tv Washington Journal 01082019 CSPAN January 8, 2019 6:59am-10:03am EST
conversationcome a on how governments incorporate religion into their foreign at 930 a.m. and the impact of the new congress are u.s. policy toward north and south korea. the senate gavels in a 3:00 p.m. eastern to debate defense and security assistance in the middle east. ate live coverage on c-span3 1220 5 p.m. when we get an update on the energy industry from api and a lobbying group for the natural gas and oil industries. -- newlywly them like elected members of congress talk about hr one, a 571 page bill that lays out the democrats priorities. the house rules committee will then meet for debate on for spending bills covering financial services, transportation, agriculture, and the epa. coming up in one hour, the league of conservation voters president and the heartland institute senior fellow discuss
the green new deal and energy and environmental issues and a 116th congress. at 9:00 a.m., the latest on the government shutdown. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] day of theis 18th partial federal shutdown, president trump will address the nation for his desire to see a specific figure for border security. tonight on c-span also at c-span.org and our radio app. this is the eighth of january and you are watching the "washington journal." in this next hour, we would like to hear from republicans only if you think the president should offer a compromise over the current funding request for the border so the federal government can reopen and workers affected by the shutdown can go back to work. here is how you can let us know.
republicans only, 202-748-8000 for the eastern and central time zones. 202-748-8001 for the mountain and pacific time zones. if you want to post on our social media sites, you can do so on twitter @cspanwj and our facebook page, facebook.com/cspan. legislatorsblican have posted comments on twitter and going on television talking about the need to come to some sort of compromise to end the shutdown. a sign of weakness to figure out a middle ground, it is a sign of strength. itning to don bacon, saying is time to fix our broken border and immigration system. it is congress' job. --gressional gridlock
my way or nothing fails us and that is the thoughts of represented don bacon. also republican leaves elton of new york -- went on fox news and talked about the idea of coming out with some type of compromise to end the shutdown. we should be doing is negotiating, compromising in good faith. what the democrats are accepting is them to get 100% of what they are asking for with regard to the debate. it is disingenuous they said we shouldn't have a shutdown while negotiating. they weren't willing to negotiate before. this isn't about money, this is about preventing the president from having a win. we need to cut through some of the bs and call it for what it is. the dams ems are looking at dems arehe
looking at this as a political fight. they would be negotiating and compromising in good faith. go, are we let you any closer after this weekend to finding a magic number for a wall? fory pelosi says no money the wall, but calling it a slat system and having it built with american steel. how much of any of that is making a difference? >> i think the democrats are at zero. the only compromise they are willing to accept right now is getting 100% of what they are asking for as if they run the government. andhave a republican senate republican president. they have important priorities like the dreamers on the dhaka population. -- daca population. of newhat is lee selden
york. another 800 million dollars or so for humanitarian issues along ourborder and on ash in first hour, we are asking republicans if the figure should stay or is there some type of change, a compromise to start the federal government and shutdown. you can let us know in eastern and central time zones, it is 202-748-8000. in the mountain and pacific time zones, it is 202-748-8001. we will start, ed in georgia. go ahead, what do you think? caller: right now i believe people are not understanding that the amount of money we spend every year on illegal recouped if the wall is up. i know democrats like to say the dol doesn't work, but walls
work and the people at the border, the people actually guarding the border have already said they want the wall. they know the wall works. i think a shutdown should go on -- at least until stop and remember they are not the only people in this country. half the country is republican. host: no sense of a compromise from the president needed, then? you don't think the president needs to change figures or something to meet democrats in the middle? caller: i am not saying we won't have to compromise, that is what i would like to see, a compromise. i think a compromise means both sides compromise. host: christopher is next from maine. go ahead. caller: how are you today? host: fine, thank you.
you are on. caller: i think he should not compromise until they are willing to compromise. it democrats just hate mr. trump. i really don't know why. they irrationally hate the fella . he cannot compromise with them. host: what do you think a compromise from emma kratz look like -- look -- from democrats looks like? caller: meet him halfway. nancy pelosi coming out with that nasty comment, i will give him a dollar. what a rotten thing to say. host: you are saying if at least --f say $5.7 billion figures figure comes forward, they should meet him halfway for that. if they came to that. i can tell you right now, there is no way. they hate this man and it is irrational. host: dave in florida. go ahead, you are on. say compromising
with the democrats is out of the question. they don't want to compromise. you have got to take a win here. host: why over this case is it out of the question? caller: did you hear nancy pelosi the other day? ridiculous. she was waving her arms around money.money, no you have got to take a stand. believe the- i people -- if there will is done, they want to stop this problem on the border. it has got to be a huge majority that want to stop it. it has been going on for too long. host: that is dave in florida.
the president will address this an addressly -- in this evening at 8:00 this evening. you can see that on c-span, c-span.org, and the radio app. if you go to.org, we will give you the latest when it comes to this issue on the wall. the wall street journal this morning, in his op-ed that the president cannot afford to lose, he offers these thoughts -- three reasons, the first is his pain tolerance. people started seeing human faces on the consequences of tough policy. on trade where tariffs have proven difficult, he has demonstrated he is willing to impose the cost. second, border politics have shifted. a few months ago the images were children separated from families and sleeping in cages. the political dynamic flipped as
a resort of an organized unlawfulness effort to bum rush the border and the third and biggest incentive for the president to dig in his he has more to lose than democrats do. the possibilities of anything but outright victory are more stark for mr. trump. if he accepts the deal that doesn't give a wall, he can blame democrats along with republicans, but he would have lost a fight he picked. he would end the shutdown weaker than his started and some of his ardent supporters could turn on him for selling them out on his -- their signature issue, affecting his election in 2020. maybe you are reflective of those thoughts, republicans only in this first hour. the question we are posing to you is if the president should compromise on this issue of the shutdown. in wyoming, go ahead. noter: yes, sir, we should compromises.
they are taking over the united states and we cannot afford to feed them and house them and give them health care. i am sorry, but that is how it is. we have compromises to the democrats, it is ridiculous and we would pay for that wall with the money we have left. thank you very much. host: as far as the compromise itself, what about those affected by the shutdown? caller: the ones that are compromised by the shutdown, i am sorry, but you work for the government and you ought to know things have got to change. host: from gregory in missouri. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a compliment about pelosi. she needs to retire and i am tired of the democrats.
they are waited on hand and foot and they have no common sense when it comes to reality. we are human beings. we make this country and that is the way i feel about a. host: the president should not compromise on this then? caller: no, absolutely not. stand his ground. it is time for change. we are all tired of it. host: when you say it is time for change, what do you mean by that? caller: democrats need to stop their nonsense and let republicans -- because i am a republican and they need to give it a rest. they say things that is not true. they start trouble. you know they do and they cause problems. host: when it comes to the shutdown, what do you think that accomplishes over this issue of funding for border security? caller: i believe in people being in this country, but not illegal.
there is a lot of drugs and things going on in this country that needs to stop. host: that is gregory in missouri giving his thoughts. the washington post focuses on democrats when it comes to this issue of compromise. rather than talk about the immorality of a wall, democrats could use leverage to achieve a moral purpose in return for a few billion dollars for a segment in the president's wall, democrats might permanently shield from deportation one over million quote dreamers" and protect tens of thousands of haitians, salvadorans, hondurans -- after having lived illegally in this country under temporary protected status. it is a longshot, but democrats should leave themselves in a position to say yes. they would accomplish a great
good for a huge number of blameless people and for the country. the editorial focuses on the democrats. republicans are the focus in this first hour if this idea of the president should compromise on issues regarding border security in light of the address he will be giving tonight at 9:00. in california, david. hello. caller: there is an article in the washington post dated october 18, 2016 by max barrett called the u.s. foreign aid budget visualized, if you could find that and put the graphic up , people can see how big the u.s. budget is and how small the $5 billion the president is shutdown. is anda if congress doesn't get the budget together by september like they are supposed to, the entire government should shut down and we should have a tax holiday.
host: should the president give anything it -- as far as this issue of funding? caller: i live in san diego county. i see this every election, pretty much and nothing gets done. congress goes through their rigmarole and they don't finish the job. we have been doing this since 1990. it has been a while. as a comparison, have you seen the great wall of china? and they did that in the bc era. host: if the president did concede, would that change your opinion of him at all? caller: it might, but i would not stop supporting him. host: we will hear from carlos in california, you are up. caller: they should not compromise. nothing has changed this border in 30 years and more than 7 million people have crossed illegally. if they don't do something about
that border -- that number is going to triple. you leave that border open, there will be over 7 million people coming. i guarantee that. host: the president should not give anything as far as what he is seeking? withr: it has to do national security. how do you compromise? most of those people are hard-working people. they just come here to work. now you get a lot of riffraff coming in. leave the border open, you are setting the country up. host: on our twitter feed, joe says compromise on the structure components such as manpower, technology, even cost, but not on the building of a much-needed physical barrier. if you want to follow us on twitter, it is @cspanwj.
you can also post on our facebook page at facebook.com/cspan. the washington post talks about this idea of building a wall under a national security framework, something the president addressed over the past couple of days. paul writes the law that authorizes the defense secretary to order military building projects requires the pentagon draw upon funds congress appropriated for military construction. the administration could have to clawback money from projects congress debated and funded. the suggestion he can build a wall by declaring a national emergency would hinge on a section of the u.s. code governing the military, giving the defense secretary the authority to undertake military to supportn projects any troops deployed in a national emergency requiring the use of armed forces. there's about $10 billion left in unobligated funds for military construction in the current offense budget in
addition to 13 billion that rolled over from previous years. the money has been appropriated for specific projects. another one spoke on anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly about the issue. annapolis, maryland is next, we will hear from scott. caller: thank you. i think the president should not compromise at all. i spent two weeks on the border in the sierra vista douglas area in arizona to see how bad the problem was and in 2005, people were saying there was 12 million illegals and how is it that 13 years later the number stayed the same? published a irs document where their estimate was 20 million. i think the number of illegals is significantly more than
anyone is ever really talking about. when it comes to the president, is this about getting the dollar figure or getting a win on this situation? about: people are talking wins and losses and dollars, it is really about focusing on the citizens of the united states and it is about having a border. if we are going to have immigration -- remember, we did not have immigration through 1920 through 1965 and that was when our immigration population had exceeded like 13% of the population. i think it is on that order right now and the citizens are frustrated with the fact that everyone is focusing on noncitizen rights versus the citizens of the united states that have been left behind.
host: in washington state, this is john out of kent, washington. caller: this is john. back in 1986, when i was still a hall in, in our union seattle local 440, they put a deal up on the wall in writing that said 1986 immigration law and this is what is required by it and specifically, i remember that deal about $8,600 or something like that for every employee or -- illegal alien he had, they are going to get charged. never happened and that is basically what happened to the -- thell, we went ahead president went ahead and
compromised with democrats and then they have got what they wanted and it seems like it is even worse since then, they always get what they want, but they are never going to take -- use the fall law. those guys are worse now than they were in 1986. i started working -- listening to your darn show in 1986 and guysaxman and said, those are supposedly do this and that and the first thing he did was that little guy from ohio that ran for president last time, they put him in the corner. host: if the president excepted a lower figure, is that something you could live with? caller: no, we have got to go ahead and do it. that is why i am glad the president has done what he has done. we just have to stop letting those guys -- the democrats run
us and our republicans -- most of them in congress are worthless. we need a few more guys like our favorite guy from texas, host: that is john in washington state. he highlighted some of the republicans that have commented, taking a look at the situation calling for compromise. in the washington post, a story on the government shutdown as it looks and how it is leaving its mark on the u.s. economy. virtually every employee with the secret service involved in an investigation, security, and protecting esther trump and current officials and their families required to work during the shutdown. organizations and their employees will not be paid. it is true at the security and exchange commission with only an extremely limited of staff members available to respond to any emergency situations. as the effect moves beyond the
nation's capital, craft brewers cannot get approval from the -- the commerce department stopped processing request from auto suppliers and other manufacturing companies seeking an exemption from the metal tariffs, leaving them uncertain over the price they will need to pay for key materials. it was the maryland senator chris van hollen sitting down with federal employees not far from washington, d.c. in prince george's county talking about the shutdown and the impact on those employees. [video clip] storiesrobably saw about the negotiations at the white house, that mitch mcconnell was not there. this is the breakup -- republican leader of the senate. they are ducking their constitutional responsibility to do their part to reopen the government and mitch mcconnell has it within his power today to bring up those two bills that passed the house to reopen the government. they should not be hiding.
you have senate republicans who are awol when we have this government shutdown. .et's come back today tomorrow, let's vote on those the first order of business. i know the president said he would be proud to shutdown down the government. nobody should be proud of shutting down the government, denying pay to 800,000 americans and depriving millions of others of important services. host: recent polling, this is the latest hill harris expo, support of- shows unregistered voters for some sort of compromise. 72% of voters think the president and lawmakers should make a deal to end the partial government shutdown. just 28% said "sticking to principles is more important than reopening the government. opposition and giving in on border funding demands was strongest among those who say
they approve of the president. among that group, 54% want the president to stick to his demand while 46% said they prefer a compromise. we are asking you about the president and if he should compromise on the issue of border funding. david in illinois, you are next. hello. caller: hi. i am glad to hear about that. living in illinois, dick durbin yesterday.ria one thing i wanted to ask you was i don't hear much about it on the news or anything about it. 1 bill, democrats hr- they won't spend a dollar on the wall and yet they have their that and that hr-1 bill says they want to spend millions of dollars to send money overseas to give women free abortions.
host: we are focusing on the president and this idea of a compromise. what do you think about that? caller: i don't think he should give in on anything, especially when they want to spend money in different places like i just told you. host: why do you think i shut is worth it over this? caller: what else can you do? it -- he goes ahead and passes a budget, you know the democrats will never budge on a dollar or more for the wall. host: in ohio, we will hear next from mike. caller: good day, pedro. how are you? host: i am well, thanks. how about yourself? caller: i am hanging on, if you know what i mean. i would like to apologize for my limited intellectual capacity. the question i have got is mexico is going to pay for it and how do you bankrupt a
casino? i am down here in appalachia, i call it redneck valley. it doesn't take a brainwashing, it takes a light rinse. we have girls jumping off of bridges and we have murder and up.e you have containers coming in from afghanistan. i would like to know what mitch mcconnell and his wife are doing about all the heroin coming in from afghanistan and got our soldiers guarding in the fields. host: to the point of the president's role in this and the idea if he should compromise? what do you think about that? caller: that wall, maybe he ought to play that song by pink floyd, you are just another brick in the wall. erb inwe will go to h pennsylvania. caller: i say he should
compromise and here is how, tell the democrats what i am going to do is print signs for every language in south america, you set one foot in the south side of that rio grande with the intent of crossing into this country illegally on the north side of that rio grande and you will be shot on site. host: how is that a compromise? caller: that is the compromise. host: how is that a compromise? caller: that would stop the crossing at the border instantly. first man shot would end it all, period. host: that is herb in pennsylvania. one organization seeing aspects of employees coming back and doing their business is the irs with tax refunds at least from the government's perspective still expected to go out.
this story said the irs said monday it will process returns starting on the 28th of january and it will be recalling a "significant portion of furloughed agency employees back to work. they plan to release an updated shutdown contingency plan. the new democratic chairman of the house ways and means plans aresaid the irs overdue and he is interested to see how the irs carries out duties. "those of elements are no substitute for the funding of the government and fully reopening these agencies. that was richard neal. -- the administration also taking steps to make sure coast guard members are receiving pay during the shutdown and federal flood insurance policies are being issued. david and dave writing the story when it comes to the washington times this morning. the president expected to make an announcement or some address
tonight at 9:00. you can see that on this network starting at 9:00 on c-span and on our radio app and c-span.org. fromit comes to a response democrats, a joint letter coming out from the minority leader of the senate, chuck schumer and nancy pelosi, the house speaker on the president assad address. in part it says unfortunately president trump keeps rejecting the bipartisan house-passed bills which already received bipartisan support in the senate to reopen the government. he is still demanding american taxpayers pay 5.7 billion for his wall, which cannot pass either chamber of congress. mexico is not paying for it. now that television networks have decided to air the president's address, which if past statements are any indication will be full of malice and misinformation, democrats must be given equal airtime. for republicans only in this
next half hour, we are hearing from you on if the president should offer some type of compromise when it comes to the issue of border funding and the larger issue of reopening the government. if you live in the eastern and central time zones, it is 202-748-8000. if you live in the mountain and pacific time zones, in a's 202-748-8001 -- it is 202-748-8001. from california in palm desert, this is elsa, hello. caller: good morning. i would like to let everyone know i feel strongly that donald trump should stay strong on border security and i would like to remind people that the largest state in america is the state of poverty. millions and millions of people go hungry every night and these are people born in the -- in the united states and i think we should take care of our people first before we let illegal
immigrants come in that don't speak our language, don't have any means to support themselves, don't have any health care. let's take care of our own people, thank you. host: no compromise from the president's point of view? are you still there? you are not. we will go to b in texas. caller: good morning. i would like to say the president is doing what we hired him to do, stop illegals. i live in texas. host: okay. caller: i live in texas. in texas, it is a big problem. illegals come over here, our mayor, the only one who supports texas is our governor. our mayors think these illegals are made it -- of gold. our mayor gathered the illegals and muslims for a christmas
party and did not do nothing for the people who live here and pay taxes. they don't pay taxes. muslims will not even let you work in your building. we have to be together. we have to stand as one. all of this you are talking about -- what nancy pelosi and m saying, nancy pelosi needs to cut out the rhetoric and sit at the table and pay for the border wall. it is not going to hurt anybody to be safe. host: why not a sense of sitting at the table from the president's point of view in terms of this figure he is asking? caller: he really needs $25 he needs all the money. let's make our lives secure. you don't live in texas. host: sherry from south carolina. go ahead. caller: yes. i really think the main focus that should be addressed.
i know the illegals are coming over into our country, but my massrn is what about the shootings that are occurring in our country? we need to focus on all the mass shootings. we had a mass shooting in california. i think we need to focus on mass killing, occurring, robbing, stealing going on in the united states. host: how does this apply to the president's current stance on the border wall? caller: in order to solve things , there should be a compromise because somebody has to compromise. we need protection in our country. what about protecting the ones being killed by our own people in the united states, our own people are going out mass shooting, every time you look on tv, there is a mass shooting.
host: you made that point. when it comes to the idea you think there should be a compromise, should that be on the president's part? caller: it should. somebody has to give. somebody has to do what is right. host: in your mind, if the president did compromise, it would not change your opinion on him and his administration. caller: no, it would not. host: why not? caller: he is doing his job. somebody has to compromise. somebody has to give in to make things right. as i said, there are over thousands of people -- government, federal employees not getting paid. that affects somebody in everybody's family. it is not right that these people are working hard and not getting paid for what they do. at the end of the week, everyone in the united states who works -- they expect their paycheck at
the end of the week. you expect your check. host: that is sherry and south carolina. emily in san francisco. you are next up. caller: good morning. i believe the president should not compromise. i believe he should issue an executive order the way obama oneand got away with it, no ever said anything, including the press about that. this is the united states of america. there are people paying taxes to keep this country moving and $5 billion is nothing compared to the taxes we pay. it is our protection from drugs, little children being brought into this country for sex trafficking and women, too. that is immoral to continue this. i do not compromise, executive
order, and president obama, in fact, the police chief of the border, he said today that president trump is correct and we definitely need a wall. host: you have a new governor in the state of california and he made a speech yesterday talking in part about immigrants and the larger idea of sanctuary. what did you think of the speech? caller: i didn't think much when he said we will have one payer for health and that anyone that comes into this state of california, illegal or legally can get it free. host: that is emily in south carolina, the cbs outlet in sacramento picked up that speech. kevin newsom saying it is that governor promising the most populist state will be a sanctuary to all who seek it.
here is a bit from gavin newsom yesterday. [video clip] >> now more than ever, we californians know how much a house matters and children matter. [applause] because so many of our neighbors have lost theirs. it, let's bring a house stronger than the calming storms and yet open to the world. a house that provides shelter to all who need it and sanctuary to all who seek it, where opportunity abounds for all who will work for it. house,california sunkist, dream soaked, and build with the sweat of honest work. we will not have one house for the rich and one for the poor or one for the nativeborn and one
for the rest. we will build one house for one california. host: we will go next to michigan, this is robert. hello. if i were president trump, i would tell nancy pelosi and chuck schumer i don't need the $5 million for the wall because the wall is not solving the problem. what really solves the problem is e-verify. any employer that hires illegal, a $50,000 fine, one year in prison and the problem is 100% solved. that is all i think --i have got to say. host: if a compromise takes place, that should be the front it takes place on? caller: you would stop all the overseas visas. they will walk out the way they walk in. host: were you supportive of the shutdown? should close it down and never open it up until -- all the democrats have to do
andive him the $5 billion they would work tomorrow. host: you said you would be willing to except e-verify. caller: i would rather have them pass e-verify. that solves the problem 100%. host: arizona is next. this is christian from phoenix. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i want to say it is very disturbing to watch the media cover up what the democrats are doing. the democrats wrote all of these laws, the immigration and nationality act has been written and amended two or three times ote by all wr democrats. running the democrats to the ninth circuit to give these illegal aliens case law in order for them to come into the
country illegally through political asylum or social asylum. they are allowing them to claim asylum just because they are alleging they are victims of domestic violence. that is not a legitimate reason to come into united states. also, when obama was in office, he started the central american , elrs program from honduras salvador, and guatemala. these individuals voted in our election. it has been proven by a ucla study. host: what does that mean for what is going on currently? particularly how the president has been positioning himself. caller: president trump is doing the exact thing he needs to do. he needs to stand his ground and say if you don't want to change these laws because we are having so many problems at the border then i will shut the government down and the president should protect our border patrol and
the coast guard, project -- protect immigrations and customs enforcement and all other agencies that are clearly nonessential, he should start cutting off those agencies that are not necessary. host: but the current situation only deals with the law, it doesn't deal with the previous laws you talked about. caller: no, sir, i fundamentally disagree. if a combination of the wall and changing the laws and no one wants to talk about that. everybody is only talking about the barriers or the wall or whatever you want to call it. you have to have a wall to deter people from coming into the country and then you have to all these bad laws that have been passed for many years. host: you don't expect those
laws to be changed currently now considering the situation of the congress with house democrats in power? caller: i do believe the democrats will get to a breaking point where they will say we have to do something because our people are hurting and the president is strong, he will not let up. he got the jerusalem busy deal done, he got nafta to change to usmca. he pulled out of the paris accord. the president is strong. host: is the situation different because you are dealing with people affected directly by the shutdown? caller: the situation -- the fact of the matter is just because you are a government employee and even if there are 800,000 of them, 800,000 government employees are not more valuable than 180 million
to 380 million american citizens. they are not. i am sorry. host: that is christian in phoenix, arizona, talking about this idea of the president and should he compromise on what he wants in a shutdown. darnell is next in georgia. hello. caller: hello. president trump should not compromise. abc,uld become like you, nbc, cbs, and all the others. host: what do you mean by that? caller: when you compromise, you are losing. you lose when you compromise. host: do you see this strictly as a win lose situation? caller: yes. host: how so? caller: look at what has been going on. loseyou compromise, you and the republicans compromise with the democrats. you have to defeat them.
host: that is darnell in georgia giving his thoughts this morning . a couple of pieces affected by the shutdown. this is the wall street journal as it talks about how the shutdown weighs on households, saying about 420,000 employees are currently deemed essential working without pay. about 300,000 federal employees have been placed on unpaid leave or furlough. in past shutdowns, workers have been repaid after temporary funding gaps are resolved, so they are likely to receive back pay the government reopens. if you go to the washington post, it takes a look at legislators, some of them offering not to accept pay while the shutdown is going on. according to press statements and social media postings at least 48 members of the house and senate split about equally between both parties have announced a plan to refuse or
donate their patent -- for the duration of the shutdown. freshmen, anduse ,9 in senate with two vacancies representatives for top house leaders, speaker nancy pelosi, steny hoyer, kevin mccarthy and steve scalise did not respond to congress -- comments for those lawmakers planning to except their pay. 223 thousandakes $500 annually while senate apiece.get $193,400 about the two vacancies in the senate, one of those expected to be filled today, rick scott expected to be sworn in on the senate side today. look for more of that taking place on c-span and our c-span.org website. when it comes to the idea of
compromise, the white house strategic advisor talking about the idea of compromise and what she sees the role of the democrats. [video clip] >> it is so important they call the democrats and basically tell them stop the delay tactics and let's negotiate. the white house has offered -- provided a good-faith offer. they have opened the doors to the white house to have them negotiated. it's about a negotiation. democrats have said the importance of securing the border. i heard nancy pelosi and chuck schumer. they said we agree we need to secure the border and they have yet to provide the definition of border security. nancy kept getting stuck on the concrete wall and the president said, let's look into steel. let's work with border patrol agents to come up with a design that works. at one point they agreed to $1.3 billion. they have not moved from that number.
a part of a negotiation is they are able to come to the middle. host: you can find more at c-span.org. we will hear from ohio next. this is tim. hello. caller: hello. i was in the army in 1984 out of arizona at military intelligence school and we went on the border with ground surveillance radar and we kept track of what was going on. this is 1984. congress democrats and were holding trump's feet to the fire because of putin invading the ukraine, but they did not want trump to hold congress' feet to the fire because people are invading the south part of america? i don't get it. work? host: from dayton, ohio. the next up, tom. caller: hello. border patrol agents, every one of them say they need a wall and
it would help them do their job. it makes no sense to even argue this. it's like giving the military a tank when they need a jet. everybody wants to call people a mexico -- a racist. even the people in mexico were saying we are being invaded. these are people in tijuana. they better pray to god. another young man died, 22 years old in tennessee this week, the other day. host: that is tom in ohio. lindsay mcpherson, on the pages of roll call, why the shutdown is good for house democrats saying democrats don't want a roughly quarter of the government to be shut down. it is ad foremost, great messaging opportunity to highlight the differences between democratic and republican governing strategies. president donald trump is shouldering most of the blame
for the shutdown. house democrats are the only ones moving legislation to reopen the government. the package of 6 waspropriation's bills composed of senate bills providing democrats with the opportunity to claim republican -- even if they will not pass their own bills "choose to keep the government shutdown by rejecting what republicans have written, not us, but republicans have written. there is something very wrong with this picture. that was speaker nancy pelosi adding it cannot possibly be the president is saying i will never signed with republicans in the sign what republicans in the senate have written. cindy in connecticut, hello. caller: good morning. thank you for taking the call. i think the president should stand firm. i am mystified by the question because anybody that follows what is going on, he had a
compromise a year ago for them, and thenll the dacas some have a pathway to citizenship and pelosi and schumer stabbed him in the back. they recanted on his offer and they would not give him one thing he wanted. i don't know who is not compromising. the american people voted, elections have consequences. they are still not over the election and the will of the people. host: why not change now? why not compromise now? --ler: they should have president trump stayed at the white house while pelosi was in hawaii hoping someone would work with him and they did not show. is this amnesia going on? i don't understand why we are asking this question? we all know the president hung around during the break hoping someone would work with him and no one showed up.
host: that is cindy in connecticut. one other thing expected to happen today on gun legislation, this is the arizona republic reporting it is on the eighth anniversary of the day when gabrielle giffords was shot in the head and nearly assassinated. u.s. house democrats are set to extend legislation -- extend background checks to every -- nearly every gun sale. -- expected to join house speaker pelosi at an event in washington that signals political and social shifts on gun control after years of high-profile mass shootings with no significant little action to stop them. "our democratic majority will push provide protestant -- push progress."san supporters of the bill, including five democratic members of the house delegation say it is a nod to giffords and other survivors of gun violence.
it will be called hr-8 and call for a near universal background checks for gun sales and not address an assault weapons ban. arizona republic reporting that this morning. from north carolina, wayne, good morning. you are next up. caller: good morning. on what you are covering. this needs to stop now. our country is at war with itself. it needs to come together. democrats need to back up and let our president run it like he was set to run. he was elected to run. back off and let him do what he is going to do. he only has one more year to prove himself and i think he needs that chance. quit badgering him.
he is the only president who has run on a ticket who has done what he promised to do. host: when you say they need to come together, you think the democrats should give the president everything he is asking for? caller: not give everything he is asking for. everything he is asking for is for the american people. he is not asking for nothing for the democrats. he is asking for us. host: you are saying that dollar figure should stand then? caller: yes. look how much we are paying for immigrants to come in here and load up on our system. i got behind a woman the other day with three buggies of groceries and watched her walk out and get in a new cadillac escalade. i am fed up with my taxes. i paid my due and served my country and i am tired of this
bickering between government. host: diana is next in hartford, connecticut. hello. caller: good morning. i am also very strong for the president. the problem is everyone says why doesn't he compromise with the democrats? the democrats said open the government and we will talk about national security. i think everyone has learned enough about the lives of the democrats. they don't want border security. they don't want ice or anything. do you think they are going to have the president open up the government and not open border security and sit down with them? he is not going to do that. open up the government and say we will talk about it another time. host: randall in west virginia, you are next.
go ahead. caller: i think the democratic and chuckancy pelosi --umer and those people everything that the american against.nt, they are host: when it comes to the figure the president wants, why are you in agreement with him? caller: because that is what he needs. patronia from north cap -- north dakota, you are next. caller: good morning. i believe we should support president trump 100%. he is one of the best presidents we have ever had. we need to stand behind him and support him.
host: so the president should not compromise on this matter? caller: no. host: why not? caller: because he tried to compromise. democrats keep badgering him and putting him down. he is only doing what he has been elected for. we want president trump to succeed. we want democrats to succeed. they need to help him instead of criticize him and block him. he is for his people. in northt is patronia dakota. a new congress on the house and senate side. some of the legislators have new jobs. and luis gutierrez joining cnn as commentators. , formerlegislator republican representative of florida and levar smith of texas
have joined the lobbying shop. former representative carlos curbelo has a joint the columbia university center for global policy as a distinguished visiting fellow. julie from new york. hello. caller: i am calling about this article in the december 19 newspaper via sodas -- the associated press from the news department. u.s. pledges funds for central americans -- pledged $5.8 billion for aid in central america. another $4.8 billion in development for southern mexico. it aims to promote security conditions and job opportunities as part of a plan to allow central americans and mexicans to remain in their countries and not have to emigrate. host: that is the article. what do you think about how it
applies to the current situation? caller: how can we send almost $10 billion to mexico and central america to keep the people in their country? i don't understand why we don't have the money for the wall. we are doing this and we don't have money for the wall. host: phyllis is next from arlington, texas. hello. caller: hi, how are you today? i am a doctor of criminology and i have been listening to everyone talking. i work in washington and there are one or two things i have to say. there has been a wall for over 50 years exactly where i live. where is president trump's income tax? that is where we all need to go to. i hear all these people saying don't let him shut everything down. wait until they start checking
their social security checks and then you will have a lot of elderly people that are republican say -- host: are the walls in texas effective? caller: the walls need to be rebuilt a little bit, yes, they do. i will agree with you on that. , whichrio grande valley takes from mexico -- the only thing i would suggest and if you want to keep people out, put nas in. in -- pirha -- rebuild that wall. progresso or brownsville, that is where the problem is starting. host: that is phyllis in arlington, texas. sarah sanders announcing the president plans to go to the border this week to tour and
talk to border patrol agents and the larger issue of what he would like to see of the wall being built. don't forget c-span's coverage of the president tonight. that will-- you can see that onn and our website. and coming up, our discussion about the green new deal, making its way through congress, what it means, what it can do for jobs, and ultimately the positions both sides take on this issue. we will be with tiernan sittenfeld and james taylor for that discussion. later on we will get the latest on what is going on with the shutdown from christina marcos of the hill, as she talks about this, day 18 of the shutdown. all of that coming up when washington journal continues. ♪
court, and public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. yourn is brought to you by cable or satellite provider. q&a, james grant. markets,writing about i think the trouble relies not so much in wall street. itl street is what it is, has been a mostly infamous name. it's been evident in most of american history. we ought to be more on our guard about are the institutions in the federal government that in theirly denied intentions, the federal reserve, , the security
exchange commission, these institutions were set up as benefactors for the public, and increasingly they are not so. >> james grant, sunday night at 8:00 eastern on q&a. our discussion in congress about what is known as a green new deal, and two guests are joining us, from the heartland institute, james taylor who serves as the environment and energy policy senior fellow. we are also joined by tiernan serves as theo government's official senior vice president. thank you for joining us. to start off the conversation about the organizations, their backgrounds and how you are funded so the folks know your positioning on these issues, tiernan sittenfeld, please go first. guest: the league of
conservation voters is a national nonprofit which works to elect environmental champions up and down the ballot. we are focused on the climate crisis, and existential problem of our time. we work with conservation partners across the country. when you say nonprofit is that strictly supporter donations? have 2we are proud to million members across the country who support our work, the legal conservation voters education fund is also backed by foundations and we have a variety of other supporters. host: same question to you mr. taylor about the heartland institute. >> it's also a nonprofit organization and we believe in advocating for individual freedom and liberty, social and economic. that's one of the reasons we are concerned about the green new deal. and your nonprofit that it purely from supporters? >> peerless from donors, it
could be individuals, corporations, but less than most organizations. host: when it comes to this idea of green new feet -- of the green new deal, what is it that it does? is there a blueprint? guest: we are excited about the idea of a green new deal, and we are thrilled by the energy and enthusiasm that new and returning members of congress the needs toto combat the climate crisis, which has never been greater. the center of the green deal is the effort to get to 100% renewable energy, we are very excited about that. as we were working with our partners across the country on a new campaign called the clean energy for all campaign to give communities the power to choose pollution free communities and commits to 100% renewable energy 500 50, we had
successful candidates up and down the ballot committed to that. we have seen opportunities in congress and at the state level to make real progress to double down on the need for a new clean energy economy that will protect the frontline communities, the communities of color that are hurt first and worst by pollution, it will create good paying jobs, and begin to jumpstart the green energy and green infrastructure package we need. host: are these specifics? or is the idea happening? honest inpeople were naming it they would call it the turn america into venezuela deal. there are subsidies and funding and mandate for renewable energy, but the legislation introduced would also create a government run banking system, it would provide universal health care and overhaul the nation's health care system, and promise employment at wages far above what you would make entry level in the private sector for every american who wants one. if you have an opportunity to
have government security, benefits, and health insurance coming take it. the reason we have a socialist legislator championing that is because this legislation would transform the american economy and run private businesses and economic freedom out of america. especially at a time when america's economy is doing well. host: some of the elements has been reported, ms. sittenfeld had mentioned a 100% transition to renewable energy and 10 years, greenhouse gas mitigation, the building of a national smart grid and job guarantees are people working in that issue, these have been introduced before, why will this be successful? guest: these are goals, we look forward to the work being done to put the policy proposal forward to achieve those goals, that is what we need for the future of this country. we are so excited, because the proenvironment majority in congress has a deep commitment to commanding -- combating the
climate crisis, the 2008 election sent a clear message that being good on climate change and supporting clean energy is good policy and good politics. there are 235 democrats in the , they include champions, people who ran because they were so concerned and appalled by what the trump administration, the most anti-environmental's ration we've ever had was doing when it came to common sense health protections like the clean power plant or the clean car standards that are good for the economy, they create jobs, they protect people from pollution, but the trump administration is gutting them, that's why these people ran for office. long-time champions like deb haaland in new mexico or mike levin in southern california. we have all kinds of champions that have a longtime expertise climate leaders, and veterans,
people who want to the department of defense like alyssa slotkin's, or in the navy like alain laurier, or abigail samberg in the cia. these people understand the question between national security and environmental security. host: and what's wrong with those connections in the larger issue? >> we have had a green new deal for more than a decade in addition to all of these failed programs, these expensive and intrusive programs. in the federal government we spend $10 billion every year on climate change programs. ,ight now we have subsidies wind power alone receives more and subsidies than all conventional energy sources combined. and solar power is receiving subsidies for all other sources combined. we have had a green new deal and we keep subsidizing failure, boosting up failure, despite the renewable energy cannot compete in the regular marketplace.
sayingw green deal is that we will take the worst of energy sources and we are going to throw money into it. host: the conversation will continue, and if you want to ask a specific question about the green deal or the green new deal as it is known as, and the elements that is known as, (202) democrats, -- for democrats, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8002 for independents. you can also post on our facebook page. to bee these things going paid for? was the most effective way? andt: we want to address improve the economy, that's the beauty of some of the common sense solutions that were created by the obama administration and we are seeing champions in congress talking about. and i have to take exception to some of the lies and the
misinformation we are hearing. the fossil fuel industry is subsidized to $700 million a year, why double down on the failed policies of the past? why would we want more oil? more coal? more natural gas? when we could more -- move towards renewable energy. we are all about innovation and we have seen some of progress since the clean air act was overwhelmingly passed with a bipartisan majority in 1970 and signed into law by a republican president. we have been able to cut air pollution by 70% in this country despite the president's best intentions and real backsliding over the last couple of years. and we have tripled the economy in that time. there is a role for government to play, for the private sector to play, and what james doesn't want is for polluters to pay. they should pay for the pollution they have caused in the health impacts they have caused. look at the cost of extreme weather, it's having devastating
impact of cross this country. in 2017 there were 16 natural disasters that cost over a billion dollars each. the total cost of extreme $306er in 2017 was billion, that is something we cannot afford. host: previous of ministrations have said and all of the above approach could be needed, what is wrong with exploring with federal money these new clean energy or green energy ideas? >> renewable energy is already massively subsidized, tiernan says i'm spreading lies and misinformation, viewers can do , the energysearch in frustration administration produce two studies, google it's federal government data, wind power by andlf, more wind subsidies
same for solar power. in the language of the green new deal it talks about massive investment in new green energy technologies and programs, as if we have not been paying enough. they also have a term redistribution, another takeover of the american economy at the time we are doing well. this program has been tried, the money has been flowing in, how long will we pay for failure? guest: we believe there is an enormous opportunity, we need to pursue things like green infrastructure. let's use basic common sense to finally transition to clean energy economies that people have voted for in november. that we clearly need. we found out yesterday from u.k. scientist that u.s. scientists are not able to do their job because of this trump sought -- shut down over the sake of his xenophobia and wasteful wall. we found a from u.k. scientist the 2018 was the hottest year on record. that was the fourth hottest year
on record, the only three hottest years above that were 2015, 2016, and 2017. the 20 hottest years on record have all happened in the last 22 years. we are off of a year that's all the deadliest forest fire in california, record hurricanes, extreme weather is happening, it's called by climate change. to say we should not be doubling down on clean energy, that we should continue to subsidize fossil fuels is absurd. calls, emily, to in a new orleans, massachusetts. i live in massachusetts and i'm very concerned about climate change. i was wondering if ms. sittenfeld could talk about the new members of congress and what they are planning to do to help the situation? host: is there a specific from the new members to make this happen? the greenhave seen deal proposed by alexandria
ocasio-cortez who is a tremendous champion for climate change, we have seen many members of congress who want to toew u.s. commitment international climate change -- efforts on climate change, we be delighted that there will a committee chaired by kathy catherine from florida, who has a long time career of fighting to protect the tampa bay and being on the energy and conquer -- on the energy committee she scores well on the environmental scorecard. there are many veterans and public service who have experienced firsthand -- servants, who have experience firsthand who need to fight climate change because of how vulnerable and makes is around the world and it's integrally tied to a national security and climate security. there are environmental justice advocates like veronica escobar, and sylvia garcia, who has spent their careers fighting for the communities that are hurt first and worst by pollution.
that's frontline communities and communities of color, we could not be more delighted. toy democrats have committed clean energy by 2050, that's a thrilling statistic. after eight years of doing battle with the most and -- after doing battle with the most anti-environmentalist committee ever. host: what do you think of these efforts? >> that's what you spy from nancy pelosi's house leadership, president trump and his administration realize -- that is what you expect from nancy pelosi's has leadership, president trump and his and ministration realize that this is not science but assertions, records a year for climate disasters, and we had -- in 2017 we had the smallest percentage of the united saving covered by drought, we ended
without a major hurricane striking the united states, in 2017 and 2018 we set a record low for the number of tornadoes, and we have had record increases in global crop production. it's one thing to throw out assertions but if you look at the data and the science, what we see is that as the planet , we not seeing these catastrophes. life, if anything, is getting better. out todaye's a survey saying that when it comes to greenhouse gases, it is up 3.4% this year alone. what do you think about that in light of everything you have asserted? >> and we have someone rising right -- carbon dioxide emissions and we see record low hurricanes, tornadoes, and record crop production. the measure is not whether the issue is -- whether the earth is warming or humans are causing it, or what are we -- the measure is what we are expecting to happen. when we look at historical data and the present and we project into the future based upon the
past in the present, the scientific evidence shows we are nowhere near creating this crisis. 2019. james at can't -- it is 2019. this is embarrassing, horrifying, and the views are flat out wrong. taking you would continue to come onto the air and say these things -- it is breathtaking that you would continue to come onto the air and say these things. if this is the case, scientists are confident that humans are causing client change and they are a dutch as they are that smoking causes cancer, to suggest otherwise is down. but were not here -- the notion of denying climate change is so fringe and so marginalized the republicans across the country, republican governors who are not is not out of concern for climate change, out of recognition a doubling down on green energy is good for our economy and creating good paying jobs were taking the threat very
seriously. people like mike hogan in peril -- in maryland, or charlie baker in massachusetts. give republicans around the country, mike fitzpatrick in congress from pennsylvania who just got reelected who has introduced a carbon bill. to have republicans were still on air denying climate change is beyond the pale. guest: if i could interrupt, that's a personal attack. the facts are republicans are not denying climate change. you just heard me say the planet is warming and humans are causing a. the real issue is whether we are creating a climate crisis. i have presented specific data and you did not present any. personal attacks, lecturing, and your tone does not do anything to enhance the debate. i presented it, if i'm wrong, show me why i'm wrong. don't just mention attacks and bring up things that you cannot back up. have 40 talked about the devastating and record-breaking forest fires over 2018, and force fires in
california have become so much more intense and frequent that 15 of the 20 largest forest fires in california have occurred since 2000. and their hurricanes devastating cycle in 2018, these were fueled by climate change. let's talk about climate change on our oceans, on people's health, let's get serious about this. this is a conversation about looking forward, doubling down on american ingenuity and innovation and how to we work together to bring about the solutions of americans in this country clearly want. call on aave a republican line, from louisiana. ray, go ahead. >> who is going to pay for all of the socialized medicine? host: we're talking about environmental issues. and that you idea paying for it. if you want these elements of the green new deal, what's the best way to find that? guest: when i tell my children tell myake a mess -- i
children, if you make a messy cleanup. there is a role for polluters to pay this, but there are industries and corporations were focused on addressing the climate crisis to see the economic benefits that can come from a clean energy economy and the government has a role to play. we look forward to making the goals of 100% clean energy or the green new deal, or any other proposal or solutions, the positive, forward-looking solutions to these serious problems into effect over the coming months. that said, we have a climate denier in the senate, mitch the most, and anti-environmental administration we've ever had, president trump. we would have waited until the end of his first year to give him a letter grade but it was so clear in the first two months, a good of a grade. it's not like were about to get major climate energy demonstration going to the law, we have high hopes for the house but we continue to make crystal
clear to people across the fortry what does this mean the air that they breed? the water they drink? the land and the wildlife. i want to protect our environment and planet and leave it better than i found it, there are all kinds of ways we can get serious about the policy proposals. but the cost of inaction is a cost that is too great to bear, especially for the future. host: and what is wrong with these funding streams? >> it's important to a knowledge the caller's concern, part of the green new deal is universal health care. they market it as a green new deal but it imposes universal health care, a takeover of the health care industry, a government run banking system, a requirement that anybody who wants a job can get one at much higher wages than you could get in the private sector are, and it requires that americans turn in their gasoline powered automobiles, to surrender them to the government by 2030.
who will pay for that? it uses the term massive investment to pay for all of this. who will pay for it is a fantastic question because we are already taxed, we are paying $10 billion per year on climate change programs, where will we get this money, why not legislate pixie dust for everyone and a million dollars every year in handouts. you have to pay for it. should jobs and other elements be part of the green new deal? goals have been put forward, there will be many committees who will be getting to work on how to we move forward in addressing the climate crisis. have talked about the committees, the energy and commerce committee that will now be led by frank pallone, a longtime champion with a 96% lifetime score on the environmental scorecard, which people can check it out, it's at our website. also the new chair
of the house of natural resources committee was a big champion or public land, there's , with a 91% as the new chair of the transportation and infrastructure committee. there is a lot of work to be done to figure out the details and to create legislative language. d.c., on the independent line. ralph. hello. conversation, i have a few points. first, the climate warmer denier there, he chaired points, he turned fixed rates, times -- he cherry picks dates, times, and locations to substantiate his argument. people need to remember that there is not one of recognized scientific organization in the united states or in the world that agrees with this position. he's deceptive by omission. conservation makes a lot of
sense. i'm all for it. i'm a very green person when it comes to the things i do. but something you guys need to look at, there is a technology called lipton salt reactors, they are inherently safe and can products. we developed this in the 60's and 70's, we gave it to the chinese, who are spending billions on this technology. but i read that the department of energy spends 20 or $30 million, we need to start his progress are we need to -- or we cannot supply the energy we need for new electric cars coming out and our industrial base. host: thank you. mr. taylor? >> i'm amused when glad he mentioned the point, the accusation that i'm cherry picking fact and data, but he did not say that when mr. taylor said is wrong, he did not point out any errors in what i said, he set a cherry picked and that is frequently what -- said it is
cherry picked. data andnt objective you back it up with government sources and they are the ones presenting the data, you backup the objective data and they say you're just cherry picking or misrepresenting. show me how. i said 2017 because tiernan did so first, she said it was eight -- a record year for natural disasters but if you look at the data for hurricanes and tornadoes you see that there has been less of these events in , and trendlines have been decreasing for decades. just because global warming exist is not mean it will take away every hurricane, tornado, flood, and wildfire that exist. there were four hurricanes last year, but if you look at the data you will see a longtime declining trend in the number of hurricanes. you can see as far as wildfires, wildfires are the component of drought and land management area
if you look at the long-term data, what you see is that of the planet warms, we see less drought and fewer conditions for wildfires, if we are getting more, we are not, we are seeing a flat trend come if we did get more it would be an indictment of our land management practices not global warming. ms. sittenfeld? guest: why would we take time to continue to make these arguments when we are seeing life and death impacts for people all across the country? we have a trump administration itself finding that the obama administration's clean power plan is a commonsense rule and the single largest thing our country has done to cut cold burning power pollution from power plants that could action prevent 4500 premature deaths a .ear 2030 it would also benefit the economy in terms of climate and public health benefits by $54 billion. it is astounding that we are continuing to debate whether --
how much climate change is happening. -- would we be filling fiddling around with this we have a chance to go back on offense and be a world leader. india and china are eating our lunch, they own 99% of the world electric -- they have high goals for getting to renewable energy. seeing an incredible opportunity to lead the world in the green energy economy and it doesn't make any sense. for: two guests joining us this discussion, tiernan sittenfeld and james taylor. lewis, in california, good morning. caller: hello. i think we should do more to , i have solary panels on my house right now and i'm satisfied with what i'm getting out of them. i don't understand why the trump administration is so against
clean energy. host: what are you getting from them? what am i getting from solar power? electricity. host: how much does it cost to invest in and what are you getting in return? caller: it lowers my electric last one was only about a dollar $.15 -- $1.15. it looks to me like they're taking money from edison and putting them back in my pocket, that's what it looks like to me. for yourank you comments, i couldn't agree more. that's the beauty of renewable energy. it's good for the planet, it saves consumers money, it reduces our dependence on fossil fuels, and the great thing about renewable energy is that it is growing, so fast. in 2017, your favorite year, there were 3.2 million people
employed in clean energy jobs. it has asked a triple to the number of people working in the fossil fuel industry. clearly there is some clean energy, this is the way of the future that is going to really jumpstart the economy and that is what we are excited about. host: that's one person's experience but he did speak positively about his investment, what did you think? guest: it takes a lot of expensive equipment to take diverse solar energy and wind energy, it's not very concentrated and to turn it into workable energy. it helps if you have a 30% taxpayer subsidy for every piece of solar power equipment manufactured in this country, which is the case. it helps if you have massive state and local subsidies as well. when you look at the data, first, renewable power and solar wind power, if they were affordable you would not have to subsidize it and you would not have to force people to purchase it. when you look at the brookings institution, a left of center
public-policy organization, it champions renewable energy. according to their study and data, wind power is more than twice as expensive as conventional energy, if you replace it with solar power you will more than triple and probably more than quadruple your energy costs. it helps if you have taxpayer subsidies, and you overlook the massive upfront cost of the equipment pieces, and we talk about clean energy it helps if you overlook the des moines and of rare earth materials, which is probably the most destructive environment of practice that is necessary for the components of solar panels and wind turbines. guest: james keeps ignoring the cost of inaction, ignoring just how devastating and what atoll these extremel weather events are having. the tolls they are taking on human lives, whether from extreme weather or burning pollution and fossil fuels, so for example the mercury role
that has been wildly successful that the industry actually for the and is critical exposure of children and pregnant women to mercury. the epa has president did -- has predicted that it would prevent a 11,000 premature deaths annually, and it's another role of trump administration is attacking. why do we see the trump administration going after all of these commonsense public health protections that are working? that are doing exactly as they intended to? same thing with the clean car standards that is saving money at the gas pump, reducing our dependence on oil, creating jobs, why would the trump administration go after that? the 150 -- 116th congress and how we can go on offense and make progress, let's .ave some oversight republicans refused to do oversight of the trump
administration, working hand in glove with their polluter ally lobbyists, let's find out why that's happening and who benefits? it obviously benefit the oil, gas, and coal industry? . host: the great deal calls for renewable energy in 10 years, why is that feasible? iseven democrats think that too ambitious. guest: we support the ideas and the goals of the green new deal, we look forward to the hard work of putting the policy proposals in place. host: is it feasible? guest: with the candidates we been speaking with, and the campaign, now is the time to be ambitious and to show what is doable, we need to challenge ourselves and hold ourselves to the highest standard. we need to shoot for the moon and that's what we are excited to do. host: from oklahoma, karen, hello.
i was watching her face and demeanor, she's rude, triggered really easy, and she gets calling mr. taylor liar and takes jab at him -- jabs at him. host: caller they are both our guests so if you would just ask a question. caller: i grew up mr. taylor, a lot of this is land management, they kicked out the loggers that could come in and do something about all of the debt underbrush, and the dead trees and stuff, if you want to talk about pollution you need to go to china. you brought up their electric buses, but a lot of days they have to wear masks because they cannot breathe. we know how our government is getting involved with the obama administration and renewable energy, what happened to solyndra? they got in and made millions and then went bankrupt.
if it such a good idea why doesn't more of the private companies do it? mr. taylor could you tell me, i think you said earlier, how much taxpayer money goes towards fossil fuels and also to the renewables? they claim that there is no money, $5 billion for a wall, or we cannot help our veterans not commit suicide every day because there's no money, so how much are they wanting for this renewable energy? host: that's a loss, we will let our guest respond, mr. taylor? >> the overall spending on climate change in the united states is over $10 billion every year. you can divide that by every household and we are paying more than $100 for household per year in additional taxes to address this phantom menace of the climate crisis. in terms of the actual data in put out 2016, the eia their two most recent reports
which examines the subsidies for various energy sources, and it's time they showed that wind power by itself and solar power by itself receive more subsidies then all conventional energy sources combined. you can do an internet search, eia levelized cost or subsidies for energy. but one other point that i think is important, you mentioned china. tear and i mentioned how china is leading the way in terms of mentioned howrnan china's leading the way in terms of renewable energy. they wreck -- they manufacture quite a bit, they recognize that there are governments that impose mandates and subsidies, china does music, 80 per -- 80 plus percent of their electricity is coming from coal power. they are not stupid enough to use it. one final point regarding mortality. what we do know, when you look at the peer-reviewed studies, the lancet which is the leading medical publication in the world. manylooked at globally how
deaths are caused by sub optimal temperatures and climate, and they compared how many were caused by temperatures that were too warm or too cold. 20:1found by a 20 --- died at more of colder temperatures than warm temperatures, that is 7% of the world's death caused by sub optimal temperatures and by a 20:1 ratio those deaths were caused by colder temperature. that's what she's trying to combat. host: we will let her respond. guest: these views are so fringy , the majority republicans in this country believe climate change is happening, they ignored humans are causing it, they want solutions. if you look across the board. 85% of people in this country really want serious action to xlr-8 our transition to clean energy, -- to accelerate our
transition to clean energy. 81% of americans think we need to continue to meet our obligation to the paris climate agreement. thate so encouraged cities, states, the marketplace, and other countries are leading the way because the trump administration of failing to do aided and abetted by organizations like the heartland institute to continue to spew misinformation, even in 2019, even when we have seen all kinds of devastating impacts. her ethic heels of and the dire warnings with the international panel on climate diree -- and horrific and warnings with the international panel on climate change. we have 12 years to stave off other catastrophe. the trump administration released the national climate assessment, attempted to burying it by releasing it on black friday which backfired and got tremendous attention, it found
the gdp could take a 10% hit by the end of the century. as an environmentalist and someone who is spent my career working to protect clean air, clean water, and fight the climate crisis because i care about the future for my children, and everyone's children. this is not an environmental view, this is about our economy, lives, our future, we have no time to waste. host: respond if you wish. she mentioned the national climate assessment, what we have for these -- from his government reports, basically the people appointed, appointed through government, they tend to be government workers, entirely people who are funded and his salaries come from government and they were put into place under the obama administration. if you ask them whether there is a climate crisis that justifies them continuing to have high-paying jobs and get their grants and john security, they will prep the worst-case scenario and say it's a case. it's like in intensive millions of dollars to chase, and wells
fargo, and bank of america, and saying that they should write up a report and ask if governments should bail out the banking industry. of course they will say yes. when you look at the objective hurricanes, we went to the lungs period without a mate -- the longest period in history without a hurricane -- a hurricane striking united states. in terms of droughts and 2017, you brought up 2017, we have the lowest percentage of america affected by drought in history. when you look at the lancet, she says it's ridiculous but she doesn't say why, it's a peer-reviewed medical journal, it's of the cold temperatures kill people, not warm temperatures. these are the facts. host: one response. child -- attack the the scientist in the public servants who worked on the climate assessment is baffling. these are scientists, this is of
course in keeping with the trump administration's author attack on science, its disregard for science, that it is trying to intimidate and gag scientists, this is one of the most terrifying parts of the trump administration. there are so many horrific aspects, obviously for the environment, public health, and our climate. but for democracy, and the ability for people to participate equitably in this country, but to attack scientists is disgraceful. host: let's go to brandon, in pennsylvania. i think these people really represent the politics of climate change. -- i think they've failed to understand that an everyday working american like me, i don't deny the climate change exists, but i would like it's obvious that the politics will get in the way.
like the abortion issue, gun control, or any political issue. lady's passion over the issue but i think she needs to move from trying to convince us to exist and this gentleman that it exists, and ask a put forward actual things that americans understand, what the effects of climate change are going to be, and what will happen if we don't fix them. and what do we do to fix them? what can i do in my home? what can i do to fix this problem as an individual? and i think this gentleman needs to understand that this issue is always going to be there, and he , he says hestand except that he exists, but what do we do about it? that's brandon, from pennsylvania, the idea of politics getting in the way of everything. guest: i appreciate your thoughtful comments, i couldn't agree more.
and i'm a bit dismayed we are spending as much time as we are letting james deny basic science and climate change rather than talking about solutions, and how this can have a real impact and benefit people like you and people across the country. that's why were so excited that the 116th congress is a proenvironment majority, it's going to be serious about protecting the air that you breathe, the water you and your family drank. there are probably parks and wildlife areas that you like to enjoy, and all of that is at stake. it's critical that we have a proenvironment majority to put a check on this reckless and dangerous behavior. i think the infrastructure and -- infrastructure package is a concrete example of how this congress could move forward. chuck schumer, a great environmental leader, he had an op-ed in the washington post saying an instructor pack should
test package is an opportunity for us to work together and address the needs for people package iscountry -- an opportunity for us to work together and address for needs -- the needs of people across the country. we need to focus on modernizing the electric grid, increased transit, make it easy for people to get around in a less carbon intensive way. >> i think it's important to keep in mind that there are hundreds of thousands of scientists around the world who stand up for climate realism. more than 30,000 signed a petition saying they do not believe we are facing a climate crisis. when i mention the national climate assessment, what i'm saying is that government needs to make sure we are getting a representative body of scientists that are participating in these reports, not because you want to have the obama administration and people who have come out and said we are facing a climate crisis and then you have them write a report saying the same thing. there are so me scientists, name, who signed their
meaning they took an effort to sign the petition and they did not care they were going to be called a denier so that we are not facing climate crisis. and another important point is that we need to understand the context of current temperatures. we are seeing some warming. [crosstalk] >> when you look at the concept of temperatures for the entirety of human civilization, for the vast majority temperatures have been warmer than today. we are warming from the death of a little ice age, the coldest period of the past 10,000 years. so when chairman opened up by saying 20 of the hottest years on record, that's because she conveniently defines the records as the last 100 years. are actually to get back to talking about infrastructure. this is ridiculous to continue to debate whether climate change is happening or whether it's having devastating impacts area that is all set -- impacts. that is settled. it is shameful and embarrassing in 2019.
i hoped against hope that a new year might bring a new heartland institute, clearly that's impossible and these views are even more out of touch with mainstream republicans than ever before. when it comes to the excellent question that was asked about for people who would knowledge to climate change that happened -- who acknowledge climate change, what can they do? i think the government can index in a climate smart infrastructure package that could modernize the electric grid, can invest in transit, and make buildings more efficient and stop leaks from pipelines. of the tragedyre that happened with the pollution of water in flint, michigan. we need to invest in clean water infrastructure. there's so much the government can and could do, and we are hopeful this new house of representatives demonstrates that leadership, we are certainly seeing it in states across the country. not just from lefty democrats but from republicans like the mayor of georgetown, texas, who
has led the way from transitioning to 100% clean energy because he knows it's good for the economy, it's creating jobs, it's saving money. we need to see more georgetown, texas examples across the country. host: this is dottie, from georgia, hello. i'm just verifying everything he is saying. first thing i saw is that he says tobacco smoke does not cause cancer? and i just looked up the national climate assessment report from the trump administration, he's not telling the truth. everybody should go and read it for themselves. instead of just assuming that everything he says is the truth. read it for yourself. he's just smiling the way he wants to smile. but he knows he's telling a lie. i know these telling a lie, because i just read it.
guest: i'm smiling because i agree, thank you. to theourse she goes personal attack, that's what she does. first let him think anyone has said that tobacco smoking doesn't cause cancer. i haven't said that, you haven't heard it, if you have read it i would like to see where. in terms of the national climate readsment, she said i have it and mr. taylor is wrong. specifically what is wrong? i do like to talk about facts and back it up with evidence as opposed to making personal attacks on people. let's take a look of the infrastructure question and emissions, you say we need to follow the rest of the world? what we know is that in this century, carbon dioxide emissions have declined by 14%, and the same time global missions have risen by 50%. under our system where we have a relatively free market, compared to other nations, where we did not sign on to the kyoto protocol or the paris climate agreement, what we see is reducing carbon dioxide .missions
and tiernan says it is embarrassing that we are not following her socialist agenda, her united nations international resulting in is much higher carbon dioxide emissions. when you look at the new -- the united nations and the environmental left, they are not very concerned about global warming. if they were they would betray -- praising the trump administration and would be lining up to follow what has been factually the largest reduction of carbon dioxide emissions in the world. that is a result of not big government programs and transforming our economy to one that's -- to one that does not work, like venezuela, it's the understanding that free enterprise and economic freedom than if it's not just the economy, but statistically the environment as well. is that i want to follow the rest of the world, absolutely not. i want the united states to resume the leadership for the rest of the world to be the clean energy leader we were during the obama administration and that we could be again. we worked very hard to ensure
that a climate champion is in the white house in 2021 so we can continue that leadership because the future of this planet, our economy, our environment, it could not depend more on it. we saw the obama administration undertake their he and inclusive science-based rulemaking to do that -- very thorough and inclusive science-based rulemaking. weather was making cars go further on a gallon of gas, or cleaning up power plants, or reducing exposure to mercury pollution, clean water, the clean water with the obama administration is an attack that we have not touched on. one in three people rely on it for drinking water at a time when we are seeing the red tide off the florida. and because of all this absurd climate denials and this fringy and extreme -- we have not gone to talk about critically important things at her affecting people now.
it hundred thousand people are --ng without paychecks important things that are affecting people now, eight hundred thousand people are going without paychecks because of this absurd demand for a while. -- awol. -- a wall. and there are scientists unable to do their jobs, there is chaos in the national parks, people are trying to fund them to keep it together but there is human pilingling up -- feces up and people are getting hurt. the impacts of this shutdown are devastating and these are the things we need talk about. pelosi is showing real leadership in the house and trying to reopen the government. we could be wasting our time debating climate change when the science is settled and so talking about how we get to work to help people in this country with electricity, jobs -- pennsylvania, to
on the democrats line, bill, hello. i would like to address to comments of the gentleman suggested pixie dust for all, whatever that means. earlier in the show he was complaining about $10 billion andg spent on wind energy saying that it was inefficient and ineffective. if you drive through the mountains of pennsylvania or in the midwest along the coast, you see hundreds and thousands of windmills that are producing energy, they are putting out no emissions. my point is that the companies that pay for these windmills would not be investing their millions of dollars to do this if they were not effective, efficient, and making money.
i have nine grandchildren. i would like to see them in a clean environment, such as the relatively clean environment that i have enjoyed all of my life. host: what about that argument? if they were not investing they wouldn't -- they would not invested they were not making money? is when power and solar power is so an economically reasonable, let's get rid of the subsidies in the mandates. -- and prevail in those the mandates, if they prevail in those conditions i will be the first person cheerleading them. there is a reason why the renewable power industry is constantly asking for more subsidies, more mandates, more green new deals, because they cannot compete in a free market. host: are they getting this? >> this early have over the past seen more than $10 billion each year in spending on climate change. according to the energy administration information -- information administration, when
power gets more subsidies then all conventional energy sources, and when the caller mentions pennsylvania, unfamiliar with that, in upstate new york where you have people with a high unemployment rate and a lower income than the rest of the nation, a good portion of it is because they are not allowed to tap their energy resources. there is a ban on fracking and natural gas production, in pennsylvania and especially in the hills you have the opposite are allowed to, energy's are allowed to produce natural gas and oil. we are seeing an increase in employment, wages, and importantly there is a reason why gasoline prices are non-four dollars -- are not four dollars. bill, thank you. your grandchildren are lucky to have you and i agree, we need to worry about their future. i hear you on the power of wind in pennsylvania. clean the thing about the
energy industry. whether it's wind, solar, or energy efficiency, those of the jobs of the future. in the last couple of years, the energy efficiency industry has been the fastest growing of all new energy jobs. at this point there's more than 2 million people employed in energy efficiency either full-time or part-time, one in six construction jobs are affected to energy of -- connected to energy efficiency. these are the winning clean energy solutions. this is what we know the 116th congress and the new environmental champions who are featured in our new member guide, which is more exciting and people of color and lgbtq members than ever before. there are several members from pennsylvania who were us that -- we are especially excited about working with. but these are the solutions and why we are hopeful. host: from wisconsin, doug, hello. caller: hello.
i want to make sure i have my facts straight, before i basin opinion. base an opinion. i did some research and came upon an article where electric cars actually created a carbon times more than a gasoline engine. thethe solar panels, with sulfur oxide, that's a dangerous me onal, it is scary to an environmental basis, i just wanted to hear your comments. not familiar with any of the studies or the information you have read because that's inconsistent with of the science and the data and information that shows that electric cars are the way of the future, and the clean energy
including solar and wind efficiency is vitally important to combating climate crisis, which is an existential threat that we have to address. >> i am to million with the data and the facts regarding electric cars and other aspects of this debate, and when you create an electric car, we are producing the battery, that is some verily environ -- that involves an environmentally destructive process, your mining materials which is very destructive. powering the are electric vehicle, very often it is coming from electricity sources that have the same carbon dioxide footprint as gasoline. what you are seeing and what your not sing in many cases, you are seeing more emissions as a result. and one thing i want to address, because i know tiernan has been promotingod job of
the league of conservation voters, -- guest: thank you. >> if you are enjoying to dollar gasoline right now, this is something they are invite -- this is something they are fighting against, if they are giving a 95% underscore cards because they want to see $10 gasoline and set up to dollar gasoline. surprised that it's not high in terms of what you would like, to give you a sense what we are experiencing in the house of representatives for the 2017 scorecard, we have averaged across the parties in the house of representatives and the house democrats had an average score of 94%, which is very impressive. house republicans had a score of 5%. the republicans in congress voted against the environment, against public health, against common sense clean energy
advancements, 95% of the time. 19 times out of 20 they voted anti-environmental. they voted with polluters, dirty that'sig oil, disgraceful but that's why we are hopeful, he could summon the of those climate change deniers lost their seat in part because they were so radical, extreme, and on touch with what their voters wanted, just common sense clean energy solutions. they have been replaced by real champions who will absolutely make this a top priority and we cannot wait to get to work. tiernan has been advocating is a democratic party, this is a partisan organization, advocating candidates and parties, and at the heartland institute we are interested in presenting facts, data, we are not a mouthpiece for the democratic party. for us and for viewers i think we need to keep in mind that what we are trying to do was find solutions. we are not trying to promote the democratic party or any partisan
agenda like tiernan. we have republicans who are serious about combating climate change, like brian fitzpatrick in pennsylvania, and we we need to get back to a time when organizations like heartland institute stop spreading lies and misinformation and the koch brothers stop funding the republicans to be climate change deniers. we have to get back to a time to legislate in a bipartisan way. .facts guest guest: you will see when we compare that our numbers are high. the policyrves as
senior fellow. tiernan sittenfeld of the league of conservation voters' . she serves as the vice president. thank you for coming. we are going to get the latest in the government shutdown on day 18. christina marcos -- cristine marcos is joining us. this is "washington journal." ♪ >> sunday on q&a, james grant -- >> i make my living about writing about markets. it is too expensive for some people out there. the trouble lies not so much in
wall street but what it is. mostly ann a name or infamous name. wall street is mostly an epithet. what we ought to be more unguarded about are the institutions in the federal government that are validly denied in their intentions. the federal reserve, department of treasury, the securities and exchange commissions, institutions set up as benefactors for the public. increasingly they are not so. and columnist james grant, sunday night on c-span's q&a. >> c-span, what history unfold daily.
in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television company. today we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. >> "washington journal." continues. government8 of the shutdown. here was us is cristine marcos to let us know. where are we? guest: this is the first day the house and senate are coming back in session. nielsence and kirstjen will be coming to meet with house republicans. this is where the ball will start to roll for the week. host: when it comes to house
republicans or senate asublicans, where are they far as the shutdown? we are seeing dissension breakout in the ranks. some republicans voted with democrats last week to reopen the government. a few senate republicans have said it is time to open the government backup and end the shutdown. the trump administration is trying to hold strong with their party. we are starting to see signs of potential weakness on the republicans'side. is this to assure the republicans about the fight going on? to ensure the republicans. what we see is each side playing with their basis. either sideeeing trying to make realistic offers that they could possibly accept.
what we see tonight when officials meet with house republicans is an attempt to keep the troops in line and try to avoid dozens of house republicans of voting with democrats on individual bills to open up specific parts of the government like the irs. host: if you want to ask questions, (202) 748-8000 four , forrats, (202) 748-8001 republicans, (202) 748-8002 for independents. what is the word from the house on the shutdown? is considering bills to open some parts of the government. we saw this in the 2013 shutdown. parks, that is
something that is popular with americans. garbage piling up on newspapers and on television. that is a vote that even top republicans who aren't necessarily worrying about reelection in a couple of years, even that is something they might feel pressure to vote for. approach piecemeal might affect both sides. will it have play in the senate? they are saying they will not pick up any bill that the president won't sign. president trump does not want any spending bill that doesn't have money for the wall. host: the president will make an address tonight. any reservation about that speech or what might be said from house republicans or house democrats? guest: late last night speaker pelosi and schumer said they want equal airtime after president trump speaks.
we suspect it will be eight to and then democratic leaders will issue a response right after that. host: here is part of the response, president trump keeps rejecting and is still demanding that the american taxpayers pay 7.5 -- $5.7 billion for the wall which can't pass, adding that either chamber and mexico is not paying for it. television networks have decided to air the address. democrats must immediately be given equal airtime. will they get that airtime? guest: yes, some of the networks have said it will air it. figuree have seen the for the wall change, five point $7 billion and additional money for humanitarian efforts. how is that playing out on capitol hill? guest: that is the message that
administration officials are trying to push. met withident pence reporters yesterday and said the word crisis 35 times. they are really trying to push the point beyond the national security and immigration standpoint that president trump is saying that this is a crisis that needs to be addressed. there are so many people fleeing from these countries that are so is violence and it and they're coming here and something needs to be done. host: let's start with michael from north carolina, democrats line for our guest, go ahead. caller: my question is, why can't the insurance companies help people who have been furloughed? host: what about those efforts to help those furloughed? ast are we seeing as far
action from the administration or otherwise? guest: that is the problem for the government workers. , andrely on the paycheck they are used to being able to pay on a monthly basis. administration is trying to mitigate the effects of the shutdown is that people live in affordable housing complexes. the administration has been trying to work with landlords to give tenants a break because they are not getting the payments they need in order to pay rent. that is one way they are trying to help workers survive what is looking like a lengthy shutdown. the treasury department announcing some irs workers coming back to do business in returns. was that meant to circumvent legislation passing from the house democrats to keep that very thing going as well? guest: one of the bills this week that democrats are planning for the floor is to specifically open the irs.
until yesterday, it look like the irs would be able to issue refunds, even if people are starting to file tax returns. the administration announced yesterday they will still be up to issue refunds, which are very popular thing that americans want their money back, understandably. alsois one way they are tried to mitigate the effects. rather than simply reopen the government, they are looking for ways to mitigate the effects. host: jerry is next from utah on the independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call. what we need to do is look at the bottom line, what is the bottom-line? we have people invading our country. the minute they stepped over the border, we have to pay for food, schooling, health care. the american people are being ripped off.
i was a democrat, but the democrats are trying to turn us into a new world order, one world government. if these were russians trying to come across the border bringing that,, gang members and we would be shooting them at the border and say they're communists. but it is ok if they are coming across from all over the world. this doesn't make any sense. we have to shut it down and support our people. the democrats are basically throwing america down the toilet. host: jerry from utah. some of the are people president is responding to in this fight. it has been a key campaign promise of his campaign of building a wall and the symbolism that provides. this is why president trump is holding firm. , when republicans had total control of congress,
he wasn't able to get this priority. now with democrats, he has to put up a fight. host: amongst the republicans, how is the freedom caucus standing with the president? would you describe them as moderate republicans? how do we look at that? staying on the president. the week before christmas when the senate passed the spending bill to keep the government-funded, it was the freedom caucus that implored president trump to hold firm and not just let this opportunity go because this is the last chance you have with a republican congress. those who voted to reopen last week primarily came from the centrists of the caucus. host: republican line from north carolina, marianne.
i agree the former contributor to the show. his message was great. we have too many democrat dressed in republicans close. they are not standing with trump. they have lied to the people of here. they are not doing what we have asked for them to do. it is dreadful they are not standing with trump. he has tried very hard. the democratic party, especially nancy pelosi and schumer, are not there for the people. they are there for their own i wants and the extreme leftists who are not continue to anything today. thank you very much. guest: we are still seeing both parties play to the bases right now. democrats are fresh off the
victory of the midterm elections can see no reason to start negotiating are offering a dollar for a wall. nancy suggested she would be willing to give president trump $1 for the wall. not much more than that. , or gun typetrol legislation expected this week on the hill. tell us what will happen. guest: today is the eight year anniversary of former congresswoman gabby giffords who was shot in the head at eight constituents event. she has -- at a constituents event. she will be on capitol hill and gun-control advocates for a bill to require universal backcheck -- background checks. this is how mainstream gun control has become for rank and file democrats.
hr eight to correspond. you saw a lot of democratic candidates even in competitive districts campaign on gun control. host: talk about the approach of focusing on that ground checks versus other things? . guest: background checks can be a little more bipartisan. this is something that can garner unanimous support from democrats and they can take a fair amount of support from some public and voters, compared to a ban on assault rifles. host: is it expected that republicans largely will sign on to this, or will they be resistance? -- will there be resistance? guest: there will be resistance but they should pick up a fair
amount of republicans. host: will hear from keith in chicago. caller: i would like to start a trend by saying to this reporter, thank you for your service, particularly in this fact free era when we have a whole political party that rejects fax. ts in preference of "personality." one thing i learned was objectivity, but let's be objective here. ofs president has a pattern outright lying to us, the people of america. whom, like iof would like reporters to remember. majority ofum, the
people to this wall. the majority of the american people. you cannot dismiss the popular vote. that is the sentiment. host: with that in mind, what would you like our guests to specifically address? democrathy should the give one dollar when the mantra was what are we going to do? build a wall. who is paying for? mexico. it is no and void after that. host: thanks, caller. joke: nancy pelosi did that she would be ok for a dollar for a wall which would not get president trump very far on building a wall on the border. democrats don't see any reason after the freshman term victory
to give president trump much of anything. mindlso have to bear in that the shutdown began before christmas. they let lawmakers go home for the holiday and no one was here for a couple of weeks. it is not until the end of last week that we really start to see the usual cycle of the fights play out. host: when do democrats become uncomfortable with what is going on but the shutdown? guest: we will really start to see pressure this friday when hundreds of thousands of federal workers will get the paycheck that they would have been getting. until now, it was sleepy with the holidays it now people are starting to seal and feel the effects of the shutdown. .ost: virginia in lynchburg will you from richard on the republican line. caller: how are you doing today?
host: go ahead. talking about all the shutdown and we want our jobs back. we have problems we need to really take care of right now about the environment. the oceans are rising. it is not normal because way back when, it worked cars in thereion and that is why wasn't that problem of the melting icebergs and stuff. we are talking specifically about the government shutdown. you may be referencing the aller.us co
caller: that is what i am getting too. we should open the government up and talk about the environment. new york city and all of the cities, we need to build a wall and get all those people involved in doing it and starting now the cause of all the pollution and all of the people in coal burning. when it comes to democrats and their efforts, three bills to be considered. the agriculture, food and drug, and it merrier -- interior? why those? guest: they all affect americans' lives. -- food stamps that falls under that departments umbrella. -- department's umbrella.
they have enough to cover recipients for this month, but it is unclear if they will have enough for february. if it goes on long enough, you could see a situation where they pick and choose, which means who receives food stamps and who in february ift it goes on for that long. host: with justice, law enforcement, tsa, what is it like for people to work without paychecks and will that be considered as far as legislation is concerned? guest: that is something use all the time, they have to travel to and from washington. seeing the effect of the shutdown on tsa agents, where there was a report that a lot were calling in sick.
that is something lawmakers will be able to see up close in their day-to-day lives. it may not necessarily affect their day-to-day lives. host: this is thomas on the independent line. go ahead. times in thisof world of doubletalk, we say to ourselves that this and that doesn't make sense. it often does make sense to sense from a sinister -- make sinister sense from the sinister perspective. the wall doesn't make any sense. it is sadistic and sinister. entity person or one that it benefits most is putin and russia. shutdown the usa government,
trump in every way that you can and trump is obliging putin by shutting down the u.s. government. host: we will go to aaron in torrance, california, democrats line. caller: you go into a room to negotiate, but if you have your mind made up emma that is not negotiating. up, that is not negotiating. you need to go in with somewhat of an open mind and discuss it and you might come up with a sound idea. if you have your mind made up, there is no sense in spending time with them. host: as far as the ability for either side to give in and keep talking to open the government, where do we stand? guest: over the weekend, vice
president pence and representatives for pelosi and schumer met in the white house complex to talk about the situation. they were not able to reach any real progress. right now, there aren't any other meetings scheduled. we are not seeing face-to-face meetings on the docket at this moment. that shows how little progress was made over the weekend and the stalemate remains at an impasse. the president will potentially declare an emergency in regard to border wall funding . how is that resonating on capitol hill, that announcement -- possible announcement coming up? guest: if president trump were to declare a national emergency and bypass congress to build the wall, democrats and a cat -- indicate that would challenge it
and would get mired in the legal system. we likely wouldn't just see democrats howling over this. are alsons in congress and to seeng branch them go over the heads of congress will not sit well with a lot of people. side or the senate house side would you see more resistance? guest: in the senate because individual members have more power than individual house members. we will see more senators be critical of president trump. the reason why there is a democratic majority is because republicans retired or lost reelection. host: the present has the address tonight for about eight to 10 minutes at 9:00.
you can see that on c-span. you can go to c-span.org or the radio app. let's go to portland, oregon on. we will hear from lynn. go ahead. caller: i would like to see it brought up more often that in the past the democrats, including chuck schumer, have voted to build a wall. i would like to bring up that it is not a horrible thing to have a wall in place, at least in portions. we had the effect of a wall when ellis island was in effect in the early part of the last century that in effect refused different people coming over if they had disease or other problems. we know walls work. we all have doors with locks and
a wall around the white house, a fence. you can call it different names and it doesn't have to be a solid wall and that is not what is intended. we need common sense here and it is not being had. everybody has done in to their ug in their-- d own trench. guest: the caller is right that a lot of lawmakers are saying it is not about physical barriers. there are some parts of the border where there are physical barriers. a lot of republicans and democrats who represent districts along the border and have firsthand knowledge of the issues are saying that you need a mixture of different approaches, like having more drones or border patrol agents or other strategies like that versus just a simple barrier.
this is something that some of president trump's core supporters have worried about that yes, they want the wall, but there is concern that a physical area of may army not be a practical solution and would encourage the president to cut a deal with democrats that includes allowing more undocumented immigrants coming into the country. host: with house democrats taking power in new committee chairman ships, what are the ones to watch as far as the committees and the people running them? for sure the oversight committee, where we will see the bulk of the key investigations that republicans declined to take up while in power. chairman elijah cummings has made clear there is a lot he wants to do and has planned. the house judiciary committee is another place where if it were
to come up, impeachment proceedings would begin. ast: that would be run by democrat from new york. anything we should expect from him? always in thebeen cap of impeachment. he thinks there should be a process building up to something. he has also been of the camp that the best thing to do is to wait for special counsel robert mueller to finish his report before democrats move forward. host: with the progressives being elected, will they be comfortable for waiting for the rape port -- waiting for the report before waiting for impeachment proceedings? guest: they are responding to basis who want to see president trump out of office. i was talking to ask the waters the other day -- maxine waters
the other day and they recognize that the call for impeachment doesn't mean it has to happen tomorrow, but they know their needs to be investigations and hearings and they want the process as soon as possible. host: let's hear one more call from mark in kentucky. caller: good morning. i would like to comment on the border wall. contact -- contract for a company to build six miles of wall, $145 million, each comes to $24 million a mile. february.art in outrageous, $24 million a mile, 18 feet high made of concrete.
contractors have been met by the corps of engineers and start in february. an 18impossible to put feet high concrete wall, $24 million a mile. host: mark, thank you. what are you watching for this week? that: with all the votes democrats are putting on the floor for individual bills to open up parts of the government, last week we saw seven house republicans break with the party and go with democrats. we need to watch to see if that number goes up or down as the administration puts on more pressure starting tonight on house republicans to stay in line. -- one of thehat people following that is christina marcos. thank you for your time. caller: thank you for having me. host: when it comes to the
president's address tonight, we are looking forward to hearing from you on what you want to hear from him. (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8002 for independe nts. more when ""washington journal" continues. >> on q&a, james grant. >> i make my living by writing about markets and it is much too expensive for some of the people out there. the trouble lies not so much in wall street, but it has been a mostly infamous. wall street isn't up debt mostly in american history. ought to be more on
guard about are the institutions in the federal government that are validly benign and their intentions, the federal reserve, department of treasury. the securities and exchange commission. these are set up as benefactors for the public. increasingly they are not so. author and columnist james grant sunday on c-span's q&a. c-span, where history unfolds daily. created as aan was public service by america's television company. today, we bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, supreme court, and public policy events in washington,
d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your internet cable provider. "> "washington journal. continues. host: what would you like to hear from the president's address on border security? you can see on c-span, c-span.org. after the president finishes a will come assponse well. look for the information on those events. air theworks will democratic response we're interested in hearing from you on what he said -- he should say in response. he says that the president will argue to the nation tuesday night that a crisis at the u.s.-mexico border requires a wall and is demanding that if hundreds of thousands of federal workers to sing paychecks, the
first oval office speech will be wallwed by a visit to the -- to the border. sarah sanders said he will meet with those on the front lines of andnational security humanitarian crisis. kansas city, kansas up first aired phyllis, on the democrat line, what would you like to hear? caller: what i would like to hear is that he is going to shut the border down. why would you want to hear that? caller: i think we need a border wall. if the american people want a border, in they should get the border. shey losey by saying that would give president trump a
dollar, it is not her money to give. it is the american' people's money. she can stand up there and talk and talk and talk for the illegals, but she doesn't do the democratseven do anything for the american people. clara in's hear from maryland on the republican line. caller: i am in favor of the wall. i think the democrats and the american citizens need to realize that we elected donald as our president. the man has done nothing but good for this nation. a need to get off of this and give him the money for the wall and let that man continue what he is doing for america. host: what do you want to hear from the president? caller: ipad2 -- i beg your pardon? host: what you want to hear?
caller: stick to his guns and keep the government shutdown. if nancy pelosi and the others won't come around, leave it the way it is. nancy pelosi's face and know she is not normal. host: we are going to new york on the independent line. caller: i would like to hear if the president is going to mention anything about comprehensive immigration reform. , the thingience about a border wall, every single wall that has been built throughout history has been a failure. the great wall of china did not prevent genghis khan from conquering the people in china, it did not step the british or the japanese from invading them. a wall did not stop attila the
un from raids on the roman empire. a wall is only going to do so much good, the people still come underneath the wall at the border. host: to the idea of comprehensive immigration reform, what do you want the president to address on that topic? caller: that he is willing to speak with anyone about it. the young people who are involved in the daca program that, that hefor is willing to go ahead and possibly give them a chance at workarships, to be able to , to possibly down the road have a chance if they would like to become u.s. citizens.
i think he should address that. let's go to louise in texas, hello. caller: i would like to know why it is such a big issue for trump to have the border wall now when he had the house, senate, he could have passed a bill to build the wall. he just wants everybody to be thinking about something else and not what is going on with trump. he does not care about the american people, he only hears about the skin on his back and that is why he has this argument now. host: will you be watching the speech tonight? she has hung up. , aon winkler writes primetime address to the country promises something different, a natural effort at persuasion, molding and shaping public opinion. to usesidents position
this on the government shutdown and what and $5 billion he is demanding of congress to fund his border wall is not promising the wall is trump at his most demagogic. that gives us reason to suspect speech will take the form of an extended tweet, rallying his supporters and and taking the rest -- antagonizing the rest of the country. if you want to go to their, there is more by damon winkler. the headline is the president is making the wrong primetime address. sheila, republican line. caller: if trump gets his wall, how is he going to stop people from flying over? most terrorists have money. they wouldn't come over through a desert. they fly over. if he builds the wall, will he have another wall to the whole united states? host: we ask people what they
want to hear tonight from the president in his speech. what do you want to hear? caller: i want to hear if he gets the wall, what is the next step. the wall will not stop anything. host: deanna in maryland, hello. caller: i am not going to listen to the person who is in the office of president. we do not have a president as far as i am concerned. what i would like him to be is honest and say the reason he wants to build the wall is so he can put his name on it and have it as his legacy, the donald j trump united states of america southern border wall. he is the most dishonest human being that i have ever seen in my 72 years. anyone who believes him must trumpeen sold a lot of
cards because as far as i'm concerned, he is no better than a slick salesman. he doesn't care about us. michael in kokomo, indiana, independent line. what do you want to hear from the president? can't believe we are having this debate about a wall. if you don't believe in a wall, go home and take the door off your front door and leave it off and tell me what you think of that for a wall. host: as far as the response, what argument or case should he make? caller: that is the case, go home and take the door off your home and see how long before people start coming out in doing what they want in your own home. you have to build the wall. there is an old saying, if you don't love it, leave it. rome is not burning.
use some common sense. that is what we need to do. host: when you say romans and burning, what do you mean? ohio. -- james is next, james, from ohio, hello. james, we will give you a chance to turn down your television. if you're new to the program, if you give the television on and listening, sometimes juppe to -- -- pay attention sometimes you pay attention to the television and not what is going on. from pennsylvania, democrat, wendy, hello. caller: i wanted to hear from him which company or several companies that possibly trump
owns is going to build the wall. host: why do think the connections are there? caller: because he seems to whip up companies all the time to pay for things or make money. from we will try james now the flow, ohio. caller: hello. host: you are on. president thing with trump, and i am a lifetime republican, this man has done nothing but lie to the american people. the wall is not that significant. tohink this country needs pull together and do what is right. we were built on immigrants. is how it started and that is how it will remain. host: will you listen to the address tonight? caller: i will listen. trump is acting
like a spoiled little child throwing a tantrum because he is not getting his way. host: for the speech, what do you expect to hear from the president on this issue? to keepi would like him true to his word. mexico is going to pay for the wall. if they aren't going to pay, the wall isn't going to happen and we need to secure our border in another way. funding to have better border security. that is the way to go. ast: this is where we are at far as what we do for the next 15 minutes. your thoughts on the president's address. it starts at 9:00. asocratic response expected well. stay for c-span on that. for the remaining time, what do you want the president to say during the address when it comes to border security? (202) 748-8000 for democrats,
,202) 748-8001 for independents forublicans, (202) 748-8002 independents. that the turkish president refused to meet bolton. wanted tois president receive that kurdish fighters are protected. support for the u.s. in syria as they viewention the fighters as a terrorist group. frank in new jersey, hi. ofler: i have a couple comments. the first is, there are all the
democrats saying they don't want borders. if they think about it, where are all the fences, and all the democratic states. why not just rip the borders down in the democratic states, like the last caller was saying, not the last caller but a couple colors. callers. if you don't think we need , why not tell us down in the democratic states. thing, peopler are making comments about how come the republicans -- i am an independent, i don't agree with either side. why are all of these democrats and republicans sitting on their but when there is a natural disaster at the border right now? both parties are responsible. host: let's go to missouri.
this is steve on what you want to hear from the president tonight. caller: what we have is a political war going on. the only reason the democrats are against the border wall is because they want to be able to tell the mexican people and say, look at us. we let you come in for free. well for us for the next 40 years. has already had speeches on how the border should be shut down and all kinds of different people in the democratic party. should thecase president make tonight on this issue? what should he say? caller: i really don't know how donald trump should address it. i hope he does a wonderful job. it is all political. host: that is steve in missouri. page of the wall
street journal looks at the united states and china was trade issues, saying it was both parties opening talks on monday to resolve the trade fight threat navy global economy. negotiations -- threatening the global economy. .egotiations start broad pledges were made by the chinese leadership. increase u.s. access to china's markets and talks of intellectual properties, and subsidies of chinese companies. you can find it on the wall --eet this is lewis in texas. caller: i have a proposal. it is obvious to me that neither
the democrats or republicans can come together right now because they are having if you'd. -- having a feud. is not feasible, but let's have a special election on the border wall only and have the american people decide whether we want to build a wall not build a wall. brian in washington state, independent line. caller: good morning. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: i would like the president to address the situation of the border security 2019 being an issue in when taxpayers were told after 9/11 in 2001, the priority was for our country to secure its
homeland, and that apparently these administrations from w through obama to trump have been just wasting tax dollars because wallhey have to build a and they haven't been doing what they say they have been doing with border patrol. i live on the canadian border, and i have seen the manpower go from local office of the county with one or two people and then a border patrolman in each little outlying community along the border within 10 minutes of the border. now it is a big compound that , borderour shifts patrolman driving from the county to the border which is
almost an hour drive to go do their job. it has turned in to a smorgasbord for people to relocate that work for the border patrol. nbc news and others reporting several announced this morning they will air the democratic response to president trump's primetime all address. cbs emma nbc, and cnn will carry the response. nbc, and cnn will carry the response. the television networks have decided to air the address. democrats must immediately be given immediately air time was as of yesterday written. the story added that democrats have yet to say who will deliver
the rebuttal. to illinois, go ahead. caller: i would like to say donald trump and the republicans controlled the executive branch and the house-senate for two years. they could have passed this and done it with reconciliation. what i want to hear from the president is the truth. we know that is not going to happen because the president is a liar. he lied about and had his people lie about catching 4000 terrorists coming over when it wasn't the case at all. when she was pushed to admit the truth, a lot of these people came through ports of entry into the airport. and i don't nothing see how we are going to spend the money. whatever the president says, how
much of that will be true? up with thetraight american people are lied to the american people? host: that is terry from illinois. laura ingraham on fox news talks about tonight's speech and what she thinks saying, i hope the president personalizes the border crisis and the statistics i gave early on are important howwe need to emphasize immigration problems have affected people's lives. tuesday's speech should be wide ,anging from chain migration need for mandatory e-verify, and birthright citizenship. if you go to the fox news website, more of her thoughts on tonight's address to the president. this is me new jersey, republican line. caller: good morning, pedro.
supportlike to say i do the president completely on the wall. everybody keeps saying it is his wall. hello? host: you are on, go ahead. caller: i am sorry. it will be the people's wall, the american wall. it is not trumps personal wall -- trump's personal wall. when nancy pelosi decides to knock down her wall in front of her home, they made we can discuss a compromise. i believe the president should compromise a little and everybody should talk and discuss what is going on. i get the democrats credit, they do stick together. the republicans, it is my party, but they don't stay together. host: let's hear from douglas.
caller: i voted for president trump. i am an independent and i voted for him but it was for economics. for him to make our country better that way. i see now he is putting people ideal that for an maybe some people weren't but not all americans want. i think he is not right in hurting workers that he said that he would support. thank you. host: in texas, cindy on the line for democrats. go ahead. caller: good morning. i would like to hear the president discuss comprehensive
border control. a wall is not the answer. we do need porter -- border protection to protect us from those who want to harm us, but a wall is not the answer. president trump said when he is campaigning that mexico will pay for the wall. last month he said he would take all the blame for the government shutdown. we must not forget that and not forget what he said. host: when you say comprehensive border control, what do you mean and what do you want the president to say about that? caller: a wall is 17th century security. that is not going to work. i'm not saying we don't need security, but a wall is not the answer. host: i just wonder what you think comprehensive reform looks like. caller: technology, drones,
maybe they need more border patrol. but a wall isn't the answer. i am sure they need funding. the crisis is the mothers and children in the tents. i live in texas. in august, i was in south texas and i didn't see it, where is the crisis? what we really want him to say he will not say. terrywe will move on to on the republican line. caller: i want to hear him say he is going to stick with this and run it to the end of his presidency. this is all about the republican and democrat battle over hillary losing and him winning very it has -- winning. with thething to do american people but bitterness between the parties.
they need to get it together because he is right, this is the people will salt this if he stands his ground and said i will open this until you kick me out of this office or solve this problem. we have kicked this can for 20 to 40 years of immigration debates. there is no reason you can't sit down to do a job and hash this out and make it work for everybody. as far as a border wall, everybody is fixated on a border wall. what the man is talking about border security. host: let's go to highland, michigan, independent line. oelle.s j caller: i would like to see the president addressed the truth ws about immigration. there is no crisis at the border.
the only crisis is what he is doing the families at the border. our country is based on immigration. it would be nice if just once he would say something truthful. host: one more call on this. this will come from kathy in california. caller: i would like to hear the president say he is going to resign for the mental health of our democracy. host: that is kathy, the last call on this topic. 9:00 is when you can see that address. for thatpan.org address as well as the democratic response. thank you for joining us today. see you tomorrow. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]
>> a look at the u.s. capitol on this 18th day of a partial government shutdown. both the house and senate are in session today. neither have government funding bills were them at this time. the house will consider a number of noncontroversial bills. the senate is expected to work on a bill imposing sanctions on syria. continue off end ther to shutdown. discussing priorities to work on an anticorruption bill. you can watch that live at 2:00 eastern on c-span three.
on the partial government shutdown, later today, the house rules committee meets to discuss possible government funding bills. join us tonight or president trump's address to the nation on immigration and border security. he is expected to talk about humanitarian and national security issues on the border. the presidents first address to the nation from the oval office. live coverage begins at 9:00 p.m. eastern followed by the democratic reaction. next, north dakota republican governor doug burgum. he delivered his state of the state address, outlining his priorities. thirds the governor's addressed since he took office in december 2016. it is about an hour. >> lieutenant govern