conference and a portion of the lower three gigahertz band i am hoping we will be able to have frank discussions about what we can do ahead of the conference. and finally once we get that spectrum authority back we should really look at what kind of inventory auction we could hold because it got a lot of lessons a lot of different bands that are at the scc. we might be able to throw them all together and produce an auction sooner rather than later. i think that will be prudent to do. it would allow a lot of caries to round out there holding bring more servers tomorrow places in the country. ask one thing through the unspoken challenge what i see is a fallacy there is a government incumbent spectrum largely the

military systems that keep you safe in combat zones. on one side. that is previously known as national security spectrum. this commercial spectrum to make and consumers to watch videos. that's a fallacy of this dichotomy i think it's dangerous if we approach spectrum policy from that standpoint. is it doable to take a more holistic look at how the united states collectively proceeds my too optimistic they think we buy build to do that? >> you are speaking to this former army officer i am the daughter of an air force veteran. it is in our bones national security comes first. it's the duty of every public servant to think about public

safety. this zero-sum game we have managed to create is not yielding any benefits. we are incredibly creative it outcomes of technology in this country. we can develop spectrum policy we are going to do is build industries, technology services they're going to develop and support the civilian economy. subsequent help support a suppod national security. but we can try to figure out how we can develop more of it in the from here. if you think 5g the holistic integration of the 5g economy

from the commercial sector to the government sector and the intelligence community back. is there a way to turbocharge this where there is a positive feedback loop of innovation, new sharing capabilities for. >> we have to be more creative about spectrum across the board. we produced an environment we terms in terms of scarcity. we have to ask ourselves what policies are really make you feel so scarce we got to look at more dynamic access systems. more opportunities for preemption if it's only occasional secondary rights for commercial actors. i think a lot of our spectrum policy discussions are stuck in this zero-sum game. at a binary that it's yours or theirs. we have got to figure how to break that down. frankly we've got to get fast because there are other countries in the world that are

eager to exploit us not making progress. >> we talk a little bit about steps you think we can take. you participated in the commercial spectrum, the pipe line act all of these you are involved in. are there any things we can do now that can shift the focus and turn scarcity into necessity for innovation? >> when things we focus on the scc i've had a lot of support for my colleagues is thinking about receivers. how we send send out a signal per there's not a lot of thought given to receivers for the first time ever we put out a policy statement on receivers the reason itmatters is more efficit receivers can use our airways more effectively.

so much of government procurement and government thinking about spectrum i think we have missed the opportunity to also focus on receivers. and receiver efficiency and making sure it's part of government permit thinking. another way to help us be more sufficient with the airwaves. and off numbers is right technical term, do we have data on that? >> don't think it's been studied well enough if you look at our airwaves you've got to identify everything we can do differently to make ourselves more effective. if you have receivers that are better built and tighter they are less likely to bleed into adjacent airwaves. you're less like into of interference. if you've introduced newif you l neighbors, you are less likely to have problems. the weight to change that to scale is to make that something the government thanks about and procurement at even the military.

>> we've talked a little bit we are colleagues you are by far and away an expert on anything to do telecommunications and the commercial environment. i was focused on the intelligent side of things. environment now it's now converged it's now inescapably a security issue it's outnumbered in an interagency meeting. it seems often in the discussion as a lesser important how you

see this playing out are the scc. how do we break through? how do we have all of those equities are literally at the table. when she makes her security as part of every conversation we have this not just your phone your wired and wireless all the sensors in the world all is information is fabulous the patterns we will be able to recognize its incredible every one of those the introduced inte abilities. in commercial security and work

on that together. it's better for the government or private sector both of us i want to thank you again for everything you have done to lead on these issues. you have really helped accelerate this convergence of an understanding of commercial security is national security. and i look forward to what we are doing and some of your ideas and insight into the third paper in our series that we will try to lay out concrete recommendations for how do we get past this zero-sum gain in advance u.s. interest more broadly. is there anything you like to close with question. >> no i think your final point is perfect how to get past the zero-sum game and advanced u.s.

interest more broadly while sedrick excellent for that for the online audience we are going to take a two or three minute break for our next panel intake we ask everyone it takes for adults to replace chairman. [laughter] will get a few more chairs appear to be back at about two minutes. thank you so much. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

live coverage of the senate here on cspan2.

good morning welcome back to "washington journal." we are joined by adam who will be discussing his research into waste and abuse in government spending great thank you for joining us this morning. >> 's right to be here, thanks for having me back. >> thank you for coming back. tell us about open the books. how long has it been around? how do you fund what we see on the website? >> we believe transparency is transformational we are a nonpartisan nonprofit organization we believe transparency revolutionize u.s. public policy and politics. we started illinois centric in the super bowl of corruption back in 2011. we were the first ever to post the pensions of virtually every

single illinois public employee at every level. here we now do that for the entire country last year we filed 55000 freedom of information act request. recaptured nearly, not quite but nearly every dime spent at every level of government federal, state, local across the country. that we do this a regular people come to our website open the books.com and follow the money. the whole political class republicans and democrats accountable for their tax-and-spend decisions. >> to your website covers both the federal and state levels spending and has analysis on where you see waste or fraud? xp open the books, we audit the books, the audits make a national news. on our website years with the database is comprised of. nearly all federal spending since year 2001, all 50 state checkbooks and 15000 municipal level truck books and some of the biggest units across the

country. we are holding 25 million virtually an entire record of every single public and played the federal level, state level and the local levels are 25 million sellers and pension records you can come to our website. you can see who by title makes how much money. even in your local school district or municipality. >> your organization open the books recently put out a report on earmarks first of all let's remind our viewers what are they? how are they approved by congress? what an earmark is that member pet project for members of congress ask the district it's been described as legal bribery to put votes on big spending bills. so in earmark for example is the one million-dollar macadamia nut initiative in hawaii.

hawaii is only one tenth of 1% of all agricultural production but the u.s. senator in hawaii what a million bucks for academia nut initiative it. like $3 million close into pittsburgh to make pittsburgh into hollywood. it is like phase two and atlanta georgia. phase one must pay for local taxpayers. phase two is paid for 3.6 million. it's like the $5 million into naples, florida into their septic system phase two. phase almost paper bright local and state taxpayers $5 million in federal money is paying for phase two literally flushing u.s. taxpayer money down the septic system in naples where the average home is an average of 600,000. >> i will show on my screen some

of these projects receiving earmark money that you have highlighted in your report. we mentioned macadamia nut health initiative we are showing $4 million for buses in wisconsin, $5 million of the ozark empire fairgrounds $6 million for institutions where members of congress spouses work. so my question for you is, do you make a judgment on whether the earmarks are appropriate or good level of spending? in your opinion is there such a thing as are all earmarks of bad or is there a way to determine what is it better spending than others? >> here is our position. local projects of merit should be funded locally. this is the historic tradition in this country that should not be funded out of washington d.c. so earmarks were actually banned for the last decade. two years ago the republic of

the house under kevin mccarthy as the leader took a secret vote and two years ago 102 republicans voted in secret to joint nancy pelosi democrats to bring back the earmarks which has been described as the currency of corruption in congress. last year right before mccarthy was elected speaker took power they can did a secret vote this time 150 a republican so it got worse on the republican side they voted to join democrats to bring back earmarks. and six months ago at the spending bill in december of last year it was signed between christmas and new year's when no one was paying attention there were 7005 earmarks stuffed into $1.7 trillion ear and budget bill for $16 billion worth of these projects republicans were seven of the top 10 largest air markers just seven republicans earmarked $3.1 billion of the 16

billion earmarks in that bill. >> went open up to the phone lines i want to give our viewers the numbers to call to talk about earmarks. to talk about government spending and your opinions on whether there is waste and fraud. democrats are like 2027488000. republicans (202)748-8001. independence (202)748-8002 pretty can send us a text message (202)748-8003. will get to your questions and comments in just a minute too. but i want to bring up representative mike simpson is a republican from idaho. and he put out what he calls a defense of earmarks. they called them community project funding. and again this is a republican.

i want you to read an excerpt of what he said in the defense he posted on his website. he writes, quote make no mistake the federal government has a spending problem. but congressionally directed spending is not more spending. it is simply a way for members to prioritize projects in their own districts within existing budget limits it. even within the budget set by congress each year these projects are limited to no more than 1% of the discretionary budget. what is your response to his defense of earmarks or what he calls community project funding? >> first of all they had to change the name because earmarks when their bandit 10 years ago 90% of republicans and 80% of democrats wanted them banned because of the corruption in congress. so look i think that congressman is putting forth the mary poppins theory of legislating you need to sugar, you need some

honest grass the collet to move these bills through congress. these projects cannot go through regular order. earmarks by definition circumvent the regular budget process in congress. earmarks are irregular. no one is against the splash pad for million dollars in essentially, michigan but no one is against the two million-dollar earmark from a member of congress in baltimore, maryland to the great blacks in >> museum were six months previously he was in scott's with eight >> figurine. no one is against these projects if they are paid for people locally. >> let's go again to the phone lines democrats 202-74-8800. republic is 27488001 for independence 2027488002. our first collar is leroy ana wilson, north carolina on the independent line. what is your question or comment

leroy? >> yes the study of how much money has been spent on bailing out the banks, bailing out wall street? the tax cuts for the rich? the war in afghanistan and iraq and the department of homeland security who could not predict january 6. i think that's 400 billion a year. have you done studies on that because that is where the real money is going. the real big bucks for these little bitty things like macadamia nuts, the money that he is talking about is really not affecting the budget that much. but these other things really are. i wondered if his organization

is doing a study on that? i would like to know that. >> thank you for the question leroy. here is our position on earmarks. the $16 billion $1.7 trillion budget bill, you may say it's not a lot of money but it's a gateway drug that fuels the big spending bills. this is a currency of corruption that puts the vote on these big spending bills. i would to show just how the next couple of examples how members of congress are actually benefiting through the earmarks. you had a powerful senate appropriations chair patrick leahy was going to retire at the end of the last session. so six months ago in the end of year spending bill, leahy earmarked $30 million into the university of vermont honors college. in may of this year after the senator retired, the university of vermont renamed their honors college after patrick leahy.

in march the president of the university of vermont gave patrick leahy a permanent presidential fellowship at the school. and he did it again year end omnibus budget bill leahy earmarked $34 million into the international airport. and then in april the city council in burlington reading to the airport after patrick leahy. that was counterpart the republican richard shelby he again was going to be retiring from congress and he earmarked $50 million to his alma mater university of alabama was going to also post his set archive he did not earmark it or a building pay did not earmark it for a project, he earmarked for the university of alabama endowment which already stood $80 billion so think about that we borrowed money against the national debt because it's all borrowed money in these earmarks we stuffed it into the university of alabama

endowment which was already a billion dollars of this is a school where they pay their football coach $11 million a year. >> our next collar is phil. phil is in long island, new york on the independent line go ahead phil. >> good morning. history seems to repeat itself. if we go way back everybody gave ted cruz a bad rap because he said he did not want all these earmarks it had nothing to do with sandy at the bill. the executive, congressman from rhode island and chris christie they all beat up ted cruz because he said i will give you the money but i do not want all these earmarks in there keep going forward with more and more stuff. they just pass a debt ceiling and part of it was to clawback unused covid money. so what did the long island

republican congressman do? they vote for that the same time the executive is trying to find ways to spent 208 million dollars so they don't have to give the money back they're all about the left and the right they are all spending our money part i have no problem pretty a group of the 70s with nothing but i will sacrifice now so my kids and grandchildren don't have to pay but we've got to do something at spending under control with all this wasteful spending is horrible they are both guilty of it. we need a third party straightness outcome thank you. >> the caller is absolute correct. both the parties are addicted to spending our taxpayer dollars at our position on earmarks it was equivalent to open bar for a bunch of alcoholics. and my evidence on this is the national debt. 1980 a little more than two years at the founding of the country our national debt said little less than $1 trillion for

a little more than 40 years later, $32.5 trillion. both parties they are addicted to spending u.s. taxpayer money. >> i want to ask you, adam, i want to go back to what republicans say. i think it is interesting when you think about earmarks or republicans were somewhat critical. they ended the practice of earmarks about 11 or 12 years ago. democrats brought it back last year under their majority with house speaker nancy pelosi. but under new speaker kevin mccarthy earmarks have continued this year but with some changes. i want to redo this from a report in roll call earlier this year. it says house republican appropriators have banned earmarks from the labor hhs, education, financial services and defense bills put fresh restrictions on community project funding and new rules

rig in the process on that side of the capitol. how appropriations chart woman kay granger republican from texas announced the new rule tuesday night, earmark spending will be capped .5% of total discretionary spending and the house of fiscal 2024 bill. members will have to submit a written statement describing federal nexus further earmark request. i will skip down it's us of house republicans are able to follow through on their pledge to cut total fiscal 2024 appropriations back to levels of two years ago earmarked funds and how spending bills will drop to about 7.4 billion dollars that's less than half of what was appropriate in this year's omnibus at about 10% less than eight-point to billion included in lester's initial house bill so let me ask you, first of all what house republicans will say is that we said you cannot do any more of those education

earmarks that you have identified as problematic. no more naming things after people they said they got rid of all of that. they are capping it further. so what would you say to house republicans who would say we have created new rules to address a lot of the issues that were raised about earmarks as recently as this past fiscal year. is that enough? why or why not? works congress writes the rules and the rules are completely lax. here is the story breaking at roll call the same source you just use, nine hours ago republicans have gone hogwild for earmarks in 2020 for the 20e situation is getting a lot worse. you have got 4700 earmarks 62% of them are from republicans. in fact the first 63 largest earmarks for 2024 the house i

republicans you do not hit the democrat still 63rd or 64th largest your marker in the house republicans are loading up. we have called on house speaker kevin mccarthy and this is very important. to this point republicans have only taken eight secret vote in the house on earmarks. we are calling on speaker at mccarthy to call for a public vote. if we are going to have this mechanism of earmarks, kevin mccarthy -- make the american people need to be able to see who is in and who is out on earmarks. on a public vote are they really going to stand and cast a public vote on earmarks? we deserve to find out. >> just to reference i did pull up that article you mention this is in roll call it just published yesterday. it's as republicans hoover uppep earmarks and how spending bills. i will read a little bit is as house republicans have thoroughly stuck the earmarking debt in their favor and appropriations bills for the upcoming fiscal year that the

top democratic recipient does not even appear in the top 60 among lawmakers in that chamber, in the first year in the majority since congress in 2021 brought back the practice republicans band a decade earlier. gop lawmakers are spreading nearly 7.4 billion dollars among 4714 individual projects tucked inside the fiscal 2024 appropriations bill. >> i want to give you some examples of how this is working. u.s. senator susan collins out of maine. six months ago in the year end a omnibus spending bill sheet move through $300 million with of earmarks for main her counterpart who caucuses with the democrats, the independent angus king earmarked $100 million but he saw how it all worked. so here is what they have requested for 2024. susan collins requested

$500 million worth of earmarks, angus king requested $900 million worth of earmarks .together the two senators in maine are requesting a $1.4 billion of special projects. >> also back to the phone lines our next caller is it d in seattle, washington on the democratic line go ahead. >> i just want to say the republicans were not worried when trump spent over one or 40 million on taxpayer dollars on golf games and then you trien cuts in medicare company here 45 billion in medicaid or 1.5 trillion in medicaid. it had 45 billion medicare, 25 billion social security, 21 21 billion cuts and temporary assistance. when you guys took office our national debt was 19 trillion paid by the time you left it was 27 trillion. you do not care about america.

you do not care about our debt. it is just shocking you have valued your job over the security of this country are you're not willing to deal with the realities at hand. you should be ashamed of yourselves. done. >> well, first about we are a nonpartisan organization for the trump administration was in power we held them accountable too. right hear from this a program on "washington journal" i called out the trump administration and the two houses of congress at the time controlled by republicans for trillion dollar budget deficits during >> timesm times i'd call that dangerous. until we have healthy trump administration accountable we need the whole congress the republican majority in the house accountable, congress accountable and the biden administration accountable is our national debt soars. this year the projected budget deficit that is our revenues, h,

that is spending over revenues, $1.5 trillion. there is no end in sight to the runaway spending of this government. >> let's go to a new color in ohio. bernie is on the independent line. >> good beautiful morning to you number one. i want to mention something i think should be mentioned every day of the world on c-span that is climate change. my real comment is a gentleman did not respond to leroy the very first caller regarding the big money spent in wars, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. and i would like to mention the fact that several years ago i heard that the pentagon could not account for $11 trillion worth of stuff that they spent money on. so, like leroy said this

38 million here and 30 million there it all adds up. please address what leroy said, do you look into these spending that really adds up big time? that is my comment. >> before adam responds bernie i want to let you know were going to get to climate change later in today's program so stay tuned. adam, he want you to talk about the fact there is so much other government spending that far outweighs what you find in earmarks. >> right and the answer that. earmarks are the gateway drug to the big spending bill. there have been trillions of dollars of spending that's been racked up over the last decade breed that is obvious in the growth of the national debt. during the pandemic there was over $5 trillion worth of federal coronavirus aid doled out to everybody. nearly every federal program was

legally gained by insiders or illegally looted over the course of the past three years. i mean just on stealing alone, now the estimates are north of $500 billion stolen by criminals, crime syndicates from around the world. then you have the legalized gaming of the system by insiders. what's give you an example we took a look at the top 300 largest law firms in the country. 126 of them forgiven paycheck protection program loans. these ppp loans were designed for mom and pop businesses on main street whose businesses had been shut down during the to the economiclockdown for thet designed for the most successful law firms in the countries whose partners during this period we proved were taking millions of dollars annually in equity payouts while their firms were

forgiven for $800 million, 126 law firms on ppp loans. so adam you just mentioned a different report called improper payments on your open the books.com website. i want to bring up we listed out some highlights from that report on improper payments. you mentioned some of them you found two to $47 billion in improper and mistaken payments and federal payments i 2022 you said the paycheck proteion program miss spent more than 29 billion the social security administration old age survivor disabilities program misspent another 2.5 billion dollars. can you elaborate on how you found these improper payments and where you think the money went?

>> every single year there is a report mandated by congress the office of management and budget has to release and it is called the mistaken and improper payment reports these are payments and went to the wrong person, in the wrong amount or under the wrong set of rules. they are obviously oops, they are mistakes. fighting a mistress in the first two years has admitted to a staggering $530 billion worth of these mistakes. it is the first administration since 2004, our records go back to 2004 and is on pace to admit to over $1 trillion the 20 largest federal programs worth of mistakes. it is a staggering suggesting that quantifies the institutional incompetence of government. >> alright again we are talking this morning with andrew, he is the founder of open the

books.com which is a website that researches waste and abuse in government spending. we are taking your questions and calls this morning. democrats (202)748-8000 printer problems 2027488001 it. independence (202)748-8002. cap next we have george calling from michigan on the independent line, you are on george. >> thank you. i don't know whether you had a hearing some billion dollars worth of armaments that joe biden left in afghanistan when he pulled out of there as part of the amounts of money they admitted to. if you hadn't you should add that in there also. >> i want to respond to that. >> you can stay on george if you have another partner let him go

ahead and respond. >> thank you for that observation george. as the taliban and advanced on afghanistan in august of 2021, our auditors, we nailed that number i think it's $82.9 billion worth of training and equipment over the course of a 20 year period provided by the u.s. taxpayers into the afghan national army and the afghan national secured forces. if you break that number down for instance it was 600,000 weapons, through 50000 machine guns, 78000 light and medium tactical vehicles it was even 1000 humvees that we stood to leave behind in afghanistan. so yes, we are all over that number is the subject matter experts during that period to hold the bite administration accountable for their hasty withdrawal. >> george of the part your question? >> yes, ma'am i did. the only other comment i would like to make is with all these

democrats calling in their blowing truck, truck, trumpet what about all this money that trump had to spend to rebuild our military because barack obama left him in such poor shape? between george bush and barack obama this country was going to the pits. when trump was in the gas was like $2.30 a gallon, milk was a dollar to half a gallon. what the expenses were down i go to the grocery store now, i do all of my shopping at walmart. i know a lot of people frown on that but i do a lot of my shopping at walmart. you cannot hardly buy a half cart full of groceries now and get out of the store for less ln one $125. this is ridiculous. you go to the gas station now that gas prices are creeping back up slowly. they are back up to almost $3.50 here in southeast michigan where i live.

this is ridiculous for think only the going get this back under control, a lot of people are not going to be happy with what i say, we've got to get trump back in there to get this economy moving again. i futilely those democrats in charge of where they are now with all that money, you are just going to more of what you've got is going to get worse. thank you for letting him i say. >> at the democrats are spending a lot of money but let's just go back to the american rescue act plan of 2021 when there was a 350 billion-dollar quote unquote bailouts. the pandemic was starting to wind out of state and local governments. but you had republican governors right in there with democrats. nancy pelosi said it best the republicans in congress, they are going to vote no on this bill but the republican governors they are going to take the dough and that is exactly what happened.

even in texas and florida you had texas running billion dollar budget surplus the state government, governor greg abbott took $17 billion with the bailout. same thing habited for the republican governors all took the money. they all spent it. democrats provided you even had a beverly hills, california 30,000 municipalities across the country build out. zip code nine oh two and a ohbeverly hills receives $6.3 million you had albertson, california the richest spot in america. they got $1.3 million with the bailout. for crying out loud los angeles county took $2 billion of the american rescue act. that is so much many l.a. county lifeguards now make up to 500 10,000 dollars a year. as a matter fact 98 of them made more than $200,000 last year. twenty of them made more than 300,0003 of them a more than

400,000 top paid l.a. county lifeguards made of 510 grand. i guess life is a beach you're in l.a. county lifeguards. >> want to read to a text message we received from tony in sugarland, texas he writes please discuss how surpassed rules from last congress which did not get much media attention dealing with the reimbursement r housing, food et cetera congressional representatives. i guess he's talking about the subsidies or the money that goes to reimburse members of congress or stipends they may receive for housing and food if such exists for members of congress or their staff at progress we have to get on that. i have heard of those all increase but do know the president, the congressional office allotments went a lot higher over the course of the

last couple of years. we have to get on this issue, we have not studied it. >> kellyanne lynchburg, virginia it right waste is in the eye of the beholder. government spending allows for a national parks and interstates. a waste to some and treasures to others how do you address those concerns? >> that is true and open the books.com but whether you are the right, the left are in the middle, we just like the examples so you have the information and can hold the political class accountable from your perspective. what to give you in example of how for instance earmarks is corrupting the processing congress. you had retiring u.s. senator roy blunt out of missouri just six months ago he did to earmarks for at $91 million. breakdown. $61 million went to the university of missouri into a building that in 2021 it was named after him for the latest

science building was named after roy blunt $61 million went to that building for upgrades and for equipment and things of that nature. then he did it again, at his alma mater missouri state university $30 million earmark into a building that the trustees at the school renamed after roy blocked just two weeks before the votes. all told $91 million of our money went into two buildings that bear the senator's name and progress want to ask you this is another question we have received and text messages from steven albany, new york he writes can you cite in the any s of citizens becoming aware of wasteful spending on the local level and effectively combating it? >> yes in new orleans, have not thought about this example for a good bit i'm going to try to walk you through to the best of my ability. there is an employee of the new orleans police department knew

when he came to open the books.com something was not right people were making a lot more money than what they should have been making. when he dug deeper kicked off what eventually turned into a federal investigation. officers were put on leave and the result of that investigation are still pending. at open the books.com's we have actually been able to rack up a lot of wins. even here in 2023. so just at the start of the year the house republican majority, they adopted a new transparency and legislation rule that for two years we run a public policy campaign at the 72 hour time out to simply read the bills. so we put this in the wall street journal we had tens of thousands of citizen signatures on a petition. it was probably 99% issue with the american people that we need to be able to tear it apart the people, the politicians the pond and sissy was in the legislation before the vote on that was

actually adopted for the first time in the house rules for the house republicans. >> aren't let's go back to the phone lines. tony is calling from new york, independent line. >> fight you all. good morning. so it talking on the subject of wasteful spending owns a focus on the local level. one of the biggest strains on the local level is police spending. i am calling from suffolk county new york and we have paid more than winners 65 billion in loans against police misconduct in general the very institute also says police saying cost the nation about one of $15 billion per year and i think we talk about police budgets that have gone up around 800 out of a

million we need to talk about at the federal level this is to be spent way too much it's tied to defense spending supplies local police departments we talk about cutting costs we need to.bail out banks paid not bail out corporations. not support the policing thank you. the program 10:30 three is a transfer of surplus military equipment the local police department across the country. we come to the website go to the map session click a pen which is a zip code and you can see in her own community what is been transferred from the pentagon into your local police department.

as from a police budgets we went through a period we defund the police movement we take a look for instance in the city of boston, texas they're down 300 officers on headcount versus what they called for the budget. texas ranger's need to commit and help them with their local policing. so the most dangerous cities and took a look at the headcount on police office of the course of the last decade with her down 500 officers in the city of baltimore as robberies and smaller crimes that federal level image the militarization

vote subject matter experts on this. there's three and $7 billion spent on guns, ammunition and military style equipment amongst the water three federal agencies. it's only 26 of them are traditional law enforcement agencies under the department of justice with the department of homeland security. seventy-six of those federal agencies are traditional paper pushing regulatory agencies. for example like the department of education like social security, like health and human services and the other irs. the irs has spent $35 million since 2006 on guns, ammunition military style equipment. >> adam, open the book.com. it is his website.

thank you for joining us this morning. welcome back to "washington journal" joined by former u.s. representative bob adjustment act, as an amendment to the national defense authorization act, which is pending before the united states senate. this is you are a moment. we've been working on this for two years, two years while people who stood with our military have been in limbo. two years when they don't know what their future will hold. this is our time. this bipartisan legislation that i lead with senator lindsey graham is also cosponsored by senator coons, senator moran, who is the ranking republican on the veterans' affairs committee, senator blumenthal, senator murkowski, senator shaheen, senator wicker, who is the ranking republican on armed services, senator durbin, who's

the chair of the judiciary committee, of course senator graham is the ranking on the judiciary committee, senator tillis and senator mullin, with many others that support that i will b -- this bill. mr. president, this bill strengthens our national security. it does right by afghans who worked alongside our troops and from a broader national security perspective as we look at the purpose, one of the many purposes of the bill before us, this amendment shows the world that the united states of america makes a promise, when we make that promise, we keep it. we keep our covenant. nearly 80,000 afghans who sought refuge in our country, who is in our country, are currently in limbo, including many whoific ared their own lives and their families' safety to protect our servicemembers. among them are translators,

humanitarian workers, courageous members of the afghan military who stood shoulder to shoulder with our troops. we were right to help those people flee the taliban and come to the united states, and it now falls on us to uphold the covenant we made to them and give them the stability and the security that they need to rebuild their lives. we know this has worked before. i know this. i have one of the biggest mung populations in the united states of america. they came after a war under really sad circumstances for our country and for them. but they rebuilt their lives and they're now police officers in the minnesota. they're teachers, they're lawyers, they're legislators. that's what we did after the revolution in cuba. that's what we did. we took people in. we give them a status that allowed them to succeed in our country. but in this case, we actually

asked them to serve with our military, to put their lives at risk, to gather intelligence for our military. hot do you think is going to want to help us in the future if we don't keep our covenant, if we don't keep our promise? the bipartisan afghan adjustment act creates a more thorough system for our afghan alace to apply for permanent legal status. it requires that the applicants go through a vetting that is just as rigorous as a vetting they would have gone through if they came to the united states as refugees. but get this -- they're already here. so one of the reasons that senator graham especially and senator wicker are so interested in this bill is that exactly this, it actually provides more security because of the fact that there's vetting that will occur that otherwise would not occur. this vetting standard is a

standard that eight former trump and george w. bush administration national security officials called the gold standard of vetting. senator graham and i worked closely with republicans, including senator moran, and the department of defense to strengthen the bill's vetting standards. that is what is before us with this amendment, keeping our covenant and doing the vetting. both ways you look at it, it's good for national security. in addition, our legislation updates the special immigrant visa program to include groups that should never have been excluded from the program in the first place, including the female tactical teams of after afghanistan, which did so much to support our troops. the entire purpose of the special immigration visa program is to provide residency to those who have supported the united states abroad, and it's clear to me that these brave women should

qualify just as many of the men did. l the afghan adjustment act is supported, as i noted, by a bipartisan group of 11 cosponsors, but get this -- this bill has earned the backing of more than 60 organizations including the veterans of foreign wars, as we know them, the vfw, and the american legion. this is one of their top priorities right now. as well as some of our nation's most revered military leaders, including admirals mike mullin, william mcraven, james stavridis, and generals richard meyers of the air force, joseph dunford from the marine corps and stan mcchrystal from the amendment. i think the presiding officer knows a few of these people and he knows how they have served our country. that's if you're not going to listen to me, listen to them, listen to the leading veterans groups in this country that know how important it is for us to

pass this bill. we must uphold our covenant. that means bringing well-earned certainty to afghans who are ready here. an example -- nangyali no worked as an interpreter in 2007, i want to be clear that when it went for an interpreter to work alongside u.s. troops during the war in afghanistan -- what does this mean? when the taliban ambushed our troops, they ambushed the interpreters, too. they weren't sitting in some office being interpreters and just sitting there and whispering to their boss. they were out on the battlefield with our military. when the taliban ambushed the soldiers, they ambushed the interpreters. when our troops were targeted with ied's, the interpreters were targeted, too. that's what nangyali risked. est did it any way.

why? to use his words, same goals, same target, same achievement e now, it wasn't just the interpreters. another afghan who wants to remain anonymous because of his family who are still pack in afghanistan -- and that's the risk we're putting these people in when they're in this very unclear status -- he was a helicopter fighter pilot with the u.s. military. he worked with our troops to combat the taliban in remote areas of afghanistan for eight years. on one mission he was shot in the face by flying bullets. miraculously, he survived as a bullet passed through his cheek and open mouth. he shed blood in our fight and we should not let another day go by without keeping the covenant we made to him. another story -- an afghan intelligence sergeant, who also wants to remain anonymous, who helped carry out several operations against the taliban

and isis with our military. in 2018 while working alongside a u.s. special forces group, he was caught in an ied explosion and lost both of his legislative session. -- legs. let me repeat that. his fight with our troops cost him both of his legs. doesn't he deserve better than complete uncertainty and a refusal of our government to even give him a status, a provisional status and never knowing if he's going to have to be sent back there? that's what we're doing? our. servicemembers and veterans understand this is combrer alternative. i know -- imperative. every member of the senate have been approached by our own military about this. veterans day, memorial day, when you're walking in a parade they tell a story about someone who stood with them. maybe that person is still hiding somewhere in

afghanistan, but most likely some of them are in our country, which is a good thing. right now they are in our country. let me repeat, they are in our country living in our country, but we right now are refusing to give them the status that we have given past people who helped us in conflicts. that's embarrassing. some of the most vocal advocates of the afghan adjustment act have been military groups, as coalition of more than 30 military groups, including the american legion and iraq and afghan veterans of america penned a letter calling on congressional leadership to pass this bill. they wrote this to the leaders of both houses on both sides of the aisle. they wrote, america's veterans served with afghans for two decades in afghanistan. we fought side by side with them, and we saw firsthand their courage and dedication.

they risked their very lives to help us and made significant contributions to our mission. again, 30 military groups, including the afghan veterans of america, iraq veterans of america, american legion, blue star families, honor the promise, black veterans project. i could go on and on and on. what else did they write? they write we call on congress to pass legislation that would allow afghan parolees who are being evacuated from afghanistan to have an opportunity to seek lawful residence in the u.s. again, people that have this siv status. then they go on, we urge you to support the afghan adjustment act as soon as possible. we promise to stand by our allies who often at risk to themselves and their families served in uniform or publicly

defended women's and democratic rights. the u.s. government made a similar promise. this is the letter from the 30 military groups of our country. they say the u.s. government made a similar promise, keeping it assures that the american commitments will be honored. 30 military organizations telling us what it was like to serve alongside our afghan allies. most of us in this chamber don't know that experience. we don't know how much they owe those afghan interpreters, those people that gathered the intelligence. we don't know because we would go on congressional trips there, but we weren't there on the battlefield. they were. so maybe for a change we should listen to what they have to say about what they saw. they know that many of these people are here right now, but we just can't get out of our petty politics to try to at least give them the status that they deserve.

many of our nation's national security experts have also called on do think pass the afghan adjustment act, accurately pointing out that doing so is both a moral imperative and necessary for our national security. here's a portion of a letter that was sent to congressional leadership by the following experts: rick ozzie nelson, former director office of combatting terrorism, national security council staff under george w. bush. he was also a u.s. navy helicopter pilot and afghan veteran. gus codabela, with the department of homeland security. michael nefak, former principal legal advisor with the homeland security council staff under george w. bush. elizabeth newman, security policy for the department of

homeland security and former deputy chief of staff for the department of homeland security. stuart verdery, former assistant secretary for policy and planning for the department of homeland security. rush ashley, former assistant drirm for federal emergency management association, former virginia international guardsman and u.s. military reserve. hans miller, former deputy assistant military of the transportation security administration. lynndon, former chief council of immigration services. what does this letter say? this letter says this, the rationale for the afghan adjustment act is clear. first, it follows through on our nation's commitment to its wartime time allies by providing at-risk afghans and their families, including many that supported u.s. military and diplomatic efforts for the past 20 years, a path to permanent status in the united states. second, it sends a clear message to current and future

allies, those that are necessary -- and this is so key and it doesn't, kind of first thing you think about here, but those that are necessary for u.s. servicemembers and the diplomats to perform their missions in pursuit of national security, that the united states is a reliable and trusted partner and it stands by the democratic ideals that it professes. this is why senator graham and i have worked on this bill for so many years. this is why we have the ranking republicans on veterans, on judiciary, and on armed services supporting the bill. when i first got to the senate, honestly, that would be enough to get this done. that would be enough to bless this and give it the gold standard just as all these former bush and trump and obama and current biden officials have given it their stamp, that this is a good vetting process, that it's certainly a lot better than having people sit here in limbo

after they served our cufnlt here's another letter from former ambassadors to afghanistan, baw it's not just military groups and national security experts. eight former u.s. ambassadors to afghanistan called on us to pass the afghan adjustment act. these experts served under presidents george w. bush, barack obama, donald trump, and joe biden. and each have an intimate understanding of the sacrifices made by our afghan allies. remember, it's these diplomats, it's these military leaders that had to ask these afghans for their help. and regardless of what people think about what happened with the withdrawal, regardless of people's views on this, can't we just agree on one thing, that we should stand with the people that stood with us. this is what the ambassadors to george w. bush, barack obama, donald trump, and joe biden, our embarrass -- ambassadors to

afghanistan said. the task of american diplomacy will be much more difficult. if the united states dmots act to support its allies by passing the afghan adjustment act, in the future our allies will be less likely to support the u.s. missions if they see that our afghan percent are abandoned. in diplomacy our words will have lost meaning. and in the unfortunate event of future conflict -- this is the ambassadors writing. not me. ambassadors that went to serve in afghanistan, that took on that assignment under four different presidents, they're writing if we don't do this in diplomacy our words will have lost meaning. and if the unfortunate event of a future conflict, what incentive would local allies have to support our troops? good question.

finally, i want to share some words from a group of more than three dozen of our nation's most esteemed military leaders, retired military leaders. as i mentioned, general joseph f. dunnford of the u.s. marine corps. admiral mike mullin of the u.s. navy. general richard meyers of the u.s. air force. admiral jim staridis of the u.s. navy. general peter ko re lli, u.s. army. stan mcchrystal u.s. army. general david mckearan, u.s. army. admiral mcgraven, u.s. navy. general austin miller of the u.s. army. general john w. nicoleson jr. u.s. army.

general david rodriguez u.s. army. general curtis scaporotti of the u.s. army. general joseph votel of the u.s. army. general mark well much -- welsh of the u.s. air force. lieutenant general jeff buchanan of the u.s. army. lieutenant general steven fogarty of the u.s. army. lieutenant general benjamin c. freakily of the u.s. army. lieutenant general ben hodges of the u.s. army. lieutenant general john mullholland of the u.s. army. lieutenant general mark c. schwartz of the u.s. army. lieutenant general john c. thompson of the u.s. army.

lieutenant general fran sin of the u.s. army. major edward general doorman of the u.s. army. major general dunn lap of the u.s. army. major general bulk elkin of the u.s. air force. major general william hicks of the u.s. army. major general james liu nder of the u.s. army. major general mark mcally of the u.s. army. major general mark quintock of the u.s. army. patrick j.reiner of the u.s. army. major general tammy smith of the u.s. army. major general james bow young of

the u.s. army. brigadier general steve anderson of the u.s. army. brigadier general kutz of the u.s. army. brigadier general jones of the u.s. army. brigadier general chad t. mansky of the u.s. air force. those are oanlt -- only the ones that signed the letter. i just ask my colleagues perhaps we should listen to those that have led our forces in times of war. when they say that these people stood with them, when they say that if we do nothing and we just let them be in limbo and we know just a few weeks ago one of them was murdered in the state of virginia in the middle of the night because he was work as a lyft driver, is that what we're going to do, just leave them in limbo? are we going to stand with them as the top leaders in our military have suggested?

they have been resolute in their support not just of doing something about this. of this bill, of this amendment. we worked with the military for years on this amendment. they have signed their names to this letter. what does the letter say specifically? it says if congress fails to enact the afghan adjustment act, the united states will be less secure. okay, there you go. we can just stand here, not want to deal with this, because everyone wants to go home for august. or we can actually vote on this amendment. that's all we're asking. we want to vote on this amendment. they write if congress fails to enact the afghan adjustment act, the united states will be less secure. as military professionals, it was and remains our duty to prepare for future conflicts. we assure you that in any such conflict, potential allies will remember what happens now with

our afghan allies. if we claim to support the troops and want to enable their success in wartime, we must keep our commitments today. the afghan adjustment act, they write -- this isn't me talking. this is all the top brass, the top military who led us in times of war. they write the afghan adjustment act will go a long way. additionally, without the fixes applied by the afghan adjustment act -- this is them writing, not me -- our immigration system will be less capable, not more capable, of properly processing and vetting applicants. to break from their letter, that was the point i made earlier about why senator wicker and senator graham and senator moran were focused on making sure this was the gold standard of vetting in this bill. back to the letter, the enhancements national afghan adjustment act adds to the

security screening process of those who were evacuated are of critical importance to our national security. listening? even if you don't agree with me on the security of our country overall in standing with our -- in standing with our allies, at the very least look at that. shouldn't we be vetting people that were evacuated? maybe that would be a good idea. three dozen militaries flag officers think without this act, our nation is less secure, our soldiers will face new obstacles in finding allies on the battlefield, and our immigration system will be less capable of vetting applicants. that's plenty of good reasons to support this amendment and why we have leading senators, both democratic side and republican side, on this critical amendment. so that's it. we have the leading people that head the committees in this very

chamber supporting this bill. that's how much work that senator graham and i have done to get them onboard. we've got them on this. we've got military and veterans groups. we have national security leaders. we have retired u.s. ambassadors to afghanistan under four different presidents, obama, trump, biden and george w. bush, and we have all of the top brass retired military officers whose names i just read off. they're not debating which bill or which amendment, because we've been working on it for two years. this he know exactly what we should -- they know exactly what we should do, and it's this bill, the afghan adjustment act. all of our colleagues have had at least a year to look at this bill. i don't want to hear that. i don't want to hear that, oh, we've got to look at this more. give me a break. this bill has been out there for a very, very long time.

there is absolutely no reason we shouldn't have a vote. if people want to vote against the american legion and the vfw and all the top brass of the military and all the ambassadors that served under those presidents, that's fine. that's their right. but we need to have a vote. that is the only way we can show that we're keeping our covenant. until we get this done, we are essentially asking our afghan allies, people who took bullet in the face, who lost limbs, to rebuild their lives on top of a trap door that could fall out from under them at any second. without the afghan adjustment act, all of it, their jobs, their homes, their safety, could disappear. by including the amendment in the ndaa, we can strengthen the national security of our

country, by making our vetting program more thorough, such a top priority of many of our colleagues, while finally doing right by our afghan allies who sacrificed for us. so, let's put aside the politics and the distractions. there's a lot of good things in this bill. we've had a lot of votes on big things and little things so far. if where is this? who's going to object to at least allowing this vote? they can vote against it if they want. some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. but don't deny us a vote. and by us, who am i talking about? yeah, the afghans that are here that sacrificed for us, the top military, the ambassadors, the military in this country who have come up and talked to each and every one of us about this bill, american soldiers who are begging us to do something about it.

that's tus. the way i see it, this defense bill is about three things -- one, our nation's security. two, setting a moral example for the world. three, showing people everywhere that ben america makes a promisa makes a promise, a covenant, it will be kempt. the afghan -- it will be kept. the afghan adjustment arveght, the amendment -- adjustment act advances all of these objectives. pass this amendment, show the world our word, show our own military that our word and our covenant matters. mr. president, i yield the mr. president, i yield the

good morning delighted to be here. >> we are going to be discussing climate change policies and recent extreme weather patterns, so let's start with you, congressman. remind voters what is the republican mission and where do you get your funding? >> it is for entrepreneurship, the environment and we are conservatives who care about climate change. this is an issue that's mostly being discussed with the language of the left and we need to discuss the terminology of the right in other words people that talk about practical american solutions and talk about free enterprise innovation and a way to get the world and

action and so we think that if we can go to conservatives and affirm the truth about practical american solutions and free enterprise can solve this problem then conservatives can start to engage, so we are trying to expand the conversation to include fellow conservatives. >> and david, what is the mission of the environmental defense fund action and how are you funding? >> thank you so much. it's the advocacy partner of the environmental defense fund. it's a world-class environmental nonprofit leading the way and developing policy solutions to take and tackle the world's biggest problems and challenges. everything is guided by science

and economics and we have the core values optimism and pragmatism. that's one of the reasons why despite the fact we are facing extreme weather across the country i feel incredibly optimistic and we are nearing the one-year anniversary of the passage of the biggest climate law that the country and i believe the world has ever seen which i believe is going to be truly transformative in terms of changing the way we get our energy as a nation. >> i want to show both of you this is the recent article by the "washington post." the headline basically says it all. he says we are living through the hottest months on record, scientists say. i will start with you, representative. our fees record high temperatures in july the result of climate change?

>> almost certainly. that's what scientists are telling us. and of course i think we are also starting to be taught by our own experience, experience is an effective teacher it's pretty effective so when the sea water is nearly 100 degrees in key west, i am a guy that grew up in the coast in south carolina. if i were swimming in 100-degree water i would realize something is up. i think that is what we are all finding out is something is up and so back in 2010 it was disbelief about climate change basically. now it's quite different. people are realizing it is real. it's obviously real. that is a current mental block is how to get. >> what do you have to add on this conversation about record

temperatures in july? >> i agree completely with the congressman it's not just uncomfortable and strange but it's also incredibly dangerous. let's zero and off the water temperatures which the congressman already mentioned. what is really terrifying about that is generally speaking as the storm's approach the coast they are supposed to slow down. when we see massive hurricanes, they've accelerated in recent years because the water temperature has driven them to move towards the coast faster increasing the damage that we've experienced and increasing the loss of life and increasing other challenges and concern. there was a study that came out a short while ago that shows anything like the blackouts that they experienced in texas that tens of thousands and perhaps even as many as 100,000 people in the area would potentially

die and that those would be the vulnerable among us, the old, the very young, the poor and those with pre-existing health conditions. so this is truly a matter of life and death and it's beyond just being uncomfortable. it's life-threatening. >> we are talking today about climate change and the effect of extreme weather events and with of the environmental defense fund. i want to go ahead and give you the numbers to call for your questions or comments on climate change. democrats, (202)748-8000, republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. you can also text (202)748-8003. we want to get to your questions

and comments in just a moment's. i want to read to you both this is an article on cbs news. again about these extreme weather events that we've been seeing. a boiling heat and raising floods taken the world by storm in recent weeks. many in dangerous and deadly conditions but it's not a temporary trip of bad luck. it's the beginning of a new and worsening reality. storms are dumping record rain on cities and wildfires ranging across thousands of acres of land are all the impact of an undeniable source, climate change. i want to start with you, david. what are the policy positions that your organization is taking to address climate change and what is the role of government versus the free market in the private sector? >> that is an excellent question

and i think the congressman is probably chomping at the bid too tackle the free-market side. my view is the bill that we passed called the inflation reduction act was intended to use the tax system to create a set of tax incentives, so more carrots and sticks and sort of policy nerd talk, to encourage people and companies to take action that will help us to address the climate crisis. the easiest one of those to understand is the tax credit for electric vehicles, $7,500 for a new electric vehicles and also includes the $4,000 tax credit for the used electric vehicles for the first time ever. american consumers want to these cars. they perform better, they cost less to fix and repair, and they save american consumers los angeles of money. they unfortunately presently cost a little bit more than

those by the internal combustion engine but with these tax credits at a lower cost they make it easier for americans to get into the vehicles and lower their payments on a monthly basis. the article that he was cited as 100% accurate. we are going to be living with the consequences of our inaction for for too long for the foreseeable future and this is unfortunately the new reality and even if we do everything we must do to tackle the climate crisis we will be stuck with a present level of badness for at least a decade before things start to get better. the choice before us isn't can we make things better tomorrow. it's can we stop some of the damage that we have done. >> and back to you, representative. talk about your policy positions on addressing climate change and

again what you think the government should be doing versus the private sector. >> i think what the government should do is apply the tax to chinese imports and imports from any country that doesn't have a similar carbon tax to what we would have. we think that is the most powerful thing to do. of course there are three ways. you can try to regulate emissions but you can't regulate chinese emissions. you can incentivize clean energy, and i agree with david those incentives are going to be powerful for american taxpayers that don't affect the economics of the chinese corporations or other parts of the world because they don't pay american taxes. and so, the reach my to be limited to america which would be great here because if you were as much a asthma cases and

hospitalizations and life expectancy. what we need to do is figure out a way to get the world around this thing and the way to do that is to just tax pollution instead of taxing income. on tax some form of income and if you care as we do as conservatives about the impact of carbon tax because carbon tax by itself hurts poor people, but if you. with a reduction for example in payroll taxes. so you do that but then what you do is you apply to any country that is sending stuff that doesn't have this similar price on the carbon dioxide. if you do that and china of course say that is impermissible

we think they lose that case, and as they do, 24 hours later because you know they do have an amazing way of reaching the consensus in china, they would have the same carbon tax. otherwise they would be paying the tax to our governmental the entry of their goods that they could have collected themselves and the goods would enter the american market with no tax. so 24 hours later because they are pretty efficient, not very fair, but to 24 hours later they have the same carbon tax then the whole world would be seeing the true cost of the burning of fossil fuels and it would be able to the price of everything. it would be more expensive compared to the renewable and clean, but therefore it is cleaner because it doesn't have more there were cheaper because it doesn't have that carbon tax attached to it.

we think that is a way to unleash the power of self-interest and the liberty of people to choose their self-interest. 8 billion people doing that would create innovation very, very fast. >> and again we are speaking with the former u.s. representative bob england with republic en and also david with the environmental defense fund action. we are talking about climate change and the effect of extreme weather events. we want you to call with your comments or questions. the numbers are for democrats, 202-748-8000, republicans, 202-748-8001, independents, 202-748-8002. let's go to the phone lines now. matt is calling from falls church virginia on the

democratic line. go ahead. >> i would like to respond to something the former representative said which is people need to respond to their self-interest and i think the current republican party will not do anything about climate change unless it is in their self-interest. he is correct. i don't think we are going to get any climate change legislation until things get worse. i am a little bit of what we call a tumor. i don't think that we as a country care enough about the problem to do anything about it. i think we are the for all in the boiling pot. it's boiling but we are still floating and we are still going. i ground and its 110 degrees in arizona. people are just living their lives. no one is protesting or going

out on the streets and saying this is not acceptable. the antarctic shelf breaking off. methane gas being released and great numbers. i really want to know for you to answer this question how are you going to convince your party made up of people who seem to be deeply, deeply antiscience who don't believe in the reality of climate change are actively fighting against it by a propaganda and falsehoods. that is my question. >> let's let the representative respond. >> here is the state of play in my part of the party. a guy that has a very short-term

hope and that is he wants to win just one more election. meanwhile, there are other republicans serving the house and the senate that have a longer-term time horizon. they want to be elected in 24, 26, 32, et cetera. and they see particularly young conservatives coming at them saying don't we have a solution to this? it's obviously real. why don't we get with it so there's longer-term horizon republicans that will eventually rise up. that's where i share david's optimism that we are going to act. now meanwhile the scientists are ringing in my ears faster, we don't have time for the demographic change, but that is the situation. we've got other leaders with other horizons but the problem

is they are scared of that short time horizon guy so he is the basically not able to talk about climate change. but here is my hope. he will be gone no matter what by 2026 because when he gets reelected, your lame-duck in the second half of the second term and the world moves on and we will move on surely to say what do we do about climate change let's get together and solve this thing isn't america great enough to solve this challenge that's the question we need to be asking. >> let's take another call. john in georgia, republican line. go ahead. >> if you pull off the average global temperature from the national weather center, you can

see that in the year 2015, that was the highest temperature on record. you can get it from 1875 through last year. it varies each year but we have had hotter years than we've had this year. china produces more carbon dioxide in the united states, india and russia combined. how is it that anything we plan to do is going to affect global temperature if china is on board? india is predicted to have one of the most robust economies by the year 2050. they are not going to get there with renewables. but the most important question is where is our energy going to come from? we can't run this country on renewables. nobody wants to build more power plants, so where is the energy going to come from in order to run the country on and all

society? >> thank you so much. i appreciate the call and the concern. i again go back to the action congress took and the president signed last year passing the inflation reduction act which was the biggest claimant bill that the country has ever seen. the congressman has talked at some length about china and we introduce india as well. both of those are places where the environmental defense fund works and tries to push those governments and societies to be better on climate. i joined relatively recently from the white house and i focused entirely on domestic matters but as i talked to my colleagues that worked internationally, but they shared with me with the common complaint from other countries was that they didn't need to do

anything because the united states was the largest emitter in the world and had never shown leadership on climate. i think the answer to that complaint last year and i think it changes the dynamic not just for the united states but for the rest of the world. other countries throughout the world now no longer have the excuse that they don't need to do anything because we have not done anything and we are also moving to a place where america has inserted herself and determined that we ought to have the global leader in the creation of good paying jobs and clean energy. at the american people know that clean energy out of jobs are coming. it's been a bit of an open question whether or not they were coming to the united states where they would go elsewhere. what we have seen is action taken to do everything in our power to cite the jobs here in the united states so that we can lead the way. that is my best crack at the answer to the question. it may not be satisfactory to

you, but i truly believe that we have asserted american leadership in the way that we never have before and that it will have great repercussions overseas and move us in a more positive direction. >> if i could just jump in and also agree with what david is saying, it is very important work that the defense fund is doing in china and i think that it's going to be effective because the chinese, we've got to assume have a need to act on climate because either if you are a repressive chinese dictator, you might have a spouse and a child, and that a spouse is chewing on your ear saying do something about the air. our son or daughter can't even go outside to play. so we've got to assume that needs to act because they are feeling it in their throats and eyes and you feel the proxies for co2.

they probably feel it even more than we do, so we've got to assume to figure out a way to act. but you are onto something that you've got to make it in their interest and i believe the way to make it is to say listen america is going to act on climate change. we are going to price in the effect of the burning fossil fuel into the price of the products. here in america we will cut taxes somewhere else so we don't grow the government in the process, but china, you are now going to pay that cost when, don't like that, apply your own carbon tax. and in which case you are good to come in without an adjustment. then the world follows. so america is in the position to lead using the strength of our economy and access to that amazing market the whole world wants access to. >> the next caller is marcus in

chicago illinois, independent line. >> good morning. i am so glad that the last caller brought up china and it's becoming quite the theme and a sorry excuse for us not to act on climate. claimant.let me just clear the a little bit. while china emits a lot of carbon, the per capita carbon output is smaller than the per capita carbon output of the united states. they also have over three times the population of the united states and they have been the leader in investing in the renewable energy and they've cleaned up the air much more over the largest cities in the past decade in the united states and even have not done even anything on that matter. a second, when we talk about

what we need to invest in here and where we are going to get our energy from, i think a major, major factor is i think we've got to get away from the focus and the infrastructure here and electrifying and building out the trained networks that are going to get people to reduce the reliance completely because right now all of our infrastructure is carve a stand against the credit for electric cars that is a good thing but we've got to stop producing so many cars where multiple families have multiple cars per household. it's out of necessity right now because we do not have the infrastructure to get to and from, to work and home that we can do that in an effective way.

we need to nationalize. >> i want to give the guest some time to respond. >> i think that he's right we do need to put in context, historical context the emissions. the truth is we've emitted more than anybody else. but we didn't quite know. back when john rockefeller was starting the standard oil, i don't think that he really knew. maybe along the way we got to know but he is correct about the

per capita. we've got some real poverty in china and they are trying to overcome that. the question is how can we all continue to prosper in a world that basically is scowling the nest and so we've got to innovate away from that and i mentioned john d rockefeller. he innovated away from oil and into petroleum. i've got to believe that kind of guy you were still alive and we do still have those kind of people around, he would to be innovating away from what we've got now. the next thing is hydrogen and solar efficiency and batteries.

let's push it and make money on it. we are for that. we think that is really important. we take the definition of sustainability. sustainability means making a profit. if you can't, it's not. so we say that's true. we've got to figure out a way that is practical and actually returns money to people making money serving customers. we think that is the beauty of the capitalistic system and we need to harness the system to deliver innovation faster than the simple sentiment could. >> marcus is onto something. to talk about nationalizing the railroad, i was going to pull out of my chair. that would be out of line with

what i understand to be a forward leaning republican position. i want to focus on a couple of marcus' points. he cited the feet excuse for an american in action being that china is already emitting so much, so what's the point. the other thing that we hear some claims this china is so far out in front of us in the development of battery storage and electric vehicles that we could never catch up. both of those things are fundamentally to seated and i believe in american exceptionalism, the congressman does too and i believe that we should position ourselves to lead as a nation and that we are capable of doing it. and that i think is the best way to tackle both of those sort of history says it excuses for inaction that are offered sometimes that relates to china. >> let's hear from john on the

democratic line. >> caller: good morning. quite a few points brought up. there's a facility creating electric motors and i'm thinking possibly auto conversion would be a good thing but the reason i was calling is that our airline industry is dropping toxins into the atmosphere that are not dealt with and i think that is probably one of the larger problems, not to men the other natural things. >> i agree it's one of the reasons the environmental defense fund is very focused on making sure that we get a sustainable aviation fuel right. we have a real opportunity be for us to transform in a way that that sector of the economy

operates in the type of fuel sources of airplanes that we use for traveling and shipping are working. there is another point that relates to the air travel. at the extreme weather events that we've already talked about have wreaked havoc on the ability to get around causing huge inconveniences for millions and millions of american travelers who had to deal with flight cancellations and have been stranded at airports. let's say for instance you were going to go to disney world. you may have already bought all your passes but you're not spending money in the gift shop and spending money on meals and contributing to economic growth in other ways if you are not able to get there. you are dealing with a costly and probably pretty disappointed kids.

we can't have that, but that's the daily experience millions of americans have worked hard to save up to be able to take a vacation with their family that they've experienced this summer and it's directly related to the climate crisis. >> back to the phone lines. andy, phoenix arizona, republican line. i have a question for your guest. i'm certainly for clean air. i with the cleanest air we can breathe and the cleanest water we can drink. most people would be on board with of that. i think earth is a beautiful thing. i've enjoyed a lot of shows and i don't know how i feel about

climate change. i believe that it could be happening. i just don't know how much of it because years but i have a hard time reconciling. when i watch the shows they have 100,000 years ago different in this region are that and so were they being honest because if that's the case may be we are in some sort of change that occurs in the history it hasn't changed 100,000 years ago this was a tropical region now it is a cold region so just would like to get your thoughts on that. thank you very much and have a great day. >> it is constantly changing it's just in this current period it's pretty clear that we are the changers. there is some of things you

can't control and for example sunspots and tilt of the earth and volcanic activity and things like that. we can't control those but we can control what we do. it's like if you eat well and exercise you increase your well-being but you've got to some genetic things going on, so that's our situation. let's control the things we can control and to be accountable. we think that is a key concept of conservatism. but what i would really suggest is you follow-up and go to the website and look at the about climate change tab and you see this amazing graphic from bloomberg that shows what it could be. maybe it is a fun activity and they plot the temperature rise.

they brought that a line. it's not a tight correlation. it is a correlation that goes right up the temperature rise goes right up. david is an optimist. that is good news actually. that means that we can fix it.

consistent with of the spirit to say roll up your sleeves let's get to work. fix this thing. you got to fix it with government regulation. okay but maybe we could fix it with free enterprise and incentivize the system the right way by bringing accountability and while do things change quickly and get excited about the things otherwise it would be doom and gloom. congratulations young lady. i'm proud of you. but i want to say that we are providing underlining excuses

for problems that were created long ago that we want people out here in the economy to pay for. people left africa because they couldn't stay there. they came to america and when they came they started to shooting rockets and ships in the ozone layer to find it profitability. now people are saying we are not going to survive year, time is running out so what we've got to do is find another so that this way they are able to inhabit our dna because it is different. their veins are green and blue and hours are read.

so when these things start to take a toll on us. they are going to allow their progress to overrule what the majority was going to end up to be for the sake of continuing history. >> we got your point of this morning. we are going to move on to alexander in brooklyn new york on the democratic line. my comments would go back to the arizona caller.

the temperatures are over 110 degrees. the ground is so hot if you fall down on it you can get third-degree burns. you have floods of huge hail and ice going to the northern city. it's a period of warmth they haven't seen in the longest time and in canada they have fires that are causing smoke that is making those have to wear a mask in the weather. the reality is if there is no education for them to look at the science i heard one of the guests say it's about doom and

gloom. we are in doom and gloom. we have to cut emissions by half by 2030. and if we are going to have somewhat somewhat of a modest way of passing through this chaos we are going to pass 2.7 degrees celsius to almost 4 degrees celsius for the sundries over. getting resources on the ground is not going to solve this. a project that is harnessing energy outside of the planet, it already happened and they were already to bring that energy back to a building to be able to get energy. ..

it is going to make us in the worst position in the world for. >> i want to get your response to that call alert saying we have got to own up to the doom and gloom as he calls it. >> we need to educate people, right? i agree we need science education. we also need some solution education. but what ever public.is is one of solution i sound like a psychiatrist but i am not. we don't think we got a solution that sits with our values or our practicalities. therefore we doubt the existence of the problem. it sounds irrational but it is what all this too. here's the plan of surgery for your back problem you're having first were going take your head upward after you take your head off or going to work on your

spine and put your head back on pre-thanks talk of feeling a lot better i don't have a back problem. that is the solution on have a problem. so, what conservatives heard in america is that the un is going to get rid of much loved epa here in america they are going to come here and regulate your very breath. okay, if that is the solution i do not have a problem is with too many conservatives say. what we are going to do is share with not just the science i agree science is crucial. it is very important to share we've got solutions that are practical american solutions that fit with our values and that will really cause the whole world to follow. then people will engage. i agree with the caller education but the science is important. but we sort of start with the solutions and if i could congratulate again with the

department of defense does this very well. david knows it's all about the practicalities of getting these things in place like you just mentioned in the airline industry when people start hearing that we have got practical solutions they can engage. if they feel like there is something they cannot fix like a death and taxes, we just give up. that leads to doom and gloom. we've got to say we can fix this and then show some practical solutions and people can engage. that is when we look at action. >> we've spent a lot of time talk about carbon dioxide we have not talked about methane. methane is a super pollutant. it is a gas that contributes to global warming a perhaps a rate 80 times as high as co2. what the congressman i think will like part of the inflation reduction act was passed last

years of market based solution on methane edf was proud to support and the reduction program which establishes a price on methane admissions companies that admit it. we try to rein in so-called routine flaring. producers of natural gas to burn off excess gas into the atmosphere which contributes to climate change and to admissions. the last two colors of focus on solutions outside of our planet. most of our focus is on solutions on our planet. next year will want something called methane which is going to take pictures from space that it representation of where methane emissions are happening here on earth. so that we can arrange that in.

are mostly focused the congress and i solutions on this planet only when we know if not to center lifetimes but our kids lifetimes and her kids kids lifetimes that will probably remain to be the case. i am proud to share edf is not limited to just thinking about our global borders. launching a satellite into space to get take pictures of earth to get a better sense of how we are admitting pollutions. >> if i could just jump in there and say that's a really important thing methane satellite. it is so significant to know, according to the economists in the last year based on the price of natural gas, it is economic to fix every leak in any pipeline. and so if that satellite can come over and say hey, you aren't leaking over there, it becomes a really good friend to

that leaker. if i plug that leak i can sell it at the end of my pipe here. that is the kind of solution that makes people say we're being really practical here we are helping to show your leaking over here, go fix it because you probably want to sell it to a customer at the end of the line who's going to use it to cook their dinner or whatever. it's a great example of a very practical solution that's going to help people say okay we have got things to fix this. it's not death and taxes. it is something we can affect. let us go back to the phone lines calling from california, denise is on the republican line. >> yes i'd like to have as much time as you give it other colors. i like to ask these two judgment how stupid they think the american people are? there patents out whether

engineering for 60 years or more. university about putting particles in the sky that's making the sun hotter and different. it's coming got into our air were bringing that in the fires. you do not report how many of them are from arson they burn hotter because of the medical particles there it emitting and to our skies. this is a power grab he think were stupid to give up our rights. they are already draining all of our armament setting all of our money to ukraine or ammunition to ukraine. how many are there supposed to be because we are having millions of illegal americans coming through our country that are military men where are they going to get jobs from? you guys are already trying to take control of our energy, our food, our water.

does anybody think these people give a crab about our planet, our future? you are a complete moron this is eight money and power grab. >> okay denise you made your point i'm going to go back to you representative. she represents what we hear from some conservative voters. as you can tell she was very adamant about her position this is all a graft. >> yes and i can understand we all face a little bit of the hypocrisy, right? it's the activists flying around in corporate jets in the big houses and their heated pools. we have got to serve a different take on that. if you want to have a heated pool we say go ahead. just pay the full cost of it. and once you figure out what you are paying the full cost of heating that pool in generate

washington d.c. and you will probably drain it until may or june. so it just bring accountability and let freedom take over. i would also like to sort of identify with denise i remember going to my had not gotten the memo in advance. i stepped out in my seat and thought what are we talking about here? i leaned over to my good friend a former member of congress from washington state a democrat who chaired the committee and he said just play alone, play along. i said okay i will try to hang in here with this. what had struck be as we are doing an experiment and we are in the petri dish. but if it gets a desperate thato it got to do. i can identify with what denise is saying it is a wild to think about blasting our artillery

shells into the air reflecting sunlight hopefully we don't have to get to that, right? i do agree we probably need some research on that to figure it out. but no one is doing it yet. let's do be careful about that. if there are things we can do short of that so we do not have to experiment and sit in the petri dish altogether. >> david, i want to ask you again what can people who identify with more progressive ideologies, is there anything you think your site can do to address what you hear from conservatives it may be very skeptical of discussions about climate change and how to address it? quick look, this not a whole lot we can do to change denise's mind. her views are pretty well formed. i'm still relatively new to the action i spent a lot of times on political campaign. what i learned knocking doors

for presidential candidate in iowa star two kinds of people in the world the people who are persuadable and there are people who are not. if you find someone who is not persuadable you should probably move on by the next folk. the work the congressman and what they are doing to try to move republicans in an authentically better direction on climate is commendable. we're not your stalking two democrats are talking to independents and republicans as well encouraging as many folks who agree with us or see a need for solutions here on earth to come and join us. you can enjoy pdf actually going to edf action.org/join us. i did it yesterday to sort of test and see whether this is trooper you can probably do it in 15 seconds, it takes no time at all will give you a lot more information about what's happening in the planet ways you control up your sleeves and contribute to solutions.

>> alright the next color is it rochester, new york. robin on the independent line. >> yes, hi. two quick things about the relation between recycling and climate change. what is the real truth behind recycling classic? we have stories about countries that really taken plastic recycling. they don't really recycle a lot of plastic. also, if recycling is truly going to have a big positive effect on climate change, i do not see a lot of advertising about jobs and recycling versus jobs and solar power and wind power those are my two questions per. >> i can take the first stab at this one. i think it's important to know her plastic comes from. it is a byproduct of fossil

fuels. single use plastic is no good for our planet. recycling plastic is better than just putting it in the landfill somewhere, where it fills up more energy it more cot is required to produce more of it. so is recycling a good thing? absolutely. we use less things that require recycling? yes we should. >> another caller marion is in grovetown georgia, democratic lied what is your question or comment? quick thank you for taking my call. i was thinking of solutions you are talking about solutions for the fossil fuel industry gets a billions and billions in subsidies and said they didn't know be like 1250 a gallon of gas. if we did stop the subsidies and then gas went up that hi, wouldn't that be an incentive for our brilliant scientist to

come up with may be some really good ideas of how to combat climate change? also, to the republican representative, i think you lose credibility when it seems like republicans always come out like for climate change or whatever after they leave office. they do not seem to be -- -- itseems like they're alwaysg sort of when they leave office they start seeming more reasonable bid that is a concern to me that could lose your credibility. thank you. >> i'll let you start representative. we have seen it on the campaign trail, and congress, republicans are not talking about climate change the ones are currently in office or running for president the way you are. why is that? works well it's back to being afraid of the one guy who has a very short time horizon was to eke out just one more victory.

he will blast you. he asserted the angel of death. he cannot help you win a primary or general election but he can kill you so he's the angel of death. and so that makes it pretty scary for those folks to speak out of line. it's sort of interesting to think of the history of this bread think about this. first of all i should say my first six years in congress i said climate change was nonsense. i did anything about it just al gore was for and i represent a very conservative district in self-care that's pretty ignorant but that's who it was my first six years. out of congress six years, ran again my son came to me and said dad you need to change it went to antarctica with the science committee so the evidence, got ins hired by the scientist and n another science committee trip.

and then became the sky that is concerned about climate and that worked fine i was running again in 2004, 2006 was fine, 2008 global financial crisis. it's really interesting to remember that early 2008 newt gingrich a former republican speaker, on the couch with nancy pelosi, we do not agree on much, do we new question of note that we agree climate change is real we need to do something about that's early 2008. at the end of 2008 new head switch we don't know he said. that is what we call the decade of disastrous disputation started with the good news is the decade ended in 2018. i think it dawned on people at kevin mccarthy who could not win suburban districts with a retro position on climate change. until people like kevin the longer time horizon people are trying to change the party toward addressing things like climate change. because like i said earlier they

want to win successive elections not just one more election in mind. that is where we are stuck. the caller is right to say people in my party a little hesitant to talk about claimant. that despite we think we've got to go on the ground to help them to build a constituency. most politicians follow, they do not lead we need to build a constituency and they will lead that constituency because the problem is obvious. >> we are going to let that be the final word former representative bob is executive director of advocacy group republic ian. and david president of the environmental defense action fund. thank you both for joining us this morning.

think for a senator to come to the fortress paper working on annual defense built note as the national authorization act geordie leader chuck schumer said he hoped to pass the bill before the august recess. live coverage on the senate here on cspan2. i want to thank my colleagues for the good work on the ac of your prayer productive last week. i hope this week can be equally so. to date we will begin our work by holding two floor votes one on senators cornyn and casey's outbound investment screen amendment. i meant about on the farmland

amendment. both of these amendments have been in the works for months. i intend to vote in their favor. i urge my colleagues to do so as well. their concerns on both sides of sides ofthe ozone the text in bh amendments courting casey rounds chester and i are all committed to working through these concerns in the conference process. tomorrow we will work vote on onthe warnock amendment to designed to halt harassment of our service members again i appreciate the cooperation of senators on both sides as we work to lock in these votes. today and tomorrow leader mcconnell, chert reed, ranking member wicker and i will also work on assembling a second manager's package of amendments. i hope this effort is successful. it will require everyone to work together. we cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the good break and currently we are also keep

working on additional floor votes that we might need to finish the nda this week we have a chance to show the american people that the senate can work productively and are national defense in stark contrast to the partisan race to the bottom that we saw over in the house. the work is not finished yet. we are going to keep negotiating a path forward. the senate will continue working on the nda until the job is done for think both sides for their efforts. now on other senate business as we move forward with the nda here on the floor, appropriators also continued working in committee. last week the appropriations committee marked up and approved three more bills and this week they will hold another markup on thursday. just like the nda i am proud to say the appropriations process has been largely bipartisan. precisely as it should be.

finally, it was so much going on this week i want to remind my colleagues we will be holding our third all centers briefing on ai following up on our classified briefing earlier this month. i think all of my colleagues are making the time to attend these ai briefings. today i also wish to recognize the efforts of the judiciary committee which this afternoon is holding its own hearing on ai regulation. they join the work of many other committees that have moved quickly this year to begin focusing on ai in a very serious way. the senate will continued ramping up our focus on ai policy when we begin hosting or insight forms later this fall. once again thank you to my colleagues for the good work on this pressing matter. now, on the ira and one year anniversary, mr. president, we are approaching the one-year anniversary of the passage of the inflation reduction act.

the inflation reduction act known as the ira was one of the most consequential pieces of legislation passed in decades. and in just one year it's already paying huge dividends with the american people, for our economy and for our environment. since we passed the inflation reduction act costs are down for families. for the first time ever we made it possible for medicare to negotiate the price of prescription drugs. a cap on out-of-pocket drug spending for seniors is just a few months away. no one will pay more than $2000 a year for expensive drugs that they need to save their lives. and of course, after a lot of hard work we also kept the price of insulin for seniors on medicare to $35. only $35 a month. sinc lilly and norvell

have also lowered insulin costs for everybody. we hope to build on all of this work with additional legislation later this year. every american deserves to have affordable insulin. not just those on medicare but let's not forget the patents for insulin expired a long time ago, was invented in 1921 or 22 i believe it was a canadian inventor who sold the patent for only a dollar. there is no, no need to have insulin at the exorbitant high price that it is for those not on medicare. the inflation reduction act has also helped countless americans manage their energy costs. the tax credits and rebates on energy efficiency or helping americans keep their homes. and to keep their homes warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer but all at a more affordable price while at the same time reducing our carbon emissions. a few weeks ago we saw that inflation slowed down to just

3%, the lowest it has been in over two years. in fact, since we passed the inflation reduction act, inflation has been cut by more than half on annual basis. a way to growth is still continuing to grow. it is now significantly above inflation. meeting workers are taking home more while spending less. that's the economy that america needs. and of course the ira is paving the way for millions, millions of new good paying green jobs. the ira produced a boom in the clean energy investment. with nearly 80 new clean energy manufacturing facilities in else across the country. when you put it all together, inflation reduction act is a shining example of the democratic agenda and action. lower cost for families, higher wages for workers millions, millions of new good paying jobs

for years to come. democrats are proud of the progress we have made in implementing our agenda and will keep working until every american feels the benefits. and finally, on a sad anniversary, yesterday mr. president mark 25 years since detective jon gibson and officer jacob of the capitol police were killed in the line of duty while defending the capitol building. it was a dark day in the history of the capitol. it would have been even darker if not for the heroics of detective gibson and officer chester. the face of grave danger, they acted with extreme valor encourage undoubtedly saving the lives of many others in the building that day. we are grateful for their sacrifice 25 years ago. grateful for the work the capitol police do every day to keep the capitol complex and cad those who work here safe.

we pray that their families have some degree of peace even though they have huge holes in their heart with these terrible losses. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. park city to begin my remarks today by acknowledging to solemn anniversaries. yesterday it marked 25 years since a deranged gunman shatter the call of a summer afternoon here at the capitol. twenty-five years since two brave officers of the united states capitol police officer jacob joseph chestnut and detective jon michael gibson paid the ultimate price to keep us safe.

the senseless tragedy of july 24, 1998 robbed two families of beloved husbands and fathers. deprive fellow officers of votive colleagues and friends. that day the sacrifice of officer justin and detective gibson saved lives. they protected the lawmakers and staff who come here to work, the tourists who come here to encounter the heart of our democracy, and the institutions of congress themselves. they reminded an entire nation of the vital service the men and women of the capitol police render honorably every day. time it will not heal the pain of losing these fine men.

but in a special way today, i know my colleagues join me in extending our sympathies to the families of jacob chestnut and jon gibson into their comrades of the capitol police. america will never forget their service and sacrifice. now it tomorrow will mark a one year since the brave people of eastern kentucky endured some of the worst flooding in the commonwealth's history. the rains, rising waters cause mass excavations in over 40 deaths. including a number of children. rhodes turned to rapids. neighborhood swept away overnight. and families were left stranded in communities like lost creek where i stood with mayor laura thomas, not a single home was

left untouched. from lost creek to communities and counties like pike and ledger. i saw similar scenes of devastation and heard the painful stories of families displaced by the floods. but in the face of devastation, kentucky's first responders rushed to help neighbors and in their time of need. as the full scope of the disaster became clear, i worked with leaders to cut through red tape and encourage a rapid federal response. i made sure eastern kentucky received big investments in recovery. and local leaders got more autonomy to restore communities, rebuild homes, and revitalize the economy. plasterers tragedy in kentucky

today there is still work to be done. but kentuckians are resilient. we rise up to the big challenges and i will continue to work with folks in eastern kentucky to break build our communities back even stronger than before. on an entirely different matter, republicans -- make democrats on the judiciary committee spent last thursday considering the best way to reach from article one of the constitution into article three until a coequal branch of government how to conduct its business. the pretext for this latest chapter of the war of the institution of the supreme court was quote ethics and transparency." they had a supposedly urgent

legislative bone to pick with justices who take vacations and publish children's books. but for all of our colleagues heartburn but that will not reliably affirm their political preferences, for all of the baseless commotion about undue influence, senate democrats have proven themselves to be quite thoroughly influenced by the far left most notorious dark of many advocates and discredited cause. here are some of the recent marching orders our colleagues have received from the activist left. quote start taking on the court rhetorically as a political villain." quote we would like to amplify anyone who uses this corruption widget is med messaging quote. restrain maga justices

immediately. quotes, rip the veil off. well, mr. president senate democrats have beautifully followed their orders. in their words the supreme court is quote maga captured. we have a quote stilted illegitimate court. quote we need to expand the court. one senator let the cat out of the bag and saying this suppose it ethics inquiry is just a predicate to court packing quote i don't think we should foreclose on that in an amendment. our colleagues understand what the far left expects of them. they know their party space has long since discarded any desire to achieve its goals from within

our institution. so it last week they rammed a blatant power grab through the judiciary committee as part of their effort to tear down a branch of government that they do not control. welcome senate republicans are going to keep fighting this dangerous campaign every step of the way and in the meantime our nation's highest court should continue to pay it no mind. now, on one final matter rushers of violence to get civil infrastructure in ukraine continues. but the consequences of this unilateral disruption extends far beyond ukraine's borders. a week has passed since putin pulled out of the agreement that allowed critical ukrainian grain

shipments to the black sea unharmed. but already russia has expanded from threatening vessels, curing the world screens of life attacking grain storage in odesa and other coastal cities. yesterday's attacks are the latest in a wave of violence in its agricultural infrastructure that will punish the world's poorest and hungriest nation. leaders in the developing world have hesitated to cast blame in this conflict to take a careful look at russia's unprovoked behavior. russia has not limited its nonmilitary targets to grain supplies. on sunday, russia struck odesa. the largest orthodox cathedral with the deadly missile barrage. so much for russian propaganda efforts to present the kremlin

as a defender of the faithful. of course putin, like a soviet predecessors has already so much to corrupt and control the russian orthodox church we should not be surprised by his disrespect for religious institutions. so let's be very clear. a regime that exploits clerks as propagandists and agents of influence and destroys historic houses of worship is not a friend to believers. now, as ukraine's counteroffensive make slow progress, the united states and our allies can be sure of a few things. first, the missions we've sent them including the cluster munitions that are now hammering russia positions in occupied

ukraine. second, at every step of the way the bite administration is a decision and an action has meant certain capabilities have arrived late to the battlefield. and a third, additional long-range fires would help ukraine put russian invaders on the back foot as our friends already demonstrated by successfully using british storm shadow cruise missiles. to the biden administration is to start moving at the speed of relevance. the speed of relevance give our friends in ukraine the lethal tools they need to finish the fight. for our part as we work to provide for the common defense, the senate must invest in a defense industrial base that can sustain america's support for

ukraine while equipping our own forces to deter further threats for russia and china.

waiting for a senator to come to the floor just be by today lawmakers continue their work on the annual defense bill known as the national defense authorization act, majority leader chuck schumer said he hopes the pass the bill before the august recess. live coverage here on cspan2. [background noises] hey everybody thanks for coming out, thank you.

[inaudible conversations] >> thank you for being here today. thank you for adam and her freedom works for putting on this press conference today. there's no greater response for the house of representatives has but to manage and control the nation's finances, the ability to meet the obligations to properly fund our government when necessary and only when necessary on the greatest reflection where the people are politically's house of representatives. it is proportion across the country but each person across the country equally represented by their member of congress. the american people gave us the majority back in november because we ran on fiscal responsibility. we ran on combating the biting

agenda. we ran against the reckless spending, the unprecedented amount of spending for the first time in the history of the country, $10 trillion of new government spending of the first two years of administration. now a record $32 trillion in national debt. approximate wondered thousand dollars per american citizen. we will spend this year about $20000 per american citizen. only about 15% of which pre-only about $3000 per citizen of which will be for the primary responsibility of the federal government which safety and security of the nation. and back in january when the new congress formed, we voted and a speaker there was an agreement to go back to pre-covid level spending for nondiscretionary nondiscretionaryspending this rn majority was united for the first five months of the year passing strong legislation that is what they gave us to pass

republican legislation to reverse the harmful policies of the bided, schumer, then policy agenda barely passed the limit which is a significant towards had a lot of good components to it the hr to border bill much of the bided reckless woke agenda disarming the country. but the fiscal responsibility the failed responsibility act but we failed the american people. with the fra which essentially kept in place all the bided spending. with one half years of congress. however, it was said by leadership at that time we will use the appropriation process that the fra was the ceiling not the floor. we would go back to pre-covid level spending for nondefensive discretionary. we are calling on republicans to

that very thing. there are some republicans in the house who do not want to cut spending. worse yet, many republicans in the senate want to actually increase spending. but we are committed to using every tool at our disposal to going back to 1.47 went up recovered level spending for nondefense discretionary allowed defense to state the current levels. my colleagues behind us and friends at freedom works are united in doing that the republican approach and appropriations ought to submit reversing the reckless, harmful dangerous of the bite administration. fiscal responsibility. i'm proud to stand here with my colleagues i'm proud to stand with our friends at freedom works and i will turn it over too adam for freedom works he will introduce the next house at freedom caucus speaker. thank you brandon. [applause] adam brandon i am the present freedom works i thank you all

for joining today. we are here bringing our activist and activist be brought in swing districts. the reason we are trying to bring people in from the swing districts is this is a big issue that not just a conservative issue or a republican issue. we are heading to $50 trillion in debt in the next 10 years. so $38 trillion she might look at this at some point it's the beginning of the spending fight per would not talk about entitlements yet were just talking about making some steps the first steps a few talked with the greatest threat in the united states was not russia, was not china, it was the debt and deficit our spending. we are proud our activists with after the judgment are done speaking here they're going to visit with their congressmen to say we are just at the very beginning with these folks are asking for is very reasonable. these are the first steps to get our fiscal house in order. we intend to be involved in this

wave of the fight in future waves because this is the future years to come. for done kicking the can down the road. we are running out of room for this is a wake-up call 30 trillion in debt were going to pay more in interest that we do a defense. that is going to turn over too congressman norman. please take it away, thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you adam what a privilege and honor it is to be your pre-want to thank freedom works at all the patriots we met with last night that have been active in this fight. folks, i will tell you this is a fight for the freedom of america. this is the heart and soul of america the economic security is national security. i am tired of hearing it will be next year. or this affects five years down the road. as adam said, we are approaching $50 trillion in debt. it is going to be more so as time goes on the interest will exceed the defense budget i will

say it when you add social security, medicare, medicaid to it we are far greater than the 32 we been talking about. these spending since 2018 has increased 33%, folks that is not acceptable it is unacceptable. imagine we are trying to get the taxpayers back money we are trying to redirect funds. there is no reason in the world with our military budget we ought to be spending on awoke programs. we stopped that we have got to stop that there is no reason in the world we ought to be putting money into it fbi bill if you want to stop a program cut the funding and that is what you're seeing the patriots behind me in the house of freedom caucus willing to do because folks, if we don't do it now tell me when? i am just excited we are addressing it now. we have got 16 days left to get the appropriations bill out for the next budget cycle which is

october 1. we are out in august but hopefully we are going to address it and as been said we want 22 levels we want no rescissions no smoking minutes for the american people folks istime to present a budget that trims the facts, goes to programs that will defend and protect this country. we ought to be spending money for ships, for planes, for cybersecurity not for transgender surgeries. not for puberty blockers. not for the awoke programs diversity equity inclusion. folks, we are voting on today should not be a social experiment and that's of the programs have become to be. we are going to call in the next 60 days you will see it play out or we examine all 12 appropriation bills but the american people decide if we are being unreasonable for the problem with washington d.c. the reason is broken is every dollar

spent is that an advocate for the problem is we didn't advocate for the american taxpayer that is all we want to do. and now my pleasure to introduce matt rosendale. [applause] >> hello, thank you everybody for coming out today. basically what we are going to watch over the next several weeks as the house of representatives going to keep their word? will we pay earlier this you made a commitment to the american people we are going to reduce spending. we were going to freeze the spending levels. we were going to make sure we removed all of the awoke spending programs that the biden administration has put forward over the last couple of years out of spending. because that is what the american people sent us forward to do. the only way were going to be able to make sure we do that is if we see all 12 of these appropriation bills totaled seven out the total spending is.

the leadership believes are going to build trickle these out to at the time, 3a week, for a week that's not going to be feasible because we will never be able to see of the total spending is until the very ends. and then we try to uphold our commitment, our word to the american people that we will not push spending beyond the $1.471 trillion for nondefense discretionary. we had one piece of legislation left that we have to try to make it 50, 60, $70 billion that is not going to be acceptable. whom see all 12 of the appropriation bills. we went leadership to uphold their end of the deal that weighed 218 members of a congress that voted to curb spending, to rein in spending and actually get the job done. heard the minority leader speak last week we passed the national defense authorization act. he said you know, this is a woefully irresponsible. it is a woefully irresponsible.

it was a woefully irresponsible what they have been doing for the last two decades. they have gutted out our military and then they wonder why is a sit in the rooms look at each other and see why is the recruitment number sound across the board? that is why because the brave young men and women that have the ability and desire to defend our country are concerned about the people that are actually running the enterprise the mechanism that's going to help them do that. what you will see is who is going to stand up for the advocates, for the regular people across this nation? that is what you will see over the next couple of weeks. i am pleased to be here with all of them i now i like to introduce my good friend from the great state of texas. >> thank you mats. so i am from texas it's finally getting warm enough we can hold a press conference today. [laughter] i am proud to stand with the

members behind me. they are all members of the 20, back in january we said we are going to change the culture of congress. we are still at it today because make no mistake, what you are going to hear is these cuts are draconian. folks we are talking about less than, less than 2% of all spend this government will do the next year. less than 2%. you are going to hear that we have made rescissions to get down to the number you heard the 1.471. within those rescissions are going to be added back later, watch for. that should not happen but if we go down to 1.471 we stay there because that was the agreement in january. watch for it. i'm proud to introduce my friend member of congress andy. [applause] >> good morning or afternoon it's hot out here so i will be

brief. i first want to thank freedom works are standing with us. for taking a stand. for being an advocate. why think about $32.6 trillion worth of debt we are racing towards $50 trillion worth of debt i liken our economy to the titanic. we are on a course and there is a collision ahead. it is a big ship that turns slowly. if we course correct today we can avoid the disaster that lies ahead. the current path of trajectory we are on is unsustainable. we owe it to the american people to make cuts. otherwise, like the titanic this will end in catastrophe, thank you. [applause] >> hello everyone andy biggs from arizona fifth congressional district. first of all thank you to adam branded the folks in freedom

works who out here. who constantly work on behalf of the american people i encourage all similar groups, get involved. let your voices be heard. that is with this great country is about its governed by the people. i also think my colleagues from that freedom caucused behind me and those were with this in the 20 and also think some of the members of the immediate. [laughter] no, i think all of you for being here today. it is warm, it is humid. i come from arizona it's a dry heat out there i can tell you that. [laughter] so, let's talk about what this means. even if you move to the 2022 levels of spending for discretionary funding or nonmilitary spending. that $1.8 trillion in spending will be borrowed. every penny of that will be borrowed. so you are looking at $32 trillion of national debt today. a year from now it will be in

excess of 34 and a half trillion dollars because as we finish out the fiscal year end move on. that is what you're looking at the national debt. which is a threat to our national security for many reasons. i encourage my colleagues to join me and i call upon the speaker to bring my built the national debt is a security threat to the poor. more and national debt ladies and gentlemen. that is why i have staunchly encouraged us to go back to 2019 non- excuse me discretionary levels across the board. wouldn't it be nice if just for three months or six months we did not spend more than he brought in every month? but on average we spend about whether 25 billion more every month that we bring in and revenue. that is even only had record

revenue is not a revenue problem here is a spending problem. the only way we get it under control is to have the courage to say 2019 pre-covered nobody was saying g we are underfunded were too small as the federal government no one was saying that. so why not get back to 2019 levels? well, i thank you for being here. we are sounding a warning call culprit we are reminding our leadership you need the votes and we are begging our leadership, listen to us. too not take us on a further irresponsible spending path and tell us i want to use the dog in the reigning thing, met the representative tells of do not tell us it's raining but it's not. don't tell us it's raining it's not rain let's have the truth, let's be honest. let's allow participation by the

american people but also their elected representatives, all of us. thanks for being there when you keep fighting and will take a few questions now. yes, sir. >> thank you congressman. just 15 more days before the end of the fiscal year are you concerned will lead to a government shutdown? given it is controlled by democrats do you believe your version of this bill is any chance of being enacted? >> we call a compound question back in my previous life. let me answer at the end. i do not believe you're looking at a government shutdown. i think we will be looking at think representative good and rosendale and other solution you will see some aspects, some of the 12 appropriation bills come out and then you'll see a short-term continuing resolution to continue spending. i am not worried about a government shutdown at this point. i think they will continue on

and try to run it out until december to be honest with you for that is my own perspective i know i'm not speaking for everyone else. >> i would add to that, we should not fear a government shutdown but most of what we do appears bad anyway. most of what we do appear hurts the american people we do stuff to the american people by promising to do things for the american people, essential operations continue. 85% mr. baker just gave me the number most of the american people would not even miss it if the government shutdown temporarily. our speaker has the opportunity to be a transformational historical speaker that stared down the democrats but stare down the front free spenders that stared on the president said no we are going through ate american people elected us to do the house is going to say no or going to pass a good republican bill out of the house force the senate and the white house to accept it or were not going to move forward what would happen if republicans for once stared

down the democrats and refused to cave in to betray the american people in the trust they put in us we do not fear government shutdown. i have a question. [inaudible] you mentioned you see the total amount. do you believe leadership to try to force the road the last minute? >> it may be you have to ask them that for what i will tie was we are united on the belief that we have to see with the entire cost is before we can start working on individual pieces of it. because again he will be left with a very small piece of that pie that we might have to take a lot of spending out of parts of the best way, the most reasonable and smartest way to handle it is to look at all 12 bills together so we can to the total spending is to make sure we are 1.471 progress you requested that they have not complied? >> we have not been denied that

yet. that's were going to see play out over i was in the next week is whether going to book all the bills together. >> yes. [inaudible] cooksey question is will we support the egg bills coming to the floor this week. we have not even seen what's in there i do not believe they are drafted yet we need to see what's in their pruning to know what's in that we need 72 hours they promised to give us on every bill and be able to read those and digest them before making a decision on that. [inaudible] can you run down from your vantage point. [inaudible] >> the question is me per se won't speak for anyone else. i think the low hanging fruit is

secretary mayorkas. i will not get into that. with the evidence we have deduced in the oversight committee and judiciary committee with regard to the biden what i would call the crime syndicate i do not know what else you can call it. the corruption that is there would certainly be very interesting perhaps even necessary step. i would say we probably should, before we talk about impeachment move on to impeachment inquiry to get more teeth into our investigations and allow us to expand and broaden those investigations to bring more witnesses. bring in more evidence i will decide the evidence i have seen is overwhelming. it would lead one to believe our sitting president is corrupted and compromise, next question. proximate tell you this to it's all the above. look at the evidence that we have.

we hadn't had hearings before the republicans took over in january. one. the present is the head of the free world but looks like this guy has done forget the damage she's doing to this country while he is in office. but the money he has accepted it appears what his son has been involved in fess up paid to play i don't know what it is. let the evidence lead is there be people ask all the time were the consequences? hillary clinton with all these hearings where the consequences question with the same thing now there's gonna be consequences. and i realize the replacement for joe biden is probably giggling somewhere now. she is not an alternative but there's got to be consequences it starts with the head of this country. last question. [inaudible] 's i would not support that personally do not know thrust my colleagues. [inaudible]

look, they promised us 12 bills. they are going to try to push through to this week i understand why the need to push through two. we have not seen the language they promised 72 hours. they need to deliver on that as well. the reality is my biggest concern is there going to cram through a couple minibuses and cr you are in for a world of further be a lot of pressure to do something particularly onerous there very comfortable to do let's not forget chuck schumer and mitch mcconnell are very comfortable doing omnibus bills late in the year. we will see how we strategize that later on. >> thank you all for being here we are done thank you. [applause] [inaudible] schumer: madam pres.

the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed with. no quorum, okay. i ask unanimous consent that the foreign relations committee be discharged from further consideration and the senate now proceed to h. con. res. 57. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: h. con. res. 57, expressing the sense of congress supporting the state of israel. the presiding officer: without objection, the committee is discharged. and the senate will proceed. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to consideration of s. res. 308 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 308, recognizing the historic significance of the 30th anniversary of the founding of the department of defense state partnership program. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 309 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 309, recognizing the importance of the blueberry industry to the united states and designating july 2023 as national blueberry month. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate proceed. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be

agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on wednesday you july 26, that foulage the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved, upon conclusion of the morning business, the senate resume consideration of s. 2226, further, at 12:15 p.m., the senate vote on the warnock amendment number 199, add under the priess order, that the senate recess following the vote on the warnock amendment until 2:15 to allow for the weekly caucus meetings. finally you that the senate recess from 3:00 4:00 to allow for the all-senators briefing. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: if there is to further business before the senate, i ask that it stand

adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until the u.s. senate today continued work on the annual defense bill. known as the national defense authorization act or nda. lawmakers are expected to vote on more an amendment to the 2024 defense programs policy bill throughout the week. followed by a vote on its final passage. watch live coverage of the senate next returns here on cspan2. >> if you ever 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 you to interesting and newsworthy highlights. these are points of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit

play unselect videos this timeline makes it easier 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. homeland security secretary mayorkas will discuss immigration and border security of your some republicans of call for his impeachment. watch his testimony before the houseudiciary committee wednesday morning at 10 eastern on c-span three. c-span now are freed mobile video app or online at c-span.org. ♪ c-span issue unfiltered view of government print funded by these television companies and more including comcast. >> are you thinking this is just a community center? it is way more than that. comcast's part with 1000 committee centers to create wi-fi enabled so students with low income families can get the tools they need to be ready for anything.

comcast support c-spa as a public service. along with these other television providers appeared giving you a front row seat to democracy. president biden signed a proclamation to designate a national monument to commemorate emmett till. a 14-year-old african-american boy who was killed after being accused of offending a white woman in 1955. the monument will also honor emmett's mother who played a key role in the civil rights movement. and will feature sites in his home state of illinois and mississippi where he was murdered. during the signing ceremony president biden and vice president harris spoke out against what they called attempts to bury history.