tv Washington Journal CSPAN June 27, 2016 7:00am-10:01am EDT
book the war on cops which examines how the events in ferguson, missouri have led to a spike in crime for several u.s. cities. ♪ host: good morning. decision day at the supreme court where three rulings have yet to be handed down. you're looking at the court now where crowds are gathering. is a the remaining cases texas abortion dispute that could end up being the most significant abortion ruling in decades. we will get to that case later in the program. we begin by discussing the democratic and republican
potential picks for vice president. viewers tong our call in and let us know who you think would be a good five presidential pick in 2016 -- vice presidential pick in 2016. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. on can also catch up with us facebook, and twitter. you.d monday morning to what does it take to be vice president? oracle two of the constitution says the vice president must be a citizen of the united dates, at least 35 years old. a lot ofes possibilities in this country for vice presidential picks. we are asking our viewers to
call in. we want to hear your thoughts on your party's nominee. a potential nominee that hillary clinton is campaigning with today in ohio, is a list that is elizabeth warren, the massachusetts senator -- is elizabeth warren, the massachusetts senator. known to be on hillary clinton's shortlist among those who are being vetted by the clinton campaign. others include senator tim kaine of virginia. washington post says tim kaine is the likely and safe the pkk -- safe vp pick. clinton's natural caution with the state of the 2016 race and all signs pushed to -- point to her settling on a vice president of pick who regarded any harm and
as a person with a resume and knowledge to help her run a decidedly complex federal bureaucracy and that is the former mayor of richmond, a former governor and former national democratic committee chairman. tim kaine being talked about and being interviewed quite a bit on the idea of him possibly being the vice presidential pick. he was on nbc's meet the press and was asked about this speculation. through this process, you went through it, eight years ago. is it a two-way process? >> do not use the word process. i have one job right now and that is to work hard for hillary clinton so she can win in virginia. that is the area where i have been helping her.
what is your question to her before you accept? >> the reason i am helping hillary -- i encouraged her to run in may of 2014 because i could see some of the challenges that this nation work -- would face and i decided by reason of character and background and experience, but also especially by reason of results, she would be the most qualified person to be president in january 2017. i have answer the questions i -- ianswered and that is have done my homework. --you have that it her vetted her. nation of a night -- 300 plus million people and i am confident she is the right person to tackle the huge challenges that are ahead of us. on the republican side, and a
lot of speculation as well. -- new jersey governor chris christie and others have not including tomno cotton of arkansas, oklahoma governor mary fallin, but there is really no way of knowing what donald trump might be thinking or who else is on his list. the l.a. times writes. we are asking for your thoughts on this. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. you can catch up with us on facebook. kerry writes i am crossing my fingers for warren. we want to hear your thoughts this morning. our phone load -- phone lines
are open to republicans and democrats. mike is up first, democrat in illinois. caller: good morning. i consider myself an independent. i was calling because i believe that mike huckabee would be the best presidential pick for donald trump. i believe that he performed the best in the debates, other than mr. trump. i believe he carried himself very well. i think he would be the most effective vice president and would be an effective president should something happen to mr. trump. host: arkansas is not exactly something donald trump is particularly worried about. what does mike huckabee brain that donald trump needs, is there something he counterbalances? is ar: i think he
counterbalance. keeled. very even something i think the ticket needs. even if he is not picked as a vp, i think he would be a good administration choice. sam, manassas, virginia, public and -- republican. who do you think should be the vice president? caller: i'm going to go with newt gingrich. i want to say that i think -- i'm hoping that clinton takes elizabeth warren because every business in this country would definitely dump all the money to win. i think donald trump is going to win every state.
i think he is going to win california. host: let's stick to the vice presidential discussion. why newt gingrich? caller: he is the one that impeached new gingrich. he knows the ins and outs of congress. it would be great to get all the legislation that trump once passed, so he would be a perfect wants passed, so he would be at perfect candidate -- a perfect candidate. a poll came out this morning saying clinton is 51%. abc givingpost and money to clinton, that about that that is about as perfect as you can get. host: there are some republicans who have taken themselves out of contention for the vice presidential stakes.
marco rubio of florida, the former candidate. governor scott walker and john kasich of ohio also taking themselves out of the running. marco rubio was on face the nation, talking about the discussion of vice presidential picks. >> i know donald is a primary candidate, he is now the republican nominee and he is going to have the next three months to go out and make the argument to the american people and these of the kinds of issues that he will have to earn people's trust. that is part of the process for anyone who would run. >> there was a poll that has you as the most popular choice for vice president. >> it is too late for that. i'm running for united states senate in florida. >> even if you were asked not to run? >> that is not a viable option for me. the differences in policies that donald and i have are too much,
and it would be a distraction to his campaign. host: we are asking our viewers to weigh in, who should be your nominee for vice president? republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. james in georgia,. republican -- in georgia, republican. caller: my choice would be newt gingrich and i'm saying that because i'm starting -- i think the country is on the wrong path, i think that what mr. trump campaigned on, my favorite issues are the issues in immigration and trade and i thought donald trump represented himself well on those issues and i think newt gingrich has always been the smartest man in a goods, plus he has presentation.
that is the best candidate in my mind and that is just what i think would be best for america. host: how campaigning as the outsider, how do you do -- view newt gingrich with his years in washington, do you see him as an insider or as an insider who has remained an outsider? caller: i cannot really get into that inside or outside in, but newt gingrich knows where all the bodies are. he knows how to move legislation, he knows how to talk to everybody, particularly in congress. that willmething that trump with his business experience, mr. gingrich understands the politics, that would be the best thing in my mind. host: john in florida, republican. caller: i think for vice
president would be condoleezza rice. she is very smart, she was a great secretary of state, she would be a great advisor to donald trump. host: do you think it would make a difference having a woman as his vice presidential pick? do you think that is something that is important, with a woman leading the democratic ticket? caller: it should be the right person for the right job, it should not be the woman card or whatever you want to call it. she is a very smart individual and would be a great the p -- vp. host: shirley, republican. caller: good morning. the caller before said the same thing i was going to say, condoleezza rice.
i hope you will consider her. he has such a wonderful family and they are also educated and condoleezza rice was like that and always polite, i just think she would really fit in with him. think viceu presidential picks make that big a difference for presidential candidates? caller: the way the country is trading donald trump, needs to get someone that would stop all of that. thing,never seen such a the way they talk about him. dome, i think he will really our country, a great thing. joe, virginia, republican.
are you with us? caller: yes. trump, thereld would be two specific choices. one insider and one outsider and both would be for the same reason. donald trump needs an attack dog who can articulate his positions and articulate all the negatives of hillary clinton. the obvious inside it are -- insider is newt gingrich. he has already been donald trump's attack dog over the past several months, and i think he would be a great vice president and if trump wanted to go with an outsider. i cannot member his first name, sheriff clark, and he is probably the most articulate speaker i have ever heard next to newt gingrich. julian, a professor at
princeton contributor in cnn with a column of the five things donald trump needs in his vice presidential pick. isng a few of the needs somebody that can govern and understand policy, some at the who can withstand the media ,potlight and onslaught somebody who counteracts xenophobia and sexism and racism. somebody with appeal in pennsylvania and ohio. earl in georgia, democrats. who do you think should be hillary clinton's vice president for pick? -- presidential pick? sanders. say bernie host: bernie sanders was on
cnn's state of the union, discussing the vice presidential talk that has been going on. >> do you think children clinton can win if almost half of your supporters to not plan on voting for her? >> we have a long way to go to election day. the world changes every week. if hillary clinton -- we are trying to save secretary glen -- say to clinton and say to the campaign, make it clear what side you are on. one of the areas that resonated very strongly across this country is the understanding that today, in 2016, need to make public education include free tuition at public colleges and universities. secretary clinton has some good ideas about higher education,
but does not go far enough. in terms of health care, it is not good enough to say that 90% of our people have health insurance because many of those insurance policies are quite inadequate. we need to be much more aggressive. the affordable care act has done good things, but we need to go further than that. what we are doing is trying to say to the clinton campaign, stand up, people are than you have been and many of those voters may come on board. host: bernie sanders not being named that short list we have heard about. he said he would likely vote for hillary clinton, has not officially endorsed her. among those on that list, elizabeth warren, and that is who held her clinton will be campaigning with in ohio at 10:30. we will have our cameras there, live on c-span. you can tune into to watch that event or continue to call in,
this morning about your party's nominee for president. democrats and republicans, continue to call in, but we want to take you back to the supreme court. it is decision day at the supreme court and joining us on the phone now from usa today, the supreme court correspondent, richard wolf. of this texas abortion case that is going to be the most high-profile case. guest: thank you for having me. the court is finishing up its 2015 term with the final three decisions and the big one of the three will certainly be the case having to do with abortion out of texas. organizationn called whole woman's health, they are the challengers against the state. the state passed a law a few years ago that said doctors have to have admitting privileges at
nearby hospitals in order to work at abortion clinics, and a clinics themselves have to meet much higher standards and a lot of them currently do, standards that are equivalent to surgical centers, and neither of those requirements to most clinics in texas meet, so when the law was passed, the number of clinics in texas went down from the neighborhood of 40 to the neighborhood of 20, and if this law is allowed to stand, right now it has been stayed by the supreme court and is a bit of a clue about where the supreme court stands on this. they blocked the remainder of the law. effect, the into number of clinics would go down to about 10 or nine, depending on whether you cap i don't want, and the issue before the court cause alle law really of these clinics to have to close or would close in the
future, and even if that happens, with the capacity of -- with the capacity of remaining clinics be sufficient, and that seems to be the only issue that would -- prevent a complete victory by the abortion-rights side. we expect for five justices to vote, at least five to vote on the side of abortion rights. the question is, to what degree, to they say this law goes to are based on the 1992 supreme ruling in the pennsylvania case of said states can impose restrictions, but those instructions cannot impose an undue burden on women. do they just say the law does not meet that standard and the law has to go, which be a complete victory? less, his is available at such as making the last decision which went for texas, but we will send it back so that more information can be gained as to capacity. time, it would still
be in abortion-rights victory, the law would be on hold, but it would give the state one last chance to try to prove that even under this law, when it would not be unduly burdened. this rulingote that could represent the most significant abortion decision by the court since 1992. to the court been hesitant take up abortion cases since then? guest: the biggest one in that interim was one that had to do with partial-birth, so-called partial-birth abortions and in that case, there has been give and take between the states and congress. congress ultimately passed a law that the court upheld saying you could ban partial-birth abortions. this is much later in term in the types of abortions people in texas are seeking equinix. other than that law, they have been hesitant, there are always
restrictions, 250 restrictions in state legislatures that are in play. , which ifher states they did not reach a conclusive opinion in texas, there are cases in mississippi and wisconsin and elsewhere that could replace texas on the docket. that case would turn out to be the biggest in 25 years, if this one does not. it does look like what we are expecting and what most people are expecting is for the swing -- for kennedy to side with the four liberals on the court. it does not look like it is going to be a kennedy opinion because what's -- with so few cases left, you can look at who has written what including for each sitting.
the two justices who did not have a majority of the opinions was brian and taken -- justice kagan. the case that we are waiting on, whole women's health the next expected to come on down around 10:00 or slightly after. what are the other disco cases we are expecting decisions on. guest: another fairly major one and a much smaller one. the second one is the case of former virginia governor bob mcdonnell. this is a conviction of mcdonald on federal fraud statutes. governor inas virginia has a one term limit. he was in virginia for four years and is a republican.
a very prominent republican. he had some personal financial difficulties and during the course of his governorship, he excepted various yet from a private businessman in exchange for doing a legend favors for that businessman. he has been convicted in lower courts and sentenced to two years in prison. who was aged wife part of this has been sentenced to a year and a day in her case is pending, but the supreme court, during oral arguments -- it took the appeal, and they seem very skeptical that what he had done in exchange for the gifts that they have -- what he had done for this guy did not amount to much, the guy did not get what he wanted, he was a vitamin company executive who wanted state university to do reports that would back up the value of his vitamins which would help him get is this in
the state. the governor set up some meetings and allowed him to have a lunch at the governor's mansion, but the supreme court justices, most of them seem to think that this was all in the normal type of behavior for a politician, you try to do things for your constituents, so if tea leaves are worth anything, the oral argument, it seems like mcdonald will win this case. our viewers showing some live shots outside the supreme court. what is that last case? guest: having to do with people convicted of domestic violence and whether it up they can or cannot be excluded from ever having gun ownership under federal law. it is a small case and it looks like it will come out that yes, domestic violence is a special category and you can't have gun rights under federal law.
what is interesting is if this was the case that justice thomas decided to speak on, he was very concerned that domestic violence convictions amount to misdemeanors, but being denied a gun is being denied -- denied a constitutional right. it was interesting to hear him speak. issue aill be likely to fairly firm dissent. host: all of those rulings expected at 10:00 or very soon thereafter. thank you so much for your time. guest: anytime. here in our back first segment of washington journal, asking our viewers who you think your nominee should be for vice president. we have lines for republicans and democrats. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000.
hillary clinton expected to campaign today with elizabeth warren, the massachusetts senator. on the list ofn top five potential picks for hillary clinton, ranked at number three. one of the key political posts at washington post says they are very specific -- skeptical that hillary clinton will pick elizabeth warren. the two do not have the best relationship. elizabeth warren was the last e-mail senator to endorse hillary clinton, and she waited until after the primaries were essentially over. clinton's poll numbers has been quite strong but as of today, lord is one of three people that clinton'sat presidential search team has been vetting.
if you want to read the entire column, it is in today's washington post, the usual spot. let's go to hubert in florida, a democrat. who do you think hillary clinton should pick? caller: definitely elizabeth warren, and if not, i think mr. -- mr. castro. host: why castro and booker? at one time, i considered mr. trump, because i like his idea about not needing anybody's money, and about the job situation, but i think he is going overboard.
i think elizabeth warren, especially, she is in tune with what the middle class and poor people, so i think she would be a great choice and she is a greater good -- she is a very good attack dog. is there a vice presidential pick that donald trump could make that would make you consider him again? caller: not at all. host: jesse is in muskegon, michigan, democrat. who do you think hillary clinton should pick? i don't think bernie sanders would take it. know who would be a good running mate. clinton is getting so many black
votes because these different black preachers are time and who to vote for. they're getting brainwashed by these ministers. a lot of them are hustlers. do you go to a black church? caller: i used to. there is so much corruption going on, one church owes going years -- i was going to for 40 years. [inaudible] dave in north carolina, republican. caller: good morning.
lied and clinton has lied and we have to give them from the white house. host: who do you think donald trump should take? let's stick to the republican side. who do you think donald trump should take? caller: quite a few and even out, he washas sit a smart man. we don't want people to take more money and pay it back, we want donald trump. everybody talks about him being bankrupt. -- that has been what was lost
in europe. anymore.profitable up we need to prop our own country of. . we want someone who does not lie, -- or what the lobbyists gone, we want women. we want the internet cleaned up. host: did you want to add anything else? caller: we want the abuse stoppedcaller:. we want thealler: abuse stopped. host: ted cruz on the list of five people who will never be
donald trump's vice president. he writes in that column, unlike many people who would put the hard feelings of the primary aside for the chance be can bidder, ted cruz starts the race -- among the top others being mentioned on that never going to be donald trump's vice president list, marco rubio, nikki haley, and joe scarborough. we want to hear your thoughts this morning on the so-called veep stakes. charlie is in virginia, a democrat. caller: good morning. i think for hillary clinton and -- wouldratic party,
be a very good choice because he has been a governor and a mayor. you can't go wrong with him and clinton is president and anything happened, then he could handle the job and i think he is very suited for it. salem.et's go to, in democrat, good morning -- let's emma in a in salem -- am salem, democrat, good morning. caller: i think bernie sanders because what i support is a mental health revolution, and the fact that we need equal health care for everyone, and should never abandon the disabled and it is a disgraceful
we are doing with our elderly and our disabled citizens. i would love to see that ticket. can put you think they the hard feelings of the primary aside and that she can pick somebody who has not officially endorsed her yet? i would wish that hillary clinton would talk about the disabled, more and that is -- i think mental health and health care is the number one issue in the nation. you cannot have a nation that is sick and pushed down to such low standards.
and 2008 and ie do not hear hillary talking .bout these issues if she wants my vote, that is what should happen, but i think bernie sanders and hillary might help our young people who are struggling. trump --onald sometimes you need to put your nation first, and i think all of these resources are going to no good use in other nations. host: let's go to john in florida, a republican. who do you think should be the republican party nominee? -- my: i believe it is
name is tom. host: i'm sorry. caller: i think newt gingrich should be the nominee for the vice president, and i think because of his history, with the clintons, president clinton, years past, he brought things together. i think he would bring donald way. back to reality in a host: what do you mean? caller: i think donald trump has -- i doas, but i think not like the way he says it, and i think newt gingrich would be a decent vice president that knows more about politics than he does. that is my comment. host: barbara in alabama,
republican. do you agree with what tom said? caller: i'm sorry, i did not quite get all of that but quickly, let me thank you so much for airing your program call in and give their opinions, because freedom is not free, so our vets in our armed services. gop, they need to get their heads on straight and get with donald trump because people like lindsey graham and they raise their hands and + the post they would be supportive and now they are chickening out. what kind of backbones to these people have? as far as the republican party, i would think that condoleezza rice would be fantastic.
-- uld love: how colin powell. they would have the root of this country and its values to put it back on the right track. host: all the people you mentioned had previous political experience, do you think that is important, that though trump ,ould pick another outsider so-called outsider for his ticket or should it be somebody with experience? caller: we do not care what color or race, it is not about that, it is about getting this country back on straight and getting our values back and it is not about stopping the people from coming into america, we want them here, but when they are killing people and even in
our own country, we have to do something, because isis once your head and they want large wants yournce -- head and they want large crowds. donald trump is going to pick someone, he tells everybody he will have people around him that know what they are doing and that is why he has been so successful. he cannot do it alone and he knows this, but he will have watchdogs in there. now does nott watch the taxpayers dollars. what is going on, and we all know this -- no this is the lobbyists in washington that no trump to not want him, they are scared to death because he will clean house. host: a few tweaks on this topic.
have two picks. one is howard dean. o'malley.ernor host: what do you like about them? caller: if you go back to history and not too long ago, thernor dean, when he was head of the democrats, internet and six, he said we would not leave one state out. and theto all 50 states democratic party won everything. wiheard -- he earned his n. , and he o'malley runs
earned his wings, so -- these are the two people that we the people from main street are saying. these are the people we want to see on that list. live in charlie rangel's congressional district? caller: i live in the bronx. charlie is in manhattan. host: there is a contested primary going on in new york on tuesday. the new york times writing about seat, thee wrangles race to replace him is one of those races were the primary in alikely get the nominee heavily democratic district. other seeds where there are
retiring members in new york in the third district. chris gibson, a republican, is retiring after three terms. richard hanna chose not to seek reelection in the 22nd district, so a lot of seats to fill, a lot of incumbents stepping down in the empire state so the primary is very important on tuesday. we will look for news from that and bring that to you. republican.gan, caller: good morning. i think donald trump ought to pick tim scott. host: from south carolina. speak up if you can. caller: i'm suggesting he should pick tim scott. clinton ought to pick anyone who is not under indictment because she will need it.
i have a question for a future reported on you this question about second amendment rights for those under domestic violence, i have two copies of the constitution and another one of those copies has a phrase following the words shall not be infringed by the words of the reporter used except for whatever it was, special exceptions. our copies ofhow the constitution are getting out there without those words and if in fact it can be infringed by the federal government. that is another topic i would like you to cover. you have my choices for vp. host: let's go to sean in illinois, a republican. --ler: host: the former congressman
from florida. are you still there? caller: yes. host: why do you like him? allen west is articulate, intelligent, he knows what he is talking about and he has the military backbone to do what needs to be done. host: that is shown in illinois. our last caller in this segment. that fight presidential speculation is likely to continue. up next, on the washington journal, we will be joined by the nationalat immigration law center to discuss steps for national immigration law advocates after the supreme court effectively blocked president barack obama's executive orders immigration. joins usather mcdonald
we will tour the museum and see one-of-a-kind space artifacts including the apollo lunar module. learn more about the museum as we talk with its director, thetor and chair of museum's space history department and you can join the conversation as he will be taking your own calls, e-mails and tweets. live, friday evening beginning at 6:00 eastern on c-span3's american history tv. >> the hard-fought 2016 primary season is over with historic inventions hello, this summer. the delegatess consider the nomination of the first woman ever to head a major political party and the first
non-politician in several decades. watch live on c-span, listen on the c-span radio app or get video on demand at c-span.org. you have a front row seat beginning on monday, july 18. washington journal continues. basic director of the national immigration law center joins us in the wake of that supreme court deadlocked last week over the legal challenge to president obama's 2014 executive order. that like the ruling means those executive orders are effectively blocked, so explain the status of this case after that deadlock? it is really good to be here to explain to americans the ordinance of this case.
it is devastating that the supreme court was not able to make a decision. the leaves in place nationwide injunction and the practical impact is we have about 5 million u.s. citizens whose parents could be ripped apart. host: you obviously support of the executive actions when they were issued throughout this process. we are a legal advocacy organization. our mission is focused on low income intervention. defend theng to rights of low income immigrant families and create opportunities so that they have the same opportunities that previous timber -- in a rations of immigrants have had -- generations of immigrants have had. host: we will keep a phone line
open for illegal immigrants. that line, (202) 748-8003. usual,se, the lines as republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000-. . independents, (202) 748-8002. president guest: obama announced a series of executive orders including increased border security, nationalization certificate, etc. program has been a program that would allow individuals who have been in the united states for at least five years who are parents of u.s. citizen children or have children with green cards would be able to come forward voluntarily as long as they prove that they meet the
penalty, to pay a go through national security and background checks, they would that be will to have their application reviewed and if they qualify, it would get what is called a deferred action, a temporary protection from deportation. it is three years of protection from being deported and they would be eligible for a work authorization under regulations from the 1980's. host: what are you telling those individuals now? guest: to some extent, it is status quo, we are making sure people stay informed about what their rights are, that they make sure that they are talking to family members who are u.s. citizens. part of the next step is the immediate consequence of this non-decision, that the court has essentially punted this issue to the provincial elections -- presidential elections. immigrants are going to go out and vote for candidates who are
in favor of their families. host: as a legal challenge moves forward, there were people signing up for the presidents program -- president's program. are those people in some sort of federal database, and what happens to them? does the government take them out -- kick them out? guest: you saw many individuals in communities going to clinics to sign up, whether they were eligible or not and going to their own personal process of getting broached advocates, proving that they are the parent of a u.s. citizen child. blocked andwas never got started, some people were not actually able to sign up officially. path for you, is the
this through congress or do you think it is through another executive action that does not get challenged or a case that gets won. with respect to this issue, we are urging the department of justice to seek a rehearing. we believe the reason that we ended up with a deadlock is because we are lacking a nice justice, so we are hoping that -- that the department of justice will seek a rehearing when there are nine justices and the supreme court can hear the case again. we believe the president acted with full authority, so we are hoping that the case goes back to the supreme court. that probably will not be for another 12 months at least. we do believe congress ultimately needs to act, this initiative by the president was a temporary fix and what we do
need in this country is commonsense reform and that does take an act of congress. you are with us for about the next 40 minutes, taking your comments, questions as we talk about the future of immigration reform in the wake of that decision last week. a special line for illegal immigrants, (202) 748-8003. republicans, democrats and independents, lines as usual. bob in massachusetts, independent. caller: i would like to know exactly when it will end that people in south america comes up to america. do we have to take in everybody from those countries? , and do we draw a line everybody says they are contributing. a lot of them are making money here and sending it to their country. i cannot not understand why we have to suffer economically. it is killing my business, where
i live. host: what is your business? caller: i am a construction worker. this is an important question. one thing to understand about these programs from the president, it is about individuals who have been here before january 1 of 2010. the majority of these individuals have been here for over 10 years. they may be small business owners or homeowners. they are part of our society, taking care of our children, serving us in restaurants, picking fruits and vegetables, every much a part of our society already. -- very much a part of our society, already. many of these individuals are working off the records right now and that is not good for anyone. this would have benefited the
individuals and, but the economy as a whole. host: what do you say to those who say it this executive order one of -- were allowed to go forward, it would just create a different those who came in this year or next year to get in and wait for whatever the next time will be until another executive action goes through or another type of industry is given? guest: individuals pay attention to the news, they know who is eligible. this is a program that alone -- individuals have to have arrived prior to 2010. the executive actions also said anybody who is a recent entrant is a priority for deportation and we are seeing that. one of the things that does not get enough coverage is obama has deported more people than all previous administrations. we have had almost 2.5 million
people deported. this administration has been really tough on immigrants and many more people are being deported. we have a net zero migration from mexico. people are not coming in one reason for that is the economy in mexico is improving. do inaid, what we need to this country is have congress debate immigration reform, have a rational discussion about what kind of immigration system -- how do we -- for anybody who wants to come into the future, our current immigration system is out of date and that is one of the reasons that we have a large undocumented population right now. host: that line for illegal immigrants, (202) 748-8003. we will go to ted in north carolina, public and. -- republican. evenr: it seems like though these people have been
here for 10 years, they still came illegally. it is kind of like the 11 million undocumented who are here now. they have been here for 10 years, they have kids, but if we are going to not enforce the rule of law, they won't that encourage people to come here and hide out in the shadows and wait another 10 years and wait another 10 years until we pass another ruling and then -- let me say this before i go. overstays and people stay here and that is another problem we have, along with birthright citizenship, 200,000 kids each year born in this country from parents who came illegally from other countries. i wonder if your guess that address those issues. -- guest could address those issues. guest: then documented
population -- the undocumented population includes those without proper arm -- proper authorization or visa overstays. that includes both sets of people. her's areverstay primarily from asia and europe -- overstayers less so from mexico and central america. one of the things again we need to do is have a debate about immigration reform. issue of whether this executive action, if these individuals were able to come forward and get protection, would somebody in the future come with her as a tentative, not much of an extensive -- an incentive. one thing many americans do not understand is the difficulty that people live and when they are living with fear every day.
up in ourrowing schools are terrified to do not know whether their mother will be there at the end of the day to pick her up from school or whether the father, we just had a case last week in ohio in a very conservative town where the father of three u.s. citizens children was deported. you have chumps reporters coming out and trying to convince authorities not to deport him because they understood he was a local resident and had been with the community for 10 years, coached the local soccer team. the community knew him. host: what brought him to the eyes of the authorities? why, butam not sure the point was for many people for different reasons, they did not have a drivers license and states that do not allow for driver's licenses, that is a way deportationut into
proceedings. that case was an example of local immigration authorities did not exercise their discretion. they could've listened to the local mayor and the police chief . that is the type of fear immigrant families are dealing with every day. it is both u.s. citizen and undocumented members being affected. robert, arizona, line for democrats. caller: would you please address me properly? good morning. good morning world. history, i have a long of having paid attention and they have a whole bunch of examples of how people are perceived to be less than typically the white race.
racist -- host: let's not be racist on the show. i am not being racist. i'm being truthful. my father never wanted to go to the military because my father is dead. he would be 113 years old. he followed history, ok? he always told me, at the point of a gun, anybody can get with a want. that is the kind of mentality we are at today. who gets what, ok? the oil, we got it because the white race of europe wanted to take the oil. pissed everybody off so now we have immigrants from the middle east who have had their uranium,wed over with
we have all these stumpy people with stuff sod they can walk. it never ends. we have everybody who needs to be armed. when will all this armed craft and -- crap end? all right, let's go to mark in chicago, illinois, line for independents. caller: good morning. i am concerned because the president of the united states did not issue an executive order , he issued an executive action. it is a very distinct difference. action was on a temporary restraining order -- h has there is nothing that stops from issuing an executive border, a decoration, and -- declaration, and protect
these people. what his justice department tells him. it was going to die anyway after a number of days, a temporary restraining order. it was cavalier but not correct. since congress will not act and the democrats failed -- to vacate the chair of the speaker, and perhaps get of better,who would think the presidentve would issue one executive order which carries the full force of and could not be
overturned by an appeals court or a supreme court. host: do you want to walk us through some legal particulars? guest: a couple of important points. this is not an executive order, it is an executive action. the department of homeland security secretary johnson to his employees, we have a limited budget and congress has appropriated x number of dollars for about 400 people per year. we should use our priority to deport certain people and not others. what this is, a directive, a guidance. it is a reason we believe the president acted with full authority. this is what law enforcement agencies across the country use every day.
are we going after somebody driving five make -- five miles over the speed limit. that same legal concept. here, there is a nationwide injunction by a district court in texas that was then affirmed by the district court of appeals. where mark may not have the full analysis of the case is now that because the supreme court issued a non-decision, they were not a majority either way, it were me -- it means the program cannot be implemented. a loss of implementation until .urther review host: what if it different circuit court picks this up and rules differently? we are exploring different legal options. the statewide junction -- injunction is in place in all 50 states.
at thent actors may look legal options. republican, michelle, minnesota. caller: something i keep on theseg, that we will rip families apart. the fact is the parents came here illegally. parents are to blame if the family gets separated. i am not separating their family. the parents made the decision by coming here illegally to separate the family if something like this were to happen. i hate to say this but if the parents have to get deported, why can't the children go with? you do not have to separate the families. the parents came here illegally and they had a child. if they have to go back to whatever country they came from, they should take the child. i understand michelle's
perspective on this. look, when somebody makes the difficult decision to come to the united states for a different, better economic opportunity for the children come it is difficult and i am not going to judge whether it they made the right decision for their children. many immigrants have always come for a better future for their children. a problem is our immigration laws are out of date and we have not reformed them since 1986. 1990's, as a result of the north american free trade agreement and the central american free trade agreement, that caused more migration and poverty and many individuals --e to the united date united states. they have u.s. citizen children, they are paying local, state, and federal taxes. it is our
responsibility as a country to reform our immigration laws. in the interim, we should not be's putting families apart and deporting people who want to be part of the us -- the society. host: a special line this morning to if you are and want to call -- we are talking about the supreme court decision from last thursday. what was the scene like? before the supreme court, there was a lot of things i'd appeared millions of people had been watching and paying attention for the decision. when we got notice that the supreme court had deadlocked, it was devastating. there was a lot of crying and hundreds of families were there been veryt who had hopeful the supreme court would rule in our favor. instead, people felt devastated.
host: good morning. caller: good morning. my previous caller touched on the main question of families returning, home countries deemed deported. a brief statement, we are actions,bout illegal people have come here. they know they are breaking the law by coming here. when they are being smuggled across or sneaking into the country, they are not going through the legal system. you are talking about common sense reforms. when we are talking about people, you mentioned families living in fear.
they are in fear because the parents are committing illegal actions. just as you could use the analogy of a parent involved in could beactivity, they ripped apart. the difference is they would go to jail and they are separated from their families for that interim. the families could return but there is no need for them to be ripped apart. you used the term undocumented, i am undocumented if i do not get my drivers license. but i have the legal right to do so. have thets do not legal right to obtain citizenship unless they go through the proper procedures. one other question about sanctuary cities, i would be interested to know your opinion about the status of sanctuary and attorney general
lynch's refusal to take action against those cities. similar question to michelle. we have to agree to disagree. we believe the immigration laws are out of date and need to be reformed. made differente choices for why they are here. they are contributing members of the society and our laws have not caught up with the reality of migration patterns across the world. i think it is important, the city's issue that rich talks about were races is, there is a lot of misinformation or misunderstandings. that lawa local policy enforcement agencies have, that immigrants regardless of their status should be able to come forward to report a crime as a victim or a witness to the
majority of law enforcement leaders across the country actually support the policies because they want to have people come forward and collaborate with law enforcement. it is good for public safety purposes. when an a shield immigration does come forward as a witness to a crime, they need to know they will not then be placed into deportation proceedings or they will not come forward. jim on the line for republicans. good morning. to know whyuld like we are so liberal with illegals coming into this country, but if we crossed any border into another country, we will be jailed and you might spend 15 years to get out. yet here we are, anybody can come across our borders, we will protect them and give them housing and medical cards, food jobs for them, and we have got americans who
cannot even get a job. i would like her to answer that question. guest: thank you for your question. the facts are pretty different. when we do come into the united states on loss -- unlawfully, they are detained in jails in detention centers on the border. families and children are held oftentimes for months at a time before they are deported. people are detained and placed in jail. secondly, there is a lot of misunderstanding about whether are hereted immigrants unlawfully and are eligible. jim mentioned a number of things including food carts. it is so far from the truth. immigrants here unlawfully are in aligible for any public fit or health care. they cannot even pay out-of-pocket for access to obamacare and we are not helping people get jobs or anything like that.
life is very difficult for individuals and that is one of the reasons why immigrants who are here without proper authorization work three or four jobs at a time. host: the headline on one of the washingtonon the times today is the legacy takes a licking, a divided court upholds the rebuke of mr. immigrationects orders. it brings up the question of president obama's legacy on immigration. what do you think that will be? guest: the headline is another example of how some of the media, especially conservative media, are misrepresenting her this was a non-decision there was nothing about this one sentence that said one way or the other that it was in favor or against what president obama took. in terms of president obama's's legacy, i think the administration will probably be most remembered for deporting the largest number of people.
many people in the immigrant community think of this as the first african-american who has deported the most number of immigrants, more than any previous administration. billion perng $18 year in test pair money pair more than all federal law-enforcement agencies combined, the fbi, dea, u.s. marshals, etc., on enforcement, enforcement.or many of your colors do not recognize or realize this administration has spent much more in deporting individuals and doing things like this. president obama was trying to remedy his potential legacy and instead what we are seeing is deporting the most number of people in the country, including most recently, detaining and from centralldren
america, mothers 14 gender violence and they are being deported back to dangerous situations. the northern triangle at the highest levels of murder rates in the world, including the highest rates of gender-based violence. we believe those individuals coming from central america should be treated and recognized as refugees in the same way we are accepting refugees from syria and the world. is there a way that the obama administration can pursue this while in office? guest: it will depend on whether the department does in fact seek a rehearing before the supreme court or we are looking at the next administration. any of the legal steps that will follow in the case probably will actually be under the next administration. what is left is either this administration doing other measures administratively, and
separately, it is up to the u.s. voters and u.s. citizens to go forward to make sure the president of the country is a president that believes in commonsense immigration reforms that and if it all of us and not just immigrant families that actually in a fit all businesses and the economy as well. host: florida, sean is an independent. good morning. caller: i would suggest we take a look of the problem from a different perspective p or we have created an economic slave >> in the united states. go for employer sanctions. when you hire an illegal individual, you lose your business paired you pay them less than $15 an hour and go to jail. what to do with the people who -- here is legally on a case-by-case basis. some are just as good americans as the rest of us are.
how to deala choice with the matter and stop the economic slave >>. thank you very much. -- slave class. thank you very much. guest: yes there is a reason many people blame the worker but it is employers, a small set of abusive employers, who want to recruit and exploit knowing the fear will keep them except in jobs that are minimum or substandard wages and conditions. from our perspective, one thing that is really needed is increased labor law enforcement. seanf the things that mentioned was paying them $15 per week. if we had an increased minimum wage and actually enforce the laws in the country, if we actually enforce making sure every employer provides insurance and all these other requirements -- host: do those laws apply to you
if you are an illegal immigrant? guest: yes. when congress pass immigration reform at that time, one thing congress recognized was we needed to make sure all employees regardless of the immigration status were covered because if not, that would create an economic incentive for employers to recruit undocumented immigrants. the problem is there is very little funding for labor law enforcement. if they knew they could get away with paying minimum wage jobs, they would pay a u.s. worker the correct wages. host: i imagine this is a lot of what you're dealing with at the immigration center. guest: absolutely. we believe when you take out immigration status out of the equation, all workers could work together to improve working conditions and fight for better wages and better working
conditions. a few more calls. michelle is waiting in waco, texas, a democrat. good morning. you are all talking aout the exact story, i have really close companion and a person that i decided to join a gold and silver business with. we were attacked by the police, saying we had bought some stolen goods. so my not aware of it friend owned a lot of businesses , hair salons, and a movie upvice, and she got picked for possession of stolen goods because we bought some stuff we did not know was stolen. is going to get deported and she was married 25 years to a who was very badly abusive
and oh is held over her head that he would deport her if she reported him for mentally and physically abusing her. she owned several hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of he didy herself because not help her at all and she is waiting to be deported. we are trying every which way to keep her from being deported because her husband, who she is still married with, never got her her papers. never wanted to. he would not divorce or because he did not want to have to pay child support. i put up -- i postponed her hearing because she does not deserve this. a wonderful woman for 20 years and never once got in any trouble, criminal or any kind of loss. people,, helped
churches, helped a lady get her own home, she owned five houses and gave her one. you get on your feet, and she never charged her. she helped a lot of people. she and her business are going under. host: marielena hincapie. of hermichelle's story friend is a common story we hear across the country. michelle's friend is a perfect example of the majority of immigrants here without papers. owners who are currently employing many u.s. citizen workers because they themselves are not able to work. they can start a business but cannot be hired by an employer. michelle mentioned the violence against women's act, very important for viewers to --erstand that individuals
for individuals who are survivors of domestic violence, there is a possibility of being visato do petitions for a that would allow you, if you can prove you have been a victim of domestic violence and have been collaborating with the police and prosecution, you may be eligible to stay in the united states. michelle mentioned they may not be eligible. i'm not sure what the exact specifications are. we needexample of why these kinds of programs, the president's great and actions or actions like congress so her friend aree not deported and especially feel confident to be able to come forward to the police. reported theave domestic violence she was living under for 25 years because she may be afraid of deportation proceedings. how unusual is it for an
illegal immigrant to own five houses, three businesses, and still not come up with the radar or need official papers? people probably do not own that are there are a growing number of immigrants who do start businesses. one out of every three businesses are started by an undocumented immigrant mainly because they are not able to otherwise -- there is no prohibition. a small business owner without having proper documentation in the united states. a hypocrisy of our laws is immigration laws say if you are here without authorization you can be deported, but our tax laws also say you could be deported but if you are earning wages or any income in the united states, you are required to pay taxes. people come forward and apply for what is called an individual
id number, the number by which they use to pay taxes every year. homeownerse here, and small business owners, they are paying taxes at the state, local, and federal level, yet they do not have a road to become citizens in the country because our systems are very out of date. republican, dawn, good morning. caller: i listen to the news all the time, different stations, and there are, if that we are all immigrants, ok? but my great grandparents came from germany, some from france and some from england, and they all came from ellis island. there was no welfare at the time. and they worked hard and they built the country. i want to know what the
immigrants are giving to our country the way legal immigrants gave to our country. is, theo one thing comment that we are a nation of immigrants, it usually refers to not that we individually have -- but we have as don mentioned, parents who come from different countries. there are no legal channels for many of these individuals to become citizens here that is a reason we need immigration reform. undocumentedo are are contributing a great deal economically. allomic and risk in tribute billion dollars per year into the social security system, which they probably will never be able to reach those credits unless they become citizens and the loss change. economically, this country is receiving quite a bit from immigrant workers who are
contrary to $12 billion a year just to our security system, not even taking into account sales and state taxes. another headline from the new york times -- we have time for about one or two more calls. marielena hincapie is the executive director at the law center. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i wanted to ask about going from eight to nine justices as you talked about earlier. if hillary wins, the decision would go the way we like in a trump wins, the decision will probably be the same. i'm curious what you think about that. that is a great question and we believe the reason we did not get a decision is because we
are short a justice. the presidential elections are critical. i think the states -- the stakes are higher than ever. will likely have the ability to nominate at least two or three justices. are not justons who will be the leader of the united states for the next four years but what kind of supreme court will we have for decades to come? we believe that probably under a hillary clinton administration, the justice will probably be more liberal or under a trump administration, more conservative. we believe the president acted with full legal authority and if there were nine justices, they would rule in favor of the obama administration. we were talking about employers and what their responsibilities are one employing illegal immigrants and those who break the laws to do that.
question on twitter. democratic and republican congresses have had an opportunity to enact e-verify. why not? some of the reasons why --has not happened, it is you need to have 11 million people here in the united states and as long as they do not have work authorizations, they will continue to work under the radar . employers are recruiting them for a reason and employers are hiring them for a reason. an immigration reform system that provides that work authorization and allows people to have the ability to work on the books and making sure that people are wrote -- reliable -- host: on the line for republicans, a minute or two. caller: real quick, i really
think the democrats flipped history when they had the civil 1960's,ll in the early and they grabbed the vote from the african-americans and they kept in that entire time. because of ignorance, they did not know and now they're trying to get the mexican people to come over and fill the stage for the vote and only the vote. that is why they want them here. i still do not understand why the president of the united states did not fulfill what he told the mexican people, why he did not do it in his first two had congress, the senate, the house, the presidency, why didn't he do it for them then? ask thatt they question? that should be the first priority, to ask them what's up and why didn't you do it then? a lot of latinos and
immigrants are asking themselves that. a lot of it comes down to congress. since president obama was elected, senator mcconnell said they would obstruct everything president obama tried to do an immigration reform was basically subsequent to that as well. the problem is congress is dysfunctional on so many issues and immigration is one of those. it is important for immigrant communities, especially citizens, we are holding both parties accountable. communitybelieve any or any voter should be taken for granted. it is important. we have got a record number of people registering to vote because we believe in the country in the future of the country and we have a responsibility to exercise our right to vote so we elect the next president, a president with an inclusive vision of the
senate pleased that the as a body has come to this conclusion. television in the senate will provide citizens with greater access and exposure to the actions of this hottie. will help all americans be better informed on the problems and issues that face the nation on a day by day basis. president obama: turn the election, i have the occasion of meeting a woman who supported me in my campaign and she decided take a take my hand and photograph get a wonderful woman and she was not asking for anything and i was very grateful
she took the time to come by. momentunexceptionable except for the fact she was born in 1894. her name was marjorie lewis, an african-american woman who had , born in in louisiana the shadow of slavery, at a time when lynchings were commonplace, at a time when african-americans and women could not vote. country from the time of its founding until the mid-1980's to build up a national debt of 800 $80 oflion, which was the size the so-called stimulus package when it came over here. we are talking about real, borrowed money. coverage of the u.s. senate on c-span two. washington journal continues. joins usther macdonald
now, the author of the new book "the war on cops." amid high-profile trials of the baltimore police officers charged in the 2015 death of freddie gray. last week, the of sir facing the most severe charges was acquitted. what was your reaction? certainly not surprised but admiration for the judge who followed the law and followed the facts. williams was not under pressure to try to deliver what i think was the false mob justice that was promised. acquittal, hung jury, acquittal, do you expect any in these trials? judge made it clear what is going on is an attempt to criminalize lawful policing.
there is just not the evidence to support the types of charges that were brought. guest: a lot of reaction to the acquittals. the action group color of change said this -- it sends a clear message to the black community that the police and larger justice system are not designed to protect us. what message do you think it sends? guest: that the justice system will ignore knowledge that is really in fact the best hope for many crime-ridden communities, for protection of lives. baltimore last year racked up the highest per capita homicide rate in its history. there were 10 shouldered under the age of 10 who were killed in drive-by shootings because police under this false narrative that they are engaged lethal, racially german
policing, have backed off of making proactive discretionary stops. lost as as are being result. last year, 45 people murdered, 43 of them were black. were a the indictments further effect on proactive releasing it i would hope with the ongoing collapse of marilyn police case that officers in baltimore realize they will not be criminalized for trying to save lives. the chilling effect, is this what we would call the ferguson effect? yes, cleveland, dce, chicago, have all been subject to what i call the ferguson , the twin phenomenon of officers backing off of discretionary, proactive policing, and the consequence of
criminals thereby feeling emboldened. there in the midst of largest crime spike almost in recorded history. last year, homicides in the 56th largest cities rose 17%. that is almost unprecedented, a massive, one year shift. greater, anywhere from 50% to 90% in cleveland and 90% homicides. among the victims, three children under the age of five who were killed in september of 2015 alone, washington, d.c. ended with 54% increase in milwaukee had its highest homicide rate in a decade, an increase of 73%. when officers act off of proactive policing, lives are lost. host: it is talked about in "the
war on cops." the authordonald is and is with us for the next 60 minutes or so. , were youguson effect the first person to come up with the term? guest: i nationalized it. sam dotson a police chief used it to describe those going on. inobserved the drop discretionary summonses, rests, pedestrian stops, and an extraordinary increase in shootings through the first quarter of 2016. he dubbed it the ferguson effect and i took note of very alarming crime statistics throughout the and talked to police officers across the country who a very they are facing
virulent situation in inner-city neighborhoods when they go to inquire about suspicious behavior and make arrests. officers frequently find themselves surrounded by hostile, jeering crowds, interfering with lawful -- incking cell phones right their face, entering a crime scene and interfering with the officers lawful authority. the discoursewith about policing that has come out of the black lives matter movement, amplified by much of the media and even echoed in the , that says that officers are racist for engaging in proactive policing in inner-city neighborhoods, that is a political message sent to the cops and understandably at some point, if they are told
that doing proactive stops in high crime areas is racist, they will do less of it. when city after city has had a falloff in those types of law enforcement activities, as a result, crime is going up. in may of 2015, i wrote an op-ed in the wall street journal about a crime increase and hypothesizing that it was due to this systemwide attack on law enforcement. host: our viewers might recognize your work with that or the manhattan institute. editor of city journal and the author of "the war on cops." we are talking about it here. i want to hear your stories on this segment. -- lines as usual for democrats, republicans, independents.
-- with kenny,l start republican. caller: i was wondering if heather ever saw a case against a cop that she believes is a true case? it sounds like your attitude is everything is anti-cop. that is not the way it works, you know. cops do wrong, other cops should point out the fact that they are doing wrong but they do not. in the real world, any of us would get a conspiracy charge when you watch your buddy do something dirty and you do nothing about it. it is conspiracy. but when the law does it, geewhiz. have dieday could not because if there was not a case, the man must not have died. host: did you get the original question? absolutely, the walter
scott shooting in north charleston last year was abominable. man runningase of a from police after having a traffic stop, and it was alleged he tried to grab the officer's taser but then took off running and was shot in the back. wasshooting in chicago completely unjustified. had a knife but was not on nature gentry -- trajectory to threaten the officer and in fact, to the extent there was any risk to the officer, which was minimal, he created that risk by abominable tactics of getting out of his car rather than taking cover. those cases were rightly charged as murder cases. of course there are officers who make mistakes.
i do not know how often that rises out of any kind of animists. not think so. the most sophisticated study of officers shoot don't shoot decisions that came out last year by lois james at the university of washington found that in fact, officers took more time to decide whether to shoot an armed black suspect than an armed white suspect. and much more frequent they shot unarmed white suspect than black suspects. that narrative is false but that is not to say there have not .een very bad shootings training has to work incessantly to allow officers to make those awful, split-second decisions. officers do feel solidarity with each other.
they feel they are facing a hostile world. and they do sometimes protect each other with bad uses of force. that in laquan mcdonald's case. the real problem there was the response of the higher-ups, both not toerintendent correct early on the false narrative about the shooting, that allowed tensions to build that was a political, massive error. churches -- however shootings are,us they are not representative of policing. threat facing inner-city communities comes from crime and not the police. -- anhelen is an insult independent from pennsylvania. caller: i have a feeling there
are many black neighborhoods where the inhabitants do not want the police in the neighborhood. i feel a lot of the problem is, if we had stopped and frisk, which would get the guns out of other laworhood, and enforcement methods, i feel that would really help these black neighborhoods but a lot of them do not want the police presence in their neighborhood. guest: actually, i discover the opposite. experience, i cannot go to a police community meeting in high crime areas, whether the south wants or harlem or south los angeles, and not hear from the good, law-abiding residents of those communities, that they want more cops. variantriably hear some of the following complaint. your arrest the drug dealers and their back in the corner next day. why can't you keep them off the
street? there are kids hanging out on mice to -- my stupid smoking marijuana. why can't you arrest them? i spoke to a cancer amputee in the bronx who was terrified to go to her lobby to pick up her because there were teens trespassing there, smoking marijuana and dealing drugs. she told me, police, jesus, send more cops. she said the only summer she felt safe to go outside was when there was a police watchtower on her corner. and activists criminologists would see a police watchtower as the very embodiment of an oppressive police state. orminologists like bernard invoking michelle would say this is the pinup to con -- this is the attempt to surveillance.
she said that was the most peaceful summer she has ever had. in my experience, certainly who feel likele police are oppressing them, but i can talk to many young black males who have never been stopped by the police and they say it's because i am a good boy, someone told me that in brooklyn, or yes, i have been stopped, but i explained, i understand what the police were doing. host: john is waiting on a line in maryland. caller: i live in waldorf, however, i live -- work in washington, d.c. i agree 100%. day and try toy give 100% of myself. -- s raised a christian
i try to do it every day but personally, talking to my we do agree it does affect us. in the back of your mind, you're like, have to make an arrest that what will happen to my job? will there be a complaint and maybe i will lose my job. it does affect your job. when did you start feeling that way? have you always felt that way as an officer? after: definitely ferguson. the job is hard as it is. , but will always be that definitely, we can sense it in the air, there is a lot of pressure. you are oh is thinking about job security and your kids and your family. the other thing that is wrong is the court.
i read that this guy, he was sleeping in his car with a shotgun in his car. he had drugs in all sorts things. then, he got probation for it, and he was on the street like a few months later, and we arrested him again with another gun. it is a ridiculous. i think our job is hard as it is. we should not have extra worry in the back of our mind, job security. let us do our job. john is absolutely representative of cops. there are two things going on here. atmosphere,reet with people charged with hate, an officer in chicago, now a prime example of what i call the with shootings,
over the weekend, one person shot every 43 minutes because stops are down there 90%, a chicago officer told me he has never encountered this degree of hatred in his 20 years of policing. the one hand,on and on the other, there is a dominant narrative which says that offices -- officers are racist if they get out of their cars and make a pedestrian stop and ask questions. that has an effect. from lawsuits, coming from activist communities like the 8 -- like the aclu. they recently published a report about the chicago police that said the pedestrian stop activity there was racially 74% of all police
stops in chicago over a four-month time in 2014 had black subjects and about one third of the population of chicago is black. by the aclu's's reasoning, and that is also a reasoning the justice department uses in filing civil rights laws to turn investigations against departments, that shows police bias. what is left out of the analysis is crime rates. according to victims of an witnesses to violent crime, in chicago, for example, blacks commit over 80% of all shootings , 85 percent of properties, and 79% of all murders. whites, also about one third of the population, commit about 1% of all shootings and about 2% of all robberies.
given those disparities in crime rates, police cannot go to where people are being victimized by drive-by shootings without being in minority neighborhoods looking for gang bangers. they are not there out of their own choice. it is what the victims are telling them. that kind of discourse has an effect and john's point about worrying about how things will just me sayingot this. fbi director james comey has now twice confirmed the ferguson effect. he calls it the viral video effect but it is the same thing. let's go to brooklyn, new york, on the line for democrats. caller: thank you for taking my call. i will just say a few things. one, this perspective is completely void of historical confirmation of the relationship between law enforcement and
black and brown communities. crime is a direct correlation and has been historically, drug proliferation in our country. we know how they get here. the consequence is for police officers who operate outside of their police code or guidelines and what the law is, there must be some consequences. that is the bottom line. we know it is a tough job and they have to makes what decisions, but if their decision proves to be faulty, they have got to prove they are able to be a police officer. that is the way it is. like any other profession. stop and frisk, i'm here in new york and it has been statistically proven that it does not reduce gun violence, did not drive down crime. you need to update your book. that has been documented already. the other thing is i am a member of the community board,
brooklyn, which was the stop and frisk capital of the world. wem here to tell you submitted a resolution to the council and the mayor's office against the formal policing because we know it does not work and we lived through it already. host: there is a lot there. let's let heather macdonald respond. guest: vincent is right as it abysmal history. complicit us in the egregious betrayal of its founding ideals. they help to maintain jim crow and were involved in slavery. that history has a long echo effect and makes any police shooting of blacks, especially unarmed, and that is completely understandable. that history has inurrent embodiment today
policing, which is more professional than ever, and in that, the percentage of black homicide victims killed by cops theuch lower than percentage of white and hispanic homicide victims killed by cops. 12% of all white and hispanic homicide victims are killed in police shootings compared to 4% of all black homicide victims killed in police shootings. the black lives matter narrative that this is something targeted at lacks is just not true. infar as stop and frisk brookland, brookland was in fact the target of a whole media campaign in the new york times about its stop rate. it was about lacks there in brownsville are 15 times more
likely to be stopped than whites. that ignores the per capita shooting rate in brown's rate is 81 times higher than nearby bay ridge brookland, for instance, which is several miles away. it is that extraordinary difference in per capita shootings, 81 times higher, that aans that every time there is trial by shooting in brownsville, the police will not be there looking to make stops to avoid a retaliatory gang shooting. this is not something -- the crime data puts them there. as far as stops being effective we can see what is happening in places like chicago where stops are down 90%. and homicides are now shooting through the roof and people are
shot on an hourly basis. on that point, there was a new york police officer inspector general for the camera last week, not specifically looking at stop at frisk the inspector general looking at the effectiveness of those kinds of stops in whether it had and would affect of overall crime legs --crime rates. we can state that the's inspector general's -- we can state of the inspector general's -- and 2015, quality of life enforcement rates after monitoring client. there has not been an increase in felony crime. the statistical method
needs close analysis. it is a very complicated analysis and does not take into thatnt the possibility this enforcement of low-level public order offenses and violent crime is so closely anated, you have indoctrinate problem. there is another study that was done that came out of the brennan center for justice, which is a knee-jerk prolong enforcement group, that found the reason that the new york state prison population went another prison0 populations were going up, was that the police in new york city were paying attention in --
violent felony arrest dropped persistently sending fewer people to prison. i would argue there is another reason to engage in the type of public order policing, which is attending meetings in high crime areas. that is what people are asking the precinct commanders to do. you don't hear, why are you arresting the robbers? you hear disorderly conduct. there is 100 kids hanging out and fighting. i was in the 41st precinct of the south bronx last summer, and they were describing these massive gang events. they said there was a girl who was beat up. whatever happened to truancy officers? people complain about car stereos and illegal vending.
the people have a choice -- the police have a choice. respond to those requests from community members for some modicum of order that people in other communities take for granted, and if they do do that though, the aclu will get their hands on that data. or they cannot respond at all. in which case some of those people who are demanding quality of life policing, just get ignored. guest: williamstown, new jersey. edward is waiting on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, edward. caller: i want to make a comment. i tend to agree with the previous color. caller.revious to the 1960's and
1950's and all the way back. there has been a lack of trust of the police and african-american and latino community for a long time perceived iswe least getting away with a lot of stuff. now the pendulum has swung all the way back to the other side they cannoteel police and be effective like the are supposed to because they are afraid of lawsuits or losing their jobs. but again, it is a few cops that has needed that for all of them. policeception of the getting away with a lot of stuff , they are operating way outside of their policy, it has been like that for decades and decades in the african-american community. agree with edward and
then sent that there is a history here -- edward and vincent that there is a history here. i think policing has radically changed. those memories die hard. sure, there can be vast improvement in officers' demeanor. they need incessant andforcement in courtesy respect, not treating people roughly and they need to explain themselves if they have engaged in a pedestrian stop and play the radio call they give the suspect description that led to that stop. acknowledge what officers are facing that contributes to what could be a very of noxious street attitude, which is resistance from
criminals, resistance from throwners, airmail being fs of public housing. and another problem, they face the massive effects of the no snitch ethic, partly due to fear of retaliation, but it is also due to simply anti-cop attitude. there is a lot of work to be done in rebuilding police-community relations. what also needs to be done for that to happen is a more accurate data-driven narrative about why police are in communities and what they are doing their. guest: all of this discussed in the "the war on cops."
it is the book by heather macdonald. we have a special line for law enforcement --202-748-8003. let's head out to los angeles, california where eddie is on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: i wanted to ask ms. mcdonald, she was talking about the youngsters in new york. has she visited any of the african-american schools? most of the money has been taken out to help those in your last segment, the illegals. the black schools had to pay for their english and other activities. taken thellegals have steps away that those youngsters would have had in the fast food and bagging and all of those types of things. tell me about chicago and their, what is it called? they have to pay restitution, or
reparations for the black people that they took and was beating and torturing them by the police. guest: heather macdonald? i've agree with daddy -- i agree with eddie that the massive influx in california is putting enormous strain on social services, including education. something thatis is happening across the country. i think as well, there is a responsibility on the part of parents to make sure that their kids are attending school and engaged in their school work. that would help as well as far as improving educational
outcomes. i don't think the problem is fundingily is lack of for public education, which is not to say again, that the unchecked, low skilled, illegal immigration is not an anonymous fiscal strain -- an enormous fiscal strain. is the is talking about place where gang members are taken for interrogation. said that this was a black site. they are there because they are interrogating them -- they are there because interrogating them in a regular police precinct would put lives at risk. guest: terry is a republican.
good morning. caller: please don't cut me off. what i have to say is very important. hadprohibition of alcohol the same thing said about them. before they passed that, there were no gangs. they passed the drug laws. their appeal the alcohol law 13 years after they passed it and the murder rate went down. scientistake a rocket to know what would solve the problem. guest: what do you think? guest: it is an empirical question. ands a familiar argument one that is plausible.
one can understand the argument. what i know is that when i am in an inner-city neighborhood, i hear they want more drug enforcement, lot less -- not less. weed in my hallway, why can't you do something about it? the oppression of illegal activity. what is not the case is that the foron drugs is responsible black disproportion in prison. , drug virtually no affect enforcement -- you can remove all drug prisoners today from the state prison system, and the percentage of blacks in prison told go down from 37.4% 37.2%. know, again, what i am
hearing is we want the dealers off the streets, not let's legalize drugs. host: we will take two phone calls in a row. jordan is up first in burnett, texas. go ahead, jordan. caller: hi, there. i work in law enforcement as a correction officer. officer, weional don't get the recognition for doing the hard work we do. i just wanted to put that out there. i am against mandatory minimums for sentencing. i am a proud democrat. and i just wanted to say that. host: all right, let's go to joe in maryland on the line for law enforcement. caller: i am a police officer in a large and work
suburban county. i agree with the author will heartedly. -- wholeheartedly. is, i think the political leaders would rather do with cleaning up the body than a negative affect of having some video on youtube or a lawsuit for wrongful death. offices in my department are scared. they don't want to lose their jobs or be negatively for trade -- negatively portrayed. good,unately, there are law-abiding minority residents who care deeply about their community who are being negatively affected because of the fact that the cost is not worth the reward, for us. host: joe, you work here in d.c.?
caller: i do. guest: joe is right about corrections officers not getting much attention or acknowledgment. it i was in chicago and spoke to a cold case homicide detective that started out in the cook county jail. and the behavior that corrections officers encounter is completely off the radar. he was telling us that prisoners mouthst feces in their so they can spit it at the officers. most, lord ofthe the flies, type of environment anyone can encounter. as far as mediterranean mums, the federal penalties -- again, letting knowledge one thing, the so-called war on drugs began
with black input. the rockefeller drug laws in new york city. -- was a push that began the federal crack sentences, the congressional black caucus is were saying this is oppression. brooklynor jones in and a queens congressman said this is the worst self-inflicted oppression we have known since slavery. this was an attempt to actually acknowledge the pain inflicted by this crack epidemic on inner-city communities. have the penalties for federal drug offenses gotten out of wack? possibly. i am not against tweaking those mandatory minimums.
but before we had those mandatory minimums for repeated violent offenders, you had crime going through the roof in the 1960's and 1970's. we were trying alternatives to incarceration that had been proposed and we had a 373% in violent crime through the 1960's into the 1990's. as joe and offices word about their careers, he is exactly right. this is not about officers not wanting accountability. they are already subject to numerous oversight bodies. this is a political issue. they are getting the message that they are racist for engaging and proactive policing. for getting out of their cars, we should not be surprised that they start backing off. is in piedmont,
south carolina, republican. go ahead. caller: yes. they don'tced that live locally. , crack come into town skulls, and ask stupid and run across the county line to live. none of them are local cops. drivesis in our town the -- no one in our town drives cup cars. they are not having to live with the people they are acting so mean to. there should be some rules instituted where your jurisdiction should have something to do with where you live. int: let's go to cecilia meridian, mississippi, life for democrats. go ahead. caller: yes. i think she is taking a very naive approach to this. no one wants to have a war against policeman. we want policeman.
the one good, decent policeman who are fair. i visit my son in new york after 9/11. new york had a really horrible reputation. that, they had enough policeman in those neighborhoods, i have never felt so safe in my life and i am from mississippi. but there was a cop on every corner. and if they want to stop the violence in chicago, they could stop it. we need to take some of those tax dollars from the top 1%, or from all of these 26,000 member churches that are getting all of this tax-free money, we need to put law enforcement out there i'm a but we need to make sure they are well trained. they want to go in after the fact. they don't do anything preventative. i don't mean you run somebody down and frisk them and all of that. get to know what is going on in your neighborhood. if you do that, they will be able to contain this crime.
host: heather macdonald? guest: with a residency requirements are present in a lot of police department. in places like your city, cops cannot afford to live in a city, so some of them do live two hours away. but that is a truly economic decision. i am after the have been studies done on whether that affects policing. i have gone to police academies and what i hear from those young recruits is they are there to serve the community. it doesn't matter where they live. and it certainly doesn't matter what the race of cops are. there have been studies that show that race works against what you would assume in the narrative, matter there was a study in the philadelphia police department and found that black and is officers are far more likely to
be subject to what is known is threatness perception when it comes to black subjects. that is mistaking a cell phone for a gun, for instance, and shooting an unarmed person. i was certainly argue that race a police officers doesn't matter. theree with cecilia that police need to be absolutely engaged in the community and do everything they can to get to know people there. but when violence because -- violence becomes what it is like in chicago, they are spending a lot of time running from radio call to radio call. proactive policing is important. it is important to stop that disorder and to feel confident that if you get out of your car, and question somebody hanging out on a drug corner at 1:00 a.m., going into his waistband
like he has a gun, that will not count against you. aclu gets every single stop form. they created this massive stop form that is cumbersome to fill out. the real problem is that the aclu is doing oversight of the police department there. and given their methodology, officers say, why should i make those stops? host: 10 minutes left in this segment. it a lot of people want to talk to you. we will go to john in pennsylvania, republican. go ahead. caller: good morning and thanks for c-span. it is really an honor. ms. mcdonald, i have been aware of you for a long time and has read your stuff. it is really tremendous. you are so courageous, i must admit. i have seen you on mainstream
media few times. these people are so crazy. they are so adamant. they are operating from for information. statistically, it is so inaccurate, it drives me crazy. i keep on hearing about underserved communities, underserved communities. and with the education spending, what is it? $30,000 per kid? pennsylvania, the all white, poor communities are getting $6,000 a year in education annually. i have a question for you though. withxamples they come up and immediately focus on -- al case,on, the duke rape
louisiana teenagers, then the last couple of years, the florida teenagers got shot by a guy, and of course ferguson in baltimore. they seem to pick the worst example to reinforce their thesis? i would like to know the true motivation of the mainstream media? it is so deceptively promoting this nonsense to the public. host: heather macdonald, i will let you answer. guest: he is right that spending in urban schools is astronomical. new work in new jersey is huge and spending. there was a decision that resulted in millions being spent on a kansas city school that had virtually no affect on school achievement and graduation rates. i agree with john.
the people who have been chosen -- michael brown himself, that still gets venerated as a martyr. serrated the "he hands up, don't shoot." people in the community of ferguson who saw what actually went on there, which was michael brown beating up officer darren wilson and trying to wrap his gun, were intimidated from testifying against -- were intimidated from testifying at the grand jury, and these were black residents in ferguson. michael brown chick -- michael brown should be completely shelved, but he is still out there. as far as the mainstream media, i guess i would say, the narrative of a racist society is safer than looking at gave your.
-- looking at behavior. while cops need to be trained and courteous, the real problem that we have that the media does not want to talk about is extremely elevated rates of black on black crime. that is a taboo subject. you have blacks nationally committing homicide at eight times the rate of whites and hispanics combined. young black males between the ages of 14 and 17, commit gun homicide at 10 times the rate of whites and hispanic male teams combined. teens combined. . patternst understand of police activity unless you know what the actual reality of crime as. we will remember in the 1990's, on newss an explicit
organizations, not to report the race of criminal suspects because they were so frequently black. this was an extraordinarily counterproductive policy because when you have an actual criminal suspect, to not to give the public everything possible known about that suspect in order to get him off the street is irresponsible, and yet, the racial agenda trumps public safety in order to conceal the sad and disturbing facts of black on black crime, which is not to say that black criminals represent the majority of the black population. they do not. the majority are good, law-abiding people who want the cops. joe, brandywine, maryland. go ahead. caller: good morning. ms. macdonald, you get your statistics from paperwork that
someone else has written. i am a person who is lived what you are not talking about. a police officer in my neighborhood growing up in brooklyn, new york in the 1950's. officer wallace. i remember his replacement was a white cop. i remember the changes that came in when they started throwing trash cans off of the roofs. there were people rallied -- there were people rallying together and terrorizing people in the neighborhood for just getting on the corner, doing nothing really. in the summertime, we had nothing to do. these things started changing band and they have completely escalated. the people don't know the police in their neighborhood. i have a policeman that lives right behind me, and i don't
even know his name right now. into theface smashed asphalt because of me singing the police doing wrong -- seeing the police doing wrong. they were beating a prostitute. they asked me to go inside when i was standing at my door. they drove me out and smashed my face into the concrete, and i filed a suit. i was living in memphis, tennessee at the time. do you know what happened to the suit? i don't. guest: when was that? caller: oh my god, that was 1975 at that time. host: i want to get heather macdonald a chance to respond. guest: joe is absolutely right. he exemplifies what i have said. these are historical facts.
in the 1950's, policing was buried different. in tennessee in 1975, policing was very different. portione are a minute of the police population. we had 36 shootings of unarmed like mail/tear out of millions of contacts. most of those engagements, the opposite person was trying to grab the officers's gun, or beating him with his own equipment. but the fact that joe received brutal treatment from cops, understandably, in the past, it colors his view today, but it is not representative. host: the book is the "the war on cops." heather macdonald is the author. we appreciate your time this morning. half-hour, we are
getting your thoughts ahead of the supreme court expected ruling on that texas abortion case. opening our phones for you to weigh in on the topic. 202-748-8001 if you are a republican. 202-748-8000 if you are a republican. an-748-8003 if you are independent. you can start dialing now. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> on the communicators, care of the house of information technology subcommittee to about cyber and data security and federal government agencies. and report card that they released in may about management of information.
he is joined by reporter jim starts. federal government has almost 11,000 data centers. facebook is one of the biggest companies in the world has four. there is no reason the federal government should have 11,000. through the scorecard, four agencies have realized $2 billion for the savings over the last two years by moving into the cloud. watch the communicators tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span two. [applause] the 2016 primary season is over with historic conventions to follow this summer. >> colorado. >> florida. >> texas. >> ohio. the first politician in several decades. watch live on c-span.
app,n on the c-span radio or go to www.c-span.org. you have a front row seat to every minute of both conventions on c-span beginning monday, july 18. >> you are hearing the sounds and seeing the sights outside the supreme court this morning. one of the cases that is expected to be heard, one that has had a lot of advocates on both sides gathering is the texas abortion case. it is expected and could be the biggest abortion ruling in decades from the supreme court. phone opening up our lines to hear your thoughts on the abortion case and expected ruling. the phone numbers -- republicans, 202-748-8001.
democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. if you are outside of the u.s., 202-748-8003. sayswall street journal" what may come at 10:00 when the ruling is expected to be handed down. it says conservatives have no plausible chance of a five note -- put majority getting the way .o an abortion restriction mandating that physicians performing the procedures maintain a facility near a hospital. apply to three
states overseen by the new orleans fifth district court of appeals. the deciding vote is likely up to justice kennedy who has approached prior abortion regulations. that is how the "wall street journal" puts it this morning as advocates gather outside the supreme court. the story next to it talks about demonstration outside of the supreme court. the supreme court becoming a usual gathering place for demonstrators. that story notes that when the supreme court rules, activists on both sides will be ready to rally with signs and bullhorns. they had been there for weeks now. there is no cover from the weather. you cannot reserve shade.
it leads to jockeying for good real estate to get the right angle. we are waiting to hear from court news about the abortion case, that texas abortion case, that has been closely watched here and around the country. we are want to start with lynn from huntington, maryland. your thoughts on this upcoming abortion decision? to say i just wanted when i was 17 years old, i had an abortion. i grew up in a slightly dysfunctional household. i had no support from my parents. -- and the ability to make that decision enabled me to go to college and become a successful adult, live my life there he do well -- live my life every do well. if i did not have that choice, i
don't know where i would be today. i would do it all over again. and especially knowing what i know now. kind ofigious aspect gets out of the equation because there are so many factors that come into play. if you have a supportive family, that might be one case, but not everyone has that, and it should be a woman's decision based on her specific and unique circumstances to have the freedom to make the decision for not only her future, but what very unfortunate future for a child brought into poverty and not having bury many -- and not having very many resources. nn you just shared your story. have you ever gone to a pro-choice demonstration? have you ever been involved in one of those? caller: know. i do support --
i do remember the day i had my abortion. there weren't that many protesters. but there were protesters there that day. it is not a lighthearted decision, even if you know it is the best. when someone is standing there condemning you and telling you you're going to go to hell, it is very unnerving and it makes it difficult decision all the more difficult. all i kept thinking is, how do you know me? how do you know my circumstances? how do you know my life? how do you know this is not the right decision for me? we live in a free country and nobody should be able to put their opinions of writing long religiously onto another person in this country. legalt know why it's even to protest at an abortion clinic. i think it is extremely harmful to the young women who are already fragile. lynn in maryland.
before you go, does this is it ofissue, how big an issue when you are voting for candidates? caller: it is extremely important. that is why i am a republican. well, i am a moderate republican. i don't believe in the religious aspect of it. i know that sounds backwards. but i am all about government staying out. more often than not, the government is putting more and more restrictions. but it is a big deal. and i am sorry that trump is kind of taking a stance against abortion. he backed off a little bit. i would like to find someone in the middle who did not put religion in the mix at all. and: let's go to sharon spring creeks, nevada, the line for democrats. sharon, good morning.
you are on washington journal. say.r: i just wanted to a long time ago, my sister had an abortion, ok? it?i was very much against . i asked her, why? i will adopt it. i will take care of it. she said that if she had it, she would have to keep it. and her husband -- it was just a big old mess up. if someone wants an abortion, let them have it, it is their business. who are we to tell them, you can have it? i just don't understand any of this. delta,ames is in pennsylvania, line for republicans. james, good morning, you are on the "washington journal." caller: good morning.
i agree with the last caller. republican, but i went away from the catholic faith to the episcopalian faith, which is a little bit more lenient on abortion issues and everything. i think that it is a woman's rape, especially with the and incest. they should be able to get abortions. lawderstand they made a that abortion clinics had to hospital surgery suites. is that what they are trying to rule on today? host: it is about restrictions that were put into effect in ,exas that had the effect
treating the number of abortion providers in that state -- cutting the number of abortion providers in that state by half. i will read an article to you -- women who are poor and non white, would face the biggest challenges. two wasuse bill enacted, the number of abortion clinics in texas have dropped to 18. 18 -- from 40 texas in theest texas panhandle show some of the travel increases after the clinic closures. that is from the front page of
the dallas morning news. we are getting your thoughts from our viewers as we await the decision on these last three cases of the supreme court. but the abortion cases the one that is being watched most closely. in arizona. good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i do not believe in abortion. i had an abortion before it was legal. i don't regret having it. it is murder. [indiscernible]
when i say there are exceptions i understand you have to make a decision. and i understand about situations where people are rape. rape comes in all forms. [indiscernible] killing a baby is not going to change anything. teaching young people who have babies how to raise them. people are not prepared. they are not going to be able to be a functioning adult. i am 54 years old. and i still cry every day for
the loss of that life that i took because a man told me it is not his. me.as much older than murder is murder. i believe in women's health and everybody's health, but you cannot destroy a living being because you can feel you can do that. there have to be guidelines. i do not believe in it. i murdered my baby. the doctor they gave me the abortion coerced me into sleeping with him. the point is, there are many people in this world, that are abusing young women, older women and whether they are in politics
or not, they are taking over and doing what they want. andlieve that mental health teaching people how to behave in their lives from the time they are little, with each them to be able to say no and stand up for their rights. arizona.t is eve in we are talking about this expected decision coming down. author writes about this -- an author writes -- this could be the most important decision by the court since 1992. we are letting our viewers: to discuss that expected decision. we got about 15 minutes he for it is expected to come down. is on the line. caller: hi. i wanted to say that there are
happen whenhould you have an abortion. i think it should be done by doctors and hospitals. there are a lot of clinics around that take care of women and give them advice and give men protection, and give women advice for protection, but they should not be in the business of abortion. -- t of all, if not are the same people that getting three or four times. the other thing is -- host: what are the laws that prevent tax dollars going to abortions? caller: it shouldn't. it shouldn't. you better take care of
yourself, that is what i feel. i think a lot of them like i said, if they are raped or something. or if they are children getting babies. i was 16, but i had mine. the other thing is that lady that controls the abortion is making millions a year. host: a few comments from twitter -- matt says the supreme court is not going to limit abortion rights. as long as i don't have to pay for it, do what you want with your body. tweet, the selling a baby parts is wrong matter what the justification is. and a tweet from ray brewster, i say it is murder when the baby has a cognitive function. troy is in pueblo, colorado. the line for independents as we continue to show you the scene
outside of the supreme court right now. go ahead, troy. caller: good morning, sir. i think what they have in babies or the -- ers' life is in danger incest, iike rape and think it should be discussed with the doctor and the woman before it is done. host: those other restrictions you would put on it, troy? besides that, you say you are pro-life? caller: yes, sir. host: all right, that is troy in pueblo, colorado. ast a programming reminder we show you what is happening outside of the supreme court. the campaign continues for the -- the road to 2016 today. hillary clinton expected, or
will be campaigning with elizabeth warren and massachusetts -- with elizabeth warren in ohio. we will be showing you that live at 10 -- show you that live at 10:30. but from now on to the program begins, we are showing few scenes outside of the supreme court and getting your thoughts on this expected ruling of the texas abortion case about the restrictions on abortion clinics. david is in texas on our line for democrats. david, good morning. david, are you with us? caller: oh, yes. good morning. host: you were on the "washington journal." caller: ok, great. i really can't think of anything that is more fundamental to decide and being able to what kind of family you want to
have. done by texas has placing restrictions on clinics and basically trying to legislate abortion out of existence, is wrong. why are you trying to force people to have children? forced -- force people to have children? that is wrong to me. with restrictions on late-term abortions. it is interesting that part of the democratic platform looks ake it will be to overturn hike amendment. i'm not sure where i am on tax funding on abortions. but the right to which should be protected and it is something i vote on. host: some background on this
k-fed is being decided today about the restrictions and replace in texas on abortion clinics to lower federal courts. apportion rights proponents say -- abortion rights proponents say it -- those proponents may have a winning hand. richard wolff writes -- if the justice joins the cipher liberals, there is the scene outside of the supreme court. you can call in and our last 10 minutes of the "washington journal" as we await this decision to come down. . is 202-748-8001. waiting in los angeles california, line for democrats, go ahead. caller: hello, good morning. host: good morning, drew. go ahead. caller: i'm anticipating the
rolling. i expect to hear pro-choice is going to be the verdict. hopefully, women will be able to continue to have abortions as late as they want. host: you think the restrictions, drew? after: well, i imagine eight months, i imagine it has to be some, you know, a deadline somewhere, you know? host: and you would draw it at eight months, drew? i don't know, maybe the last trimester or something like that. i don't know how extreme i want to be without one. i am pro-choice. i imagine a woman has a right to an abortion. we will see when the ruling
comes down, you know? host: we will see in just a few minutes. gabrielle is in maryland, line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning and thanks for having me on. i am so glad. it is an interesting and complicated subject and so many topics to address. i wanted to point to the gentleman that we are forcing girls to have babies. we are forgetting that no one is forcing them unless it is a rape situation. we are not forcing girls to spread their legs and have the sex. we need to back the issue up a bit and maybe offering a lower cost for birth control. in certainly poverty-stricken areas where education for raising a child might be lower. obtained, we can offer it technically on street corners so the girls who are going to be having sex can also have birth control, which is a
lot less expensive for taxpayers. i feel like we are all wound instead of going back more holistically, instead of talking about the girls. they are all spreading their legs. why not have to live up to response ability? host: we are watching the scene outside of the supreme court. audience on twitter who comments every day. -- thetes just now pro-abortion demonstrators have professional signs. the antiabortion demonstrators have occasional homemade signs. that is his rating on what he is seeing right now. kerry is in tarzana, california. an independent.
good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to address one thing i just heard the republican woman from maryland say a few minutes ago that we also need to educate women in terms of birth control. i agree with her. , however, if we look allhat is happening, women's rights are under attack because planned parenthood is being defunded. what you would do in terms of birth control is being wiped out. i am definitely pro-abortion. all these pro-life people to me is absolutely ironic that you are pro-life, but yet, pro-death penalty. so bring them here, and kill them later. i don't understand it. we should let abortion be legal yo. you cannot control a woman's body.
that is her decision, nobody else's. host: dorothy, good morning. caller: good morning. i want to express this. why is it that we always have women's issues being protested against? we don't protest viagra. but we are always out there with this i trust -- out there trying to tell women something. i agree there should be restrictions. that you cannot have one after so many. months it should be three months or something like that. agree withhy, do you a guy on twitter that said if men were having babies, not only would it be legal, but it would be paid for by the big, bad governments? caller: absolutely because we condemning--
anything men have for their pleasures. what about men who take viagra and go out and have sex with as many women as they can? we are not protesting that. our insurance pays for that. -- they don't even want women to get the pill. come on, now. host: let's go to kathy. just a minute or two left in the program geared to go ahead. caller: hi. i am against abortion, but my main thing is, we pay for contraception, we paper literature on all of this, and -- first of all, women can take conscious and its -- women can take contraception. centerssee women in the and they get this literature, i
don't see why we need to pay for an abortion? pay, aren you say we you talking about money, federal dollars that go to places like point. ? -- places like planned parenthood? caller: yes. first of all, if they given the literature, it should be put on a computer to all centers, for one. for two, if they receive contraceptives, with the exception of women who have been attacked by read this -- who ists, oracked by rap their lives are in jeopardy, that is a different situation. or have medical problems or they could die from this. that is not choice. that is a difference. that is a medical emergency. host: all right.
sally is in silver spring, maryland. my for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. i wonder what all of these pro-life women would feel if they had to look at a child who was conceived by someone that they hated for the rest of their lives. and i also wonder, how that child is treated but the rest of it life if it's a mother really disliked the man that caused that pregnancy? and i mentally pro-choice. women need to be able to say what they want so they can lead a productive and happy life. and also, the child the same way. i think a lot of children who were caused by an unhappy problem that occurred, live a terrible life because their mother really keeps thinking about the man that made her
pregnant. thanks, sally in silver spring, maryland. caller, as the in today's show showing you outside of the supreme court as we await the last three decisions, including the decision on the texas abortion case expected to come down in just a few minutes. we will see you back here tomorrow morning on the "washington journal." [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] democratic presidential candidate hillary clinton will be campaigning in cincinnati with senator elizabeth warren. this will be their first joint appearance. set to start at 10:30 eastern. we will have live coverage here