out -- the u.s. indirectly paid warlords. there is an article in the newspaper about how money is peing funneled in afghanistan. here are the phone lines. we are also online at c- span.org. and you can find us on twitter at twitter.com/cspanwj and here is this story in "the washington post." the u.s. is funding a massive protection racket in afghanistan, and directly paying tens of millions of dollars to warlords. the security arrangements are part of a $2.16 billion transport contract and violate laws on the use of private contractors as well as a defense department regulations. military officials on the ground are focused on getting supplies were needed, and have virtually no addition of health security is actually provided for the convoys that transport goods throughout the country. a democrat from massachusetts says the findings of this report range from severing too shocking. he wrote that in introduction to the report. so, that is what we will talk about during this first segment. we're wondering what you think about that? is it a necessary part of war? does it just happened in afghanistan to increase security there? we will learn more about the report throughout the day. congressman tierney is part of the committee on house oversight and reform. he said in an interview on monday that he hopes to report will help members of congress to the analyst with the they think this is the most effective way to go about dealing with terrorism, or the most effectively. the report's conclusiins will be introduced at a hearing today in which officials are scheduled to testify. the lawmaker will not comment, represent give fleet from arizona, until he has seen the entire report. looking at how the of the papers are covering this issue. here is one concerning the taliban taking u.s. funds. the trucking contractors say they pay as much as $150 -- $150,000 per month to warlords in protection money. let's go to the phones and hear from michael on the democrats' line, in queens, new york. caller: good morning. i have a quick question. can you explain to me why this is the first time that i have gotten through on c-span? every time you see the party lines, why is it that republicans are always on the top line? host: well, do not hang up yet. we do change that up so that republicans or democrats are not given preference. we change it periodically so that one is at the top compared to the other. do you have any comment on this news that the u.s. is indirectly paying the afghanistan war lords? caller:, i am an obama supporter. there is not much that i know much about it right now. but my comment, that is what i was calling about. i guess you are right. host: it is not topic-dependent, but we just changed it periodically out of fairness. let's go to john in lancaster, pennsylvania. caller: yes, this is why we pay $4 per gallon for gas. it is for the troops in afghanistan. we are bribing people not to kill us. it is a continuation of the way the u.s. works -- we are as corrupt as possible. the cia, blackwater, other private contractors are given this money and they in turn give it to the warlords. you can bet that they are hanging onto some of that money themselves. we are just unbelievably corrupt -- is more than bad. host: what is a different model? how can things be changed in afghanistan? caller: turn around and go to the east, or to the west -- come back home, get the troops out. get them out of afghanistan, pakistan, iraq -- get them out of all the bases we have all over the world. it is the most misguided policy i can imagine. host: bringing it back to this story, the report describes a system in which subcontractors charge between $1,500 up to $15 project to supply guides and help secure safe passage through territory they control. let's go to vivian on the democrats' line from memphis, tennessee. caller: our government is dealing in illegal things over there. that money they are using in afghanistan to pay this what could be used right here to save these people unemployment and create jobs, manufacturing jobs for working people. our government needs to come out of afghanistan, like the previous caller said. people are suffering right here and here they are paying or lord's money? america, wake up. we need to revolt against our own government. host: looking at other news from afghanistan -- from "the financial times" -- a botched suicide bomb attack. richard holbrooke arrived yesterday to assess progress in the key phase in the campaign against the taliban. we will go to fairfax, va., with trevor on the independent line. caller: hello, are you there? i was going to say that is pretty disturbing news. it is probably part of the way that you have to conduct war as a nation to get things done. but i would appreciate it if the government would tell me the truth of why we are over there, rather than just telling us their case in the taliban or osama bin laden. i could except the facts of were much more readily. that is pretty much all that i have to say. -- i could accept the facts under the circumstances. host: craig, democrat from las vegas, nevada. caller: yes, i would like to see the people of the u.s. step forward. what we tell the senators, until you pass unemployment extensions, we cut your pay. you get no pay. let them live on $200 per week in food stamps. let them do that for about one month, and then they will know how we feel. instead of wasting $900 apiece. start doing stuff for our people and forget the rest of the world. get out of these wars and quit wasting money. host: let's look at other news in the headlines, from "the wall street journal" bomber pleads guilty in plot. this is looking at the event yesterday. a pakistani-born citizen calling himself a muslim soldier admitted on monday he tried to detonate a crudely made car bomb in times square in may. shahzad pleaded guilty in federal court in manhattan to attend-count indictment that included charges of conspiracy among others. he faces life in prison. he is one of the number of homegrown terrorists who have surfaced. it poses greater difficulty to track then other foreign-born suspects. also, news from the supreme court. we will talk soon about financial negotiations, what is going on in congress on the hill as the house and senate committees work on him not regulatory reform. let's go to francis in pine hearst. caller: this has been going on for many years. it is not new. i also feel if we have to pay war lords for protection, then we should not be there. they are very correct. this has been going on for years -- it is not new. it is only coming out now. it is absolutely the wrong way to be fighting a war, when we have to pay people to be on our side, the we should not even trust them. host: this is from sioux falls, s.d. -- good morning, eric. caller: ok, we're talking about afghanistan, and my question is -- who was running karzai's party? it seems like especially bush was funding the skies campaign. it's seems like his cousins and brothers are always in charge of illegal activities -- it seems like especially bush was funding this guy's camping. they are making money off the route. his family has been accused of trafficking all kinds of things. why are we supporting this guy? when will we support someone else? that is my question to people. host: ok. looking back at "the washington post" article, it says the report found no direct evidence of payoffs to the taliban. one trucking manager found that about $2 million per week goes to the insurgents. let's go to virginia, john, on the democrats' line. caller: good morning. it goes back to president eisenhower's warning -- now is the military /pharmacological/energy slashed congressional complex. they had just bought enough congressmen to keep wars going and waste resources, and line the pockets of a few at the expense of everyone else. we have to have campaign finance reform, have to get rid of the corporate suits within congress. it is the only solution. host: this is dan come on the independent line, from massachusetts. caller: thanks for having me on. i am with a lot of colors this morning -- with a lot of callers. this is not a news story. it has been going on for quite some time. we are paying the enemy to get our supplies in there, and the same enemy is fighting us. it is crazy. i think in our country what has happened, generally, taking a broad look at it is we have put a premium on faith and a discount on facts. we think we know people in office, or who have been in office, and would not think it would do such bad things, so all these conspiracy things people business. people who have faith in these people -- it is blind faith and then they discount the facts of reporting about things that have actually happened where the person is not telling us the truth. but all these people who have this mysterious thing called faith --no one is accountable. if everyone just has faith in things, then there is no accountability. that is where we are as a country. we put a premium on faith, and a discount on fact and truth. host: we will get back to this article concerning u.s. forces having to pay afghanistan what. now we'll talk about the ongoing discussion about financial regulation with our guest. good morning. i want to begin by reading a section from the paper -- one evening late last week the house and senate negotiators wound down another session of hammering out details of fun into regulatory overhaul. senator dodd uttered what almost everyone else in the room was thinking. is that still the mood right now? guest: i think there's a little bit of hope as we begin this next week of negotiations, that will maybe give a little more resolution. it is very hard to get to resolution on the big items last week. going into today's conference that two big issues on the docket our consumer protection and interchange fees. yesterday an agreement was reached on this. maybe this is something that will work this week. host: how much pressure is there to get it wrapped up this week? guest: there is not. i think the white house has been interested in getting wrapped up. president, goes to toronto this weekend to meet with g-20 leaders. this legislation, if wrapped up, would give him leverage when speaking with foreign leaders to press them to reform their own banking systems as well. host: talk to us about what happened yesterday. it sounds like they came near a deal regarding the volcker rule. guest: the volcker rule is a rule proposed by the former fed chairman, now white house adviser, paul volcker, the taliban banks from using their own money -- basically doing proprietary trading to buy and sell securities on the market purely for their own profit, not on behalf of their clients. it has not yet been formalized, but there is a discussion about exempting firms like insurance companies and mutual funds that could secure the support of senator staff browbrown, one ofe republican senators to support the bill on the floor. it is something we will see later in the week, not today. host: you said senate negotiators have a little more power here. will it play out this week? guest: yes, i think so. the $150 billion resolution fund being proposed by the house -- to be used to -- to be paid for by large banks, to wind down collapsing financial institutions. the senate had to drop it because the bill would not pass the senate if you include it. the house is still trying to push and include it in the final bill. chris dodd, the senate banking chairman, has already said this bill would not have gotten to the senate like that, and i cannot make it happen, basically. host: you mentioned senator brown -- who else will senator dodd appealed to? guest: susan collins is another to watch. she is the main republican. she successfully amended the senate bill last month when it was on the floor to include some tougher capital requirements for banks. and that has become a big focal point for the banking industry to rework that amendment. there has been some back and forth among house and senate negotiators on it, but in the end, susan collins was one of the three republicans in the senate who supported the bill. you do not want to disenfranchised in need of them, because once the bill gets through conference, you will have to clear 60 votes in the senate to proceed to the final bill on the floor and to pass it. host: this is stephen sloan, staff writer with congressional quarterly at cq.com. thank you. looking at this -- tentative deal to limit debit card fees. the house and senate democrats announced a tentative agreement to impose new limits on the big card fees which would resolve the main difference between the two chambers as the race to complete financial legislation before the fourth of july. it largely preserves the senate's language. also, and jumping over to this piece of el china's currency off the table -- the g-20 focuses on europe. looking ahead, the decision of china to allow its currency to rise gradually against the dollar has strengthened obama's hand going into the summit meeting this weekend in toronto. a little bit of other financial news from "usa today" and its financial section. more troubled mortgage borrowers are failing out of the obama administration for closure- prevention program. our main topic now looks at the new report out, looking at how the u.s. funnels money into afghanistan, perhaps paying war lords. this is how "the wall street journal" covers it. a six-month investigation of over $2 billion in pentagon contracts to support the u.s.- led war against the taliban from the contractors, some with close ties to the president karzai, are pretty with little or no oversight and routinely bribed local officials. this call comes on the democrats' line. caller: good morning. i think there is no difference in the united states paying for safe passage of our troops and corporate america pain for safe passage of our bills. only in that context it sounds wrong when they're both wrong. that concludes what i have to say. host: let's go to or again on the independent line -- to a oregon. caller: just like the other fellow said, it depends on who is looking at it and whose pockets they'reegetting into. there is so much distortion of where funds are supposed to be going and what funds are being used for what. i'm really astonished that no one seems to recognize that people are getting paid for doing things they know are illegal. we pay no attention to it. they are getting paid off by congress, and by everyone else. they say it is ok, you go ahead and distort and misappropriate these funds, and it is all right because we know we will get some back. i scratch your back, you scratch mind. why is it none of this information ever seems to get to press? so that it brings aatention to the general public so that they can say something, or even act upon it? host: john, republicans line, in raleigh, north carolina. caller: i just think it is too early to draw a negative conclusion, because i think there is more positive than negative. we're heading toward the end of the year. have you seen the new demo yet? host: the topic at hand is the afghan war lords. let's go to ohio caller: i just think this is terrible. it is bad. they're pumping money into overseas, and just like a previous caller said, this is nothing new. i want to know what the republicans will say? they are so against unemployment. it is people who are not working, if they cannot find jobs, especially in ohio -- i have been laid off for year-and- a-half and cannot find a job. they're holding up unemployment, but embezzle money overseas. host: you mentioned republicans, but does this concern you with the white house and what they're doing in afghanistan? caller: i just think it has been going on for years, and no one talks about that. they are trying to say it is a problem now, but i think they are doing it because obama is in office. this has been going on for years. this is nothing new. host: a senior administration official said "i think it is much too early to draw a negative conclusion." next up is a joke, on the independent line, and when york. caller: good morning. i do not wherknow where to starr to end. it is very upsetting. i am upset that c-span and the media have nnt informed us about blackwater, and halliburton, and who they really are and where the tentacles go. a funny thing happened here on long island that shows you where the station is headed. i read somewhere that grummond, a big contractor here, helped to build the space shuttle. they just received a huge contract to build these huge bllimps that will be flying over afghanistan and pakistan. much like the drones, but from a different altitude. they will not be ready for two years. the blooms will not be ready for another two years. so, if you think your sons and daughters are coming down any time soon, if you think there are not people who want americans to stay and die, and be in the middle east, think again. host: let's look at an ap story from washington. the top u.s. commander has been summoned to washington to explain his controversial comments about colleagues in a recent interview. the official said that general stanley mcchrystal who has since issued an apology for comments, has been directed to attend the monthly white house meeting in person on wednesday rather than over secure video teleconference, so that he can discuss his comments with president obama and top pentagon officials. the republicans line, and jacksonville, fla. caller: thank you for taking my call. yes, i think it is time to get out. i do not know why we're still over there. iraq, obama has blood on his hands killing all those innocent civilians with drones. why aren't we told by the media how many of our soldiers are being killed? every month he used to give out how many were killed, but they do not do that anymore. the first caller wanted to know republicans are on top? if the caller had been watching every morning for a long time, she wwuld know every month it is changed, once per month. thank you. host: this is from houston, texas, ronnie. caller: good morning to america, even though it seems like a sad state of affairs. judge made an excellent comment. we are talking about karzai. george bush started this mess. and there is no stopping it. karzai was crowded, we did, and wrong from the beginning. how can you get someone who is wrong and expect them to do something right? america is choking on its own vomit whether you realize it or not. these people over there talk about khan, caesar, russia, but this is a trap that ameeica is been right now. host: this article from the front page. a reminder that britain was paying a high price for keeping our country save. kansas city, missouri, justin, an independent color. caller: hi, thanks for taking my call. i think it is completely ridiculous. the first reaction -- we got into this for money, and now we're spending money and getting troops killed in general. it is ridiculous that 50 years ago people would be marching hundreds of thousands of people protesting the war like this, and now we just have to sit back and make the dollar just to survive. it is ridiculous that people are living homeless and starving here -- what can we help them? it is blasphemy have people have gotten so used to bloodshed that we just sit back and take it. host: the paper is reporting that drug use has increased in afafghanistan. it is taking a toll on the afghan population with roughly 800,000 afghan adults now using opium and other illicit drugs. jumping down, the defense the permit has identified over 1000 american service members who have died as a result of the afghan war. let's go to yardley, pa., rick, on the republican line. caller: the media tells us in so many ways, but they don't tell us that the taliban complete eradicated the drug use. the media do not tell us why the nine-11 hap