tv Washington Journal 01092019 CSPAN January 9, 2019 6:59am-10:01am EST
chief of staff for senator ted cruz. he also worked for governor rick perry, even ghostwriting a book for the governor. mr. roy has also been a federal prosecutor. dan timber now represents the third district. he was previously a member of the legislature, serving terms in both the state house and senate. representative taylor saw combat in iraq as a member of the u.s. marine corps. in the six district, ron wright succeeds congressman joe barton, for whom he both worked as chief of staff and district director. earlier in his career, he was on the city council for arlington, texas. new congress, new leaders, watch it all on c-span. up next little on "washington journal," your calls and comments. all of our guests today focus on the impacts, now in its 19th day. at 8:00 a.m. eastern, nicole how federals about
workers are dealing with these shutdown. later, to memories of congress join us to discuss the shutdown and border security, democrat gerry connolly of virginia and republican don bacon of nebraska. [video clip] >> member of congress pass a crisis.t ends this it every citizen, call congress and tell them to finally, after all these decades, secure our border. ♪ host: that was president trump last night in his first oval office address. it was a 10 minute statement followed by a five minute response from nancy pelosi and senate minority leader chuck schumer. the two sides set to meet again today as the shutdown moves into its 19th day. we are asking our viewers, what sort of deal could you support. is there a compromise you would
offer to address the situation on the border? give us your best ideas. it democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. you can catch up with us on social media. on twitter it is @cspanwj. on facebook it is facebook.com/cspan. a very good wednesday morning to you on this 19th day of the government shutdown. we want to hear your ideas for a solution. we will show you more of the president last night talking about the state of negotiations. [video clip] >> the federal government remains shutdown for one reason and one reason only, because democrats will not fund border security. my administration is doing everything in our power to help those impacted by the situation. the only solution is for
democrats to pass a spending bill that defends our borders and reopens the government. situation could be solved in a 45 minute meeting. i have invited congressional leadership to the white house tomorrow to get this done. hopefully, we can rise above partisan politics to support national security. were in that 45 minute meeting the president talked about, what sort of deal could you propose? here is chuck schumer talking about the state of negotiations with the president. [video clip] >> tonight and throughout this debate and his presidency, president trump has appeal to fear, not facts. make no mistake, democrats and the president both want stronger .order security
however, we sharply disagree with the president about the most effective way to do it. how do we untangle this mess? separate the shutdown from arguments over border security. there is bipartisan legislation supported by democrats and republicans to reopen the government while allowing debate over border security to continue. there is no excuse for hurting millions of americans over a policy difference. about miss ars paycheck. farmers and small businesses will not get loans they desperately need. host: taking your calls on the "washington journal." democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. what sort of deal could you support.
penny is up first, a democrat from missouri. good morning. caller: i cannot believe i got through so quickly. i think the democrats are squandering our blue wave. stuff would have been wrapped up in the 115th congress. what if pelosi and schumer came out last night and said the president is talking about -- still, maybe we could reinforce some areas. these americans still kind of play on that a little bit. maybe negotiate that $5.7 billion price tag a little bit things likee we get to take caregents talkese cases and then about reopen the government has
the rest out. i think the democrats are really squandering our blue wave. host: what is the rest of that could be hashed out? talking when i -- the price, for one thing. it seems like the $5.7 billion is supposed to be spent on the wall. work with us -- in the steel and take it to american steel coming back. use it to reinforce places and for barriers. more borderu know patrol agents are added and more judges to handle the case. host: this is dana in los angeles, a republican. what is your plan? theer: i would have congress people in california
on outat is going out -- here. it's like a third world. most of the cities are devastated. the schools are devastated. we are now known as the least educated people in the united states. i don't think you are ever going to stop it. i think the globalists and the people that have all the --erest the: take us today 19 of shutdown. how far does this go and is there something you would be willing to accept to end the shutdown and address the concerns the president has laid out? would tell the democrats to put everything in writing, which they will not do. if you listen to nancy and chuck , i they never get -- they never get specific.
. i am going to tell everybody. i will tell the whole country. i am 62 years old and i have been in california all my life. i am in the security industry, so i know a lot of people. you will regret not putting that wall up. in los angeles and every city for 50 miles surrounding it where i work, it looks like mexico. nobody speaks english. the whole state is down. everybody is on socialist medicine. you people just don't know. if you knew it was coming, you would stop. host: this is robert in waldorf, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. my deal would be, the democrat's first action last week was to appropriate $20 billion for the u.n. and international
abortions. in foreign billion aid building behind you that congress has appropriated to send out to foreign governments. you mean to tell me we cannot find $5.7 million to put -- $5.7 billion? billion going to mexico and -- they can put the government back for 5.7 billion dollars? you mean to tell me you cannot find that money for the american people -- the security of the american people and to end this shutdown? $5.7 does it have to be billion in your mind? caller: it could be $10 billion. the amount of money we are giving to foreign aid. host: could it be less then $5.7
billion? caller: it should be more, don't you think? if we can give $50 billion in foreign aid, why can't we give that to the homeless? the veterans? the people out of work in this country? billion topaying $50 foreign countries when we have people digging in dumpsters to get food? host: we are looking for your deals, what you would offer if you were in on the negotiations that continue on this day 19 of the government shutdown. here is a few facebook posts this morning to the question we put up. parents said i would be -- terrence said i would be willing to give the deferred action -- build the wall and a border into walldify docket -- daca into wall.
trump reveals taxes, government reopens, barriers, not walls put up in areas where imminent domain could not ruin people's lives. a few of our social media comments. what deal could you support in this ongoing standoff? alex in new york city, democrat. good morning. caller: what i would support is exactly why -- what schumer and pelosi presented. they stated they were going to present $1.3 billion for new fencing, 300 66.5 million dollars for border security technology. those two things alone would help protect the border. in regards to some of your trumpers calling, that gentleman from california, the democrats have presented a bill. they have come up with a lot of ideas on how to protect our borders. trump has stated it is his
shutdown, he is not moving. he is throwing attempt or -- throwing a tantrum. he knows his base is expected to go through with it and he has his own friends who will profit going through with this wall idea. if you want to build the great wall of america, this isn't the nation to do that in. if you want to live behind a wall, go to china and live behind the great wall. i am disgusted with trumpers who accepttly come up and the lies trump is putting out. fact check after fact check and they still believe trump's lies. host: here is more from the president on what he is asking democrats in congress for. [video clip] >> my administration has presented congress with a detailed proposal to secure the border and stop the criminal
gangs and human traffickers. -- border agents at the department of homeland security. these are the resources they requested to keep america safe, safer than ever before. the proposal from homeland security includes cutting edge technology for detecting drugs, weapons, illegal contraband, and many other things. we have requested more agents, immigration judges, and bed ince to process the rise unlawful migration fueled by our strong economy. our plan also contains an urgent request for humanitarian assistance and medical support. furthermore, we asked congress to close border security loopholes so that illegal
immigrant children can be safely and humanely returned back home. -- at the request of democrats, it will be a steel barrier rather than a concrete wall. this barrier is absolutely critical to border security. it's also what our professionals at the border want and need. .his is just common sense host: negotiations expected to continue between president trump, his team, and democrats in the house and senate. here is the lead story in today's wall street journal. a democrats blocked the chamber from considering -- in a bid to pressure the
government to reopen -- meanwhile, in the house, house members starting to move a series of individual bills looking to reopen parts of the government outside of the department of homeland security. the idea to open those parts of the government not impacted by the homeland security debate and allow negotiations to continue. today they will begin moving a bill to reopen the treasury department, the irs and tomorrow moving to the food and drug administration and agriculture and interior and environment as well. later in the week, transportation, housing and urban development. those bills moving their way through the house rules committee and you will see them on the floor. tweets from members of congress after the president's oval office statement. dianne feinstein saying let's reopen the government, make sure our citizens are paid and safe and sit down at the negotiating table and reach a responsible
compromise on these real challenges. mark meadows is the house of the freedom caucus, republican from north carolina and says when looking at the shut down, think about who is consistently the one initiating attempts to compromise. they are the ones trying to find a path forward. one more from the republican from new york. i support increased border security -- my democratic colleagues, it is time to negotiate and compromise. there's a great deal to be had and it could and must be done quickly. if you were offering a deal. we are asking you what would that deal be? what would you be willing to give? let us know by calling in. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001.
independents, 202-748-8002. rusty in texas, go ahead. caller: howdy. i think the way trump and the democrats sounded, i don't think there will be room for shutdowns. what i would offer is a possibility of maybe a tax on people that employ illegal immigrants. behinde labor would be that -- i would hope democrats would be wanting to play ball. both sides are in a corner and cannot get their way out of it. i don't see any hope the shutdown will end. my heart goes out to the federal employees that are furloughed or not receiving a paycheck. i am disappointed in my party
-- not being able to get funding or go to work and get a paycheck. republicansinted in . that they cannot find $5 billion for a structure desperately needed on the border. host: some 800,000 federal employees being impacted by the shutdown and tens of thousands of contractors as well. we will talk more about that coming up in our next segment. we will be joined by nicole ogrysko covering the impact on the federal workforce and the contractor workforce. you mentioned this being one of the longest shutdowns. currently the second longest shutdown and it would tie for the longest shutdown on friday. we are on day 19. eric is next in maryland, independent. what is a deal you could agree
to? caller: good morning, pedro. thank you for taking my call. before i give my opinion, i would like -- the very first one is what i saw yesterday hurried first of all, i am a federal employee and i am essential. i am at work right now. what i saw yesterday on tv was so disheartening, especially coming from the democrats. i know they are not willing to negotiate, no matter what. the president has already -- the only way out of this situation is to declare a national emergency.
they are saying there is not a crisis at the border. a crisis at the border when you have an insecure country, it is not good for anybody. nancy pelosi, all these members d.c.ngress, in washington, or virginia where most of them all -- r -- they all have a wall to protect them. they think the country has to be like this. you mentioned the idea of the president declaring a national emergency to bypass congress to find funding to build the wall. plenty of speculation about that heading into the president's address yesterday. some of the speculation continuing in today's papers about whether or not he could
legally do that. this is from the washington post. like many other unconstitutional arguments, there will be no clear answer ñ supreme court rules on it. theoretically they righted there are ways this could be done legally. there's a section governing the military that gives the defense secretary the authorization to undertake military construction projects not otherwise authorized by law. the administration would argue the section amounts to congressional author ration, meeting one of the crucial test of constitutionality established by the supreme court in 1952. because the constitutional expectation is that no money shall be drawn from the treasury without the appropriation of congress and the constitution makes no exception for national arguedcies, some experts
any such maneuver is unconstitutional. the legal debates continuing and probably will as long as that idea continues to be floated. we want to hear your ideas for ending the current standoff. what deal would you propose? dennis in iowa. a democrat. go ahead. caller: i think republicans, if why don'tthe wall, they start a fundraising campaign to pay for the wall? . trump said mexico is going to pay for the wall read i am not mexican. in iowa, it made national news, that mollie tibbetts got murdered by an illegal. illegal was looking for a republican farmer. don't blame democrats for illegals. host: would you accept any deal
that includes money for a wall? if it is $1 million, would that be okay if it reopens the government and other immigration issue -- priorities are addressed? caller: i say republicans, put your money where your mouth is, you pay for it. host: that is dennis in iowa. this is larry in alabama, republican. good morning. -- caller: off, first off, i would like to say i support our president and anything he has to say, has to do for this country. the security of the country is what he is trying to look out for. taking care of all these illegal aliens coming in on our taxpayers -- compromiseuld do the is pay for the wall with drug money that he takes from the
cartel and the drugs he takes from the cartel. host: that is larry in alabama. this is ruth in illinois. good morning. caller: good morning, cnn. host: it is c-span this morning. caller: i wish chuck schumer would come with $6.6 million like he offered when president obama asked for the wall. donald trump is trying to stand all americans, not just the wall. the wall will protect low-wage jobscans, hold on to their and i fully support donald trump . i am a low wage american and that is who trump stands up for. i am glad all these people have
all this money they can vote for a democrat. host: you mentioned chuck schumer. he was standing next to nancy pelosi, speaker of the house as part of the five-minute response to the president's address to the oval office. here is a bit of what nancy pelosi had to say. [video clip] >> much of what we heard from president trump has been full of misinformation and malice. the president has chosen fear. we want to start with the facts. on the very first day of this congress, house democrats past legislation -- passed legislation to reopen the government and fund smart, effective border security solutions. the president is rejecting these bills, which would reopen obsession over his with forcing american taxpayers to waste billions of dollars on an extensive and ineffective
wall. a wall he always promised mexico would pay for. the fact is president trump has chosen to hold hostage critical services for the health, safety and well-being of the american people. the fact is we all need to support care our borders while -- secure our borders while honoring our values. we can install new technologies to scan cars and trucks for those coming into our nation and hire the personnel we need to facilitate trade. we can fund more innovation to detect unauthorized crossings. -- counterproductive
-- stop have deepened manufacturing a crisis and start reopening the government. 7:30, day 19up on of the ongoing government shutdown. what deal could use support to end the standoff question mark -- standoff? republicans, 202-748-8000 -- democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. as we show you that live shot of capitol hill. we want to keep you updated on other news around the country. this being reported by abc news, rod rosenstein expected to depart the department of justice in the coming weeks according to multiple sources familiar with his plans talking to abc news.
he has communicated to the president and white house officials his town to -- has planted apart around the time william bard would take office. rosenstein apparently had long been thinking he would serve about two years and there was no indication he was being forced out at this moment by the president. .e will keep you updated we have been talking a lot about the executive and legislative plant -- branches. here's a story from the judicial branch. robert barnes noted justice brett kavanaugh issued his first writing aurt -- unanimous opinion in a noncontroversial case that involves one company suing another about who decides whether certain disputes should be settled by arbitration. the answer was an arbiter, rather than the judge should make it that decision.
kavanaugh's debut as author came in front of only seven of his colleagues. justice ruth bader ginsburg recuperating from cancer surgery. she remained at home. willroberts has said she participate by reading transcripts of the oral arguments of cases she has been missing. in the washington post today. back to your phone calls, hearing your thoughts on a deal you could support to end the ongoing standoff. robert in great falls, virginia. go ahead. caller: i think the deal is already on the table. the deal of the appropriations bills that passed the voice vote in the senate previously and recently passed by the new house in the new congress. the deal is there for the president. he must sign them and they can
negotiate over funds for homeland security. it is pretty straightforward. i think many republicans in the senate are getting squishy. murkowski switched. cory gardner switched. the senator from maine switched. there are rumors others are going to turn. the choice will be made for the president pretty soon. host: that is robert in great falls. you mentioned republicans and whether they are standing strong with the president. here is a story may be robert saw today. more gop defections could force trump's hand on the shutdown going through some of the republicans who have talked about their concerns about the lingering time the shutdown has gone on. the payment is causing lisa murkowski -- called for congress to pass bipartisan bills that would reopen much of the unfunded parts of the federal
government, separating funding from the debate over the border wall. "i continue to stress there is no good reason for a shutdown. it is possible to provide for security and address the humanitarian crisis on the border while doing our jobs and keeping the government functional. republican congers men from texas saying his positions haven't changed when he supported a democratic plan last week to reopen the government, he said republicans -- he was one of the republicans who broke ranks, voting with democrats. shutting down the government is never a good idea. mark in lexington, kentucky, a republican. go ahead. caller: thank you for having me on. i just wanted to mention that this has been going on since reagan when the great debate over migration took place.
90's they camete up with all sorts of electronic ways to monitor the wall. none of this has been implemented. it is time to support the president, to put up an electronic wall, a solid wall, a look through wall and to give thataca students and category citizenship. that would be fair. california,n independent. what would be fair in your mind? caller: democrats win back the house and he pulls this nonsense to blame them on a failure on his campaign promise. i think the democrats -- terrorism as a result of not having the wall or having a wall. host: amy is next.
richmond, virginia. a democrat. good morning. caller: hello. can you hear me? host: yes. go ahead. caller: i have two solutions, i guess. the first would be have mexico pay for the wall. not one time during trump's campaign did i hear american taxpayers would pay for the wall. all i heard was mexico would pay for the wall. if that is not going to happen, trump could pay for the wall and let mexico pay him back. i know that will never happen. i agree with robert from great falls, virginia. if the first solution falls through. host: remind us of what you were agreeing with in terms of that? caller: robert from great falls virginia -- great falls, virginia said something about the bills already approved by congress before trump sat down and watched fox news and saw all
the people saying his presidency was going to be over if he caved on the wall, et cetera, et cetera. a deal was ready to go and then he saw the talk shows and changed his mind. host: fort mitchell, kentucky. a line for republicans. greg, go ahead. caller: good morning. thank you for having me. i understand there has been a billion dollars from the last presidency for border security. let's use that to build the border and also. i heard if every american trump a check mr. for $100 we can have this wall and we can go back to work. that is my solution. thank you. host: a map in today's washington times talks about all wall at a glance. the current length of the barriers along the border
includes 354 miles of fencing, 300 miles of vehicle barriers and in 2017 congress approved nearly $300 million for 40 miles of replacement barriers in 2018. congress approved to build about 82 miles. the president is requesting $5.7 billion and here we are on day 19 of the shutdown over that issue. bill in wisconsin, independent. go ahead. caller: i think congress needs to listen to the people. his we elected president, wall andwas big on the congress is not listening to the people. they are doing what they have done before. they need to get behind the president. we already said we wanted the
wall when we elected president trump president. wallre we building a rather than military bases when we occupy our borders -- they are secure. we should start building a military base from coast to coast on our southern border and some of that could have fencing. let's secure them by occupation. host: are you as worried about the northern border? caller: i am because i have heard the northern border is currencyt of our fake comes from. our friendly neighbors to the north -- not so much the drugs in the central part of the united states, but our eastern, northern border is doneerrent would be well there also because i believe a
lot of our counterfeit money comes through the canadian border. host: how would you feel about this idea of passing spending bills that would reopen other parts of the government outside the department of homeland security to start bringing at least parts of the shutdown to an end? would you be ok with that? presidentthink the has to work with congress somewhat to get these people work. my heart goes out to these people who are not going to receive a check. at the same time, i think congress has to get behind the president. we voted him in and congress is not listening to the people. they say the people aren't behind him. we were behind him. he is the president. get behind our chief read he is the guy we elected. how do youid you --
read the results of the 2018 election? caller: as far as what? i am not following. host: in terms of what message america was sending to the president and congress with the results of the 2018 election. caller: ok. i think we said enough is enough. he said he is going to clear the swamp, he is going to build the wall, he is going to secure america. i look back on what president trump has done in the past when he thought to fly his flag and had to fight for that right. to me,ed his patriotism being a former -- former marine, that he loves this country. i think congress needs to realize he is not a tyrant, he is a true patriot. get behind the guy that is for america. host: this is jerry in mount vernon, illinois. a democrat. go ahead. caller: i think we should reopen
the government. on thels are already table, but the republicans and democrats -- before this all worthless.ump is host: that is jerry in illinois. here is mark in the washington post saying it was president trump who won the night. he writes in the column it was the president who did not unilaterally declare a national emergency last night. instead, he called for compromise. he said "to those who refused to compromise in the name of border security, imagine if it were your child or husband whose life was so cruelly shattered and totally broken. pelosi and schumer failed to use the one word that millions of americans were longing to hear, compromise.
until now, trump owned the government shutdown that prompted this address because he is the one that started it. if democrats continue to attack him and won't entertain any compromise, soon the shutdown will be theirs because they are the ones who refused to end it. host: what a deal could you put on the table that you would accept? in fort lauderdale, florida. republican. go ahead. why couldn't they take the bill the house passed sitting in the senate -- discontinue the filibuster rule and pass what is sitting there? toill pretend i am speaking a democrat politician and respond to some of the things i have heard. drugs one, most of the
come through the regular transportation points. if we completely stop the drugs coming through the commercial transportation points, where do you think they will go next? you think they will say we cannot do this anymore? they will try to come through the border. the other thing is what are we going to do with these unskilled people who don't know our language? these people think they will come to an opportunity -- a place where they have opportunity? automation is taking over all the jobs they think they will be getting. the other thing people have not thought about is the birthright problem. they can argue that on humanitarian problems. what about the chinese and the russians doing the same thing? their children can get passports and get educated in the united states. they can threaten their parents
unless they create espionage and the united states and we cannot do anything about it. people aren't really thinking. the other point democrats make is the cost. it cost $8.5 million to shut down the government. if they are concerned about cost -- you come out ahead from shutting down the government. the pointents -- democrats make. the electronic thing on the border is the most silly thing of all. these people want to be discovered. them.ant the drone to see they know the courts are overrun, so they are in. be talking more about the cost of the government shutdown and the impact on
federal workers. here is one story making the rounds from yesterday. tax refunds are going to go out even if the government shutdown were to continue into filing season. accepting will start tax refunds january 28. it comes after the acting director said those refunds would still be sent out during the shutdown. the irs plans to recall "a significant portion of workers who have been furloughed during the shutdown to process the tax returns. wisconsin, independent. what is a deal you could support? caller: what i can support is what trump has out there right now. politicians -- republicans and the senate in the house better
take note. otherwise, they can be replaced. host: is that a deal? caller: what? host: is that -- what you laid out. is there any negotiation room in your mind? caller: you cannot negotiate with idiots and that is what chuck schumer and nancy pelosi are, they are idiots. host: what sort of negotiation would you start with and where could you go in that negotiation if you were sitting in the room with president trump and democrats in congress as they meet again today and expected to discuss the status of the government shutdown. democratmississippi, a . for the ending of the shutdown is america should work together.
on the is to put a toll border for everyone coming from mexico and going back to mexico. i think that would be enough money to build that wall that don't nobody think will work. that is my idea. host: you would be okay with the idea of the wall, how the wall is paid for is your biggest concern, is that correct? caller: yes. if you put a toll like all the bridges and interstates in the tolls states, -- we pay to drive that have been paid by -- you can tax the people coming from mexico as the president had been talking about and the president is going back to mexico. that would be enough money to pay for the wall. reston, virginia.
republican, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i found out over the weekend the white house staff is getting a 10% raise. i have been working for the government for many years and our raises typically don't keep up with inflation. our --tick around with for our discussion with nicole ogrysko. there have been a some development about whether that will actually happen. caller: i was going to say, if thethe shutdown, civil servants aren't getting paid, i don't think white house staff or congress should get paid. i am surprised they are and they are getting a 10% raise. host: we will talk more about
the status of that and whether that will happen in about 15 minutes. allen in wallingford, connecticut. go ahead. are 600,000here people that overstay their visa, why couldn't you have a $200,000 bond and if they overstay their visa, they lose the $2000 and that would pay for an agency or agents to track them down. virginia,ainesville, good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i have a comment about the question you asked. art ofragged about the the deal. if this is the art of the deal federal employees
ransom and trying to get his $5 billion -- if that is the art of the deal, that book is not worth a penny. people hostage -- i work in washington, d.c.. areington, d.c. hotels empty right now. employees in these hotels are furloughed, they don't get paid. pay means they don't also taxes. is final comment i have trump is a con artist and there are probably americans in middle commentwho -- my final
a bipartisan bill signed before christmas and it.p withdrew from he can sign it now and get these people back to work and negotiate. don't hold your people ransom and call it art of the deal. give me a break. thank you. reaction from capitol hill, including members of congress and senators. this is lloyd smucker saying it is evident democrats are unwilling to compromise and on interested in negotiating. speaker pelosi admitted she would only give one dollar to fund a border wall. border security is not a joke.
the republican saying president trump did an excellent job reinforcing the american people why additional resources are necessary. find a compromise that will strengthen border security and reopen the government as quickly as possible. one more from mark green, the president has shown he is willing to negotiate and set up a concrete wall. he offered a metal wall that would be just as effective. it seems democrats don't want a deal, they want to resist. asking what a deal would be that you could support. thank you for waiting. caller: thank you. first time caller. i think the one thing that is missing in order to get the democrats through the negotiating table would be that the trump administration gives guarantees.
every time i bought a big ticket item such as a house or car or tv, i would want a warranty based on the things they were trying to sell me. if the trump administration says this is what the wall is going to do and we will put that in a guaranteed form such as if it we will allowire, nextemocrats to select the justice,, court appointee. that is my comment. host: how long would you be willing to give the wall, if it were built -- the time to do that promise? how long would you be willing to wait for this guaranty to come through? beler: i think that would part of what the negotiations -- no more than 10
target -- if we build so much of the wall, we should expect no more than 20% of the heroin coming across the southern border. something that should be put in writing as a guarantee. they are saying this wall will do so much. i have no guarantees to buy this thing. i'm a strong supporter of the trump administration. i'm a long time republican. host: david in arizona. this is steve. good morning. caller: good morning. democrats -- reopen talks to compromise on border security. i would like to express my cynical side and just rhetorically ask, does anyone know where this 274 miles of wall is to be built?
checkd suggest you property sales along that portion of the border for the last couple of years. i would also ask that whoever war" for"fair bidding this wall, see if he is a major contributor to donald trump's campaign. i am sorry, i wish i could trust our president and i believe, for myself, he could instill trust in me by publishing his tax returns. let's follow the money. i believe this is why the muller investigation -- mueller is taking -- investigation is taking such a long time. they are having a hard time finding the convoluted trail of money. host: want to keep hearing your
thoughts on a deal you could support to end the current impasse over the issues at the border and day 19 of the government shutdown. lines for democrats, republicans, and independents. new guns unveiling legislation on capitol hill. it democrats said their long pledge to tighten the gun laws would it take center stage early this year as lawmakers introduce legislation on tuesday aimed at expanding background checks to nearly all gun sales. house speaker nancy pelosi, mike thompson of california who leads a task force focused on adducing gun violence and gabby giffords officially unveiled that legislation expanding background checks -- with the goal of flagging people for criminal and mental health -- there was a moment of --
the anniversary in tucson arizona where gabby giffords was shot. she was on the house floor for that moment of silence. it was led by ann kirkpatrick, who currently represents that district. [video clip] >> gabby served with great distinction in this house and despite her nearly fatal injuries has gone on to encourage and inspire us to take action to reduce gun violence in our country. today, a bipartisan group of our colleagues responded to gabby's call by introducing and cosponsoring house resolution 8. this bill, which i support, will keep guns out of the hands of people who are currently prohibited by law from purchasing guns. it will eliminate loopholes in the current background check system. it will not prevent responsible
gun owners from buying guns, but it will make sure gun purchases are made in compliance with existing laws. i look forward to the debate we will have regarding hr 8 and hope we will soon pass this bill out of our chamber. is aiolence in our nation major public health problem and it must be addressed. the american people who sent us here are waiting for us to step up and act responsibly on their behalf. we must do so. mr. speaker, i ask for a moment of silence. >> the house will observe a moment of silence. host: we are going to be talking
more about that legislation in our last 30 minutes of the washington journal today. stick around for our discussion. we will take your calls about the issue of stricter gun laws in this country. we have about five minutes left in this segment getting your thoughts on the deal you could support and the impasse over the current government shutdown. don in michigan, a democrat. go ahead. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, john. caller: i don't think we have a crisis at the border. the only crisis at the border is the one the trump administration created themselves and i think the democrats are dealing with the crisis he created as best as they can. -- toy is not willing to negotiate with the democrats, so he is creating the crisis himself. host: how would you negotiate? what would you offer?
caller: how would i negotiate? just about what nancy pelosi is offering because i don't think there is a crisis at the border. there might be a humanitarian crisis. the only crisis is we have a treasonous president who cannot tell the truth and a bunch of republicans unwilling to admit they made a mistake. host: this is joe in woodbridge, virginia. go ahead. caller: thanks for taking my call. i would like to focus on two solutions rather than name-calling. the compromise i believe can be made would be for president trump to give ground on building a concrete great wall of china-like barrier. i believe fencing, steel barriers, if he concedes that, the democrats will probably be willing to compromise. i think so. i think that would be a good compromise. he would look humble and the
democrats could have their little victory. i would like to talk briefly on situation.erstay my solution for that and the asylum-seekers that disappear in our country would be a facial recognition system in every u.s. embassy around the world. it is cheap and it works. everybody applying for a visa should be able to put their face in a facial recognition system. the same for asylum-seekers so we will be able to locate them and remove them to their home countries. everyone has to use a bank and go to a supermarket. everyone goes to walmart. facial recognition is here and affordable and we should be using it. host: charles is next. detroit, michigan. independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to say, may god bless america. president donald trump is a
whatever heent and wants to do to help this country to make it great again and more safe for citizens here working hard for dollars, i think, as a country, we should support him. vote forave enough to president donald trump, we should be brave enough to county that is what i wanted to say. i am tired of people. i am a full supporter of what donald trump is saying. president trump is fully right. we need that wall. there are a lot of people working here day and night to support their families and more people here just taking and taking and not putting back. host: geraldine in rochester, minnesota, democrat.
caller: i do not support the wall. i believe there are people out there who we could use of the $5 billion to pay them and go to the border to secure the border. donald trump speaks nothing but lies. and do not support him, he should not be in their. hitler's does the same thing. what is trump going to do. ? become a dictator? that is what it looks like he is doing. host: we spent the hour talking about a deal, a compromise. our hill or comparisons helpful in trying to come up with a deal or somewhere that the two sides can sit down? caller: look what heather did. he is a dictator -- hitler as a dictator. site is no way trump full down and have a deal unless he has his own deal. that is what hitler did.
what is trump going to do with you have so many people -- money for are any border wall that would be acceptable to you? caller: i don't want the wall. a billion take may be dollars. fast democrats could compromise with them -- we come at a democrats could compromise with them. the president is not a dictator. why can't he add like a president and get the workers back to work, open up the , make a deal with the democrats, instead of just having-- we are not anything, i will have my 5 billion for the wall?
missa geraldine of minnesota come our last color for this segment. plenty more to come. , we are joined by federal news towork's nicole ogrysko discuss how the government shutdown is impacting federal workers, and we have virginia democrat gerry connolly here to discuss the reaction to president trump's address last night. announcer: sunday on q&a, author and columnist james grant. writing about markets in something called "a grants interest rate observer" which is too expensive for people out there and. think the trouble lies not so much in wall street.
wall street is what it is. is -- in american history. we are to be on our guard about about institutions in the federal government that benign in their intentions -- the federal reserve for example, the treasury, the securities and exchange commission. these institutions set up as benefactors, the public. and i think increasingly, they are not so. announcer: james grant, sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. ♪ announcer: c-span, where history daily. in the 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's
cable television companies. today we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington dc and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. washington journal continues. we will focus on the shutdowns impact on the federal workforce. nicole ogrysko is a reporter at the federal news network which covers federal agencies. remind us about the numbers when it comes to federal employees. how many are currently furloughed, how many are working and not getting paid, and how many contractors that are being impacted? >> the total for federal employees is about 800,000 impacted by this particular federal shutdown. ,,f the bat, -- off that
there are about 20,000 who are still working, and 380,000 our homeland furloughed. the contractors, that is interesting, we don't know. the numbers have been pretty difficult to come by. the professional services ,ouncil deals with contractors and the have a really big number, like hundreds of thousands of federal contractors for supporting agencies. so that number is hard to want to fly. these shutdown discussions come up, there is talk about backpay. is that guaranteed? nicole: it is not guaranteed, but it is virtually likely, based on the past. in 2013, congress passed legislation guaranteeing back pay for federal employees. same with the shutdown in 2018. so while it is not guaranteed,
congress pretty much every time rolls through and passes legislation. host: what about the contracts we just talked about -- the contractors? nicole: they are not guaranteed back pay. those people in federal cafeterias, janitorial staff, security guards, it is not guaranteed. at an think we have seen that go through in congress in recent shutdowns. host: who is leading the effort, and is it garnering support? nicole: it has multiple cosponsors -- you saw delegate eleanor holmes norton in the house, and senator tina smith and then cardon, chris van senate team cane in the -- tim kaine in the senate as well there are people who have jumped on board that effort. host: and we will be joined by one of those virginia
congressman, gerry connolly will be here to talk about the shutdown. we're talking about the impact on the federal workforce right now. focus on federal workers, the line to call is (202)-748-8000 . all others can call at -(202)-748-8001 . we are starting to see stories about individual employees setting up gofundme pages. can you talk about the effort and what you think about the ethics of being able to do that? nicole: it is really complicated because while there are government ethics rules for accept gifts, and that is pretty much what these gofundme pages are, if you receive a donation, . butre receiving a gift typical ebix guidance would tell you, you can't accept a gift if it is over $20, or if it is from a prohibited source, that would mean someone or a contractor that your agency does business with.
that list could be very long. in addition, there are rules governing the dollar amount. worth $50accept gifts from one person in a given calendar year. there are a ton of ethical questions. it is not necessarily explicit guidance from the office of ethics on how they should deal with this. host: are they working on putting the guidance out? did put out a standard guidance before they left because much of the office is for a load. the guidance was pretty generic. agency ethics officer is likely aren't working, they are most likely for a load. but general councils should be working. so if federal employees have a question and want to be proactive, they could email the general counsel. is a story that
struck you as you were researching the story? nicole: family members with disability perhaps, or with serious medical conditions, one might be a federal employee, the other might be a stay-at-home mom or dad. the financial answer into the shutdown brings is causing them hardship. we had a caller who was a federal employee is the last segment and he was upset about the idea of the administration appointees getting a pay bump during the shutdown, appointees of the trump administration. can you talk about that? nicole: well, it is currently delayed. late last friday, a memo was put out saying -- hold off on giving your political appointees a pay raise. they acknowledged the fact that in the last three or four years or so, congress has chosen to freeze pay for political appointees. they have done that with appropriations language. the language has been pretty
standard, something that lawmakers just add in their appropriation bills. but because we don't have appropriation bills and we are in a government shutdown, they that. do now we are in a situation where appointees could get a raise at some point. host: was this something that was realized after the fact, that it did not do that -- that they didn't do that? nicole: it is unclear. the optics don't look great. the president has chosen to freeze pay for federal employees for the rest of 2019. congress could come back and say otherwise, and it looks like they will. congress will most likely come back and say, we want to freeze pay for political appointees. is nicole ogrysko, reporter who covers federal agencies. we have a special line for federal employees (202)-748-8000. hear your shutdown stories, your questions, how it is impacting you.
all others can call this number, -(202)-748-8001. we start with vivian from alabama. vivian, go ahead. concern. have a everyone is worried about federal employees not getting a paycheck at this time. it is pretty much guaranteed when they come back. when all of our manufacturing jobs left detroit and all those other places, where was all the compassion? those people did not have a chance to get her money back. they lost their homes and everything. two or threehave months since avenue savings accounts to say your mortgage and whatnot, you're not doing right.ng even come up making less than $20,000, have a savings account that would help me if something happens. host: how many federal employees have the savings to the last missing a paycheck? nicole: that is an interesting point. the national bureau of economic research published a study over
the summer. they looked at a particular instance of liquidity shock. what happens when you are faced with a particular financial hardship and the impact it might have on your savings. they looked at the 2013 shut down because of they saw that as a good, isolated example of a group of middle-class americans, and what impact it might have on them. 8-5 days outat from federal employees' next paycheck, they didn't necessarily have the savings in place. they were not prepared for what might happen when they don't get the paycheck. research tells us that this is an issue. that this is an issue. we are hearing stories from federal employees themselves during this shutdown describing their hardships. i think the caller makes a good is an though, that this issue that not everyone is necessarily prepared to handle.
host: in terms of the rest of america getting money back from the federal government, can you talk about this changing irs employees and why they will be going back in to work if the shutdown last several more weeks? recently gotrs permission from the office of management and budget to bring back some irs employees. we are not sure how many yet will be returning to work to hand out tax refunds to american taxpayers. agencies have the ability to , employees in certain circumstances particularly if it is considered emergency work, it is unclear how the shot -- how long the shutdown will last. the irs is one example of an agency that the administration back.osing to bring
the usda is another one, who announced yesterday that they had found a way to pay snap benefits. host: how are they able to do that if these people were originally deemed nonessential, these employees, if they had artie been pushed back from doing that? nicole: if you are a federal furloughed, you are you can't go too far, you have to be prepared to come back to work at any time. can be when the government and large opens, or when your agency asks you to come back. so it will be interesting to find out how exactly these employees feel. they will be working for pay, and that is not necessarily an ideal situation for someone. host: a map showing federal employees by state and around the country, you can find it yourself online. 22,000 federal employees in this stage.
we have a caller from there, please go ahead. caller: good morning. to put democrats and republicans aside. how, toon't understand get your agenda across, -- you're using your own people to -- you are screaming because he can't get a wall, but why are you using your own people? host: do you know any federal employees in north carolina? caller: it just bothers me that this man has the power to shut down a government just so he can get his own agenda through. host: that is jimmy in raleigh. jeffrey in a new york, go ahead.
caller: i am a former federal employee. deemed emergency essential that are required to work -- the area i am concerned with is that democrats and republicans voted this budget-busting budget, and $5 billion is not real money. wall, don'tmp the give him the wall, it doesn't matter. they damaged the economy by creating the huge debt overhang and that is going to destroy the economy. but they did not care about that. host: you say you are a former federal employee. did he ever go through a government shutdown? yes, i was deemed
emergency essential, but i was repaired to come back at a moments notice. host: how did you do financially? caller: i was very conservative, i never made a lot of money, but i went through it fine. but the thing is, federal employees are paid less, but in exchange, they have job stability. and it is going to get to the point -- a lot of them are very talented, but it will get to the aret where those employees just going to say, it is not worth it. i am tired of being a pawn in this political game. host: that was jerry from new york. theel, are we seeing leave federal service of this? nicole: it is too soon to say, but at the same time, maryland senator chris van hollen had a
townhall with some federal employees and they brought up the same point. the president is saying that the shutdown could go on for months or years, and it is a concern for them. we heard one of them say -- or maybe this is not the place for me, i may have to find a new job. the government already has a recruitment and retention problem particularly with young people. groupst majority of the who work in the government are over age 35 and they are having a hard time getting millennials took him to. work for these agencies i don't think the shutdown makes them attractive to work for. host: we went to hear from you federal employees this morning, the number to call is (202)-748-8000. one impact we have seen is federal employees missing their paycheck, contemplating filing
for unemployment insurance. can they do that, and what are the ethics of that? nicole: it defends what state you work, not where you live, but physically, where your agency is located. there appears to be a process to file for unemployment. it depends on the states, as far as how long the process at the end ofd the day, if you are a federal employee, not a contractor, but a federal employee, you will likely be paid. you might be in a situation where if you receive unemployment benefits, you may have to pay them back. host: gyms in massachusetts, good morning. caller: good morning. i live in a place but alongside of a big national heart, and i know a lot of people. they don't have any extra money. they are not paid are a lot, i don't know how they live on it.
it is day to day, really. it is unfair to use -- president day -- neveraid a spent a day for in his life. how does you know what it feels like to watch every dime that you spend all the time and then todenly you don't have them use the employees as a lever. to get what you want and then at the same time, we could for zero dollars, make a law that says, if you hire an illegal person, and of like a bar, if you let a person under age come in and they don't have sufficient identification that proves to you that they are old enough to drink, if you serve them, you get shut down. it ought to be something as simple as that. make it a law that if you hire somebody that does not have absolutely bulletproof proof of citizen, you lose
your license and may be a mandatory six months in jail. make it severe that nobody will do it. but the government will not do that. i have suggested it to many senators and representatives. i don't know why they won't do it. but for zero dollars, you could stop every person who hired you illegallks -- who hired folks, if they were under such a severe punishment possibility, they just wouldn't do it. your new said that federal employees who live or work dear in national park. you are seeing stories now off parks that have damage from visitors going into those parks, who don't have a rangers are not protecting the park, trash building in the park -- can those people who work in the park go in and help clean up the trash or help visitors in their unpaid hours, can they do that? nicole: that is another tricky ethical question.
we spoke with a few federal employment ethics attorneys and one said, i would find it difficult to have an interior department employee volunteering in their free time to pick up trash for ultimately the interior department. his message was, federal employees should not volunteer in no way, so that it furthers their agency's mission while they technically cannot work at all. so there are some tricky ethical questions associated that. at the same time, if you are a federal employee and you want to volunteer for a nonprofit like your church or your school, it cleare, if you make it that you are acting as a member of the public and not as a federal employee. i think you have a good argument to pick up trash. but i think if you are working for an agency and he wants to help the agency doing a shutdown, that is where it gets tricky. host: vanessa calling from
washington d.c. caller: good morning. my husband is a federal employee who is for a load, but he is essential, so he has to go in every day. it is ridiculous that people who go to work every day don't get pay. theily for us, i work in private industry, so it will not be difficult, but it will still be hard. host: vanessa, thanks for the call this morning. in terms of how you are dealing with this, how certain are you about back pay issues? well, the last time it happened to us, we were able to get back pay, but it is never a guarantee. then it doesn't stop everything that is happening like -- how are we going to pay our mortgage? that is still going to hit our
credit as far as if we are late, or getting back pay does not help us today. host: thank you for the call, vanessa. your thoughts on her story. nicole: it is very relatable for the 420,000 federal employees who are working and are not being paid right now. there are two losses currently out there at this point -- to on behalf of filed the other coming directly from the national treasury employees union. they argue that having employees work without pay is a violation of the fair labor standards actp thi was an argument they brought in 2013, and they won. attorneys are still calculating the damages associated with that , so nobody has received payment for their damages yet. but i think it is likely that
the courts would rule in their favor on this again. host: what would be the outcome, more damages being paid, or could there be an injection to keep that from happening in the future? nicole: unclear about the injunction, but i believe it means that employees might receive potentially double. they would be paid -- obviously, they received back pay, but they might be paid again because of this particular hardship that they dealt with during the shutdown because of this particular case. host: vikki is up next, from st. petersburg, florida. morning.ood i support the president, i support border security, and i am a democrat. i don't quite understand why all is on the workers who are displaced at the moment, because of the are going to get back to -- back pay. they will also be reimbursed
for, like your guests just said. i am a retired federal employee. got backened, and we pay. when you are a federal worker, you sign up for things like this. the like sending up for military. you are giving service to our country. be aople don't want to federal worker, they shouldn't apply to be one. it takes a lot of pride to be a federal worker. these people who are nonessential and are out, or a people that are working, it is not because of pay, it is because of a love this country. host: the believe that potential shutdowns are just part of the deal? caller: ever leave the potential is always there, just like if service.t into the if you go ahead and apply for a
police or fire job, you will not there isfirehouse, if a potential of the fire, you will do your job, the job that you love. this is what federal workers have. i think this'll conversation should be on the democratic leadership that is holding our president hostage, because he has done more for this country, giving manufacturing jobs back into this country. i know this is off base, but when people sneer at him and say that mexico was supposed to pay for this wall, inadvertently, mexico is. because all those manufacturing jobs that are coming back into our country, that is where it is. i don't understand why people use these to let points against him. they truly, truly hate our president. host: suzanne is on the line for federal workers, she is waiting from maryland. good morning.
caller: good morning. i have a question about active duty military. i wanted to find out if they have decided to pay them while they are watching our borders and stopping terminals from bringing drugs into the country, which i thought was a major want forwhy there is a the wall. it just kind of doesn't go together? nicole: the coast guard pay is an issue, particularly for the military portion of the coast guard. decided that it could pay its military workforce at the end of december, right before the new year. they consulted with the office of management and budget and found a way to do it like many agencies are doing it, like the irs. the question is are they will be allowed to do it in the future. unclear.
the military is paid on a different schedule than civilian employees, usually in the middle of the month and then toward the end of the month. that question will come up very soon. it is still unclear whether the coast guard be able to find a way to pay for its military workforce. host: talk about the tsa and this question about six-outs. sick-outs. doese: there were about there was a percentage more all -- there was a percentage more people calling out sick this year than this time last year. they could not comment as to why their members were potentially calling out, or if it was because there were actually sick or because it were fed up with the situation. they weren't sure.
job.orkers do a difficult i don't enjoy going through the security line at the airport and that is something they have to deal with every single day. morale at the tsa has been typically low. but they are actually two where the bottom of about 400 agents of the best places to work rankings. so it is a difficult job and having to come to work without worse. make things host: a statement from the tsa on those numbers you are talking about. this is from their press office. call outs nationwide have had a minimal impact. on january 7,t callouts were 26% -- call outs 6%, as opposed to 3.8% a year ago. they go to our next caller, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call today. host: what is your comment or
or question? caller: i support donald trump and the republicans and the democrats and independents of the new york stock exchange. they are great necessities and thaty and demand for ets could build this mexican border wall with the collaboration of the federal union. host: ok. go to antonio here in washington d.c good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. federal worker myself, but i have friends who work in various capacities for the government. what i wanted to comment on was during thesemes discussions, they don't mention the secondary effect. i had a friend in grad school in one supposed to work of the observatories during the 2013 shutdown.
they actually ended up setting his position back more than a couple of years. that the effects of the shutdown are often understated for that reason. that is not considered. it our last minute or so, can you talk to the secondary effects? nicole: that is a good point. on twitter a few days ago, i saw federal employees using the #s to tell theies unintended consequences of the shutdown. one agricultural department employees said he could not get into his greenhouse to water the plants in the usda greenhouse. and because of that, it is a ton of work they have spent months on, treating the plants, other things in the greenhouse that
they cannot -- that will ultimately be lost because they can't get in to their office to deal with these things for weeks at this point. ultimately, when they come back to work, that person will have to rebuild what was lost in the greenhouse. that is something you don't necessarily think about. the caller made a good. point. somebody actually estimated the cost of the shutdown per day? nicole: there are all caps of estimates out there. billions of dollars is generally an accurate way to describe it, but surely, it has a great impact. federal employees ultimately will be paid for work they are not necessarily doing, there is also a productivity loss. ,ost: the federal news network you can go there to federalnewsnetwork.com. nicole ogrysko, thank you for joining us.
nicole: thank you. host: next, we are joined by virginia democrat gerry connolly and nebraska democrat don bacon. we will be right back. announcer: coming up this weekend on book tv, saturday at 6:45 p.m. eastern, california democratic senator kamala harris details her life and career through her book. eastern, this author talks about his latest liberty.ast call for then, send it on afterwords at 9 p.m. eastern, this generalist talks about her book -- it was all a dream: a new generation confronts the broken promise to black america. she is interviewed by editor in chief of "the root."
watch this weekend on c-span2. announcer: sunday on q&a, author and columnist james grant -- >> i make my living by writing about markets in something called "grants interest rate observer" which is a bit expensive for some people out there. wall street is what it is, it has been a name that is not so widely revered, but it is an epithet. in american history, right? what we ought to be more on our guard about are the institutions in the federal government that benign in their intentions. the federal reserve, for example. the treasury. the securities and exchange
commission. these are institutions set up as .enefactors to the public but increasingly, they are not so. announcer: author and columnist, james grant. sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. >> washington journal continues. host: democrat gerry connelly joins us now. his virginia seat lies just across the potomac river and he oneains -- and it contains of the highest numbers of federal employees. are we in a closer to ending the shutdown than we were yesterday? rep. conolly: what shocked me about the president's remarks you woulde just -- never know that you are in the middle of the second longest federal government shut down in american history. i thought it was a very shameful part of the presidents presentation. the crisis we are in is a shutdown of the federal
government. the furloughing of almost 800,000 federal employees plus lots of contractors and the services being denied the american people as a result. and he chose to talk about the wall. i thought that was a huge disservice to the country by the president. host: is there any deal to be had here? rep. conolly: i think the deal that is increasingly attractive to republicans is -- let us reopen government and let us start a series of conversations about order security. the wall could be part of that conversation. it is aou make it -- non,ndition, a sine qua without a wall, that is a nonstarter. host: what are you hearing on capitol hill? rep. conolly: four republicans who represent large numbers of federal employees and federal contractors, and for republicans
, it is really important for their economy and they are beginning to get we actions back home about the consequences of the economic ripple effects that are all negative from the shutdown. so they are under increasing pressure to find a way out of this. host: can you name names? rep. conolly: the already have several republicans in the -- lisa murkowski of alaska, shelley moore capito of west virginia, susan collins of colorado,y gardner of and i think they will be joined by more. host: walk us through what the house will be doing when it comes to these individual funding bills coming to the floor to open parts of the government. how that is going to work and what the strategy is behind that? rep. conolly: we have already passed a full funding bill for and ast of the government
short-term funding bill for the department of homeland security in the house. ironically those are bills that we are sending to the republican senate that they had already passed unanimously. mr. mcconnell, whose face ought to appear on a milk carton in this shutdown, previously shepherded those bills and now cannot be found to bring them up for consideration in the senate. i think he will be under increasing pressure from his republican members. 24ember, the republicans had senate seats up for reelection that they are defending in 2020, and increasingly a lot of those 2020 republicans will feel the heat. if mitch mcconnell will protect his majority, he will have to help find a way out of this. so far, he has been missing in action. host: gerry connolly is with us until the top of the hour. if you support the shutdown, the phone line to call is (202)-748-8000. and for federal workers, the
phone number to call is (202)-748-8002. if you don't support the shutdown, the phone number to call is (202)-748-8001. rep. connolly: in my district, and probably for every federal employee, there is at least one employee.ntract the private sector since ronald reagan increasingly provides a direct services to the federal government, so sometimes the federal employee works next to a federal contract employee in the work lace. those federal contract employees are not only not being paid for their work, they don't necessarily get guaranteed retroactive pay when this is over. host: and you are trying to guarantee this for some federal contractors. rep. connolly: yes. host: which ones? rep. conolly: i don't understand what you mean. host: you said federal contractors.
rep. connolly: my view is, if you do the same work in the work lace as a federal employee, you ought to be treated with the same kind of consideration retroactively when this is over. you recommend to a young person to go into the federal service this of days? would.nnolly: i the federal service is a calling this days and serving your fellow citizens, making america a better place, is a very noble thing to do. host: laterally take a few calls. barbara from florida, good morning. caller: hello. yes. i am calling to support donald trump, our president. i have always been a democrat that i am leaving that party because of their stubbornness. i just -- they just want to get rid of trump, period.
that is my statement. thank you. rep. connolly: i don't know that democrats just want to get rid of trump. he was elected president and we certainly respect about, but it does not mean that we march in lockstep with his agenda or his goals. we believe what he is doing right now is flat out wrong. holding the federal government hostage, the actual operations of the federal government hostage to a political promise, which had two parts to it -- we would build a wall, and hard to, mexico would pay for it. be in theuld we position as citizens of seeing our federal government shut on over a wall that mexico, not you and i, was supposed to pay for? that is my position. host: do support impeaching donald trump? rep. conolly: i think it is premature to hold that conversation. we have a process underway. robert mueller's investigation is not complete.
it is a criminal investigation. more and more revelations continue to tumble out. he just got a six month extension on a special grand jury here in washington. i want to see robert mueller be allowed to complete his investigation. then we will see where we are. every president has to be held accountable. but to prejudge the situation by saying, let's have impeachment and we will fill in the blanks later, i break ranks with those who make that argument0 abc news reporting that the department of justice in the coming weeks -- your thoughts on that? rep. conolly: i think it is a real's? -- real a to los the department of justice. mr. rosenstein to his credit appointed a special prosecutor and has overseen in the investigation and has done so honorably. it has got an ominous and chilling feel to it to hear that he might be leaving. host: robert calling from
virginia, he opposes the shutdown. go ahead. caller: good morning, guys. i believe this is all political for 2020. i think donald trump is just picking a fight with the democrats to get this thing rolling for 2020. if robertuestion, mueller finds that trump did collude with the russians, will the supreme court justice seats be vacated? rep. conolly: what a good question. unfortunately, that would impeachments.onal but let me say, i agree with you and it is so glad to hear you frame the question in a good old southern accent. because this ought to concern every american, irrespective of what part of the country become from or what political party we belong to. this is about the integrity of our country. proof is fond of
collusion, it is a serious matter, and impeachment proceedings will have to start to occur, because you can't turn a blind eye to a foreign interference in the most sacred function of the democracy, the election itself. but we are not there yet. we will see what happens. to the supreme court, one of the consequences of the electoral victory by donald trump is that he gets to appoint and the republican senate gets to confirm supreme court nominations. the republicans and donald trump have radically changed the influence on the supreme court and in the district and circuit courts throughout the united states. and that is why elections have consequences and that is why we ought to be concerned about what is happening right now. host: alexandria, virginia, jerry is a federal worker. good morning. federalnot only am i a
worker, but i am also part of the armed forces. i don't know why you guys. and congressman connolly, who happens to be my congressman as well, not only as support. not somebody i have good feelings about. he claims to be supporting the military and federal workers. if you look at something -- c-span, do your homework, there was something put out, a rating for all congresspeople. he has one of the worst records supporting -- not supporting military and federal employees. narf?what is caller: it is the national association of retired federal employees. caller: it is a disgrace. host: congressman, your response? rep. conolly: the facts are wrong. of national association active and retired federal
employees has supported me and all my elections. i have a 100% voting record with them, and also a virtually 100% voting record with the military association employees. when certain military groups actually did endorse, i was endorsed by those organizations for reelection. i was praised most recently by virtually every veterans group for the work i did recently in getting a bill passed through the defense authorization act to make sure that fallen soldiers' families continued to receive death benefits doing shutdowns such as this one. your facts are completely wrong. . i am glad i have a chance to clear them up. host: new video from the white house. white house press secretary sanders was asked about the border wall this morning. here is a little bit of what she had to say. am concerned about the crisis of the border.
we need democrats to step up and do their job. >> is there truly aggressors of the border, and if so, why did the president declare a shutdown? shutdown -- the best solution is to be able to work with congress to get this done. you can close a lot of the loopholes, fund border security fully, and that is what we are hoping to do. why all the concentration on the open border? >> it is not the only place. what we know is that the southern border is a most vulnerable point of entry to our country, something we have to protect. even if one terrorist comes across the border, it is want to many. we have to do everything we can to stop that. >> the president appeared to offer no new proposals or no new ideas at his address.
what if anything changed here over the course of the last 18 or 19 days. >> the president was laying down his proposal for the american people. theut a proposal forward to congress and two democrats and we still have not heard back. they have yet to make a counter offer. we hope they will get serious about negotiating. >> in terms of negotiation, is that something you imagine will get woven into this if the shutdown does not end soon? proposal,e put out a it is not something that is being discussed at this point. we still know that there are dacas that are regarding that need to go up to the supreme court. right now we have a proposal on the table and we would like to see democrats respond. host: congressman connolly, your response. rep. connolly: what is sad about watching this proposal is, we have a solution, build the wall.
froms a political is supposed to be paid by mexico, and suddenly it becomes the issue for the democrats. we have an agreement to fund the government that the past republican-controlled senate allowed to pass unanimously. it was donald trump for decided based on right wing pundits reacting to this, that he would change his mind. bus, we are in the second-largest shutdown in american history. now, the wall, the russian of the wall is based on lies -- in the wall is based on lies and and norma's distortions. >> if you listened to the president you would think that everyone who courses the border is a drug mule, but most of the illegal immigrants come in through trucking that
legal ports of entry -- most of the illegal drugs that come through the border come in through trucking. rate among crime immigrants and undocumented immigrants is lower than that of population.merican >> there are tragic examples that happen, but there are also tragic examples that have been with nativeborn americans. >> to characterize immigrant population in appeals to the most xenophobic, nativist elements of our society and it is a shameful thing to hear coming-out of the mouth of the president in the oval office. and to hear sarah sanders repeating those lies and those distortions, frankly, it is a sad day for america to watch. host: what we didn't hear from the president last night was that he would clear a national emergency to find the funds to build his border wall. sanders just said it no, that they are still looking at the possibility. your thoughts on that.
rep. connolly: i think he didn't do it because there is no national emergency. it is a little hard to declare one that does not exist. this is a manufactured crisis. the only crisis on the border is the humanitarian crisis he helped. create we are ready lost two children who have died because of lack of proper care because of the system he has not put in place that ought to be put in place at the border. if he wants to talk about border security writ large, democrats are more than willing to talk to him about that. if he wants to continue to insist wall or nothing, i don't think there will be it, and ground because we don't share that view at all. just as for his base, the will has become symbolic of something. host: if the wall becomes symbolic --has it become symbolic for democrats? rep. conolly: it has become a symbol and a metaphor for his nativist policies. host: does that mean he cannot
allow any mile of the wall to be built? rep. conolly: there are parts of the border that have barriers, physical barriers. most of us think it is a silly waste of money when you could so much better invest in technology , drone technology, for example, intelligence intercepts, new facilities that would -- and personnel, that would frankly do a much better job of securing the border and providing ancillary services, including services. but the wall has become this anti-refugee, anti-asylum, anti-immigrant symbol. use saw what happened in the midterm elections when he went on this kind of rant around the country. on average in suburban districts, republican incumbents lost four or five points that week. this is not something that resonates with the public. we are not a bigoted people and we can see through this kind of
fear tactic and fear mongering in characterizing an entire class of human beings, immigrants. host: we want to let you chat with as many colors as possible. phyllis in new york, good morning. caller: i would like to say, the buck stops with the president. i will use a scenario. you get city sanitation workers in the new york that work overtime during snow and don't get paid for six months. the money is allocated for them, just like it is for the federal workers, the money is there. why don't they roll it over it like big corporations do? of dollars every day, make interest on it, and that will pay for the wall? rep. conolly: we will take it into consideration. but i don't want to pay for the wall. , mexico was supposed to pay for the wall. that was his promise, and he needs to keep it? rep. conolly:. host: bob is a federal worker in
annapolis, good morning. bob, go ahead. caller: hello. host: bob, you're going in and out. maine. go to wynn in caller: yes, i oppose the shutdown vehemently. it is an issue that is really based on rhetoric. that is what is killing communication between the two parties, that is what is charging up the left and right to go out -- to go at each other's throat. nobody has a good data to make the decision and that is what the problem is. you can go in there and find some data and have it support your cause. what i think c-span should do is have a session once a week where you can put charts up, show the
isa, dispute the data that spewed out by either the left or the right to you get to the truth. cbo data and i have a set that shows how much pay federal workers get! sector. to the private 52% higher than federal employees whose bachelor's education. if you have a high school diploma, you get 50% higher compensation than private sector employees. what the woman said earlier on a prior segment that people should have savings -- they should have savings. privatethink that sector workers should be hindered by not getting their paychecks because of the shutdown. take the whole wall thing, take it off-line, and don't try to
harm any of the workers as a result of this medical spat -- political spat. rep. connolly: i couldn't agree with you more, federal workers should not be held hostage to a partisan political agenda that is losing support by the hour because of there is no real intellectual russia now for a rationaletellectual for a wall. on your comments on federal employees, at the lower end of the skill set, federal employees tend to do welcome. to the private sector in terms compensation. but when you get into the high skill set, lawyers, technicians, engineers, scientists, they are actually way behind their private sector counterparts and increasingly so. for a group that says we ought to run government liquor twooration, i worked for
corporations over 20 years before i came to government -- no ceo would freeze the salaries of his workforce for three years running. or put on a hiring freeze, threaten compensation, redo their pension program, call them names, disparage their work -- that ceo would be removed from every responsible corporate board. threaten to shut down the corporation. can you imagine a major corporation traded on wall street doing that? of course not. yet that is what we are doing here. federal workers should not be -- shoulder age not be held hostage to the political whims of a president. host: we have a federal worker, go ahead. caller: i have been in the military and i have been a 96 and iworkers since ' have been through multiple shutdowns for varying reasons
and both parties causing this. to you think it is right that congress gets paid their per benefits, while federal workers daunt and we are being used as pawns? rep. conolly: that is a perennial debate when something like this happens. everyone has a favorite cause of one congress should get paid. host: are you taking a paycheck? rep. conolly: i am taking a paycheck. i am working night and day to get the government back operating. i remember when we were talking about d.r.e.a.m.e.r.s. legislation, people said that if we did not passive, congress should not get paid. if we didn't pass a budget, congress should not get paid. the constitution mandates that congress should get paid, to -- and toongress from focus federal members on doing their jobs. i don't favor the government shutdown, i never have and never will. i think it is bad public policy.
you as a citizen have a right to expect that the president and congress are doing their jobs, keeping government open and operating. that is -- doing. -- caller: yes, good morning. i think if we save one american life with of the wall, which back, -- which, by the way, it seems like democrats want the wall, then they don't want the wall, i don't understand that. they are tell you, making a big thing out of something that is not that big of a problem. i think the president is in a better position to make the call , and i support him. i was a democrat, but now i'm a republican. i don't like what they are doing and what they stand for. thank you.
recall the history here of this shutdown. the president didn't bring up the wall when the senate unanimously passed the two bills we passed last week. that was a unanimous vote in the united states senate. a republican-controlled body. the republican-controlled house to pass those bills. and the president said he would sign them. it was only when sean hannity and rush ingraham, limbaugh, and other right-wing talking heads objected to his signing of those bills without a wall that he changed his mind. he abruptly denounced and pulled the rug from underneath mitch mcconnell and the republican , which maythe senate be why he is missing in action, that he would not sign it. he created the crisis, he injected the wall where it had not been and we're in the
position we are in. i think that's wrong and i will hold him accountable for that. democrats did not create this prices, president trump did. guest: before donald trump was there a time when you supported a wall, or money for building walls on the u.s. border? guest: i have supported border security but never a physical it's a 14thk century answer to a 21st century problem. i favor beefing up border security, and humanitarian assistance to meet the asylum requests for the growing, intermission we are taking care of children who are ponds in this game. we have already lost two children who have died because of lack of care on this side of the border. we cannot have that. that's not what america is. host: we will leave it there, jerry conley, a democrat from virginia.
thank you. up next week we'll continue our discussion of day 19 of the government shut down with nebraska republican congressman, don bacon. we will be right back. ♪ >> sunday on q&a, author and columnist james grant -- james grant. >> it's a called grant's interest rate observer, which is a quest to -- i think the trouble lies not so much in wall street. wall street is what it is. that has been revered, but mostly infamous. it has been there for most of
american history. what we ought to be more on our guard about are the issues and the federal government that are validly denied in their intentions. the department of treasury, the fed, the security exchange commission, these have been set public,nefactors to the and increasingly they are not so. atjames grant, sunday night 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. >> c-span, where history unfold daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. 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. representative don bacon is back at our desks, a republican from nebraska who has served on the armed services committee and homeland security committee during his two years on capitol hill, and agriculture as well. afters your take away those dueling addresses last night from the president and nancy pelosi and chuck schumer? >> we have a problem at the border and we need to get it fixed. the president ran on this with his priority during the campaign and he won election on it. this is an opportunity for compromise and we are not seeing it. but nancy pelosi and chuck schumer set down a single dollar for the wall, that's not compromise, that's gridlock. we have a broken border. we are talking about a steel barrier, it's about 234 miles of
steel barrier, not 2000 mile of it's targeted areas for border patrol watches, but the advocating for a better screening device for cars at ports of entry, more law enforcement officers, judges, facilities, we need a more comprehensive approach. the steel barrier is a part of that. it's only for 12% of the border. that's what we are looking at. a lot of people say we are looking at a 3000 mile of wall, that's the targeted approach and it works. guest: has the president can't -- host: has the president compromise? he has asked for $5.7 million. host: has he offered yet -- offered less? guest: yes, and they offered is will dollar. even when the government was up and they refused to negotiate, they said not a single dollar.
we will not negotiate until it reopens. so open or closed, they had been refusing to negotiate and we have to meet in the middle. that's how the government works. host: where is the middle? , the president has expressed willingness to come off a $5.7 million and go down, and he has exposed willingness to meet in other areas like daca, and other areas that we need to address. i support more legal immigration, nebraska has an issue of a lack of workers, we work on thele to immigration side and there is give-and-take on this, if we come together we should be able to solve a lot of issues. you mentioned your work on the agriculture committee, democrats are looking to reopen parts of the government outside of the department of homeland security to start bringing workers back to the jobs, would you support the bills that would
specifically reopen agriculture and some of the related agencies? guest: i would if they would be willing to compromise on border security. the senate refuses to take up any of these bills if they think the president will veto them. this is wasted effort. it's political posturing. not clean bills, some of these have added abortion measures. would -- we do need to open up government,es of agriculture, the interior department, homeland security, we have multiple bills, but the senate will not address these and will not reform them if the president will veto them. so we need to get to the problem at hand. we need to negotiate on border security. host: and the senate will not address it, republicans and mitch mcconnell has said he will not bring them up because the president and support them, should he reconsider that opinion?
to put pressure on the president to reopen the government? thought the democrats were working together -- i know a lot of democrats i work with one for border more borderwant security and would support some physical borders. and nancyschumer pelosi, when the government was open, refused to negotiate with the president. they said not one dollar. solve this problem now, and as soon as nancy pelosi and chuck schumer agreed to meet in the middle, this government will open. the congressman is with us until the bottom of the hour. the phone lines are as usual for these segments, if you support the shut down its (202) 748-8000 , if you oppose (202) 748-8001, and we still have that line for federal workers at (202) 748-8002.
recently with border patrol agents, were you on the border? guest: i saw them at the homeland security -- security committee hearings at the end of last year. i asked what do you really need? what is your goal here? that's why i think of our voters know that they did not want this to thousand mile wall, they want targeted barriers, we saw that it works during the caravan were they could not cross because of the physical barrier that was there. they want targeted areas. i think we need to understand what their needs are. it's not just about the wall. it has to be a comprehensive approach. this is one piece of the puzzle. and we have to realize it. i think when voters hear that it is part of the worst security plan, and when they hear about 72,000 people dying of drug overdoses, and heroine coming into the country, and criminals
that have been stopped at the southern border, there is a problem and we want it resolved. did: we did here that -- we hear about declaring a national emergency and sarah sanders a said this morning that it is still being considered, is that something you support? guest: it would be a mistake. we have a growing national emergency. it signifies a failure of congress. this is congress in a fact. we have article one responsibilities. what we have seen in the last 20 years, with president obama, president bush, and president clinton, when congress has gridlock it cannot solve problem. it refuses to compromise. presidents fill that void with executive orders, or we have judges that legislate from the bands. -- bench. the founders designed at a three people branch of the government
and we're sitting on a three areed stool but two legs the right size and congress is half the size. we need to negotiate in good faith. host: we have and who supports the shut down. i did 10 years in the military, i used to be a democrat, now i'm a republican, au know, you're talking about billion dollars a day on this shutdown. in one day you could take care of all of this mess. if all of you could agree, pay for the wall, get it done, and everyone will be back to work and no one is losing money. we would all be ahead. this hot -- this country would be ahead and we would be saving money. guest: is it that easy -- host: is it that easy? guest: i think it is, chuck schumer voted for a wall three
times the size that the president is asking for, so we have had leadership that has voted for walls much bigger than what is being requested, but because the president is asking for it, now they are saying now. i have seen too much of that in our politics, if you love the you write a blank check. or if you despise the president, you resist and that's not right. we need to look at what is right for our country, we have a broken border and a problem at the southern border, whether it's opioids, heroine, or criminal folks coming across, most people come over and want a job, we are not trying to label the whole group. they want to make a better living for their families, we want to do it legally. we want legal immigration. and we think we could solve this quickly if there was a willingness to meet halfway. greg opposes the shutdown,
go ahead. i think is crisis at the southern border only became a crisis when the democrats won . republicanss the had, and they never funded this wall, so why all of a sudden has it become a democrat holding a shutdown when republicans could not get the wall funded? thank you. guest: i think that's a great question. there are two aspects. we do have a filibuster rule in the senate that requires 60 issue,that has been an we had 51 votes in the republican senate last congress and it made clear that it was a nonstarter. the house, the senate, and the president focused on tax reform, there are other things we're working on. but we should have moved this forward, it has been a problem, i have voted for two compromise immigration bills that has
physical barriers for the border, the provided more judges , all of the things we need to do to make the southern border better, but we cannot get it passed in the house and one of this was the unwillingness on both sides. republican said if i know the -- vote yes on this we know the senate will not bring this up to the vote. and i have to take it back to my district. the filibuster has been a factor but here's another factor, we have have folks on both sides of the aisle that demand 100% or 95%. we have folks who said not one single block, not one brick. any sense of amnesty on one side you say no go. that's a recipe for getting nothing done. and then the executive branch will fill in that void. we have to give on this. we have to be willing to have physical barriers, we need to e-verify,tps, daca,
we want to upgrade the legal immigration system. have people coming in with master degrees that's "i want to be a part of our country. there are things we need to do but it takes compromise. that wants to be a part of our country. should this have come first after the president was inaugurated, the -- more so than a tax reform effort or the repeal and replace of obamacare? guest: i would say tax reform was needed, because american businesses were paying double what most other countries were whichng for their taxes, takes us back to the global economy. and we are the only country that did not charge -- that charged overseas earnings twice. so our companies have $3 trillion on side of the united states. that was something we needed to fix. we needed to fix our health care
have doubled and tripled, and we had $2000 deductibles. i think all of these issues need to be addressed but you cannot do them all at once. host: a federal worker in washington is up next, good morning. caller: i have a couple of questions for the representative . i need a yes or no answer, did not trump say he would sign the sent to him, and then changed his mind and the it, saying i will not sign it. yes or no. noble should answers. -- he had an agreement to work with the tax passage and judicial form, they said they would work on this in february. i would say yes, there was an agreement with mcconnell because he wanted to work on other things. from many voters
back on, saying we are tired of you kicking the can. have been hearing from folks that we do not believe you're going to work on border security. i think the president assumed the same thing and he changed his mind. this is not 100% perfect on either side, or 100% turbulent. , and are shades of gray the president should have been very clear, who had said earlier in the december, so that there was not mixed messages being sent, we had a lost opportunity. host: it sounds like you had a follow-up. caller: i do. so this thing with the border, i lived in los angeles in the 50's, they have been bringing them across the border for years, republicans, driving down ares, and the $3 trillion
talking about, that's our money from our jobs that they took and you guys gave it to the rich and borrow $3 trillion to do it and you stuck the american people where we are about to lose because of the apologies of the republican party. you have become traitors to and republicans and democrats do not care for the american people. guest: i do care. i want american businesses to globally.ata compete i am excited that we have the best employment numbers in five decades, and manufacturing grossed -- growth. the best unemployment numbers in the history of our country for african-americans and hispanic americans, we have tripled the gdp growth since we came in in january, i am for -- i'm proud of those. and on tax reform, it has been revenue neutral at this point. we have lost 1% of the deficit,
so far it has been attributed to the tax reform. the revenue has broken even. it's the spending is a problem and we need to get our arms around that. i would say you are right. we have had an immigration, a broken immigration system for a while, that's not a good reason to let it continue. legalort a strong immigration system but we do not someillegal immigration, companies hire folks that are undocumented. they get an unfair advantage for those were trying to do it right. i have 13 unions supporting me in the last election because they knew i would deal with other companies that were undercutting them with undocumented workers. this is such a multifaceted problem. we need to resolve it. host: asheville, north carolina. paula. caller: before i get into what i think is a compromise, i want to say that i do not understand this. this is our president. we should support the wall.
$5 billion is nothing compared to the money we waste housing and helping these people, and medical aid when they are not even supposed to be here. that is beyond for me. want to know if pelosi and schumer are going to stand up and try to compromise? open the government and do what they say. .pen it for two weeks i have heard many people say to get this resolved in four or five hours, but for two weeks haveell them, if we don't a compromise in two weeks we will shut it down again. i think that's the best way to handle it. thank you. guest: i would say that we had the government open in december and they refused to negotiate, they both said not a single dollar. whether the government has been
opened or closed, so far they have refused to come to the table. not a single dollar for a physical barrier. and i think what is right for our national security, what is right for our country, we have a broken border, we have the power and the brains and the ability are willing towe not demand 100% of what we want. if we have people at the table want to take 80%, then we will get this fixed. don bacon of nebraska, republican, we saw news report starting with abc about rob leave his expected to post as deputy attorney general in the coming week after the next attorney general is confirmed. sarah sanders at the white house this morning was asked about those reports. here's what she had to say. >> [indiscernible] i have not spoken with the
president about that specifically this morning. that the deputy attorney general had always planned to , he wouldd two years like to help with the transition of bringing the new attorney general in. we hope that happens relatively soon. i know he wants to build a new team and he has done a great job. we will let him make any further announcements. guest: -- host: congressman bacon? guest: i don't have much to add. i think it's an opportunity for our fbi and attorney general leadership, it has been under such a microscope, i think we do need fresh leadership. i appreciate that mr. rosenstein is willing to help bring in a but this turnover is natural. i think it's time to bring in some new leadership with the attorney general, the fbi, which we are starting to see. i think that will be healthy for our dialogue. the leadership should be under
the microscope for three years, it has been overly politicized. we should do better. your thoughts about the turnover of the department of defense? specifically jim mattis's departure? guest: i respect and roma i was a lieutenant colonel when he was a to start -- i was a lieutenant colonel when he was a two star general. he is a man of great wisdom and one of the best leaders we have produced. it is a great loss. hopefully someone will fill those shoes, maybe a little differently. i respected him and i thought he was a voice of wisdom in our administration. i did not want to see him leave, i cannot picture a better person at the top. the way that he left, and some of the criticism coming out from the president about jim mattis? perspective, the
.eed for allies is true i don't think the president disagrees, though there are differences in tone. i think this is all right. willresident of any party take criticism, sometimes the criticism is valid and it makes us better. feedback is good. in the air force we say that feedback is the breakfast of champions. i think secretary of defense has good-- mattis perspective, we don't want to pull out of syria without a strategic plan, and we are back in the right spot. we are wanting to leave syria but we want to do it wisely. we don't want to leave allies hanging. they have fought with us for 13 years. ,e need a strategic withdrawal we don't need to be announcing it to the public and isis. i think in afghanistan we want
the minimal presence that will in sure that the taliban is not take over afghanistan, where they will house isis and al qaeda. i think the secretary of defense offered some good critique. host: about five minutes left to get feedback from our callers. joseph, who opposes the shutdown. ,aller: i was listening to don he says it matters of the government's ", what does afghanistan have to do with the wall in america? i'm so confused, i was under the -- i feel that terrorized by the government shutting down. if it doesn't matter then why is it being done? to terrorize me? i don't understand. guest: i would agree has nothing to do with afghanistan. i have it involved in intelligence, i was an intelligence guy in the airport
-- air force, and i have been ,rivy to intelligence briefings there are isis and al qaeda operatives that have a pipeline going from the middle east into south america and central america. there is a trafficking network that brings them into mexico, guatemala is a supporting sunni , so there is an issue theecuring our border from terrorist perspective. i think it matters of the government to shut down, i did not need to communicate -- my point is with nancy pelosi and chuck schumer, when the government was open or closed, they refused to negotiate. they are saying real in the government and they did not do that in december. it was open. my perspective it matters. from are being appended -- my perspective, it matters. lies are being up ended. appended.re being
--up ended. it's a sign of gridlock when we have these shutdowns. but this is a priority and we cannot keep saying that we have been doing this for the last two years, another three months, another six months, nancy pelosi and chuck schumer have refused one brick. they don't want a single dollar and that's not the right answer. in tennessee, ron, who supports the shutdown. caller: this comment that i have to make you today, i hope you let me speak. i -- this is and not for the far right, this is for common sense americans. there has been all kinds of bible scriptures quoting this, so i went through the bible to see what god says about a wall, in the bible god commanded
someone to build a wall to protect the people, they did it with swords in their hands. jerusalem, israel as god's nation and there is a wall around israel, i have been there five times, there is a wall around the city of jerusalem. there is a wall around the temple mound. wall, thee greatest largest wall ever built? if you think it's the great wall of china it's not, god built a wall. , it's in miles long the 21st chapter of revelations. it's 6000 miles long, 1500 miles high, the bible says it is the 12 foundations. were discussing the southern border, and 2019. caller: this is when talking about. see this is what you do. nancy pelosi said it was immoral. god is not agod is not immoral. he is holy.
god built a wall and we need a wall. host: congressman. guest: thank you pastor, i appreciate what you are doing. i am grateful to all of our pastors out there. nancy pelosi has a wall around her house, so does president obama and hillary clinton. work andr is does it we saw with the caravan, it did work. it gets twisted and exaggerated. we wanted to hundred 34 mile targeted by border patrol as part of an integrated border security plan with stuff that will search vehicles, more law enforcement officers, sensors, a remote part -- a remote piloted aircraft to protect our country so that we ensure folks can come
here legally and share in the american dream the right way. host: our last call is from california. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. -- people calling for walls and some people are using the bible. yet a wall on your own backyard -- think of all the manufactured prices. teacherso support the and force them to go on strike because all of a sudden we don't have enough money for education.
they want the government to increase their salaries. we don't have enough people who can think critically. we are looking at 12% of the border. chuck schumer has voted for a wall three times that size already but says it does not work. we are at 12% of the border. it is not an answer by itself. it has to be an integrated part of border security with sensors, manpower, more judges. this is an opportunity to address some of our legal immigration issues. if we have folks that want to come to the table, we could solve some any problems that have been nagging at us for over two decades.
this zero negotiation or zero compromise hurts america, it hurts our economy and security. host: representative dunn bacon, republican from nebraska -- don bacon, the public and from nebraska thank you. we are going to be talking to you about your support for stricter gun laws. phone lines for whether you do or don't support stricter gun laws. you can start calling it now and as you are calling in, yesterday, and congresswoman who lost her son to gun violence helped introduce the new background check. here is part of what she had to say. [video clip] waseven years ago, my son violently torn from my life. the victim of a gun in the wrong hands. today i join my colleagues and former congresswoman debbie giffords to prevent more families from facing the horror and heart break that was brought
on by gun violence. , unlicensed sales and online sales have allowed guns to end up in the hands of violent criminals. andlosing these loopholes expanding background checks, we will make our communities safer. states that have already expanded background checks have lowered homicide rates, murder rates and gun trafficking. background checks empower law enforcement to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and domestic abusers. quite simply, background checks save lives. i am honored to cosponsor this bipartisan legislation for my son jordan, survivors and for the safety of every family in
this country and i asked my fellow parents, my fellow members and my fellow americans to stand with us today and support universal background checks. together, we will make our communities safer and the country deserves it. thank you. [applause] >> washington journal continues. host: our question for you in --s last 25 minutes before phone lines for you who support, (202)-748-8000. phone lines for those of you who do not, (202)-748-8001. more information on that bill introduced yesterday, it was a bipartisan bill. five republican cosponsors. they include peter king, brian fitzpatrick, fred upton of michigan and chris smith of new
jersey. we will play you more from that press conference and scenes from the house floor when that new universal background check bill was introduced. we will start with your calls. on tree is up first in florida -- audrey is up first in florida, who believes we should have stronger gun laws. caller: thank you. i would like to make the comment that republicans want a border wall sometimes and even though it lets through drugs and illegal immigrants, they still want the border wall but when it comes to gun laws, it is a lot of the same. there will still be killings so they say well, people will still kill people. it is the same thing. gun laws will still help prevent a lot of deaths.
-- both ofh that those things are intertwined. even though it will not stop all the drugs like the wall and even though it won't stop all the killings, i think it is important that stricter gun laws are introduced. host: what specifically do we need? caller: i believe in stronger background checks. i believe we also need to be able to track the deaths from guns. i think people in the health care field should have a greater say because they see the carnage that guns cause, good and bad. host: jerry is up next in ohio. caller: i support more gun laws. i think we should improve the ones on the books. we don't need to add more. charles is next and things
we do need stricter gun laws. indiana. go ahead. caller: i was calling to show my support. for stricter gun laws. host: what about this specific legislation on background checks? caller: definitely it will mean that. more often we keep seeing it more and more and we need to do something about background checks. no question about it. host: for more information on this legislation introduced yesterday. this was the political wrapup of it. it was moving through the legislative system. the proposal would require federal background checks on all gun sales including private transactions. there would be small exceptions to those checks such as transfers between family members or temporary use.
gun control groups estimate that roughly 1/5 or more of gun sales don't include background checks. that is where this legislation introduced yesterday is focused. here are some stats from gallup when it comes to the idea of stronger, more strict gun laws. feel gunion, do you laws should be more strict, less strict or kept as they are. back in october of last year, 61% said they should be more strict. 8% said they should be less strict. 30% said they should be kept where they are. you can compare that to october of 2090 -- of 2009. those numbers are with gallup, dating back to the 1990's. in texas and believes we should not have stricter gun laws.
are you with us? caller: yes. shouldting that they enforce the gun laws they have. host: explain that a little bit more. which ones are not being enforced? caller: i called to give a simple answer that i do not approve of stricter laws, especially in the private area. we don't even enforce the gun laws we have. criminals will always have guns. point, this from congressman doug collins, the top republican on the house judiciary committee, said that he shares his colleagues convictions that congress should find effective ways to prevent violence and improve public safety but said new legislation is not the solution on those fronts. recent shootings reflect failures that of existing
policy. background checks are already in place and working across the board but the recent shootings reflect failures in implementation. showsd this legislation that they are less interested in adopting solutions to prevent mass violence than in promoting gun control. that is from the washington times wrapup of this bill being introduced yesterday. james is next in texas, does not believe there should be stricter gun laws. caller: i agree with the previous speakers that the current gun laws are not being enforced. thereal problem is that is so much lawlessness being promoted in television and on movie screens and drunkenness and lawlessness and all kinds of stuff. that is what the young people see and the people that have a tendency to disregard the laws. that is all they see on tv.
host: jane is next in pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning. am for more gun control laws absolutely. it should've of been added that if you have a child that gets a hold of a gun and you leave it lying around in your house, which has happened and your child goes and kill somebody. as a parent, you deserve to be in jail as well. you should be charged with murder. thank you. host: do you support stricter gun laws? (202)-748-8000 if you do. (202)-748-8001 if you do not. having this conversation a day after this background check legislation was introduced in congress. on the floor yesterday for the introduction of this bill, a moment of silence for the
anniversary of the tucson shooting eight years ago. former congresswoman kathy difference. kathyhy difference -- giffords. eight years ago was when that shooting took place. here is kathy yesterday speaking at the event in which members rolled out this new legislation. [video clip] >> stopping gun violence takes courage. right,rage to do what is the courage to use new ideas. i have seen great courage when my life is on the line. to comehe time together. republicans, everyone. we must never stop fighting. be bold, be courageous, the
country is counting on you. host: gabby efforts -- gabby giffords, a survivor of that shooting in tucson that left six others dead. we are talking about gun control laws in this country. jeff in rocky face georgia, what do you think? caller: hello? host: go ahead. pelosi chuck schumer and , they were ahead -- they were the head of the house when -- and they okayed -- to be sold to in. in and -- to put are they supposed to pay taxes on that? host: we are talking about gun
control laws in this country. when it comes to how democrats view gun control laws, some history of that from today's washington post. whenoked back to 2007 nancy pelosi, her majority was built of several dozen democrats who endorsed the national rifle association and whose ranks swelled later to give democrats the largest congressional majority. years that democrats held the majority, they never advanced a single significant gun-control measure and in the eight years they controlled the senate, they held just one meaningful debate. yesterday, eight years to the day after she was shot and nearly killed, former cap -- former congresswoman gabby giffords returned to the capital to back you legislation for universal background checks. the swinging of the
political pendulum when it comes to gun-control laws. darrell is next in preston, missouri. caller: good morning. absolutely no there should not be any more gun reform laws. more people in the country need to take the second amendment seriously and carry a gun. we are lucky to have the second amendment. shall not be infringed. remember that, in the second amendment? host: arizona is next, good morning. caller: good morning. in regarding background checks, it is frustrating. it is not a yes or no answer. it is the details. background universal for people who can buy guns currently who want to do background checks on
them, but that does not seem to be an issue that people want to address as a singular item, not as the entire concept. i don't want new laws just for new laws. we need new laws where they make sense. i need to say one comment in regards to what we were talking about in the last half-hour. issues one of my biggest to argue about who did what and when, it is not that simple. what i am looking for is an understanding of how the senate can filter those items that a president won't sign. that is not their job. their job is to represent individuals. i need to see it on the floor so i can get the details. host: we will stick to this discussion about stricter gun laws in this country. tom is in kirksville, maryland.
thinks of there should be stricter gun laws -- thinks there should be stricter gun laws. put in anger management all the schools. graduate,ne until you anger management. when that happens, i have a daughter whose roommate was killed in virginia tech. had that person had anger management, they would not have done what they did. it is anger management, it's the key to it. it is the key to gun laws or whatever they are. it is anger management. stats from the pew research center on gun deaths in america. in 2017, that year saw more gun deaths than any year in decades. the centers for disease control and prevention, nearly 40,000 americans died of gun related a 20% increase7,
from 2012 and the highest total since the mid-1990's. suicides involving a gun. taking overall population changes into account, there were 12 firearms eluded deaths for every 1000 people, a 20% increase from five years earlier. carol from atlanta, georgia, believes there should not be stricter gun laws. caller: i believe we do not need any more laws. i believe if we were to read the laws by state on gun control, i believe we would have all the information we need to speak as to whether we need stricter laws. them.not follow i believe that the people who are being killed with guns are
done with stolen guns. -- they are in the hands of children, that is just uncalled for. we just need to enforce the laws that are on the books. laws into read the order to know whether we need stricter gun laws. host: that is carol in georgia. this is the story from townhall.com. out, the gunoming was quotedmerica about this universal background checks bill. they say mass murderers know how to circumvent gun-control laws. the gifford shooter passed a background check. every tragedy which is supposedly animating this gun control proposal involves circumstances which would have made background checks irrelevant. that story in townhall.com.
virginia is in palm city, florida. caller: good morning. i am in favor of stricter gun laws, especially background checks. i think people who are mentally or just have no control over their emotions need background checks. host: another virginia is waiting in spring hill, florida. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. i moved here a while ago. i have six children. the most important thing we can give our children is substance. and more gun crazy laws is just going to be more creative -- is going to be more creek -- going to be more confusing. let's bring god back and our schools.
our son moved here and said he was losing his direction and he said let's pray. we really need to get down to the basics of how this country was started. god says defend yourself of course but you are not going to turn to a gun when you have a god. you have somewhere to go. or guns orn anger this violence that video games. it has to begin in your heart where everything is. host: that is virginia and florida. less than 10 minutes before the house will come in for the day. taking your calls on whether you support stricter gun laws in this country. (202)-748-8000 if you do. (202)-748-8001 if you do not. backgroundd this checks bill introduced yesterday by former congresswoman -- with former congresswoman gaddy giffords on the floor. she represented that tucson arizona -- that tucson, arizona district.
-- was involved in the introduction of this legislation and in calling for a moment of silence on the floor yesterday. [video clip] >> gaddy served with great distinction in this house and despite her nearly fatal in just gone on tojuries has inspire us to take action to reduce gun violence in our country. today, a bipartisan group of colleagues responded to her call by introducing and cosponsoring house resolution eight. this bill will keep guns out of the hands of people who are currently prohibited by law from purchasing guns. it will of the many the current background check system -- it will eliminate loopholes from the current background check system. gunill ensure that purchases are made in compliance with existing laws.
i look forward to the debate that we will have regarding hr eight and hope that we will soon house this bill -- soon pass this bill out of our chamber. gun violence in our nation is a major public health problem, and it must be addressed. the american people who sent us here are waiting for us to step up and act responsibly on their behalf. we must do so. mr. speaker i ask for a moment of silence. >> the house will observe a moment of silence. host: one op-ed that was released yesterday after that legislation was introduced on the house floor appeared in the daily beast. it is by parkland high school
survivors. they say it is time the republicans -- republican cowards ditch the nra cash and vote for gun control. -- what will congress do they ask? taking your calls and asking whether you support stricter gun laws in this country. -- is in arkansas and believes we should. caller: i do support gun laws. i think that expanding the background checks would be a really good thing because you have so many people out here. you had a caller on here that mentioned anger management. it, therehink about were a lot of health issues out here -- there are a lot of health issues out here. dyinge so many children by guns nowadays.
it is ridiculous. i support the expansion of background checks. i think that is going to be the most important thing. host: sandy in ohio does not believe we need stricter gun laws in this country. caller: i think we have enough. shootings, the parkland one, the sheriffs just stood there and let the students get killed because they were cowards. the democrats like that david hogg calling republicans cowards for taking nra money. we believe in the second amendment. it is part of our constitution. the problem is the democrats do not believe in the constitution and many of them including hillary clinton and pelosi and bloomberg and all of them want to do away with the second amendment and they take these young kids and they get them all
riled up and the other woman about the morals, nobody is taught morals anymore. we are not allowed to talk about god in the schools. parents are not even teaching their children right from wrong. i watch that woman on c-span and her son got into a fight with another guy and they both had guns but she is going after the nra. ourybody wants to go after second amendment and then we are screwed. host: do you own a gun? caller: no i don't. but if i want one, i would like to have one. where younfringing -- have to pay insurance. it is everything to get our guns. one bill after another. losey said i hope it is a slippery slope to getting our guns. hillary wanted confiscation like
australia. that was not a voluntary confiscation. that was mandatory. host: that is sandy in ohio. the house coming in in just a moment or two. gary is in kentucky. go ahead. support stricter gun laws if you can get criminals to go along with it but that does not seem to be the case. i think we are tying the hands with stricter gun laws, of law-abiding citizens that have a right to carry a gun. you get the criminals to go along with it, maybe the stricter laws will be ok, but they don't play the same game. host: how do you feel about the bump stock ban? we lost gary. grant in massachusetts, good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i am a democrat. i do not own any weapons. i do not support these stricter laws.
i feel that the constitution was written in such a way to facilitate access to weapons to our citizens and beyond basic background checks i don't think any further gun laws are appropriate. host: donna in alexandria, minnesota. that the believe stricter gun laws are needed at this time. right now, the way the bills are being written, our second amendment right is not being by talking to -- it is not being hindered by any of our laws and it will not be hindered by any additional laws. background checks for people who are known to be abusers and people that are known to have that anger issues, those
are known to have mental health to getshould not be able a license to carry a gun. host: we will have to end it there. the house coming in. it is day 19 of the government shutdown. we take you live to the house floor for gavel to gavel coverage. aatio fromhe e e clrk the speaker'room, washingn, d.c.jaary, 2019. i herebyppoint tonorable robin l. llyo t spear o tempore on t d ed, nan pelosi,pear of thhoe of reestatives. thsper prtempor pursuao trdf the house of january 3, 2019, e chaiill now regne meers listted by e jori minority leadersor morning hour debate. the chair will altnate ecognition between the parties. all time shall be eqll