host: good morning it is monday, may 13. whether it is the college campus

protest over israel and god also her preparation and protest of national conventions. protests are the spotlight. we are asking you if you ever participated in a protest and what issue were you rallying for? phone lines are split by age if you are under 25 (202) 748-8000, if you are over 65 (202) 748-8002. you can send us a text at (202) 748-8003 or catch up on social media at x at cspanwj and facebook at facebook.com/cspan.

first some numbers from the gallup organization. the gallup organization pulling on this topic in the last time they did it was an in the wake of the dobbs abortion decision. gallup first pulled back in 1965 with just 10% of americans said they felt the urge to organize a public demonstration. speaking of the 1960's parallels between college product test -- protest of today and 1960's. 1960's advocates see parallels

to protest today. some said they see themselves in today's protesters while others drew a stark line between their action and the violent language of demonstrations today. we want to hear from you this morning in this first hour. have you ever participated in a protest? (202) 748-8000 if you are under 25, 25-65 (202) 748-8001 and over 65 (202) 748-8002. the protest were just one of the topics including on face the nation. they were asked about hillary clinton's comment that students participating in the protests

are ill-informed about the issue in the middle east. [video clip] >> she said student protesters don't know much about the history in many areas of the world. what you make of the concern amongst young voters? >> i thought secretary clinton's comments were dismissive of students concerns about the awful humanitarian crisis and high civilian death toll. we can hold two ideas in our head at the same time. one is the right of americans to peacefully protest and the need to make sure students feel safe on campus. we also need to make face we stamp out anti-semitism and hate

wherever we see it. the great majority of the students are following very closely what is happening in gaza and see very high civilian death toll's and we can certainly revisit history and past negotiations. i believe the overwhelming majority, not all, there are some very bad elements, as well as on the counter protest side, i believe the students do understand what is happening in gaza with respect to civilian casualties. host: that was chris van holland and we are asking you if you ever participated in a protest? this survey from axios about student participation in protest

of the past several weeks finding only a percent of college students have participated in either side of the protest. the students ranked the conflict as the least important issue out of nine events offered. including health care, civil justice and climate change three times as many college students blame hamas as they do president biden. what have you protested in your lifetime? -- we began with rob in phoenix over the age of 55.

host: what did you protest? caller: my first protest was the big wto in seattle. i don't think i was affiliated with any of the groups. i thought it was going to be an event and i wanted to be there and it turned out to be a landmark event in seattle and we shut down the world trade organization and the surrounding buildings. there was some violence and i remember at the intersection and seeing the greats being picked up and used to break the windows and i was shocked by that. i did not participate, i'm not an entire cast.

i didn't know who they were. i went to the wto 5-6 months later ndc and currently i went to the democratic convention in los angeles in that same year there was a big protest in los angeles. that was the start of my participation in protests. host: what were you marching for in los angeles in 2000? was it still the wto? caller: no, no. i come from the 60's and 70's. i was just fed up with politics as they were. rage against the machine played their last concert there.

it was a big, big event. i got involved in the green party with ralph nader. i found myself going into politics into a different sort. i would not protest against myself or joe biden. i don't find that form of resistance usable anymore. not with the prospect of trunk. host: of the marches you've been to which one made the biggest difference? caller: they were all significant. the wto was a big event to show the power of the public and i did not expected or understand it. all they did was effective in

showing against the corporate world of that sort of thing in the world bank. i was there when they arrested the puppets. the big papier-mache puppets and they shut down the warehouses where they were building giant puppets. the democratic convention, i saw lines of police and stare them down. they pushed protesters away. all of them very powerful. i have been protesting ever sense but not anything like those days. that's my experience. host: thank you for sharing. this is charlie and little rock, arkansas. what have you protested? caller: i protest of various causes. i started protesting against

westborough baptist church when i was younger they showed up at a random funeral for an air man that died. since then, as an adult i have protested for minimum wage and b lm. i've been to several pro-palestine protest and little rock. i have been so quite a few protests. host: for the most recent one, how many people have been in the little rock one? caller: the war processed are

on most saturdays and we will have one this upcoming wednesday and it is a drive and protest but people are protesting in their cars it is a drive through protest. the protests have been good and have had a large attendance. i was surprised the first few times we came out because there were from 15, 17, 100 people at the protest. the ones with cars are harder but we have had pretty good attendance. host: are you making a difference? caller: yes. more people are showing up but our politicians both local and

national to pay attention. that is why we have people like tom cotton agreeing that the protest aren't good which is ironic for a democrat and a republican to be online you are left leaning until it comes to palestine. host: this is patrick in lady lake, florida and the line for people over 55. caller: my last protest was the losing of life in iran and iraq. there wasn't interceptive in email of the cia and mi5

director where can say's do you know if we can reach the votes about wmd attacks. most of the immigrants going to israel are from russia and they have no jewish blood whatsoever and we are supposed to support israel? is salt label does anti-semitism. host: are you participating in protests this time around? you mentioned the war in iraq? caller: one more thing about israel. they elected ariel sharon and

they spent 20 years israel by the fourth and he was elected prime minister. a member of a gang who bombed the english out of jerusalem so this garbage from the u.s. media where israel is innocent that wants to get along with everyone. host: this is michael in reno, nevada. what have you protested in your life? caller: in the last presidential election i tried to protest against electronic signature verification. when i looked at the glass plate

i noticed it was not signature so i protested against that with those civil clerk and she would not accept i because she did not wa to get invoed. i sent a copy of the lettero newspapers hoping someone would care other than me host: did it further than filing a protest? did you take the protest any further? caller: i gave up because it was overwhelming. i wrote a letter to the editor and i hope someone would care

enough and may be they would protest against the electronic signature verification because it is an insult to ask a human to write on a piece of glass and because their hand slips over the glass, is not like pen on paper. host: this is marlene from arlington, texas and this is the 25-55. caller: i used my free speech to protest for palestine and the fbi showed up and i protested against a border wall. i protested against the tiktok

ban because they wanted take our free speech away. i think if we are gonna do what we are going to do we need to protest. we need to be able to fight. you will have a good day, thank you. host: glenn from ohio over the age of 65 what have you protested in your life? caller: in 1964, the fulton act right act. i was arrested and taken to jail in selma, alabama. i was 13 at the time.

i had many opportunities but that was in my own time. all the time we tried to have a right to vote they try to take it away from us. it's not right. host: how did you get involved at age 13 and were there other 13-year-olds getting arrested on that same day? caller: it was all school kids. it was in alabama and we have the state troopers and policeman and they said if we see one more protest sign you will get locked up.

and we didnd we were locked up in a school bus and they took us to county, i tnk it was state pron in selma, alabama. host: this was in 1963? caller: 64. host: a student protest from 1964? when you say the students organized, how did the young kids organized? how did you get there? caller: james sarge and albert turner and martin luther king was supposed to have come to town that day but i think he knew he was going to be arrested.

the whole school, most of almost there. it was 1965 debate at cambridge university in england when james baldwin and the conservative commentator. i can't remember his name right now. that was my only time that i was protesting. host: glenn, thank you for talking about it. from the history channel, in

1960 three in birmingham the children's crusade when the youth of birmingham marched for justice in the picture of the protesters being sprayed with fire hoses against the wall there. in 1963 in the caller about the 1964 marches. caller: my first protest was in new york as a kid back in 2003 when they wanted to put a cell phone on our school. me and my close friends all went to protest and eventually, we won. host: why did you not one of the cell phone tower? caller: it was harmful with

radiation which we found from studies back then. host: have you protested since then? caller: of peaceful protest honking for peace. host: did you feel that it made a difference? caller: a lot of people were receptive because you know how bad it was and how much we were lied to about the death count? host: this is noah in alabama on the line for those over 65. caller: i haven't protested a

whole lot. there isn't a lot to protest. i was going to make a comment on the palestinian/israeli. host: were trying to stick to the protest and thus our subject for this first hour. let me get to james in pennsylvania on the line for over 65. caller: i never participated in a physical protest as far as marching but what i do is i write a lot of letters to congressmen, senators, president. when i watch the news, i always see just one side.

it doesn't matter if it is fox, msnbc. they concentrate on the one thing that is wrong in most protest are nonviolent. it's because they're d concerned about the situation where the news media focuses on the 2 people in the group they do something wrong and i think it is very unfair that our news media always focusesn the negative part of the protest, not the positive side. ople have legitimate concerns about the lives of the lost i gaza.

the news media, all it says is that they are anti-semitic. they're just anti-israeli government. host: what issue have you written a letter about that resulted in action? which letter has made the most difference? caller: nothing, really. i'll get an answer back and we try our best to do this or that. it's always an excuse or reason. it is one of the things that i find you look things up to find the facts and write about it and they say it doesn't seem to matter anymore if you protest for or against something.

host: a few of your comments via social media. aaron writing and hundreds of us stood outside the state capital mask up from gretchen whitmer. civil disobedience is not an anero any problem. most protest remained peaceful but protesters only annoy people who are trying to work and send a meaningful message. i moved to reve the come

confederate flag. we are talking on phone line split by age. have you ever participated in a protest ended up it make a difference? we show you the story from the washington times. chicago's democratic mayor is to keep protesters miles away from the convention. the story noting that brandon johnson and 70 organizations have formed a coalition where they anticipate thousands of people showing up from across the country. they have suggested alternative sites which would render them

invisible to the 50,000 people who will descend on the d&c and august. again that is the washington times. this is maureen and age 25-55. caller: back in the 90's i protested a strip club. i live in a resort community we built a house and had three kids and all of a sudden this place that was a bar they had assigned for a strip club. i went out there on friday

afternoon between 3:00-5:00 and i stood there by myself of the sign. we had family living on the property. occasionally, i had people help me and i worked with our town planner. i got the law change. i did visit the place so i could say that i had been on the inside and of he kind of slid it in there and do not apply for a permit. we worked with the town. i stood there every friday night with a sign. probably for an entire summer. eventually went to the town

planner and got the law changed. when he changed ownership the stripping do not go along and now it is an apartment complex. that is my story. it is not anything like that man who stood for voting rights that called earlier, but one person can make a change and that is what i want to say and i wish the parents and family members would protest for all of the fentanyl deaths we are faced with every day. and thanks john, you are the best host. i feel like i am talking to someone. you are the best host and i thank you so much. maureen in massachusetts, thanks for the call. this is linda in wilmington, north carolina. what have you protested? caller: i was in high school we

were protesting -- general awareness of segregation. also the band the bomb movement and i was a serial protester for a while there. host: wide to become a serial protester? what did you get out of it? caller: i was making up for that. host: you are making up for your parents? caller: [indiscernible] host: do you feel like you've protested enough to make up for it would you continue to do it? caller: the last protest i

participated in was occupy wall street. i may serial protester. i do not live in new york anymore. host: for you one of those folks on wall street? -- were you one of those folks on wall street? caller: i just went during the day. host: that was the last one you participated in? caller: i think it was the police violence one that happened as we were walking by and i joined them for a while. it was not really organized. host: that is linda in wilmington, north carolina. this is randy in michigan. caller: i would like to start by thanking you and all of the other men and women it takes to bring us this great program. you are doing a great service. i have protested in front of our courthouse when our republican legislature under our governor

wanted to tax our pensions. i was part of the occupy wall street in the flint michigan area were we watched out -- where we marched out in front of bank of america protesting their ceo pay and not investing in america. i also protested at our shop at buick when we went to make elaborate decisions and some of the foreman decided not to do it. we protested out front until we finally got enough attention to have the upper management go back and live by the agreement we both agreed on. hours were all -- we did not occupy any spaces. it was basically walking out front. the one at buick was just be with the big sign.

i did that through february and march the year i was doing it. those were the biggest protests in -- that i was a participant in. host: what you think of the folks occupying spaces on college campuses and how these protests have gone for students at colleges today? caller: that is a tricky one. i do not think they should have interrupted -- it is alright to walk in protest. i was never involved in one where they occupied anybody's space. i am not into that. you are not going to gain any sympathy by doing that. you have to at least put out your argument and let somebody think about the argument and let them make up their mind. if you do that it is a lot harder to make your point

legitimately is how i feel. that is how the younger ones are doing it that way. right or wrong, that is the way they are doing it. host: that is randy in michigan. i want you to keep calling in, i want to keep your your protest stories. phone line split by age. what have you protested in your lifetime and did make a difference. (202) 748-8000 if you are under 25, (202) 748-8001 if you are 25-65. (202) 748-8002 if you are over the age of 65. i want to take some time to note that as we have been doing on mondays as the donald trump hush money trial continues in new york we will take a look ahead. to do that we are joined on the phone by a reporter with the associated press. good morning. the headline, trumpet trial

arrives at a pivotal moment. start witness michael cohen poised to take the stand. what are we expecting from him? guest: the trial has been building to this moment. michael cohen was trump's lawyer , some people call him the fixer. he said he was involved in the hush money deal at the center of this case, the pment to stormy daniels. we heard a lot of testimony about that deal. michael cohen is the guy precors hope can link the deal directly to donald trump in terms of what michael cohen says trumdicted him to make the payment in the weeks before the 20 election and then cohen may be able to give insight into the actual charges in the case, which are that in getting reimbursed trump and his company logged the reimbursement payments as legal expenses, which prosecutors say as a way of covering up the cover-up,

that they were not legitimate legal expenses, they were reimbursement for hush money payment. host: this is likely the make or break moment of this trial? guest: absolutely. so far we have heard a lot of testimony from other witnesses putting some pieces together, but it is michael cohen who can finish the puzzle. he is the person that prosecutors say was in a meeting with the national enquirer executive talking about being the eyes and ears of the trump campaign in 2016 to identify negative stories and alert cohen to take care of them, to bury them. you start apot in august 2015. i suecprosecutors are hoping michael cohen can fill in the blanks from then until the 2016 election when the payment was made. the reaction to that payment came in the wake of the access hollywood tape where donald

trump was talking on -- was caught on tape talking about his behavior with women. that sent the campaign reeling and michael cohen can give some insight into that step. the question is credibility. the defense has been attacking michael cohen's credibility. we know he has pleaded guilty to perjury and lying to congress. there are other questions about his character and credibility they will seek to poke at as they question him. host: how many days is michael cohen expected to be on the stand, and considering how donald trump reacted to stormy daniels's testimony what should we expect when michael cohen and donald trump are in the same room? guest: it could be a while. prosecutors say they have two witnesses left. they could possibly rested their case by the end of this week. there are three trial days this week.

i suspect michael cohen will be on the stand for most of that. as far as reaction, we had a dress rehearsal for this moment in october when michael cohen testified at the civil trial involving donald trump where he was accused of inflating his wealth and the judge found he had done that and penalized him hundreds of millions of dollars. michael cohen testified in that case and trump had a very visceral courtroom. he maintained his position that michael cohen is a liar and perjurer. in this case trump is prohibited from making those kinds of remarks out in the hallways to cameras. there is a gag order that restricts him from talking about witnesses, including michael cohen. it'll be interesting to see how trump reacts in court. what kind of facial expressions he has, how he talks to his lawyer. we heard during the stormy daniels testimony he was cursing and muttering at the defense

table, and then what his reaction is outside court. the natural instinct for trump has been to attack. in some ways he is responding to attacks from cohen. it'll be interesting to see how trump reacts to all this considering we did see them face-to-face in october. host: one quick follow-up. the prosecution has said two witnesses this week. michael cohen and we know who the other one is? (202) 748-8000 we do not -- guest: we do not. they have been careful not to disclose who their witnesses are. it seems like they've been building this case towards a finale with cohen. there is one other possibility that may be required or try to seek testimony from the former trump organization cfo allen weisselberg who is currently in

jail serving his own perjury sentence for a testimony he gave in the fraud investigation. the judge on friday asked prosecutors to make an effort to try to get him on the stand. whether he does or not remains to be seen. it seems clear he would not be very helpful to them. he has been a trump loyalist. that is one wildcard. you might be witness number three. they say michael cohen, one more person, then if they can get weisselberg on the stand. host: michael sisak has been covering the trial for the associated press. you can find him on x. thanks for the time. about 20 minutes left in this first segment. asking you about protests in your lifetime. has it made a difference. paul in kingston, new york. thank you for waiting on the line for those over the age of

65. go ahead. are you with us? caller: i am on the air now, correct? host: what protests have you participated in? caller: i was not only a participant in many protests. i was an organizer, i was the head of an antiwar group and i was an organizer. i cosponsored a tour of dutchess and ulster counties for jane fonda and tom hayden, one of the chicago seven. one of the most creative and colorful demonstrators i organized, i came up with the idea, this was held on the grounds of the historic senate house in kingston, new york where i lived. what it was was a symbolic signing of a peace treaty with north vietnam, and those who signed the peace treaty were actors dressed up as george

washington, thomas jefferson, and benjamin franklin and they rode up in colonial on horseback and signed the peace treaty with a quill. while they signed the peace treaty little children from various area schools played the drums. that got a lot of coverage. i have been a demonstration since the vietnam war. i was involved in the civil rights movement. i was the vice president of the ulster branch naacp. then i was president of the ulster county branch naacp. by the way, i am white. i also became involved with the environmental movement. i have been in demonstrations all over the country, both locally where i live, washington, boston, you name it. i am very proud of that record.

i believed in every cause i stood up for and i think everyone of them was on the side of the angels. i have very happy memory. host: is it fair to call you a professional protester? caller: i never earned money off of it but i would call myself professional, but i was active in many different movements. host: at what age did you know this was what you wanted to do and devote so much of your adult life to? caller: it was during the vietnam war. i knew people who were veterans in vietnam. i had a friend in the marines. he came back very much against the war. he later got cancer in the leg he had been shot in. when they told him it had to be amputated he went to the ba --

he went to the va and got all of his prescriptions filled and took them at once and committed suicide. one of the organizations i was involved in, i was chair of the ulster county peace committee, one of the national organizations was vietnam veterans against the war winter soldier organization. host: what was it like meeting jane fonda and tom hayden? caller: i was very impressed with both of them. she was very nice, she was very friendly to all of the people she directed with. i spent the whole day with her. i introduced her at press conferences and radio stations on tv. tom hayden was one of the chicago seven. that gave me an idea, having talked to him, an idea of how to prevent violence in the future like happened at the chicago

riots. i came up with the idea, for a time i was head of the whole movement in this area and i got the idea of having the heads of the various organizations sit down the chief of police and the chief of detectives. we got to know each other as people. when you get in tense situations , you cannot have one side looking at the other and say they look scary to me. who knows what they will do. the other side is looking back, look at all of the police and guns and uniforms. it looks like germany in 1933. who knows what they are going to do? the idea was to have people on both sides sit down around a table and get to know each other as people. where you are coming from. then you do not have that paranoia. it worked.

there was no violence. nobody betrayed principles and everybody did what they felt they had to do and nobody got hurt. host: what are your thoughts watching the protests on college campuses in the past three weeks? caller: i am very critical, i think i would do it a different way. i'm very critical of the israeli government. i'm not critical of the jews the right of israel to exist, but there is a very large piece movement in israel. many of the criticisms i would make of the israeli government have also been made by israeli citizens. albert einstein who was a jews and one of the brightest people in history once predicted that if menachem begin and others who

thought like him would ever come to power, israel might become a fascist government and i believe that what it is today is a fascist apartheid government, not to the mocker seat we refer to it as -- not the democracy we refer to it as. i think i would handle the demonstrations in a different way but i totally support the right of israel to exist. i'm very critical of the israeli government. i want to make that distinction. host: that is paul in kingston. thank you for chatting with us about it. today and in oklahoma, the line for ages 25 to 65. good morning. dan, are you with us? we will go till will in wisconsin -- we will go to will in wisconsin. same line.

caller: my first protest was when i was 14 years old. living in chicago. the greyhound bus company decided they were going to drop a brand-new terminal for chicago in our neighborhood. we successfully fought that. then in college a number of protest in stte iran-contra and such. as an older adult, community development projects and some protests against donald trump and several of his situations, included how he treated the island of puerto rico after the hurricane. to point out one thing, my daughter was one of the participants in the encampment at the university of minnesota in minneapolis.

now having a palestinian scarf sitting in the laundry basket in everything she brought home from college. host: how do you feel about her participating in that protest? caller: we do not cii. -- we do not see eye to eye. i am proud of her being out there. she studied for finals while the protests were going on. but that was a lot to ask of our youth to step up at such a pivotal time in their lives. what is going on at columbia and some of the other universities is absolutely ridiculous. don't know about people demonstrating during commencement ceremonies and such. i was proud of her for stepping up her what she believed in. host: you said you won that

protest against the bus station when you were 14? caller: we did. my parents and other parents, the school districts, we all came together. host: how important is it to succeed in what you are trying to achieve in your first protest at age 14 in your feelings about how useful protests can be. we had some folks right on facebook saying protests are useless or they do not make a difference. host: -- guest: -- caller: it made a difference because it kept a bus station out of the middle of our neighborhood. locally where i live now protests have had any effect on unfortunate ideas about development. at the local level they can be very successful.

just let your voice be known is crucial in this country. host: thank you for the call from wisconsin. you mention protests at commencement. one news story noting a few dozen pro-palestinian students staged a graduation walkout yesterday at duke university in protest of commencement speaker jerry seinfeld, a jewish comedian and supporter of israel. immediately after he was introduced students began booing and walking off the lawn, some chanting free palestine and carrying the palestinian flag. mr. seinfeld received an honorary doctorate and delivered his commencement address without further interruptions and did not mention the walkouts. this is michael in huntington, new york on the line for those over the age of 55. what have you protested in your lifetime? caller: i protested the vietnam war, both at my college and in

washington, d.c. got proudly cast in washington dc -- got proudly gassed in washington, d.c., and at that time i was at a discotheque that was bombed by the black panthers. i was severely injured at the time. i remember the era quite well. one of the things i have to point out right now is that there is a large difference between then and now. we were protesting because we did not want to be forced to go to a foreign country and murder people. here, the protesters are protesting something that is not within our control. secondly, i think people should realize that the protesters are

rightfully protesting, but peaceful protests are being turned violent by outside agitators and i believe as mayor adams of new york said, a good percentage of them are foreign agitators here in order to create more agitation, violence, and turn america upside down for the purposes of electing donald trump, who is a russian agent, which is obvious in the way he acts and what he does. what we have now is a situation where vladimir putin was in the middle of a situation where he was about to lose the war. he -- one week after hamas attacked -- host: come back to protests and

your experience with protesting. i want to stick to that. you said you are proudly gassed when you were participating in a protest. what you think of the police response to the current protests? we have seen some of the violence break at these protest. caller: i think it is far better than it what it was in the past. in the past to the police response was far more violent. adams got pretty good control considering the situation. i believe they were forced into a situation that they had to respond. he, during vietnam, we protested around buildings, we never took over buildings at nyu. that did happen at columbia. this is something that happens in all of these eras. there were many outside

agitators that had turned the protest violent there. we have to watch out to not be used politically in a situation. we must -- i am pro israel, but i said benjamin netanyahu -- no one thinks of this. why did hamas do this the way they did? the atrocities, take pictures and send them out to everybody connected with those people. they wanted the response they are getting. there was an interview with the head of hamas said the palestinians to him are martyrs to be used for the cause. their deaths did not matter to them. they wanted the response they are getting. benjamin netanyahu has been stupidly doing exactly that. host: just a couple of minutes

in this segment. we want to keep your your stories. at 8:30 we will come back to th qstion. if youo not get in this segment we hope you'll join us at 8:30 to 8:45. we want to keep hearing your stories about participating in protests in your lifetime and whether it made a difference. georgia, hampton georgia, thank you for joining us. the line for those over 65. caller: in atlanta we were known for protesting. one ofatt i have participated in inta s when i was in high school in ninth grade. luther king's birthday artin holiday. we cannot get anything. i have you unmute. caller: i amning. host: we could -- host: i am

listening. caller: we cannot get any done. then mayor jackson said if you help get me elected we will make a holiday. we did the voter ratio for maynard jackson. heeantime we closed our high school. r principal was yelling for us to get back in. wedo high tower closed the whole community. we stopped progress in atlanta. we got it past. we were one of the first cities to get it passed in 1969 or 1970. that was one of the greatest protests i had participated in. host: rightist for the cause and the success of it? -- greatest for the cause and the success of it? caller: we were successful.

our cry was this was his birthplace. our parents wanted past. the former mayor they had did not want it, so his high school students and college students we had to do what we do best, which we grew up. back in the day when i was growing up in atlanta protest was our first name. martin luther king never did protesting in atlanta. we the people did the protesting. i commend those students because as we were told, it is for the common good of man. that could be anybody being killed. for the common good of man. joe is to come here and the students are organizing for him when he gets here to speak at this graduation. and i might have my play card and me, i dealt with this.

post: that is georgia. this from the atlanta history center. looking back at martin luther king jr. celebrations in atlanta, georgia. that story from 2020. looking back over the years. talking at the beginning of mlk day in georgia. thanks for the call. laurel is our last caller in this first segment. more to talk about, we will come back to this question about a half-hour, and in this next half-hour, taking a look at the week ahead on capitol hill. we will be joined for that discussion and will take your calls on the congressional hearings coming up before congress this week. ♪

announcer: this week on the c-span networks, the house and the senate art session. the house will take up a final version of a five-year faa reauthorization l2 extended programs past the friday, may 17 deadline. they are also expected to consider seral police and border security bills this week. wednesday,dministrator of the federal highway administration and niol transportation safety board chair jennifer homendy testified before the infrastructure committee, investigating the collision of the container vessel with the francis scott key bridge in baltimore this past march. thursday, fdic chairman martin ruberg testifies before the senate banking committee following a wall street journal investigation reporting that the agency fostered a culture of racism, sexism and abuse, prompting some lawmakers to call for his resignation.

aunt jessica -- appeared before house appropriations subcommittee on her agencies 20 when a five. watch this week live on the c-span netwo, or on c-span now, our free mobile video app. head up to c-span.org for scheduling information for to watch live and on-demand anytime. your unfiltered view of government. c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington, live and on-demand. keep up with the biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from u.s. congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play.

scan the qr code and download free today or visit our website. c-span now, your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. washington journal continues. host: we like to take a look at we can congress. i want to start not necessarily on capitol hill, but certainly on a topic involving a member of congress. the democratic senator of new jersey, his trial begins today. what if the trial about. remind folks why he got involved in this, his second trial as people may remember. >> the first one happened around 2015, 2060i believe. it took so long from initially

breaking the news. essentially, the indictment involved him receiving gifts for colluding with foreign governments. this is all somewhat related to we assume a halal meat organization and him giving special privileges to certain companies. his wife is getting wrangled into this, so it is going to be very interesting. it all starts this week. host: the federal district court in manhattan is where it will be. you mentioned the story originally about the investigation. guest: october 2022. it was very unclear what was going on, but big news was this is happening once again because we know that is under

investigation and almost like the tribe of several years earlier. some of his colleagues are already calling for his resignation. we are not clear if he's going to continue along this path of seeking reelection. it's going to be very interesting. host: one of his biggest critics is john fetterman. guest: is very consistent. he just doesn't think this is appropriate, he should step down. i will add that bob menendez did step down as foreign affairs chair, which makes this indictment even more interesting, because he was the chair of foreign affairs committee and senate. host: this taking place in new york, coming back here to capitol hill and sort of the week ahead business-wise on the legislative calendar. we saw the end of last week, the

senate passing their versions of the faa authorization and then finding time for the house to take that up this week. is that said to be smooth sailing for the building the house? guest: at this point, yes. we've probably gone through our most contentious period of the house which was again passing that ukraine a on national security funding. i think it will eventually pass the house. host: the other issue on foreign policy is what we talk a lot about last, the biden administration pausing offensive weapons to israel. members on both sides of the issue who strongly disagree, is there a legislative track that you are looking out for to either demonstrate or force the biden administration's hand? guest: here's the interesting thing.

there's been some letters coming from republican leadership. it has strictly been a bunch of letters so far but the biden administration is asking for more aid to ukraine so i'm wondering if there is going to be some battle or negotiation there, some kind of exchange to see whether or not they are going to allow these weapons to go forward. host: it was late thursday that we learned that the republican of florida freshman said he was going to file impeachment articles against joe biden. what is going to come of that, if anything? guest: i've spoken to republicans and democrats and a lot of people said they weren't taking it as serious. we don't know if she's going to push this motion, it would force a vote within two legislative days. it's not clear that's going to

happen but we do know he is drafting legislation. host: for about the next 20 minutes or so, so go ahead and start calling in with your questions and comments about the week ahead in washington. this weekly segment that we do in congress is in session. the house expected to return tomorrow at new eastern, the senate in the 3:00 p.m. hour and of course, you can watch both on c-span and c-span c-span 2. other legislation for congress breaks for the august recess and the campaign trails and everything involved with an guest: election year. guest:i spoke to chairman thompson a wild ago and he said

that the legislation would probably be out of committee by memorial day. this is something that they have to take out. we are going to meet the extension later in the year. along with the defense reauthorization, and of course, we will probably need to fund the government once again. host: it is an october to october fiscal year. how far along are they? we saw how far behind they were by the time they passed legislation to fund the government through the rest of 2024. >> i do hear often that this is speaker johnson -- one thing that he really wants to get done

was avoid an omnibus. not sure how much legislature they have between now and september 30. host: looking at speaker johnson's job security amid a potential ouster from republicans who disagree with him. has that been put to bed? what is your estimation of where johnson stands right now? guest: marjorie taylor greene did not have the votes to move forward with this. i do not see any appetite to push forward another resolution, however, she did kind of throw out this idea.

she throughout this idea that former president trump did say maybe this would happen sometime down the line. if he is not reelected in the coming year, whether republicans are a majority were not. host: if who is not reelected? guest: speaker johnson, sorry. host: when it comes to facing -- facing the motion to vacate in congress, could marjorie taylor greene offer another of these? is there a limit on how many a member of congress can offer, and can she do it in the same way and everything sort of shuts down and wait for that to happen? guest: she can offer as many as she likes thanks to the rules package republicans put forward. so yes, she can. when they were getting last week, thomas massie set i can't promise that it won't happen again, but what i will promise is you don't have to worry about it next week, but you can take a

week off. host: (202) 748-8000 for democrats to call in. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. independent, (202) 748-8002. staying on marjorie taylor greene for a minute more, one of the things she called for as she was criticizing speaker johnson before this vote was a vote to special counsel jack smith's office with investigating donald trump. wherever that stand and how much support is there in the republican caucus guest: they just don't have the votes to defund an entire investigation against a former president. host: in terms of who we found out our johnson's biggest

critics, obviously marjorie taylor greene leading this, any other surprising votes that join them in their effort last week when they came to trying to out speaker johnson? we could imagine that this is all political and that they needed to go back to this district and say i certainly didn't vote to save this far right republican. it was more democrats who didn't go along with their party leader. host: when is the next time members are going to head home? guest: it is one more week in may that they have an entire week off host: who is probably going to get the most of your full after what happened here? guest: i think nancy mace is in

for a tough reelection. many people believe kevin mccarthy is behind her opponent, but then there's a very interesting election right here in virginia, facing a maga republican. bob good would say that he is extremely conservative, however he did not support former president trump during his primary. he backed ron desantis and i

think these interparty battles, and keeping an eye on these interparty battles. host: there's always one race that sneaks out every election cycle that nobody had on their radar. has there been a surprise so far? guest: a democrat from new york. his opponent was backed by a pack, a jewish funded pac. the sentiment there is that because of his views against funding israel, there is this ever to oust him.

but what i can tell you is that he focuses his attention on a primary trying to win back the house. it is kind of a distraction for them. host: is the campaign committee playing in this race? guest: i think people are going to be very safe, especially members of congress who are probably not going to talk about the race or not going to pick a side, which is again very interesting as well. host: why is the trial taking place in manhattan, is the question> guest: that's a great question, i'm not clear. the federal district of new york

are the people that actually -- this is ralph and washington, d.c., independent. caller: i didn't vote for trump, and i wouldn't vote for hillary, but this time i am voting for trump. jack smith, special counsel authority did not exist. by what authority does he become god? i could charge anybody with any crime i've decided i want to skew them for and bring criminal charges.

guest: we seen this in cases with president biden with the documents case and also with trump in various situations. pretty sure he has the authority to do what he is doing by the attorney general. host: we mentioned that the house and senate don't come in officially until tomorrow, but key congressional hearings that you will be watching for are back in town on tuesday, wednesday or thursday this week. guest: key congressional hearings. that's a good question. the judiciary, i'm not aware of

a hearing is going on this week but i'm pretty sure the judiciary has something coming but is escaping me right now. host: there is a question whether presence of universities are going to be back on capitol hill anytime soon. guest: not that i know of, unless the schedule has changed recently. i'm very curious now that school is over or ending how that turns out. there's going to be a clear distinction about student protesters and people who come from the outside to actually protest on college campuses toward the end of graduation time. host: our first hour today we spent asking viewers whether

they had protested and whether it had made a difference. have you ever covered a protest, and if so how does one cover a protest? host: i guess very carefully. i did cover the 2020 black lives matter protest. host: where did you go? guest: right outside of the white house. i had the pleasure of covering protesters, but also being a reporter at the same time when president trump crossed the street in front of the church. i was in the white house pool. i can tell you it feels very different when you're inside the white house as opposed to outside among protesters, but in general, i saw a lot of families , generational protesting, but i also saw people putting graffiti on buildings.

i think there is a clear distinction of people who come there to protest and people who come to cost strife. i remember someone specifically grabbing water bottles just to throw in the crowd and did not seem like they were actually there with cause. i think pointing those things out while you are in the crowd is very important. host: so you british reporter and donald trump walked off the street to the church and held up the bible? could you follow him for that walk after the protest, the police came and include this out? guest: i have this very, very famous pool report that talking to people doubled over at the stench of the gas that was in the air. host: what do you remember from that walk and were you able to talk and ask that president question that all? guest: know, we weren't.

i was not clear as the pool reported where we were going. i just thought it was odd that the president was walking outside of the white house and when we eventually got there, there was a gaggle out there. i think ivana trump was there, a couple of other people, and then he made the speech the biggest thing i remembered the smell of the area and how quickly they had pulled protesters away. host: for you able to talk to any of the protesters that day? there's the image of the president holding up the bible at st. john's church.

guest: i go back inside the white house. protesters didn't come back immediately. they didn't come back -- i don't remember this actually coming back. whether or not it was a toxic. eventually the secret service did come out and say they did dispense this, but not actually

anything toxic. people running while they are covering the president. host: coming up on the four-year anniversary of that walk in that photo. you mentioned that you knew some people were there to legitimately protest. you felt like there were other people who were there to cause violence. how do you choose who gets interviewed when you're trying to cover a protest and you try to interview both types of people and get their voices in? what was that like the day before you were doing that? guest: you interview everyone. i remember the defund the police effort when i was put on the assignment and the assignment was go find out if people understand what the meaning of defund the police is. it wasn't clear at that point

what people meant, and it was interesting because different people had different ideas. some people had no idea. some people had very scholarly answers about how they wanted to approach this. obviously talking to everyone including the graffiti poster and understanding why. host: thanks for waiting. north carolina, line for democrats, what is your question? caller: wind is everyone feel like trump can get away with anything he wants to? if i took papers from it and they asked for me to return those papers, if i didn't, why does it feel like everyone says trump -- the united states into -- it should just be written

off? host: the documents case i guess is the focus of the question. guest: that's the argument that everyone is having. many people will support trump. the question is why are we persecuting in former president and people understand and see that the justice system should not give any favoritism to anyone are arguing know, pursue every action you can even if he is a former president. it has been the debate since they started this entire thing. host: a user on twitter mentioning henry cuellar talking about bob menendez or vice versa. remind us of what happened last week with henry cuellar. guest: very similar to bob menendez, henry cuellar is facing charges for illegally

taking an exchange or dealing with a foreign entity and exchanging favors for gifts. that is a very fresh indictment, we won't see anything for that for i imagine a year or so, but he is up for reelection and that is a very, very volatile see for democrats. actually, it's not really clear where democrats are going to fall on this. host: bl is sending a text from ohio yi guess what, we have another client and at the what mr. menendez did was we were thin with mr. trump did, asking the immediate they are going to cover it as salacious lee as they cover the other trial, the donald trump trial, saying please do. less than two minutes left here. what did we get to yet, what

stories are you covering this week? guest: i have a story out today about the nation's security, the woman who had national security background, how some of them are leaving. both of them come from very tough district or swing districts with democrats. they flipped those seats in a 2018 and now they are seeking higher office. abigail spanberger is running for governor and -- is running for senate. my question to some members on the hill was does this leave a gap in national security conversations when some people are, specifically in the republican party, the chair of the intel committee are spewing russian talking points. some of these lawmakers are essential and articulating to their colleagues what is

necessary and how things are unfolding even though their colleaguhave access that they do. host: the headline, democrats are about to lose their mob squad. we always appreciate your time on washington journal. guest: thank you for having me. host: coming up, you're going to be joined by sarah hey, washington university irregular terry -- regulatory study center. how the biden administration is trying to secure its regulatory policy ahead of the 2024 elections. but first, back to that question that we asked you this morning. have you ever participated in a protest? let us know when and where and did it make a difference? phone lines split by age. go ahead and start calling in now and we will get to those called right after the break.

announcer: this year, c-span civil rights 45 years of covering congress like no other. since 1979 we feel your primary source for capitol hill, providing balanced, unfiltered coverage of government. taking you to our policy is debated and decided all with the support of america's cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting powered by cable. friday night, watch c-span's 2024 campaign trail, a weekly roundup of c-span campaign coverage providing a one-stop shop to discover what the candidates across the country are saying to voters, along with first-hand accounts from political reporters, updated polling numbers, fundraising data and campaign ads.

watch 2024 campaign trail friday night at 7:30 p.m. eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org, or download as a podcast on c-span now, our free mobile app, or wherever you get your podcasts. c-span, your unfiltered you of politics. since 1979, in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress. from house and senate floors to congressional briefings, party meetings and committee briefings, c-span gives you a front row seat to have issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government.

visit c-spanshop.org, c-span online store. browse our latest collection of products, apparel, books, home decor and accessories. they were something for every c-span fan, and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. washington journal continues. host: taking your phone calls now in this segment of washington journal. but before we do, want to keep you updated about what is happening on capitol hill today. obviously the house and senate don't return until tomorrow morning and afternoon for the house and senate respectively, but today, plenty going on here in washington including coming up in about 25 minutes, a conference on the federal debt and fiscal policy. that is happening at an event that will be airing on c-span

two at the american enterprise institute. one of those groups that is hosting that session on the debt and fiscal policy. that coverage beginning 9:00 a.m. eastern. c-span 2, the c-span now app and c-span.org. this afternoon, jan easterly will be joined by other federal officials to discuss cyberspace and digital policy strategy. that being hosted by the atlantic council here in d.c. 6:00 p.m. eastern today, a discussion on u.s. defense priorities around the world and the role of military forces in it. that being hosted by the council on foreign relations. now back to this question we ask at the beginning of the program today about protests.

college protests in preparation for potential protests at national conventions this summer, we are asking for your stories. have you ever participated in a protest in your lifetime, and if so, what was the cause? was it successful? we just want to hear your experience. (202) 748-8000 if you are under the age of 25. 25 to 55, (202) 748-8001. if you're over the age of 65, (202) 748-8002. plenty of calls already, appreciate you already calling in. tennessee first, this is joe, good morning. caller: i actually called to speak with your guest. i've never been in a protest. with martin luther king, they had that marched in chicago, i didn't participate, but i was

there watching what was going on. if i could make a, and about what i wanted to ask, you have a gentleman from north carolina calling in talking about a case, why did mr. trump get away with that? but nobody seems to focus on the fact that biden as a senator and other documents that he took, they let him pop out really easy. host: just coming back to the protests, do you think that protests make a difference? is there a protest you can recall that made a difference? caller: them folks in chicago, let me tell you what, they had people being taken off the streets by 5:00 because of the impact that they made on what they had done walking down cicero avenue. they just rolled things over and destroyed.

they made a big difference. host: akron, ohio. mike, over the age of 65. what protests do you remember from your life? >> i was part of a protest, the very last anti-vietnam war protest that took place on the campus of kent state university in the spring of 1972. i was still in high school when the 1970 protests took place. one more comment about 1970, i sister was on the campus in 1970 for that protest when the students were killed. i was still in high school. i will be turning 71 in a few months, so i will be 71 soon. host: how close was your sister with the shootings broke out? caller: she was a sophomore, i guess 20 years old.

she was a few years older than i am. i got onto campus in the fall of 1971, so 15 months after the shootings took place. in the spring of 1972, the end of my freshman year, the anti-vietnam war protests, i was there actively involved. i made it heard i didn't want to be anywhere near a guy waving the flag of north vietnam. i was against the war but i was not for the north vietnamese. people back then didn't have cameras or cell phones, but there were cameras there from the local cleveland channel at that prote. i didn't wa to be seen anywhere close to somebody raising the flag of north vietnam. host: what do you think of protesters today unfurling palestinian flags or efforts to

raise palestinian flags were american flags had been hanging and some incidents about that? caller: the to have the flag of palestine or whatever, that is fine with me. but they should not take down american flags in the process. than i do not agree with. if they want to raise the flag of palestine, that is ok. i believe that israel has a chance, they need to have that homeland, but i am not a big fan of netanyahu. i believe that there is some compromise that could be reached. if i could makeone more comment -- host: quickly because i've got a lot of folks waiting. caller: thank to the fall of 1972, i've been for the quite upset because nine out of 10 people on that campus wouldn't mcgovern. we took the defeat, there was no

protesting the election. we got beat. i felt sorry for the handful of students on that campus who supported nixon because they were outnumbered 10 to one. but when the election was over, between election day and thanksgiving, i played this song by the bee gees called massachusetts. massachusetts was the only state that voted for george mcgovern. my roommate got tired of me playing massachusetts for a few weeks. i got over it. i got over it, that's all i can say. host: out of the garden state, ages 25-65. go ahead. caller: when i was younger, the vietnam war protests. they seemed to be a lot more intellectually-driven. i think what we're seeing today is not protests. what i think we are seeing is

like a misguided attempt for attention as well as just serious ignorance of the issues. all you've got to see if that the lgbtq community supports a system that is not friendly, and then on top of that there's the organization to this. this is not a grassroots movement. this is being organized and we are all being. host: so do you think the vietnam war protests were fully grassroots and not organized? caller: to a degree. i've read articles about how i get the cia was actually involved in getting involved with student unions and stuff at the time. that was a little bit of organization, but that was far more grassroots than this is. i've never in the day, people used to talk about it.

people used to interact and say this is different. there is something seriously different about this, and it seems to be our official. host: there is a difference between then and now. we show this in erfurt segment today. this from the gallup organization, the question of have you ever felt the urge to organize or join a public demonstration about something? 39% of americans in 2022 responded yes to that question. that pole coming at the time in 2022 in the wake of the abortion decision. but that is three points higher than 2018 when pulling took place same question. 36% of americans saying they had the urge at some point organize or join public demonstration. compare that to 19 62 five, just 10% of americans responded than and said that they had felt the

urge to organize for joint a public demonstration. this is brandon in california on the line for those under the age of 25. good morning. caller: good morning, everybody. i was at the ucla encampment, actually, and they really just wanted to say that there's is this message of how hateful and a lot of hate speech and antisemitism at this protest. i would like to say i didn't see any of that. sometimes people aren't fully informed on the issue but a lot of people are there just to learn. there is so much love, people from all different backgrounds just sharing their experiences. fighting for their rights as human beings. so i think that it is very, very strang t messaging being spread around these in cabins

and stuff. host: review at ucla overnight? i want to say it was early in the protest. there were hours of violence. here is one of the headlines, warnings of violence at ucla, police didn't step in for over three hours, referring back to that incident. were you there that night, april 30? caller: i actually was not there. but even the headline, there was no violence there at all until the counter protesters came and tried to break in. we had counter protesters trying to break into the engagement for days. warnings of violence is nonsense. we were so onto defense the entire time. shadow to these organizers who really did a beautiful job of keeping it in an inside space and making sure that people weren't being agitated.

shout out to them. host: what was going on inside behind those walls? we have so many news photos of the barricaded walls and the students looking over the top of those walls. what was happening on the other psych? caller:: i helped build the barricaded eluded myself. there's a lot of love but obviously people can get a little extra emotional, so the organizers are there making sure people are following the rules. we are not trying to engage with any of those counter protesters. we're just trying to free palestine. all eyes on rafah right now. i just want to counter some of that misinformation. a guy who called said that it seems artificial, but it is grassroots people from all over who have built these organizations that are local and now they have grown to national. just calling that artificial is

not what we're talking about. host: you said you helped build the barricade at ucla. why did you need a barricade? caller: it's hard to tell in the videos, but there's people trying to break in constantly. one specific curlyhaired kid who has kind of gone viral saying that he wasn't able to go to class, i saw that guy there every single day trying to break in. so once again, just trying to combat some of that misinformation. host: what do you mean break in? caller: break into the camp and agitate, waving an israel flag. once again if you are disagreeing with us that is totally fine if you want to have an open conversation, this guy is not there for open conversation. host: would you participate in another protest after your experience with this one? caller: i already have, so yes.

host: you have another one planned? caller: i will definitely be showing up to free palestine every single day that i can. host: this is benjamin, virginia. that line for those over the age of 65. what if you protested? caller: i am 82 and the first time i protested, i was at columbia university and i came from columbia to washington for the culmination of the great march on washington on the mall. so that was my first protest. host: and what with that experience, being at the march on washington, seen as one of the most historic road test moments in this country's history? caller: it was fantastic. you could just see the huge

crowds and it was peaceful. there was discussion of possible violence, there was absolutely no violence and so on. of course, it was a pivotal moment in the history of civil rights in the united states. host: and we're really standing at the march on washington, did you get one of those spots along the reflecting pool outside the lincoln memorial? caller: yes, i was maybe halfway down from where the speakers were, and i think it was on the left side. so that's where i was. host: what do you remember about martin luther king jr.'s speech that day? how did you take it in the moment? caller: well, it was a long time

ago. i was accelerated to be there and martin luther king was such an inspirational speaker, and that was one of his greatest speeches, and of course i've listened to it and read it since, but that is about all i can say at this point. host: you were at columbia, you said. what do you think about what happened at columbia earlier this month? guest: well, i think that the new president has been insufficiently supportive of the protesters. i do not think the police should have been called in. they were called in twice and all it has done is escalated the situation as i predicted to some of my classmates, and these

demonstrations and encampments have spread throughout the country as a result. so for anybody who opposes these protests, it has had the opposite effect, it has made them so much more visible. not just in the united states, but overseas as well. post: thanks for sharing your memories, appreciate it. sticking with the 60's, one more article from today's paper. this is usa today talking about alfredo gutierrez, one of the latino leaders in arizona. 78 years old recognize recently for his life kind of public service. he was kicked out of university in 1968 for leading student protests on campus and ended up not graduating from arizona state he finished his degree

finally six decades later after he was forced out of school because of his cast activities on campus. and there is a picture of him being joined by the provost of the university at the convocation there on may 4, getting his degree six decades later. this is david in massachusetts. that line for those under the age of 25. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you doing? host: doing well, where have you protested? caller: i've protested for black lives matter and also organized #-- palestine and massachusetts. we had a caller who said that this is the grassroots. if there's any funding that i could tap into, i would love to get connected to that because we've been organizing musicians who are willing to donate their time and resources to raise funds.

the idea that it is not grassroots has not been my experience. it has been a community-building experience, and also at the same time, a very sad thing to come around, to know that our government is funding a genocide in the middle east, where there is a long history of colonialization and apartheid in palestine. it has just been such an experience to build community around this issue particularly in a time when is the most dire circumstances. host: where you at a specific school in massachusetts? caller: school, no. host: who is we and how did you get connected to that? caller: we is just the community members.

and through union and through connections i've had in the past with other protesting organizations that have happened here in massachusetts. a lot of the people who were involved with the black lives matter protest iso are involved in the free palestine movement. host: in terms of musicians and people who donate their time, are the usually successful in those efforts, or is it harder to do? caller: it is and that requires a lot more planning ahead of time. i would say that we are successful with it, but to me, this isn't a grassroots movement because we have done that effort. most of the money gets sent and some of the money is for local

organizing expenses, but these are -- host: that is the u.n. relief agency that you're talking about? guest: yes, which america has defunded after some allegations were made. they had hamas members which was totally unsubstantiated. following those allegations of a bunch of countries, there has been no evidence to support that claim. however, i don't believe at this time the binding iteration has restored funding. also there's been attacks on other agencies the world food kitchen which was supplying much needed aid to the people of gaza . at this time it has just been -- this isn't a grassroots movement. i don't even understand where that would come from. in my opinion it hasn't been

involved at all. that is what i would say about that. host: the al jazeera news organization in an article recently explained which countries have cut their funding to that relief organization. david, thanks for the call. this is yolanda in north carolina. caller: good morning. host: where have you protested? caller: i have protested in jersey at the age of 17. i also protested in raleigh, north carolina. host: for what issue? caller: the issue in new jersey was a flash -- black male was attacked by police dogs and in

raleigh, north carolina it was for trayvon martin. host: tell us about being at those protests. did you leave feeling that you had accomplished something? >> the first time i was a teenager and this black male, we did get results because of the protests. trayvon martin, when they had the protests in north carolina, i was very proud to introduce my daughter to civil rights and protesting. my daughter also protested with me for trayvon martin, and my

daughter went to a protest for george floyd in raleigh, north carolina. i was proud as a parent teaching her that we have rights in the united states. host: yolanda in north carolina. about 20 minutes left here for your story about participating in a protest at some point in your life, just asking when it was, how you felt about it, did it make a difference? ryan, pennsylvania, dying for his age 25 to 55. caller: i calling when i protested the stop the arena movement. host: and what arena are we talking about? caller: it was going to be built within chinatown in downtown philadelphia. it has been causing a lot of problems that is -- as it has pushed through.

the traffic in the area is really bad. and i read an article came out this morning which is why i'm calling in. suggesting that they put federal funds into the project, and over the last year, the letter has been very extreme. we what is going on as they are going to try to connect two chinatown areas and solve the issues of the expressway flooding, and also kind of cherry pick that as a way to subdue the community of chinatown. they are very, very against that. host: the article in the new york times, chinatown champion feared arena has long been squeezed by development projects.

is this the first protest you were involved in? caller: no, but after i was part of it i realized how important it was. the majority of the voices who were for the arena were not part of the community. restaurant owners, a lot of large apartments. chinatown discovered in small, freestanding homes, and if they clear that out, it pressures a lot of developers to put in housing that they can charge a lot more, and they will justly develop the area really quickly. but if you go, it does feel very historic. something that really changed my mind about it, it isn't particularly safe in a lot of areas. but chinatown at night you see kids walking around, you see emily's around at night. older people.

that is not. typical for a lot of people. i think that is in jeopardy of being lost if we replace it with market street. they are going to replace the market street shopping center with an arena, and if you live in washington, d.c., they did the same thing with the arena. they do the same thing in other cities. it is kind of odd. host: this is marine in mobile, alabama. line for those of the age of 65. >> good morning. i'm calling because i'm thankful that you are discussing this. i think it gets to the heart of free i think it gets to the heart of free speech in the united states. i'm glad you're having callers call in. there's only twice i've been involved in a protest. once was about 10 years ago in mobile, alabama. people got together to support victims of violence and i walked

with them t a walk -- with them, it was a walk. the other time was in 2017. i think that was the year that there was bastille day celebration in france and a van drove into the crowd, killing multiple people. and bystanders. and during that same spring or summer, police were killed in texas and one day i just thought, i'm going to stand on the street corner in mobile, alabama, and -- with a sign, pray for peace. and i did and others hong konged and joined in -- honked and joined in the next day and for about two weeks we stayed on that same corner, just holding signs, pray for peace. and peace on the streets. i felt like ordinary citizens should have a chance to stand peacefully in protest for whatever the issue is, including

what's going on today about the conflict between israel and palestine. at the heart of it i think people are just tired of violence and war. wherever it is in the world. including ukraine, israel and what's going on there. i think people have a fear that it's going to escalate into world war iii and people are speaking out all over the world in large crowds and if in our country these are suppressed, i don't think that we're any different than china or russia trying to smother free speech. if speech should go into violence, that's a crime. when it's intimidating others from going to class or destroying property or harming people, then i think that police

force should be used but if people are camping out and they have their signs and they're just trying to make statements, i think that should be protected. host: you have gotten the urge to pull out that old pray for peace sign in the midst of what we've seen recently? caller: yes, i have. but i'm a grandmother and i'm kind of afraid to be out on the streets because of violence and random violence and people attacking others who -- just the division in our country today. but i did that for -- i just thought for about two weeks, is there a way that regular people can show how, you know, advocate for peace or whatever their issue is. and then encourage diplomacy instead of bombs. host: maureen.

this is loretta in huntersville, north carolina that. line for those ages 25 to 65. go ahead. caller: yes, good morning. no, i have not ever participated in a protest. although if i were probably 30 or 40 years younger, i may participate in protests that the point in support of the palestinians. but i think one of the earlier questions was whether these protests do any good. and i would say, absolutely. i remember in the beginning, right after october 7, when the u.s. news had started reporting and they had that narrative of drumbeat, you know, leading up to war. basically portraying israel as

the avenger for the hurt it had suffered. but once those protests got started, and the protesters made their voices heard, they were strong and they were insistent and they didn't back down, those -- that news coverage changed and obviously, you know, the biden administration had to consider more than just the israel policy. they had to start considering the palestinians and the palestinian support. because the people didn't back down. host: is that one of the best things that a protest can do, is change the media lens on a topic? caller: the lens, the media was, you know, basically following the biden administration's policy for israel. and therefore they started that war drumbeat that we always hear.

you know, with one side rah-rah and the other side being beaten down. and that changed when those protests started. host: we'll stay in north carolina. this is brad in chapel hill, that line for those 25 to 65. go ahead. caller: hi there. thanks for hosting this conversation. yes, i've been in many protests in the past, participating in many of the protests supporting women's rights to health care and in many of the black lives matter protests over the last eight years or so. been very actively protesting in those. but more relevant to the recent conversations, for the past four years i've been quite active in protesting against the

government of benjamin netanyahu. i happen to be an israeli american. and so i've been quite active protesting against my government there in israel. but doing the pro tests here -- doing the protests here. since october 7, been very much on pins and needles and quite actively protesting in support of hostage release and an end to hostilities. i'll emphasize that i don't see myself and i don't participate in any form of counterprotests, i'm not a counter protesters against the current -- counterprotester against the current pro-pa*plan protests but -- pro-palestinian protests but i'm for hostage relief and end of hostilities. host: where you have done that? in chapel hill? what form has that taken? caller: the north carolina area, in chapel hill, raleigh, durham,

greensboro. and have been up in new york city and in washington as well. host: and in terms of counterprotests, the caller before you was talking about how protests can change the media lens of how a story is covered. can counterprotests do the same thing? and bend the lens back? caller: i kind of push back at that narrative because i really don't view the situation -- or i feel that the media lens is having an overly polarizing effect in which everything is portrayed as either entirely pro-palestinian, quote-unquote, or entirely pro-israel, when in fact i think people just are worried about looking for peace and looking for -- and worried about the escalation of war. and i think that there are many,

many people, both on the israeli side, if you want to use those terms, and the palestinian side, who really want to live in peace and so, yes, i'm trying to -- and there are many people out there and i don't think that this gets enough media coverage, there are many people out there that really want to find peaceful co-existence and solutions. so that's why i don't -- i'm a very proud israeli and i'm a zionist, but when i do my protests i'm not out waving the israel request flag. i'm -- israeli flag. often my signs will have both palestinian and israeli flags on them because i want to say that both of our groups and both of our sides want to and can find a peaceful solution. host: thanks for the call. from north carolina. staying in the tar heel state, pwes measure city -- besimer city, this is mike. you're next. caller: i'm a little on the

other side. i'm a counterprotester. in our local area of gaston county. i've been to protests, anti-protests where these black lives matter, trying to remove history, confederate monuments, in fact. in dallas, north carolina, stanley. i mean, these -- we just recently had a ruling from the court here, said that statue has nothing to do with justice going in there. that statue has been there and it's just a little bit crazy on that. host: which statue are we talking about, mike? caller: a confederate monument, just for confederate soldiers who died during the civil war. and 97% of the soldiers who fought the civil war for the south did not own slaves. you know, they viewed it as states' rights which is my

opinion. but one other thing about this palestinian protesters, you know who the hamas and iran has all said that these palestinian protesters are all -- i'm not quite sure -- i don't understand that and the israeli saoeurbgsd you see the israel -- side, you see the israeli flag and the american flag. on the palestinian flag you see the palestine flag and the hamas flag and the iran flag and you even see the -- [indiscernible] -- flag. you know how they give trump down the road about, oh, they were protesters good on both sides, ok, biden said the same thing about these palestinian -- he caters to them, to the left wing of his party. then he talks about the israelis. i mean, he's basically saying there's good people on both sides. why is biden not held to the same that trump is? host: can i ask one more

question before you go, on counterprotesting, you said you're a counterprotester. when you show up at these events, how much interaction do you try to have with the protesters that you are being a counterprotester to? caller: you can't. it's their way or no way. you can't talk civil to them. they get in your face. and they don't want to look at the other side of it. they don't want to look at my opinion. if it's not their opinion, you're automatically a racist. and it's just -- i mean, you can -- at same courthouse area there's a big black marble statue saying it's like a long piece of marble formatterren luther kipping -- formatterren luther king -- for martin luther king. martin luther king didn't do nothing for me and black lives protesters said the confederate monument didn't do nothing for them. i don't understand it at all.

these iran, the big universes in iran said they would give every one of these palestinian protesters a scholarship to there. let's take a lot of these people that are out there, let's send them over there. it won't be an hour, they'll be crying, wanting back in their mom and daddy's basement because they don't understand, they don't take the thing, freedom of speech in this country. you can have freedom of speech -- host: got your point, mike. that's mike in north carolina. james waiting in grand rapids, michigan. those over 65. caller: good morning. thank you. i attended a lot of protests in washington, d.c., in 1970. host: what were you protesting? caller: the vietnam war, genocide, again. and i'm really proud of these kids now because it's a question of morality in my opinion. it's a question of being

complicit in genocide. and i don't want to be complicit in genocide again. enough is enough. ceasefire now. host: did you feel that your protests in the 1970's made a difference, james? caller: not enough of a difference, not a significant difference, really at the time anyway. but i was there when we carried coffins to the white house and it was powerful. and the demonstrations were -- i always went to the washington monument, to the mall and there were usually 10,000 to 40,000 people there on the weekends. and i was shocked that it never even made the news at home. you know? it was surprising. the media narrative is basically

propaganda. you can't get real news anymore. you couldn't back then either. host: there was one poll from axius that said only 8% of college kids have participated in some of the current protests on either side, 8%. do you think the media is overplaying or underplaying what's happening now? caller: well, i think they're underplaying it, actually. as far as the war goes. and also, it bothers me that they call it the israel-hamas war. israel is a country with nuclear weapons and f-14's. we're giving them f-35's. i mean, come on. you know, this is so wrong and the whole thing about good people on both sides. you know, every demonstration i

went to, the pro testers were -- the protesters were peaceful. we'd be chanting and passing joints and just, you know, having speakers and then here would come -- i guess they call them counterprotesters now. but i think they were plants, you know, or they were just people who were violent. and they would always start to cause violence. they'd come with clubs and chains and what would happen is the police would come in buses. i mean, hundreds of them. and they had, you know, helmets and shields and clubs and they would -- they had gas masks and they'd line up and then these so-called counterprotesters would come out of nowhere and do

this little theater thing with the chains and clubs and go after the police a little bit. it was like theater. it was like not real, you know. they pretend to go after the police and then the police would put on their gas masks and start ripping out tear gas and the demonstrators would just get up and walk away. there'd be men, women, children, pregnant women. totally peaceful the and then -- totally peaceful. and then the tear gas would come out. host: james, thanks for sharing your stories. and all of our callers for those stories. about 45 minutes left this morning in "washington journal." we're going to turn to regulatory policy, a discussion on the congressional review act and how the biden administration might be working to secure some of its regulatory policies, even if donald trump is elected in 2024. that conversation with sarah hay of george washington university.

stick around, we'll have it right after the break. [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] >> this week on the c-span networks, the house and the senate are in session. the house will take up a final version of a five-year federal aviation administration re-authorization bill. they're also expected to consider several police-related and border security bills during national police week this week. on wednesday, administrator of the federal highway administration and national transportation safety board chair testify before the house transportation and infrastructure committee, investigating the collision of the container vessel with the francis scott key bridge this baltimore this past march. on thursday, fdic chairman

testifies before the senate banking committee following a "wall street journal" investigation reporting that the agency fostered a culture of racism, sexism and abuse. prompting some lawmakers to call for the chairman's resignation. and f.c.c. chairwoman appears before a house appropriations subcommittee on her agency's 2025 budget. watch this week live on the c-span networks or on c-span now, our free mobile video app. also head over to c-span.org for scheduling information or to watch live or on-demand any time. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> if you miss any of c-span's coverage, you can find it any time online at c-span.org. videos of key hearings, debates and other events feature markers that guide to you interesting and news worthy highlights. these points of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos. this timeline tool makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what

was debated and decided in washington. scroll through and spend a few minutes on c-span's points of interest. >> book tv's podcast about books. current nonfiction book releases. plus best seller lists, as well as industry news and trends through insider interviews. you can find about books on c-span now, our free mobile app. or wherever you get your podcasts. >> c-span now is a free mobile app. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from the u.s. congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns and more from the world of politics. all at your finger tips. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of

"washington journal" and find scheduling information for c-span's tv networks and c-span radio plus a variety of compelling podcasts. it's available at at -p store and google play. scan the q.r. code to download it for free or go to c-span.org/c-spannow. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: a conversation now on regulatory policy across presidential administrations. our guest is sarah hay, a policy analyst at the regulatory studies center at george washington university. good morning. guest: good morning, thanks for having me. host: a recent "wall street journal" headline. trump used a 1996 law to overturn obama-era regulations and biden aides hope to stop the republican from doing it again if he wins. the 1996 law that the "wall street journal" is referring to

there is the congressional review act. what is it? why do we have it? guest: so the congressional review act was enacted in 1996 as a way for congress to retain oversight of federal regulation and so it's kind of an ex pabssive -- expansive law. it can cover any regulation, the broadest definition of regulation that we have, under the administrative procedure act. and so when regulations are disapproved using the c.r.a., agencies are barred from reissuing them in a substantially similar format and the regulation is taken off the books immediately. host: maybe we should start with what are regulations? guest: absolutely. host: and who promulgates regulations and what is that process? guest: so regulations effect your everyday life. it's making sure the bacon you have for breakfast this morning is safe. it's making sure your dish washers are energy efficient. regulations are issued by federal agencies to implement the laws that congress passes.

host: why was it felt in 1996 that a congressional review act was -- why do we need to renew these regulations if it goes through a big review process and a public comment process, when these regulations are being promulgateed? guest: that's a great question. this came following a supreme court case in the 1990's that eliminated the legislative veto and basically said that congress needs to pass laws to change agency actions and so the congress has the congressional re-- passed the congressional review act to give them a fast-track procedure for reviewing agency regulations. host: but it's a procedure that hasn't been used very often since 1996. but was used a decent amount right after donald trump comes into office. guest: exactly. host: explain why and how it's been used. guest: as you mentioned, it really was not used that frequently until 2017. we only saw one rule overturned in 2021. but then -- 2021 -- 2001. but then when trump came into

power, congress saw this tool and took advantage of it to overturn 15 regulations from the very end of the obama administration. host: what did they target? what regulations did they want to overturn? guest: they targeted regulations that really run the gamut of policy areas generally from labor and employment to finance regulations, to the environment, to education. and so they targeted regulations in those spaces. host: a congressional review act overturning of a rule seems to be most useful for when an administration comes in of a different party and has a congress who can actually use this legislative power that's also of that same party of the presidency. guest: right. host: so compare when else this has been used then. how many other times since 1996 have we seen this been put in place. guest: as i briefly mentioned, we saw this used once at the beginning of the bush

administration in 2001, overturning a clinton era ergonomics rule from osha and then the biden administration in congress in 2021 also used this to overturn three trump regulations. those were -- one was environment, one was equal employment, those kinds of things. and so these administrations will use them to advance their regulatory priorities in that way and i'll speak a little bit about why we didn't see anything at the beginning of the obama administration. it's because the c.r.a. has been traditionally thought of as a deregulatory tool and we think that the obama administration was a little bit shy about using this deregulatory tool and preventing agencies from taking substantially similar actions in the future. host: i know it's a small sample size, of how many rules have been overturned, but is it mostly environmental rules that get targeted? workplace safety rules? what is usually the low hanging fruit for a c.r.a. overturning of a law?

or rule, i should say. guest: that's a really good question. as we mentioned, the trump administration issued the most -- or congress under the trump administration passed the most of these c.r.a. resolutions and those were targeting the labor space. but as i alluded to, they target really any policy area. but i think something that's interesting to note is that a lot of these rules are not major rules so a major rule is something that has an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more every year. only a handful of the rules that have actually been overturned by the c.r.a. were major rules which is a little bit counterintuitive. you would think they would use such an easy tool to get a quick policy win on a big topic. but it's really been more of these smaller rules that we've seen. host: what's an kpwafrpl of a major rule -- an example of a major rule? guest: let's think about something that just came out this past week. i think the federal trade commission's noncompete clause rule is likely a major rule, if

i remember correctly. because those are rules that have a large impact on the environment. or on the economy. host: when we're judging major, not major rules, it's monetary impact and is it cost is usually what they're going for or is it benefit as well? guest: that's a really good question. i don't remember off the top of my head, but i think it is just annual economic impact, whether that is costs or benefits. host: major rules and minor rules, what's -- the congressional review sabgt and how it's been used, that's our topic until the end of our program this morning, sarah hay is our guest from george washington university. it's the regulatory studies center there. taking your phone calls. as usual, phone lines split by political party, (202) 748-8000 for democrats to call in. republicans, (202) 748-8001. and independents, (202) 748-8002. she's one of the authors of a

report on how the c.r.a. has been used across administrations. what do you focus on at the regulatory senter? guest: we're a nonpartisan academic center at george washington university. we do that through studying regulation like these conversations we're having here today. host: what is the best way to improve regulatory policy in your mind right now? if you were the regulatory czar of the biden administration? guest: that's a great question. i'll think about that and get back to it later. host: (202) 748-8000 for democrats, republicans, (202) 748-8001. and independents, (202) 748-8002. was there a specific incident that jump-started the event law that became the congressional review act in 1996? what was happening at the time? guest: that's a good question. i mean, the politics at the time

were the clinton administration was in power and there were republicans coming into congress but, yeah, i'm not 100% sure about that background there. what i can tell is you that the c.r.a. has been really used effectively since then and something interesting to note as well is that, beyond being used to overturn regulations like this, members of congress use it as a political messaging tool to some extent where they'll introduce a resolution targeting an administration action, even though it might not pass congress or it might not be signed into law. we've seen congress this session introducing a lot of these actions, targeting biden administration regulations and all of the ones that have passed have been vetoed by the president because presumably he doesn't want to overturn regulations issued by his own administration. so it's another interesting facet of this tool. host: is there a statute of limitations on how long a regulation can be on the books before it's safe from a

congressional review act review? guest: yes. there's a couple components of your question here. tpa*eufrt first of all, -- first of all, the c.r.a. has a 60-day action window. once an agency issues a regulation and it's reported to congress, then congress has about 60 days to take action, give or take recess days. but then there's also the lookback period which is the end of a session of congress, the last 60 working days of the session, whether that's legislative days in the house or session days in the senate, congress can review those rules that are issued during that period in the subsequent session of congress. so those kind of have a grace period to give congress its full 60 days of review. so that's why the c.r.a. is particularly potent during these political transitions that we've been talking about. host: for that time frame for how long you can do this, take us to what generally happens at the end of an administration or the final year of a potential administration that may not be

re-elected in the beginning of an administration. specifically, coming back to that "wall street journal" headline, biden is racing to trump-proof his agenda. what is he trying to do here? guest: so as i just talked about, the lookback period. that period, those regulations are vulnerable in the next congress if there is a political transition. and so what we've seen the biden administration do this year, that's really unique, is they issued 34 economically significant rules in april, which is the most in our history of data tracking at the regulatory studies center. and so you can kind of use that as a political signal for the biden administration that they're trying to solidify their top regulatory priorities before the earliest estimates of that lookback window. the earliest estimate of the lookback window is late may this year. and so any regulations that are finalized before then are almost certainly safe from the c.r.a. host: questions coming in from social media. jim in pennsylvania saying, i do hope your segment is replayed

many times, every time someone says -- host: in terms of how much the public pays attention to regulations versus how much congress and staff is paying attention to regulations, what do you generally see here? is this a hot topic? guest: it's definitely a to the topic in the regulatory space -- a hot topic in the regulatory space right now but regulations aren't what we learn about in our government classes in high school. so i think it's a great thing that these conversations are being picked up by your show, by "wall street journal" right now and really engaging the public

in this law that used to be considered really obscure. host: linda in sanford, north carolina. independent. linda, you're on with sarah hay. caller: yes, thank you for taking my call. and for the most part i don't agree with anything on c-span but for the most part, you know, i rate it about a 75. host: on agreement or disagreement? caller: about 75 -- y'all are a little too liberal for me. i will be very honest. because i am a 73-year-old american. my family members and my husband's family members have fought and died and give their life for this country. and i agree with the topic today. i'm going to stay on topic. biden regulations and potential rollbacks under trump. biden ain't my president. and biden -- everything biden

does, when trump gets back in there, he's going to roll it back. and those people are a bunch of thugs and all that, i'm going to get off the subject a little bit here, but all this protest stuff, october 7 and january 6, the same people. host: linda, i want to keep it to regulations. because we have sarah hay here to talk about regulatory policy. how much, if this story is talking about what the biden administration ising trying -- is trying to do ahead of a potential trump administration, how much have candidate donald trump's staff talked about targeting specific regulations? how much are members of congress looking to target specific regulations? guest: which ones is the hard question because we don't know what is going to fall into the lookback period because we don't know when it's going to be but

what i can say is that i've heard from colleagues at the government accountability office that they are getting a lot more requests from members about whether certain things count as rules and could be subject to the c.r.a. host: this is dan in palm bay, florida. republican. dan, we're talking regulations with sarah hay. caller: hi, yeah i wondering, i was wondering what regular laces -- regulations, what biden regulations are they planning on handcuffing donald trump with? i mean, don't they realize that donald trump's economy was way better than joe biden's? everyone sees that. i mean, there's no denying that. unless people were just tkhraourbal like your guest appears to be or she's -- host: dan, i think our guest knows quite a bit about regulations. handcuffing the next administration with regulatory policy, can an outgoing

administration do that? guest: not really. so there are a couple different ways to overturn regulations, even beyond the c.r.a. and so those actually exist in all three branches of government. so agencies could start another notice in comment rulemaking process in which they, again, draft another regulation, receive more comments on it and issue another regulation that contradicts the old one and takes its place. there's litigation is an option and then congress can pass legislation to say agencies can or cannot do these things, as well as using appropriations to say, that's a nice rule you got there, but you can't use any of your funding to implement it. so there are ways to overturn regulations. the reason we're talking about the c.r.a. right now is because of the approaching lookback window and how this is a much faster process than any of those that i laid out to overturn regulations. host: when you promulgate a regulation, you mentioned the comment period. who generally comments on regular stphraeugs is it just industries that are impacted?

are there certain people that you keep finding pop up in the comments section, can any americans comment on any proposed regulation? guest: any americans can and should comment on proposed regulations. that's a really great way to get involved in the government. and we see comments come from a range of actors, definitely industry groups, as well as nonprofits, a lot of them will organize what we call mass comment campaigns where -- it used to be called postcard campaigns where you'd send in a postcard to the agency but now it's a form letter you type in online at regulations.gov and everyday americans, academics like us comment on regulations. and everyone can and should. i really believe that's a good way to get involved in the regulatory process. i can also mention that the biden administration has been taking steps to increase public engagement in the regulatory process through making opportunities for public engagement known through tools like the unified agenda and just

being more cognizant of getting new stakeholders involved in the process. host: academics comments. you said we comment. so what's the last regulation that you commented on? guest: i actually commented on a financial crimes enforcement network regulation about anti-money laundering in residential real estate. i just thought it sounded interesting and it was a good way to practice using the bipartisan tools of regulatory analysis to assess these regulations and provide some feedback to the agency that they might not have considered. host: does the agency generally pull back a proposed rule after comments and make changes based on what people say? or how often do they just say, thanks for the comments, and we're going to go ahead with our rule anyway? guest: agencies are required to consider all of the comments that they receive and incorporate them into the final rules so you'll see in the preamble of a regulation there's a long beginning of a regulation and it just talks about what the agency's trying to do and in final rules they'll explain the

comments they received and what they did to react to the comments. host: so this is regulations.gov. how does this work? we'll show viewers the website. it's literally regulations.gov. easy enough to find. if a viewer wants to comment or find out what the proposed rules are, what do they do? guest: as you -- if you scroll down on the website, you'll see that there's a bunch of these hyperlinks here and you can see there's a section on the side that should say comments due soon or something like that. so if you click on those, you'll see a list of the regulations that are available for comment right now. host: including a proposed merger of anchorage financial network credit union located in chicago with great lakes credit union in illinois, a community re-investment act. agency information collections activities, proposals, submissions, etc., and so on down the line. this is the regulation, the

comments are due today on these pieces of legislation. guest: if that's what you clicked on, those are ones that are due today and you can navigate the website to find comment periods that are due further in the future and find the regulations that you really care about. host: if you were to click on one, you simply just type in what your comments are about it? is there a word limit when you do it? guest: no word limit. you can type in whatever you want. you can add attachments. i've seen a comment from an organization with up to 20 attachments linked to it. so you can add data and what the agencies really look for is data and your situated knowledge of how this regulation would effect you as a real person. host: regulations.gov. back to your phone calls. this is jacob in alexandria, virginia. independent. you're on with sarah hay. caller: my question is about schedule s. you know that o.p.m. has a rule called risk, reduction in force, why wouldn't they just changed r.i.f. rules instead of showing

an executive order schedule? host: i'm not swhaour that question was? do you know? guest: i know about schedule f but i'm not an expert on o.p.m. regulations. schedule f was a proposal from the trump administration to reclassify some federal employees basically as more similar to appointees and i know that o. p.m. has started issuing some regulations regarding schedule f. that's the extent to my knowledge on those policy issues. at the reg study center we focus on regulatory process rather than individual topics. host: the national federation for federal employees talking about schedule f. a campaign to stop schedule f. to protect the civil service from political corruption. saving the civil service act, h.r. 1002. jacob, how are you -- how did you get involved in this schedule f issue? caller: i work with a bunch of federal employees who are freaking bout getting fired if trump gets elected or

re-elected. but there's something called the reduction in force rules in place which was issued by o.p. ph-frpt. it has all these complicated hoops you have to jump through. they can't be a veteran and if they have more years of service over someone you're trying to get rid of, you can't get rid of that person before getting rid of the person with more years of service. every president complains about these rules but they never seem to change them and i'm wondering if it's because it requires congressional review? guest: i think you're using the term congressional review slightly different than this act but it would be an area where congress could introduce legislation on the topic. host: congress can review anything at any time, is what you're saying? to reduce regulation? guest: i believe so. host: howard in north carolina. democrat, good morning. caller: top of the morning to you. good conversation. we just had a person who said something about they're not liberal and all that. but will this be considered under the c. r-frpt a. where --

c.r.a. where the biden administration passed the pact act for the military and burn pitts? and -- pits? and do this all comes into the c.r.a. wherein the republicans are giving rights to appliances and all that stuff, to give them rights to have? i mean, i know that's ridiculous, but appliances got more rights now than the women in america. and i thank you. host: i think it comes back to rules versus laws and what the congressional review act is targeting. guest: exactly. host: if you can go over that again. guest: so what we learned from school house rock is that congress passes laws and those laws then go to the agencies and the agencies figure out how to implement those laws by issuing regulations. and so those regulations are basically the specific steps that we take to make sure those laws are fulfilled. and so the congressional review act specifically is a form of

checks and balances. in which congress can take a look at those regulations that the agencies are issuing. host: barbara wants to go back to what regulations we're talking about today specifically when it comes to the biden administration. as you pointed out, we don't know what -- if donald trump is elected and if there's a republican congress, what they would target, can't predict the future. but past is prologue here. what types of regulations do you think they would probably target? guest: yeah, i think just looking at the policy areas that were targeted by congress at the golf swing of the trump administration, we saw a lot of oversight on the labor regulations, financial regulations and environment and natural resources. and i'll quickly note that those were interesting because those were from the department of the interior rather than the environmental protection agency. so looking at how we manage our natural resources. host: the biden administration rolled back many of the

predecessor's, the trump administration's achievements. why would it be a problem if the successor rolled back many of biden's acts? we're talking about executive orders that were issued on the first day or the first couple days of the biden administration. we see this every new administration. so the difference between rolling back using executive orders and how easy that is, compared to the legislative process, through the c.r.a. guest: right. that gets into, there's all these different ways to enact policy and some of them are a lot more long -- they have a lot more longevity than others. so executive orders are very easy to repeal. they do a lot of that at the beginning of administrations. and then legislation is, i mean, it's pretty hard to get something passed through congress. so laws are pretty hard to overturn and then regulations also have to go through the notice and comment process, again to get them overturned, unless we go through those other pathways we talked about earlier

such as litigation or congressional action. or congressional legislative action i should say. host: phone numbers again if you want to join the conversation about regulations, (202) 748-8000 for democrats. republicans, (202) 748-8001. and independents, (202) 748-8002. sarah hay is our guest of the regulator -- regulatory studies center at george washington university. how did you get involved in focusing on regulations as your day job? guest: honestly t just a job that opened up and i've since fallen in love with it. i think the thing that i find most interesting about regulation is that it's not something you learn about in your high school government classes. i really didn't understand the full extent of how regulation really makes the government work and is the nuts and bolts of making the government work every day. something that i'm very passionate about is getting more people involved in the regulatory process and learning about this because this is how the government implements laws and how it works on the day to day basis.

and so i think that's something really powerful and i'm really grateful that this program is talking to your viewers about regulation. host: was there one law that was passed that the regulatory promulgation around that law really interested you? what's an example? guest: something recently has been, we've been seeing a lot of regulations coming from the infrastructure investment and jobs act lately. and so those have been a lot of i think environmental regs as well. and so i think that's been interesting to watch the process. we saw the politics play out of getting that law passed and now we're seeing it come through in the federal register. host: are there regulations that the supreme court has overturned? regulations -- [indiscernible] -- guest: the regulations definitely do get challenged in the supreme court. that's a little bit beyond the area of my expertise. i typically focus on how congress overturns regulations. but there's definitely evidence

or those definitely go to the supreme court and there's also evidence that c.r.a. regulations have been used in some litigation as showing congressional intent. host: explain what congressional intent is. guest: congressional intent is basically, what did congress mean when they signed this law into action? and that gets to the heart of regulation because agencies have to show where their regulation comes from in the law and say, this is why we are allowed to issue this regulation. and so the c.r.a. resolutions recently have been used to show that, oh, congress disagrees with the agency issuing this regulation, thus that probably means that that was not their intent with the original legislation. host: can congress step in and do that before a regulation is promulgateed? if the c.r.a. is used after a regulation is promulgated, is out there to kind of pull that back, is there a process midway through of, hey, i looked at regulations.gov, that wasn't congress' intent when we signed this bill into law, that

regulation goes far beyond or 180 from what we wanted to do with this law? guest: members of congress can certainly submit comments on federal regulation and they do. but with the c.r.a. specifically, it only applies to final rules, you're not allowed to use it on proposed rules. host: how long does that process usually take, propose a final rule? guest: i think it takes about two years on average but it can really vary. there are some that go through quickly and there are some that have been in the process for 10 years. host: to paul in columbus, ohio. line for democrats. good morning. caller: hi, good morning. i have two questions. first, what is the most regulated area or areas? and then second, higher education, how regulated is that area and what you see coming in the future? thank you. guest: that's a good question. regulation really does touch every aspect of american life. but particularly with regard to higher education i saw that a few weeks ago the biden

administration issued a new regulation about student loans. so that's something that they're trying to accomplish through the regulatory process as well. host: there's not one agency that's known to issue the most regulations? guest: there's a handful that issue a lot of regulations. host: what are some examples? guest: the environmental protection agency for one does a lot of regulating. you see a lot of regulating with centers for medicare and medicaid. these really big programs that you think of. but a lot of agency does a lot of regulating. host: everybody generally knows what the e.p.a. or the agriculture department is. what is a lesser known agency that issues a lot of regulations? guest: that's a really good question. i don't know if it's super lesser known but i know that occupational safety and health administration -- host: osha. guest: yes, they issue a lot of regulations regarding workplace safety. host: max is next out of georgia. independent. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you both for taking my call. good morning both of you.

as we look at these regulations, i think we have to remember two things. just look at the constitutionality of them. if these are powers being taken by the federal government that should be in the realm of the state government, that's something we need to look at and really act upon rolling back and giving these powers back to the states and to the people. second thing is that you have a concentration of people in washington, d.c., who don't have much experience in the regular life out in the united states, in different states around the nation. they think of regulations or ideas that may not play well in d.c. but may not be too well received in different states. and that's another thing we need to look back. i don't have a problem with rolling back regulations.

as long as we look at the institutionality of it -- constitutionality of it and if these powers are being usurped by the federal government or they should be up to the states. but thank you for taking my call and i appreciate it. host: thanks for that. state versus federal authorities here. guest: that would be a great thick to submit a -- thing to submit a public comment on. agencies are always looking for more perspectives on how they look at their regulations so i would encourage you to submit public comments on those regulations that you question. host: is there such a thing as a congressional review act, a state review act? do individual states do what congress is allowed to do here when it comes to state rules? guest: i'm not sure. that's a good question. in america we have 50 different systems of regulation in all of the different states so it's a little bit hard to answer. host: when a resolution of disapproval is issued, when the c.r.a. process has happened and congress says that they want to pull back this rule and the new president, generally new

president, agrees with it, how long does the agency have to unravel that rule and are some rules harder to unravel than others? guest: yeah, that's a really good question. my understanding is that when a resolution of disapproval is signed into law, the regulation basically ceases to exist immediately. and then the agency will have to take time to take it off the books as well. but it ceases to be effective immediately. host: has there been a tkr-frplt r.a. rule that's been -- c.r.a. rule that's been pulled back that holds up other rules and so other rules have to be pulled back because this one now goes away? are these rules built on top of each other to regulate a law? guest: i don't know that that's a case and i think that goes to something we were talking about earlier that it's not been many major rules targeted. it's more the smaller regulations that certainly have a meaningful impact on people in those sectors but don't

necessarily broadly effect the economy. and that's one theory as to why we haven't seen the net neutralities or the waters of the united states targeted by the c.r.a. is because they are expansive and could be hard town ralph and i'll also note that the c.r.a. only lets you target the regulation in its entirety. you can't pick and choose provisions of the regulation. and so you might take a look at something and say, oh, i really hate that provision, but i kind of like this other provision. and it might not be worth it to you to try to use the c. r.a. on that regulation, particularly since if a regulation is disapproved with the c.r.a., the agency is barred from reissuing it in substantially the same form. host: what is waters of the united states? guest: that is a regulation that basically governs the navigable waterways of the united states. host: and one that's certainly a target a lot of controversy in recent years as i recall. guest: yes, it's been a target of controversy and members of

congress have introduced c. r-frpt afrpt regulations -- c.r.a. regulations targeting waters of the united states but not all c.r.a. resolutions get a vote. we've seen 330c.r.a. resolutions introduced in congress but only 20 have ever passed. a lot of these are introduced and don't necessarily go anywhere. host: political messages? guest: to some extent, yeah. host: bill in albany, new york. republican, good morning. caller: good morning. good morning, thank you. ms. hay, i would like to ask you a question about executive orders, please. when president biden came in on his first day, he did reverse many executive orders, right? from -- guest: yes. caller: that president trump had in place. the one that i think affected us a lot was the pause on drilling of oil in the united states, whether it was private land or private-public land. government land. whatever. and i looked it up and i read it

and i saw through it and there is that executive order there that did pause and that was when -- he did it for the environmental issues. we had to get our oil overseas and the prices more than tripled and that's when we started inflation because the trucks that were carrying the gas, the food for the stores, they had to raise their prices and we all know that, if we're all honest with ourselves. we know the prices went up. now, is that pause still on from what i understand? because i know we're exporting oil now, right now, but is that drilling -- that paus for drilling still on the books in the executive order and if it is, why don't we take it off so the prices of oil come back down the way they were, they were at $2.10 under president trump. host: the question is, how long

does an executive order last? caller: how long will this particular executive order is, it still on the books? do you know specifically about the pause on drilling tphoeult united states? -- oil in the united states? guest: there are so many executive orders issues, i'm not super familiar with that. they last as long as they are on the books. some of them are really durable. there's the executive order governing federal regulation, 12866, that has lasted since the 1990's. but then there's some that are less durable, like -- i think it was -- yeah, there's some executive orders that get overturned or removed every -- revoked every presidential administration. host: whitehouse.gov, executive order on protecting public health and the environment and restoring science to tackle the climate crisis. january 20 of 2021. the first day of the biden

administration. i believe that's the one that the caller was asking about. if you want to read up on that. white house. com. you can -- white.gov -- whitehouse.gov. caroline in baltimore. democrat, good morning. go ahead. caller: hi. good morning. and thank you for c-span. i joined this conversation late but i love it. i don't think people understand the power of regulations. i worked on some from the affordable care act and when the trump administration came in, when they could not get rid of the affordable care act, they started displantling it -- dismantling it through regulations. they started zeroing out fines that were supposed to help go towards paying down our premiums. they started with risk corridors, they zeroed that on t and insurance agencies couldn't come up with their money. so we don't look at regulations, but when they can't get a way around a law or passing a law, regulations help them find a back door into doing what they need to do.

and then also, one last comment. because it's public, i mean, public comments, i worked on short-term limited duration as far as health care. the majority of people said, please don't back this away. but under the trump administration they pushed it through anyway. i'm like, do people really read regulations and know how much really power is in the regulations? because they can do whatever they want to and don't have to go through congress. and that's my comment. host: thanks for the call. less than a minute left. sarah hay, a chance to respond. guest: i think you're absolutely right that regulations are the backbone of government and it's how government really implements all of these laws that get passed by congress. yes, fully agree there. host: george washington university's regulatory studies center. you can find

gwu.eudu/regstudies. sarah hey serves as a policy analyst there. also on x. thanks so much for your time this morning. appreciate it. guest: thank you. host: that's going to do it for our program this morning. we'll of course be back here tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. it's 4:00 a.m. pacific. in the meantime, have a great monday. [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] host: nice job. did you enjoy it? >> today, jen r of the cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency joins other federal officials to discuss cyberspace and agile policy strategy. hosted by the atlantic council, watch live on c-span, c-span now

or online at c-span.org. this week on the c-span networks, the house and senate are in session. the house will take up a final version of a five-year federal aviation administration reauthorization bill to extend its programs past the friday, may 17 deadline. they respected to consider several policing and border security bills during national police week. on one's debt -- on monday, administrator of the federal highway administration and national transportation safety board's chair testify before the infrastructure committee investigating the collision of the container vessel with the francis scott key bridge in baltimore this past march. on thursday, the fbi chairman testifies before the senate banking committee all among a wall street journal investigation reporting that the agency fostered a culture of racism, sexism and abuse from think some lawmakers to call for the chairman's resignation.

jessica and rosen were sold appears before the house appropriations subcommittee on her agency's 2025 budget. watch this week come alive on the c-span networks or on c-span now, our free mobile video app. also head over to c-span.org for scheduling information or to watch live or on-demand. >> if you ever miss any of c-span's coverage, you can find it anytime online at c-span.org. videos of key hearings, debates and other events feature markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights. these point of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos. this tool makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in washington. scroll through and spend a few minutes on the points of interest. >> c-span is your unfiltered

view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> you think this is just a committee center? it is way more than that. >> comcast is partnering with 1000 committee centers to create wi-fi spaces so low income families can get the tools they need to be ready for anything. >> comcast supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> former president donald trump's x attorney, michael cohen is testifying in his criminal case in manhattan. five years ago, michael cohen testified before a house committee regarding his work for then-president from, highlighting the actions he took at the direction of his former boss. this excerpt from that testimony is about 45 minutes. in today's hearing. mr. cohen, if you would please rice and i