valuable for narrowing down. search, click and play on the cspan video library at cspan.org. >> can anyone tell me from what country? syria, any other country? seth. russia. any other countries steven.

eritrea. that's correct. thank you. so there are traveling very long distances tozv find refuge in europe. there's this map. i'm going to distance themselves in order to le safe. so no more traveling alone, others are traveling as part of family units.÷ú some are traveling in search of economic opportunity. others are literally fleeing for their life to escaped8 war, rap and force subscription into army's. the vast majority of the refugees, that's÷ú too many lat. why they're fleeing.p okay. thank you.pv:÷úv:

meredith? within our immigration bureaucracy, over the course of the semester we've discussed some of those. today, we're going to discuss two additional, the refugee and asylum. as you know from your class reading, americans have usedsthe word refugee throughout the 19th and 20th clen tri why did it range you going that way. during the mid 19 century, for example, they referred to the german laying the double illusion in europe as refugees.

in 1865, as part of the post civil war reconstruction, the federal government established an agency known as the children of refugee frequency. and during the mexican revolution of 1910-1920 an estimated÷ú one million people several in the southwestern united states. american journalists and politicians commonly referred t% these people as refugees. there are many other historic examples that we can point to. we have used the term refugee over and over again throughout american immigration history. however, today, refugee has a very precise legal meaning about legal meaning has developed over the last 60 years as we look into today's class. we don't see a distinct refew gee policy until theu! -- refug

policy until the end of the world war two. refugee relief act. and through these two programs, the federal government allowsht roughly 600,000 europeans to innovate until the eye -- because it was deemed in the÷ú national interest. can anyone tell me what truman would have deemed it in the national -- and place person. we are lost in the cold war with the soviet union. we're battling for the hearts and minds. this is a way of signaling to

the rest of the world our humanitarian commitment. any other reason why we should truly press.÷ú jooir post war economic at the end of the war, there were an estimated 10e million people left homeless and in some cases stateless, 5th in europe alone. truman wanted to akwom date a greater share, in order to assist your post recovery as was cut out. financial aid was not enough. theunited states had a world law by grags. and yet coop resisted, even fully aware of the horrors of the nazi death camp.

congress resisted. can anyone tell me why swoufb so essential at this time. . well bear in mind at this moment sometimes, everything is still in myplace. so admitting people outside of the national or yes or nos, quote t. as highly expected. it existed on capitol hill. when this persons act finally passed, it passed three years after the war and hadzv excess. >> even though president truman goes going to ÷úat. >> he was -- because he felt that was "system" american sense of justice. in the end she÷ú signed the

legislation because you want to be able to assess from the -- even though it was not -- the bill thasú you were looking for. so why did he consider this to be inconsistent. holy inconsistent. because÷ú the war -- it came ou of congress put so many restrictions on who could be one. and germany for example and you have to have lived there by 1945. i'm just excludedp -- the law ws amended two years later in 1950. by august ofu! 1952 of the europeans that were brought in -- only 80,000 of them werep jewish refugees. the majority of them were making peace to the majority -- were

minus. president eisenhower alsou! believes that much more had to be done to assist the countries of western europe, countries that were so economically recovering from the war. and, now, okay, going to be additional burden of thousands of refugees that were fleeing the newly emerginght communist countries and moving into western europe. this time congress responded÷ú with the refugee release act of 1953. this act was 214,000 visas over the next two years to quote refugees.p yoet b÷únurd.

srefugee policy became a tool. it was a way of assisting those who were fleeing communism. betç because the people who are fleeing communism don't look or say there was a great deal of suspicious in the united states. among the americans about whether these individuals were truly democracy loving, freedom loving individuals. so tho who came from communist countries tend to be heavily screened because of americans here of sponsoring -- to the

deal with a number of cry tierian fights.÷ú in 1956, socialists revolutions and hundred drink of the decision so so -- aym then of t soviet union, within days had the soviet clamped gown, hundreds of thousands can fled into÷ú organizing waivering. some 200 hungaryian refew yi, eventually took it in austria alone. to accommodate the refugees. the eisenhower used a -- walter% known as the parole of stories, which allows the attorney general to parole people into

the united states without a visa and i'll -- outside of immigration kquopos they could not become permanent resident or those congress past that helped them learn the lives of that.ym he used this to admit some 32,000 refugees. were brought in on the which riley. >> americans -- the tore, they dot not like v:it. before they were released to their assigned sponsored family. i photographed that you see here on the screen, we see vice

president richard mixon meeting with children÷ú around time. the next humanitarian crisis came in cuba in 1959. fidel castro and÷ú his july 26 movement over threw the government about who you stop. between 1959 and÷ú 1973, you're admitted to the united states. the majority of them who so-called freedom flight of the mid to late÷úzv 1960s. >> by the time the cubanz6dre e refugees were spaced out.

the federal government has nvrsed $900 million into cuban refugee release. they're paroled into the united states could not become permanent resident and let congress pass enabling legislation. it allows them to normalize their status. this is what persist. across the hungaryian act and the 1966 cuban apoll jised.s we need our own, after the two year in the united states. so we beginír to see the or januaries taking place in the 9 1950s and 1960s. but the white house is using the parole authority, as back door to bringing vehicles, outside

and keep it close by. so consequently when congress paid, the heart accelerantzv ofs the 65. and o6ó someone who has communist -- so when you see÷ú that further association of the wreckaging with someone who is blaming communism.÷ú disassociation with season and that's why he continued through the 1970s. those admitted oon theym refuge quota, all came from communist countries. and did exactly what the front, continued to parole on communist, outside of immigration border.

so 137,000 wepe admitted to come bode ya and congress passed, to provideym settlement of the system. there's 130 days refugee. now the students who adminm refugees was also contested. tloit the 1960s and i acceptedh cam pan full. they wantedsthem to go someplace else. back in 1956, for example, the eisenhower administration had to enlist the 50s. to help them the idea of hungaryian refugees. public relations worked with specific journalist who publish

story after story and news magazine. when are you going to÷ú come ho, news week and life. the photograph that i showed earlier and vice president richard nixon meeting with the÷ with the children as part of that pa campaign to sell the idea and leaving off some of tho population already. many americans were still not convinced. 20 years they were more resistance to accommodati southeast ash sha. who are viewed as -- to probably get to it the united states. the pain of the÷ú war had a gre deal to who do with that, in southeast asia refew gee. the despite the news and under the fight that hundreds -- werem

done. less than ofym exthey say there recognition policy. but also code world war going on. he demonstrated the yr butv: to tell the. a capitol moves aurnd of -- went through great light. as you see here on the photo. these photos are people trying to get -- what's for lan da. she understands refugees, some went through extraordinary --

they jumped over -- >> in some cases they built 100 borders. they demonstrated. they symbolized the hunger on behalf of human suit to live and freeze the fire, what started the exqumist. the highly skilled of their. there were people that were highly skilled on the survivor. >> refugees science like albert eistien, excuse zv von brown so

could work in u.s. intelligence. he and his fellows played a key role in the space program. refugees also informed our political life. think of henry kissinger, madeleine albright they played a key role, there are others that played a key role in shaping our political life. they've shaped our cultural life. the austrian composer and the russian french painter. there are many, many other

refugees we could highlight. they've always played an important role in the political, economic and cultural life of our nation public opinion polls tell us that americans were very concerned about accommodating refugees no matter how noble the cause, no matter how noble the individu individual. >> in 1980 congress passed the refugee act. in the 1980 refugee, i tried to free the definition of refugee. instead they adopted the u.n. definition of refugee. can anyone tell me the five protected categories of the u.n. and u.s. definition of refugee?

>>. >> race, religion, nationality. >> it's a well founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality. the refugee act also established a newumerical quota. they were tired of bringing in an indefinite number of refugees. and they put a strict limit on those refugees that could be brought into the united states. how is the refugee quota determined, can anyone venture a guess? since 1980s, the white house establishes an annual refugee quote tarks and carves up that quota according to that year's

national priorities. during the first year, the quota was set at 50,000. it was eventually increased to 120,000, but since 9/11, the annual refugee quota has hovered at 70,000 to 80,000 a year. we have never come close to meeting the quota. the closest we came was 2013 which unfortunately has been cut off at the bottom of the slide. that year in 2013 we came within 100 slots of meeting the refugee quota of 70,000. as you see on the slide, here on the first column you see the annual ceiling and then the actual number of refugees that were admitted during that fiscal year, we've never come close to meeting the annual refugee quota. despite attempts to bring the definition of refugee in line with international norms in

practice, anti-communism continued to be the ideological lens through which we determined who a refugee is. who would be prioritized? the soviet union, cuba and vietnam. now, the end of the cold war presented numerous humanitarian challenges for the united states. millions of people were displaced from their homes and forced to cross international borders. as nations appeared, they were politically realigned. we've seen war, civil unrest, and far too many countries. by the end of the 1990s, the first decade after the post cold war period, by the end of the 1990s, there were 14 million

refugees worldwide, the majority of them women and children. in the post cold war period, foreign policy interests continue to influence who comes into the united states but what we're seeing also in the post cold war period is the growing importance of domestic advocacy groups. they're playing a much more proactive role in shaping the contours of refugee policy, who is admitted to the united states. those groups that have powerful advocates representing their interests before congress are much more successful in prying open the door to the united states. our system is highly responsive to advocacy. let me give you a few examples. in 1990. the decision to give half of the refugee quota to soviet jews had a great deal to do with domestic pressure.

during the administration of ronald reagan, the white house had railed at the soviet leadership to allow the jewish refuseniks to leave the soviet union. jews had been consistently denied the right to emgreat by the soviet union. when gorbachev came to power and instituted his policies of greater openness. jews were finally allowed to immigrate in greater numbers. as soviet policy became more liberalized, their chances for coming to the united states became more restricted. because theism grags and naturalization service now argued that the jews could no

longer claim percent indication, because the soviet union was easing up on its restrictions of the jewish population. the reasons why they wanted to immigrate were slowly starting to evaporate. it was american jewish groups who passionately advocated on behalf of the soviet refuse nicks. it was these group that is reminded the bush and clinton administrations to accept those who had once been at the center of foreign policy negotiations, it was this passionate advocacy on the part of american jewish groups that facilitated the entrance of 358,000 former soviets most of them jews from 1990 to 1998. here are some other examples. following the 1989 tiananmen square massacre, congress worked hard to allow students to remain

here. many were afraid to return home, because they had been vocal protesters at tiananmen. now they were afraid to go home and face retaliation on the part of the government george herbert walker bush objected to these congressional initiatives much because he feared it might strain diplomatic relations with beijing. in the end, his administration bowed to domestic and congressional pressure. the emergency chinese relief act allowed some 80,000 chinese students and faculty to remain in the united states and be permanent residents and citizens. here's another exam of the importance of advocacy. many cuban boat people, found asieh them in the united states in large part because of the advocacy of the very vocal and politically influential cuban american community in south

florida. haitian boat people by comparison were more likely to be called economic migrants despite the fact that they were fleeing more oppressive conditions. haitians were much more likely to be detained and deported than the cubans. this did not change until the congressional black caucus took up their cause and forced a more humane response from congress. the nicaraguan adjustment and relief act of 1997, this allowed hundreds of thousands of central americans to remain in the united states. and this legislation was the culmination of almost two decades of intensive advocacy, on the part of an unlikely coalition of allies on the political left and right. >> there are many other examples that i could highlight here about the importance of

advocacy, as many of you know, i have a new book that's coming out in the spring. and in that book, i discuss many other cases of the importance of advocacy. so advocacy has been key in the post cold war period. advocacy has been very important in shaping the contours of our refugee and asylum policy. here are three other factors that have affected policy in the post cold war era. >> the first is the growing number of asylum seekers. who can tell me the difference between a refugee and an asylum seeker. >> asylum seeker is a refugee that's already waded to their final destination country and is asking to receive sanctuary. >> a refugee is identified abroad for reset elment in the united states. so a refugee may come under the

attention of the united nations high commissioner for refugees who contacts the united states or another third country and asks if that person can be reset elled in the united states. and the person is subjected to intensive screening, before they are allowed to immigrate to the u.s. the asylum seeker asks for protection on the u.s. soil. they may do so at a port of entry like jfk or l.a.x. airports. they may come in as a student or as a tourist while they're here in the u.s., they may ask for asylum. the difference between a refugee and asylum seeker. now, during the 1990s alone. half a million people requested asylum, and the numbers have continued to grow since then.

>> our asylum system is over burdened and immigration judges must hear an extraordinary number of cases each day, just to move through the backlog. asiylum seekers are not guaranteed legal representation. legal representation makes all the difference. in fiscal year 2010, only 11% of those asylum seekers who did not have legal representation were successful in receiving asylum from the u.s. having legal representation makes all the difference. but most asylum seekers do not have legal representation, they either cannot afford it or they cannot receive pro bono representation because the system is stretched to thin. that's the first factor in the post cold war period.

makes the post cold war period different. the growing number of asylum seekers. terrorism on u.s. soil is a second factor that has affected. as a result of terrorism on u.s. soil, the world trade center bombing and then 9/11. our immigration bureaucracy was completely revamped, today's refugees are the most vetted in u.s. history to prevent would be terrorists from entering the united states and causing us harm. the state department now tells us that refugees can expect 18 to 24 months of vetting, of screening before they are moved through the system and considered for admission to the united states. but being placed on a waiting list, even if you are successfully vetted and you are asked to wait, that does not

guarantee that you will be admitted to the united states. there is no waiting list, per say. even iraqi and afghan translators and other service personnel, who have already been vetted to work with u.s. armed forces in the middle east. even they are not guaranteed admission to the united states. the asylum system has also been revamped. three years after the 1993 world trade center bombing, congress passed the illegal immigration reform and immigrant responsibility act. and this law had two provisions that affected asylum seekers in particular. the immigration officer has enormous authority to decide if

an asylum seeker has fear of persecution that should be further evaluated. if the officer does not consider the person to have a credible fear of persecution. he or she can order that person removed immediately from the united states. and that process is known as expedited removal. asylum seekers are now also generally held in detention until their asylum hearing. if you have friends or relatives in the united states, you might be released to them. if they are willing to assume responsibility for your care. it can be a year or more before an asylum seeker is given authorization to work in the meantime, you must rely on those friends or relatives for your livelihood. you are held in detention, because since 9/11. most of our immigration bureaucracy would prefer to err on the side of caution than to allow someone be released into

society that might cause us harm. a third development that has affected u.s. refugee policy since the end of the cold war. is the growing number of people who do not meet the strict definition of refugee according to our law. as we discussed earlier, refugee has a precise legal meaning. you move prove refugee. today they do not always fall neatly into those five categories. those people that do not fall into those five categories, present us with all sorts of moral challenges here are four issues that are particularly challenging to policy makers today. can child soldiers receive refugee status?

according to our law. according to international law, only civilians can be refugees. over the past two decades, some 300,000 children under the age of 18 have been con scripted against their will by one army or another, to work as fighters, as cooks as servants as sexual slaves. prior to 9/11, a few hundred of these child soldiers, succeeded in garnering asylum in the united states. however, they are the exceptions. since 9/11, most child soldiers have been denied entrance to the united states. because anti-terrorists legislation passed in the wake of 9/11 bars the entrance of those who have offered support to a known terrorist organization. and many of the armies that con script them against their will

are on the terrorist watch list. >> here's challenge number two for policy makers. is there a better way to assist victims of trafficking. some 780,000 people are trafficked each year for labor or sex. even our own little town of ithaca new york has seen victims of trafficking. in order to receive protection from the united states under the trafficking victims protection act, one must be willing to assist law enforcement, which many are not willing to do, because it would place their families and villages at risk of retaliation from international 2r56king cindy cats. victims are faced with two equally difficult options, in order to receive protection from the united states. you have to be willing to testify against your abusers. but in order to guarantee the safety of your families and villages you must refrain from doing so. is there a better way to assist victims of trafficking?

that's a question that refugee advocates ask our policy makers all the time. challenge number three. what do you do with children who arrive unaccompanied in the united states. thousands of children arrive in the united states by themselves year to escape domestic abuse, gang violence. poverty, trafficking. the border crisis of 2014 which you'll recall from a few years back, called attention to the number of unaccompanied children fleeing criminal violence in central america. fleeing violence is not in itself a grounds for legal asylum. it doesn't guarantee you will receive asylum. those who don't have family here in the united states, are quietly returned to their countries of origin. refugee advocates ask, is it moral to return children to dangerous conditions if their

safety cannot be guaranteed. might there be another option? >> finally, a fourth challenge that confronts our policy makers today. our victims of environmental disaster entitled to some type of protection? >> according to the united nations and the international organization for migration. climate change related migration can reach as high as 200 million by the year 2050. that's not too far into the future. fleeing natural disaster in itself, is not grounds for receiving asylum or refugee status. there is another option for victims of climate change. the 1990 immigration act, for example created a status known as tps. temporary protected status. if you were already living in -- if you were already in the united states as a tourist or student and war breaks out in your country and there's some

kind of environmental disaster that prevents you from returning home safely, you might be eligible for tps. and the recipients of tem prashry protected status are authorized to remain and work here until the state department ascertains the conditions in your can't have improved sufficiently in order to guarantee a safe return. and at present, nationals from 12 different countries are potentially eligible for temporary protected status. however, these individuals occupy space in our society. they're allowed to live and work here temporarily but denied the chance to adjust their status to permanent resident or citizen, except in a few exceptions, a few circumstances. there are thousands of salvadorans and nicaraguans and hon durans who have held

temporary status for over a decade without the chance to normalize their status. they have raised their families here, paid payroll taxes. invested in their host societies, but they don't have a chance to become full members of american society. and our legislators at some point or another, will have to decide whether long term residents under tps should be afforded the opportunity to become full citizens. as you can imagine, this proposition is sure to ellillica very heated debate in the halls of congress. >> these are four of the issues our policy makers are considering at the moment. the past year, it was announced at present there are some 60 million refugees and displaced

persons worldwide. 60 million, up from 14 million at the end of the 1990s. the u.s. is among the 10 countries that carry out reset elment programs with the united nations. however, let me end with this sobering note. as generous as our policy is and has been. and i and my family are beneficiaries of that generosity, when we immigrated from cuba, the number of refugees that the united states admits each year are a drop in the bucket. fewer than 1% of refugees worldwide are ever reset elled to third countries like the united states. it's the countries that border political -- it's the countries that border areas of political conflict that have always born the real burden of accommodating refugees.

refugee camps in jordan which you see here on the screen have become the size of cities with the exception that the residents, the pep who live there do not have the chance to practice their professions, to run businesses to own property, to move about freely to choose where they're going to live educational opportunities are largely absent. the things we take for granted in our day to day lives here are denied people who live in refugee camps, around the world, there are refugees who have lived in these circumstances for over a decade they have raised their families in these condition conditions. they were generally ignorant of

their plight. thank you for your attention. i'm eager to hear your questions. >> the picture walking through the water. >> that was in -- i forget which country in central africa it was one of the areas that was hard hit by flooding. there are so many people around the world who are affected by typhoons, and they're becoming increasingly common as you know as we talked about weeks ago, many of the visitors we think of

as refugees today when there is a natural disaster like an earthquake, typhoon or hurricane it disrupts livelihoods. people are forced to move internally when they move, they put pressures on the population where they have settle d that often times leads to sectarian violence and before you know it, you have a war or some other type of civil unrest. many individuals today that we call political refugees moved in the first place because of environmental dislocation. it's becoming increasingly hard to tease out the environmental refugees from the political refugees. >> i wanted to ask about the syrian crisis. i wanted to know, what is the

crisis, and how has it changed. how have they changed. >> steven was asking about what kind of refugee system is in place, and many of the countries that have absorbed syrian refugees in the case of many countries that are host societies for refugees, many of them are not signatories to the u.n. convention on refugees or the 1967 protocol. it's somewhat startling, here are these countries that never signed the convention on refugees, where they committed themselves to accept refugees. they've been forced because of circumstance to accommodate a number of refugees one quarter

of the population in lebanon are syrian refugees. they've done so working with the united nations high commissioner to create these camps. but they're hoping the camps will not be permanent, eventually things will stabilize in syria, so that people can return home it's the goal of the nhcr that refugees not be permanent residents in a society. the goal is to house them temporarily you look over the past 16 years, there have been a number of cases where refugees have been able to return home. many guatemalans who had settled

in refugee camps were able to return home and rebuild their lives in their old villages that's the goal of the u.n. nhcr. >> we talk a little bit about how refugees -- >> the question was, is there anything comparable to the cuban ref u gee program for the syrian refugees. >> it was unique in aamerican history. there was never -- it wasn't just the amount of money that was invested in the community. it's the programs, how far

reaching they are. to help them learn english and pass the certification exams that would allow them to practice their professions in the united states. many of the cubans who were arriving during the 1960s, were the highly skilled of their socie societies. they had skills that were important to the u.s. economy. they couldn't practice those professions, they couldn't speak english or had to pass the certification exams that would allow them to pass the certifications. the program worked with local colleges in south florida so that the cuban doctors and dentists and lawyers could take these courses and retool for life in the united states. but the cuban refugee program also helped individuals establish new careers, so the federal government noticed that there were many women who were

arriving without their spouses, in the united states because their spouses were imprisoned in cuba. these women had never worked in the labor force before. they helped train these women as secretaries as teachers or teacher aids. the cuban refugee program also distributed monthly relief checks to help pay the rent and surplus food like cheese and meat so that families wouldn't go hungry until they became financially established in the united states. that's atypical. we've never seen a program like the cuban refugee program since in american society. most refugees today -- when syrian refugees come to the united states, they qualify for the same assistance that other refugees receive. they're entitled to eight months of intensive assistance from the federal government.

the federal government works with relief agencies across the united states. like catholic charities the lutheran relief services. and they help place refugees around the country. at the local level, communities help become established. you will be fully integrated into u.s. society. >> you mention how the quota has never been filled before, now that the obama administration is increasing it to 100,000. do you think it will still go unfilled. if i thought the quota once it's increase

increased whether that quota will be filled. if past history is any indication, given how long it takes to vet a refugee for security reasons. it's highly doubtful we will reach that 100,000 quota. thank you. >> do you think we'll exceed the usual 70,000? >> yes. kristen asked whether we will exceed the 70 to 80,000. yes, i think we will. we'll probably -- if i had to guess, it will be somewhere between 85 and 90,000 people that will be brought in. bear in mind that 100,000 are not all syrian refugees. the quota has been expanded presumably to accommodate more syrian refugees. it's not guaranteed that all those spaces will go to syrian refugees. >> so i know refugees have a

unique legal status in the country. how do things like deportations work. i know we have an expedited process for people at ports of entry. once they're accepted as refugees, it seems like they can't be deported. >> if they commit a crime in the united states or are discovered to have lied about their past in some way they can be deported. if they have not become permanent residents. once they become permanent residents. there have been cases of individuals who became citizens and stripped of their citizenship and deported. we know of cases over the past 10 years of rwanda refugees who were later discovered to have lied about their participation in the again side. and once that information came to light, these individuals who had normalized their status and become citizens were stripped of their citizenship and deported

to face the consequences back then in their homeland. >> thank you. >> there's a lot of talk about the screening process for refugees, is it strict enough it wouldn't let terrorists through? >> if i could comment on the screening process for refugees and whether it will allow would be terrorists to enter the united states. no screening process is 100% fail proof. there's just no way to guarantee safety, there's no way. however, i think it's less likely that it would be a terrorist will enter through the refugee track if you've been reading the news, many individuals who were opposed to syrian -- to bringing in more syrian refugees, always

highlight the example of the tsarnaev brothers, they were not refug refugees, they came with their families, with their parents as children as tourists. once they are on u.s. soil they asked for asylum and were vetted. they established roots here in the u.s. there was no way to predict that these young men who immigrated as children, would become radicalized on american soil and cause us harm they did not come in as refugees, through the refugee track. it's less likely for a would be terrorist to enter through the refugee track than the tourist track. >> any other questions? >> thank you. >> does the united states have any long term plans in the future for large influxes of refugees or maybe even disasters

in our neighboring bordering countries to take in large numbers? >>. >> that's an excellent question. are there any policy debates underway about expanding a more humanitarian response to victims of climate change. at present, not that i know of. the word refugee has a precise legal meaning. we would need to reconsider perhaps expand our definition of refugee in order to accommodate people who are victims of climate change. as i mentioned earlier, sometimes it's really hard to tease out the climate refugee from the political refugee. if a victim of some kind of climate disaster can prove persecution based on one of

these other five categories, then, yes, that individual may be able to receive refugee status in the united states based solely on climate change or climate migration, it's highly doubtful. at least at present there isn't any move on congress to expand the definition to include climate change. >> any other questions you might have? >> i'll wish you a wonderful afternoon. let me pass out the final prompt and i'll wish you all a great afternoon. thanks for the attention and the excellent questions. this week, washington journal will devote the entire program each day to the key issues facing the new trump administration in congress.

on wednesday morning, our issue topic is energy and environmental policy. we'll discuss how energy and climate issues might be impacted by the new congress and the incoming trump administration. thursday we'll talk about immigration and how president-elect trump and the new congress might change immigration policy on friday morning, we'll take a look at the future of the affordable care act and how the trump administration will repeal and replace the aca. be sure to watch washington journal at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> sunday indepth will feature a live discussion on the presidency of barack obama. we're taking your phone calls, tweets, i mails and facebook questions during the program. author of the presidency in black and white, upclose view of three presidents and race in america. princeton university professor author of democracy in black,

how race still enslaves the american soul. and david mariness. author of barack obama, historian. on lectures in history, westville state university george michael teaches a class on white supremacist groups in the mid to late 20th century. he explains the difference between white supremists and separate separatist groups. >> good evening. today we're going to take a look at the history of the white separatist movement in the united states. at the present time, white separatism is a very