Thank you Gratis, six minutes now past 11. And good morning. This is midday on Minnesota Public Radio. I'm Gary Acton glad you could join us US Senate has certainly been busy this week or today. For example, the Senate voted unanimously to restate us support for Taiwan key source of friction between the US and Mainland China yesterday the Senate voted overwhelmingly overwhelmingly to reform the IRS there of course is the continuing debate in the Senate over Farm policy specifically weather Farmers facing severe crop damage to get special aid from the government plus of course continuing discussions over Social Security Medicare and the wisdom of imposing sanctions are nations with whom the US disagrees as a Republican senator Rod grams is deeply involved in many of those debates and he joins us this morning from Washington to discuss those issues in more. We certainly invite you to join our conversation as well. If you got a question for Senator Graham, give us a call. Call are Twin City area number is 227-6002. 276 Thousand Oaks High the Twin Cities. You can reach us toll-free. And that number is 1 800 to +422-828-227-6004. 1 802-4228 2 It Center thanks for joining us this morning overhaul the bill that passed yesterday is certainly gotten lots of attention. Probably the most headlines this week. Is this measure really going to change the way the IRS does business at first blush. It will it's going to you know, put some new rules regulations are standards in place that really puts the IRS kind of at Bay and end gives more rights back to the taxpayers. You know, that they're you're not guilty before proven innocent type of an aspect and it hits going to you know, hopefully stop some of the abuses and harassment on that is going on. So I think it was as you know a step in the right direction. Will most taxpayers feel this no it's not going to make much change. But if you have been one of those who have felt as harassment or abuse as we found out through many of the hearings that the finance committee in the Senate held this is going to be a very very big issue for those. So I think it's going to make a big difference. I think it puts the whole IRS on notice said that it's got to change its way of doing business and but I hope it doesn't stop is Gary from making even more reforms or changing the entire tax code as we know it today. I hope this is an interim step to relieve some of those pains or pressure but not stop Congress saying well this is enough for now because I think there were many of us who believe how we need to change the way we collect taxes are revenues in this country short of totally abolishing the income tax. Is there something something between what was done yesterday and the total abolition of the income tax that you could see what would be a kind of Middle Ground on this not right now and in fact, you know the way the bill was passed. Is a result of those hearings and some of the major of uses that we were told about and talked about and discussed. But in the right now, I don't see an interim step plan. In fact what's on the table right now is the tax code elimination act which is the, you know, the huge step of changing it all together, but I don't see anything right now in any of the Committees are hearings saying is there another step we can take so in other words if you're satisfied with this, this is all the father were going to go but if you believe we need to reform our tax codes then I think we're going to have to take care of that large step in between the vote today on Taiwan Taiwanese policy brings to mind again. The president's trip to China and the ongoing debate in Congress over US policy toward China. Were you Generally satisfied with the way the president handle to his trip to China pretty positive that you throw politics in there. You're going to get a lot of people supporting or not supporting the trip or what was done. I think it was a lot of Cosmetics of what went on but overall I had him. What was the feeling was it a general positive feeling are we moving in the right direction and I think all together, you know, except for a couple of controversial things and I think you mentioned the three nose on Taiwan that has some people worried or concerned but overall, I think the trip was a good trip, but you know, you got to look at both sides you're going to find those who really have bad things to say. I don't think it was a bad trip and then you can have those who have all the positives to say. And I don't know if it was all that positive. But basically I think the trip was worthwhile to think the president moved the ball forward, but you know, there's still a lot of concerns about our relationship with China. Trade policies with China the human rights in the religious persecution issues. So if you know, we still have concern about our relationship and further our relationships with China and which direction at country is going to go how would you like to see the US balance the the mutual concerns of trade and maintaining good contact with China and at the same time express our displeasure with their human rights issue policies, and then there has been a real debate going on in Factoria. We have formed in the Senate Hero by partisan group and that's a number of Democrats and Republicans and we have now met three times and we plan to me with Administration officials next week. I Sandy Burger in particular in the Navy and bringing Henry Kissinger to look at options because right now it seems the first thing we want to do when it comes to if we have a displeasure with China or you don't have a concern about what they're doing. The first thing Converse is done is throwing up sanctions and a lot of these are very in the my opinion counter-productive and you know, I caught a lot of Flax or to speak over some of the debate we've had on religious persecution items and I'm I support the goals that we need to reduce these and we need to be vocal on our displeasure with China and other countries. There's a hundred and twenty countries on the list of the state Department's dealing with human rights and religious persecution issues. Not just China sanctions have not worked at think you go back to Eva 1978 in the grain embargo that the Jimmy Carter placed on Russia the Soviet Union, it didn't work then sanctions don't work now and that's why this bipartisan group has gotten together same area of over half of all the same ship that this country is placed in the last 80 years over half of them have come in just the last four there's one third of the entire working the or the globe of population that is off-limits now to American businesses because of one sanctioned another there's a total of 61 sanctions on 35 country. So we're looking for an alternative in. That's why we need I think the bring the administration in a lot of heads of got to be put To find out how can we make a strong vocal statement of displeasure or support without using a specialty food and medicine has one of the weapons in the sanctions that we have. So I think that's what we need to do. But also on trade agree quickly, I think we have to be better and trade negotiations and I think a lot of the problems we're facing especially with China is that I don't think we've been as good at the table and negotiating his Trade Agreement says we should have been and I think we need to put more emphasis on that in order to open the Chinese market. They're going to be selling here. We need to sell their so that's one issue trade, but I think the other issue of sanctions as something they really need to get a handle on when I ask you about one other thing here before we get to some callers and that's a horse the agriculture situation in this country specifically here in Minnesota where Northwestern Minnesota Farmers have gotten hurt so bad with crop disease in the rest Democrats are calling for some direct Aid substantial directed. Farmers you have indicated you'd rather go to XSport route. How's that going to play on the farm policy before and went to Freedom. The farm is because the old policy wasn't working. And when we were talking about putting loan rates and other type of programs for farmers were really not setting a floor but a ceiling and I we have many major Farm groups. In fact two weeks ago. We met with the leaven largest farm commodity groups in the country soy beans corn wheat barley excetera and every one of them talk to three most important things. They said we're trade trade and trade and then we also got into taxes, you know, like a state taxes Etc. But what they wanted they did not want a return to the farm policy as we knew it before they don't want government controls telling him what the plant when the plant where to plant, you know how to sell them where to store excetera. They like the ability to plant for the market and the problems right now. Have nothing to do with freedom to farm the new Farm policy in this country. It has to do with the problems around the world and that is the markets and we have to do a lot. We need FasTrak we should get that back on. We're hoping to bring that up. We have to reopen or trade talks with China. We need to help with IMF that is a natatorium international monetary fund to help with the financial crisis and Asia and now spreading to rush excetera. The demand for farm products are there they just don't have the cash now to buy it. And in fact, we've lost 25% of our export market for grains in just the last six months and that all hurts the farm community. So it's a growing crisis there and that's why I think all of that works together. Is there any way to restore Again part the safety net that farmers used to have without the totally going back to the old way of doing things to know? I think it would just be the first step out the door again, and and like I said even talking to many Farm groups that we've talked to even this week, even though they feel the problems in the pressure there. None of them are saying what I They know there are a few groups that are advocating that the vast majority of them are not and again what they want is the ability to have markets to sell their products, and if you really look at the transition payments Gary, we are paying Farmers today under the transition program a free of the farm more money than they would have been getting under the Old Farm Bill So to reinstitute that is not going to help them and I have might be very short-term type gratification or security type net. But in the long-term, it's only a I think going to exacerbate the problems that we are feeling in the in the agricultural Community three four years ago, so I don't support them a senator Rod grams is with us. He joins us from Washington this morning to talk about some of the big issues before the Congress, and if you'd like to join our Congress conversation, give us to call are Twin City area number is 227-6002. 276 Thousand Oaks had the Twin Cities 1 800 to +422-828-227-6000. One 800-242-2828. Marry your question, please. What retirement program and how does it compare to Social Security of the Arts as far as the Senators go? Are they on the same program? Yes, we are at used to be where they weren't but now we're covered under Social Security as everybody else. And I think that's great to have the old retirement plans in the big numbers that you heard about say even dealing with like Dan rostenkowski was and thirty some years in Congress excetera. How about the plan is changed at least twice since then and we are now under Social Security as well. So a lot of that has been taken care of I think you know, I always believed that the senate or the house should not treat their retirement one way and then expect Americans to have another retirement plan. I always feel that you should live under the laws that you pass and if you think Social Security is good for the American public then you better make sure that you have the same type of plant that you live under so we have done that. So but as we look at Social Security as we know it today, you know, there is a big debate now beginning to what are we going to do to make sure that Social Security is going to be a very viable and solid a program for this generation and the coming generations and as we know today social Is heading toward bankruptcy. You cannot survive in its current form. So there has to be some changes made over the last 20 30 years. There's been 51 changes and Social Security but they have all been increasing the taxes on you know, the taxpayers and then workers and if they even that hasn't helped to raising more taxes to you know, save of a floundering system isn't going to work. So I'm glad that the administration, you know, President Clinton has been involved in the debate Patrick Moynihan the Democrat senator from New York has introduced a bill. There are a number of Republicans that are going to be introducing a bill. I'm going to be introducing one hopefully later this fall. So it has become a real bipartisan debate. It can't be a Democrat idea can be Republican and it can't be just Administration. Glad we have to come together and we need a lot of input from citizens around the country as well. But we do know we can't have the current system as it is. It has to change some way in. That's where the debate is going to begin Center. I know you've Located in the past at least some move toward allowing workers to to invest some summer all of their Social Security money in in the market so they can get more out of it. Is there a way to do that and still still provide for people who well who mess up on their Investments so that when I get to be old and they're not totally destitute advocating the personalized accountant and when I said there's a number of bills coming out, you know, right now every American that is working has 12.4% of their income to ducted and put into Social Security and there are a number of plans out there one would say you could take 2% of that. There are you know, input 10.4 into Social Security 2% into a private account others another one Senator Phil Gramm of have that says 3% Rick Santorum has got one coming out that it says 4% we're working on one that says you can take the whole 12.4 because we want to make sure America. Have all the options in front of them and then they can help to decide but under the system of personalized accounts. Everything would still be you know, mandatory. You have to make sure you put away money for your retirement, but there would be so many guidelines when you deal with safety and soundness just like her banking industry, you know, that's private personal but yet his lives under many many government regulations to ensure safety and soundness that means to yours your deposits are protected in the bank. So you don't lose that money in the same at these personal accounts that the money would be there safe and sound and there are many precautions that would be taken I end up like to think that we're on The Cutting Edge in the world if you know in investing or I mean inventing new things or wherever we're going. But there's something like 10 other countries in the world. Now that have gone to this there something like 20 more that are considering it. So we're really behind the curve and I'll give you an example quickly and chili if you take two workers one in Chile won in the US and they both have equal earnings over their lifetime and they retire under Chili's system. You would get 11 times more money in retirement benefits than under our system. But I think Americans need to look at this. They need to have a voice and a choice and also to you know to ensure that there be safety and soundness now for many who are already 50 or 55 the system won't change your retirement will be guaranteed as it is today, but it's for the Next Generation let you know why I won't even be able to take advantage of this. I just turned 50. I think I'm going to be sentenced to the current system. But I want to make sure that my children or grandchildren have at least an option that have social security as we know it now or to opt into more of a personalized account. Not that we're going to dictate it, but they have the choice in the opportunities. On Monday, the Medicare commission comes out here brand has a hearing look at ways to try to shore up that system. How do you see that playing out? There's another system that is also heading toward insolvency as we know it and I when we talked about making some reforms to extend the life of Medicare in are balanced budget amendment all they did was took 60 billion dollars of Home Health Care out of Medicare and put it into the general fund so that the the Medicare account looks oven for 10 more years, but it comes out of our general accounts. All we did was shift the money from one pocket to another and it does nothing to save the long-term viability of Medicare and that's why I this bipartisan approach on this commission is very important to at least lay out. Where are we going to go? How do we keep social Sarah Medicare solvent? So it provides the benefits that this generation needs and also the next much like Social Security and I'm glad it's going to be in Minneapolis next. I hope as many people that can get out there and at least be able to hear the debate that's going on to him put in the concerns that are being voiced because this is very important just like Social Security. We got to make sure that this system and there's going to have to be some changes made but how can be the least painful but yet provide the maximum benefits that we can you know over the next 50 years or more sure your question for Senator Graham's Place sanctions as a deterrent. I think I if I understood he talked about the new sanctions that are going on especially in Pakistan and in India in dealing with the problems and Cashmere the Iraq sanctions, I think that's something different that deals mainly with terrorists and there are a number of states Libya or Rock Sudan the run to those very strict sanctions, which I have supported because terrorism can be exported and we don't want we want to make sure that we don't support that in any shape way or form but the new sanctions were placed. This is according to a Glenn amendment was passed in 94 about to pull reparation of nuclear testing. And when that happened in India and Pakistan, of course those sanctions immediately went in we did pass a bill yesterday Gary that passed 90820. So it was overwhelming support both sides of the aisle to reduce those sanctions. So that agriculture was not included because keeping food away from the people. I don't think it's a very good sanction in this again goes back to a lot of our concern we all Wanted to give the president flexibility and other waivers to you know, drop sanctions and other areas that did not get into the bill, but I think we took a first step saying that food and hopefully medicine will not be part of the sanctions that we place on these because those hurt the very people that we hope to protect or help. So that was a very big step yesterday dealing with those sanctions, but overall, I think Congress is in its first phase of really looking at the future of how we're going to impose sanctions as a weapon or a tool of our foreign policy Center. You think we are caught in something of a bind lecturing India and Pakistan other nations about nuclear weapons. When of course we still maintain a huge Arsenal very much. So, you know the old community of five nations that had nuclear weapons right now, if is expanded we know at least two more and there are everybody knows who are all three other countries out there that have nuke Capabilities as well. So our old philosophy or policy of containment not to expand or the proliferation of nuclear technology. The other countries the containment issue is dead. I mean that it's no longer viable because if it doesn't work and you also got to sit back and look and say that other nations are going to develop nuclear technology within say the next 10 20 or 30 years. So our policy again, I've talked to Senator Joe Biden of Delaware, who is the ranking member on her Foreign Relations Committee about how is this policy of containment no longer viable. So what do we do from here? And we bring them into the community of nations with nuclear power to put on the same responsibilities and onus on to them in regards to how they handle this to accept them and say alright recognize them now is a nation with nuclear capabilities and to make sure they live by the same guidelines that the other five do so, I think that opens a whole new world of debate, but you know, Gary that The smoke is out of the bottle sort of speak and you know, the technology is, you know, being expanded and basically we can't stop it. But how do we police it and make those countries that do have it responsible. So it doesn't get into the hands of terrorists or a rogue Nation. I think that's our biggest challenge over the next decade back to the phones at odds on the line from Duluth with a question to answer food and medicine should be used as Weapons infection site. I'm wondering if you're implying that only to certain Nations or would you reply to Iraq as well? A million people have died because of the the sanctions and the aftermath of the Gulf War the United States shouldn't accept the responsibility for the death of those people in a rock. You have to put that on the shoulders of Saddam Hussein Al because of his actions, but do I support you know, exempting food and medicine from our list of sanctions? Yes very much. So, in fact, I'm a co-sponsor with Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut how to lift those type of sanctions are restrictions even in dealing with Cuba and you know that we should not use food and medicine as a weapon there as well that you know, again, it doesn't hurt to Fidel Castro but it hurts many hertz many of the Cuban people who need the food and need the medicine and other technology. So I would like to see that taken off from there because we need to use a different type of weapon again, and I don't know exactly what it will be but something that puts pressure on the government's because Fidel Castro who eats. Well Fidel Castro gets all the medical attention. But many of the people of Cuba do not so I buy putting these sanctions on that. Do not hurt those in the leadership for the governments of these countries. Not only Cuba but others, so that's why I, you know, I've been supporting that the try to take those off the list and able to provide food and end up medicine to find another way to try put the pressure on these governments were at least a week and very strongly express our concerns. Whether deals with human rights religious persecution or whatever. It might be Senator. Rod grams is our guest this our joining us from Washington to talk about this some of the big issues before the Congress again, if you'd like to join our conversation to 27 6000 to 276 thousand in the Twin Cities outside the Twin Cities 1-800. 242-282-8227 6001 800-242-2828. You might wait for just a couple of minutes here as we clear some of the lines so that you don't get a busy signal when you call in. We will get to some more callers in just a moment. I'm learning Benson on the next all things considered the temp a musical. casual day that story on the Casual Friday edition of all things considered weekdays at 3 on Minnesota Public Radio. Can o w FM 91.1 in the Twin Cities. By the way over the noon hour today 2nd Armored. Midday program are going to hear from Karl Road Course got his start in journalism here in the Twin Cities was one of the first African American reporters to work at a major newspaper work for the Minneapolis Tribune went on to work held several a positions in the government has been one of the nation's leading political social commentators for many many years. He was in the Twin Cities earlier this summer to speak at the annual Convention of the American Association of retired persons talking about diversity on affirmative action in the rest interesting speech and we'll have that over the noon hour today programming on Minnesota Public Radio is supported by the 8th Annual Twin Cities used book fair, July 10th at 4 p.m. July 11th at the State Fairgrounds. Great fun for Book Lovers. Also a reminder that NPR's Main Street radio coverage of world issues is supported by the blandin foundation committed to strengthening rural communities. Expanding cultural opportunities through the Minnesota rural Arts initiative. We can look for a sign to partly sunny Sky across the state today, maybe a shower or thundershower this afternoon, especially in northern and western Minnesota with highs in the 80s Twin Cities partly cloudy with a high in the mid-eighties right now. It looks like it's going to be fairly warm this weekend warm and humid typical July summer weather in the state of Minnesota right now in the Twin Cities. We have a sunny sky 79° are guess this hour is Minnesota senator Rod grams who joins us from Washington to talk about some of the issues facing the Congress and center before we get back to our collars. I should ask you about the tobacco bill or we certainly heard a lot about that in recent months the Senate voted down on that big girl. Tobacco bill sponsored by Sir John McCain President Clinton suggested that Republicans caved in to the tobacco industry essentially bought off by the tobacco industry. Your response. Oh, I don't believe that that mean that sure there was a lot of debate going on about the tobacco bill, but I think the majority of the members of the senate or the Republicans. Anyway believe that this was nothing more than a huge tax increase it was nothing but a tax bill that was going to generate close to a trillion dollars over 25 years. I was off budget spending and I mean, I think there is more sensible weighs more sane ways. I'll take a look at this problem. In fact in our budget this year alone Kari. We got 825 million dollars dedicated specifically to the problem of teenage smoking and so there are a lot of money in the budget for the afters many programs that are dealing with this when you look outside of this, I mean the bill started out the one that was agreed to a year ago that had the tobacco companies on board and double ready to move ahead. But I think it was a lot of greed and things that went into the committee that stopped the price of this bill and it finally got so bad that it just couldn't stand under it. Don't wait, but it was mainly nothing but a huge tax bill it was going to put a lot of taxes on Americans and a huge growth in the federal government something like Seventeen new programs or agencies. And so I think I've seen her bill is going to come out not this year possibly but I think you'll see it next year and Hannah's you know, that there's many stalks going on now between tobacco companies and the number of states trying to find ways of, you know, making a settlement such as in Minnesota. So I think that's going to move in the right direction, but this was not a good bill and I was glad I voted to make sure that it was killed not to send it back to committee or anyting else but to make sure that this huge tax increase was killed and hopefully come back in a better bill will emerge next year Rob. Your question for sonograms place has been so instrumental in cutting funds for poor people in for welfare and other galuteria programs. I'm wondering if the senator Comment on why the drawdown of military spending has been so slow in the wake of the end of the Cold War right now. We spend 18 times in defense spending the total of our 5 supposed enemies in the world. The Congress recently voted some 300. I think it was million dollars to build a plane that was to be built in Newt gingrich's District, which of the military did not even request and I'm just wondering if the senator is willing to bet there's also some other issues like the the military's plan for fighting two concurrent Regional Wars at once with the requirement to win them in a faster time and with less calories than the Gulf War and it seems to me that We should be drawing down this military spending drastically. There's a whole host of questions and they gave it first of all, we are the only superpower left in the world and when you talk and compare it to you, no other countries, you know, that's like comparing apples and oranges and what we have to do is to make sure that we provided the fence that's going to keep this country free and strong anything less than that should be unacceptable to where citizens when you talk about do we spend more on that done the military and he said that I'm been working on cuts and programs for poor people. I would like him to send me a list of one of these programs has been cut or to name one program. In fact spending has gone up every year for all of the programs dealing with in all the entitlement programs excetera. There have been no Cuts in those programs. They have expanded to take care of those needs. And then when he talks about the military the military today compared to 1990 just eight years ago has been cut by 35% It is the only program in the federal budget. That is undergone any Kind of cuts. And in fact, we're spending less today according to our GDP in relationship to what we spend on the military. We're spending less today than we did just before World War II when we were at very dangerously low levels. So the military has been cut and there are continuing efforts to try parrot down and make it even more efficient. But there has been no exorbitant spending on the military when you talk about fighting two fronts, you know, when the war that's always been this policy and it's able to have at least preparedness or the capability of meeting to type, like so say another person golf with a rough what would happen if North Korea would invade South Korea would we have the ability to react on both sides of the globe? And that's a been a policy under the Clinton Administration was a policy under the Reagan and Bush administrations and even before but overall people have this notion that we're spending more on the military and less on Social Services. That's not true you if you can Find me the thing in the budget that shows that but we are continuing to spend more on social programs and services for the poor and we are spending Less on the military and I think we're at a point now where there is a lot of concern that the military is not up to par. It is not ready to meet its obligations. We have lost. I can't tell you how many of percent of Pilots out of the Air Force out of the Navy personnel. It's hard to to you don't meet the obligations that we have. So there's always the people out there that think they were spending more on the military and that's not true. Do you think Senator that the Pentagon is spending its money wisely you note for example that there is growing concern at least certain certain number of people that the that the US military is returning to the bad old days of the late 70s. So when it really was not a very efficient fighting force by according to the experts. We are spending all the ways you know that. What does the budget has essentially gone down still spending a lot of money on it? Are we getting enough bang for our buck? And that's why I said there is there still the efforts to look at how the money is being spent how were pyramids in all of our Weapons Systems and everything else and out when the gentleman talked about a plane being built in some District. This is going on all the time. And we we had built submarines built up and Democratic districts in in New England at the Navy said it didn't want or need but then again sometimes politics thinks they're smarter than the Pentagon and what we should really be looking at is how they can be done. But should we continue to look at ways to save money or purchase Weapons Systems better to make sure that we have the bang for the buck. I agree with. In fact, I've been working with Senator Chuck Grassley many times and he has been one of the biggest critics of the Pentagon in the defense system and how we spend our money and just to give me an example of Gary of him about 20 years ago or during World War II like in the Marines for instance. There was like one Officer for every enlisted man and today there's like one officer for every three. So are we getting top-heavy I think we are can we pair down? Can we make it more efficient? I think we can but while we're doing this, we can't throw out our national security at the same time. But yes, I believe and I'm continuing to look for ways of being better purchasers of up with the weapon systems that we need to continue the R&D to make sure that we have the best in the world but not the throw good money after bad and to make sure that the money we do spend makes us the most secure nation in the world. You just returned from Russia. Do you think that they still pose a threat to us in any way they could because they do have the capability, you know what the missiles and the nuclear tipped weapons that they do have a but there is a country that isn't really chaos. And that is you drive through it looks like you know, like they're 30-40 years behind the times and they are struggling as parts of Russia are very affluent. Like we were in Moscow and in there they they seem to have A lot of money excetera, but when you get down to the mini rule areas of Russia, they have a lot of problems. They have a lot of you know in consumer goods and medical supplies medical facilities clinic excetera. So they do have an issue heard in the news, you know, the other problems with their financial system and I just had a meeting just before I called you Gary with secretary Reuben and undersecretary layer Summers from the treasury Department about all the problems in Asia and now spreading to Russia and how important getting IMF funding is and that this isn't going to be something we're going to solve overnight but long-term, but there are an awful lot of problems in Russia Today. Could they be a threat? Yes, but could they sustain it? I don't think so, but that we should right now be looking and trying to find ways to Aid them and not to you know, giving them for an eighth or money to find out where we can strike a Partnerships to help them develop the the natural resources that they have to be able to provide for their economy that's going to lift the standard of living for their for their people, but Right now Russia is in real trouble when it comes to their capabilities for manufacturing excetera and also their economic system in the before they fall off the edge into chaos. I hope there's some things that that with the IMF now they hope to strike a deal with Russia this week or early next week and that wherever the world can come to an assistance with him. I think it's going to be important canceling your question, please yes. I heard you talk earlier a senator Graham's about Congress now being under Social Security, but what about their health care plan? There are many Americans that you just do not have access to healthcare insurance at all. And I wonder if inverse of Congress are willingly giving up their health care insurance or health care coverage so that they can be on a par with the American people and I want to make one more comment when you talked about the social security system and she'll a I believe that the military does not even fall under that that so-called privatized system. They they still get their their pension totally paid for. By government the way the Social Security System here works. It's only private citizens that are taking their chance on on private investment sure about that day. I don't know about the military, but I know that the people in Chile are very happy with what it's been doing it since it's over 17 years old and I you can get into a cab with a cab driver and ask him what he's got in his retirement account evil plot of past book and show you exactly to the dime exactly what he has in his account. So all the people and I've traveled the chili and talked with him and talked about those who have helped put the system together in those who are administering the system today and it is very successful. That is very strongly supported by the people of Chile. Now, whether if you're in the military, if you're under a different retirement system, I and II I'll have to look in to make sure I'm talking about Healthcare. There's over 90% of Americans, you know that have health care coverage and that's still at the others that were worried about in trying to you know, find ways both on the state level through st. Paul helping with men care. Also on the national level of billions of dollars are being spent to try and make sure that those without a healthcare or health insurance have coverage in some way about when you talk about Congress. We have the same type of insurance that anybody in the country has I have Blue Cross Blue Shield. There's nothing special and just like your employer in my employer who is the federal government pays part of my premium. I pay about a third of my premium and I have the choice of about a hundred different insurance policies that I can have and I happen to choose the one that I have but it's no different. It's policies that are on the market for anybody else to buy. The only difference is that we have the choices and that's what many of us have tried to do out through Medicare and other programs to make sure that the American people have the same choice and we have used the federal health care system as an Autism model. So no, we don't have any there's no special program. There's no special policy. It is the same one that you could buy or your neighbor could buy. Or that I could buy and the Mike employer contributes part of that. I contribute part of it but it is a it's nothing special but it's the key to it is that it gives us Choice flexibility to choose the Blessed best plan for the money for us sinners. How about moving to a total Universal Access Health Care Program of some sort some some program, whereby everybody would have access to coverage Medical Center. You were always given Health Care in the end. Of course the taxpayers pick it up. I would rather see more of it put into the private sector than the government sector as well. So is there a way that we can find out that everybody can have coverage for a separate policy. I just as soon see if we're going to be be providing a health care for those who can't afford it. We do it in the form of vouchers so that they can go buy it, but they stay in the private sector and don't read. I on a government program when you look at a national type of Healthcare System. First of all, you got to look at the United States has the best healthcare system in the world Bar None. I mean, we've got the richest people in the world that can buy the best Healthcare and their countries, but where do they come they come to the United States and many of them come to the Mayo Clinic? So the what is it the King of Jordan go get Healthcare anywhere in the world, but his plane is parked at the Rochester airport cuz he chooses American Healthcare over anybody else. So we've seen systems in Russia fail. Canada is in problems with their nationalized health-care England has split there's because they have private now in public because of the demand they needed so for those who want to change our system to maybe mimic Russia socialized medicine that is fail. I don't support that. I don't think the vast vast majority of Americans supported. I think what we need to do is look at ways that we can make sure that we can have all the Americans covered under some form of Pi. And keep it into the private sector cuz I believe just like anything else in the private sector competition gives you the best product at the lowest price and that includes Health Care as well as automobiles or anyting else. Are you concerned senator in terms of competition that the companies that control not only Healthcare but she there seem to be so many other Industries Banking and Telecommunications right on down the line to get bigger and bigger the mergers continue and it seems like the level of competition at least in this country is actually being reduced. Well, we don't have Monopoly. There are laws and we'll keep that from happening but say the big Merchants like City and travelers to make no cities group and you know that's growing bigger granted. That's one of the largest corporations now in the country, but I think you got to look at what is it going to offer and services and prices to its customers and I think in the end you're going to find that Americans are going to have access to even more. Tools in the financial markets ready access to you know, those financial services and I think you'll find it at less cost again. This is competition and if one company is going to overcharge another company is going to find it there going to be able to come in and offer the services at a lower price. So I'm not worried about that. You know what we got to keep an eye on it. But the laws are In-Place Aunt you know against that are going to work and out. But right now I think to say that you know is that the economy's change is the financial markets changed and as these companies are moving in that direction, of course, everybody wants to make a profit. But the only way you make a profit is to offer a good product and its service in order to do that. Maybe it's the scale that they have to go to so they can offer these new financial services and products and that they can do it at a very competitive price because Americans are demanding this and I so I'm not too worried. I'm not worried about that right now, but it's you know something I think Congress is always got to keep an eye on and it to make sure that the laws we have in place now. Right here to gave your question Place. Hi. I was hoping to centigrams batak a little bit about his position on foreign aid to developing countries may be particularly these IV Africa cuz I know you're going there soon the contact for my question is it seems the political climate really is to cut back on this kind of Aid and you know usaid is having its budget cut emissions close at the same time. You see Paul's that indicate that whereas people would Advocate giving less for me than they think the US government is giving I actually generally we have to take any more than we really are. So I was wondering if you see the pairing back on foreign aid to developing countries as a positive trend or in a would you like to see us actually kind of restored to are the leadership position? We had a couple of decades ago, but I think Dave about 10 years ago compared to now I think if you put it even an adjusted dollars we are about half What we used to do in a lot of that is coming from pressure as you mentioned. A lot of political pressure were many Americans would feel we shouldn't get any foreign aid. I'll because the problems we have here in the country. We should take care of our own first before we are spending money abroad but I think many of us realized that you know, this is a large world and in many times in order to provide benefits for our citizens and that is a way to do that is to make sure that other countries are strong economically and can be a viable trading partner buying our goods and services. So it all kind of works hand-in-hand. It's kind of like advertising, you know, you don't always see that was dollars right away. But as a business, you know that there's advantages to advertising because it's going to come back and increased revenues and demands for your products. So there are very good things about foreign aid, and then there's also the moral side of it and that is to help out those countries and people who need help and assistance with just minor things such as trying to provide a clean and healthy water supply for drinking water off medical just immunizations Extend the life and and the health of many communities just to make sure that the young children can be immunized in those aren't very big dollars. But what we are doing as far as foreign aid is it we're trying to make putting obligations on the country that receive our foreign aid and there's been many cases. I'll just give you a quick one like in 1 African country where say 10 million dollars is given in foreign aid and it was all spent on Mercedes and pulling a wing on the palace for the leader but nothing went to help the people and what we're saying is that we want accountability for those dollars and if we're going to invest or 10 million dollars in a country or a hundred million, whatever it might be that we need to have accountability. We want to see how that money has been spent and what good has come of it and we want to make sure that it's on an economic scale where the people are benefiting so I don't think it's the question right now is how much more they were giving too many of us are concerned with how that foreign aid is being spent how well Congress is monitoring, you know, this is harder and taxpayer money. They were taking from the American public and if we're going to be 82 somebody we should be very cognizant that aware of how that money is spent and what the returns are and if the debts being wasted then we should cut off for an aide. But if it is helping and it's going to benefit I think us in the long run we will continue at so I think of foreign aid formula will remain about the way it is right now and that's less than 1% of our total budget or about 17 billion dollars this year. Just about out of time here. Let me run a couple of other series Bosch you real quickly. Just also took a look at the nuclear power industry in France. There's a lot of talk where it where they rely heavily on nuclear power plant to 24%. A lot of talk in this country about phasing it out. What do you think is the future of nuclear power in America? That's one of the reasons, you know, they have a policy of a closed loop in their nuclear cycle ours is an open-loop and that's why we're looking for permanent storage site or in France. They re process and reuse it and when they're done they have a very small amount. Waste material compared to where large amounts to this was a policy that President Carter putting Place back in 1978. And the reason was the fear over the plutonium that could be used for weapons. Well, if we have a closed cycle that plutonium would be re burned in the reactor. So it would not be available for weapons. So why we went there Gary was to look at what is France done. How is they close the loop to make sure that they burn more of this material so it isn't, you know out there for nuclear weapon production compared to ours and if we have to debate and maybe change your policy, but bottom line that nuclear power when you look at the demands and the growing demands on energy that it has to be a part of our overall policy for energy because if we're going to replace nuclear power with fossil fuels we're going to only add to the problem of pollution and if you want even come close to a working out the Kyoto Protocol where we're going to reduce emissions, it can't be done with cold or fossil fuels nuclear power has got to be up a leg of our energy. Picture I read recently that some Republican party State officials would like to ease you out of the Senate then to have somebody else running 2018 truth to that. Not that I know of but do you know the politics makes strange bedfellows? But Gary all I can do is the best job I can when I'm here and do you know, this is a great opportunity for people in Minnesota to go at least hear what I'm doing and some of the reasons behind and let them make up their mind. But if I'm going to do the best job I can of course when it comes to campaigns on the run the best campaign that I can and then we'll let the people in Minnesota decide everybody the wounds from the State Convention such as they were been healed. I think I think we came out of the convention, you know, probably more united than the Republican party has been in years and I always had we had some great candidates going and I supported Joanne Benson Norm Coleman did a great job. He won the endorsement and I said when we came out of the convention, we all had to be on the same team and I'm going to be supporting normal hundred percent and we want to make sure that we keep her. I'll look in the governor's mansion in the in St. Paul in the afternoon of Ember. So it's important but I think the party is very United and we got some great candidates. I think we got some great opportunities and 98. Thank you very much for joining a senator Gary my pleasure. Thanks so much. Dealing with it by not a Republican senator Rod grams joining us from Washington at this hour to talk about some of the many issues that the Congress is wrestling with. This is midday. Thanks to all of you been with us. This are especially those of you who called in and tried to call him with your question to waited so patiently, unfortunately, we just we can't get to all the colors. Midday will continue in a moment. I'm Ray Suarez since Memorial Day wildfires. It burned hundreds of thousands of Acres of Florida forest and threaten nearby residence fires are also blazing in Mexico and hit hard in Indonesia in the last year join Ira Flatow on Science Friday for a discussion of why the world's forests are burning and weather. El Nino is to blame. That's the next Talk of the Nation Science Friday from NPR news. Science Friday begins at 1 this afternoon over the noon hour. We're going to hear from Carl Rowland right now. It's time for the writers almond.