tv Washington Journal Sahil Kapur and Alexis Simendinger Discuss the Week... CSPAN July 11, 2017 8:03am-9:05am EDT
destiny of doing this act of civil disobedience. >> c-span, or history unfold daily. , c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. it is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. "washington journal" continues. congress is back from its break. a busy week ahead, we are joined with sahil kapur of "bloomberg news." covers fromdinger realclear politics. guest: good morning. host: what is the white house strategy as far as getting the senate bill done? guest: that is a terrific
question. the president is very eager , almost desperate -- very eager, almost desperate before the august break. challenge fora the hill and for the white house. the part of the president is to see the senate to revamp and redraft the bill. take it to the floor and that is still a question mark. arm-twistingfar as promises, what is the white house strategy? friday sending people to the hill? are they talking -- are they sending people to the help? are they talking to people? guest: they are trying a little bit of everything. the vice president is spending time talking to lawmakers. he will be on the hill to say
for the weekly luncheons. he tries to talk to members in the senate. we know how it is. as the president has described, as mitch mcconnell has described, for every vote you get by adding something to the legislation to appeal to a member, you are losing support or not gaining support for a reluctant member of the republican conference in the senate. the president described it as a delicate, narrow lane they are trying to move down. if you are asking what is plan b or clancy, the answer -- or plan c, the answer is wait and see. the president is not eager to -- it is debt, as lawmakers as republican lawmakers have said. if the president were to be asked -- do you want to work
with democrats? house isr the white the only way the president would be interestin interested in dois if repeal happens first. we know that is also unlikely. host: as far as the senate side, what is the to do list for senator mitch o'connell to make this -- mitch mcconnell to make this happen? pull this had to o bill. he was lacking support from a few relatively moderate members like dean heller of nevada and susan collins of maine. they said they cannot support the bill and its current form. he said there will be changes to the bill. he said his to do list involves winning some of the moderate holdouts in winning the conservative how to like ted cruz and mike lee.
rand paul is another one, but he seems far gone. i do not know if his grievances can be addressed. to do that, i think it looks like this -- as far as i can see -- win the moderates with additional funding with opioid addiction states. some extra funding, senator mcconnell is talking about $48 $40ion to $50 billion -- billion to $50 billion. subsidies,be lower the carrier will extend to it. on the right, it is the regulation. they want to get out of things like the essential health benefits and the affordable care act. the big discussion is the ted
cruz proposal. suggestedfrom texas insurance companies who sell plants on the affordable care plans oncomply -- so the affordable care act that comply should be able to sell plans that do not. how senator mcconnell gets there , i do not know. i know i would not underestimate him. host: our guests will talk about this and other topics. if you have questions -- democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. as far as -- you talked about the to do list any particulars, when it comes to making this appeal, a senator reshot
personally -- a senator reach out personally -- strategy was, how does it work out? guest: he will be him and a strategic team. of -- it will be a combination of negotiating and arm-twisting. they are pressuring their members by telling them this is our last chance to do it. senator mcconnell suggested, if finishot get to the line, i will have to sit down with chuck schumer and negotiate a package. yesterday, i asked senator hatch, the chairman of the finance committee, what he would look like. he is that it would be nothing what the republicans want. he said it would be a lot of stabilization money. host: those words from a person to let it fail and collapse. ,earing these kinds of efforts
at least to stabilize it, how does it appeal to the current president? guest: i think we should add to the political element of this. the argument prevailing among republicans, as a talking point, not a persuasion point, republicans have to remember one thing -- for more than seven years, they haven't arguing with appealing the affordable care act. been arguing with appealing the affordable care act. he will suffer politically if they do not. in the senate -- they will suffer politically if they do not. in the senate, it is not -- before it passed a different bill. the reason it is different is the senators have to run statewide. to presidentfixed trump or the conservative base. when you're asking about president trump's persuasion, he
is not helping the case because he has been all over the map. he has been saying the hospital is -- cindy house bill is meet -- saying the house bill is mean. he flirted with the idea that they could do it separate. the white house, through the other officials, said no, that is not our position. the president has been not necessarily the outside cheerleader that we would have expected in the past that a president would be. necessarily as effective with a senate conference. guest: it is true, he has been disengaged and relatively so. in the house push, it took until the very end, when speaker ryan called thehe
president and said you need to help get this across the finish line. that is when he what full-court press. according to republican leaders in the house, it made a difference. seems senate, he distracted by other things. especially russia, we can see his tweeting habits. -- he is -- he can see eager to show he can get this done. for him, it is a test of whether he can achieve big pieces of legislation as president. it is something that republicans have been obsessed about more years. ears.out seven y they are forced to come together around the version. it has been proven difficult. the aca and the bcr it, the -- and the bcra's is in the team.
host: stephen is from louisville, kentucky, the democrat line. caller: how are you all this morning? i wanted to talk about a couple of things. number one -- i wanted to respond to the previous caller in the last segment who was from georgia. he was a republican and was talking about how the democrats are the culprit behind this stuff. i would like to remind him that the republican party is in charge of all three branches of government. as far as the democratic conspiracy, it is ridiculous. the republicans are talking about preaching to us -- everyone -- about personal responsibility. i recall mr. harry truman used to say the buck stops here. where does the buck stop in the administration? this president blames everyone at a drop of a hat. the election integrity committee, he talks about how
they are wanting to get to the bottom of fraud. what i would like to know is -- how does acquiring our social security numbers, our past voting preferences, clinical party registrations -- what does that have to do -- political party registrations -- what does that have to do with fraud? i think we can agree the election system needs to be reformed. if he is so serious about this, why doesn't he admit the russians hacked into our system? he does not want to do that. what about gerrymandering? is that issue we have to be concerned about? host: we have you caller. respond to what you like. guest: let me respond to two things -- the caller makes an interesting point that the pressure the republicans are feeling under the control of the
senate, house, and white house. through taxo go reform is the next element of the republican agenda. the urgency they feel is that the calendar is moving away. the second element i want to comment on is voters interested in the president's advisory commission in election integrity. this is a story i have covering at realclear politics. the commission was more out of the -- was warne -- was born out of the president's twitter. immigrantsillegal cast that were robbed him of the popular vote in november. the president had to descend the assertion that he made on twitter.
we know hillary clinton had 2.8 million more votes than the popular vote. his eagerness to defend this spiraled into the establishment, by executive order, of this commission. the caller rightly describes. it the status -- describes it. the status of it is another controversy. it prevents the states in the vice president involved in the commission from accept think the material that they asked for from the states. it is under litigation now. involves exactly what the caller is describing. what kind of information should the states want to or be able, under their state laws, to provide to the federal government? what is the perth this -- what is the purpose of aggregating this information across federal databases? all to providet
some cover for the president? the idea is it is supposed to create recommendations for the president before the 28 elections. all of it has been -- before the 2018 elections. all of it has been on hold due to what the caller described. guest: a number of actions of the president's rhetoric on this issue stems from the grievance that he feels from not winning. russianng on the investigation -- he had a historic loss of a popular vote. he does not like it. he views it as an attack on him and his president. there is no evidence of. host: let's go to south
carolina, the republican line. caller: i would like to thank c-span. i would like to ask your guests democratic -- why does the democratic party do not want to repeal, even though it is imploding? and on pot of it -- an odd part of it is -- they want us to bail it out. it is going to be on taxpayers' backs. he will be on our children and ran children. -- it will be on our children and grandchildren. that is why donald j. trump was made the president of the united states. we are tired of it. we are tired of you saying -- you are making out like he did not win the presidency, he did. he did because we are sick of it. host: thank you. guest: a couple of interesting right,-- the caller is
in some parts of the country, obamacare markets are not doing well. iowa, wisconsin, many insurance have pulled out of the -- many insurers have put out of the markets. it is a real problem. it is something democrats want to fix. it is something they want to do differently than republicans. bailout are interesting -- bail --s are interesting because all social programs that have been enacted have a reinsurance program. once democrats that in affordable -- in the affordable care act, is called a bailout. it is the same thing as the affordable care act. they are not calling it as a political tool as they did then. it is hard for me to say that, given there is so many members of -- some in the members of republican members of congress was an effective way to
attack the aca -- it was an effective way to attack the aca. senator mcconnell has mentioned if he does not -- if republicans do not get the repeal and replace built across the finish line, some actions have to be taken. some shoringeed up. guest: i would like to add, a large portion of the affordable care act relates to medicaid, which is a shared program between the federal government and the states. federal taxpayers put a lot of money into medicaid as part of this. the informal care act expanded medicaid by offering governors in states additional resources for their states to expand the population of poor children, elderly, but they could cover. in this case, the caller is confused about how much federal
resources already go into health care across the board. whether it is medicare or our veterans, the childrens' health program, a lot of our federal presents in our marketplace helped people before. as well as the medicaid programs. i do not want callers to miss the point that this is a tradition. -- this is a tradition and is federally supported. guest: can i add it is an important point? they keep the runnable tax credits in obamacare. they were called subsidies that, they are -- subsidies then. it is the same thing, they just cut them. there is few were available.
some people may not be eligible for them under the republican bill. per beneficiary cost will be cost under the senate bill. it will be capped under the rate of medical inflation. it is getting a one dollar race when you're but rises by five dollars. you are -- your purchasing power is less -- it is getting a one dollar raise when you are getting a ren raise of five dollars. your perching powers -- your purchasing power is less. host: sahil kapur is a reporter joining us. as well as alexis simendinger, she is our white house responded -- white house correspondent. host: go ahead, you're on. caller: thank you.
i'm calling about insurance. everyone wants to blame obama for the problem with the insurance. we have been having the problem with insurance, i have been talking about 30 years. they make it -- this is what i do not claim a party. it is all about parties and infighting. they are not looking out for the american public. -- i have been saying for 30 years -- the insurance industry has been running our country. they have the lobbyists and all of these other things. they get whatever they want. government say what we can and cannot do. it does not affect their bottom line. we are not looking out for the american public. when our representatives get up in office, them and their families have complete coverage under any kind of insurance.
n't they come down in the trenches and lift like we ive likerenches and l we live. it was long before obama had anything to do with it. host: that is janet in texas. let me expand and comment if you want. as they were heading home to break, you heard susan collins talk about this key issue. the clinical action back home as legislators are heating -- the action back home as legislators are hearing. guest: this is exactly the kind of commentary, in one form or another, the makers have been hearing went they come home. -- hearing when they come home. it usually has to do with their personal relationship with health care or insurance. that is why this issue is so
difficult and politically weighted. i remember because i covered the clinton administration -- the effort that hillary clinton lead for president bill clinton never actually came to a vote. administration said they learned from that. we have learned how difficult it is to deal with this issue. one of the things i think the caller underscores is how challenging it is for lawmakers to create law that deals with theamount that we have in united states. is onedicated amount that private insurance. lawmakers, by large, in the senate, each time we have a new senate, a sham we have a new house, we have a large proportion it -- senate, each
time we have a new house, we have a large proportion -- it is one of the interesting things for me to listen to the debate. there are some republicans in the conference have long experience with health care and were there at the beginning of the affordable care act. fork grassley from iwa oa, for instance. i think all that is true. a senator from indiana is one of the leading republican voices in this issue. he has made critiques. i mentioned earlier, where the subsidies cut off. he has a lot of constituents that are below the poverty level. when the critique you make
you know what you're talking about. guest: he is sponsoring an alternative legislative approach with susan collins. guest: he would allow states -- it would allow states to keep the affordable care act in the states if they like it. they could deny all the federal funding if they want. they would have the options. one person tried over and over again. fdr dropped it from his new deal because he feared the backlash from industries. nixon tried, but the republicans failed. enacted, thet was discussion was universal coverage, let's aim for universal coverage. single-payer medicaid for
all insurance. the effort was to make a patchwork look less patchy and fill in some of the gaps. we have ended up still back in the summer discussion. guest: what president obama decided, learning from the history of previous residents who tried and failed, the only way to make it work is to not disrupt the system. essentially untouched other than changes to long-term provider reimbursements. this large portion of uninsured people, which was large at the giventhey were the ones subsidies to buy from you exchanges. way to get something through an across the opposition , i am mostly keeping the -- opposition, he said, i mostly
keeping -- host: joe from maryland, go ahead. caller: thank you. are the republicans and president trump doing something that make the health insurance"? -- insurance implode? did they pass rules that made it difficult? as far as ronald mcdonald morning the democrats to work with them, when obama comes in, it is a one term president. he threatens the republicans if you do not work with them, he is working with democrats? how is that a bipartisan work thing? as far as russia, give me a break. the lady before said trump won. wontrump and russia
because they were together. you don't care, as long as i get done what i say am going to do. he has not done anything he's that is going to do. explain to me -- did they do something to pass rules and regulations to make the insurance companies get out? guest: them address the health care point. i think it is a good question. seeinging -- we are administration who wants to succeed and what -- seeing one who wants to succeed and one who wants to fail. fund, as a reinsurance risk corridor, it's the same version of the same concept. the reinsurance funds dried out after a couple of years. that is one we saw premiums
rise. the other aspect, the cost sharing fund, the similar thing. you provide cushion in funding for insurance companies that take on a lot of sick patients. therepublicans challenge legality of it. the admission had went back and forth on whether they would put the payments out. they say the uncertainty is impossible for us to plan around. the plan was to get out of the exchanges entirely. one reason -- it is one reason they cited. reasonableonomically reason. the republicans believe it could not succeed. guest: if we add the congressional budget office, which has the responsibility of looking at propose legislation and make an analysis of what the
budgetary impact would be. it has described in its assessment of the republican backed legislature that the uncertainty the legislation would have stimulated the debate and washington -- debate in washington. their willingness to be in the exchanges and offer products to consumers for health care insurance, as he is describing. cbo describe the uncertainty we are living in, politically and policy wise, has harmed the effectiveness of the informal care act. -- of the affordable care act. guest: i should point out, we have the unusual spectacle of the health and human services saying the tasks they are overseeing are failing.
that is not the case. guest: at the white house, we hear it every day. host: for mark in michigan, independent line. caller: happy birthday. , when the politicians say there is a silver bullet, they are lying or deceiving the public. what they should be able to do is prorate tax, a five year tax cycle, everybody will have a chance to not pay tax for one year. the person would get 1/5 of whatever they were expecting to pay in fica, city, state -- whatever. this is paid for by the obama health care. cost ise the extended running into, we could charge -- or at least
some subsidy he borrowed from the health care to begin with to start his institution. he could pay some of the money back, no different than trump with his million dollar tax write off for 20 years. thank you. host: let me 180 a bit. one thing we hear is hearing tax or four. we heard steve mnuchin say an effort happening on this in september. talk about how both sides want to go for it on tax reform, what it means depending on the current state. guest: but me start with the big picture. president trump -- let me start with the big picture. present cap campaign if you -- president trump campaign if you put republicans in charge, you will see the circumstances of tax reforms -- see substance sive taxe substan
reforms. -- see substantive tax reform. to have a unified bill, to unveil a tax reform bill before the august recess. tackle it in the fall. there are a lot of arcane reasons we could talk why health care is tied to tax reform. whatve not seen whether they are talking about is tax reform, a fundamental rewrite, or more limited tax cuts. we are waiting to see what it would be. and what impact would be on the
deficits. as we know, if you pull back on the resources that go into the treasury department, the government has on paper -- republicans are eager to say even if they cannot divide a system that is deficit neutral. offsets in the budget are identified to pay for the loss of revenue that would be represented. they are interested in using what is called dynamic scoring. it would be their legislation over the long haul. they describe it as an economic stimulus of enormous proportions that the economy went to the benefits of tax cuts even that we score it as a loss of revenue. we have not seen the details. set an most republicans a substantial
rewrite of the tax code is a no go in the senate. we have seen there is controversy and pushing and pulling among republicans on this issue. ur?t: mr. kap guest: there's a lot of talk about health care before taxes. about $700 billion worth of tax cuts, but it was a political decision. there was no reason they could not do taxes first. what i was told by several republicans was health care is an issue we have campaign on seven -- campaign on for seven years. the president, when he has talked about the issue, has talked less about tax reform that tax cuts. -- reform than tax cuts. it does not jive with the idea with offsetting and paying for the assets. by raising revenue means
raising taxes on another group of people effectively. in 2001, w. bush did put them on a credit card. route theclear which republicans will go. paul ryan really wants to do a revenue neutral tax cut, which has to be offset. it risks expiring. the president has not given a clear view. we do not know where he stands. the only thing the white house has put out so far is a one-page blueprint at the end of april. it had sugar, but not the spinach. -- they say yes, we would love
to. how are we going to sacrifice what amounts to $100 billion for one percentage point decrease in the upper tax rate? the other thing i want to point out, the prospects are slipping. the republicans -- one of the recent senator mcconnell wanted it to be done by the end of june. -- they have three weeks. it will have to be reconciled with the hospital. we do not know how long it will take. there is a five-week august recess. , we have ass returns bunch of deadlines staring at them. it is by the end of september. in october, they have to raise the debt limit. republicans hate -- where do you find the time to do tax reform?
you look at thanksgiving and christmas, how are you going to get something be done by the end of the year after year taking the little steps? it is a very difficult project. republicans have said, ryan, it has to be done. you do not do big things in an election year. people get spooked. guest: politically, they wanted to have it deliverable to their base. want to benefit americans before the election. host: -- guest: some republicans are calling for canceling the august recess. host: from pennsylvania, the republican line, cheryl. hello. caller: hello, how are you? host: fine, please go ahead.
caller:, is the best way to get rid of this argument is to get the government out of the way. all you have to do is open it up to the free market, but the insurance companies fight over business. but the medicare patients -- let the medicare patients, who qualify for it, have a safety net. the rest of them, go find their affordable insurance on their own. you do not have -- you will not have this problem. in government -- when the government gets involved in things like this, it does not work out. they do not want to give out their goodies. the same with people who are getting medicare. the taxpayer are paying for subsidies. this is asake, privilege, not a right. the people in this country have to wake up. state, created a welfare
in so many levels. how many taxpayers have paid for people to sit on the couch and do nothing? host: ok, thanks. guest: she has identified one of the most political debates we are having. she was arguing from the republican disposition that health care is not a right and democrats argue it is a right. they have been arguing it for decades. she has come at the heart of an unresolved political debate we are continuing to have. the two things i would add, from a policy perspective, part of the argument she is making about pulling the government out of health care and what the impact of that may be -- lawmakers believe we saw the impact before the affordable care act was enacted. what were the repercussions of having a federally supported
system in a private insurance market? what happens to cost and access to affordable coverage? the other element i think is interesting is the debate she is having about what will the federal government -- what role will the federal government have? we have justng -- been talking about -- why republicans in the same inference are completely dug their positions about what is right for their constituents. guest: this -- what the caller described -- in some ways, the situations on the individual market -- the reason democrats
did it, when you have a market segmentation, a lot of people were denied coverage with pre-existing coverage. their annual and lifetime caps could hit and they would have to pay everything out-of-pocket. enactedon the democrats the system we know as obamacare was the sick people would be able to have government assistance if they needed and afford coverage. it has worked well for them. the biggest winners out of the aca were sick, relatively poor people with high medical risk. there were losers to, of course, including -- losers too, of course, including young and healthy people who would have to pay upfront. how you unwind it, there are members like ted cruz and mike
lee, if we go back to a more pure market system, then things will be fine. there are trade-offs. it is not as civil as a more government mean something and less government mean something else. heard hospitals, we have republican lawmakers from rural states talk about how they are being pummeled by hospitals in their states who are concerned that if the afford contract is repealed and nothing takes its place, there will be a resurgence of very ill patients showing up in emergency rooms and crippling hospitals with cost they felt they were not able to sustain before the formal care act became law. we are hearing from lawmakers -- we are hearing
from lawmakers more than insurers. it is not the debate about what insurance want and what patients want. guest: it is an important point. i do not know what the republicans are fundamentally doing can be reconciled with what hospitals want. there's a reason they supported the affordable care act and the reason why they are opposing the republican efforts. if you do not have coverage, people come in who cannot pay. they have it before the aca. the reason they want people -- -- fear people covered, the the fewer people covered, the higher the risk. host: in ohio, the democrat line. caller: i would like to make a, and challenge all of the baby boomers to write donald trump and copy the senate and house of representatives as well as their
governor and mayor in reference to the medicare and medical issue. is an issue with the medical when other countries have medical coverage for everyone. they cannot come together. you can look at canada and private countries. they already have other medical coverage in place. trump talks about how much money he wants to save, but we have to pay for his family to stay in new york. instead of them come in strict to the white house, cutting out that money except it can go into a budget, he differs things -- for the country so his family can have other things.
it is a shame the united states --ls citizens that being that it was ok as long as he was contributed to the pot. now that you live to collect social security and medicare, you are a disgrace. it is awful but other countries respect him. host: a lot of points on health care and a lot of fronts, what would you like to take on? guest: the health-care element, one of the interesting debates is the weapon that republicans are using against democrat, arguing what theya re are two inches a way. -- two inches away -- they are making consumers concerned about the idea of their individualized eding -- ceading.
single-payera of or medicare for all, they are thrown if the united states should adopt as democrats -- as have argued,rats it is not the position that arecrats, going into 2018, politically arguing as a conference. we have a system that is a hybrid. the argument is it is not the position that the democratic
party itself has adopted. -- aned to mention it observation on the caller's part is what we are seeing in the global debate. -- in the political debate. guest: it is part of the irony. we have various systems lumped into one. in many ways, they are separated and segmented. we have socialized medicine, eva -- medicine -- the va. medicare patients -- there is a big disconnect before the systems and the rhetoric that surrounds them. it associate into tribal politics and identity politics. people work backward from it. that is why it is so chaotic. obama talked about socialized medicine. it is more like the swiss
system, federally supported him -- federallyurance an supported, private insurance. let'sa tear from scott -- hear from scott. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am a long time c-span watcher and pedro, you are the best. what i wanted to talk about is your topic -- a week ahead. you are doing it an hour late. that is one of the problems with you folks in washington. of all of theklog stuff needs to be done in you are not showing up on time. you are all members, including members of congress.
it is an example. ,he congress and leadership they have their news conferences -- most of them leave, they go home. i would like to have you folks, on it -- folks comment on it. host: the california -- guest: i would like to say the california caller is up very early, congratulations to you. it is an interesting discussion because there are many c-span viewers who do not understand why washington has all of these breaks and long stretches of not working washington. there are complaints -- this has
been something the republicans were aware of when they took control of the house and the senate -- how much time they should allow their members should spent at home versus how much time they needed to spend in washington. the house rules, in terms of what you can do, are much --ferent thn the senate different than the senate. it is a mystery to a lot of people who do not live in washington, how these lawmakers early what they earn. it is upwards of $170,000 a year for a work schedule that -- too many americans -- look very visually -- very leisurely. in every complain, year i see new congress and arrive, that they are working at a risk lays and they need to go home to state touch -- to stay
in touch with their constituents. it is interesting to me that it is an age-old complaint about washington that will never go away. guest: the crucial element i would add is the fundraising aspect for lawmakers. it is something -- over the years, they say they have to spend more and more time doing. sometimes, more hours in a day. the staff is them a list -- the staff use them a list to call and beg for money. york, he saidnew he is so tired of fundraising that he can bear to be a congressman anymore. he was a rising star for the democrats in the house. that is how ruling has become. become.rueling it has known will make the argument that we should have all of our -- no one will make the argument that we should have our august
recess. one congressman -- how did it play out? guest: it is an interesting point. it is a hard sell to voters. mr. shafer has had a point. the reason to do that is so you do not have wealthy people coming into politics who do not need the money. you get a more financially diverse set of people. count onot have to themselves and their families to come into washington. the politics would be a reality. host: from new york, joe. caller: good morning. could the washington politicians
address common sense solutions? for example, increasing the number of physicians. i have not studied the issue. i know a young man who is is impressive, struggling to get into medical school. i know someone else who is a physician, license, a dermatologist in russia, who is having trouble adding licensed and seeing patients here. she's in her 50's. i know systems in other countries, like china, if you go to college for five years. you begin to see patients and at 25, you could be a physician or a certain type of physician. is that something you cover at all? thank you. guest: it is a good point you bring up. there are -- there is a doctor in ruraln plural, --
areas. a number of hospitals in rural areas rely on immigrants to be doctors. a part of the reason is the united states does not quite have the same incentive to encourage people to become doctors. there are the level of the programs as there are also. it is a time-consuming, stressfuland profession. the fact that the united states is relying on immigrants says a lot about the imbalance. host: one more call from helen, oklahoma, republican line. go ahead. caller: yes, i was going to say en thek the congressm two-state or the august recess instead of going home --
congressmen need to stay through the august recess instead of going home. i expect them to work on the weekend. they need to take a month off that i think them needing to take a month off is ridiculous. they do take other times off during the year. just a, -- i am a nurse and i think -- just to comment, i am a doctors in think four countries do not acclimate to our culture -- in foreign countries do not acclimate to our culture. wentxample i have is i to the doctor who was trying to be a psychiatrist. he said something very inappropriate to a female patient. if she was a better wife, her
husband would not do her. now he is athat -- psychiatrist. host: ok. caller: you have to watch out for who comes into the country to practice medicine. host: thank you. aside from the topics we have talked about, let's do this -- is the most interesting thing you are watching from the white house. then -- we spend time talking about russia. seen, the new york times has shown there was a meeting. during a crucial time during the campaign that has brought donald trump jr., together with the russians in a way that has not
existed before during our discussions and reporting about the russian probe and whether there was collusion between trump campaign -- between become campaign itself and russian interests tied to vladimir putin. nursing the white house responding where -- we are seeing the white house responding where donald trump jr., saying there was nothing to the meeting. the russians were interested in having information that would be helpful to the trump campaign. it amounted to nothing. as to nothing. as you used in a clip earlier, with whom attorney he met has a different version
of the story, in which he that the trump campaign was looking and trolling to get information. has put the russian investigation on new footing. congress decided everything we're talking about, what are you interested in following? i'm just goingy, to quote a well-sourced reporter topic, thisle on the is the closest thing we've seen to a smoking gun. are estions on that piece firstly, if the president's son told the e -- and was russians were trying to help his father, did he not tell them that? would he not tell him that? i'mn't know the answer, but certainly wondering. guest: the white house has said the president was not aware of discussion. guest: the white house. and i think his own statements, statements have
signalled from the lawyer the president was not aware of this meeting. have, the uestion i time cited three sources who had -- a lot of the other thing of thoet to close is that on wednesday, there will be a hearing for ray in the senate, the president's nominee, the director will get asked what is more important to impart iality. blockberg news -- and lexis simendinger, white house correspondent, thanks for the today.ation host: where does your state rank when it comes to their economic condition. we'll talk with eileen norcross,
rankings and state she'll share them when continues.n journal" >> sunday on q&a. after untry announced -- on women g the ban drivers in her book "dearing to and -- >> never see a woman driving on country, in a huge you can put three texas inside, wanted to change this by this movement, the movement is going on, never stopped, we're still campaigning for the right to drive. drive is e right to
more act of civil disobedience, supposed to drive. we show that we are able, we are our own life ving and being in the driver's seat of our own destiny by doing this act of civil disobedience. >> sunday night on c-span's q&a. >> c-span, where history unfolds 1979, c-span was service by ublic public television companies and brought to you by cable or satellite provider. >> "washington journal" continues. host: a discussion on the economic condition of your state with eileen norcross of george mason university mercatus serving as project director, thanks for coming on. guest: thanks for having