better way. ou can help the uninsured and help lower healthcare costs through market based solutions
8:59 am
-- but you have to get the government out of the way. eight million he pound elephant and we have to deal with that and do the earlier. talked about guest: but aren't the exchanges a market based solution in many ways? insurance companies who are competing side by side for choose.s to guest: only one insurance company or two are offering in the exchange. that is not true. many states -- guest: more importantly, we have market.ange, the free you go on online and go to e-health insurance and compare companies' plans and prices. it works just fine. there is no need for a bureaucracy to try to herd everybody in and control insurance. host: the former deputy director. dean clancy a former burks -- bush administration
9:00 am
official. levin has an extensive piece in the "washington post" president bush mid work.e healthcare form he is pointing out issues of education and i want to read the last bit of it called finger pointing. he says implementing the affordable care act requires working of partners together. it will help the obama administration own the problem. the blame game and give a point person done and to get this someone who can serve as a public face of the implementation effort. second, h.h.s. should organize a crisis management center with insurers a place to solve when it goes live they hould serve as intelligence gatherers and third the administration has signaled it
9:01 am
will be aggressive in enforcing a.c.a. serious penalties for noncompliance. work with should insurers who have made good faith effort to come my. be more istration will successful that reinsurers insurers they are viewed as partners. any thoughts on what the former guest: i give him credit for writing this because he does have a lot of experience enforcing medicare part d or actually doing the enrolling in medicare part d. and remember that in et67 when this went into effect, the train wreck was in the title. >> host: medicaid part d. guest: you did not have the education. they really rolled it out very quickly and you had seniors who had been receiving these same prescription drugs for years. their pharmacist was like i can't give this to you any longer. and that was happening across the country. so i think there has been a lot
9:02 am
of lessons learned from medicare part d that is changing the way the administration is trying to do the enrollment of the affordable care acted. but one of the other important things to note is in medicare part d democrats were not supportive of the medicare part d. we all remember. but what happened is that when it became law, you had members of congress across the country helping their constituents to figure it out and to get enrolled. and that's the question that i have for republican congress people now, is are they going to do the same thing? are they going to actually help their constituents get health insurance? they should be taking a lesson from democrats. guest: i was in the bush white house during the time of the rollout worked with the secretary on it. in fact i always opposed part d. i thought it was a mistake. but we were able to make it work. it was based largely on market
9:03 am
principles. the biggest problem was it was not paid for and not part of a necessary reform of medicare. the secretary has been a great disappointment to me since the time of the bush administration. he spent what i call an obama care collaborationist. his private consulting company has been making money helping states set up these obama care exchanges. so he has a financial interest in obama care succeeding that you need to think about. host: let's hear from a caller from iowa. tom, on our democrat's line. caller: the last four years i spent $20,000 on health insurance just for my wife and my 15-year-old son. my health care is covered under the v.a. because i'm a disabled vet. i believe that this health care law should help us out. it's just ridiculous. and because my wife had high blood pressure it was considered a preexisting condition.
9:04 am
they wouldn't pay for any of her doctor vizzyits or medicine or anything else like that. i wasted $20,000 over the last four years and i can't afford to be throwing that money down the drain. also with lifetime caps i watched my sister die in hospice because she bumped up against lifetime caps. so i think it is a good thing we get rid of these lifetime caps. i wish we could have single pair like most civilized countries have these days. guest: he's right. i think what he is experiencing are what families across the country have experienced because they have a real story to tell. i think one of the things this whole debate has sort of gotten away from is real people. there are real people like you and your family who are preexisting conditions just because they had high blood pressure. also, your wife had a child. that was a preexisting condition.
9:05 am
a woman meant she was going to get charged more for insurance because she was a woman. so what you're getting to is really important and we need to do more of really talking about what this law will mean for real people because it's not the fear mongering, it's not any of that. it's that people are going to be able to get the care they need. host: there's a question tapping on to what laura said. guest: i completely agree with that. that's what we've been saying. we don't have a free market health care system now. we have millions of uninsured people. it's not because of some evil insurance company plot. it's because of government policies that drive up the cost of insurance. the driving up of the cost of insurance is what causes insurance companies to do things like impose lifetime caps that are unreasonable in some cases. the fact is you have to clear
9:06 am
away the mandates, the red tape, the distorting subsidies in our health care system. the ones that existed even before obama care as well as obama care if you want to have a system in which more people are covered, health care costs less, quality is going up, all of that can only happen through a market-based system. and these other countries with single payer which the caller described as civilized people stand in line for weeks and months for the most routine sorts of office visits and diagnosees that we can get relatively quickly because our system is still relatively freer. if we go down the path that obama care would take us we're going to have people standing in line longer waiting to see the doctor longer bureaucrats are going to be rationing care because they simply can't afford to pay for all the things that they've promised. it is not civilized to do that to people. that's what's going to really happen. >> host: one of our tweeters agree.
9:07 am
guest: it doesn't do enough. it won't do enough. we've seen the studies stacked to the ceiling that show just opening up insurance to sell across state lines doesn't work and it's not going to do what we need to do, which is to get everybody in the system so that we can lower costs. but more importantly that we can make sure that people are getting the care they need and they don't have to worry about getting sick. host: from indiana, richard on our republican line. a retired trucker i was in business for years. and required by law to provide work mens compensation insurance for my employees. on top of truck insurance which covered medical, 300 to 500,000
9:08 am
per incident. it just -- is the government going to now turn around with obama care and demolish work men's compensation insurance or are all employees across -- employers across the nation going to have to pay workmen's compensation insurance on top of the health care insurance licies that are now being -- in 2014 that are coming to play? guest: the answer is yes, you'll still have to pay the burden of workmen's comp and now you'll have -- assuming the employee mandate is ever enforce. i think this is going to become permanent. but if it is enforced you're going to have to pay for that too. host: let's go to north carolina. independent line. caller: i had a couple of points. one about the rhetoric and the cost of insurance.
9:09 am
the one guest there pointed out the contradiction about up to this point there have been arguing that they've been moving too fast and this law was shoved down our throats and now they're against any kind of delay and want to implement it immediately ready or not. and thas le inconsistent. but the other point related to that was the claim made this was a government-run health care insurance or something like that. and but it also later on talks about how the insurance companies are so for this can't really be both. can't be some kind of socialist government system while the private insurance companies are having a bonanza off this thing. they're all private plan thars buying into. but as far as the insurance premiums going up, keep in mind they've been going up every year steadily prior to this law the reports that i heard on npr the other day talking about in the last decade the premiums have gone up 120%.
9:10 am
since obama care have become into effect, the increase only about 2% can be attributed to the law. the rest of it is the actual market forces. so you have to kind of eliminate the natural increases that would happen anyway along with the impacts of this law. host: andy brings up a couple good points. what do the insurance companies say about this delay? guest: well, i'm sure the insurance companies don't want to delay the individual mandate because that's the one that guarantees them more customers. it is in fact a socialist scheme here. it is a corrupt bargain between big business and big government. in this case the insurance companies basically the government's guaranteing them customers in exchange the insurers are agreing to be regulated by public you'll tilts. so it's a conspiracy against the patient for the benefit of these folks in washington. so yes the insurers very much
9:11 am
love this mandate and they don't want it delayed. host: how are the consumers enpowered by the health care law? if this is a benefit for the insurance companies and a conspiracy how are consumerers empowered? guest: by a lot of things. one, insurance companies can no longer deny them care because they have a preexisting condition. they can no longer establish lifetime caps. but one of the thing that is dean points out is that this is a socialist scheme. this is a socialist scheme that was originally introduced by a republican and your friends at the hertyidge institute. so one of my concerns is that these buzz words that we've been hearing over the past few years, socialist scheme and rate shock and what's going to happen is really set up to try to scare people. it's trying to put a lot of confusion out there so that people don't enroll.
9:12 am
the simple fact of -- you don't want people to get enrolled in health care and that is a problem. and i think it needs to be really sort of exposed that republicans will do whatever it takes to make sure this law fails, that they can take away people's benefits and that people are not going to get health care. guest: we want people to have health care. health care that actually works for people. their family needs. rather than what people deside what's best for them. the heritage foundation is in fact at the root of this. they thought it was a free market solution to have an individual mandate and all that. i think they imagined that a republican would be president when it was gplemented and wouldn't be corrupt bargains among the special i want rested. and now we're learning what those good intentions have led to. i agree with you. the heritage foundation and republicans they are to a large extent responsible for this disaster. but that doesn't mean it was a
9:13 am
good conservative idea. it was a bad idea. host: a couple more minutes of calls. irst a look at the headline. melissa on the democrat's line. caller: good morning to everyone. a lot of good points have been brought out this morning. i wanted to ask in the talking points i'm not hearing discussion about people who are going to fall through the cracks. cracks exist in every system. i've been trying to follow the discussions that c-span has had antithe health care law. and people are saying not everyone is going to be covered. one of the words i keep hearing coming up is it's based on your income. well, if you don't have an
9:14 am
income to report, you're not going to qualify for insurance. there's a means test out there based on income. if you don't have income how do you qualify for insurance? and another thing that i wanted to ask is when the ptaca was passed in 2010 there was the federal direct student loan program that was tied into that. and i would like to know how much of that is going to be funding the health care law. host: thank you. we'll see if we can get some answers for you. guest: i think one of the important things is for people with low incomes that they can join medicaid. the problem is -- and you mentioned cracks. one of the biggest cracks we have is that so many republicans refuse to accept federal funds to expand medicaid to bring more people into the system. and you're right, there are cracks that are there that we have to really figure out how to fix. one of the quickest ways to do
9:15 am
that is if republicans came to the table and actually talked about things and figured out a path forward and accepted that medicaid expansion makes sense for the states just like jane bur has said that it makes sense for the people and good business sense. that's one of the things we can do to make sure that people don't fall through the cracks is make sure states expand medicaid. host: let's get one more call. in new york. republican line. caller: good morning. just a few questions. -- we don't want obamacare. 54% of the people don't want obamacare. and i have an issue paying for somebody's abortions. and to the lady are you involved with acorn? you know, this is a bill that they shoved down our throats like they're trying to do with the immigration bill.
9:16 am
thank you. host: thank you. acorn? guest: no, i'm not. i think one of the things that joan gets to that's important to remember is it would be really interested in why you don't support obamacare because it makes -- it works for people if you actually learn the facts and what's in it and don't just listen to dean who talks about -- who talks about those socialist schemes. but i think there's a lot out there that i understand that people are confused and i understand that people are scared. but there's a lot you can do to really learn the facts because once -- and i think this is why dean and others are really waging this nonstop campaign for it to fail because when it actually is implemented people are going to realize hey this isn't so bad. host: dean some final thoughts. guest: obamacare will eventually collapse. it may take years, it may take
9:17 am
decades. the math and economics don't work when you put the government in charge it's going to fail. we would like to see it collapse happen sooner so that we can get to a patient-centered health care system where you and your doctor are free to get the health care you need. markets work. and so to help hasten doing that we're encouraging you, especially if you're in your 20s and 30s to burn your obamacare card and resist the health care draft. host: thanks to both of you for joining us this morning. more "washington journal" ahead. mark ginsberg will be talking about the situation in egypt, syria as well. your calls. all of that coming up. but what's ahead on the sunday shows.
9:18 am
9:19 am
9:20 am
>> i wanted a kind of representative look at american life so i needed politics, business, entertainment, food, finance, art. i also was interested in this recurring pattern which you see with gingrich, you see with oprah, jay-z sam walton. people who really began in very humble flaces and are not unlike the main places, dean, tammy, but who sort of reinvent selvthem as something new and find a new language and a new idea that is riveting to americans. and through that they build an empire. and they can't stop building it. there's almost like an imperative like with a corporation you have to keep growing, even as a person, as a brand you have to keep growing. but sort of a deck dance sets in where the language becomes a kind of parity of itself and
9:21 am
they no longer seem to be producing something good. they just continue to produce. gingrich just keeps writing book after book. oprah is on the cover of every issue of her magazine. so they become the celebrities that we are now familiar with who are just dominate our imaginations and in a way have come to replace the institutions that have faltered n this period of time. host: on the screen joining us from new york is mark ginsberg former middle east adviser to president carter and also a former president of arab tv productions. here talk with us about the u.s. role in egypt and syria. thanks for being with us on "washington journal" this morning.
9:22 am
guest: good morning. since it's rammed dan we say rammed dan kareem to all of our muslim viewers. host: who is in charge of the political situation there? who is running the country? guest: for all intents and purposes the supreme commander of the armed forces is in charge, the person who more or less ordered the military to arrest president morsi. he is in charge. but the person who has been designated by the military to serve as the interim president is the former constitutional supreme court justice scholar who is -- his name is mr. belbawi. he just appointed a new vice president who as everyone probably recognizes is the former head of the international atomic agency mohammed albaradi.
9:23 am
so you have in effect the leaders at this point in time who more or less are calling the shots. host: and the associated press actually reporting this morning that he has been sworn in as the country's vice president .riting what is his likely roll to be? >> it's no doubt that it is going to be controversial because everything in egypt is very controversial. he has always been sort of the favorite of the secular younger people who originally rose up against the mubarak regime several years ago in what was then egypt's revolution 1.0. of course we're now in the 2.0 version of egypt's revolution. and in the capacity as vice
9:24 am
president of the country, it is really hard to tell what power he has because in the end all of this is meant to in effect reshuffle the deck so to speak when it comes to reformulating a new constitution. but he represents a broad coalition the national salvation front of seculars who largely took to the tawrir square 22 million strong to in effect demand the ouster of mr. morsi. host: mark ginsberg from 1994 to 1998 was the u.s. ambassador to morocco also was president carter's middle east adviser. the conversation in washington on capitol hill has talked quite a bit about the future of u.s. aid to egypt. as a matter of fact, today's "washington post," an op ed piece by senator john mccain and senator lindsey graham, they write in the paper this morning, not all coups are created equal but a coup is
9:25 am
till a coup. what do you think of the opinions of senators mccain and graham this morning? guest: well, it's actually fascinating gitchen the fact that both senators mccain and graham have been more or less on the other side of the equation when it comes to the middle east. but the fact of the matter is that under u.s. law -- and i used to work on the hill -- the law in effect require it is suspension of aid if there was
9:26 am
a military coup. now, you can parcel whatever may have taken place in egypt in many different ways. as you know, and many of our viewers know, the united states has refused to designate what took place in egypt a few days ago as a military coup and the secular yats who took to the streets and the military refused to designate it for obvious reasons as a coup and yet the muslim brotherhood and others clearly are calling this a military coup. so this comes down to legal niceties but in the congress i would tend to air on the side of supporting senator mccain's interpretation at least from the legal point of view. >> host: with us is mark ginsberg to talk to us about syria and egypt. the numbers are on the bottom f your screen.
9:27 am
you can tweet us. we'll take your e-mails as well. if the u.s. is not yet calling it a coup how has the white house and administration react sod far? what direction are they heading? >> let's put this in the perspective of what this means and why the administration has been wrangling with this. we provide to egypt since the camp david accords of 1979 approximately $1.3 billion in direct military assistance to egypt ds military. at one point there was about $850 million in economic aid that was given to egypt but that has been reduced over the laves few years to $250 million. so more or less the total taxpayer outlay to egypt is approximately $1.5 billion. and what the obama administration has been trying to do is to thread the needle so to speak to try to work with
9:28 am
all parties to work with the military to try to accelerate its timetable to transition from this military takeover to in effect a government transition or a more or less a civilian transition. and just a few days ago, the administration in effect supported germany's call that president morsi be released from detention. and so in some respect it is administration is now siding with the muslim brotherhood's call that mr. morsi be released, putting more pressure on the military to act more quickly to accelerate this transition to some form of civilian rule. host: you mentioned at the top of the program hs ramadan and here is a piece. holy month brings higher spirits.
9:29 am
let's go to calls. we have michigan waiting, leonard on our independent line. caller: good morning. and former ambassador, thank you for c-span, great washington, d.c. my question to you sir is, with the american public and the taxpayers funds, what are you expecting the american citizen and the government to do over in egypt? i mean, we cannot put men on the boots out in troops. this is a revolution between their democracy -- why should the united states help these people? can you answer that in plain
9:30 am
english, please. guest: sure. and it's a great question because after all it is a taxpayers' money that is going and is the most direct lever of influence over egypt. once upon a time we had far more influence and relationship with the mubarak regime than we have recently. the fact of the matter is that the military assistance was given as a result of egypt's willingness to sign a peace treaty with israel. and that ultimately is the cornerstone of u.s. foreign policy strategically between israel and egypt. and that is, that peace treaty. and that continued military assistance has been more or less the gift that the united states has given to the military. but i agree also with the inherent assumption that there's very little that we can do to influence the situation. frankly, ever since the people rose up against mubarak we've been more or less ten steps
9:31 am
behind the egyptians and have taken it from both sides. the muslim brotherhood has believed the united states has opposed them from the beginning and the secularists who have taken to the street and are very upset with mr. morsi's rule believe that the united states has saddled up to mr. morsi and the muslim brotherhood. so we really almost have it in a situation where the united states has been criticized by both sides and as a result our influence is very weak at this point. host: also asking former ambassador ginsberg about syria headline today -- yesterday in the "new york times" front page about syria. what can you tell us about the situation in syria? guest: it's such an anguishing situation. just on many levels. think about the fact that
9:32 am
because mr. asad and his cleek of cronies and his family want to retain power that over 100,000 syrians have already died in this conflict. so the humanitarian catastrophe let alone the millions of syrians who are suffering both on the borders, refugees as well as the people who are caught in the crossfires. so you have that level. then you have the influx of al qaeda, islamic radicals from all sorts of places, pakistan, afghanistan, iraq, who are vying for control as sunni martors against this so-called shiite alwite regime. it's become a proxy war that is has spilled over that has shaken the stability in lebanon, the asad regime at this point in time has been more or less been able to turn the military gains in its favor because of the continuing support of russia and iran and the enormous amount of military
9:33 am
assistance provide bid them and frankly as the bill you just pointed out the division that is have been indemic between the more secular democratic elements of the opposition and the more radical elements that frankly have the determination to drive the really more moderate elements away. and as a result take as many arms as they can and steal as many arms as they can as the west provides. host: the white house recently announcing they would supply some small arms to syrian rebels. where do things stand with that? guest: that only came about as you know because the administration determined that syria had crossed a red line with respect to deploying small amounts of weapons of mass destruction. the fact of the matter is that whatever the united states providing, i would designate it written in a huffington post piece a few days ago as pea shooters compared to what the russians and iranians have been providing.
9:34 am
whatever we are providing will have very little influnes compared to what qatar is providing. and that's what americans don't realize has far more influence and is now providing shoulder-fired missiles and that is getting into the hands of the radical islamic terrorists that in the end are going to wind up being our bigger problem in the long run. host: here's a call from new jersey, republican line. caller: good morning. thank you. i would like to know what the status is of the religious minorities in egypt. are we supposed to support morsi just because he was elected even though he doesn't respect the rights of all egyptians? and maybe there are no good actors in this case but aren't the military evil? thank you. guest: your question is so important right now because out of the 90 million some odd
9:35 am
people in egypt, 10% of that population are coptic christians and they under the morsi regime have been subjected to the worst type of discrimination and attacks. indeed, some of his supporters have killed priests in the last few days because of allegations that somehow the coptic christian church has support it had overthrow of the morsi regime. let's understand, mr. morsi was no panacea to egypt's ills. he was incompetent across in terms of managing the day-to-day affairs of the country. he was determined to in effect seize as much power in the presidency without sharing it with his opposition and to in effect develop a greater consensus. 22 million people don't take to the streets seeking what i call a popular impeachment against a president for nothing. their live became miserable. just the streets of cairo and other egyptian cities became
9:36 am
unbearable. there was crime, there was extorsion, kidnappings, lines for fuel, food. and this regime spent most of its time worrying about theology worrying than filling pot holes and taking care of the average egyptians' needs. that's what drove this. it had far less to do with secular versus islam and far more to do with mr. morsi's incompetence as president and his seizure of every lever of power he could get his hands on . host: we go to arlington next. caller: i think that in the early days the yilingts -- united states obama regime did not want to have morsi come in. d the second is that because the american policy is so weak and has not looked after its
9:37 am
own interests, what has happened is we are supporting form over substance and the recent comments that the administration made after germany, that they should let morsi go seems to be very outside of our interests. we want and we have wanted the liberal establishment to be in there when the other establishment came in, when morsi came in it was just like the bowl she vicks did in russia. when they kicked out and then began to kill the rest of whoever they thought were their enemies. guest: well, the point is very interesting because, remember, after the mubarak government was overthrown, the secular elements in egypt society remained extraordinarily
9:38 am
divided. the muslim brotherhood declared it would not run a presidential candidate not interested in having control over the presidency and it broke its promises and in the end it squeaked through an electoral victory and it was an electoral victory. it won 51% of the vote. mr. morsi was never supposed to be the candidate for president. he was the alternative second choice because the first choice was disqualified because he had an american as a mother in-law, believe it or not. the fact is also that mr. morsi had never proven, despite the fact that he was educated in the united states and by the way did support u.s. polls siss in the middle east to a certain extent so he has to be given some credit for that. but the fact is he didn't do the type of consensus outreach that was necessary instead of the winner take all grab all your power do what you can to sideline and marginalize the secularists who won after all
9:39 am
49% of the vote. and look, i'm also -- i frankly am in favor of abolishing the presidentsy because in egypt that's the real problem. we're all focused in the presidency when in the end what egypt really needs in my judgment is a more representative parliamentary democracy than a presidency where the president whoever he or she may be wins takes all and then tries to marginalize and seize power and in effect almost becomes one vote once. host: you as a former middle east ambassador and presidential adviser, what do you see as the u.s. interests in egypt? the primary interest. guest: well, the first -- our primary interest i think is to avoid from terms of what we're seeing here the clash of civilizations that is in effect armed islamist whose are angry and upset and bitter over the fact that they had their democratic elections stolen from underneath them in effect reject the whole concept of
9:40 am
representative government. and that to me is my biggest fear because if the muslim brotherhood -- which remains one of the most dominant political forces in the country -- decides that in effect democracy is not for them because the military will take it away if they indeed participate and win, that could be the real tragedy and lead to blood shed and constant struggle and undermine egypt's stability in the long run. that can't be good for anyone no matter what side of the equation you are because egypt is the centerpiece of the arab world's culture and stability in the long run and what happens in egypt doesn't stay in egypt. it will have enormous influence on the role of islam and democracy throughout the middle east in years to come because after all we're just in the begin acts of what is essentially a long-term season of despair and hope perhaps for this so-called arab spring. host: let's hear from john who is in san diego on our democrat's line.
9:41 am
caller: good morning. i just wanted to know what would be some of the possible ramifications of cutting aid and how would it affect any relationships we have going into the future with the egyptian military? the question whether or in e cut the $1.5 billion annual aid to egypt. the military has always been in effect an organization within a society in egypt. they have always stood alone and in effect controlled a third of the economy. believe it or not they actually run their own business operations and as a result it's made many a lieutenant commander and general very wealthy as a result. cutting that military assistance to a military that is in effect the instrument for stability in the long run in egypt and the instrument for
9:42 am
stability on israel's southern border to control hamas from still launching another war with israel, that's really what the key question is. will the military in effect wind up acting in a way that's inconsistent with u.s. interests if we cut the assistance. and that i think is one of the outstanding $64,000 questions. host: back to calls. to south carolina. joe on the republican line. ller: i don't believe that egypt has met the criteria for aid in some time. and the real effect is that we i'm not even a republican. i don't -- i just called on this line because it meets the criteria i stand by. but i believe that's really one of the major, is that everybody gets separated when you
9:43 am
separate the government and the fact that we're talking about the muslim brotherhood and israel can take care of themselves. netia huh has come on tv and said it publicly in plain english. we don't listen to that. we just go ahead and take it upon ourselves and butt our noses into things we shouldn't. we should be taking care of what we have here on our own soil. that's the bottom line. and the second part to that is this might be a little off the subject but the fact is that republicans and democrats even call them whatever you want but all they're concerned with is who can control the money. that's all the concern is. the concern is no longer how can we help the american people , that is far from the agenda. host: all right. mark, piggy backing on joe's comments for a second about israel, what do we know of israel's concerns or comments
9:44 am
about the changeover in egypt and their -- likewise, any action towards syria? guest: boy, that's a tough one. the fact is that let's just talk about egypt. look, the peace treaty between israel and egypt from the camp david accords that was negotiated between prime minister bagen and president is a dat under carter remains thrivenpin of israel's long term security in the middle east. so there's been increasing instability in the signi peninsula. radical islamists have attacked military and civilians as well as egyptian soldiers, who there's been a terrible attack a few days ago after the overthrow of mr. morsi against the egyptian military by islamic radical terrorists in the sign nye. so you have the instability there that's the number one concern right now that israel has. with respect to syria, israel
9:45 am
has believe it or not had a relatively -- in fact its most quiet border for decades has been the bord we are syria until the efforts to overthrow mr. assad began. mr. assad has been more or less the devil tizz railies have known versus the devil they don't know. and the israelis would probably tell you if you scratch them a bit that they would prefer assad to remain in power because that's the devil they know compared to a potential radical islamic terrorist group taking over that would then launch a holy jihad against israel on its border. so israel is deeply concerned about that, deeply concerned about the growing power of hezbollah as a result of the military assistance it's receiving from iron. that -- iran. that too is a real problem. the real problem that israel faces is the role that iran is
9:46 am
playing in syria and the nuclear program that iran has. look, if you were to ask the average israel -- and i just came back from there -- what their number one concern is, it's not palestinians, it is not egypt. it remains iran and the situation in syria and the potential spillover as a result. and that is i think the number one issue for them. host: on syria you wrote recently that even hue deani cunte couldn't get the u.s. out of the straight jacket it's in when it comes to syria. what did you mean by that? guest: the united states has lost every opportunity to play a nonmilitary influential role in syria since the beginning of this conflict. and the administration has been caught flat-footed when it declared that there was a red line that was ultimately crossed and that the decision to provide what i call meager military assistance which i frankly oppose in the end because it's not going to make
9:47 am
any difference in the long run and frankly i was far more in favor of providing humanitarian assistance at a more active rate years ago and being much more involved diplomatically than either secretary clinton or secretary kerry have been involved with. so i feel that we have missed the boat almost from the beginning and the administration has been unable to figure out a coherent policy towards syria ever since the overthrow of assad began. we should have stopped worrying about the military equapings, kept better control over our so-called allies such as qatar that are undermining u.s. policy in syria right now and doing far more to provide humanitarian assistance to syrians who need it as well as to jordan that is suffering as a result of this. and we have consistently been wrong every time we needed to act on these issues. ost: quick tweet from you.
9:48 am
guest: oh, they're referring to the fact that there's a great deal of anger among the free syrian army forces. these are the so-called western oriented forces that support the overthrow of assad in which the united states is supporting. pearptly one of the al qaeda h.r. linked radical groups killed one of the leading commanders of the free syrian army which is only the just the smallest element of what essentially is an underground war that has broken out between these two competing forces for the military upper hand in syria against the assad regime. and frankly, it's an indication of a civil war occurring within a civil war which i was -- had warned about months ago and deeply concerned about today. host: back to calls. about ten more minutes with
9:49 am
mark ginsberg on the issue of u.s. role in egypt and syria. minnesota is next. caller: thank you for taking my call. i just have a couple points. first of all, the liberals in egypt are the ones who started this revolution. while the brotherhood, they were mobilizing for 54 years they didn't do anything so it was taken from under the liberals. second point is -- this is to senator mccain if he is listening. a cue day tad doesn't get 48 notice. they would start right away but yet they gave them 48 hours to mediate with the people and to connect with the people. the third point is i wish that
9:50 am
your guest speaks to this and what about the white elephant in the room, saudi arabia and qatar now? they play a big role. they have been playing in every problem that the united states has ever faced with al qaeda, it's always coming from saub especially from -- saudi arabia especially from the official there. host: thank you for your call. guest: let me take that last point because it's one of the most complicated ones for americans or anyone else to understand. that is the inconsistent alliance between the united states, saudi arabia and qatar in syria as well as in egypt. the fact of the matter is that both qatar and saudi arabia are more or less running their own foreign policy in syria at this point in time. it is not consistent with u.s. interests in the long run because they more or less are supporting the more radical sunni elements against the assad regime. the united states has been far more supportive of the more
9:51 am
secular free syrian army. so that raise it is question. now, with respect to egypt, qatar has pledged $4 billion in economic assistance to the new regime in egypt. look, the problem is in egypt a great deal comes down to money. egypt has lost its major source of foreign currency and that is tourismr since the mubarak regime. and how many americans want to travel to egypt these days under these circumstances? number one. number two, the cost of wheat the staple of egypt's 90 million people, has risen through the roof because of inflation. and number three, the fact of the matter is that when you listen to what mr. morsi said when the military had given him 48 hours instead of giving a conciliatory outstretched arm to try to reach an accommodation with his adversaries while 22 million people took to the streets zpwenls his regime, it was the
9:52 am
most defiant in your face speech that any leader could have possibly given. he used every opportunity to miss an opportunity to accommodate the popular need to a regime that had more or less grown ignorant and unwilling to hear the cries of its own people. look, if anyone believes that those 22 million and -- who rose up against mr. morsi were strictly secular elements of society, they're wrong. there were many millions of supporters who voted for him who have turned against him because of their deep unhappiness with the rule that he has demonstrated in the two years that he has been president. host: on the economic collapse, headline in the "wall street ournal."
9:53 am
what's the future of elections in egypt? guest: the fact is that the new transitional government under this new president, the prime minister, want to in effect create a new constitutional convention to try to in effect redo the constitution that gave mr. morsi so much control unilaterally. so they are going to need to have elections. the key here of course is why would the muslim brotherhood believe that participating in elections is going to accommodate them after they just saw their election stolen? this is the real hard test here. can you in effect recreate a revolution 2.0 in egypt where the brotherhood and its supporters are prepared to go back to the ballot box instead of to the streets? and i think there is obviously
9:54 am
the need and i believe there is a need for the military to be far more accommodating to get the brotherhood in. many brotherhood people who have taken to the streets in cairo right now are saying how do you expect us to participate if you still have a democratically elected president who was our president who is still under house arrest? so i suspect that the administration is saying, that makes a lot of sense to us as well. but the key is if you let him out what is he going to do? he does consider himself and many of his supporters consider him the sole atlanta president in the country. so this -- legitimate president in the country. i don't know how to figure that one. host: we have a few more calls. new york city. david on our republican line. caller: why the u.s. government support it had muslim brotherhood? nd how the brotherhood were in
9:55 am
afghanistan and the people created the war with half of them egyptian, why did the u.s. support those people? there's no difference between al qaeda and the muslim brotherhood. host: you wrote that the morsi administration, he was particularly accommodating -- surprisingly accommodating to washington on a host of issues. why was that? guest: well, on a foreign policy front he was. he supported and helped broker a truce between israel and hamas during the last conflict. he support it had united states efforts to seek the overthrow of the assad regime. and most importantly, he has had an open line of communication with president obama on a variety of regional issues including libya. and yet at the same time, here we go. we've made our big failure. while he was accommodating us, we ignored essentially his grab for power that antag niesed his opponents and we should have been far more willing and
9:56 am
interested and speaking up to try to keep a break on what essentially was a nonor an extra constitutional grab for authority. he was trying to silence his critics because he was president and that should have been a wakeup call for washington. host: here's louise in bethesda, maryland on our democrat's line. caller: mr. ambassador, is it possible former president mubarak could make a political comeback in egypt? guest: i doubt it. he has been -- he is still under arrest and trial. that is highly unlikely that even anyone that i can think of even than the small cadre of advisers and supporters who made a lot of money off him want to see him return to power. the fact is that the millions of people who took to the streets would never want to see him return to power. and the muslim brotherhood would never want to see him return to power. so you would never have, in my judgment, a popular consensus
9:57 am
among the egyptians. i guess, if there's anything that would drive both sides together, it would be the threat that mr. mubarak would somehow or another find a way back to power at this point . host: one more quick cal from las vegas. caller: thanks for being ofpblet i have a great deal of respect for your opinion and your experience. i want to ask you a quick question. to me, it seems like turkey will be playing a bigger role in this entire region. can you address that? is -- not just syria and egypt, but the entire region. it seems like turkey is the lynch pin. am i off base? guest: i'm heading to turkey next week. the prime minister, who has suffered from his own democratic uprising in the streets of istanbul, as you may recall, he too suffers from a certain amount of islamic hubris, grabbing power,
9:58 am
throwing his opponents in jail. and he has a significant challenge within his own society right now to reconcile his own grab for power against the more traditional democracy that many turks want to see. but the fact of the matter is that from turkey's own perspective, it almost wants to see itself as the lynch pin of restoring a more ottoman like influence throughout the middle east and it has been engaged in that effort although it's faltered in syria where it had a great deal of influence and could have played a more effective role. so i think he is far more worried now about his problems at home and the challenge that he faces from his own secular opponents. host: mark ginsberg, former ambassador to morocco in the clinton administration and also former president arab tv productions joining us from new york. thanks for joining us this morning. guest: thank you. host: that will do it for this morning's edition of
9:59 am
"washington journal." we're back here tomorrow morning 7:00 eastern for your calls and comments and we'll begin with a look at the consumer financial protection bureau. our guest will discuss his role and student loan om buttman. jack girard after that. discussing the decisions over the keystone pipeline. and we'll finish up with the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction and the latest report all of it getting under way tomorrow morning at 7:00 eastern. i hope the rest of the weekend is great. we'll see you tomorrow. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] > next news makers white house
10:00 am
judiciary chair bob goodlatte nd james comey at his confirmation hearing. later, the privacy and civil oversight board on n.s.a. surveillance programs. capitol hill from is the chair of the house udiciary committee republican of virginia. thanks for being with us. >> glad to be with you. here is alan gomez of "u.s.a. and " the immigration beat steve covers capitol hill for the washington times. we begin with immigration and you in your caucus is there significant republican support with both border security and issue of illegals in this country right now? are they major areas needed for immigration reform. border ealing with security enforcement and


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on