tv Washington Journal 06152019 CSPAN June 15, 2019 7:00am-10:03am EDT
it's facing. and later the daily beast's lachlan markay discusses ethics and the trump white house. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. washington journal is next. with summer vacation starting, planning has already started for the fall, and the possibility of salary increases is on everybody's mind. our question this morning is do you think teachers deserve higher salaries for the work they do with children? we are setting up special lines on the question, do you support higher teacher pay? we want to hear from
teachers, your line is -- 702-8000. we want to hear from school administrators at 202-7 02-8001. parents, we want to hear from you at 202-702-8002. if you don't fit into any of those categories, we still want to hear what you think. you can always reach us on social media come on twitter, and on facebook. let's set up the question for you. of teachertopic pay has been a hot one in the democratic presidential race for the democratic nomination. one of the first candidates to jump off was kamala harris, who came out in
april with her proposal for raising teacher pay in new hampshire. here is what she had to say. >> let's be clear, there are two groups of people raising our children, parents, often with the assistance of grandparents, and our teachers. we are not paying them their value when we know teachers in our country make 10% less than similarly college educated individuals. which is why as president i will implement what will be the first time in our nation a federal investment in closing that teacher pay gap. [applause]
let's be clear about $13,00500 represents a years worth of mortgage payments. year is a years worth of grocery bills. year puts a significant dent in student loan debt. i firmly believe that you can judge a society based on how it treats its children. [applause] one of the greatest expressions of love that a society can extend towards its children is ,o invest in their education
and by extension that means investing in their teachers. host: what exactly do teachers make? we have some information from the bureau of labour statistics. on thearten teachers 55,an annual wage is 470. elementary teachers make 58, 230. middle school teachers, the median annual wage is $58,600. $60,320.ool teachers let's see what is going on in the actual issue itself. we have with us this morning there up her neck, who is the education week school finance reporter. guest: good morning. good morning. how are you doing? host: i am doing just fine.
what kind of proposals are we seeing around teacher pay? guest: what is interesting about this presidential election is a lot of candidates are waiting wading intosue -- this issue. harris, she was proposing something around $350 billion over the next 10 years for the federal government to increase teacher pay. that is just giving them a $3000 raise. there are about 3.6 million teachers in the country. all of them make a variety of wages. this is going to be very expensive for the federal government to wade into this area. the vast majority of money for education comes from states. how did teachers fair this
year on getting wages? guest: states have a lot of money to spend this year. as i mentioned before, raising teacher pay is expensive. we have about 22 governments who recently proposed to raise teacher pay. that is anywhere from arizona where the governor is trying to get teachers a 20% raise to arkansas where they were trying to raise the minimum paid to $40,000. in most states, teachers have been mostly successful. the challenge going forward is teachers are going to have to withiate those pay rates their local governments. incentivizeing to test scores. one thing i would like to emphasize is the fact that the
vast majority of teachers are making significantly less than what typical college graduates make. teacher pay over the last 10 to 15 years has declined by 4%. huge teacher shortage across the country. i have talked to superintendents who cannot fill slots for math teachers and special education teachers. schools in which students are sitting with substitute teacher's entire year. stategoing to cost the and federal government millions of dollars. host: you just said there was a huge teacher shortage. what are we seeing with that issue around the u.s., and is pay causing that? the incentive to become a teacher, this is a profession
that for a long time folks new you would not be paid a lot. in priorem now is that years a lot of folks got into the profession because they knew if you become a teacher, there was attention that he would likely a group once you retire. -- accrue once you retire. a lot of states are indicating to teachers that they are not going to be able to pay their fair share of the pension costs. the teaching profession has become much more stressful. onre are a lot of pressures teachers, including class sizes, school facilities are not the healthiest environments to work in, and the stresses of increasing poverty. districts are not paying for the sorts of resources we need. that goes to the fact that americans are not as willing to
pay their fair share for schools . paying taxes is something americans have decided over and over again that we do not want to do. the vast majority of taxes go to america's public school system. oft: there were a bunch high-profile teacher strikes around the nation in 2018. how effective were those strikes? guest: they were surprisingly effective because they were not union led. they were grassroots movements among the teachers. they used the tools such as social media to show followers what they were experiencing on a day-to-day basis. teachers were posting pictures of their paychecks showing i am making $25,000 a year as a kindergarten teacher. there is a lot of sentiment out there for teachers. the problem is when it comes to the statehouse, which is what is
paying for half the cost of their education, legislators are still reluctant to close tax loopholes, raise taxes, or find new revenue sources to pay for teachers. host: i started off by talking about how the democratic presidential candidates are using this issue to try to break out of the pack. who is leading on the issue of teacher pay in the democratic candidates, and what are their proposals? vary. their proposals i think kamala harris is one of the most ambitious proposals to infuse more than $350 billion in education. joe biden's proposal to triple the amount of money we spent on title i funding. $10t now we spend around
billion on title i. he wants to triple that about $45 billion. that money would go to schools that serve a disproportionate number of students. a number of candidates like bernie sanders are saying we need to distribute the money to increase student outcomes. these are things the state and the federal government have tried in prior years. it is a very divisive issue. one of the things that was effective about the teacher strikes is that one of the key things they were saying is that we are not spending enough to get teachers into the door. it is not a matter of trying to get teachers to do a better job. we have to pay them what they deserve. we have to pay them. in any other industry, you would say we think this job is worth this amount of money.
most studies show that what we are paying teachers is below what they actually could be paid. said times i know you have average teacher pay. average teacher pay is just the average. there are teachers that are making $30,000 a year. there are teachers that are making $200,000 a year. s dramatically. presidential candidates, if they are saying i want to increase teacher pay by $30,000, which teachers would get that money? what schools would they be working in? these are very complicated issues that i think the federal government has not waded into. historically this is a local control issue. host: one last question.
we see and a lot of the -- we have nots seen the link between pay and performance, something we saw in the bush administration and the obama administration. why are we not seeing that? is that unpopular among the democratic party now? guest: no, it is just a very good thing to do. years, america had a very difficult time defining what an effective teacher is. it means very different things , very different things to teachers, very different things to principles. -- principals. they get paid now off of years of experience and certification. once you get into trying to pay for performance, are you going to use test scores, student
surveys, act scores? we have had a very difficult time defining what a successful school is, let alone a successful teacher. i am not saying these questions are not important, but they are questions america has not made a decision about. do we want the federal government deciding that? do we want the state government deciding that? do we want school boards deciding that? that is a question of america has not come up with the answer to. host: thank you for coming on this morning. and running us through all these exciting issues. thank you for your time this morning. guest: thank you. host: we want to hear from you on this topic. teachers, we want to hear from you on why you deserve more pay and how you are surviving on your current salary. (202) 748-8000. school administrators, you are
important on this topic. we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8001. parents, of course, we need to hear from you because the teachers are educating your children. (202) 748-8002. everyone else, you still have a saying this because state and federal tax money goes to those salaries. we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8003. let's talk to mike calling from north carolina. good morning. host: -- caller: good morning, sir. how are you? host: i am good. go ahead. caller: it is an excellent topic. i wish the question what have been rephrased. it is too ambiguous. do teachers need a raise? everybody loves teachers. the default position will be yes. we are told constantly most teachers don't make enough. the better question would be who is responsible for paying teachers, and where does the
responsibility lie? we have lost focus. i am going to get a little preachy. i am a conservative. that will become obvious with how i stakeout my position. there is a reason the founding fathers did not put education into the enumerated powers and the constitution. they did not want the federal government getting involved in this. they left this under the 10th amendment. any powers not expressly given to the federal government will remain with the states and the people. that is why throughout most of our history the states and again itnd counties -- goes to federalism as well. they came up with their own public schools, k-12, parochial schools, university systems. we came up with the best public
education system without the federal government being involved. that is the direction we need to go back to. i personally feel that the department of education is unconstitutional. i would dissolve it. send that $60 billion. i think we are up to $60 billion a year that is sucked out of the states and sent to washington to pay for 5000 bureaucrats. i'm not sure what the value add is on what they deliver. i would say they are all wasting time. what if that money was somehow appropriated back to the states based on population, based on number of school districts, any number of metrics. i know north carolina could probably use an extra $1 billion to build schools and develop curriculum programs. that is the direction i think we need to go.
should teachers make more? yes, they should if they are good teachers. that isst guest said difficult to measure. you have to come up with metrics. the teacher profession is not immune to that. there are ways to measure a good teacher just as there are ways to measure a good lawyer, engineer, salesperson, carpenter. we all know to a certain degree that democrats and the teachers unions want no part of merit-based pay. host: let's go to christopher calling from south carolina. christopher is a teacher. good morning. caller: good morning. i am just starting teaching after 10 years of trying to get into it. this topic is important to me. when we look at industrialized systemsand their school , one thing america has come and
whoever was on just before me was saying we have this federalized system. it does not work. it has not worked. it is not working. if you look at japan and europe, they nationalize their school system. resources are shared. i worked in the rural areas that don't have money. it is depressing and said to see these kids get left behind because they don't have the right zip code. i think nationalizing the resources and spreading it out areasse rural and urban where poor people don't have as much of a chance would really help. that is what i wanted to say. host: do you think as a teacher you make enough money to live on and your school has enough money to educate the children that are assigned to you? i have no issues sharing my salary.
as a starting teacher, i am learning $35,000 a year -- earning $35,000 a year. cost of living in my area, that is pretty dicey as far as rent and utility. i was offered a sizable signing bonus of $3000. if you want good teachers, you have to pay for good teachers. if you look at other industrialized nations, teachers get paid to live and work and teach. that is their job. if i have to take a second job, that is time i cannot be grading tests and working with students after school. that is time i don't have to lesson plan. as far as teacher pay goes, it needs to be paid well, but the schools come first. i think we should take that local funding component away and put federal money into the system. do you have a second job, or are you making up by unjust. teacher salary?
your teacher salary? have a second job. it is the summer. i have never met a ton of teachers who did not have a second job during the summer. i work a second job. technically i work at their job to keep the money flowing in when i am not teaching. from let's go to joe pennsylvania. joe is apparent. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: i'm good. caller: this topic just sets me off. teachers don't need another dime. they are responsible for the world's biggest holocaust. they had robbed generations of young people of critical
thinking. all you have to be is a business ader and hang a help wanted for a laborer. you are better putting up a camera and showing job interviews to america's funniest home videos. they are stupid and lazy. randy bumgarner makes $900,000 a year for rebel rousing. host: how would you fix the problem? caller: we have got to get back to basics. we have to teach respect, arithmetic, teaching kids how to write a conference of letter and do basic math. these teachers are off base. they are unrealistic. they should have no input into how children are raised. we are generations deep into this. we can all see the outcome. kids have no respect. they have no work ethic. they have none of the things that create a strong fabric for
our society. , and let's go to phyllis phyllis is a teacher. good morning. caller: i am also a parent. i think the teachers need more money. caller ist the last blaming the teacher. it is the parents. the parents are not teaching the children respect. the kids in the classroom do not respect the teachers. they don't want to learn. they are on their ipads and phones throughout the school day. it is terrible the way the kids are. you cannot walk into a classroom today. these teachers have to work 24 hours a day to get paid. year,ted out at $2800 a
and now making $35,000 a year. host: i think we lost phyllis. let's go to ray calling from pennsylvania. good morning. caller: who is going to pay for this? where is this money going to come from for all this free stuff? the taxes are going to go up. our school taxes in pennsylvania are pretty high on our property. we are open game. anytime they want to raise them, they control the school boards in pennsylvania. they put big money into the coffers of the legislators and state senators running for office.
money,have that kind of then you are making too much money in your salary. they also ran for office in pennsylvania about 40 years ago. they quit teaching and ran for office and the teachers unions backed them up. every legislator used to be a teacher. it is like they make the laws. reporterheard from a earlier that there is a teacher shortage around the u.s. how do you attract more people into teaching with the current salary? caller: i don't know how you do that. it is a local issue. you can't just do parity across the country and everyone starts making the same money because that is what they do in pennsylvania. they tried to tell you i want to make what they make and mount lebanon, a suburb of pittsburgh. there is a lot more money because there is a lot more tax on the homes.
they want to make that in greene county, a rural area. they want to make parity with mount lebanon. they all use that argument. it is an argument of i want to make with this guy does. in new york city, they have got convicted child molester offenders that are teachers and are not teaching, but they are still in the schools in new york city, and they are getting paid. , they are nottion allowed to have anything to do with the kids. the union has said you cannot hire this person. it is crazy. you ought to bring some of that up. let's go to robert in alabama. robert is a teacher. caller: i'm not presently a teacher. i am a school administrator. i am a parent.
childrene who take the prepare them for life, and then they want to pay them less than anybody else. the problem in the u.s. is they don't want to pay the teachers because they don't want to teach too many african-american children of color to be well educated. they want the european descended children to be well educated. the teachers should make more than the federal government people pay. teachers pay hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to get prepared to teach someone else's kid. the army cannot use them until the teacher gets through with that. wish it -- with them. we shape all people. the president has been through elementary and secondary teachers. the elementary and secondary teachers should be the highest paid in the country, higher paid than lawyers and doctors. you cannot become a lawyer or
doctor until you have gone through elementary and secondary high school. states like alabama where they are so prejudiced, the ones who run this state, they don't want good teachers teaching african-american children. it is prejudice in this country. host: let's actually look at the median salaries for states around the country. as we heard earlier, teachers do not make the same in every state. these are the states where teachers have the highest median salary. in new york, the median salary for teachers, and this includes public and private schools, the median salary is $78,576. we see other states with high numbers like that. connecticut $78,330. alaska is up at the top of the
list as well. these are the states with the lowest paid salaries. north carolina pays its teachers $45,901. 44,284. $ the state with the lowest median salary for teachers is oklahoma is where that number is $39,306. let's look at some tweets coming in from our viewers this morning. here is one that says, i support higher pay for math and science teachers. i do not support higher pay for gym coaches and civics teachers. another says, taken into consideration they work 190 days and get great benefits including pensions, unless they are underfunded. take more now means less later. that saysther tweet it is up to them.
asy can negotiate their pay individuals, the same as computer programmers, lumberjacks, and lawyers. the good ones will get paid more. kids are more ill-informed now than ever in our history. let's go back to our phone lines and go to richard from baltimore. caller: good morning. thank you. the statistic about the median income is relevant unless you take into account that teachers need advanced degrees. looking at the median salary not relative to other professions puts it in a vacuum. all teachers need advanced degrees. should we be making the same as a cashier? or as an accountant? we are all upset about how much
teachers make, and people say they make too much money or get great benefits, but when you start looking at children, the most important thing is our children. the lowest paid profession in medicine is generally pediatrics and the same for teachers. we talk about caring for our children, but we don't do much in supporting them. host: do you think you make enough to live off of as a teacher? caller: i do not, honestly. i live in baltimore. i rent my house. i cannot afford to buy one right now. if i was to live solely on my salary, fortunately i am a career changer, so i made good money prior. we really don't. the fact that we get summers off is awesome, but most of us have to work. work a secondople
job during the school year or summer are not working jobs that are commensurate with their education. host: do you think raising pay would bring more people into the industry? you said you are a career changer. why did you get into the career? caller: i was in international sales living overseas. back in 2000, i was making $250 ,000 plus a year. i had a change in life. chasing the dollar while satisfying was not gratifying. i wanted to do more with my life. this is the hardest job i have ever had in my life, and i work as a construction laborer. it is the most gratifying. i have children who come to school everyday because they do everyday who smell because they do not base every
day. they need the school to give them some sort of structure. our society is failing our children. host: do you think teachers are respected enough for what they do? caller: i would like to say yes, but the answer is no. one of your prior callers was railing about how horrible teachers are and that they do not teach the right things. that is not under our control. we teach the curriculum we are given by our locality. we do what we are allowed to do. i teach math. math and science are a hot topic , and we are really failing compared to the rest of the world. the desire is we just need to teach them more math. the problem is they are not able to handle it. right now a seventh grade pre-algebra curriculum is a year and a half curriculum in other
locations. when students come into a great already at a third grade level, trying to teach them all this other content that they are not prepared for, it is just stupid. unfortunately we are told every lesson has to be a great level objective. -- grade level objective. when do we have time to go back and teach the foundation? host: let's go to thomas. thomas is apparent. caller: good morning. how are you? host: i'm fine. go ahead. caller: i will be 16 september. i believe as the parent of -- be 60 in september. i believe as the parent of two daughters that the problem stems from the disciplinary method. when i was a child, my mother
and my father both told me one time what to do. if i could not do it, i had to pick myself up off the floor. that was called old-fashioned discipline. it no longer exists because the people that have ruined it are the child abusers, the ones that have overbeat their children. they have caused law enforcement to clamp down on disciplinary methods. i commend the teachers. the problem in the school system now is that teachers are having to deal with more disciplinary problems than teaching. yes, they are underpaid. the reason they are underpaid is because who wants to pay someone to babysit your child? 90% of the children will go to school, and they bring guns, curse out the teachers, curse,
line, whatever you do. that is because of the disciplinary factors in the world today. and it isenforcement, not even their fault, they are doing what they have to do to control this united states. tochild, i am not ashamed say, i tell her to do something. she'll get mad at me, go ahead, hit me, i will call th e cops on you. that is what this world is teaching our children. it is teaching them no values. my son-in-law will say i cannot wait until you die. i will have this, i will have that. host: let's go to walter from new jersey. caller: how are you doing? host: go ahead. caller: i believe teachers deserve more money. they have a thankless job.
i think the pay should be equalized nationally. host: walter, have you ever been a teacher or send any children to school? have four children of my own. they are all grown. i am almost 70. callers have heard some say earlier how do you pay for these teacher salaries, and why do teachers deserve extra money when other people are not making as much? caller: teachers are highly educated professionals. most teachers have advanced degrees. to sonya who is calling from kentucky. good morning. caller: good morning. i am a parent.
i have a success story with my children. i was fortunate to have a school i could put them in that was k-12 in a small community. now starting as a college professor, and my daughter is an engineer at one of the largest engineering firms in the country. i was fortunate enough to be able to find and afford an in-home small caregiver. thatis happening now is both parents have to work full-time just to make ends meet. that was not always the situation. going inton are daycare systems where they learn no life skills.
they learn no life skills about cleaning. opinion -- then they are sent off to the teachers, and the teachers are having a terrible situation to deal with. i think the pay needs to be increased. host: let's talk to doug calling from new york. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you doing today? host: i'm doing well. go ahead. caller: the reason i think teachers are underpaid is because think about a $30,000 a year job. you are trying to get things done. here before.t in today's society, you are not living anywhere near the good life. you are living at the lower end
of middle class. we should not be doing that to the people that are teaching our children. another problem with the school systems is they keep taking away things like the arts, the philosophies,e the psychologies. we are now seeing that as a society where people cannot see somebody else as their self. that can easily be taught inside the school, but you usually don't get those kinds of courses until secondary school. we have to take a larger view that what is happening with our children in school, and a lot of parents need to do that because studies show that children are taught a lot of their life personalities in the very young ands, between one
four and five and nine. most of the children were in preschool by the time they were three or four years old. we need to take better care of them. they are the ones that when you have to go to work to provide for a living are trying to help their children grow up to be good people. --t: it is summertime founder and former ceo of c-span rhineland is featured in the wall street journal. if you want to know what brian's picks are, pick up the wall street journal. c-span2.atch booktv on
n's are archived -- author interviews are archived on c-span.org. says, when teachers have to buy supplies out of their own pocket, they are not paid enough. the only program we are all willing to pay for is the capability to invade any country in the world. we can have the best education system in the world if the parents demanded it. another says alabama could double teacher pay and still below. teaching is vital to america. i taught high school in broward county, florida, for 20 years. i left the field because it became harder and harder.
you have to pass us, and we don't feel like working today. let's go back to the phone's here is chris from nottingham, maryland. i watched the show every day. i appreciate it. i agree that teacher pay should be higher. three kids through college. an advanced degree for the one that was a teacher now. she has to pay a lot of money out of her own pocket. problems come from the homes because the kids have no respect for the teachers. you can sit in your neighborhoods where that is a big problem now. kids,of them have five and they get taken away by the social worker because the mother
was on drugs. that is where a lot of the problem comes from. a lot of these kids are taken away because their mother is on drugs. that is about all i had to say. host: let's talk to christine calling from arkansas. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: yes, i'm a parent. i believe that teachers are the greatest thing we have in this society because they teach us the curriculum, and they know how to discipline without slapping their kids around. let's talk to vincent calling from minnesota. good morning. caller: thank you for c-span. parent.
both of my kids were national honor society students in the school system. the one thing is this. back in the early 1960's, we had a substitute teacher come in. she was really appalled that our map was so far behind -- math was so far behind. back in ohio they were pushing kids through versus teaching them. i watched with my dad on 60 minutes some of the schools in germany where at the high school commencement, they have fortune 500 companies there for their high school kids. there is no reason in the u.s. that we should not be comparable. we have the best colleges and universities right here in the u.s. there is no reason we don't have
a preschool, kindergarten, first and second grade and third grade system where you can bring the kids up. i think it is an american problem. the teachers definitely should be paid higher because my daughter went into teaching and the southside chicago. it was abysmal. i was scared for her life. she stuck it out. she taught there for four years. she switched jobs because it was just a pain. host: in the new york times, brown university education kraft wrote, a raise for the millions of current public school teachers is not a bad idea, but it needs a bit more focus. more targeted plans with lower sticker prices, higher minimum
salaries and bonuses for teaching subjects at struggling schools likely be more sustainable and politically effective. raising teacher pay and benefit students as well as teachers if we do it in a strategic and well calculated way. providing teachers with meaningful remonstrance that are earned, not -- meaningful promotions and pay raises that are earned, not automatic. david, calling from north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. good morning. somebody is doing a good job. i just went through raising my young child without no sitters and had to conform to the very narrow perspective of a time we
go to school. we need to double up and make a longer day from 7:00 to 8:00 and and change are almost perfect system to facilitate all the industries in this great nation. i'm tightening up. i will let it go. host: let's go to judy calling from westville, new jersey. good morning. go ahead. caller: yes, i am calling about the teacher for higher pay. i think they deserve higher pay. of teacherst support their classrooms with product out of their own pocket. i think it is the future of our children. firstas one of the
callers said, everyone would love to pay teachers more money, but where does that money come from? do you support higher taxes to pay teachers more money? caller: um. that's a good question. yeah if we have to. we have to support our schools for our children. sure. yes. host: we also had a discussion earlier about whether it should be a nationally standard salary, or do you think states need to set the salary based on where ?ou live caller: i think the standard should be set for where you live ? pat callinggo to from south carolina. good morning.
i believe the teachers need more pay because they are having to .eal with children they are coming in with anger issues. chairsseen kids pick up and throw them across the room. fights where police have literally had to come in and put them in a police car, take them to their parents. coming fromould be these school districts who are taking a lot of this money right now. they are putting millions of money in their sports fields, sports programs. thehey are even -- kids in the summer.
the parents cannot provide decent meals. they are doing that. they are providing the kids with books and things they need because the parents cannot provide for that. the teachers need more pay. there are some bad teachers in our system. they are not in there to teach. they are just in there for the check. the majority of our teachers are great. i think they need more pay. host: it's talk to barbara calling from georgia. barbara is a teacher. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. i believe comment is teachers deserve a raise. parents our children's from 8:00 in the afternoon.
8:00 in the morning to 3:00 in the afternoon. when i was a parent, that teacher is a teacher, she is apparent, and i believe they deserve a raise. i had an issue with the tax. i don't mind paying school tax. at first i said i don't have kids in school. is moneyalized this that is paying the teacher's salary. they deserve a raise. these teachers teaching these children. as a substitute teacher, i see what they go through. host: let's talk to charles calling from virginia. charles is a school administrator. good morning.
caller: hello. retired. giving schoolteachers a fair and reasonable salary. one thing i would like to see is alternative certification. we have in our nation many retired engineers, scientists, foreign-language speakers. a way toove to see bring in people from other professions, run them through a boot camp, six to eight weeks, teach them theory of education, educational methods, how to complete all the paperwork to be a teacher, and then get them in the classroom. we have a huge number of people who have skills in computer science, engineering, mathematics, all the stuff that is in shortage. because they don't have a number
of courses in educational theory and education, we cannot hire them to teach class. what you are saying is that you think anyone can be a teacher, are you saying that? caller: i'm not saying that. i am saying we have a great many people in this country who have a great many skills who could serve as teachers in public and hadublic schools if they alternative certification. i am not saying anyone can be a teacher. it's not true. what i am saying is that alternative certification, bringing in retired people from other professions. virginia has had a program for career changers. a person can have a background not in teaching. we run them through the program. we get them the theory of teaching, how to be a teacher,
and then we get them in the classroom. we have a huge number of people in this country who could be in a classroom, but because they don't have some courses, we cannot use them. that is what i would like to see. we have all this talent that we are not using. from let's talk to mario florida. good morning. parent.i am just a younger,hildren were you had like 50 in a class. all those children would listen.the teacher could get through to everyone. today the way the kids are raised and what the teachers have to take from these children is horrible. what they are learning, they are not even learning school.
i saw on television where they had a drag queen in a grade that they are teaching about homosexuals. this should be caught from a parent, not going into school, and these little kids don't know. i'm a girl. i'm a boy. what are they talking about? host: let's go to kathleen. kathleen is a teacher. taught 34 years. i am retired now. my son is a middle school teacher. he is certified in five areas. after 14 years, he just got a raise to $56,000. a family cannot even live on that. he and his fellow teachers in florida all have to work second jobs. they have to take work off through the summer.
people think they get lots of benefits. they are wrong. it is very sad to me that they had children, your children, parents all over the country. they have the children more than the parents have them. week, seven hours the children are in school. they basically are trying to not only be teachers but to some of the children they are surrogate parents. you wonder why any of them stay in this profession. host: let's talk to caring calling from georgia. she is a teacher. good morning. karen, good morning. you're on the air. go ahead. i'm, i'mh, well, i'm, a teacher.
yes, teachers deserve more pay. good morning. keisha, who isto calling from north carolina. keisha is a school administrator. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: i'm good. ahead. caller: i was reading an article. at the end of the article, it states that the teacher working conditions have to be considered in addition to additional teacher pay. i believe the nation has to come up with a teacher norm for paid to make it comparable from california to north carolina. looking start at individual working conditions and say that is where our legislators need to look at investing resources. i have heard people say, and i have experienced myself children with different home backgrounds,
therefore you need more psychologists, social workers to improve the teaching conditions and school conditions. everyone needs more funding. it is those working experiences that really makes a difference. what type of school administrator are you? are you on the school board, a principal? caller: i have been teacher, principal, and at the county level. host: are you seeing more teachers come in and not able to survive on their salaries? caller: i am seeing teachers are supplementing the salaries they are given. they seem to be able to exist fairly well. whatyou start looking at teachers are doing during the summer, several of them are taking second jobs.
when you look at teachers going back to school, they have to take out student loans to get advanced degrees. you see that teachers are barely making because of their love and commitment for the but because of their love for the students, they are staying in there. our: i would like to thank callers for calling in and making this a very interesting discussion. coming up, tom schatz will join us to talk about his group, the 2019 congressional pig book and the porkbarrel projects in the federal budget. we will be right back. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪ >> detroit puts the world on wheels in one generation, these and other names created these --
america's number one industry. birthplace of the production line, and the idea that everybody can ride. vision with know-how, that's detroit. ♪ >> we're about to go seven miles with marvin gaye. i've got impeccable timing. ♪ >> the c-span cities tour is on the road, exploring the american story, >> we are in downtown detroit, there's a lot of development, businesses opening. >> 95% of detroit is an upside down town. i don't think johannesburg is a good model for development. >> with the help of our comcast cable partners, this weekend we take you to detroit. >> the city of detroit itself
was founded by the french in 1701. >> the detroit river was the busiest freshwater shipping channel in the world in 1922 and it still is today. >> water special feature on to detroit on book -- on detroit on book tv. and on american history tv on c-span3. the c-span cities tour, exploring the american story. do i look forward to running against them. holds a rallyrump in orlando, florida, on tuesday, launching his run for a second term. watch live at 8:00 eastern on c-span two, online at c-span.org, or listen live on the radio app. washington journal continues. host: we are back with thomas schatz, from the citizens against government waste. he's the president and we are
going to talk about the congressional pig book. tell us what citizens against government waste is. guest: it was founded in 1984 following the commission under president reagan. we have been around for a long time, and we have of course been investigating, researching, exposing, and eliminating government waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement. the pig book has been around since 1991. we have identified 11,014 earmarks, and so when people say it's just a few million the year, or a few thousand there, it adds up over time. the earmarks are correcting, costly, inequitable, and we should talk more about them. one of the many publications we put out each year, and certainly something we have been working on for a long time. host: since we will be talking about money, our viewers will always have this question.
how was citizens against government waste funded? guest: by individuals and associations and foundations. the vast majority of our money comes from individual taxpayers, and always has. host: and also we will be talking about federal earmarks, let's set the stage. what is an earmark? guest: if it's one of our seven criteria developed back in 1991 with the congressional park west or's coalition. to be not specifically authorized, not subject to hearings, serves only a local or special interest, it exceeds the budget or last year's funding. this has been the same criteria since 1991, and this is something we have been doing and exposing for a long time. guest: what did you find -- host: what did you find for this year search for government
waste? what should we look for in this year's pig book? guest: the numbers themselves are higher than last year, $15.3 billion, that's a 4% increase over the 14.7 billion dollars in fiscal year 2018 and more than of 2017. $6.8 billion and that number is more than half of the record $29 billion in 2006. the number of earmarks is 282, up 22% from 232 last year. thenumbers are not going in right direction. there is good news, the chair of the house appropriations committee said that they will not have earmarks in fiscal year 2020, the upcoming appropriations bill that they are working on now. and the senate republicans, this is the first time ever that any group of members of congress has agreed to a permanent ban on earmarks. right now they are subject to a
their definition is different than ours. but if they agree to a permanent ban, that's a rule, not a law. it's a good step in the right direction. i think part of it is that they have seen the number keep growing. host: you would say the center republicans passed a rule and not a law, what's the difference? does that mean it's not really in existence? guest: it means they will not add earmarks to any of the bills while they are considering them in the senate appropriations bill. host: center republicans are the whole senate? guest: senate republicans, but they are the majority. by their definition they will not be adding them to their appropriations bill. that is one of the reasons the house appropriations chair said that we do not have a bipartisan agreement to put earmarks in the bill. the house is supposedly not going to do them as well. it's a little complicated housee it's easier if the
passed a bill in the senate passed a bill but they do a lot of things based on their rules, which they can change every congress, sometimes they don't go over to the next congress. it's an important step, and hopefully it will set an example for the rest of congress. host: what were some of the big things he found in earmarks? -- in earmarks? quarantine, $9 million. the last time they had that money for fruit flies was 10 years ago. a lot of these things go in and , $13.8 million for a wild forest and borough management, and to control brown tree snakes in guam. host: where do these earmarks come from? who puts these into the bills?
guest: that's a great question. in the 111th congress there was a rule that required everyone to add their names to the earmarks. so on the back of the appropriations bill there was a list. during that time, to show the inequity of earmarks, the 81 members of the house and senate appropriations committee who constituted 15% of the entire congress, got 51% of the number of earmarks and 61% of the money . so this is an inequitable process where the majority of the earmarks goes to a very small group of members. of onear we only know for sure, senator brian schatz, no relation, added $16.7 million west mentors in hawaii, which is the entire of the federal budget.
the east-west center, and only because of one member of congress, that this went in there. air --ome people defend earmarks. tom davis was on this program on monday and offered his defense, here's what he had to say. [video clip] >> they are project designations, this is an article one responsibility of the house of representatives. if you look at the history almost every project that went through had earmarks, there was an earmark when congressmen decided on roads and bridges and how they built it. it's a constitutional responsibility of the house of representative's. and they allow members to personalize their districts, to show their constituents that there is a reason to keep them around because they can bring back certain projects, they may not get funding because they have to go through the bureaucratic model otherwise. default vote to
yes on the appropriation bill a set of now. bridge, and it's easier to pass, it's the glue that held guard -- ledger station together and it brought republicans and democrats together. neversidential candidate carry my district, i was a republican, and the district was designed to be a more democratic district. but i was mr. woodrow wilson bridge, i close the prison and got 3000 acres of land given to the county. people may not like my party but they saw some quality in keeping me around. it allowed me to be more independent in my voting record, because i had earmarks to fall back on than just voting with the party on certain issues. that,members do not have so they are judged by their party, and as a result people are voting for the party, not the person. i think it will continue to
advance the movement from a democratic model to a parliamentary model in terms of how we are electing p -- people, and i think it's bad for government. so i would bring them back, but with more transparency. host: could you respond to former representatives davis? >> -- guest: at least he didn't go to jail with some of his corrupting colleagues. as former senator john mccain said, when the members have the power to use the power to corrupt the system -- he talked about the fact that members of the appropriations committee get the majority of those projects. it's not equitable. it goes to people in power. , that an otherwise liberal or conservative, people will look at this and say wait, i agree we should spread the money around the country, where it is needed. which is where 99.9% of the
money goes. this is a very small part of the budget. article one is to appropriate money, not to steal it for the rest of the contest from the rest of the country and stick it in your district. host: we want you to join this conversation about earmarks. we are opening up our regular lines, for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002. we are always reading on social media, and twitter and facebook. harold is calling from illinois to join the conversation. good morning. caller: good morning. i think these earmarks are just another way to bribe congressman or someone to vote their way on
a bill that they normally would not vote on. i think the money and the isitics -- in the politics the main problem with all of this. and we should have some term limits. i think the congressman will do what they can to stay in their, make 175re, they only thousand dollars a year and most of them are harvard educated lawyers that could be six-figure employees, but they choose to keep that job for some reason. and i think the lobbyists that go in there, it used to be where you would get a number of people --sign a piece of neighbor paper saying they agree with that and you take it to your congressman. you don't take an envelope full of money into a big bank and say i need this bill passed and could you get it thrown in with an earmark. guest: we called the legalized bribery, except when it becomes illegal as it did in 2000 with two cunningham -- duke
cunningham going to jail, bob banned his lobbyist staff. -- and his lobbyist staff. and members do use it to help themselves get reelected, but it's not a big piece of what they do and not all of them have .one it we don't think it should be coming back at all that's why we are happy to see the republicans in the senate agree to a permanent ban. goes one of the earmarks for the f 35 fighter jets. we actually had a flyover and d.c. of one of those jets earlier this week. let's look at some of the footage from that flyover, provided to us by abc news area -- news. we were all in washington and we hear that flyover that happened earlier this week from that fighter. what did you find out about the f 35 fighter and why is it in
this? guest: it's eight years behind schedule, with a budget that's almost twice the amount per plane that they thought it would be. the lifetime maintenance costs and operations cost is $1.2 trillion, up 20% from $1 trillion a year ago. problems,reported more this week, they added $1.8 billion in additional joint strike fighters, 16 planes across the services. i was on another network talking earmarks when the f-35 flew over. we should be creating new revenue systems, working on essentials, not wasting money like that. host: here's a question from one of our social media followers, what do you think about earmarks establishused to
consistency in congress question mark -- in congress? billionhe record was 29 dollars in 2006. before they agreed to this bipartisan budget agreement at the beginning of 2017, earmarks were three doll -- $3 billion to $4 billion a year. low, backistorically to where we were one. it helps pass more expensive legislation, because as the first caller pointed out, members get a few million dollars and they vote for these very expensive bills we had but those projects don't benefit them -- those bills. but those projects don't benefit them. some of it's based on population, need, if your bridges falling apart you get it on the list, you apply for the money, that is mostly houston. and with what the former congressman said, the woodrow wilson bridge is an interstate
highway project, it was not near mark. and a lot of the things he mentioned were not earmarks, because even in his district it would not of been more than 1% of the funding. from lynn is calling bountiful, utah. good morning. you.r: good morning, thank i would say that nothing is dided -- improve since we away with earmarks. the budget is worse than it ever has been. and as far as the list of examples are guest gave for what he would call ridiculous or , the 13ied earmarks billion he listed for the horse and burro program is just enough to keep it inefficient. if we had more in that budget we could have a system where it would ultimately bring taxpayer costs to warehousing horses
down. the 13 billion that is being offered is just enough to give them very inhumane sterilization, rather than birth control and kill tens of thousands of them. that's just the cap -- the cost for rounding them up and killing them these environmentally -- these environmentally beneficial animals. guest: this is about the process by which these projects are run, not judging how wasteful they are. it's proven to be more expensive the expected, so we look to appropriations bills, we see if the project matches the criteria that we developed back in 1991 with the congressional port budget coalition. merit,rojects may have they should go through the same process that every other project in washington goes through. 99.9% of the money spent in
washington is provided by formulas, not because some member of congress decided on their own to added in -- add it in. host: what does the president have to say about earmarks? guest: he once said that he thought they might help get legislation passed, he has not said that since. i would like to think that the things we pointed out have finally reached the white house. and with the republicans in the senate saying no earmarks, it does not make sense for anyone else to say it should be going on now. but it is something that we wish others would talk about more often. host: another question from one of our social media followers. our emergency funding for natural is asterisk considered earmarks? was flint michigan's water contamination fund funded through earmarks? guest: know, and emergency appropriations is not considered an earmark. it's the projects they add to those that have nothing to do
with the existing emergency. or maybe something that happened many years ago, we see this all the time. we dolution to that, and have this more than they used to, and emergency fund to be used when emergencies occur. obviously serious events happen, like hurricane katrina, rita, and other situations. fema and other agencies should have a specific amount of money, based on the history that they can use without congressional appropriations to immediately deal with exigent circumstances like emergencies. gets an when congress bill they add on to it. host: are not scholars from wisconsin, tim, on the independent line. caller: good morning.
me if i'm, correct wrong, but i believe a lot of is thes are just -- it biggest form of socialism we have in the country. and you talk about government waste, my god, most of those departments we have in the government, like the department agriculture, those are totally unnecessary and we could save a ton of money if we got rid of those departments. that that'sng wishful thinking on my part, but fundingike lending -- planned parenthood, there is so much waste that could be taken away, but there are so many people in congress that have a vested interest in a lot of earmarks. i cannot member the name of the congressman you had on the floor, when mr. davis said that's the way to get reelected,
but since when is that a way to get a program? just so you could get reelected? i think it's one of the most corrupting things in washington. guest: i certainly agree with your last comment, it is corrupting and it is a priority for some members to get reelected. but if they think not getting earmarks will help them get elected, that's the incentive we are looking for. if they are doing other positive things for the country and they are not getting earmarks, i think that would help reduce spending. host: linda is a caller from iowa, on the republican line. good morning. curious about mr. contribute into this cause that he has. how does he get his funding? guest: we mentioned the funding earlier, the vast majority of our money comes from individuals, some from foundations and associations.
the organization has been around since 1984, following the report of the grace commission. i joined in 1986 and have been doing this for some time. host: you said earlier that republicans in the senate said they were not going to do earmarks, and you talk about nita lowey in the house. didn't years ago congress said they would stop doing earmarks? guest: moratorium, that's not a ban. it's a temporary suspension of whatever it might be, a temporary and do something. our definition is not the same as congress, although we point out in the pig book, since the moratorium projects that were earmarked before the moratorium we are still finding and we consider them to be earmarks after the moratorium. is aast-west center
perfect example. it was added to the appropriation bill and the state department did not request the it was added in in the senate, but the house agreed and that was not helpful. you can argue under almost any definition that we can find, there is an earmark. host: bill is from crescent city, florida, on the independent line. i have a few observation for mr. schatz regarding the overall spending versus military spending. i wanted to know, my understanding is that 50% of our ,ax dollars go to the military and i remember the military-industrial spending, and the bill at the end of the year for national defense authorization act, when these
bills come about, you can pretty much throw anything in it, and if anyone questions that they come back with the old you are not supporting our troops. and there was the kloss -- cost plus spending that i learned about on the show iraq for sale, 50 news ago. i wanted mr. chas to address these things that i brought up. longerit's a much conversation, talking about military spending. in the congressional pig book we do identify wasteful spending. going back to the grace commission, which under president reagan found $104 billion of wasteful spending, 25% of that was defense. defense is not 50% of the budget, by the way, it's about half of discretionary spending but there's also non-discretion
entitlement spending, which is 60% of the budget these days. host: let's talk to paul, on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning gentlemen, how are you? host: were doing well, go ahead. guest: i want to terminate the president's fund. pass paymentszed to past presidents. think about it. president carter has been getting $500,000 a year for 38 years. and i will take mansour off the air. talk: it is something we about, there is some minimal bipartisan support to reduce funding for you to presidents but we cannot do it for past presidents -- for future presidents, but we cannot do it for past presidents. i think congress can pass some restriction on how much they get .rom the taxpayers
past presidents and former presidents did not typically make a lot of money years and years ago, but now it's a different situation. the trend in congressional earmarks? it seemed like there was a , andy incline through 2005 it went down to zero in 2011 and 2013 and it seemed to be creeping up again. is there a cause for this rise and fall? was 2011 andomaly 2000 13, where they passed a continuing appropriations bill. they did not identify an individual bill so we could not find earmarks. not that they were not there. but they kept the spending at -- prior lee years year's level without being specific about where it was going. the trend was after the moratorium to average about $3.5 billion a year, and now it is up over the past years to a level of $15 million.
the difference is the bipartisan budget agreement. they increased overall spending increased byrmarks more than 70% over that period of time. this is a massive increase, and one of the reasons why, if they bring them back, they will again be out of control. host: is it easy or hard for voters to find out who is behind these earmarks? guest: it's harder than it used to be. they claim they are not adding earmarks that they don't have the transparency. and the rules that they have for transparency only apply during the 111th congress. which is why we know that that 15% of congress appropriators got more than half of the earmarks in the money. is calling from westville, new jersey, on the independent line. caller: i have a couple of questions i hope can be answered. for many years, we have been promised an audit of pentagon
spending and it has never happened. i want to know who is responsible for doing the audit, and why it has not been done. morer earmarks, i'm concerned with international earmarks that we have. -- give to nato and we never get sufficient money back from them. they have a lot of benefits, free university in europe, and our citizens are getting screwed. our social security fund has been looted and i want to know when the american eagle is going to do a giant low back on the pentagon and the people in office who actually are traders to -- trey taurus to their own traitors to their own country. guest: the pentagon has not passed their audit and we think it's important to protect citizens against government waste.
the chief financial officers set in motion the idea that these should be -- and a regarding nato, this is a very small part of the budget and it's not earmarked exactly. on theavid is calling democratic line. good morning. caller: hello, how are you. host: i'm doing good, go ahead. listening, this is the first time c-span has ever answered the phone during the first ring of the phone and it just came through. howuestion has to do with they got that tagline, with people drawing social security and the necessary spending for waterways,d our these areitalization,
all things that are necessary and they have a tagline on it, and i forgot the word that you've all used and i think it's shameful. already making it to her people cannot make a living anymore. -- how can people pay attention to their politicians if they have to work two or three jobs? guest: in most people's cases the largest payment they make his taxes. if you look at the other investments you may can you make sure it's being spent wisely and i think people need to do that with their tax dollars. calling from west virginia on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question as to who is
authorizing all of this spending for trump to fly all over the and holdvery week these campaign rallies which probably cost a million dollars a trip. did congress authorize this spending? who is paying for all of these campaign rallies? thet: the campaign pays for campaign rally, they have to reimburse the government as every campaign is had to do for every president regardless of which party they represent we had -- represent. host: we would like to thank , and the citizens against government waste to just put out the congressional pig book that identifies earmarks. thank you for being with us this morning. guest: thank you. host: coming up we will take your calls on campaign 2020, we are opening up our regular lines, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for democrats (202)
748-8000, for independents (202) 748-8002. ♪ this weekend, american history tv has live today coverage of the annual gettysburg college civil war institute summer conference. this morning at 8:30 eastern, with a discussion on jubal early in the unionist cost, with katie shiley of virginia commonwealth university. a look at nat turner's rebellion , the combat experience of civil , and aulders -- soldiers panel discussion on the artifacts of the civil war, moderated by brian lasky of west virginia university. on sunday are live coverage continues -- our live coverage
continues with a discussion on preserving the gettysburg national military park with jennifer of oklahoma state university. , and ae in the civil war look at the civil war and emancipation in the heart of america. this is followed by discussion on seeing the conflict through the eyes of leading historians with gary gallagher, erin garyan dean, and heirs -- gallagher and others. you can watch the civil war conference on american history tv and c-span3. washington journal continues. host: once again we are opening up our phone lines for conversation about campaign 2020. who is going to be the democratic nominee? and what will the campaign against president trump is looking like. and what is president trump
going to do to try to hold on for one more term? we are opening up the phone lines to you, republicans your number is for republicans (202) 748-8001, for democrats (202) 748-8000, for independents (202) 748-8002. and we are always on social media on twitter and facebook. last night, during remarks at a house party in windham, massachusetts, senator elizabeth warren had this to say about one of her proposals. a wealth tax. here's what she had to say. [video clip] >> we need to up -- impose a wealth tax on the top 10% of the 1%. [laughter] and here's how this will work. any of you at home, you have been paying a wealth tax. we just call it property tax.
all i'm proposing is different is for the top 1/10 of 1% it's not just real estate. , your stockmbrandts portfolio, your diamonds and your yachts. the first $50 million assets, you keep it, no problem. 50 millionth and first dollar, you have to kick andsense -- in two cents, two cents every dollar after that. the point is not to be punitive, the point is to say look, you have worked your rear end off, or you inherited. but you got this great fortune. if you built that great fortune here in america, i guarantee you built it in part with workers
that all of us helped page to educate. getting your goods to market with roads and bridges that all of us paid to build. you built it with protection from police and firefighters and all of us helped pay their salaries area -- salaries. we are happy to make those investments, but when you make the top 1/10 of 1%, pitch into sense -- in a two cents so everyone else has a chance to make it. host: robert is calling from pennsylvania on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. go ahead. i would like to say who's going to be running into thousand 20. biden andrump versus
independent sanders. trump will be the victor. host: you think bernie sanders will knock at the democratic nomination but he will run anyway tomorrow -- run anyway? caller: yes, he will run as an independent, he has nothing to lose and he has been an independent all his life. againstd you running biden and sanders, trumbull come out the victor again? caller: yes. ,ost: let's talk to steve calling from pittsburgh, pennsylvania, on the independent line, good morning. let me say, i don't like donald trump, i think he's awful for the country and probably the worst president we've seen in recent years. is the mostnk he likely to win in 2020, because the democratic party as a party is so divided. they have almost lost their
identity and they are caught up in identity politics, trying to catch too many people to vote for them. there are a lot of people in the middle who would probably sway post -- closer to the republican side. not necessarily great for black people, but i think as far as kamala harris and cory booker getting the black vote, i think they are not all that galvanizing. it is far as elizabeth warren and bernie sanders go for getting the democratic-socialist , and as far as pete buttigieg and others going for more progressive votes, that will split the vote. in the end, donald trump i think we'll just get reelected. primary 23% democratic personible -- 23% -- 23 democratic primary.
he could have someone who just got lucky because the votes were split. from philip is calling lindale, texas, on the democratic line. good morning. caller: thank you so much for the call. i would like to tell everyone that i would like to see everybody go out and vote. i'm a registered democrat, i have voted independent and republican. it's important for the people to educate themselves on what is going on. we have a lot more people out there that should get out and vote. and i want them to realize that people have suffered and died for us and come back crippled mentally, physically, and the people who have died for us for this value we have to get out there and vote. i think it is extremely important that we say god bless america. we have a wonderful country to live in and we have this freedom to do that.
i hope each and every person out there will take a little time to read their constitution where it says we the people, we the people of the united states, and we are the people. not the select few. get out there and look at your candidates. if they are doing the things that support you, your family, your community, your state, vote them in. if them the opportunity. --give them the opportunity. home forpan is your live unfiltered political coverage during campaign 2020. tonight the virginia democratic tonight at 7:00 p.m., with mayor pete buttigieg and senator amy klobuchar. you can watch that tonight on c-span, c-span.org, and the radio app.
that's the virginia democratic party dinner. coming up on tuesday, president trump is going to have his reelection kickoff at 7:00 p.m. in orlando. you can watch it at 8:00 p.m. c-span two, c-span.org, and c-span radio. president trump this morning put out a tweet about that orlando rally. here is a tweet from president trump this morning.
despite the greatest presidential harassment of all time by people who are dishonest and want to destroy our country, we are doing great in the poll, even better than 2016 and we will be packed at the tuesday announcement rally in orlando, florida. keep america great. that came out at 8:00 this morning. campaign 2020 is up and going. you can follow it on c-span. sale is calling from ellicott, city -- ellicott city, maryland, on the republican line. expressionre is an
that goes something like the enemy of my enemy is my friend. i think what trump needs to do is remind the people of the effort that hillary made to try from interfering with putin's election, as to why putin might have trended towards supporting trump. thank you. david, ons talk to the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have two comments. on elizabeth warren's proposed wealth tax, it's not about approach, except she limits it to the top 10th of 1%. 1%ould apply that to the top , which would then include many
members of the senate and congress. by going 1/10 of 1%, she excludes all of congress from paying that wealth tax. number two, as far as the democratic nominees for president. i have voted independent, republican, and democrat over the past numbers of years. i think the moderates could win the general election, but it will be hard for them to win the primary. if any of the very liberal candidates win the primary, i think trump will get reelected. don, on thetalk to democratic line, from south carolina. good morning. caller: good morning i don't believe there will be a fair election in 2020. i believe president trump is going to try to manipulate
things so that he will win no matter what the vote is, and he will be protected. this is a question for the constituents of kentucky, i hope they call in and explain to me why they are going to support name --nator, lost his mitch mcconnell. he is in the pocket of donald trump, and he is protecting donald trump. my reason to say that is his wife, elaine chao, the secretary , is one of theon only secretaries still with the president. he has fired everyone else, or they have been dismissed. all of them are gone. herself, arey, and
in the roadbuilding business and deals with china. they are making a small fortune, her family, and her dad's company. so therefore, in return, mitch mcconnell is protecting donald ofmp from any kind investigation considering the russian involvement. host: this week, c-span's the chair interviewed of the budget committee. here is his response when asked about running for a senate seat, or who he would like to see challenge mitch mcconnell. >> i have no plans to run for the senate. -- [video clip] to run foro plans the senate, we have two potentially amazing candidates. one that a lot of people know is amy mcgrath, the former air force pilot who ran for a
congressional seat last year and barely lost. greatdy barr developed a following in kentucky, and a national following. i think she is looking at the race seriously, and i think she's going to make the race. if not there's a guy named matt jones, who has a statewide following, he has a sports radio and he has a lot of conservative republican listeners, who i think would vote for him. but i think amy is probably the first target of the dnc see -- they have talked to her and i have talked to her. she is totally dedicated to public service. if she ran you would see the beddoe o'rourke and ted cruz race of 2020. the nation will be focused on that contest. host: you can see the entire interview with the congressman
at 10:00 a.m. on c-span. you can also hear it on c-span radio and watch it online at c-span.org. let's talk to curtis, from south carolina, on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you. host: just fine, go ahead. caller: two points. i voted for barack obama, and bushclinton, and george w. . i think a lot of people are really underestimating what donald trump is doing, especially for the african-american community. reform, trying to get some inner-city grassroots that should be going to inner cities to improve the public housing and different things. and when the senate committee tried to do that, candace owens
immediately fired back with facts and i think that showed a lot of african-americans is just biased on that point. i think african-american -- the african-american community is going to wake up a little bit because all of the illegal , this ison coming in going to come in as a minority political years. caroline, from springfield, virginia, on the democratic line. points, ihave two feel that every state, especially kentucky, should have a nonpartisan organization for making sure that they are following the rules to support , i wanted to share waserday, president trump
compared to jackie o, and i think there will be a ship to appeal to people, they want to now vote for him. was russian interference, and i think there is a subtle strategic step president trump, and i think there is something connecting cuba and sorrows, under bobby kennedy we were moving towards russian involvement being away from cuba and i think there is a investment and network that is changing. from let's go to richard, cincinnati, ohio. good morning. caller: thank you. , although iy that usually vote democratic i agree with trump on the trade issues.
and i think that is something in the election. but why aren't we talking about peace? we might be days away from a conflict with iran, if not war. there's really only one fromratic candidate, hawaii, who has been pushing on this. syria, the guts to go to to try to see their point of view, and was attacked by even democrats like howard dean. saying thatnish up i have called congressional and senate offices and tried to talk to them about the danger of a false flag attack that some of these attacks on these tankers, or coming up soon, is not what it seems to be. coming up on june 26 and
june 20 seventh, 20 of the democratic presidential candidates will debate each nighton stage over a two period. the montana governor did not make the list, and he put out a new ad on friday, responding to not being included in the first debate. here is that i had. [video clip] i saw that the governor did not qualify, and that's horse [beep] you don't need to be from knows -- to know that somebody who one the state by 4, when trump won the election -- he doesn't qualify. really? what are you waiting for? go donate.
let's go to carol, from hudson, massachusetts, on the republican line. good morning. caller: i'm on the wrong line. that, i agree with that woman earlier, that things there is some kind of conspiracy , that o'connell is walking around like a zombie, something is going on. trump has something on him more there is some sort of financial influence. womanagree with the other that says it's this whole venezuelan thing, and the russians and it's all connected and somehow it's going to be a big mistake for trump to have spoken to the russians whatsoever.
markets calling from rock hill, south carolina, on the -- mark is calling from rock hill, south carolina, on the independent line. caller: i thought i would mention a couple of things i'm concerned about. i guess the main thing would be the validity of the election. age of social media where people seem to be able to and put online, twitter, or whatever, whatever they want to say without much repercussion. including the president, who has been reported to have used misinformation and out and out lies, from what i've heard about 10,000 times. so now the election is coming up. withemocrats will come up someone to run against him.
we have no independent fact tocking system in place verify what people are saying to the public. theyse with busy lives, don't have time to check these things out. they are interested in quick facts, that's why so many people believe the mueller report proved that donald trump was innocent. it didn't. but people believe what they hear in the media. so if you have networks like cnn, nbc, or fox, biased towards one political party or another, they can tell the people that are watching these programs what they think is going on, and a lot of people will believe that, and base their opinions and ultimately their votes on what they are hearing. danny, fromgo to ohio, on the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my
call. i voted for president trump last time, i will be voting for him again. i love american history. and the declaration of independence that thomas jefferson wrote said i know these choose to be self-evident that all men are created equal, and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. among these is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. liberty is something that cost lives for us to have. obtain when we are the most powerful nation on earth. georgia is calling from louisiana, on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i'm calling about elizabeth warren. i love to see her run. becauseve a question,
of for not careful we will be in a war and i want to know why we have a black and white picture. , fromlet's go to lonnie north carolina, on the democratic line. caller: i have been listening to a lot of people talking about how they will continue to vote for trump. which i can't understand, it's beyond me that they are going to overlook everything that they see and hear and say this man is honorable. i see no honor in this man. i don't see justice in this man. he's also talking about a friend who was a prisoner of war, who committed mass murder, and he wants to let them out. there are other generals speaking against this. i see this man as a threat. he wants to start a war with iran, to try to get him another
four years election. republicans, wake up. your republican -- your president's berserk. he's losing his mind. people better wake up and look. every day they are likewise today -- where they always picking on trump? because he's always in the news. he's tweeting that he could get russia to help him again and no one is saying nothing about it. in the old white republicans let him talk about mccain like he was an enemy of the people. even these old vets won't say anything about trump doing mccain like he's doing mccain. , peteroming up next grier joins us to talk about christian science monitor series , democracy under strain. from our spotlight on magazine segment. a discussionave about ethics in the trump administration.
we will be right back. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪ >> this weekend on booktv, sunday at 6:45 eastern, we visit the home of husband-and-wife richardjeanne safer and brookhiser. jeanne: the difference to me is what matters in life, it is called the chemotherapy test. the chemotherapy test is when you are lying on a hospital bed, getting chemotherapy in your vein, you do not ask the party affiliation of the person standing next to you, getting you through it. >> at 8:00 p.m., author mark levin talks about his book "on freedom of the press." mark: the difference between
modern media and the patriot media is the patriot media, printing the pamphlets, the printing press, they were trying to fundamentally transform government. wanted representative government, and they did not even want a lot of that. today come of press is trying to fundamentally transform us. >> and at night :00 eastern on -- and at 9:00 eastern on "after acosta cnn's jim discusses his book, "the enemy of the people." he is interviewed by jay rosen. as folks know after the statement, we are 90 plus days since our last official briefing in the white house briefing room, and we just do not have access to white house officials the way that we used to, even during the trump administration, where we have them on the record, and that briefing room, where everybody is mic'd, and you have a variety of
reporters, not just the networks ying to get in, but newspapers, foreign reporters, all of that has been lost. >> watch booktv on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with peter grier, the washington editor for christian science monitor, who is here to talk about an eight-p art series and our spotlight on magazines segment, "democracy under strain." peter, thank you for being here. guest: thank you for having me on. host: what prompted an eight-pa rt series, "democracy under strain"? well, we are trying to find out what adds to the conversation. we look at all the stuff going wrong with democracy today.
partisanship is out of control. isre is gridlock, nothing getting done. peter has been around a while, and he can look and see how these things stretch beyond the trumpcare wreck how they started, and where they are going. host: so the most recent piece was entitled "block the vote: the history of efforts to change and contain and change voting practices in america." on voting access, and what did you find? thet: well, i started with vote. voting is of course the core aspect of democracy. it is how we participate, and there are a lot of issues surrounding voting right now. is onely voting rights that a lot of democrats and republicans are fighting about. the statesnd is that
are really going into different ways. there are 15 states that are making voting easier. that is to say automatic voting registration, where you have to opt out. there are 25 states that have tightened voting registrations, through the voter i.d. requirement. interactives process with a dynamic pulling the nation apart a little bit. host: what are the differences between the states that are expanding voting and the states to, i am noting going to say restrict voting, but states that are pulling back and trying to make sure their voting systems are tighter? guest: right, right. you will find what you have is, while they are not exclusively red and blue, there is a red and blue twist, and in recent years,
republicans have made a real push to, in their view, tighten up a voting system that have gotten too loose. they want to have voter i.d. they want to purge people they think are not really on the voting rolls anymore. america has a terrible history in terms of allowing selfridge and in terms of restricting the rights of minorities to vote, so you have to look at those or at least reactions to those actions in that context. host: one of the states you've focused on in this article was wisconsin. talk to us about what is going on in wisconsin when it comes to voting. guest: right. so that was a very interesting example in which you answered the question -- does it make a difference? does it affect the outcome? are they switching to votes? and people against voting restrictions would say yes. in wisconsin, it was very close. trump won by 20,000 votes.
there were 60,000 fewer votes in the state, and of those, about 20,000 fewer votes in the city of milwaukee, which is a very democratic district. so you can say you know, that might have had an effect. but political sides do not really agree with that. they will say we do not really know. barack obama was not on the ballot. that could have been a big reason for minority voters not to have turned out. in general, while restrictions may be bad in an ethical or a moral sense, they are not really switching elections in america -- at least as far as we can tell. host: if you want to join this conversation about voting rights in america, the eight-part series, "democracy under strain ," we would like you to call in. republicans, you can: at (202) 748-8001. democrats, you can call in at (202) 748-8000. independents, you can call in at
(202) 748-8002. and keep in mind, we are always reading on social media. andwitter, we are @cspanwj, on facebook, we are at facebook.com/cspan. what are the 2020 implications ?f all of these everything evolving around the next presidential election, is there an application around aning -- is there implication around voting? guest: there is. who is going to vote, what is the turnout going to be? of voters, 60% on a really exciting election. i do not know about you, but in 2020, it is already the excitement or the interest so buildup that it is going to be a record. so in that context, we do not really know what is going to happen. what happened if 70% of americans turn out to vote? the mix might be totally
different. it will be interesting to see. host: ow, one of the things that you also wrote about is this divide and turning into a them versus us, but it is not anything new in america, is it? is not.o, it in some ways, the split between the powerful rural voting block and cities is nothing new. it dates back to -- thomas jefferson you stop about "evil about," and the feel urban voters, they do not really mentality inthe the countryside that really counts. but that becomes a template to divide america into racial, ethnic, and social and cultural different groups. not usedknow, that is to necessarily have a partisan lott, because there were a
of rural democrats, a lot of urban republicans, but increasingly, as america divides into a red and blue eyed a theation, that slips onto rural/urban divide, too, so you whata deep gap between rural area voters want and what urban area voters want. host: when you are talking about rural, are we talking upstate new york versus new york city, or are we talking new york state versus iowa? when we say rural versus urban, what exactly are we talking about? guest: that is a good question. you really are talking new york state versus new york city as much as the different states, a rural-dominated state, like iowa, versus new york. in state elections, for instance, that has an effect. what do they think? ofmany ways, the sort
partisan gerrymandering stems pace divisions as much as divisions between different states. up to the 1960's, the power of rural voters in big elections was much greater. if you think partisan gerrymandering is that on a national level, it was outrageous on a state level. that was not outlook and the supreme court -- that was not outlawed in the supreme court until 1964 or so. these divisions remain in the state legislature. host: you brought it up, and i'm glad you did. talk to us about malapportioned it. ment ismalapportione kind of like gerrymandering, the state gets freedom to divide up their own political power. who is going to vote, how many people will vote, where the
districts are going to be, so if you are a rural legislator -- california is a great example of this. in california, the rural areas were extremely powerful. they controlled the state legislatures, and they made sure that their districts included many fewer people, so, you know, au can have, let's just use loadable as an example, 10 voters in california, a member ure, andtate legislato that same number for an urban district would be, like i'm a 3000 voters. so in essence, the rural voters have much greater power. until the one person, one vote rule in 1964 to really rule this out. host: ok. going back to voting rights, we have a question from one of our
social media followers, who wants to know if you know how many countries do not require an i.d. to vote? guest: that is a good question, and it sounds like the question of the person who sent it in probably knows the answer to. to tell you the truth, i have not used this international sense of us are not going to guess, but in america, that is a very popular change in terms of the voters. light 69% to 70% of the voters will say well, we think there should be photo id as a requirement, but not everybody has a photo id. y 91-year-old mother-in-law have a hard time finding a photo id, because she does not drive anymore. that is a little bit harder. host: that brings us to the national identification question we have had back and forth, should there be a national
identification? would that help in this voter issue? guest: should there be? that is a whole other can of ticks there. you know, in america, i am not that ist is something really reflective of our -- make everyone have a passport. i don't know. that is not something i am going to jump into. dave, who isalk to calling from san antonio, texas, on the republican line. dave, good morning. caller: good morning. i have a unique experience here in san antonio, when i came to see my granddaughter is way from high school. it was -- graduate from high school. it was right during graduation season, and the high school
parking lot was filled with cars. they almost unanimously had "vote for hillary" on their bumper stickers. all of the parents there, 90% of illegals there were immigrants. the children were illegal. ofgrandchild was maybe one 20 or 30 white and black students at the high school. i was curious to exactly how serious are these people about wanting to vote. and there they were, in november, voting for hillary clinton. host: go ahead and respond guest. guest: well, i will say this, you do hear this a lot. you hear people who have an anecdotal reason of why they think there is voter fraud. the fact is that whether there is massive voter fraud in america is something that has been studied for decades, and
there is no evidence that there is a large-scale voter fraud in national elections. you can kind of see why it would be in the sense of how many immigrants it would take, how many illegal immigrants voting it would take to actually sway an election or make any difference. it would be massive. there iscan believe massive voter fraud being covered up in america. i do not believe that. there has not been any real example of that. it does not mean things like that do not happen on a small scale basis, particularly in localized elections, but, you know, this is a subject that i have written stories about since the 1980's. there really is no evidence that there is large-scale voter fraud on a national level in america. host: so when we have lawmakers who say well, we need to make sure our voting system is secure , and people who are voting are eligible to vote, if we do not
have that proof that there is actually voter fraud, then what are those movements about? guest: well, again, let's -- you do not have to have proof of voter fraud to feel that you have to defend against voter fraud. honestly, you go to a voting line, and you are standing there, how many take up their wallets and take out, say, a photo i.d.? it is common. perhaps that is just a commonsense thing that would make the population feel better about it, because to a certain thent, it is not about fraud, per se, it is about how we feel about the election system. fair?feel it is remember, democracy is not about majority rule. democracy is about us all be leaving the rules are fair. somethingk that is
that voting restrictions could help with. host: let's talk to diane, who is calling from upper darby, pennsylvania, on the democrats line. diane, good morning. caller: good morning. i have a few questions, but i want to start with this one. last year and this year when i went to vote for school etc., we city council, had the same names on certain parts, like maybe for school counselor, for schools. the had the same names on democratic side as they did on the democratic side. ,o, say the name was john smith john smith was listed on democratic, and then john smith was listed on republican vote. either it is democratic or
republican, not both. it is called a crossover of some kind. i did not vote for anybody that was a crossover. i would like to know -- is that considered voter manipulation? i saw it last year a little, but this year a lot. there were four names on one vote, and you get to vote for four on school, two on counsel, whatever, and i saw it a lot this year, and it upset me. it extremely upset me. host: it sounds like she is talking by local election, where they might have different rules and how you vote in a local election. guest: right, like school districts. school district elections are a whole other country. i have no idea how they set up those votes. that could well be the case. there are elections which are supposed to be nonpartisan, but the people who are running kind their i.d. and
party identification to be known. on theet's go to brock independent line. rock, good morning. caller: good morning. , guys. good morning, mr. grier. thank you for your time. i just have two questions, guys. how does the divisive rhetoric between dems and republicans delayed the progress of america and respects to economic growth and its moral compass? and second, how does voter suppression and the lack of adequate public education access undermine the future of our children? thank you. guest: thank you. those are excellent questions. as to your first one, i am talking in general about what the partisan divisiveness means to america in general.
obviously, it is extremely corrosive. erodes, not all at once, but bit by bit. it can be helped along by elected leaders. it can be helped along by the way people talk to each other. particular, what it does is it makes us feel like the other side is the enemy, and when you feel that when you lose , it is a catastrophe, because the other people are so bad, that is when democracy phrase. -- frays. and that is really i think kind of what we are seeing in america today, that people feel it when the other side wins, it is a catastrophe. and he asked about the economy, that reflects on that specifically as well. the second part of your question was about suppression and how that affects our children. first of all, i will answer that literally.
20, orage voters, 18 to college-age voters, are among byse who are most affected so-called voter suppression efforts, that, because, again, they often do not have the voter i.d. necessary to vote at elections. they sometimes are not eligible to vote where they go to school. they have to go home. and so to a certain extent, that is aimed at them, because their vote tend to bes different than many of the areas where they are attending school. it makesl, of course, -- it just seeks -- it makes voting less of an everyday part of people's lives, and for youngsters growing up, if they do not see their parents going to vote, if their parents are not able to take them into the voting booth, that is not put
it is -- that host: the supreme court and how the supreme court may be considered more and more political as the years have gone by. tell us who robert cooper greer was. guest: that is dangerous. i wondered if they would alert you to that. you of course are a supreme court expert. isert cooper grier considered one of the worst supreme court justices of all time. to him.ated fortunately, i am related to his brother. he is involved in one of the worst supreme court incidents in history, the dred scott case, in which african americans had no role in american life. robert cooper grier voted for
dred scott. he is the only northerner who voted for dred scott, and he did that in a conspiracy with the incoming president, president james buchanan. they thought that if dred scott lived to be a national decision, that a northerner would vote for it as well, the issue of slavery would be done with. there would be no threat of a civil war. what that showed of course was the limits of the power of vistaprint court decision to, you know -- power of the supreme court decision to change, you know, the mood. to tear the country apart. that is a cautionary tale today. obviously, slavery is a huge, divisive issue, but the supreme court cannot go beyond the national consensus. they can take action to tear the country apart, and in that sense, you know, they are a political body, but they are also reflective of the national climate, maybe, not the national
weather, but the natural climate. host: and we have seen the supreme court has had to jump into more issues, because it seems like congress is not handling the, so it goes to the supreme court, which once again makes it seem like they will be more political, because they are dealing with issues that congress has not made an issue decision on one way or the other. guest: that is correct. supremebout the springboar court as political, and some people do not like that, but ports are political. laws do not address everything. they have to make judgments on their own feelings, and that is political. the actual political structure, when congress does not solve issues, a lot of that ends up in the lap of the supreme court. host: let's go back to our callers, and go to scott, who is calling from new york good morning. on independent line. scott good morning. , caller: good morning.
hey. good morning. happy father's day. i am glad that we are americans and not united states people. i went on record in the summer of 2015, when everybody was laughing at a man by the name of donald trump, and i predicted what was going to happen, and exactly what i said was going to happen in 2015 happened in the fall of 2016. now is feeling is saying we're not going to have to worry about the 2020 elections, because we are already in a trumped up situation which come within a year, we are going to have it into a state of martial law, and at that point, we will not have another presidential election, so the history of america will be our first president cannot tell a lie, and our new one could not tell the truth. guest: he is not alone in believing that.
you hear liberals who get together and worry about, or this case, independent people, who worry about the vote, saying that. but i believe american institutions are stronger than that. i believe that if you try to do enough of aould be pushback, enough of a revolution, that would be prevented from doing that. host: let's go to kevin, who was calling from staten island, new york, on a democrat line. kevin, good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. thank you for this interesting conversation. mr. grier, you're opening comments were about low voter turnout in the country. highou examine oregon's voter turnout, their voting by mail turnout? and also, what is your opinion on why the public has not supported voting by mail. as you must know or probably know, oregon have a very high, i think it is over 90% voter
turnout. i will listen off the air, and thank you again, c-span. guest: right. i did not examine not, per se, but i am certainly aware of that. first of all, i think voting by mail is in fact popular. generally speaking, efforts to make it easier to vote are also pretty popular. people can be in favor of voter and voting by mail and automatic voter registration. so in that sense, i think, you know, the public does support what you are talking about. and in oregon, they have very high turnout. making it easier to vote increases the turnout, so, yes, it would do that. but of course in america, voter gettingis not -- it is newer voters to turn out, not all voters to turn out.
so it is focused on the things that help them, not the things that help everybody. host: let's go to bob, who is calling from alabama on the republican line. bob, good morning. caller: good morning. good morning. mr. grier, hello? host: go ahead, bob. we hear you. caller: mr. grier, i mean, you 12w, i do not have but a grade education, but it is real simple to me that only voting, to cut down on voter fraud, use what god gave you, your fingerprint. take your fingerprint, go up to your election place, and they will issue you an idea that coincides with your fingerprint, .it when you walk in the vote, mass your fingerprint, it pops up your name, you get a free iv that they are going to give you, you presented to the people
arehere, and if you vote, legal, you vote, if you are illegal, you do not vote. host: what do you think of that, not only voter idea but the government collecting fingerprints? matter,s a practical there is not going to be a national bank of fingerprints of every american. i think that is something that, again, i do not want the federal government just to collect my fingerprints, and there are many other people who would feel the same way. so that is not going to happen. host: let's go to hilda who is calling from tampa, florida on the independent line. nilda?ilda or caller: it is nilda, with an n. i have been listening for so long am i feel like jumping from
one thing to the other. my father is 90. the mrs. going to the election spot now, because of his walking disabilities. to go back to why i originally called, for 19 years, before my grandson was born, i worked the election faithfully. wass one of the people that behind the desk that voters would show identification. people -- it had just gotten nationalized, which come citizenshipational papers, so that they would not have a single problem. they had with anything to prove and show, passport, drivers license, letters with address and envelopes they were and ints of their state, just want to say is that there is a big difference between the ones that hold up the line,
because they do hold of the line, if they do not come with any identification. the process is supposed to be quick. you want it to be quick. there is no reason why a person doesn't -- if they drive a car, they are not supposed to be driving without their license. host: go ahead and respond real quick. guest: a lot of states do not a lot ofter i.d., and states are different as to what counts and what do not. host: we would like to thank peter grier, of "christian science monitor," for their great series "democracy under strain." peter, thank you so much for being here today. guest: thank you. it is always great to be here. host: coming up next, we will talk to lachlan markay about ethical issues going on in the trump administration. stay with us. we will be right back. ♪
>> the complete guide to congress is now available. it has lots of details about the house and senate for the current congress. bios and contact information about every senator and representative, plus congressional committees, the and the cabinet here to 2019 congressional directory is a handy, spiral-bound guide. order your copy from the c-span online store for $18.95. >> most of us, when we think of west and churchill, we think of older man sending younger men into war, but no one knew better and few new as well the realities of war, the terror and the devastation. he said to his mother after his second war, he absolutely new
the disaster that war was. >> sunday night on "q&a," candicen canada' mallard talks about her book "hero of the empire." candice: he says i want to fight. so he ends up going with the regiment to pretoria on the day that it falls to the british, and he takes over the prison, and he frees the man, he points in the prison his former jailers, and he watches as the flag is torn down and the union jack is hoisted in its place. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." mugs arengton journal"
available as c-span's new online store. go to c-spanstore.org. check out the "washington journal" mugs, and see all of the c-span products. "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with lachlan markay, a reporter with the daily beast. he is here to talk. to us about ethics in the trump administration. . lachlan, thank you for being with us. guest: pleasure. thanks for having me. host: you have a book coming out next year. what are you saying in this book? guest: i cowrote this with another white house reporter at the daily beast. we wanted to take a different on the crazy years we have had, so we are examining the trump white house and the trump era through the eyes of sort of mid-level people in the white house, the administration,
media, on k street, etc.. the inspiration was the gentleman who wrote the novel is that he wanted to do the book. he compared it to napoleonic wars through the eyes of napoleon's foot soldier. it is certainly a book about trump in the sense that he is sort of the threat that runs throughout, but we want to tell the story through the eyes of people who worked for him, followed him through washington, the hangers on, the outside advisors, and people who have just sort of filtered into this town over the last couple of years. host: well, ethics and the trump administration, that is in the news right now. the office of special counsel says white house advisor has violatedway the hatch act numerous times. tell us what the hatch act is, and what specific violations were they talking about? guest: well, it dates back to
the 1930's and into the new deal ofn a number of opponents franklin delano roosevelt accused employees of the work progress administration, this new deal agency, essentially using their government agencies to try to advance the president or the political prospects. -- the president's political prospects. so essentially bars this activity. against be an order someone or campaigning for a political candidate or even public statements that, you know, suggest the use of once official position as a employee to advance a candidate or a political party. what is the office of special counsel, and where they located, and what do they do? confusedght, not to be with special counsel robert mueller. this is a post-watergate
collection, and the scandal was his use of the federal government as a political weapon, up to and including law enforcement and intelligence agencies, to try to advance his political goals. this is one of the major things that came out in the watergate administration is that nixon and his administration had ranked employees on a scale from 1 to 4 on how politically loyal they were and how valuable they would be from a political spectrum to the nixon administration feared they created the protection board, which is supposed to as a form ofs federal hiring and promotions, so that political considerations did not come into play there. the office of special counsel was a part of that merits protection board. into aned off independent agency which is tasked with the hatch act, whistleblower protections,
protecting the integrity of the workforce, make sure wrongdoing is investigated and essentially prosecuted. host: does the hatch act applied to political appointees? guest: it does. the president is given a lot of leeway and discretion in managing the folks that he appoints two senior administration positions. so when it comes to a career federal employee, the office of special counsel can work with the merit systems protection board to impose their area sanctions, ranging from a suspension for 30 to 90 days for a firing. when it comes to a political appointee, it is much more difficult, and really all they can do when it comes to a senior white house employee is to recommend certain actions by the president and by the white house. in the past, there has been a good amount of deference given to the recommendations, but more recently, you know, it is just
one of many norms that appears to be sure to the side. host: has anyone ever been fired because of a hatch act violation? or what kind of punishment have other people gotten for hatch act violations? generally, what seems like very explicit cases, there is often leeway, a warning letter issued, additional training that is required. very often, these are, they can be sort of obscure rules that some appointees or employees may not be aware of, so there is a bit of deference to the idea that, let's make folks aware of the rules before we take very severe action. but anywhere from generally 5 to 10 federal employees per year that are disciplined in some form. most are not fired, but suspensions or
official reprimands, things of that nature. -- that we saw in the past week, i have never seen a reprimand, you know, i have never seen public statements from the office of special counsel that were that scathing and that definitive and the lengths to which the office went, including giving an interview to the "washington post" to say not only is this a routine violator of the hatch act, but the blithe nature with which kellyanne conway has referred to requirements of the hatch act is effectively undermining the law, period. they are essentially negating the hatch act as a tool that can be used to discipline or even malign presidential import these -- appointees. host: let's let our viewers join
injured we will open up a lines. republicans, your line is (202) 748-8001. democrats, you call (202) 748-8000. independents, your line is (202) 748-8002. a keep in mind, we are always reading a social media, on twitter @cspanwj, and on facebook at facebook.com/cspan. now, this is what the white house had to say about the office of the special counsel the reprimand and suggestion that kellyanne conway should be fired. "others of all political views have objected to the office of special counsel's unclear and i'm clarify roles, which has had a chilling effect for all federal employees. mediams to be affected by pressure and liberal organizations, and perhaps osc mindful of its own
in a fair,act impartial, nonpolitical manner and not misinterpret or weaponize the hatch act. it came to congress in around 2011, and he worked for oversightin committees, the house government and oversight reform committee at the time, chairman darrell issa and later chasten changes, both republicans, and he was also the staff director for late senator john mccain when he led the committee on investigations. sorry, the senate select committee on investigations. so i actually noticed that line in the white house's statement, and i thought it was interesting, this is the special counsel who is definitely a republican. he was appointed by president trump its way 70. back in 2017.--
they were dogged in the investigations of the obama administration, as they should have been, in my opinion. it would be hard to say that the idea of media pressure and liberal organizations sort of bringing this gentleman in seemsular to heel just divorced from his background and the approach he has taken to oversight in the past. i look at the work he has done, and i see someone who is committed to protecting whistleblowers, to protecting the integrity of the federal workforce, but that is kind of all the white house has in this instance, is to resort to those sort of ad hominem's. host: let's go to the phones. who isalk to rachel, calling from forney, texas, on independent line. rachel, good morning. caller: good morning. i want to talk about acosta, which trump appointed labor ,ecretary, secretary of labor and he is going after sex traffickers of young girls, but before he got into office, he
was able to get a level three child molesters, jeffrey epstein, off without serving any kind of prison term. they have all kinds of evidence on him, and nothing on him. jeffrey epstein is trump's best friend, which trump was known to rape a 13-year-old girl in his home. host: do you want to respond to any of that? guest: well, i think the influence that major political donors can have over the process in one of the ways that manifests itself is an insulating these powerful andviduals from reprisal law enforcement agency. i think it is something citizens should be wary of. hasink the "miami herald" done some amazing investigation into the epstein case in particular. political powers need to be checked, whether it is the president of the united states, a senior white house official, or a very private political
donor. host: let's go to carroll, who is calling from florida on the democratic line. carol, good morning. caller: good morning. good morning. i really wanted to call and talk about the line and disregard for the norms that is happening as a regard to national security. as an air force veteran, i was willing to give my life for this country in a foreign land. and i learned that integrity meant doing the right thing when no one is looking. with this lighting and disregards for the norms, i am very concerned about national security. what are we going to do to make the case against iran when no one believes the president or kellyanne conway? and the breaking of the hatch act is only one thing that has completely disregarded our norms and put us at risk. if everyone is above the law, then we have no democracy to protect in foreign lands or at home.
guest: thank you for your service, first of all. i agree with your concerns. i think the hatch act in particular is very illustrative, because it shows the degree to which there is not a formal mechanism for enforcing these sorts of loss. we defer very often to long-standing norms, as he put it, traditions, practices, respect for the rule of law. when that goes out the window, very often we have sort of taken for granted that those norms will be respected, and there are not official mechanisms in place for ensuring that accountability. i think that is a really grave concern, and there are tensions in our political system right now, a degree to which folks feel washington needs to be sort of uprooted, you know, and changed wholesale and sort of throw out all the bad guys, and this wave of populism that has sort of taken over, i think that is one of the main byproducts of
that. and i agree that it is very dangerous and requires that congress really asserts authority to a greater degree than i think it has. jose, who's go to wa is calling from east london does, california, on the republican line. jose, good morning. caller: good morning. you know, i am so perplexed of the hypocrisy in washington and the fact that hillary clinton so muchten away with criminal activity. i will give you an example. the clinton foundation millions of dollars of campaign contributions, and the clinton foundation has been found to have broken so many laws, and yet nobody has gone to jail over it. then you have the iranian deal. you know, the thing is -- and then the server, i think there
was a navy person that took a photograph inside a submarine, and he actually served, you know, a few years in jail because of that photograph. yet hillary has basically put a ,erver outside the parameters security parameters, national security parameters, and you had all of these foreign governments into it, yet she is running free. guest: well, i think there was a great deal of scrutiny, certainly during the 2016 campaign,. the practices you mentioned i was reporting extensively at the time on the clinton foundation, her evil practices, etc.. when it becomes a question of law enforcement, that is something career prosecutors decide, whether there is significant evidence to make a case. there was not in that instance, but i do think you raise a good point and very
often these calls to enforce things like the hatch act or other laws to govern and restrict potentially corrupt activity, calls to enforce those laws can be very partisan, and you have democrats calling for the enforcement against republicans, republicans calling for enforcement against democrats. there are things i've seen proposed that i think would go a long way towards ensuring a more steady, you know, a fairer, i guess, a more consistent oversight of, particularly the executive branch. david ruidoso, who is an editor at the "washington examiner," is committed to giving oversight chairmanship to anyone who is not the party of the white house at any given time. to the degree that you can channel partisan energies in a way that is or is that accountability will be taking place, even if it is not necessarily for the purest of reasons, i think will go a long way toward giving at least the perception of fairness in those oversight roles. host: you had a recent story
about rudy giuliani's ties to ukraine. what did you find,? and what was a significant? guest: it was really thinking backing -- piggybacking on a "new york times" story, essentially attempting to dig up dirt on hunter biden, joe biden's son, who had done a few deals there. ned parnas, amed ukrainian gentleman who lives in florida. he was helping giuliani out with this. we had been following him for a long time. he ran a company called major energy producers, was donated a lot of money to president trump last year. we were observing his various business and political ties too prominent figures in the trump world. we reported that h he was last year, which i
understand with a client referral for them, and this is also looking through this company of his to secure major export of u.s. natural gas to europe, so it is sort of a small node in this very large network of folks who have become suddenly very influential now that a political ally of theirs than a white house. thes all the things of obama administration and previous administrations, but my job is to figure out who those folks are right now, who is not being covered, who is maybe doing something that might benefit from a little sunlight, and to driv try to shine a light on it. host: why is this significant? why should we care about these connections? guest: well, these are folks who are not public figures, who the vast majority of americans have never heard of, who nonetheless are exerting influence on american policy in surreptitious ways. and i think rudy giuliani has
been a major nexus for a lot of this, because he is a private citizen. he is not a government official. he is a lawyer who represents the president and his personal capacity but nonetheless retain significant influence over segments of the republican party and folksy has done business with over 40 years in public has beenhe, i think, particularly interest -- not least because he is one of the few trump people who will consistently speak with reporters on the record -- which is really great, and i appreciate that. but this goes back to the book that my colleague and i are writing about these figures in and around the white house who are able, through their ties to the president or folks around him, you know, exert influence for their own benefit and their own ends. who: let's talk to nevin, is calling from tennessee. good morning. want to point out
that i lived in new york before i lived in tennessee, and i live there in the 1970's, 1980's, and 1990's, up until the 2000's. as a was always known grifter, a con man, just a total criminal. i just -- i do not see how this guy can actually stay in office. i appreciate the ethics part, but there is no ethics in this administration. i think the title of your book is an oxymoron. these people are grifters, from every single person who has been on his staff to the people appointed who were involved with domestic violence. it is just one, big, corrupt administration. guest: you know, is certainly -- actions that the president has taken has certainly opens new fronts and tested limits of ethics and the federal government. for instance, the president's refusal to divest his extensive business holdings, for his release his tax
returns. corruption is nothing new in u.s. government or any government. it is as old as government itself. but i do agree that we are sort of having to deal with, you know, an extent of conflicts of conflictand a type of of interest that we never really had to deal with before in this country. you need go no further than a few blocks away from the white house to see the trump international hotel in washington to sort of see firsthand what that looks like. i agree that this is presenting sort of unprecedented challenges, and i think the real problem, immediate problem, in my mind, is the refusal of congress to really reassert its authority over the executive branch. madisoian ideatte of checks and balances has not really account for the strength of party loyalty in our modern
political system. you are seeing now congressional democrats really ramp up these investigations in the trumpet administration. . it looks like those will go to court before they get any resolution. ofmay come out at the end the first trump term with a lot of new legal precedent that really moves the ball forward when it comes to congressional oversight of future administrations as well. if you are looking for any sort of silver lining in all of this, i would say that as it. host: lets talk to crystal, who was calling from philadelphia, pennsylvania, on the democratic line. crystal, good morning. caller: good morning, america. the bitter kool-aid that drink musts callers be a delusional concoction. "i would never call the fbi." of course not! because he probably would have been reporting some shady deal he was trying to pull of.
trump university -- losers. trump casino -- losers. he is a tax cheating family. thatn, it makes no sense tells, its that he makes -- how do people keep believing it? -- i: you know, it is think what you hear there is the extensive sort of partisan in the country right now. i understand your frustration, and i would just suggest that folks with different political views have had similar frustrations with administrations in the past. that is not to say -- i do not want to compare and contrast the actions of various presidents like that, but, you know, i do think that we need to try to, you know, have a little empathy towards our political opponents in this country and understand why they might be supporting
someone who we might not necessarily agree with. i think the nation would be better off. host: let's go to basil, who is -- ing from north caller: -- states are allowing babies to be killed out of the womb. this is a nation starting with senior citizens now, and in a few more years, but at times this young man is in his 60's and 70's, they will be eradicating people who are no longer useful in america, in your citizens enters and all of the likes. host: ok. guest: that is a little above my pay grade. [laughter] host: let's go to carroll, who is calling from texas on the independent line. carol, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call.
thank you for c-span. thank you for being on, sir. i just wanted to say one thing, and that is -- when our republicans going to step up and start paying attention to all of these things and start adhering to the rule of law? i mean, they are going around to the democratic candidates that are running now, and they are saying -- we want you to solve all of these problems. we want you to solve problems with the environment and the climate and pollution and come up with solutions for everything, and yet the republicans, you know, immigration. the republicans have been in charge for three years now. there is no hillary clinton in any administration out to blame for anything that is going on, a hating clinton is not policy you can govern with. and my problem is, i know a lot of republicans. i am friends with a lot of republicans, and it hurts me to sit there and watch them just turn their back and completely
ignore everything that is going on with our president, who is, you know, basically acting like king. host: go ahead and respond. guest: republicans, really -- i sort of came up in washington during the obama era, when republicans really rode this sort of wave of opposition to the administration, to majorities in congress, and really sort of built a coalition around that. it is much easier to be in the opposition, i think, than it is to sort of be the governing party. and when things go wrong, as they inevitably do when you're trying to make policy, it is much easier to blame an thanent, real or imagined, it is to do the hard work of legislating and compromising and coalition building. that is true, i think, crossed political divides.
i remember early in the obama administration, it was george w. bush's fault. now it is hillary clinton's fault or it is barack obama's fault. i think you will see that in every administration. there is a natural tendency to point to easy answers and things like that. it just comes down to doing the hard work to get things past, get things through congress, and the truck administration has done a fair share of that, for better or worse. host: well, we would like to thank lachlan markay for being here with us today. when does your book, "sinking in the swamp: how trump's minions and misfits poisoned washington ," when can we get that book? guest: that will be february 2020, you can preorder on amazon right now. host: perfect. we would like to thank all of guests,ers, all of our and all of our viewers for sticking with us through "washington journal." make sure you stick with us tomorrow for another edition. had a good saturday, and a happy father's day to all of the fathers out there. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019]
[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪ . some ofis a look at what is coming up today on c-span. times"los angeles reporters talk about the death of rapper nipsey hussle, who was fatally shot in march. hearings thisill week, starting with comedian jon stewart and others on the september 11 attacks. ofn looking at public risks deepfake videos were audio or video is altered from true or original content. acting homeland security secretary testifying on border security and the agency's
funding needs before the senate judiciary committee. today, the virginia democratic party holds its blue commonwealth gala, featuring two presidential candidates, senator amy klobuchar of minnesota and south bend, indiana, mayor pete due to the judge -- pete buttigieg. >> oh, do i look forward to running against them. >> tuesday, president trump holds a rally in orlando, florida, officially launching his run for a second term. live at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2, online at c-span.org, or listen on the free c-span radio app. ofmost of us, when we think winston churchill, we think of the older man sending young men into war. but no one knew better and few knew as well the realities of
war, the terror and devastation. after said to his mother the second war that the raw comes through. he absolutely knew the disaster that war was. "q&a," a night on historian talks about the early military career of winston .hurchill says, give me a regiment, i want to go and fight. so he goes with a regiment on the day victoria fell to the british, and he takes over the frees the men who had been his fellow prisoners and puts in the present his former as ars, and he watches flag is torn down