host: good morning, it is friday, january 5. colorado and maine have ruled that donald trump could not

premiere on the ballot because of his actions on 1/6/2021. trump-pence asked the supreme court to review the ruling. our question to you this morning is do you support or oppose those efforts to remove president trump from the ballot? if you support that number is (202) 748-8000, oppose (202) 748-8001 and align set aside for those residents of maine and colorado (202) 748-8002, you can also text us at (202) 748-8003, let us know your name, city and state. and on social media on facebook facebook.com/cspan. welcome to today's washington journal we are glad you are with us. we will start with the washington post article that

says trump asks the supreme court to keep his name on the ballot. the gop front runner is also appealing a main decision. donald trump asked the supreme court to ensure that he can appear on primary ballots by invalidating the ruling from colorado's courts that says trump is ineligible to serve as president. last month, the colorado ruled he did participate in insurrection and as a result, could not appear on the primary ballot. this is the first time they ruled he could be removed from the ballot based on the provision that bars those participating in an

insurrection. it could make its way to the u.s. supreme court. a couple of polls, this one from yougov. do you approve or disapprove that donald trump cannot appear on the primary ballot because of his actions leading up to january 6? all adults strongly approve, 38% , somewhat approve 16%, strongly disapprove his 28%. in democrats strongly approving at 63% and republicans strongly disapproving at 58%.

another poll saying that if the supreme court were to review the decision to do you think they would withhold it -- upheld it? there is also this news from the associated press, voters file an objection to trump's name on the illinois ballot. this is maine's secretary of state, this is what she said last week. [video clip] >> it does not say convicted of insurrection but engaged in insurrection.

and i detailed the legal bases based on the facts presented at the hearing jermaine. maine is unique in that we have a process under main election law the secretary of state is obligated to ensure every candidate meets the qualification for the primary ballot. under main law, any voter can challenge the qualification of any candidate and we are then obligated to hold the hearing. this is part of the process. he has the right to appeal and i voluntarily suspend my decision through the appeal. i swore an oath to uphold the

constitution. the main election law requires me to hold a hearing and now is the next step which is the process in the courts. with various interpretations of the constitution i pressed forth the reasoning and legal arguments made at the hearing and now they have the ability to make a determination and i will uphold what the courts direct us to do. host: that was the main secretary of state on her decision to remove president trump from the ballot that is now being appealed by the trump team. we want to hear your opinion, we start with rob from new york city. caller: good morning, thank you for c-span and the excellent

work you and your colleagues do. our former president is a master at publicity stunts. he knows how to get national and international attention better than anybody and it is a drug for him. he gets a rise each time he is able to gather the attention for him to out to his former publicity stunt he needs to do an even bigger and better stop. that is the reason why i think he is dangerous. i am not sure that he has any ability to govern themselves, to control himself.

when the drug is publicity, there is nothing off the table. host: do you support these efforts to get him off the ballot? or do you think that is feeding his publicity machine? caller: it's both. i support the effort. common sense tells you that what he engaged in three years ago was nothing more than an attempt to try and stop the counting of the votes in congress and stir up the people who have been misled by him to go in and crash into our capital and try to stop our government from proceeding

normally and properly and legitimately. it is outrageous what he participated in and i absolutely think he should be off the ballot in all 50 states. host: joe in stamford, connecticut. caller: good morning mimi, how are you. host: good. caller: c-span is turning into cnn and msnbc. always bashing this man and asking stupid questions. of course, they oppose him because he is such a threat to this country. meanwhile, we have a president destroying this country and the constitution but trump is a bad man. that's all i have to say it's good to see you. host: barney in sarasota,

florida. caller: guess what america, this is the worst president of ever seen in my lifetime. the constitution don't do nothing to these people. he shouldn't have been able to run the first time. he is always running to stay out of prison. you have one third of the united states, uneducated. you have the crooked supreme court, the packed court. you knew what was coming. host: what do you think the supreme court will do in the colorado case? caller: the supreme court is bought and paid for.

they will not take them off the ballot. they will not do anything because they are scared of trump supporters. everything this man did, nobody will prosecute him. it takes black women to hold the spam accountable. the descendants of slaves have to hold this man accountable. this is no democracy. host: jerry is in carrollton, ohio. caller: i find it funny that guy before me talks about the republicans that held him in bondage? i don't think so. donald trump is one of the best presidents we have ever had.

i don't understand all the lies he has supposed to have told. i want to say to the people that think it is alright to do what you are doing in the election in colorado and maine. when they pulled that, the people should take them out of voting. nobody get to vote out there. that's about all i have to say. host: the entire state of colorado in maine? caller: if they won't let donald trump on the ballot so people can have the right to vote, then take the entire state out of the election and then it will change. it's amazing how crooked the

democrats really are. it is pitiful. thank you mimi, i appreciate it. host: here is a portion of the filing from former president trump of the supreme court. it says in our system of government colorado's ruling cannot be correct. this court should reconsider this question, reverse the court's ruling and return the right to vote to the voters. the question of eligibility is properly reserved for congress, not the state courts to consider and decide. by considering the question of his eligibility and barring him from the ballot, the supreme court --

caller: i oppose the efforts. one person in maine deciding for everybody, three iv leaguers are biased. they should not make a decision, the best president we have ever had in my opinion. joe biden is the worst and they want to take this man off the ballot. he has not been convicted of everything. they have charged him with this

insurrection, not from what i have seen, he's not guilty. i think too many of these people are traders. itors. it's been going on as long as i have been alive. this country has been undermined by marxists. host: let's talk to robert who is in glen oaks, maryland. caller: hi mimi, this is robert. host: hi robert. caller: i believe he should be taken off the ballot but all of the commentators on television, they keep talking about section three of the 14th amendment but

section five says he should only be removed if congress approves the removal with two thirds of the vote. that is what they should bring up and stress. i think he should be removed but only after congress does their 66% vote. host: dan in louisville, kentucky. caller: thank you for taking my call. i oppose and like the guy was just saying they would not get two thirds of the vote into getting him off the ballot. i can understand all these

people, some of them don't even know what they're talking about. i don't even see how they can see president biden doing a good job. he should be impeached just on the border and not protecting the country. he has to be the worst president and if he wins this, our country is shot. it will be a communist country. i'm 65 and i think i'm on my way out but i hate to see the downfall of this country. democrats are destroying the country and if people can't see it i don't know what's wrong with them. i appreciate you giving me the time. host: here's michigan's secretary of state and an event

in washington dc talking about what faces the supreme court. [video clip] >> there are a lot of factual and legal ambiguities that makes this not directly analogous. when there are legal ambiguities to aiding and abetting, due process, all of those things are complex and who should be deciding qualifications and interpreting this in a way that will give us clarity and finality? it's i wrote an op-ed when this

first emerged, that led me to conclude and feel firmly that the supreme court needs to decide this and give clarity and finality on this or it will devolve into everyone has their own interpretation and feels that they are clear and right in my decision is that it is not as clear-cut as people are making it out to be. in the recognition that the first impression creates a precedent for the future. we have to be transparent and by the book and how they should play out. that is what the u.s. supreme court is for. we can debate the makeup of the supreme court, that's a reality. but from a legal precedent standpoint, when you have these

questions of fact and law it is the job of the court to figure it out. is not the job of one politician to make that call. host: we are taking your calls on the question, supporting or opposing these efforts of taking the former president off the ballot because of his actions on january 6, 2021. dusty and myrtle beach, supports those efforts. caller: i'm not the typical caller from a republican state. president biden has signed five bills into law. the republican president put us

back into the 2007, 2008 and 2009. the worst years of my life. this is a cakewalk going through what we are now. we had an epidemic, a virus that shut the country down. anybody that can't see and understand, that shut our whole country down for a year? host: about keeping trump off of the ballot, do you support that? do you think you should not be eligible to run? caller: i support it. he should have been impeached at the first time and the second time. yes, i support it.

and if you look on your computer you will also see where illinois has joined in with colorado and maine. as time goes on, there will be more states added. host: what do you think the supreme court is going to do? caller: you and i both know the donald trump stacked the supreme court and mitch mcconnell. we only have nine, so you have five that are corrupt as they want to be. they are dedicated to donald trump. i hope they will do the right thing and make the right

decision because if he gets back in the white house, and he will not draw a line down the middle of the country and persecute the democrats. host: i got your point dusty. let's hear from a colorado resident. caller: i am a navy veteran, 52 years old and an american indian. this is my first calling so i am nervous. host: you are doing great. what do you think about what's happening in colorado? caller: all the democratic states have been after this man for eight years. he took every minute. i am sick of it. he didn't do nothing wrong.

host: ok, and michael in pittsburgh, pennsylvania. caller: good morning mimi, thank you for taking my call. you let a lot of people get their voice out. i feel like in the newspaper has gone so far to the left. that's why i love sees in. cspan. i agree with so many of the callers who oppose taking trump's name off of the ballot. i think he did a good job when he was president. i do think it is laughable, very sad that so many people

think that he is being undemocratic. i think it's undemocratic to keep the president off the ballot for no good reason. host: why do you think it's illegal? they are citing the 14th amendment. caller: the 14th amendment was made for real rebellions when the confederacy was a problem for the survival of this union. that is for real terroristic threats. donald trump said to work

peacefully to the capital and he cannot be held accountable that some people went overboard including people in our own agencies who were found to be involved in that melee. a big deal has been made out of that and once again, the media has shown donald trump to be -- they are trying to make him out to be a rebel when he's trying to hold this country together. if everybody could watch the movie i saw pertaining to this issue and populism and is from 1930 called meet john doe starring gary cooper and barbara stanwyck. it shows populism, it was made

in 1930 during the depression with people losing jobs in the country was being transformed into something we could not recognize. and it has so many similarities to what is going on today. i think he will be pleasantly surprised and i think people will understand what populism is. people are sick and tired of politicians running the country down the tubes. host: here's the front page of usa today that says warning signs flash from sc 2024 vote and it says they took up all that both sides express what the

election can bring. 52% of donald trump supporters say they had no confidence that the result of the 2024 election would be accurately counted. anyone who supported joe biden were confident. 67% of trump supporters did not feel that biden had been legitimately elected. and finally, 40% called the riot ers criminal. and mary is calling from indianapolis, indiana. caller: good morning. thank you for letting me voice my opinion. i am completely opposed to the

process that is taking place with donald trump. i blame the media on this. i believe the media is one-sided. they think american citizens are not intelligent people. i watch all of the networks and i read all of the papers. it is so far biased that even the supreme court has become biased. i think the american people if he should be on the ballot. what makes one person and one state allowed to voice our opinion? host: alright mary, let's take a

look at what former president trumps former attorney. she talks about trumps concerns about the colorado appeal going to the supreme court and the supreme court is made up of three justices he appointed. [video clip] >> what's the concern you voiced and it is a valid one. republicans are conservative, they sometimes shy away from being pro-trump because they feel that even if the law is on our side, they are trying to look neutral and they make the wrong call. i encourage them to look at the loss of the constitution.

if the justices read the law as i do in most american lawyers do including alan dershowitz. host: we are taking the calls on that question with your efforts to remove president trump from the ballot. i wanted to update you on some news that hit the wall street journal front page that the islamic state claimed responsibility for a pair of bombings that killed dozens of people in the largest attack in iran dispelling suspicions that israel could be behind the attack.

and tom is in woodbridge, virginia. you propose? -- oppose? caller: c-span, you are a national treasure. i work professionally in the intelligence community. i ran for u.s. senate in virginia in 2020 and i was in the primary. i was the strategic secretary. these are the facts, they lied to you. that is a message to all democrats. host: who is they? caller: the democratic party working alongside members of the

fbi who have all been fired lied to the american people about the russian collusion, allegations against carter page innately the investigation so they could defame president trump. and then they battled him his entire administration. ultimately, the big lie is the fact that the fbi intimidated twitter, facebook and americans to keep them from talking about the hunter biden laptop. people need to remember the first impeachment of donald trump. sorry to interrupt was over contacting the ukrainian government over the companies of

the biden family. host: our you still working for that office? caller: i am a government contractor but i wrote a report out on amazon and audible. host: i want to ask you one more thing, you brought up a lot of different issues regarding intelligence but this is on the front page of the washington post, 25% of adults say that the fbi instigated the riots, this is a paul, 34% of americans -- republicans hold that view? caller: i don't believe that. i don't think they could've

choreographed this deliberately. my belief is there were people on the left that hoped violence would occur and there were people on the right who hoped violence would occur and there were instigators and agitators who fueled the spark of violence. there are three important things people need to be looking at. the fbi has not been able to tell us the person was who placed the pipe bomb, in addition to that the gallows built on the capital was built

at 6:00 a.m. in the morning and then it was left alone. it was left as a propaganda piece. host: who built the gallows? caller: the fbi does not know and they have not made any arrests. caller: the third thing is we know that people were being told to storm the capital. host: but ray apps has denied that. caller: he did say we need to go into the capital and everyone was speaking out against him at the time. we need to take a close look at the pipe bomb situation because they were reported to the capital police within minutes of

the first breach within the capital. host: ray epps is not a federal agent. and you are saying he is? caller: he is a federal agent. host: i have to move on. we have tony coley from detroit, michigan. caller: i think that last caller is what is wrong with america. it is sickening. i support donald trump be kicked off the ballot because of the fact that he incited people to do something to the united states capitol police has never been done.

i am not mad at anyone for selling out america. i don't feel that way. but i feel like it is the stupidity of people. donald trump was born of privilege. in his position, he does not have their best interest at heart. this country has fought wars for their independence to sellout for a dictator in russia? host: let me ask you about the balance in keeping him off the ballot. the argument has been made to

let the voters decide, what do you think about that? caller: he should not be eligible because of the insurrection. and that is nowhere. he tried to overturn a free and fair election. for that alone, he should be in jail. anybody else would be. if i could please say, as far as i can see, a certain group of people have power and they are afraid so they are willing to destroy democracy itself because they are losing power.

power is unsustainable for anyone and to give it to a pariah who does not have your best interests at heart, that some of the most dangerous stuff that could ever happen to us. i don't know how most people sleep at night. host: on facebook, mary agrees with you saying i support the constitution. if you try to remain in power after losing an election and try to use violence to stay in office you should be banned from holding office ever again. tony says he has not been convicted of a crime and it will create more division. this sets a bad precedent for future elections. mike on facebook says our

constitution is clear, president trump engaged in an insurrection and is ineligible for president. back to our calls, shiva. i can't see your state. or rather steve and north carolina. caller: i think the american people represent a hiring process. he can be discriminated against for being a member of black lives matter. they don't have to hire you. there is no law from prohibiting from hiring under those circumstances.

donald trump is under the same umbrella because he is applying for a job but people don't want him, they don't think he's good for the position. in the states are getting together to prevent him from being hired. i think that is what it is all about. that's pretty much all i have to say. host: let's talk to deborah who is a main resident from bangor. caller: i think he should be taken off of the ballot because the evidence is overwhelming. even in his own words he talked about what he tried to do to change the vote in georgia. pick any area in the number of times his own people, lawyers

pointed out all of the objections to the judgments against him. he did not win the election, over and over. his own people told him he did not win the election and he kept trying to get it his way. and when it did not work, he prompted his band of rebels to go to the capital. host: what do you make of the argument that he is not being charged for insurrection or convicted? caller: it's not necessary. he does not have to be convicted of it. the evidence demonstrates that he did. if anything, in my state, i

don't understand why they are perfectly willing to allow this person to take the reins again. given all of the evidence that he has demonstrated on tape and video. it is crystal clear. i just don't understand it. and if it gets kicked to the supreme court we will have to live with that decision. host: let's go to raymond and sherman oaks, california. you oppose? caller: i strongly oppose the efforts to remove trump from the ballot. number one, he has not been found guilty in a court of law.

nor has anyone who participated in the january 6 the time been charged with insurrection. the 14th amendment says you must engage in insurrection or give comfort to the people behind the insurrection and i don't think he has been proven doing. it is an issue of precedent, for whatever reason all of the democratic states go through with this what is to stop republicans to doing that to democrats in the future. that's why the supreme court needs to set the standard for the states. in the polarization going on in our country is insane and for whatever reason, if trump is

removed i don't see why a repeat of january 6 could happen. i don't think anyone should take that lightly. as a democrat i think this is up to the supreme court. host: tricia grade without on facebook, i oppose and i am a democrat. -- tricia agrees with that on facebook. good morning, victor. caller: i didn't realize we had this many people and about government. donald trump is because nothing but trouble since he has been elected. i wonder if the people who support them understand what

they are doing. i don't know if they don't care or don't understand how important this is. trump should not be allowed to run for office and a lot of his supporters should not be allowed to run for office again. host: why is that? caller: they support a man who has done all of this. if they support someone like that, and he does get back into the presidency they will not be any better off than they were in the past.

if these people would open up their eyes to realize what they are doing to our country and future generations. they are looking at this picture differently than i am. what happened on january 6 is one of the worst things that this happened in my lifetime in this country. i don't see it changing if donald trump gets back in the office. it will be a communist country under a dictatorship. it's unconstitutional and people don't really care about the constitution. that is what we are supposed to be running our government by and that is not happening. that's pretty much all i have to say about that. host: darrell issa next to california, what do you think darrell?

caller: i definitely support him being removed from the ballot because he took part in that insurrection by getting people riled up. a little over an hour of his speech was we need to go over there and fight, fight, fight. what else are they going to do? who are they supposed to fight, their congressman? so they went out there bought just like he said. -- they went down there and f ought just like said. a lot of people say that part of the constitution was written

because of the civil war. a few years later there was the amnesty act that pardon people about the civil war. and if it was just about the civil war they would have left it in place. a lot of people saying that he has not been charged with insurrection. there was a county commissioner in new mexico who participated in the same insurrection and a new mexico judge ordered him removed from office. they have already acted on it it would be unconstitutional to let him run. it's not a matter for the voters

any more than an age requirement. the constitution said he could not run. host: let's go to tampa, florida. let's hear from robert. caller: i am opposed to it as well, it makes no sense. half of his supporters are special interest people who will benefit from him being president. it makes no sense. host: sam and minnesota. -- sam in minnesota. caller: i am a definitely supporter of donald trump. and i think joe biden, i would

say don't run again for your own good and the country. there is a song called don't know much about biography in geography but i do love donald trump. in these people who are against him do you like to see -- host: what do you think of the people who want to remove him from the ballot because of his actions on january 6? caller: i certainly want him to run and thank you and god bless. host: mike in maryland. caller: i support him being

removed and also, if he was innocent he would want to go to trial and prove his innocence. instead of avoiding it. thank you very much. host: let's talk to adam in annapolis maryland. caller: good morning. i want to highlight most of the callers today are emotionally. unfortunately she did not go through the court processes

where it was labeled it insurrection. all of our motions really don't matter in terms of the constitution. host: this is former assistant general john yu talking about problems with the colorado decision. [video clip] >> the merits of it, did donald trump commit or involved in an insurrection? can an appellate court or trial court make that decision without having a trial? does that mean anyone or any official could decide who is an

insurrectionist or not an insurrectionist? unless congress passes a law setting out how you make that determination then you open it up to every county clerk deciding for themselves who is in insurrectionist? what is the limiting principle? what if they say joe biden is an insurrectionist. how do you allow 50 states and 30,000 counties decide? the main flaw in the cases on the merits of the application of the text of the 14th amendment. i think the strongest issue here is the president is not covered by this text of the 14th amendment. there are two kinds of coverage provisions in the first one is

what kind of office did you have and what offices are you forbidden from assuming? neither of them refers to the president. the closest either comes to us the officer of the united states and while there may be an exception may be but the constitution text uses the president and office of the united states separately. officers of the united states are appointed. they even take different oath's upon taking office. it's very hard for those who want to bar trump to show officer of the united states

includes the president. host: next we have joe from maine. caller: let's talk about john yu, who the heck is he? this is ridiculous what he is saying. every ball regarding who can be on the ballot, anybody can run? that is not the way it is. he could grab his mouth all he wants. he is a fox news hack. the other caller saying he was factual and colic about the russian hoax.

and then brought up the first impeachment. donald trump has lied repeatedly. host: do you think you should be left off the ballot? caller: he can be left off the ballot, but the rules of who can be on the ballot say you have to be at least 35. why don't they elect dennis the menace? there emoluments rules, he stole millions of dollars. the impeachment going on and republicans would not vote them out.

you want to talk about the truth and transparency. the republican party is full of bunk. host: next we have roxanne. caller: i support him not being the ballot. for the people who keep calling in saying that he should be on the ballot, i understand that. if that was the case, why doesn't charles manson go to prison for years?

he wasn't there, it was his words and people went on his word. if people look at donald trump the greatest thing. when your child comes home from school to say a bully will them. don't say a single word. we are better than him. he has never been held accountable for anything and this is our chance to stand up. he doesn't care about poor people, he's rich. we have nothing in common with donald trump. we don't even use the same toothpaste. he probably has never been in a walmart. so please america, wake up. host: coming up next, economic policy institute's david cooper and heritage foundation of rachel greszler on the pros and

cons of raising minimum wage. and dr. paul spiegel will talk about the american ♪ >> today, watch c-span's 2024 campaign trail, a weekly roundup of c-span's campaign coverage, providing a one-stop shop to discover where the candidates are traveling across the country and what they are saying to voters along with first-hand accounts of political reporters, updated poll numbers, fundraising data and campaign as. what she spent 2024 campaign trail today at seven eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org or download as a podcast on c-span now. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. ♪

>> the house and senate are in recess for the holidays and will return next week for the start of the second session of the 118th congress. the senate convenes january 8 and the house on january 9. both chambers faced two upcoming federal budget funding deadlines to avoid a government shutdown, the first on generally 19 and the other in february 2. >> the committees are ready to do the work but we are waiting the other team, the other side of the chamber to come forward with a number we can agree upon. >> leader mcconnell and i will figure out the best way to get this done. neither leader mcconnell or i want to shut down. >> follow the progress when congress returns on the c-span networks, c-span now or anytime online at c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of government.

book tv every sunday on c-span two features leading authors discussing nonfiction books. jessica wilson from pepperdine university and contributor from st. john's college and baylor university's jonathan tran talk about the value of a liberal arts education and at 10 p.m. eastern and afterwords with the book pandora's box, changes in television over the last 40 years from the network to cable to streaming. he's interviewed by the wall street journal media and entertainment bureau chief. watch book tv every sunday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at book tv.org.

>> c-spanshop.org is our online store, browse for police collection of c-span products. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. ♪ announcer: a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this. it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work. when citizens are truly informed, our republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. from the nation's capitol, to wherever you are. the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues.

host: welcome back. we are joined now by rachelgreszler, the senior research fellow for the heritage foundation and david cooper the research director for the economic policy institute. welcome to both of you. give us an idea of the history of the federal minimum wage, where did it come from? guest: the federal minimum wage started in 1938. it was at a level of $.25 per hour and this was meant to be a minimum level. it has varied over the years and if you look at the real level of the minimum wage, not just a nominal amount, it was at its lowest level in the 1940's so a little over five dollars per hour. it's going up as high as $13 per hour in the 1970's and now it is at a relatively low level, $7.25 an hour. we also see the smallest percentage ever of workers who

are actually making that federal minimum wage. today is one out of every 1000 workers who are earning exactly the federal men wage. you also have a fair number earning below that because they are in tipped positions. the employers had to bring them up if they don't make enough tips to bring them above the minimum. host: tell us what the federal minimum wage is designed to accomplish and who would benefits the most. guest: it was established to provide a wage that was supposed to allow workers to afford the basic necessities. as rachel said, it's been raised various times throughout the year. in the late 1960's when it was at its highest, it was at a level that arguably allowed low-wage workers to of -- to afford those basic necessities. as it's been allowed to a road over the years, it's become was now effectively a poverty wage. it is so low that someone earning the federal men wage

can't afford the basic necessities. no can live on $7.25 an hour anywhere in the country. we see lots of cities and acting hiram in wages because lawmakers have recognized this wage is not realistic for anyone to afford the basic necessities of life. host: and there has not been an increase since 2009. white do you think that is? why hasn't congress acted to raise that? guest: it's due to in transients among republican lawmakers. the public is broadly supportive of raising the federal minimum wage. there's about 30 states and the district of columbia that inset minimum wage is higher than the federal minimum wage. there is almost a most just there is a most safety men -- cities and counties that is set them hires with his broad support among the public to raise the men wage republicans in congress have just been uniformly against it. congress and the house, lawmakers in the house past the

pate -- the raise the wage act of 2021 that would have raised it to $15 brower but that bill was never put just was never put forward for a vote in the senate. any effort since 2009 has run into this wall of republican opposition. host: why do you think that is? guest: i think part of the reason the minimum wage has not been as much of a push is because so few workers are actually earning at that level. host: wouldn't it help those workers? guest: you look at that 10th percentile workers so low income earners, we saw the biggest increase they have experience in wage growth between 2017 and 2019 when used to reduce regulations and reduced taxes in high demand for workers. a strong labor market will do far more for workers wages than increasing the minimum wages because policymakers themselves can't create new money. it can only redistribute it. as we've seen the states enacting higher minimum wages

and city and local areas, that the appropriate way to do it if you believe there should be a minimum wage because there is such variance across the u.s. in what is the median wage and the standard of living. you look at a $17 per hour wage and in mississippi, $17 per hour is about the median wage. 50% of workers earn below that. that would be the same thing as proposing 839 dollar per hour minimum wage in d.c. where we are. i think it makes more sense to let the states and local governments address this issue. host: how are small businesses reacting to this? guest: it's most difficult for small businesses especially startups and there have been studies that show the survival rate of startups is directly correlated to minimum wage and the increase will reduce the chance of that startup surviving. that's because you need room to grow. you start small and these businesses don't have the capital to provide the higher -- as high wages as others do and they need room to grow we've

seen companies like amazon and starbucks that are paying $15 and $18 per hour and we should celebrate that but that's because they have the time to grow and expand. they can utilize something like automation that allows them to cut out the lower wage jobs that might otherwise be available. host: we are taking your calls for our guests if you would like to call in with your comment or question. if you are a minimum-wage worker, you can call us on (202) 748-8000, if you employ minimum wage workers, call us on (202) 748-8001 and everyone else, (202) 748-8002 and you can send us a text at (202) 748-8003 and we are on social media so facebook.com/c-span and

journal@c-span.org. there is the question people cutting hours with a raise the cause for the consumer. guest: i want to respond to something that rachel said and that's yes it is true there is very few workers earning the federal memo wage now but that's misleading if you think of the scope of workers that would benefit if we were to raise the federal minimum wage. we conducted analyses of who would benefit if we raised it to $17 per hour since 2028. that would lift wages for tens of millions of workers because it will benefit not just folks at the federal minimum wage but everyone earning between $7.25 and $17. a much bigger population of beneficiaries than just those earning the federal minimum wage. on this question of how it affects businesses, the effect

of the minimum wage on jobs has been one of the most studied topics in labor economics. the best research we have shows that if raising them in ways has an effect on job growth, it tends to be very small, so small that we have trouble measuring it. yes, it is true that if you raise the minimum wage hike, you might make things a little more challenging for some businesses but it will also create opportunities for new businesses as well because you are providing more income to low-wage workers who tend to spend every additional dollar they receive. that will help generate spending in the economy and generate consumer demand and create new opportunities for businesses who are able to operate under this system where they are competing based upon talent and the quality of their goods, not on who can get the cheapest labor and make products the cheapest. host: this would be contrary to that from the herald review --

guest: as i said, you will always be able to find examples of is this is who are unable to adjust to a change in the wage policies. the studies show that for every business struggling with this, there are businesses that are benefiting as well. there are new entries into the marketplace who can take advantage of an economy that's softer because low-wage workers have more to spend. low-wage workers tend to stay in their jobs longer when they are paid more. if you pay them more so they are not costly struggling to find a new job that may pay one dollar more per hour, they can focus more on the job they have they are not concerned about whether they can make ends meet at the end of the week. they're more productive, turnover goes down. there are benefits to businesses were paying higher wages that

are not being discussed in reports like that. host: let's hear from senator bernie sanders and i will get your response from may of 2023. this is about his effort to lead an effort to raise the federal minimum wage to $17 per hour. [video clip] >> today in america, it is unacceptable that while the richest people become much richer, over 60% of our people are living paycheck to paycheck. everybody appear, knows what that means. your car breaks down your kid gets sick and you're suddenly in a financial disaster. this should not be happening in america. let us be clear, i don't think there is any debate about this -- nobody in this country can survive on $7.25 an hour. maybe some of my colleagues in congress might want to live for

a month on $7.25 per hour and see what that's like. you can't do it on nine or $12 per hour. we need an economy in which all of our workers earn a living wage. it is not acceptable today that nearly 35 million american workers earn less than $17 per hour. further, it is a national disgrace. the minimum wage in this country , congress has not passed a minimum wage increase since 2007. the world has changed a little bit since then and congress has not acted 16 years ago. host: what do you think of that argument? guest: i would like to agree with the statement that nobody can live on $7.25 per hour. that's why the minimum wage is not intended to be a family supporting wage and that's true.

what you need to look at is we need initial wages and we need to step -- steppingstone jobs to get teenagers and opportunity to step into the labor market and eventually climb up. the majority people who earning minimum wage and started their which is most americans have a pay raise within a year. the answer in this of higher wages is what's the best way to make america more productive and produce higher wages as opposed to shifting the mandates? what concerns me is yes there will be some lost jobs, we can't create new money and businesses will have to adjust whether it's reducing jobs or benefits or shifting hours. those who lose their jobs will be the least advantaged and half of them who lose their jobs will never get back into the labor market. that's a lifelong consequence for a significant amount of people and there will be benefits. i think you have to look at both sides of the equation here.

it's important to keep that entryway open for people who are teenagers who don't have a lot of education and might not speak much english, who have a disability or a criminal record. there needs to be an entryway into the workforce for them. host: is it your opinion it should stay at $7.25? guest: i think the federal level should stay there but it's up to the states for the higher wage. guest: the problem with that is there are some states where if the federal government does not step in, it will simply never raise the federal minimum wage. there are some states that don't have any federal wage whatsoever primarily in the south. you can't just abandon those workers. we have to set a federal standard that allows them to earn a paycheck where they can afford their basic necessities. this idea that is just a starting wage, there is a lot more workers than just teenagers and first trouble is that benefit when you raise the minimum wage.

in the late 1960's when the minimum wage was equal to 12 and $13 in today's dollars, the minimum wage at that time was worth about half the median wage in the country. the min wage worker was making half what a middle-class worker in the country was making. someone at 725 today, if they are starting their first job are making less than one third of what a typical middle-class worker is earning. they are starting off much further from the middle class than their counterparts 60 years ago. that will make it harder for them to ever achieve that middle-class income if we start them out on such a low wrong on the latter. host: let's talk to callers now, everett is first, an employer in grand junction, colorado, good morning. caller: good morning. i'd like to look at this from a different angle. perhaps the strength of the dollar where the power of the dollar versus the peso.

if your dollar doesn't buy the products that businesses are selling or in the same amounts, your dollar is being weakened to the point where a dollar doesn't buy what a dollar should buy. that's the point i'm making. the other point would be people on fixed incomes like i am, i'm retired and i'm on a fixed income, that doesn't change much. host: should it be pegged to inflation? should there be an increase every year? guest: if you believe there should be a minimum wage, that would be one way to do it. what we are seeing today is regardless of the minimum wage, americans across the board at all income levels are suffering because inflation has been so high it's eaten away $5,600 of

median value in the last three years so everybody is struggling. that brings it back around to it's not just individuals, it's businesses and retirees. looking at the government policy there, inflation has been caused and is another policy that puts more money in people's pockets will have unintended consequences. host: bobby is calling from south carolina, good morning. caller: good morning. just a few things -- david was factually wrong where the minimum wage was started. it was not started to help people make a living or anything like that. the minimum wage started by white union owners who wanted to prevent black and chinese from

entering the workforce of the put in a minimum wage and it affected blacks and minorities the most. that still is true today. people want to impose their morals on other people. the fact of the matter is the minimum wage actually makes it illegal for two adults to enter into a contract with each other if people like david don't like it. why is it david's business what i pay my landscaper? or what somebody pays me? that's not capitalism. that's not free markets. that is the centralized planning. if you go to countries like singapore that have no minimum wage, they have a higher standard of living. there wages are higher because they have more opportunity. david will always tell you that

some people will benefit. and he's right, the people who can produce more than the minimum will stay. what david doesn't tell you are the many people that lose that bottom wrong because nobody will pay somebody who can't do the minimum. host: let's get a response. guest: i'm not an advocate of central planning but i think we have to set rules for the way our economy operates. there is no such thing as a free market. it exists within the rules we set for it in this country for most of the last 100 years, we have set rules saying that workers should be paid at least enough so they can afford the basic necessities. that was the concept behind the minimum wage and the caller makes an interesting point about the differential impact of minimum wage policies. when the federal minimum wage

was established, it did exclude a lot of occupations and industries primarily in the service sector and leisure and hospitality. these were industries where black workers and workers of color were disproportionally represented and it was done intentionally to exclude those workers from the protections of the minimum wage. the caller is right in the sense that when you raise the minimum wage commit has a disproportionate effect on workers of color. it tends to their wages more and white workers who tend to be in jobs that are higher-paying. when the federal minimum wage was at its highest point in the late 1960's, that was when the expanded coverage of the minimum wage to cover a lot more industries and more jobs and workers of color were located and when that happened, it reduced the black/white wage gap by 20%. that's enormous. that's why the minimum wage is such a powerful policy for creating an economy where

everyone can benefit, not just those who have these advantages or have some sort of historical host: host: advantage. anything you would like to add? guest: the history is important and recognizing the economics of price control. it will always be intentional to exclude somebody. even know -- even though there are no racist intents there anymore, it's good to study the impact. there was a disproportionate impact among black teens for the newest federal minimum wage. teen unemployment between white males and black males was similar to prior to that minimum wage increase. afterwards, there was a huge disparity. i think you will always end up with selective job losses and that will be for the least advantaged people and they most need those jobs and opportunities to begin with. host: joseph in new jersey, good morning. caller: good morning, how are

you? i don't want to be tough on dave like the other caller. i'm listening to people from these think tax and it talks about helping blacks and african-americans. i was a bus driver but before that, i was a busboy, a stock clerk and i had tough jobs. dave is talking about the rules this country has to obey the rules. we've had 20 million people in the last 30 years come here illegally. they undercut a lot of employees. they can get hired by someone off the books and who gets hurt? the african-american. and i use that word american because they are american. you're going to pay somebody from another country a lot less because you don't have to pay social security or any benefits.

tell dave to talk to his democratic buddies. close the border and then you can talk about minimum wage. host: let's get a response. guest: what the caller is getting at raises and in -- an important point. when ever some class of workers are exploitable, it harms workers more broadly. when we have immigrants who are being exploited and being paid substandard wages and they are being hired off the books and paying them less than the wages that american citizen would have to be paid, that is harmful for american workers. what we should be doing is setting standards where employers can do that area we need to crack down on employers who are taking advantage of low wage workers and some would say setting up systems where a lot of those immigrants can receive the same protections that u.s. citizens receive. until we are removing the

opportunity to exploit those folks, than there is going to be potential problems for workers who would otherwise be holding those jobs. guest: you do set the bar too high on any worker in the united states. you will create a situation where there are some people below that and i think with millions of immigrants passing the border, we will have a higher welfare cost or there will be increased welfare or there will be individuals working off the books. a good example of that is too high a bar of the cost of employment is to look to puerto rico. they have roughly a 40% labor rate participation. they have a significant underground economy workers are being paid below the minimum wage and don't have any of the protections of labor laws. it's a legal but it's significant and you have so few people who are employed on the books and are getting the benefits of the protection. host: let's go to texas, billy is on the line for minimum wage

workers, good morning. caller: good morning. i'm a long time journalist and a man of god and i can tell you that are minimum wage system will work out. we are the world's leader. we are teaching the world how to do things. there are crazy people trying to run things. we will change our minimum wage and we will grow. we won't give up and thank you. i think c-span is doing a great job. host: are you still making them away? caller: no, i run my own business. i've got a newspaper and my sister is the mayor down here. we are just bringing things together. we have people from all over the world here.

also a lot of illegal immigrants but this will work out because we are a nation of god. we will always have problems but we've got a great president as well. we also a great vice president. we are going to win because we are american and we are a nation of god. host: broadway, virginia, jerry is calling, good morning. caller: good morning. first off, i would like to say devastate a common sense fact that no one is going to get more buying power if the wages increase. when wages go up, prices go up it's a never ending cycle. that's called inflation. i'll give you an example. we have a lot of processing plants here. people working those plants consume a lot of protein. when they get up pay raise, the price goes up. the give a pay raise back to the

company they are working for. the only way you can get more buying power is to let the government lower taxes and have less regulations. host: what do you think? guest: when you raise wages, it's true that some of that increase, sometimes will pass that on into the price increases. they also could reduce profits a little bit. there is benefits to businesses with reduced turnover costs and reduce costs for hiring and training new workers because they stay on the job longer. the research has found that increases in the minimum wage have negligible effects on prices because of these other factors that affect price levels. wages have outpaced price grow dramatically over the last few years. since 2019, low-wage workers

have seen their wages rise by almost 10% above the rate of price growth. it's not true that every time wages go up, prices go up. it sometimes can happen but in the case of them in wage, raising the minimum wage will affect certain sectors of the economy more than others. it will not affect sectors where you will have a ton of price activity work price increases broadly across the economy. it might raise the price of some goods in restaurants and things like that where is of the -- where there is a disproportionate level of minimum wage workers but will not have a measurable effect on prices more broadly. host: senator bill cassidy said the cbo estimates the bill increases the deficit, this is the raising them in wage bill, increases the deficit over 10 years by $46 billion with over half of the cost, 27 billion coming from increased cost to

medicare and medicaid. the report indicates the legislation would lead to increased prices for goods and services forcing american families to spend more out-of-pocket at a time of high inflation under president biden. a higher minimum wage does not mean much to a worker who loses their job because of it. i want to ask you about what you said about raising the deficit and the cost to medicare and medicaid. how does the federal minimum wage impact that? guest: an increase in the federal minimum wage would absolutely increase prices. it would increase prices more so for the things lower income families are buying. one of the things is the cost of health care. there are more low-wage workers and so that will drive the federal government's cost but also private individuals costs

and businesses cost and health insurance cost will rise. there is a study at the heritage foundation that measured the impact of minimum wage on fast food prices and it would then cause dirty 8% and most recently, there is an analysis of $17 per hour minimum wage on the cost of childcare. those costs are high and there is a big struggle for families. i estimate it would increase cost by 20% on average across the u.s. that's on average and you have some places that would have cost increases that are greater and in some places, childcare will be -- would be unaffordable and that would lead to unemployment among childcare workers. there would be significant price increases and it would disproportionally impact lower income americans. host: is there a price that maybe wouldn't have that impact, a lower minimum wage? guest: i disagree, i don't think

it would be a substantial price increase. some of what the cbo is getting at is the fact that many workers in health care make really low wages. home health care aides are making $14 per hour at the medium. that's arguably too low a wage for workers in that profession if they want to grow the supply workers providing work in those jobs. if you were to raise the minimum wage less than $17 per hour, it would have a more muted affect would help fewer people. it would raise incomes last and there are price impacts. those would be smaller. the reality is we had a minimum wage back in the late 1960's that for those workers, the are earning about 60% more than a minimum wage worker today. since that time, our economy has become vastly richer, vastly more productive. the idea that our economy

couldn't afford paying workers more than back in the 1960's is ludicrous. if we had raise the federal minimum wage at the same pace as labor productivity growth some the late 1960's, we would have several minimum wages over $17 per hour. the idea that we can accommodate a high minimum wage is $17 an hour isn't true. we have the money to do it, is just the money is going to a relatively small group of people in this country. host: bonnie in iowa, an employer, good morning. caller: i'd like to make two points as an employer -- i've lived in six states and four mid west states and florida and california in the small business we had was in a midwest state and the wages we paid there were adequate for those workers. that made sense. i can promise you having lived in san diego county and also having lived in naples, florida,

one of the richest areas in the u.s., there is no way that those wages would've made sense. therefore the three l's of the minimum wage would be the same as real estate, location, location, location. second, as we talk about life in the 60's with the minimum wage, we keep forgetting that people's expectations of what i need to live a good life were so different. we didn't have automatic washing machines and dryers of dishwashers. we didn't have cell phones. we also had none of the expectation that i have to have money where i can eat out all the time and spend it on nails and jewelry and hair and tattoos. that was not the norm. something else we need to examine is if we compare the standard of living in the 60's to the standard of living today, what people's expectations are of what i need to live a good life, i wonder how that would change the price comparison. host: what you think, david?

guest: again, i think the caller is right that states a locality should be able to set minimum wage that are appropriate for their region. when you have to start with a baseline across the country that allows folks to afford a decent life, might organization has a tool called the family budget calculator where we look at what it takes to afford a modest but adequate standard of living for every county in the united states, compiling data on cost of food, housing, transportation and health care. that shows that there is not a single county in the u.s. where a full-time worker making $15 an hour today can have that modest but secure standard of living. we need to set a federal standard for across the country that will allow anyone wherever they are in this country to afford a decent life and then

let cities and counties were cost-of-living or higher set standards above that to account for the fact that the regional costs are higher. host: we just put on the screen some of the numbers for minimal wage increases. jerry is in somerset, kentucky, good morning. guest: i would like to ask the guest a question. how much wealth to the top 20% have in this country? guest: not of my head. caller: the number is at 77%.

that would be equivalent to taking two and a half pats of butter and spread it over two pieces of bread. i started working in 1966 and i watch that number climbed steadily. it's gonna reach a point where it doesn't work no more so thank you for your time and i hope everyone has a great day. host: comments? guest: when we look at the wealth that americans own in the distribution of it, we tend to think there is a big pile at the top and we should distribute that through the minimum wage. the reality of the businesses impacted by the minimum wage, they are not the fortune 500 companies. they are smaller mom-and-pop shops. they are facing the same budget constraints we do. if your mortgage goes up by 134%

which is the proposed increase in the federal minimum wage, something has to give. key smaller businesses might go out of business and might have to reduce the workforce or have to cut back on benefits like providing health insurance and paid family leave. they might reduce worker hours and shift automation if they have the capital for that. when we look at the wealth distribution, it's important to realize that it's not the really wealthy companies that are paying minimum wages, it's the small businesses. host: nashville, tennessee, an, good morning. caller: good morning at thank you for taking my call. i'm a new employer. my business is only been open six months. i may former wage investigator with the u.s. department of labor. listening to the conversation, one of the problems with the minimum wage are exemptions inherent in the standards act.

his summonses and grocery 500,000 dollars, they don't have to provide a minimum wage. a farm worker suffers more than anybody. there is no overtime for farmworkers. minimum wage is $7.25. however, if an employer brings in agriculture worker, that minimum wage is up to $13 per hour for that worker. there is a lot of disparity in how the federal government under the labor department actually enforces or doesn't enforce minimum wage. another thing a lot of people are missing is when you take the state wage, make it $20 or whatever but if that business is subject to the family standards act, even though the minimum wage is $7.25, the regular rate

is the open rate. if they work overtime and they make 20 bucks an hour, then it's going to be time and a half. i truly believe that this needs to be abolished. i've seen so much abuse. i was an investigator that did agriculture and i also did low-wage employers. i did a lot of investigations where immigrant workers were discriminated because they just got paid tips and workers were being paid that way. they don't make enough tips to bring them up to minimum wage. they are also subject overtime as well. i don't have a lot of time and thank you for taking my call. guest: the color makes some important points. when of them is that there are exemptions the federal minimum wage in one of the biggest ones is for tipped workers. under federal law, they can be paid as little as $2.13 per hour

so long as there tips takes them up to at least the federal minimum wage. the problem with that is that it's on the employee to hold their employer accountable. they have to collect their tips, their earnings and their paycheck and the hours they work and do this calculation and make sure they are making at least the minimum wage. if they are not, they have to go to their employer and say you owe me money. to try and force workers to do that just puts them in an unworkable situation. we do need to get rid of some of these exemptions like the tip read it the loud businesses to treat some classes of workers different from others. the other point i would make related to the caller's comment is we have far less enforcement of labor standards than we need. u.s. department of labor wage per hour division has the same number of investigators today as it had back in the 1950's despite the fact that her

workforce has grown dramatically since then. we have far fewer people enforcing the laws and even in states that have higher minimum wages, a lot of them don't have any sort of labor investigation agency. they do for that to the federal government. you have a lot of businesses with workers being paid less than the minimum wage and not getting all the pay they've earned they have no recourse to try and get those earnings back because employers know that if they cheat their workers, they're unlikely to get caught. host: holland, ohio, a minimum-wage wage worker, good morning. caller: good morning. i don't have too much to say but i totally agree with what bernie sanders said. people who think that the minimum wage should stay at seven dollars per hour should drop their wage to seven dollars per hour and see how it is. you can even pay rent.

that's why the homeless situation has tripled. people can even afford rent. and food let alone rent. that's pretty much all i have to say. the minimum wage should go up for the people, not for the rich people but the poor people. host: are you making minimum wage right now? caller: no, i am retired. might minimum wage was $2.25 per 's and 60's. guest: it's important to recognize you can afford -- a family on a min wage up of many people not supporting families and want that job for a different reason. we have seen homelessness go up in the big cities that have some of the highest minimum wages.

studies have been done in those cities that the minimum wage has benefited some people but it has also hurt some people because they lost their job entirely. the people or homeless on the ones without jobs, all of these trade-offs need to be considered. when you look across the board, it's important to create entry so people can have a pathway up to the higher job in the future. host: one more call from vancouver, washington, good morning. caller: good morning. my impression is that most jobs in the u.s. pay above the minimum wage. i don't know if that's true but that's my understanding of it from what i've read. the minimum wage is kind of a somewhat inaccurate standard. there aren't that many people making minimum wage when you look at the entire population.

the market pressures have forced wages up so much that the current minimum wage is pretty low in relation to the overall economy. you can't really support a family on a minimum wage. there's just too much competition for workers for anyone to pay the minimum wage for very long. i'm not even sure that there is a mechanism to make sure that the men wage stays higher. guest: the caller is right that right now, we are in a great economy. we have low unemployment that is causing low-wage employers to retain talent but that has not been the norm for most of the last 60 years. the minimum wage has played a much stronger role in setting wages for low-wage workers than most of recent history.

we are at a point in our low-wage workers are benefiting from that strong economy and that's fantastic but that's a great time to raise the minimum wage to lock in the gains the workers have achieved. if and when the economy gets worse, god for bid and employment goes up and there are the same market pressures to raise wages, they will still have that standard that's been set and saying they will not be paid less than this new minimum wage. host: david cooper is with the economic policy institute. rachelgres isz withl the heritage foundation. er thank you both so much for joining us. guest: thank you. host: later, johns hopkins bloomberg school dr. paul siegel discusses the humanitarian response to the israel-hamas war but first it's open forum. you can set the agenda and start calling and now in the numbers are on your screen. we will be right back.

>> since 1979, in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress, from the house and senate floors, to congressional hearings, party briefings, and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat of how issues are debated and decided. with no interruption and no commentary and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. ♪ >> c-span's studentcam documentary competition is back, celebrating 20 years with this year's team, looking forward well considering the past. we are asking middle and high so students to create a 5-6 minute video addressing one of these

questions -- in the next 20 years, what is the most important change you would like to see america? or over the last 20 years, what's been the most important change in america? as we do each year, we're giving away $100,000 in total prizes with a grand prize of $5,000 and every teacher who has students participate in this year's competition has the opportunity to share a portion of an additional $50,000. the competition deadline is friday, januar19, 2024. for information, visit studentcam.org. announcer: listening to programs on c-span through the c-span radio app just got easier. tell your smart speaker "play c-span radio" and listen to washington journal daily at 7:00 a.m. eastern and other public affairs events throughout the day. catch "washington today" for a

fast-paced report of the stories of the day. listen to c-span any time. tell your smart speaker, "play c-span radio." c-span, powered by cable. ♪ >> the house and senate are in recess for the holidays and will return next week for the start of the second session of the 118 congress. the senate convenes january 8 and the house on january 9. both chambers phase two upcoming federal budget deadlines to avoid a government shutdown. the first is on january 19 and the other on february 2. >> the committees are ready to do the work but we are waiting on the other chamber to come forward with a number we can agree upon. >> leader mccowan i will figure out the best way to get this done quickly. neither of us want a shutdown. >> follow the progress when congress returns.

c-span, your unfiltered view of government. announcer: a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this. it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work. when citizens are truly informed, our republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. from the nation's capitol, to wherever you are. the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back, is open forum. i want to let you know that the jobs numbers have just come out from the department of labor. here is the near times -- -- here is the new york times --

we will go straight to calls, michelle from philadelphia, pennsylvania, republican. caller: hi, i just wanted to, i was calling for your last segment. i was trying to call on the employer line. i just wanted to tell your guests that in pennsylvania, our minimum wage is $7.25.

i have a restaurant and i don't understand why so many think tanks and congressional republicans are trying to oppose the minimum wage. the federal minimum wage is something that's good and i don't think we need to investigate giving people more money. host: at your restaurant, how much do you pay your workers? caller: our workers are paid five dollars plus tips. that was my next comment was about the tips. i don't understand why farmworkers would be getting tips. at the restaurant, we tip and our workers make about 20-20

five dollars per hour. that's a pretty decent wage. also i wanted to say that the people who are unfairly abusing the tip credit, there are certain programs out there, payroll programs, where they will alert you if you go below the minimum wage. they will report it. that's one way to stop that from happening. host: all right, mike in california, independent. caller: good morning, happy new year. host: happy new year to you. caller: this will go all over the place. about four years ago or 50 years

ago, you do the comparison of one dollar to the peso, i think it was 100-1. when they did their poll on workers coming across the border, even two dollars per hour was $200 per hour and they take that money back home. they always put the black man up against a hispanic or whatever. we never had that incentive to work like that. they are going around calling people lazy right now. i've been told to my face. i worked since i was 15 and i have calluses. i never had an easy job. no stealing or robbing or selling drugs, just wanted to work like a regular person, mind my business and die.

the hispanic people don't respect black people on the jobs off the bat. they feel they are related but it seems like they've chosen them over us. it's been in the newspaper since i was a kid looking for a job, now hiring bilingual. you can look at yourself. we don't want any black's is what they are saying. i'm not blaming anybody because there is enough black people with money that can make companies and hire blacks but they don't do that. that incentive to come over here and work, and i would be glad if i was mexican and came from a third world country and i wouldn't mess with black people. i don't get it. host: in other news, there was a school shooting in perry, iowa. here is the white house press

secretary yesterday addressing that. [video clip] >> the president is tracking the tragic school shooting at perry middle and high school in iowa. our hearts break for the families of the victims and -- in yet another set senseless act of gun violence. we praise the braves first responders on the scene and forcefully, there is no longer an active threat to the school. the white house staff is been in touch with the governor's office and federal officials are working with local law enforcement to support their investigation. we will know more as they complete their work. it's only the first -- fourth day in the new year and we are already faced with another horrific school shooting. the question we ask is when will enough be enough? the question the families ask and the victims of families ask is when will it be enough? when will enough be enough.

our students and teachers deserve to know their schools are safe spaces and to focus on learning, not duck and cover drills. while the president and this administration had taken historic action to reduce gun violence, more must be done to keep our schools and communities safe. congress must enact universal background checks, ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, require safe storage of firearms and the gun industry community from -- and have begun industry carry liability and pass a national red like law. we cannot allow these tragedies to continue. host: we are back on open forum. bob is on the line for democrats, st. louis, missouri, good morning. caller: good morning. my name is bob and i want to talk about the republican party and ex-president trump. why do we keep catering to this

guy and allowing them to make a mockery of our government when everything that comes up he is involved in, he has a way to deny whatever the justice system is trying to do. he was recently talking about making money while he was in the white house, his whole family and that's wrong. i spent 36 years as a policeman and five years in the military protecting thei believe in the . now we have a guy who doesn't -- host: go ahead. caller: and he doesn't understand how the government works. all he knows how to do is steal money. he's a con artist.

he's not fit to be president. he is a typical criminal. he always has an excuse. he always plays the victim. the only thing he knows how to do is bully. that's all i've got to say. put him in jail and be through with it. host: on the republican lite in columbia, mississippi, eva. is it eva? caller: yes. i want to talk about the president being over the vice president. usually he sets the agenda. when mar-a-lago was rated, obama said he turned all his documents in. joe biden had part of them. when joe biden is collecting all this money and making all these deals with his son, did obama know what was going on? how come obama didn't know? we were paying for them to go

around and make these deals. obama used to say when he was president you did not earn it, somebody else did. was obama getting part of what they were getting? was he the big guy? sometimes you can't help but wonder what's going on between the president and the vice president's office. thank you. quit calling republicans. i'm not stupid. i don't drink kool-aid. i'm not in a bubble. i am not dumb. i'm educated. i'm 80 years old i know what i'm talking about. thank you. host: annette and alexander city. caller: thank you so much for this great program and for you as a host. i wanted to comment on the raising the minimum wage. i was really surprised they never mentioned no one has to live on $7.25 an hour.

there are so many government programs. i've had rental property. as such, i accepted section eight vouchers which paid for part of the rent and some all of the rent. they got childcare. they got food stamps. some of them were making $10 an hour. they qualified for that, and at the end of the year they had what they called earned income tax credit. all of them were getting back at the end of the year, not paying, at least from $5,000 to $8,000. there was a wide range of coverage for people who were maybe having a hard time. these people had -- these women had children. they were single with maybe two or three children. they qualify for this. every time someone says no one can live -- if it gets raised from this lady making $10 to $17, will now there be a

decrease in the benefits she's getting which will show she will not be on her own and not get the government help. she will not really get a benefit from it. but the main thing was they never comment on what benefits the government has for you. again, happy new year to all of you. host: a few programming notes for you to be aware of. happening today, president biden expected to mark the third anniversary of the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol in valley forge, pennsylvania. you can watch that live at 3:15 p.m. eastern here on c-span, on c-span now or online at c-span.org. earlier today at 11:00 a.m., a press conference to mark the three year anniversary of the january 6 attack on the capitol. it is held by the not above the law coalition with remarks from

marilyn congress and jamie raskin and eleanor holmes norton. that is live at 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span, c-span now, and online at c-span.org. it is open forum. ross in flushing, new york. democrat. caller: good morning. this was the first time i've ever called you. i'm glad to call in. i wanted to talk about your previous two guests about the minimum wage. it seems like such an incredible logic flaw that so many people seem to be ok on people's business model being built upon not paying people a living wage. this seems to be beyond democrat and independent and conservative or republicans. why are we starting from a place that is fundamentally ok not to pay people a living wage for

their work? why do we keep -- host: how do you define a living wage? isn't that up to interpretation? caller: you know what? there is a bit of interpretation. if we start with basics you are able to afford a home where you are safe and secure, right? where you have reasonable space. i think that is a good basic start. four you can afford food in your community and afford healthy food in your community. i think that is a basic start. when you can get clothes. someone doesn't have to say you look too nice. you can clothe yourself comfortably. you can move around with dignity. let's start with the basics. it shouldn't matter if you are a family or not.

because people have to realize we change our positions in life. some families break up or they die or whatever else. you have to think about the single person as well. that affects how your family looks. there is a fundamental of falsehood going on. i wished i had spoken to that. why are we, each individual person in this country so comfortable with telling people that they don't deserve a living wage, or talk about using the social support system as a solution to the fact that people are being underpaid. that should be available for people have been incredible change in circumstance. host: got your point, ross. david in louisville, kentucky. independent. caller: it's a mess you've got going on in washington. i think they should -- c-span

needs to be locked out. you are not a credible department. c-span1, c-span2. the huckabees stuff in congress, the senate, the house, wipe them all out. we need to rise up and take our country back. january 6 wasn't nothing. it's coming though. host: what do you mean rise up? you mean violence? david is gone. mary in las vegas, democrat. caller: hi people. there's a report coming out. the trump family got around $7.8 million just in the first two years while he was president. no further investigation was done. when the republicans took over congress they stopped investigating.

they are investigating the wrong president. 2017, ivanka got fast-track trademarks from china. most of the family got over $5 million from china. this is payback money, bribe money against the constitution's emoluments clause. 60 new trademarks from china. she brought in $3.9 million from the trump hotel in d.c. it was the family's center of corruption by charging foreign countries, 20 that we know of so far, to charge them writes about the competitors rates. the couple reported 640 million dollar in outside income while working in the white house. kushner saught -- sought $2 billion from the saudi's and $1 billion from qatar to help him with his failed building.

even his treasury secretary got a billion dollars from the saudi's. the former foreclosure king. now the saudi's have concentrated power in the u.s. on the largest oil refinery in north america. saudi wealth has involve them in the golf tournament at trump properties. the guy loves other people's money. he loves -- host: an article from cbs news about what you were talking about with this headline. trump businesses got at least 7.8 million dollars in foreign payments while he was president, according to house democrats. it says donald trump's businesses received at least $7.8 million in payments from foreign governments and government-backed entities from 20 countries while he was in the white house. that's according to a new report by house democrats. it is 451 pages long.

joseph in richmond, maine. republican. joseph? are you there? caller: can you hear me? host: good morning. caller: good morning. good. tomorrow is january 6's anniversary. is that correct? host: that's right. caller: as far as showing video of january 6 like you do every anniversary, i was wondering if you're going to show any of the video that has not been shown to the vast majority of the public of the inside shots of the police letting the protesters walk through and help them generally speaking. talking about ray epps in

his role or non-role in why he only got six months where someone that was not even there got 22 years. when you have someone like ray epps just spewing to go into the capitol. if he's not a plant, we will find out maybe one day. that is my question to your crew. will they be digging out these tapes or just show the same ones? or, will you show the one where the police are shooting over bullets at them, showing -- throwing teargas at them? that's enough. will you show those videos? that's my question. host: drew is a democrat in west palm beach, florida. caller: thank you for -- i'm

calling because of the minimum-wage question. thinking that i have seen the situation on both ends when it comes to the living wage and being able to afford childcare. your caller before me talked about all the programs. in west palm beach, if you make $10 to $12 an hour you don't qualify for those programs. rent is astronomically high in west palm beach. everybody is saying why should we raise the minimum wage? why should we -- why should we give workers more money? i would love to see a mother at the end of the day go home to her family and i have to leave her child to go to a second job because she is able to pay more money. as a childcare director i have seen parents pay up to a hundred

dollars a month for one child -- $800 a month for one child. i had a niece who had a baby. the amount is 420 five dollars starting in february for one infant -- $425 starting in february for one infant. to live and care for one's family, making a decent wage, it's very important . yes, services are there but do you have to lie to receive them? not just be able to say this is what i make. i'm able to care for my family and myself. i appreciate being able to say that but i do believe the minimum-wage needs to be looked at and balanced out, especially in places that where childcare is so high it is keeping people from returning to work. thank you and everybody have a good day. host: richard in jamaica, new york. republican. good morning.

richard, are you there? caller: i'm still here. host: you are on the air. go ahead. you have got to mute. caller: i've got it. hello? hello? host: go ahead, richard. let's go to sandy in ohio, independently. -- independent line. caller: the woman who called a few callers back, she said she was running a business or she was a landlord or something. anyhow, the less you have the more help you get. i am 77. social security. the caller put you in a

different bracket. i know many thing years -- seniors would rather not have the kola. it changes their health care. they don't get as many benefits. their rent goes up. many other things. the coverage for their health care, they will take it away. they took half of mine away because of the -- i didn't have a race. and many other seniors say it. the less you have, the more you get. that is my comment. have a nice day. host: all right. that will be our last caller. i wanted to bring up one of the colors did mention ray epps and the conspiracy theory about him. here is 60 minutes saying there

is zero evidence that ray epps was a federal agent. in the months after the attack on the capitol. ray epps became a target of a conspiracy theory that accused him of being a federal agent that incited the right. the unfounded accusation began on right-wing websites and seeped into fox news channel's prime time shows, including tucker carlson and the ingram angle. it was then amplified by elected numbers of congress, including senator ted cruz and representatives marjorie taylor greene and matt gaetz. that is the time we have for open forum today. we will look at the humanitarian response to the israel-hamas more with johns hopkins university's dr. paul spiegel. stay with us. ♪ >> the house and senate are in recess for the holidays and will return next week for the start

of the second session of the 118th congress. the senate convenes on january 8 and the house on january 9. both chambers phase two upcoming federal budget funding deadlines to avoid a government shutdown. the first of january 19 and the other on february 2. >> the subcommittees are ready to do the work. we are awaiting the other team, the other side, the other chamber to come forward with a number that we can agree upon. >> leader mcconnell and i will figure out the best way to get this done quickly. neither mcconnell nor i want to shut down. >> follow the progress on the c-span networks, c-span now, or anytime online at c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. ♪ >> today watching c-span's 2024 campaign trail, a weekly rent above campaign coverage providing a one-stop shop to discover where the candidates

are traveling across the country and what they are saying to voters. this, along with first-hand accounts from political reporters,, updated poll numbers fundraising data, and campaign ads. watch c-span's 2024 campaign trail at 7:00 eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org, or download as a podcast on c-span now, over every you get your podcasts. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. ♪ >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span video just got easier. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio and listen to washington journal daily at 7:00 a.m. eastern, important congressional hearings and other public affairs offense throughout the day, and weekdays at 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. eastern catch washington today for a fast-paced report on the stories of the day. listen to c-span any time. just tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio. c-span, powered by cable.

>> i healthy democracy does not just look like this. it looks like this, where americans can see democracy at work. where citizens are truly informed our republic thrives. get informed straight from the sources on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. from the nation's capital to wherever you are. the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. >> washington journal continues. host: welcome back to washington journal. we are joined now by dr. paul spiegel at the johns hopkins bloomberg school of public health, the center for humanitarian health. he's the director there and an international health professor. welcome to the program. guest: thank you very much. host: tell us about the center

for humanitarian health. guest: it's composed of the school of medicine, nursing and public health. we concentrate on conflict and natural disasters, humanitarian emergencies. we teach graduate students. we do a tremendous about of research to try to improve the evidence base and improve response. finally, what i'm doing here is trying to use evidence-based efficacy to discuss situations all over the world to try to improve people's lives. host: tell us us about your background. why you were deployed with a united nations agency in the middle east. guest: i'm a canadian physician, epidemiologist. i have been working in humanitarian emergencies for over 30 years now. starting with the doctors without borders, various ngos.

i worked with the centers for disease control in atlanta. ultimately, before joining hopkins i was with the un high commissioner for refugees running their health and technical programs. i have been responding as a doctor and public health expert for many years to most of the major emergencies. about seven years ago i joined johns hopkins. i hidden my mph residence either. i did a professor of practice there and directing the center. each year i take between four to six weeks to respond in emergency and keep up my skills, my practice and hopefully make a difference. i think that make me better professor and teacher. i just spent the last four weeks working with various human agencies in supporting the gaza

crisis based in oman, jordan, and cairo. i returned about five days ago. host: before we talk about the situation, give us an idea of what the health care situation was in gaz before the israeli-ground invasio -- and israeli ground invasion. guest: very similar to what we see in many middle-income countries. they receive -- often the health care is free of charge. they have access to primary health care, hospitalizations. they have good public health services. luckily, there vaccination rates in gaza was very high, which is important for this crisis. there are still a lot of problems. the lifestyle issues. many high rates of noncommunicable diseases like diabetes, hypertension, obesity. a lot of smoking.

they lack a lot of specialists and specialization. some basic cancers could be treated. anything more severe or complicated we need to be referred outside the gaza strip. host: what is the situation, the current situation as you can tell right now? guest: it is a really difficult, horrific public health situation. what has happened is the gaza strip is very small to begin with. it's also extreme the high density popular incident -- highly densely populated. approximately 1.9 million people have been displaced, moving primarily south. throughout that there's been repeated bombardment. the civilians themselves often have to be displaced multiple times. there really is no place safer these people to go. one of the groups, the un relief

and work agency has schools throughout the country. those are being used as shelters. for example, i believe there are now 155 shelters with over 1.8 million people they are sheltering. though shelters are crammed. they are meant to be schools for about 2000 people. now they shelters 16,000 people in the. insufficient water. insufficient toilets. there is one toilet for every 500 people at this point. normally it should be one toilet for a maximum 50 -- 20 people. the water and sanitation problems are huge. people are able to get access to some health care but it's extremely limited right now for a variety of reasons. the amount of medication and water, food, and fuel is minimum.

that makes it extreme the difficult. there are many health care workers. many are still working there but they are also affected. they are constantly being displaced. they have to stand in huge queues to get water for themselves. the situation is extremely difficult and different from any of the other situations that i have worked in in the past. host: going back to your comments about water and sanitation issues, what kind of health problems are you seeing now from that lack of clean water and sanitation? guest: sure. i'm and epidemiologist. we are looking at numbers and trying to compare before october 7 and currently. we have seen a dramatic increase in diarrheal cases since october

7. they have been recorded just amongst the data, the un relief and works agency. over 100,000 cases of diarrhea and similar or acute respiratory tract infections. in terms of the diarrhea, that's 83 times increase compared to the previous year. we are seeing cases of meningitis, suspected meningitis, suspected jaundice. we are seeing a lot of waterborne diseases. we are waiting, waiting, waiting for a massive epidemic to occur, which we believe is inevitable. the scary part for public health experts as we don't have the means to be able to respond, both in terms of access and in terms of there is a lack of water being allowed in. there is lack of sanitation

facilities. the context is quite explosive for disease of epidemic potential to occur. host: is colorado problem? -- cholera a problem? guest: thankfully not. there has not been cholera in gaza for a long time. if cholera were to occur, there needs to be cholera there. there has been cases previously in syria, even some of the wastewater in israel a while back. there is concern if cholera was introduced into this community it would be devastating. host: we will take your calls for dr. paul spiegel of johns hopkins university on the humanitarian situation in gaza. the lines are regional. if you are in the eastern or central time zones, you can call (202) 748-8000. if you are in mountain or pacific, the number is (202) 748-8001.

we are also taking your text on (202) 748-8003. as well as your social media posts. dr. spiegel, the number of hospitals, several have come under attack from ariel babar admit -- aerial bombardment. what is the situation with operating hospitals? guest: this has been very disturbing. it is not particularly new. over the last few decades we have seen more and more hospitals and health care facilities being attacked in conflict settings. we are seeing the same in ukraine. what is different here is the intensity of the attacks and the numbers. currently, only a third of hospitals are actually functioning in gaza. that is partially functioning. we are seeing there is not

enough medication to be allowed in. we are seeing surgeries, some without anesthetics. we are seeing some surgeries that are not able to be undertaken and therefore people are dying unnecessarily. because no one has any shelter, no safe place to go, many hospitals as well as some health centers in the surrounding areas are occupied by displaced persons in terms of sanctuary and in terms of trying to get shelter in some way. these these attacks on these health centers need to stop immediately. it has been extremely disappointing to see this occurring with impunity. host: the new york times says,

half of gazans are at risk of starting according to the u.n. more than 90% of palestinians in the territory say they have regularly gone without food. i'm wondering what kind of health issues that might cause, especially for children. guest: that is another aspect that is a bit unique. one aspect is that people are not able to seek safe haven. in many other conflict settings, people are either able to leave the country or the area to a safe area. the second aspect is, there has been at the beginning, no food was allowed. over time, it has been very, very limited. this seeds like situation is having a massive effect on what is called food insecurity. there was a recent icp report showing while there is not starvation and famine at this point, it is extremely high risk for this to occur.

in terms of children, when children are malnourished -- and adults, but particularly under five children, their immune systems, my stand it is extremely difficult for them to fight off disease. other diseases, whether it be diarrhea, acute respiratory tract infections, will have an increased chance of causing death and mortality. we have not yet seen and i mentioned previously that the vaccination rates, thankfully, were very high in gaza. we are concerned about -- you mentioned cholera, we are concerned about vaccine preventable measles occurring. that has not occurred. even while i was there, unicef was able to ship in the first amount of vaccines. hopefully, that will be avoided and a measles outbreak will be avoided. all of that is contingent on

people getting access to health care and vaccinations. host: dr. spiegel, what can you tell us about the gaza ministry of health? are you in communication with them? guest: i was not specifically working with them. i was primarily working with the world health organization. we spoke to people in gaza every day and they are working with the gaza ministry of health. it is an interesting situation, because -- the main primary health care provider for palestinian refugees. they were closely with the industry of health. for example, the ministry of health -- sorry, the government in gaza, hamas at this point, has shelters where people, which are also schools but are not receiving health care to the same extent that the shelters are providing health care.

excuse me. at this point, my interactions with the ministry of health in gaza did not occur. host: let's go to the calls now. annie is in fairfax, california. good morning. caller: not virginia. excuse me. good morning. i would like to say something that i have experienced here in my own food insecurities in the past. the food that they give you is s-h-i-t. i wonder what kind of food you they are bringing into these places. there is food that is delicious, probably gazan food or palestinian food. are they bringing in dried milk and crappy rice? and, potatoes? well, those are good. carrots, those are good.

i just do not believe in the food aid. i believe there is a lot of corruption a lot of times. that people take for food, they take the money that is supposed to go to the food. i wonder if the doctor has comments on that. i wanted to ask a quick question about -- i am sorry, i forgot my quick question. host: that is ok. go ahead. guest: in terms of food aid, generally, globally, the world food program is the biggest provider of food aid. that is often a mixture of some sort of pulses, wheat or rice. in this case, it is flour in gaz a. also, depending on at this point, it is hard. you are not going to be bringing in fresh fruits and vegetables. but there will be canned goods

that will provide nutrients, as well. it is not possible in this situation, but globally now, there has been a shift in terms of food aid, in trying to provide more cash for food so that people are provided, let's say refugees are provided cash and they are able to use the local market to provide to buy the food that they wish. but, certainly, quality of food and particularly, big issues in terms of micronutrients, fresh fruit and vegetables which are extremely expensive and perishable, are problematic and has always -- and have always been problematic in the situations. there is not enough food being allowed to get in at this point. host: she also mentioned corruption. are we sure that the aid that is meant for the people that are suffering in gaza is getting to them? guest: i think that is, in all

situations, it is hard to know particularly at this point. normally, what the world food program would do is aid distribution would occur. when there is sufficient security, they do surveys to see where the aid was, who received it, etc. in an acute situation like this, it is not possible. i certainly have been reading and hearing about aid being used by hamas and other groups. i do not have evidence for that whatsoever. host: let's talk to robert in nashville, tennessee. good morning. caller: morning. in this whole situation, it seems like, certainly israel and our major needy outlets is getting a fair shake -- major media outlets is getting a fair shake. the palestinian is not getting a fair shake. i think having this gentleman on is very good. i want to compliment c-span.

as more of a technician describing the humanitarian situation, which is clear that this opportunity is being taken to -- 2.0. you know, it is like a turkey shoot. it is a country with a full-blown military against a resistant force that has to dig tunnels. the people are suffering. my question is for this gentleman from johns hopkins. i appreciate your work over the years. but, my question is, with an epidemic possibility, which is horrible for the indigenous people in gaza right now under these conditions, is it possible for it to jump into israel, and

this backfire on israel and get into their epidemic and their population? thank you, sir. guest: sure. i guess anything is possible. epidemics and how they move depends upon neither population movements or connections between water and sanitation areas. the gaza is surrounded by egypt and israel. so, a lot of the way epidemics do grow and spread is by population movement. at this point, which has been a unique situation in this crisis, is that people are not allowed, the gazans are not allowed to leave into israel or to egypt at this point. so, i think the chances of that would be minimal. but, in terms of disease and

disease spread, one never says zero because these things can happen in ways. host: let's talk to franklin in washington, d.c. good morning. caller: hi, thanks for taking my call. i have had an opportunity to work in the humanitarian space for a number of years. i have worked with ochoa and the world bank and untp. through those experiences, i think what is interesting, and i wonder if the guest could talk a little bit about -- not just interesting, but important for this audience on "washington journal," which americans tend to under appreciate is the humanitarian development nexus. we are talking about a minute terry and eight which is desperately needed right now. too often, i think we see this in dollars in defense and hands to mouth and that is it. we are dealing with a situation to where we are going to need to rebuild the international

community, development is going to play a key role in building some kind of lasting -- without getting into the specifics of israel and gaza and its conflict and a two state solution, perhaps you can talk more generally in the humanitarian space about the interconnection between peace, humanitarian aid, rather humanitarian aid, development and lasting peace and how those things work together so the american taxpayers and audience of "washington journal" can understand a little bit better, begin to understand better that this is not just aid that goes hand to mouth and money out the door. this is sustainable peace that benefits the region, ultimately benefits us and achieves a solution to us when we invest in development and lasting peace. thanks for taking my call. host: go ahead. guest: excellent and pertinent

question. there is terminology, these humanitarian peace nexus, what it means is that when we respond right now even in acute crisis, the response that we are doing now, we need to think about how this will affect development in the future. one example could be, which is not happening, there is a limited access right now in terms of gaza. for example, in many situations in different parts of the world, we have ended up in humanitarian system building of parallel systems that are ngo, non-governmental organized based. there is a lack of sustainability. we need to be able to work more closely, to be able to say, think about when you are doing development, what programs do you have when a crisis occurs, there is more resilience among

the population, education or health system? conversely while doing the humanitarian response, we should be working with development people to ensure what we are doing will not have negative effects in terms of development. finally, this piece component is to say, are there aspects that we can do -- help is a good example because it is often less political than other areas. in terms of vaccination, are we able to have cease-fires where we can then undertake vaccination campaigns? a very important area that we need to be able to work more closely in. i would say both the u.s. government, which is the biggest donor globally in terms of humanitarian -- i can't comment on the development. the u.s. government, usaid is looking at this but i think need to be looking much more closely than in the past to make

sure we move forward on this, which will ultimately be more cost-effective. host: if there are individuals that want to help, whether it is the gazans or other people around the world that might be suffering, what do you recommend? guest: what i recommend is to go online and look at agencies that are already working in gaza, whether they be national ngos or international ngos, u.n. agencies, red cross. i generally do not provide names specifically because there are so many worthy ngos. but, it is important for people to do due diligence to make sure that where they want to give money, it will be getting into the hands of the people. but, i think you can go online and there are many recommendations of where to get funds that would be very helpful.

it is much needed in terms of this crisis and many other crisis. host: karen is next in silver spring, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i am concerned about the border. why are they sending these children over here without their parents? i have raised my children and i am not going to take in any others. host: karen, that is off our topic today. did you want to say anything about the gaza-israel situation? caller: i think they should realize that they are all related, and quit being so mean toward each other. host: understood. david is in vancouver, washington. go right ahead, david. caller: oh, thank you for taking my call. my question is for dr. paul. what does he think about the

countries all over the world, what they think of the massacres going on right now? is 20,000 dead, innocent civilians enough for israel enough, or do they want more? these people have suffered enough, since 1948. my point is, somebody has got to step in and stop the massacre like our country, our u.s. government. they should step in. we have been giving these people billions and billions of dollars. the least they should do is listen to us and stop the massacre. i grew up in the west bank. we call israel democracy, there is no democracy there. they can throw you in jail, they can do whatever they want. human life when it comes to

palestinian, human life is -- i mean, it is not important to them. so, what is the endgame here? we could send them humanitarian aid and give them a life, but how about --what is the endgame? what does dr. paul think about the rest of the world watching this going on? host: all right, david, we got your point. dr. spiegel, about the concept of international military and law and how it applies to what is happening in israel and gaza. guest: thank you. we are all aware that this is a very sensitive and political situation. i am going to focus on the humanitarian component. first, in this case, every conflict that i have worked in

over the years and recently in afghanistan and with the ukrainian refugees is that, people on both sides suffer. i think sometimes, we are still very one sided or another and we are not recognizing that what happened on october 7 in israel, the devastation that happened there with the israelis and the hostages that are still in gaza, and conversely what is happening now in gaza amongst the civilians. everyone suffers. obviously, the longer term goal is to have peace. that is going to be political and likely take a longer time. what one of the concerns i would say the humanitarians have the speaker did mention is, the number of populations of civilians that happen killed within this war is extremely high in a short period of time. there is now estimated about

22,000 people have been killed. a couple thousand at least, if not more, have been hamas -- but at least 70% of these people have been civilians. international military and law -- this is very complex and we have a whole center at hopkins, the center for public health and human rights, that looks on this specifically. there are too broad areas to try to reduce the effects on war on particular leon civilians. there is discrimination of making sure that those that are affected by more, discriminated by those and proportionality. how in order to achieve your military aid, what is the length and the -- what is the length and the amount that you can

affect civilians and what is the ethics in terms of, if there is a flank in the building and there are 20,000 people in that building surrounding, how much are you able to attack this particular building when you're thinking about one fighter versus the people around? proportionality is very complicated. i would say many of us looking from a humanitarian point of view see that the numbers of civilians that are being affected, the proportionality does not compare to other situations such as in iraq with mosul where there is similar warfare. there is strong concern about some international humanitarian law in this particular area. ultimately, the goal is to have a cease fire so that the war

will be able to stop and particular people, be it the palestinians themselves, the gazans will receive the needed water, fuel and medicine that they need immediately. host: roberto in new jersey, good morning. caller: good morning, happy new year. host: happy new year to you. caller: i would just like to make a comment on the israeli-hamas war. first of all, hamas has been, not only hamas, but the palestinians have had elected governments since world war ii. they have not produced a leader like egypt since then. if israel is not capable of winning this war, shame on the world community. to answer to dr. spiegel, a way of fighting this war. if you want to lose wars, just ask the americans. that is the way to do it.

on a further note, if the fbi is listening, i would like to thank them for bringing down u.s. senator bob menendez. thank you. host: dr. spiegel, i know you are not involved in the policy and politics side. i am curious as to how this israel-gaza conflict and war compares to other wars and conflicts that you have seen throughout your career. guest: every conflict is unique and different. so, i would say there are a couple issues that are different. to summarize, one is that people are not able to seek safety and a safe haven. that is a major issue. in many other situations, in iraq and yearly in mosul,

humanitarian corridors were made to allow civilians to leave to protection and safety. this has not happened in gaza. there have been tents, but even in areas where there are supposed to be safe zones, they have not turned out to be safe. that is one area that is very different. the second aspect is the intensity of the bombing and the amount of civilian casualties in this period, a short period of time, has been extremely high. together with this lack of metals -- of medical supplies and attacks on health care and on hospitals. all of this is added to a situation where the humanitarian component is, we are in dire straits. it is not really possible to be able to respond in a humanitarian sense to the needs of the people in gaza as it has been in many other of these

crises i have worked in the past. i think that is what is most concerning. i am not a military strategist. i am not a politician. i am focusing on the public health and humanitarian aspects. we are not able to respond as humanitarians in the way we need to at this point. without that, and as you mentioned, right now we are talking about that's. civilian deaths primarily direct due to trauma. in reading previous -- in many previous conflict what generally happens is over time, the indirect deaths due to infectious disease, we have not talked about maternal child health, pregnancies, all of these groups of people see significant increase in deaths due to these indirect effects. we are not going to -- we are not currently able to respond as we have been able to in previous

crises. host: darlene is next in florida. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i think he just mentioned parked of my question -- part of my question. i have two questions. for people who are seriously injured, where do they receive care? if they are that serious, are they transported to the closest country that will allow them in to have the injuries taken care of? secondly, he had talked about the food. another caller had mentioned rice and the doctor said, no, it is flour. which, i understand. my problem with this is if you do not have power and you do not have a home, what good is flour? are they receiving ready-made

food to eat, that they can eat without being heated or whatever? thank you. guest: very astute questions, thank you. in terms of -- before i left, i was speaking to a trauma coordinator in gaza. the situation is so severe in terms of both access, getting to the hospitals. many hospitals are not functioning, or partially functioning. if you are seriously injured, particularly in the chest or the head from trauma, there is a higher likelihood that you will actually die because you are not able to get care. it is going to be those that are , we call those the red cases. the people that are going to survive are likely those that have had wounds to their

extremities. we are seeing even in that situation because there are not enough surgeons to begin with in gaza, and there is not enough space in hospitals, beds or materials to do this. we are seeing a disproportionate amount of amputations, or we are seeing broken bones and external thick stations occurring. the referrals are very limited. the only referrals to my knowledge that are going out are through the rafah crossing into egypt. i did visit, there was a health care worker and her family that were severely burned in one of the attacks. she and her family were evacuated through rafah and were being treated in a burn unit in cairo. but, the numbers of people relative that are actually able to refer and get out of the

country are extremely limited. that is one reason that we are seeing such a large death toll. in terms of the food, this has been a major problem. yes, you can give flour. you can give rice. it is difficult to be able to cook when there is not any fuel. jose andres and his group are doing an extraordinary job. he said they were giving approximately 100,000 people, had been receiving and a lot of this is cooked food. the problem is that many people are moving and this situation is so in flux so people are being displaced multiple times. that is one of the reasons you are finding that people are eating one meal or not even one meal a day. we have looked into various aspects in terms of, there is very little food available on

the market. most of it would have to be canned goods because there is not refrigeration or things like that. most people can't afford it. many other organizations are giving out flour and canned goods. it is probably the canned goods that are going to be most important at this point because they can last for a while. there is just not enough. host: let's talk to amal in vienna, virginia. caller: good morning. first of all, i do not have a question that a comment about the whole situation. as a u.s. citizen, i feel that what is happening over there is [indiscernible] in the united states today [indiscernible] host: amal, are you still there? caller: it has lost its credibility.

it is really shocking, the countries comment on a daily basis with the united states being a part of it. i do not know if you heard me. i said the united states has lost its credibility. host: we did hear that and unfortunately, we are out of time. sorry to cut you off. dr. paul spiegel, at johns hopkins school of public health. guest: thank you. host: we will end the show now. we are going to take you over to the house of representatives for a quick pro forma session. we will be back again tomorrow morning, 7:00 a.m. eastern. thanks for watching. thanks for watching. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024]