later, a discussion on iran's nuclear programs of the country's threats to cut oil exports to six european nations with matthew kroenig. host: president obama will sign into law that payroll tax cut extension. look for that on c-span.org. meanwhile, finance ministers approved an aid package to greece yesterday but it still may not be enough. here in the united states gas prices are all of the front page. return to your thoughts on gas prices, your wallet, and your vote. the number to call for our republican line is 202-737-0002. the number to call for our democrat line is 202-737-0001.

the number to call for our independent line is 202-628- 0205. send us an e-mail at journal@c-span.org. or go to feedback and post a comment or question their. gas prices may top of $4.50 by this summer. with more uncertainty, that may help drive up an all-time high for gas prices. spending improvement and economy analysts are saying. we want to know how it will impact your wallet. does that impact your vote? who is to blame? "chicago tribune" has this headline. record highs could slow the economy. many economists worry about that. as well in the "chicago

tribune." here is "the los angeles times." iran is a factor, but some are spreading the blame as well. we want to hear who you think is to blame on the gas prices. we'll be talking about the situation in iran during our last hour of "washington journal." want to show you some of the other stores that have been in the paper on gas prices. -- other stories that have been in the paper on gas prices. the politics on this. quoting some members who attended a meeting with house speaker john boehner last week. the republicans -- here it is. white house officials are preparing for republicans to use consumer banks to condemn his

energy -- consumer angst to condemn his energy policies. they find, among their constituents with a return to the districts. they're gone this whole week. iran's recent warnings have pushed the price of a barrel to more than $103. a six-month high since september. that has raised the average to $3.50 and a 30% increase. how does an actor well and your vote? victor, you are an independent and up first. caller: good morning. my main complaint is this.

i feel that the way the structure of how they are using the marketplace, they are raising the price of gasoline, just like they did back in 2005. host: who is the day? -- who is they? caller: wall street. the speculators. they're raising it way above what we have. we have plenty of oil and plenty of gas. we are bogged-down in the gas. we have a surplus. it is an illusion. the oil companies have made up record profits of the last several years.

the fact is that they're just trying to make more money. i was is watching the stock market earlier this 40. gold is going up almost $1,800. host: i am sorry, say that again. what did you say? caller: gold is going up $1,800. at the same time, platinum which is more rare is a lot less. host: can you back up and explain your evidence, where you read that we have plenty of oil? caller: the oil that we have is a lot more abundant than that we may think because of the fact that we are producing more gasoline in this country.

we have an excess. we are exporters of gasoline at this moment. this is an illusion. all it is doing is creating more of a need of raising the prices of the cost of products in our country. it has nothing to do with a shortage whatsoever. it is artificially basing things on the strait of hormuz where only about 5% or less action against the nine states. the main part of the united states goes to several different areas of europe, but not to the

united states. host: to your point about speculators, this is from the u.s. economy. what is the biggest factor in oil prices? oil prices are also affected by will price futures which trade on the futures exchange. this changes daily depending on what investors think the price of the in the future. if they think it will be high they did it -- they bid it up even higher. since oil is in dollars the 46% decline puts pressure on oil prices. sometimes commodity prices drive of even with demand fault. in other words money that used

to be invested in real state is now being invested in oil futures. what makes oil prices go down? the season usually drives the price up. on average, by about 10 cents per gallon. despite the increased use of ethanol, gas prices usually go down in the winter since transportation needs are lower. this even offset an increase in usage for winter heating in the northeast. let's hear from john next to the republican in north carolina. caller: the basis of all of this is failed foreign policy and the part of president obama. he has allowed the middle east to slip further and further into turmoil. this increase in gas prices will be a strain on the u.s. economy and everybody's wallet. not only that, the worst part of it is it will be a national

security issue. i just hope when it becomes voting time, even the people up there, the nice democrats that love mr. obama they remember that the national average the day that president obama took office was $1.79. i do not care who you are or what world events have influence on its. according to my standards i'd not look at that as being a good job when it comes to an executive. just remember, $1.79 was the price of gas the day he took office. when you went out five bucks a gallon not only is this a strain on your financial situation, it is also a -- it is also reducing your liberty. you cannot travel when you want. it is a reduction of liberty and a national security issue. host: before you go, let me

bounce this off of you. but the flip side of you are saying. some analysts say rising gas prices mean the economy is getting better. demand is up and people have more money to spend. but that argument could be a tough sell to voters and republicans know it. what you think about that? if people have more money to spend, they're putting more money in their tanks and driving around more. that's means possibly the economy is on its way back. caller: well, if the economy was on its way back and there was confidence, gold would not be going higher. with the caller before this, you showed that 40% decrease in the dollar. that is called inflation. therefore, the use of your dollar will be lower. to spend more to get the product. another interesting thing we're talking about is gas prices. right before i get off the phone, if you looked at "american thinker" this morning

there is an article that shows how mr. obama is going through the ocean councils and applying the standard of a substantive rationale that is used by the united nations, which is going around the premise of our u.s. constitution the coastal assets and resources are those of the states that the border. you have a president that is using the epa and other a ministry vehicles to back door the states to basically federalize what assets these states have. when you hit the united states and want to draw off shore to get the royalties and increase the coppers of the states to help run situation, they are getting back adored by the president. on february 27 is when it will shut down the public response or public hearing aspect of this legislation.

everybody can thanks their president through an administrative lockup for higher gas prices again. host: a ok. we will leave it there. you mention the gas prices when president obama to cover. if you go to consumerrepr orts.com they have the prices. we're talking with the impact of gas prices on your wallet and your vote. this is from "the chronicle" web site. if sustained over year, it will cause the economy $35 billion. economists say it is a meaningful amount. a special and growth is only so- so.

mike in at the new haven, ohio as an independent what does this mean to you? caller: this is ridiculous. the speculators dumped a hundred and $6 billion into the meat -- $106 billion and the market. they're going to make billions of of this. that $35 billion is nothing to prepare the province to make with the oil companies. what we have to do is figure how to get this mess. the only way is that we get rid of them idiots in washington. what have they done all year other than backdoor deals and argued and fought with each other? we need to wake up and become occupiers because it is obvious that it will get done. host: how are you voting then? in 2012? anti-incumbent?

who we vote for president? caller: they have made it to where independence cannot vote for anybody other than to vote for the lesser of two evils. the lesser of two evils have been in office for so long and are so corrupt, it should be corporate washington and some of corporate washington, d.c. thank you. host: a democrat in ohio. what is the name of your town? caller: i am sorry? host: what are gas prices like there? caller: $3.49. when you take into consideration, i do not think that congress is doing the right thing by the american people the way they're supporting the oil companies. they should take away the oil companies. i know people will go crazy when

i say this, but this whole idea of a price freeze. host: what do you mean? caller: just like what happened in the days of the first oil embargo in the 1970's. roll the price back to $2.50 and leave it there for six months. that will force but it is right out of the market. i am going to vote for obama. i do not see any other choice in the manner. i do not agree with the man from north carolina. it is not the president goes default all these things are happening. there are a lot of things going on in this world that are out of hand. i lifted the republicans and the choices they have given me. santorum? no way. romney? maybe. if he has the right vice- presidential candidate to go along with him. more than likely, i will plug my nose and vote for the president

again. host: all right. tin is a republican -- tim is a republican. if you go to gasbuddy.com and put in your zip code, it tells you where to find the cheapest gas. host: good morning. how are you? i just wanted to make two comments. the gentleman from ohio made a good comment about the lesser of two evils. we can sit here and talk about this all day. no one is talking about inflation. when nixon was in there and people had to sit in line every day, we had to get guess one day and could not discuss another day. to have to go with the odds and deepens. nobody is talking about that. inflation is through the roof. unemployment is higher.

this whole system is completely out of hand. i do not know what the american people can do except what the guy was talking about, the lesser of two evils. opec has run the situation for years and nobody has a dress that except ronald reagan. what are we going to do? host: ok. speaking of gopac, if you go to their websites -- speaking of opec, if you go to the websites you can see a list of countries to participate in that. it serves the end -- it starts with algeria, and goalie, -- angolia. and then if you go to opec's website, there will talk about the role of opec and what they do, how they impact gas prices. if you are interested in that information.

we go to the next phone call, stanton island, new york. go ahead. caller: how are you this morning? i think it is a great topic you're discussing. the reason why prices were so low when obama came in is that we had a hearing with more reasonable people on the senate with the commodities futures trading authority there. we found out basically that some 70% of the heating oil in the northeast was owned by morgan stanley. they did not take delivery of this. they did not have a place to hold it. they're just buying the features. people do not understand the way the markets work. i think the program and that would be helpful. as the gentleman said before, when you get to $106, it does raise the price on everybody but if you lifted the bureau

and our number one export last month was gasoline. the gentleman was right. that is our number one export this month. when you have people that are allowed to come in and bid out contracts and make it impossible for the people who need these things in the northeast, like to mention before, i think 62% of heating oil companies went out of business because they cannot afford it. all these guys from goldman sachs and the rest of it were buying it up. if you look to the commodity futures trading, it is called a council or something. you are fine. people there are from these investment firms. a mississippi law that will come in and actually hold hearings to stop these tests. they reduced it in six weeks to a man of water for $4. host: that was back in in 2009?

caller: it was just before back in two dozen aid so that the prices went down. -- back in 2008 so that the prices went down. the prices rebounded. i do not fault obama so much for this except that he keeps people from these investment firms around him. when you see these republicans basically, their holy grail is there will not reduce taxes. but then for six weeks they fight them and say if you make a paycheck you can raise the taxes. look at your paycheck. lookit your paycheck since obama came in. i do not understand why people vote republican when these tests showed time and time again that they are against the middle class.

i have basically had it with them. i might vote for the pope. host: bath, an independent in virginia, good morning. caller: i think my memory is correct when i say that the price of gas when obama took office was down. but the before, with bush the press had been up and gas was $4 a gallon. you have to look at that. when it went down, bush had already fill the pockets of the oil companies and continues to. i really think that oil and fuel, energy in this country are based on the economy does. the government wants a fair market price.

they make the money to lower our taxes. host: let me show you and others what we paid for in a gallon of regular grade gasoline. this is from the doe's website. 2010, the average retail price was about $2.78. this is which to pay for. 11% of that is for distribution and marketing. 14% for refining costs and profits. 22% during those 10 years were for federal and state taxes. 52% for the crude and oil. you can see the breakdown of what goes into paying for a regular gallon of gasoline.

that is from the u.s. and she is administration website. if you are still more on that, back to the politics on this and "the new york times" that ran on saturday. they often include rising gas prices among the tough messaging for the week. a recent document said that the national debt, unemployment, and the price of gas are the best ways to define the obama economy. the white house spokesperson said that the president is keenly aware of the impacts that gas prices have on families. mr. obama's economic team says it is an unwelcome reminder of how things outside their control can hamper recovery.

the men charged with getting democrats back in the house is quoted as well. the suspect as will be the argument coming from democrats as this issue heats up on the political trail. richard, a republican in new york good morning. caller: i do not know if you cover it yesterday, but there was a march in washington for ron paul. that was amazing. i would like to see why -- i do not think it is trying to change unless we get everyone out of the government. nothing changes. all the same people.

host: we have that same comment on our facebook page. go to our facebook, you can go there. he says, it makes you want to vote for ron paul even more. it is for ron paul or the monetary policies of the federal reserve are the issue of inflation. those are some comments on our facebook page. you can go to twitter. my honda hybrid will take about $35 to run for 650 miles. i traded in my mustang $70 for three under 50 miles. a democratic car held with the name of that town. -- a democratic caller, help me with the name of that town. what time is it there? caller: 3:49.

when george bush took office in the run-up after the meeting with dick cheney and the energy people. gas prices start going up. the people in the south better wake up. host: if you go to gasbuddy.com our producers put in your zip code for that. you can see with the cost for the cheapest cost is in that area. more stories for you this morning. the financial times has this story. finance ministers approved an aid package to the country. here is a store that only the financial times has.

there were able to obtain a confidential report that argued that it will not be enough for greece. they could possibly need more. two of the bailouts main principles may be self- defeating. it may cause debt rubbles to rise 128 200 billion euro dead could cause and to never return to the financial markets by scaring off investors. say this new austerity package will make its very hard for greece to come out of the debt of the course of a new three- year bailout. and then in the economy section of "the washington post." who is next at the world bank? speculation about who will take over. here are some names could force. secretary of state, hillary clinton.

robert rubin. larry summers. bill gates and timothy geithner are on the list. back to some other domestic headlines for you this morning. this is "usa today." the court action could prolong the help fight. over the case, a federal policy that restricts the timing of losses connections -- connected to the senate tax. a historic section, the justices will consider that policy and i just. if the answer is yes, the legal fight could be delayed until 2015. this could prolong confusion

yet the high court could find that the law demands it. the nine justices are deeply divided ideologically. that is "usa today" with that story this morning. some other headlines for you with what is happening overseas. the situation in iran relates to we're talking about here. in the "the wallstreet journal." pushed oil prices to a nine- month high. the stand of between iran and the west will raise the burden of oil prices near a level last seen in 2008. it was said that oil markets including those in the eu, could cope with any losses from iran

exports. people familiar are finding -- at the center, people familiar with the i iranian talks are try to find replacements. india and china are stumbling. we will talk about that coming up in our last hour as well. how all this plays out with u.s. tensions toward iran and the situation in iran. that is the headline in "the new york times." also iran is a warning to u.s. as syria intensified its crackdown. that is a discussion in the last hour. alex, we're talking about gas prices and the impact of them. what do you think? caller: good morning. i read an article about one month ago. i was in florida and said our largest export was refined petroleum exports.

the question is that if we are chilling in the gulf and we wanted to a pipeline to the u.s., we want to refine and ship it why don't we sit control? refine it and sell it here. why are we exporting when our gas prices are going up? it seems to me the easy fix to be done by executive order as a factor of national security. all these politicians are speaking half truths -- they say we need to drill. we the oil, but we to refine the product did what you think of that idea. host: a republican in a red oak, texas. caller: forgive me if i am long winded. the last caller was right, but he forgot something. he forgot to make gasoline synthetically. at that time, the cost was 67 cents per gallon. it was producing millions of

gallons per gasoline per year. the reason we did not bring that technology into the nine states is because we were reminded of two things in the middle east. that oil the have sand, and the kennedy either. caller: will put you on hold and try to come back to you. steve a republican in virginia. good morning. caller: their fill two weeks ago that the united states is number one in the world. then it is russia and then saudi arabia and then china. there are only three reasons oil is so expensive. barack hussain obama -- that is it.

host: a democratic caller, what do you think? caller: i was wondering if you've ever seen the documentary "who killed the electric car?" and at the latest one is "revenge of the electric car " to have you seen those? host: i saw the first one you mentioned. what does that have to do with this discussion for you? caller: it is possible to hire -- to power all of our vehicles by electricity. it is basically unnecessary but the oil companies keep us tied to their oil palms. there are ways to power all the vehicles electrically. are you familiar with the chevrolet will vault -- chevy volt?

according to the epa, if you go to chevrolet's website their highway mileage is 95 city, and highway. we have ways to get rid of gasoline but i don't know if we have the courage or not to do that. host: i am going to leave it there. i also want to update folks on 2012 politics. the latest poll had into the primer, here is the arizona poll taken -- into the primary, here is the arizona poll. newt gingrich comes in third with 60%. ron paul trailing at 9%. you can move on to michigan. rick santorum with a lead in that state. 37%. rick mitt romney, -- mitt

romney 32%. here are some more headlines for you on politics. january is a pricey one for the romney camp. he spent nearly three times as much money as he race in january leaving him with $7.7 million left in the bank as he works to regain his grip on the republican presidential primary. his campaign spent $18.8 million in general while raising $6.5 million. he still brought in the most of all of the gop candidates. mr. obama reported that he had $76 million in the bank at the end of january. a super pac reported that it raised $59,000. king could pose a campaign raise 54 $5 million in general making it the former house speaker's best. santorum also posted a record haul.

he raised $4.5 million in january after bringing in $2.2 million for all of january. ron paul raise $4.5 million in january. a super pac supporting mr. romney called restore our future raised $6.6 million surpassing mr. romney's $5.5 million hall. -- haul. that is the latest on fund- raising numbers for the campaign trail. the front page of "usa today" has a poll say the republicans say let it ride. did not want a broken convention and republican leaders choosing a new contender. they would like to see the

campaign continued. fited 7% said the battle is not hurting the republican party. also, we showed you the latest polls. here is something in the new york times. romney does after santorum on budget in a battle he did not bargain for. "the new york times" saying it is a critical seven days for romney's campaign. mr. romney has been to a high- profile opportunities this week. his campaign is billing as a major policy address. both states will hold their primaries next tuesday. what you think about these rising gas prices and what does it do to your wallet to your vote? caller: when i was a kid my dad

worked for the oral exporting company. he always said that oil is everywhere. it is involved with everything we touch, everything we eat. basically, the whole economy is based on oil and it still is. gas prices appear, i see the rise in prices hitting the lower and middle class's disproportionately. more so than the wealthy. they are doing their additions and adding to existing homes. i do not see it affecting them as much as i do the people who really are impacted by this. as a republican, i would like to see that point brought out by

the republican candidates. this is severely affecting people. people are not driving. i think people started walking. they're not driving as much as they used to. host: i do not you're listening earlier, but industry analysts say the opposite. they say rising gas prices is an indication the economy is coming back because demand for gas is going up. people have the money to spend so they are. caller: i do not see that as a local around here. i see people very upset with what is going on. congress not dealing with energy in general. the point is that on a personal basis, i have seen people cut back on things. retirees in particularly in the

area. it affects the food. it effects the heating oil. it affects just about everything. oil touches everything. this is the one factor that people tend to forget. had uncles who ran gas stations. we're out there and it really impacted people. it is different now. people have gotten used to it. i'm afraid you will get used to this and the use to the erosion of their purchasing power because we are -- we have this problem with oil and marketers coming out and exploiting the oil situation. host: an independent in south carolina. good morning.

if you went to gasbuddy.com we're showing your zip code. that is region find the cheapest gas in your area. what is it like for you? caller: i like the u.s. seeing -- you're putting this to the forefront. the only person coming out ahead, my 401k has made me $3,000 since january. but you are paying double for bread, double for milk. but you, the 401k, your pay more for everything else. and basically, wall street is the problem again. host: ok. a republican in mississippi, good morning.

what are your thoughts on this? caller: americans should not be fooled. these rising gas prices are based on the fact that it is tax season and the people who own the gas pumps, it is time to benefit from all the new money out there. the president does not own any gas pumps. he is not invested in all that. i think the biggest idea is to correct that money up that has been issued in taxes. american is to stop buying the gas. to not take vacations and a start striking against all of this. host: a gas a boycott? caller: that is what i think this to happen. america has lost its moral value. host: here is a "bloomberg"

peace. it says for an average couple living in suburbia, driving about 1,500 miles each month to conduct its average gas mileage of -- a 50 cents gallon increase will cost them about 20% more than the payroll tax cut saves them. in their case, what they give the gasket takes away. go to c-span.org for our coverage of that. it goes on to say that even this understates the political affected gas prices which is magnified for three reasons. these of the families and the areas that disproportionately account for swing voters. second they surge in states that are critical battlegrounds.

third, they almost always occur in the summer after the primaries and an before the convention when little else is during the political conversation. each of the last elections rising gas prices have posted particular problem especially for the democratic -- for the national democratic candidates. notches by sarah palin's star appeal but also the power of her drill droll message. two of its most popular responses a cut in gas purchases or accession " drilling are from the constituencies. that is the politics written in bloomberg. a caller from arkansas, would you think? caller: i have a solution and i

hope the president is listening. the oil it has a dog in this fight and it will not hunt. the president has a solution. all he has to do is get a consumer protection agency which the artist said of and have them go in and investigate what is going on. this is a national security issue right now. right now they're going to rip this out of office. he wants to make this a one-time president. it has hurt the entire nation. host: on the national security issue, we will be talking about that spike -- what the spike in oil prices play. up next, we'll turn our attention to politics. that is the headline on the front page of the miami herald. obama back to florida for votes

in cash. it will mark obama's 14th visit since his inauguration and second this year. coming up next, we will talk to charlie hurt. we'll be right back.

quacks we have a country where millions of innocent people have had to go to prison. the have put bars on their own windows and bars on their own doors because we have abandoned their neighborhoods to crime. i cannot live with that. our neighborhood should be safe. children should be able to play in the streets. you and i can fix that together. >> as candidates campaign for president, we look back at 14th man who ran and lost. go to our web site to see video of "the contenders" who had a lasting impact on american politics. >> i believe the destiny of america is always safer in the hands of the people than in the conference rooms of any elite. >> so let us give our country the chance to elect a government that will see and speak the truth for this is a time for the truth and the life of this country.

c-span.org/thecontenders. >> i had up c-span's clcv project. it stands for -- how do we do that? waste filly 20's with one person and so they can produce videos from the road. why do we do this? because they want to get out of washington d.c. to collect programming. we will descend on each city with all three vehicles. one will do history programming at historic sites. the other one will see you booktv. the third one does community relations. that is important to us because you work with our cable partners. the last thing that is important to know is that this gets

archived on our web site. " we're also doing is extensive social media. you'll see us on facebook. you will see foursqaure which is location based. you'll see us on tour as well. a chance to get our message out not only on there but also on line and threw social media as well. and that is why it is important that we want to get out of washington d.c.. we need to produce programming for all the c-span networks. >> was the next stop in shreveport, louisiana. on c-span3. "washington journal" continues. host: charlie heard back to the table. let's talk about campaign 2012.

upcoming primaries in michigan seems to be -- all eyes are focused on that state. we showed a poll to our viewers earlier. rick santorum beating mitt romney in that state. why is this important? a couple of papers saying this is a critical week for mitt romney. guest: adding it is a board for a number of reasons. chief among them, it is brit romney's weakness there. -- mitt romney's weakness there. he should do well. his father was an executive in the auto industry and has a long history there. his father was a well-known politician there. it is crucial in that respect. even four years ago, he spent a lot time court in the state. it would be added boerse the -- it would be an embarrassment to him if he lost. it is crucial for more reasons

as well. it is one of these midwestern telex that will determine the outcome of the election, much the way that there were so crucial in the democratic primary. they always are. in the general election, mitt romney cannot convey his message to those people and rick santorum and swoop in their and do well in places like ohio and pennsylvania -- you know, romney is toasted he cannot convey that message in places like that. i really do think that. what is interesting is how confident the romney campaign is that they will pull it out in the end. oftentimes a campaign is like,

well, we will do our best. they were not like that. they do not care what the polls say. they are going to win it. that means they see something in the polling that we do not necessarily immediately gathered. or we are already seeing it, and a barrage against rick santorum. host: the poll that was taken was a public opinion poll. there's been talk this weekend about rick santorum and things he has set about religious education. alienating women voters, etc. could it be that this poll is not exactly reflective of what is going on? guest: yes.

i think that is important greta. a week ago -- he is closing the gap. mitt romney is in a lot of these places that santorum had opened up. some of it is the realization that santorum may not -- he can be a trouble some general election candid for republicans. in part, because a lot of voters are going to german this election -- his -- are going to determine this election -- he runs counter to a lot of the field. the other thing is that mitt romney has been running ads and going after him on earmarks. we heard rick santorum go after

mitt romney over the amount of federal dollars are put into the olympics. they pointed out rick santorum -- you do not want to go after a guy when you leave yourself open like that. host: a michelle was happening on the ground -- on the airwaves, i should say. -- let me show what is happening on the ground -- on the airwaves, i should say. here is romney's campaign at highlighting his michigan roots. [video clip] >> i grew up in michigan. i was excited to be here. i went to the detroit auto show with my dad. it was a big deal. how did they get in such a fix that they lost jobs? president obama did all the things the liberal wanted to do for years. you've got millions of americans out of work.

home values collapsed. i want to make michigan stronger and better. michigan has been my home and this is personal. i am mitt romney and approve this message. host: that is the latest at by the mitt romney campaign. mitt romney and other kansas are relying more and more on their super pacs than ever. mitt romney's super pac out raising him in january. here is what they're putting on the airwaves in michigan going after santorum as a big spender. [video clip] >> how did rick santorum actually vote? to raise the debt limit five times. raise money for the project including a bridge to nowhere. santorum even voted to raise his own pay and a joint hillary clinton to let convicted felons vote. rick santorum. big spender, washington insider.

host: to those at work? guest: absolutely. i do not mind negative ads because they are very pointed. there are fair ones and unfair ones. these are a perfect example. what you remember about mitt romney's add? he was driving around in a car. the one going after rick santorum, it was a lot more affective because its points a very distinct picture and a very harsh one. they are affected. as you pointed out, it is amazing. this cycle the amount of negative ads. not necessarily ron paul, but the super pacs they do not

control it personally. but supporters of theirs do. it has been incredible how vicious -- i would also argue it is probably not as bad for the party as a lot of people say. i think it strengthens and its. -- candidates. it brings the problems that will come out later anyway. host: one of the papers and noted this morning that governor romney will be giving a major policy speech in michigan later this week. do we know what he will be talking about? guest: i think it will be focused on the economy. he understands this whole election -- the outcome will be on the economy. i think ita lot of established

republicans wish everyone would stop with these other candidates and get behind mitt romney. on paper and if you look at polls, he checks all the boxes that the republican nominee needs to in order to go up against barack obama. i think a lot of the party leaders are very concerned that the others may inspire the leaders in certain ways but they cannot carry that very simple message. i think they are worried about the general election campaign being about anyone other than barack obama. if it is about barack obama, and they think they can win. if it is about crazy things newt gingrich sometimes says or some of the weird writings of ron paul's newsletter, they get very

nervous. they just want it to be about barack obama data. host: rick santorum has responded or try to preempt attacks coming from mitt romney 's super pac. he put at -- he put out an ad called the negative attack machine. [video clip] mitt romney's negative attack ads on full throttle. his super pac attacked federal republicans. why? because romney is trying to hide from his big government, romneycare. his ugly attacks are going to backfire. host: could they backfire? it is always good to throw a turbine that they are throwing mud at you. in

one thing that has been amazing has been the number of paid actors who look like the other candidates. i do not remember ever seeing that. every single candidate has been caricatured in someone else's ads. some have been web ads. i do not know what it means. this is like watching "saturday night live" skits. that guy was a dead ringer for mitt romney. host: we're talking about campaign 2012. caller: good morning. let me start out.

i have a point to make. please give me a chance. i find it very -- people say they are christians. it doesn't matter. god doesn't see differences. he sees the same. we can say all kinds of things about president obama. i want you to look at something. the bible says you're supposed to respect the leaders. it doesn't matter if you like them. if you look at the republican party and see all the things they are doing. it doesn't matter what kind of actors you get to play the part.

as far as mr. romney, governor romney -- i want to respect him. people talk about him. it is hurtful to him and his family. rick santorum had some of the things to say. it is amazing how people can sit and tell women what is good for them. the republican party doesn't have anybody like jeb bush. everybody wants jeb bush and the governor from new jersey. they see that everything is going down the drain. thank you so much. host: we will get a response. guest: republicans are lost.

i think this is a troubling time for them right now. i think they are expecting mitt romney to walk away with this. whenever you want to say about the other candidates, there is one thing that is crucial. mitt romney is unable to close this deal and that is a real problem for republicans. i love top republicans say, what about chris christie? every single one of these people that are shot to the top of the pack were at some point or another regarded as, this will be the person that will call last the entire party around them. then we secret perry, michele bachmann, they fell away -- then

we see rick perry. host: an independent in arizona. caller: good morning. i wanted to ask one thing. do you notice more of the religious overtone this year? i would like to make a comment on why is that religious organizations can be tax exempt but yet run a business and not want to follow the rules as any other business would have to. host: hold on. we have to get different issues. -- we have two different issues. guest: there's been more overt talk about religion. there's also been talk about

weeding out the tax code. one thing i do not think we will hear in a republican primary any time soon is the idea of removing the tax protection for churches as part of our tax reorganization. it will be interesting because republicans -- conservatives have been so adamant about the flat tax and eliminating the tax loopholes and things like that. that raises the amount of taxes that people overall pay, which is counter to what we think of conservatives. if the democrats and republicans and liberals and conservatives come together and make a concerted effort to do that, whether religious institutions

remain sheltered from those taxes and what kind of sacred cows still get those tax benefits. host: we have a social conservative leaders on a show yesterday, tony perkins. he was talking but social conservatives rallied around mitt romney. [video clip] guest: he has not been able to rally social conservatives support behind is campaign. he worked aggressively to try to do that. he has adopted a new political business model. he was reaching out for social conservatives in the last cycle. this time he is sidestepping them. he is not convinced amthem that they should be -- i think you

see an alternative not just challenging mitt romney but exceeding him in the polls that more and more social conservatives are going to move from newt gingrich and those supporting mitt romney, moving towards rick santorum. i think he continues to route momentum behind his candidacy -- i think he continues to have momentum. guest: they have done it from the perspective of social conservatives. rick perry, michele bachmann, all of them have stellar standing among social conservatives. that has been his weakest all along. one thing that is interesting is the fact that mitt romney -- the

issue of his personal faith has simply not been an issue in this gop primary. it was not an issue in any of these places. the concerns that social conservatives have about him stem from his vacillation on key issues such as abortion. host: as massachusetts governor. guest: his positions have remained steady since then since he left office. but that is a deep, deep concern. you don't change your positions on these things for anything. that is what rick santorum has done so well. if mitt romney does one of being the candidate, it will be interesting to see if the mormon

is soism thing come up. if it does, that will be dirty politics from the left. it did not come up in the republican primary. host: this is from abc "the note." the dnc is going after rick santorum. mitt romney is only down by four points. "the l.a. times." let me throw in this headline. some say he is their choice because he seems the most authentic. guest: the obama campaign and democrats are watching all this

unfold. i'm certain there's a degree of nervousness as well. in politics, you want to know what it is you're dealing with. they have no idea what they are dealing with. it is amazing at this late in the game. the front-runner has managed to survive but is badly wounded and is limping along and we see another person surging. we have the prospect -- newt gingrich is not going anywhere. ron paul has no reason to bail. he will always have money. he will stay in it to the end. so i did not remember covering a

primary of anything quite like this. host: we have a message from paul. guest: when you hear conservatives talk about -- everybody on that side of the ledger is devoted to undoing health care and topping barack obama. that is the primary concern. when the most effective arguments on the conservative side has been a mitt romney can do it. he is the most likely to make this election about barack obama as opposed to one of the republican candidates.

maybe that works out well in the long run, but it doesn't make for a very inspiring campaign. host: democratic line, greg in tennessee. caller: thank you for taking my call. the biggest concern i have is voter fraud. we have a major problem with election fraud the people counting these votes. we did not have a way they are counting the votes. they are not counting certain counties. to play devil's advocate a little bit. if you know you can control the account of the votes why are we

putting up people like mitt romney or newt gingrich are all these losers against a so-called president named obama? guest: it comical aspect of this primary was an iowa, the specter of the entire caucasus worrying in the balance -- weighing in the balance. there were leaders that went to bed and it was this midnight scramble to get them up and to get them back down. we want up thinking that mitt romney had won by a squeaker. a month later, it was turned for rick santorum. that's the big argument that republicans mighake for voter

i.d. to require people to present an i.d. that eliminates dead people and double voting and things of that nature that skewed elections. i do not know if they ask you elections. -- if they skew elections. caller: i take exception with the previous caller that said they are white men at making woman's decision about contraception. i do not know -- the point is that as a christian, we were taught that life is not just for the privileged, the perfect, or the planned. now the government says ignore that.

i did not understand how people think it is a women's issue went it is to a religious issue. guest: i was amazed at how poorly president obama handled the contraceptives issue or how the administration handled that issue, especially at an important time in the republican primary. the polls suggest that it was a wash. it will not have a huge impact. this whole concept of the health care legislation which is by nature a large one-solution- fits-all concept. this is where people are going to have real reservations and problems with the health care

legislation. it gives republicans a lot of ammunition to go after exactly the religious conservative circles where they need to do best. host: richard in new york. who do you think you might vote for as an independent? caller: i agree with what george soros said when he said there would be variable differences between the president romney and president obama. the continuity of agenda between bush and obama is kind of amazing. my most important form of voting will be voting with my feet. i'm into looking into the south pacific or somewhere in canada.

things going on in a market in terms of the militarization of the police state and things i see in new york state. i was threatened by arrest by an officer. i was not doing anything illegal. host: john in kentucky. caller: i watched "the contenders." that was really good. the democrats lost in michigan. mitt romney represents the martini drinking people. you can tell the tea party republicans because they sit and drink beer. i think the republican party -- mitt romney has his

problems. i just think republicans -- the tea party people -- i think that mitt romney epitomizes -- host: he has a part-time connecting with republican-based voters. guest: 4 republicans, this election is all about the obama health care legislation. i think so many conservatives have made the argument powerfully that mitt romney is the only person who will -- you may not be in line with him on a lot of issues or you may not have faith that he will stick to its positions on things, but he

is made a promise that he will go into the white house and onto the health care legislation. that is in the and what i think it is all about for these people. not much of a difference between obama and mitt romney are the second caller may not see mitt romney as a true tea party conservative. what most republicans care about is getting somebody in there who will and do this -- who will undo this. this is a turning point. it will become another one of these entitlement guarantees that will become an albatross to the economy and it will be something that america -- can

you imagine getting rid of the and taba programs we now have -- getting rid of the entitlement programs. it is a monster in terms of the cost of it that the others have turns into. host: the supreme court may weigh in on that issue the constitutionality of the healthcare law. it could be delayed until 2015. "usa today" has that story today. mike in michigan. caller: everybody is saying that mitt romney and rick santorum are in the lead in michigan. we have not seen any romney or santorum supporters of. michigan. host: who are you going to support? caller: ron paul, all the way.

guest: his supporters will walk to the end of the earth for that guy. look at the number of delegates he is collecting. there's no real path for him. but he raises a lot of money. he has a lot of supporters and they have stouck with him from four years ago. ron paul ran four years ago. he has been ripped off by the other republican candidates this time. he is crazy talking about the fed. people thought he was on a different planet four years ago. this time around, all the

publicans have come to him. it is hard to say why he did not catch on with the more mainstream republicans. i do think that he hopes to hand over the keys to is kingdom to his son, rand paul, who is a lot more of a mainstream -- he won a statewide race in kentucky. host: what role will ron paul play at the convention? he has not want a state yet -- he is nonehashas not won a state yet. guest: i think he could help shape the platform in particular

regarding the fed and monetary policy. i think there will probably ignore him when it comes to a lot of the foreign policy stuff because it is so counter to what republicans have been embracing for the past eight years. it is an incredible amount of power he has managed to leverage with what seems like not much on a big scale. host: we have a tweet from the frequent viewers on twitter. gregory, you're next in atlanta, democratic caller. caller: good morning. mr. hurt, could you talk about the recent bill in virginia about forcing a woman to have

heard dr. do some kind of procedure if she has an abortion? how will that affect the campaign of 20124 republicans? -- 2012 for republicans? guest: i think it passed the house. host: it moved to the senate in virginia. guest: i do not know what will happen to it there. i think it does underscore how deeply and passionately in large segment of republican voters feel about those issues. that is why rick santorum is doing so well right now. he has a pretty flawless record on those issues. he would fight for the losing

its battles. he would go down with the ship. it was the issue that he cared about. host: independent caller from ohio. caller: thank you for c-span. somebody brought up the aspect of romney's's religion religion that would be a liberal thinkg. they criticized obama up and down. they still claim he is a muslim. he was in a christian church and they criticize that. any correction of any kind of historical knowledge would tell you that momrmonism is a cult. thank you.

guest: that is an interesting point. i do think there are strict limits people feel on what they can openly criticize one another is religion. that is probably a good thing in politics. it gets to a different level when you start attacking people over religion. when that came up in 2008, it came up in the primary. the issue about reverend righwright and all the talk about the muslim business -- all that was during the primary. john mccain criticized for making a concerted effort by saying i'm not going to talk

above reverend wright and the church, and republican said he removed a powerful weapon from his table and should have been able to use it because it informed president obama's spiritual thinking about things. it came up during the democratic primary but not during the general. mormonism has not come up in the republican primary. you would expect that to be the place it would come up. host: howard is a republican in california. this is from "the new york post" this morning. who they would like to see in the vice-presidential slot. caller: good morning, greta.

host: good morning. caller: let's load the wagon up first. [laughter] host: you do not want to go down that road? are you looking for a superstar? caller: i see mr. hunt on the screen smiling. most price presidents are chosen geographically for the ticket -- most vice presidents. that man is a heartbeat away from the presidency. we should look at the proposition of selecting a vice president very carefully. to get to the issue -- i was going to make a comment about reverend wright and the caller from ohio, looking for some kind

of an argument to turn to religion and try to drive a wedge, as mr. hunt who is not exactly goldwater republican has stated. we have not brought religion nor should we. the catholic church is standing up for their rights. who was it -- george stephanopoulos in a debate broad up birth control when it wasn't even on the radar. it is an interesting dichotomy that the liberal press and the liberal movement use in looking for something. after the selection of our representative, republican representative, where do you see the emphasis of the republican

attack going to the president? would be possibly $16 trillion debt and no reliable plan? host: strategy against obama. guest: economy jobs. i don't think they want to bring up social issues or anything like that. i think it will be a very tactical bloodless unpacking of every little debt, jobs, regulations, things like that that republicans or establishment republicans feel mitt romney is the best to sort of convey that message. host: you can read his column on wednesday is in "the washington

times." thank you, sir. we will turn our attention to the national endowment for the arts. then we will turn our attention to u.s. tensions with iran. first a news update with c-span radio. >> newt gingrich says that president obama pursues " outrageously anti american energy policy that snubs the keystone oil pipeline and puts too much stock in electric car technology." the president entertains a fantasy that the electric car is going to liberate us from saudi arabia. the wildest nominating process i can remember. the race is still wide open.

mr. gingrich is behind mr. santorum and mitt romney in the latest national polls. a deal has been reached for greece to avoid default in march. greece except it unpopular fiscal measures. stock futures are rise ahead of the opening bell. the dow jones futures are about 30 points. [video clip] >> we have a country where millions of innocent people have had to go to prison. the have put bars on their own windows and bars on their own doors because we have abandoned their neighborhoods to crime. i cannot live with that. our neighborhood should be safe. children should be able to play in the streets. you and i can fix that together. >> as candidates campaign for president, we look back at 14 men who ran and lost.

go to our website to see video of the contenders who had a lasting impact on american politics. >> i believe the destiny of america is always safer in the hands of the people than in the conference rooms of any elite. [applause] >> so let us give our country the chance to elect a government that will see and speak the truth for this is a time for the truth and the life of this country. >> c-span.org/thecontenders. "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with matthew kroenigsunil iyengar who is with the national endowment for the arts. $154 million was the request from the president.

you'll see an increased -- host: 60% of your budget goes for the grants to colleges and for research. can you explain how the budget process works? guest: the 60% figure was referring back to a meeting. the remaining 60% is direct grant making to cultural organizations around the country to put on arts programming and to fund arts projects that the american people can benefit from. it is $154 million.

that is about an $8 million increase over the current appropriation. $5 million of that will go to support our grant making which is the core business of what our agency does. host: can you give us an example of who might receive those grants? guest: nonprofit organizations may include universities. i had the office of research and analysis. i often deal with university grant applicants. they can come to arts.gov. we have many examples of how to apply. i'm not talking about the research component. the majority of the grants are

for arts projects to instill arts learning and to strengthen communities through the arts. we have grants that focus on art-making. it could be residency programs for artist. they can propose a project that they want support for. we require a one-to-one match. applicants have to demonstrate that they have some additional support for the amount they are asking for from us. host: where would they get that from? guest: these applicants are very resourceful. there are private funders out there. local and state agencies that offer support for the arts.

we find that the nea has over the long term generated a lot more additional dollars for grants that we fund for projects that we fund. i think it's an effective leveraging mechanism. host: this was written by the chronicle of higher education. "a dollar is matched and generates $26 billion of economic activity --" was it billion or million. how do you track that? guest: there are a diverse sources for doing that. we have put a lot of emphasis

on the this administration in understanding what are grant making activity is accomplishing. he is referring to some studies done by other arts organizations that have looked at the impact of arts programs. when americans go out to see an arts event they are spending -- maybe for babysitting for the night when the code to engage in arts activities. this can be tracked through indirect cost models that attempt to account for the economic impact. that is not counting the direct revenue generated by the arts. where we of matters to make a lot of strides is we look at the national data from our partner

agencies and through these various sources, we show that artists are key members of the workforce. it is surprising how entrepreneurs they are. they are the 3.5 times as likely as other workers to be self employed. they often have high levels of education. we have been trying to portray a more robust picture of the arts. host: how often is a business spurned from some kind of arts in denendeavor? how often does that turn into an

actual business? guest: i think compared with 20 years ago, the ecosystem for arts and culture is vastly matured and developed. in the past, maybe it was non- profit arts organizations at the core of the nation's infrastructure of arts. now there is increasing collaborations' whether it is if your with your groups or at the local level in municipalities. there is often arts and design integrated in cultural planning. i did not have a hard number. the innovation that is provided by arts organizations is ced seeding programs across the board that benefit a wide swath

of americans. host: an independent caller in pennsylvania. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: i have been trying to have the fun from the nea where it would not cost the government anything. this would be the same way c- span is funded. when c-span was founded, they had to pass it regulatory fee for four cents on everybody's cable bill. that is only increase to 7 cents over 30 years. c-span is the premier television industry in the country. anything that comes under the umbrella of nea -- the broadway plays, the poetry readings --

have not passed legislation to take 5 cents from every ticket sold. host: what about that idea? the arts will up more than enough support without the nea. guest: i would dispute that reason. i do think the method has been tried in some european countries. it would be useful to see some kind of appallinpiloting to see what that model will look like. this goes back to the charter in 1965. there was a void of that thenea nea could help to fill in the public domain.

this does speak to what the caller just said. they do need to be supported not only by private sector but it is appropriate for the government to play a role in encouraging climate for the release of creative talent. arts education is essential to a greater understanding and appreciation of those works and for the nation's creativity. there is increased importance put on creativity and innovation in 24 centuries skills for workers these days. the arts do play a role in enhancing those skills to the kinds of creative thinking, critical thinking that the arts appreciation and parts participation enables. i think there's a lot of complexity.

movie theaters -- there is a clear line. those deals are emerging and that is an interesting place to be. we want to maximize the ability to get the hearts out to the american people and to provide access -- to get the arts out. how do we do that through media or through product design? product design is court to economic growth. what are the skills which can nurse through arts funding to create the next generation of innovators in all domains? it is a very complex question about how to separate the public good from the arts. host: 90 show our viewers a

chart -- let me show our viewers. look at the funding back then and how it shot up in 1984 to about $162 million. it came back down in the 1990's and shot back up in 2010. this corresponds with the recession that we saw in this country, i assume. less than was provided back in 1985. guest: that takes a toll on the real dollars beckham spent on arts activities -- on the real dollars that can be spent. we have increased leadership, from people within the nea. our chairman and partners, we

have managed to leverage relatively smaller resources to accomplish some fairly big things. we have engaged in some federal partnerships that i think have been very useful. we see an appetite among these other agencies that we worked side by side what to bring the arts into their own policies. our chairman reached out to about 14 federal agencies and departments and created a task force on the arts. we realized there was demand among the health sector, people in education to understand how the cards contribute -- how the arts contributing. we plan to invest in the next generation of research aggregate

findings and reports them back. this is part of our general accountability. we want americans to understand how their money is being spent. there are some gaps and we can demonstrate the impact of arts. host: is that your role at the agency? guest: it is two-fold. we evaluate and we look at the work we do as an agency and whether we are meeting certain targets that we set for selfourself. we have a strategic plan and this is all of our website. one goal is to promote public knowledge and understanding about the arts.

we commissioned studies and we get data out there through a variety of media, through webinar is and report back to be found on our website. we take a hard look. we cannot prove what is not there. we take an empirical look at the data. host: this is a tweet from one of our viewers. guest: i would say if there is hostility in that regard, i am not familiar about the kind she speaking of. there is a sense and maybe eight distrusts -- and maybe a distrust.

we're trying to show people -- and this is coming from empirical evidence -- the arts in many ways our public service just like roads housing, public housing, other types of social services that we take for granted. we're being fiscally responsible and how we assess needs by the public and how we getart art out there for all americans. habits have changed over time. we get a pulse on how americans take part in arts. there was a censussurvey that was pretty large where we try to understand how do americans is

engaged in arts given the emergence of new art forms. we try to understand what they are getting out of that art. we have found that our education seems to have declined over the years. we have been doing research since 1982. the percentage of 18- to 24- year-olds has dropped by about 23%. the majority of that decline has been borne by non-white majority groups. we have seen declines in exposure to arts education among those groups. host: let me show the viewers the numbers.

that number in 2008, 49.5%. guest: the arts education is a key indicator of a variety of -- we have done studies. art participation -- people who engage in art participation are more likely to volunteer in their communities and take part in social events then non-arts participants. it tells us about the link between arts learning. that may extend to civic activity later in lfe. ife. host: the percentage of those

who received arts -education- 57.9% for whites, and the number drops for african americans and hispanics to below 30%. let's go to migke. caller: thtankank god for c-span. i have been a working artist all my life, spending 14 years -- are you there? host: we are listening. caller: i worked primary with canvas and brush. i work with paint and canvas. it is national endowment for

arts in this country is a joke. if i was registered in paris i wouldn't access to cameras paint, all the material at about a third of the cost along with a studio apartment and access to other avenues to help bring material to me and helping to support myself to promote my painting. host: 10 rebounds this tweet off of you from jim -- let me bounce. caller: hmm. well, with me i find that if i tried to find stuff online, it is much cheaper -- i go down to

the store and pick up my stuff. if i were in paris or in amsterdam where i've lived -- right there, on the counter. host: i think we have your point . guest: one thing i was thinking about as he was explaining that concept and making the comparison is that part of the work of the nea is to find out how we can serve the american people better through arts programs but to integrate the arts into the fabric of community development and in health care and other domains. the issue of parts supply -- arts supplies may be one aspect of that. we want to get them connected

with cultural planning efforts in other communities. there is a program called our town. there has been part of the growing initiative known as secretive place making. we tried to integrate the arts with the design efforts going on in communities. we tried to engage people and the festivals. this is part of a concerted effort to inspire citizens to apply for projects in their communities that they think will lend character and cost efficiencies perhaps to their communities. this is something that has cut across lines. this is not just the province of artists. this is part of the committee planning effort. i think the nea we try to

leverage partnerships that we think can provide broader access to all americans and to inspire artists to be part of the civic dialogue with other entities. host: north carolina, a republican. caller: good morning. the last caller made me change my point. it was "i have been to college i do this, i do that. i want the taxpayers to pay for it." i got a pretty good check from the irs today. that is where we're at in this country. we have $10 million going to this program. we are in a serious problem in

this country. should we start a program where taxpayers, you pay your tax dollars to me so i can do what i want to do because i feel good about it? if they're such good entrepreneurs, why do they need tax dollars in order to survive? host: 8 viewer saya viewer says it is subjective. guest: i have some sympathy with what the caller said. we're not about just supporting individual suppression. everybody is in a place right now economically where we cannot do everything we would like. i'm not saying this is the role of the nea. we tried to provide resources

with the broadest population of americans can have access to. i get back to what the tweeter said. there is this gap and it will not be filled by the marketplace alone. host: do you have evidence of that? guest: look at how many institutions have been supported. talk about feeders and symphonies. -- talk about symphonies and feedtheatres. for many years they have been receiving some subsidies for meter local or state or federal government. what is exciting about this particular nea is president and sent to a great sustainability for the arts ecosystem.

we do not have a situation where the marketplace cannot take care of these initiatives. we are trying to be a sport as possible in worked with several federal agencies -- we are trying to be as smart as possible. we were invited to work at walter reed facility up the road in bethesda. when veterans for coming home with traumatic brain injury, there were prevent a battery of therapies and wanted to understand how it helped when we give them express a write-ining and art therapy. so they are working with us. there's the national center of intrepid medicine that is

outside of washington at the walter reed facility that the nea is working with to explore how to express rightso what i am trying to explain is that there is a demand not only from the public but our other federal partners to see arts more effectively to leverage our own. be it education the housing department, the military itself. i would just say that one of the things that particular program builds on, i should mention is a program called operation homecoming. it is ahas been in existence for many years now. we have worked with families and a veterans' in creative writing workshops. there has been a tremendous response in demand for those types of services. it is possible they could about

the same services from elsewhere, but the question emerges, why wasn't that done before? the nea can galvanize great thinking about bringing the arts -- not only bringing access to americans, but a broader engagement that is part of our society. host: are you regulated by the government? guest: we are an independent federal agency. we are appropriated. we are not under the white house budget. host: earlier a caller made a comparison at about how it is funded and how he would like to see the nea funded. we get no federal money. many of you know that. the average cost per house is about $0.60 per month.

we are not regulated in any way by the government. a democratic caller in houston texas, go ahead. caller: when i was in elementary school, week was taken to a concert -- we was taken to a concert. i got to see an opera show. i learned from that. my music teacher, i still remember her. i can still hear her. a lot of people do not even know that the song whitney houston sings is a country- western song. host: what was the impact of having access to music arts on your life? caller: it made my life richer in my opinion. i think that is why so many kids

now probably, they're not exposed to anything except for rap. host: let's hear from larry in florida. caller: i have two questions. has this man now or anytime in the past been performing in peter? or he -- or is he simply part of a europe -- of the democratic sector. when a taxpayer be dismayed to hear about all the entitlements between the military and the department of education and somehow that turns around? isn't that what is wrong with the whole thing? bureaucratic tax funded, special place for people? isn't that true? host: before he responds, i want to hear from you. you support funding the nea. caller: yes, i do.

host: let me bump this off of you. this is separate from our guest appeared this is a piece in "the washington times" recently. rick santorum voted to preserve nea funding many times. as a republican, what you think of that? caller: he has been criticized for every kind of spending that has come along. it concerns me that he goes for lots of things. guest: i will try to answer these questions and then i would like to revert to the first caller. first of all, just my own background. i have been a musician in the past. not necessarily a very great one. i enjoyed the three arts. you can decide where that puts many scale of bureaucracy. that said, a one point that needs to be made, and i am trying to make it, the caller

referred to some kind of dark tunnel through which money goes from department all the way to the nea. we have been extremely transparent. the second point is that the whole point is to keep costs down. skills, talents, abilities across the government as well as financial resources. i do not understand how one could not work more effectively with other agencies to make that happen. as i said, this was a demand from the department of defense to approach us and ask for help with the project. in other cases, we reach out and try to locate partners across the government where, not necessarily dollars are being spent. we get resources to staff or constituencies to make -- to serve more americans in every possible way. i think this speaks more to the need of the fiscally responsible than it does to play

in spending on miscellaneous things. which we do have. that kind of relates back to with the first caller said, which i was delighted to hear. that is the kind of thing where as a researcher, i cannot go on hold up and say i spoke to a woman who had a great arts experience that changed her life. we're trying to collect data through innovative means that been used in social science and economics to understand how arts can relate to well-being. that is a conversation that is an international one. the degree to which it could affect acted -- academic achievement. but also that the arts have a lot to do with one's a subjective well-being and down the road with their ability to engage more fully in a broader range of experiences that life has to offer. host: we found in one of your

surveys -- the relationship between socio-economic status. guest: i don't know which card is being referred to, but one of the things we have observed is that there has been a correlation overtime that the people with more needs -- the people who are less affluent, who might come from population subgroups that have been at risk and have not served as much, that the arts, just like other domains, eupepsia mentioned earlier -- some minority groups. lower income groups. they tend to have less access to the arts. i did not necessarily mean they did not go to the symphony or the ballet. i'm talking about art in the broadest sense whether it is

engaging to media or any other format. why is this important? we know the arts have a lot to do with cognitive ability and social ability. they also have an economic value which have been talking about a little bit. to get back to the callers point, we are at a point where we have to recognize and understand what the value is that the arts provide in a portfolio education of skills and knowledge that we want our children to have. host: let me add to that conversation. here is a tweet from a viewer. can you tie those together? guest: einstein does it well. he is a violinist who really knew his music. that is an extreme. there certainly is. and we have seen this in the signs. art has a lot to offer in the

way of problem solving and risk taking. one can see the experiment and try out new forms. in gauge and create. -- and gauge and create -- engage and create. and who is trying to be a musician or any field, they know how to dance affects motor skills and balance. over time, and you basically learn to appreciate values that express themselves in other ways. through signs, there has always been an interesting relationship between scientists and artists. the nea, for example, has had relationships with science. with our partners at the institute of health. we all recognize there is a need to understand how the arts influenced human development. host: out to give a few more

phone calls if i can. a democrat in georgia. make it quick. caller: i will try to make it quick. this is the problem. to let me finish my comment, c- span is a great organization. but they take my money without my consent. i guarantee you that republicans will be calling in, criticizing ina federal agency. it takes so long to make a call to c-span. they criticize the arts the same reason they do that is the same reason they criticize public television, which i consider the premier programming. you learn a lot and it is diverse. it has contributions of minorities to this country that are constantly played on public television. that is the reason why they are

so against public television. it is the same reason there against the nea. they want only whites to venture to the country. this is diverse. it brings on other ideas and the ideas they tend to want to propagate. host: we will let that stand as a comment. from texas, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. this seems a little naive to think that this was created as recently as it has been. our whole civilization of the united states, europe, it is almost as the art did not exist until this organization was created. i happen to be a taxpayer. i got the guy who previously called is. i started myself and my life with all types of art.

every type of art there is i have purchased it, acquired it over a period of 60 years. i have four children. they are all in the arts. my grandchildren are musicians. nobody subsidizes any of that. my young grandson just came back from england with a band out of a high school in the chicago area that was all paid for by donations. we do not need the national arts organization to do with these are doing. i am also retired military. i liked the previous callers comments about what does the military -- what does creative writing and have to do with wounded veterans coming back? that is a stretch. host: i will leave it there. can apple two threads from the

last two callers? the second one was that the nea is welfare for cultural elitists. both colors getting at this class and ethnicity, can you tell us what your data says? guest: first of all, getting back to the premise. if you look a participation across the board and that people who participate in relation to other positive social outcome that is a strong link we find in our own data. we are exploring it through more bigger studies. that said, i think it is imperative to understand there's a great disparity among groups in this country who engage with the arts. there are households which could not really afford buying and acquiring artwork. are participating in other arts activities as we know them. that said, i think the nea's

goal is to help to provide americans access to these crucial pieces of their heritage. but also have been transmitted from generation to generation. i still think it was an eloquent piece of a light -- of legislation, the founding of the nea. that is what we see the nea doing. one of the things in our mission is to advance creativity, excellence, and innovation for the benefits of individuals and the communities. i would just argue a bit with the point made that any of this is a stretch. because, you know, you talked to wounded veterans who have experienced this are those web not but are interested. there are many who want to engage in these programs. you realize very quickly that it is doing something for people. it is not necessarily express will through hard data. that is where we come in theory

we are trying to study this and really understand. is there a case to be made here? is there a strong link between positive outcomes? host: will you put out a report on that? guest: i think eventually we will. the national center of intrepid medicine, we're doing that to really instill greater knowledge about what is going on in these clinical protocols. host: appreciate the conversation. up next, we're switching gears to talk about u.s. tensions with iran. first, c-span radio. >> more than 2000 afghans rallied against the burning of the koran and other administration materials during trash disposal at an american air base. they're demanding to meet the president and threatened to demonstrate benefits demands are not met.

meanwhile, john allen, commander of the troops, ordered an investigation into what nato says was an improper disposal. he insists the incident was not intentional and he apologized for it in a phone call earlier to the associated press. more on iran will exports. -- on iran oil exports. long-term contracts and a ban on unilateral cancellation of contracts by buyers. the spokesman says that all of these should be considered if you are going to continue trade in oil relations. in the last hour, pakistan says inner pole will ask to arrest someone in association with the assassination. he is accused of failing to provide adequate security for the man who was killed in a gun

and bomb attack in december of 2007. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> hi there. i had at the lcv project. it stands for local content vehicle. the purpose is to get programming outside of washington, d.c. how do we do? we stash one of these with a small person and a video camera so they can roll, record, and producing from the road. why do we want to do this? to get out of washington d.c. and such programming for all of our networks. we're doing and lcv cities at tour. one will be a history programming at historic sites. the other one will do booktv programming at bookstores. the third one does community relations advance. that is important is to work

with our compete -- with our cable partners. the last thing that is a board to know is that all this not only does and the air, but it gets dark cap on our web site. what we're also doing in the cities is doing extensive social media. you'll see is on facebook and fourswaure, -- foursquare, which is location base. it is a chance for us to finally get on air, but to get out as well. that is why it is imports rose to get out of washington, d.c. really make a commitment to getting outside the beltway to produce programming for all the c-span networks. >> watch our necks stop at shreveport louisiana the first weekend of march. on c-span3. washington journal continues. host: we are back with matthew

kroenig. u.s. tensions with iran is our topic. if you go to the litany of headlines we have seen, iran leaders offered to resume u.n. security talks but then the proposal comes one day after the leaders claimed new progress in creating nuclear fuel rods. and then the unveiling and you see the headlines over the weekend. a return to nuclear program. iran wants the u.s. and syria. what does iran what? guest: we think ultimately that iran's strategic objectives continue to exist at the state. they want to exist. they also see themselves as one of the rightful dominant powers in the middle east. we think that is whether goals to be a player in the region. we think that they think by acquiring nuclear weapons they could achieve both of those goals.

also, to be able to project power in the region and be a more dominant state. that said, they are vulnerable to pressure and to calibrate their intentions the nuclear program based on how the international community is responding. they are responsive to pressure. i think what we're seeing the past few days is that the sanctions are starting to bite. this is convincing iran to consider negotiating and come back to the table. at the same time, they want to be in a strong position on the negotiate so the point at the advances on the program to say that this is incomplete but they're making progress. you will not able to get us to completely give up our program. host: let's talk about sanctions against them. europe had sanctions going already. over the weekend there

sanctions put out by bank transactions. the bank that iran oil companies try to use. can you explain that and why that is affected? why now? why not earlier? guest: it is difficult to follow all the sages because there are some new different players. there are the united states, u.n. security council, and the new sanctions committee to place almost every week. it is hard to keep track of all of them. sanctions have become much tougher in recent weeks and months. especially with the announcement of the eu oil embargo. as you point out, this is based in brussels. it is considering putting sanctions on iran. this means that essentially all of iran's banks would be cut off in a banking system that allows banks to do financial transactions with each other. that would be pretty hoarse sanction.

were put a lot of pressure on iran. gueshost: would it have a huge impact? guest: i think we're seeing that it is already hurting the iranian economy. and then what is at the negotiating table, to make concessions on the nuclear program. so far we have seen iran has been under pressure and is more willing to talk. we have not seen any evidence of we have changed their calculation on the nuclear program. at the end of the day, that is what we want to achieve. so far, to nothing with any reason to hope the sanctions will work in that sense. host: even clapping dumping transactions? why now? over the weekend, you think, why did this happen long ago? when we first learned during sanctions, white in this whole thing transaction thing happen? guest: it is a good question.

when the obama administration command had this fuel track approach. the first track was engaged with iran. he said he would extend an open hand to iran and try to reach to iran leaders to try to negotiate. he was hoping that would work. when he saw the track would fell, he switched to the pressure track. that happened about the fall of 2010. we've only been on this track for a little over one year. the sanctions have slowly built up over time. part of the reason we did not put tougher sanctions on originally was because we were worried about the effects of sanctions on iran in the global economy. it is something we're still worried about. iran is a major exporter of oil. taking iran off the market conclude make a shortage in oil and would spiked prices, which are bad for the economy. try to put pressure on iran without completely undermining

the economic recovery we've had since the financial crisis. that is a game we are still trying to play. host: and yet we saw the iranian leader unveiling their varied latest fuel rod. it was put up by iranian tv. this image, if we could show our viewers, of him unveiling it with a blow. taking the seat -- taking the shot of putting it in a boat. what is the message there? what does that say? guest: i think there are two messages. the first is to a domestic audience. they're trying to tie legitimacy and prestige to this nuclear program. it is a popular domestically. iran issued currency that had the atomic symbol on it. the second messages to an international audience. as i was mentioning before, when they go into negotiations, they wanted position of strength.

they know that the united states ideal position is to get them to give up their program completely. i think i'd try to trump it, these advancements they're saying that we are too far along. maybe we will talk about some curbs, but they're trying to essentially create facts on the ground to make their negotiating position stronger. host: what can iranian leaders fear the most? political unrest or and stability? guest: what they probably fear most is military action. the u.s. and israel have both said they refuse to take military off the table. israel could strike in the coming year. i think iran fears u.s. military abilities more. we have the ability to inflict lasting damage on iran. the probability of a u.s.

strike and the late israeli strike is what they fear most. host: you are on the air with matthew kroenig on foreign relations. caller: i wanted to point out it is a war of faith to the middle eastern people. for us it is political, pushing democracy. we are in the gulf or we could be in israel. our true ally is israel. since 2000 they have been pumping oil by the billions of barrels. people do not know about this and they are not a part of opec. if we send troops to israel to protect them, they are our most important ally. what iran is trying to do, what

syria is trying to get into israel. they want to take over israel. the bigger plans russian help in these countries. host: is that really the motivation by iran? to get into israel? guest: i think there is a religious and ideological element to some degree. but i think we have seen since 1979 that the iranian government, despite rhetoric, has been pragmatic with security policy. that said, by pursuing nuclear weapons, which iraq things continues -- which iran things continues to its security. so, i think israel is right that a nuclear iran would pose an

existential threat. i do not think iran would intentionally use weapons against israel of them acquired them, but there's always a possibility that within a crisis that could be an accidental nuclear exchange. if that happens, israel is a very strong -- a very small country. a couple of nuclear weapons in an accidental exchange with iran could devastate israel. host: the role of russia? guest: russia and china have been interesting. the analysis has been very concerned about their program for a long time. when the new clyburn must first announced, but now we're on board with tough sanctions. russia and china have resisted intense pressure on iran. having part of the reason is that for them there and less threat to buy nuclear iran.

the message is kind of a middle eastern power. we have forces in the reason the in the region. -- in about region. when you look at china, you have a strategy of economic growth and securing access to energy. for them, they see the middle east more in terms of getting access to energy. they're less concerned and iran posing nuclear program is less of a priority. host: from los angeles, early morning to you, go ahead. caller: it is early. i hope to make points before you cut me off. we were discussing the oil crisis and all of the middle east situation and have they are affecting the american people. now, do you have a situation

where you have so-called allies in israel who are doing all this and turning in the country. iran is not threatening israel, israel is threatening to bomb iran. iran is a big enemy. and then you have a whole way in which to discuss this. you make israel more important than the american people. host: let's take that point. guest: i think he is right that israel is turning iran. have said all options are on the table, including a nuclear weapon. but iran has said israel is a cancerous tumor and should be wiped off the map. this claim that the united

states is only to sit in iran pose a nuclear primitive of israel is not quite right. i leave it was a real threat to the national security interest for a variety of reasons. it could be to defer their power in the region. as a pointed out before, and the crisis involving a nuclear-armed iran, it could result in a nuclear war in the middle east that could be catastrophic. at some point, they could develop what -- vehicles that could deliver them to the will east coast. israel is very threatened by the promise the caller pointed out. i think we have a real reason to be concerned. host: the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general dempsey, was on talking about

iran. here is what he had to say and do a talk about it. [video clip] >> i think it would be premature to exclusively decide that the time for a military option was impossible. i think the international sanctions that we've been able to gather around sanctions is beginning to have an effect. i think our diplomacy is having an effect. and our preparedness. fundamentally, we have to be prepared. that includes, for the most part, being prepared defensively. host: your a former consultant to the defense department. what would it take to be prepared? guest: there's a lottery to talk about. in terms of being prepared defensively, if there were a strike on iran posing nuclear program by a israel or the analysis, iran would have three principal ways up the tolerating. it does have a strong

conventional military. it is developing one. the first thing iran could do would be to support terrorist and procedures to state terrorist attacks " against u.s. or israeli interests. the second thing iran could do would be to launch ballistic missiles at u.s. bases or ships or allies in the region including israel and gulf states. the third thing iran could do is create trouble in the strait of hormuz. viewers will remember there are a lot of threats and counter threats made about this. by laying mines or attacking ships to go through. those of the three primary ways iran could retaliate and the types of things united states would need to be pretty defend against if there were a strike. host: "the wallstreet journal"

weighed in on what general dempsey had to say. he has told them they could breathe easier because such an attack is not likely to work and a case. the u.s. fears iran's retaliation. the regime is a fearsome global military threat. do you agree with that? guest: i grew with parts and disagree with others. i think they are right that if we want to convince iran that the threat of a military action as early on the table, we have to be strong in our rhetoric and not put it off the table on and take it off because the consequences would be disastrous. on the other hand, dempsey did not say it was off the table -- he said it was premature. there is a time for diplomacy. i think that may be right. that said, we could -- or we

have to make a decision. general dempsey did say that we're developing in that direction. host: a call from georgia. caller: bank -- thank god for comments from general dempsey. for two decades we have been in an industrial fourplex -- warplex. iran is being attacked right now. it is a form of warfare. we need to leave a lot alone like those buildings. it is a defensive weapon. they have a right to 1. we need to leave them alone and

some of raising oil prices by these fake conflicts to prevent -- to provetect israel. guest: he said iran has a right to a nuclear weapon. i do not think that is the right to look at it. there's a victory treaty that was established in 1968. it is an international treaty. it technology at the or five countries who had developed nuclear-weapons, including the united states. those countries would become nuclear-weapons states but they would agree to not use them. iran signed the treaty and agree to not require nuclear weapons. they agreed to allow it to national aspect is to verify their not developing a nuclear weapon. we have concerns that iran is not in compliance with the treaty. at the atomic energy agency the amount the report that detailed

look to iran bang dollar misdoing. with china get them in compliance with the treaty and to keep them from acquiring weapons which, as i pointed out before would pose a great threat to the nine states and international community. host: a republican in maryland, go ahead. caller: i like to respond to two comments. and having read this guy who has calculated the income base of all kinds of information? it is a mathematical calculation. he is over 90% after with his predictions. based on his numbers iran is now going after the nuclear bomb veered is more for peaceful purposes like energy. but you never hear in the news

media because the pentagon uses this guy and has worked with him to identify hot spots around the world. my last, that like you to comment on is in the early 20th century it was great person who took all the oil from iran. the president was elected in 1952. he performed -- he informed the british cover that he would like to take back the oil. and the sure he would implement social programs for iranians. what happened is the british cover a complaint to the american government. they sent a coup. it is because of that action that iran is where it is. the ticket democraticly -- a

democratically elected president out of office. guest: i will respond. you pointed to a game theorist and i'm not familiar with that study. adding the suggestion was appear interested in nuclear energy and now weapons. that's been their claim but they're really only fooling people who want to be fooled. the work they're doing on nuclear weapons velma's of the candor is it to me to do if your only interested in energy. you did the minister to jenkins situation and tell what we think their ambitions are would fit into that. we should help the to get some kind of agreement that gets iran to put curbs on their per gram. countries to often build advanced unclear programs like this and stop short.

it is interesting. is your opposing nuclear program in the 1960's, many to bourse and the sinking their same iran right now, that they only want energy. they will not go ahead with nuclear weapons development. of course, they did go ahead. i think we're seeing a similar path here were people are hopeful it will stop short but it is unlikely. host: is unclear the signal -- the signature to the nuclear nonproliferation treaty? guest: there are a number of countries that refuse to sign because that intentions of developing nuclear weapons when it was under negotiations. pakistan. israel never signed the treaty. north to reassign the tree but then pulled out after developed a nuclear weapons. there is one other comment, as i could dress, the tensions between the west and iran.

that is also true. that's it, i think there is international politics. very food, things could change quickly. if you're ever, we're fighting a war with nazi germany and if years later germany is one of our closest allies. whites want to point out to these things as deep history as being some of the causes. if you to really understand what is, the nuclear program, we to focus on the more recent history in the distant past. host: as hear from mike, an independent. good morning. caller: with a talking about the non-proliferation treaty a lot. he just had a productive. -- touched it. so, iran has signed the treaty? i was worried about israel as well as us. also the number of nuclear weapons between these three countries, if you know how many

each country currently has. host: you said israel did not sign the treat, but the u.s. did? guest: yes, the u.s. signed the treaty. the tree lot didn't countries before the treaty was resigned, including the united states. iran signed the treaty. israel never signed the treaty. in terms of the number of nuclear weapons the united states into doesn't 10 negotiate an arms control of the surveyed union where we agreed to limit on number of nuclear weapons. that is how many are in the u.s. arsenal. israel's arsenal they keep it a very secure. they refuse to confirm the have nuclear-weapons. estimates are that about 200 men

fear weapons. iran does not yet have a nuclear capability. if they continue on the courage to get to a cavernous as the end the year. it would depend on iranian behavior and have to decide to progressive nuclear development. host: a democratic caller, good morning. question or comment? caller: how sure are we? why can't we get diplomacy in a rack? -- in iraw? -- in iraq? why are we defending israel? that is my question. thank you. guest: israel is a sovereign

state and has a right to defend itself if it sees nuclear development of iran as threatening. the united states has been in close consultation with israel bank. -- with israel. they said they're not giving a veto over their national security policy. the other question had to do with diplomacy. there are only three ways that this will turnout in the end. he threw get a negotiated settlement through diplomacy or we will acquiesce to a nuclear- armed iran. or the u.s. and israel have to conduct a military operation to end the nuclear weapons. the diplomatic option would be the best of we could get there. it does not seem like there is any overlap with what the supreme leader would be willing to agree to.

as a clip from general dempsey pointed out the u.s. policy is to pursue diplomacy and continue to put sanctions on iran to get iran to the negotiating table. again, it is very hard to see with that agreement would look like. host: back in the senate last week, there was a group of bipartisan senators to put together a resolution on iran. the resolution said nuclear containment is not an option with iran. it demands of the hostile regime immediately suspend all uranium enrichment activities. the republican in seattle, washington. go ahead. caller: late in the year 2000, november or so saddam hussein told the world that iraq would no longer treat oil for u.s. dollars. as soon as baghdad fell, the

iraqi traded in dollars for their well-being. isn't that really the reason that all this is happening? host: i am sorry. i did not mean to cut you off to the low early there, but we got your point. guest: i think energy supplies are imported the global economy. making sure that energy continues to flow from the persian gulf reason -- region. i think the caller was suggesting we're putting pressure on iran because of energy. i think it is reversed. i think we're putting pressure on them to spy with it will do to energy prices. -- despite what they will do to energy prices. this will choke some of the oil

supply to the u.s. economy and raise prices. even if we did not get to that point, the fear of conflict is leading speculators to drive of the price of oil out of the fear. when we say we are interested in iran's new liver because it is a great threat, we believe that. there is not an ulterior motive. host: go ahead, patrick. caller: i recently had a blog isexchange. i wanted to move to the treaty. it speaks about this. you think there's a role for the ninth is to play in the disarmament of iran in some way? -- for the united states to play in the disarmament of iran in some way? thank you so much. guest: good questions.

the first and, if i understood correctly, it was is there a role for u.s. disarmament. many people argue that it is difficult for the dance is to make progress when we have a 1500 deployed strategic weapons. it is hard for us to tell iran the cabinet. it is hard for us to get cooperation with other countries. and i think that this kind of a rhetorical level that may be true. if he iran's talking to, they're thinking things like how would it affect their security? how much national pressure will be brought to bear? can we stand? i think these are what is going on in teheran right now. realistically, it is probably not in their talks relations. sizing the u.s. nuclear arsenal

and how many weapons we should have is an important issue. proliferation is an important issue, but i think they're separate issues. it is misleading to conflate them. in terms of joint diplomacy with israel, i think that is something that is going going on. we are concerned that israel conduct a strike, in part because the israel military option is a bad one. did not have the same ability to inflict lasting damage that we do. if we get to a point to use nuclear action a it to be whether or not the u.s. is doing it. the other question is on opacity. they're neither confirming nor denying the have nuclear weapons. i will not be the first country to introduce weapons into the middle east. one of the things that is interesting is that if iran acquire nuclear weapons, but

then i think is real close the policy will pass and go by the wayside since they always said they would not be the first country to reach these new for weapons. if iran were the first direct test, that would allow israel to come out and declare its nuclear arsenal. host: democratic caller in kansas. go-ahead. caller: i don't think people fully realize an attack by a military strike with the really means. the iranians are not stupid. devon watching us. i am an iraq war veteran. as a with the iranians capable of doing. the navy will not sell out into the persian gulf. if we want to change the behavior of the iranian state comes to war, which it will do. americans are realizing to win that kind of war, and we will be in it, it will take

mobilization. probably gas and drafts. unlike the iraq adventure which involved less than 1% of the population. guest: when people talk about military option for iran pose a nuclear program they're easy talking to airstrikes to iran facilities. no one is talking about a ground invasion are putting boots on the ground. not to minimize the consequences of the military strike on iran's military firm could set off, a number of returns is retaliation. it is hard to imagine coming to something like the iraq thingwar. we had hundreds of thousands of ships and the ground occupying the country. no one's talking not invading iran and throwing over the regime.

it would buy some time at the minimum to push the program back and buy space for more diplomacy. host: loss angeles, good morning. caller: your very gracious for taking my call. i want to achieve that i am an united states navy combat wounded veteran. i served upon the u.s. liberty that was attacked using unmarked aircraft. israel is no friend of america i guarantee that. they wounded my shipmates and wounded -- a murdered my shipmates and wounded many others, including myself.

go to ushijack.com if you to learn more about the u.s. liberty. host: are you familiar with what he was outlining their? guest: it was a case that took place a few years ago. there was -- israel attacked a u.s. ship. a lot of uncertainty surrounding that was whether not israel knew it was a u.s. ship or not. it is something that happened in the past griffith is a deep situation today israel is a close ally to the united states. we have many close allies in the region. i think that maintaining that strong partnership with israel is important. again, one would think about the iran nuclear issue is a mistake to think of this as something we are doing as a favor to israel. even if israel were not the picture, we would be concerned

about iran posing nuclear program -- should be concerned. we have our own interests and sense to stop them. host: peter is next on the republican line. caller: my question or concern is in the world that china plays in the sanctions against iran. they have taken a very passive perspective. does that lack of cohesion among the un superpowers, china and russia namely, and if they well -- what sort of actions to would persuade china to get on board with, handling the iran nuclear program? guest: china and russia have been less willing than the united states and the eu to put tough sanctions on iran over the

years. we're seeing that now with the oil embargo. the eu has agreed to stop all contracts with iran. the united states is not buy iranian oil. china has refused to go along with that. if china were to go along it would put more pressure on iran 's economy. it could give us more leverage at the negotiating table. that's it even as china continues to buy it does not mean the embargo will be unaffected. it means there's less competition for iranian oil. if no one else to buy iranian oil, china is trying to get a discount. if they did this, that is less money going into coppers and iran. that helps us to achieve our objective. host: robert is next on our

democratic line. webster, new york. caller: my question has to do with iranian national pride and national psyche. we know the political and religious leaders are moving forward. what does your research show the feelings and thoughts are of the men and women in the streets? host: let's take that point. guest: the nuclear program is very popular in iran. i think they're a lot of people hoping for a regime changed and hopefully the error string will make its way to iran. hopefully government come to carry the complete curbs of a nuclear program and give it up. we to be hopeful that would work out call by think. -- we can be hopeful that would work out, i think. the protests in the elections of 2007 and 2009 would give up

their power appeared their regime change, a new government in iran would be good. i cannot think we're going to get that to happen in a way that will solve the program. host: frank, a republican in new jersey. can you make it quick? i have less than a minute or so with caller: the guests -- which the guest. caller: i want to make a couple of comments. there is no reason -- one reason he wants nuclear power. it of the bombs led to blackmail the world. guest: i do think that iran restrains its foreign policy if it does fear u.s. military retaliation. if it had nuclear weapons it would fill a cake to deter major u.s. retaliation by the threat of nuclear war. i do think some cover was given to be more aggressive. i do think there are reasons to

be concerned that they would pose a grave threat to national security so we should do whatever we can to prevent that from happening. host: our last phone call from indiana, i will squeeze him in. independent, go ahead. caller: the treaty does forbid countries to sign from pursuing nuclear weapons but on the same token, it also offers its expertise to countries for civilian programs. the have inspected iranian facilities hundreds of times and never found iran to develop material yet. guest: it is true. that conducted his research on nuclear weapon design. in fact, inspectors are in iran today try to get answers to these unresolved issues of

possible military dimensions. the latest a read this morning is that iran is the 90's inspectors access to one of these potential military congress -- is the nine inspectors access to one of these potential military complexes. host: matthew kroenig, thank you for speaking to our viewers this morning. "washington journal" will return tomorrow morning with more of your phone calls your questions, and your comments. thank you for watching today. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]