senator elizabeth warren speak before clark county democrats. and on sunday, live at 5:00 p.m. eastern, joe biden, pete buttigieg, senator amy klobuchar and tom steyer speak at a forum on infrastructure. live coverage on c-span. watch on demand at c-span.org and listen on the go on the c-span radio app. on tuesday, wgbh tv in boston hosts a debate between senator ed markey and two of his challengers in the 2020 massachusetts democratic primary election. congressman joe kennedy and shannon riordan, an attorney. watch live at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, online at c-span.orgo or listen live on the free c-span radio app.e natura congressman bruce westman, republican of arkansas, a member of the natural resources committee in the house, is alsot a supporter of what's being

called the trillion trees act,'s an effort that was made more um public by president trump's support of that at the davos world economic forum. tell us, congressman, what does this act propose? >> well, this is an act that does just what it says, plant trees across the globe by 2050, for the u.s. to do our share oft that. lott s a whole more, though. our biggest tool that we have are forestsnd kee as far as mitg climate issues. when we utilize those forests and keep them sustainable and working and active, we royal have the best tool that's out there that's widespread, it's natural, and it's very economical to sequester carbon out of the atmosphere with fr forests. >> you come to this as a forester yourself, the only one in congress, a graduate of yale,

a masters in forestry there. this must have been music to your ears when you heard the president getting behind this re effort. >> yeah,is abo it's something t near and dear too me. if you look at the planet, takn there's 3 billion tree the in the planet, and we do a good jot of taking care of our forests. trees of but to take care of the forest we have got. that's partly what's in the bill, not only to plant trees but to take care of the forests that we've got. then the neat thing about trees is they produce wood which by dry weight is 40 to 50% pure carbon. when we harvest a tree sustainably and make a product out of it, the carbon stays in the wood. the table, part of the wood underneath, you see wood all around the studio here, that carbon was pulled out of the atmosphere decades or even centuries ago, and it remains in that wood. so this bill has a component to

it to promote sustainable building practices, which can do -- go a long ways towards reducing atmospheric carbon. not only can we sequester carbon in the trees but we can harvest those trees and we've got an endless amount of storage where we can pull carbon out of the atmosphere, it goes through the forest, into building products, and it's stored there. people are catching on to this, especially in my state, where we have a lot of beautiful forests, good, sustainable forestry practices. the university of arkansas, where i did my undergraduate work in engineering, they built two five-story mass timber dormitories, moved into them last fall. they're the largest wooden building project in the country. >> are those as safe as a steel or concrete building structure? >> absolutely.

if you put the design standards out, and you have to meet all the fire codes, there's been a lot of testing on using wood in buildings. if you think of a big log in a fire, it chars from the outside but it takes a long time to burn into the middle. and the neat thing about wood, it heats up, it retains its strength. that's one of the first questions that are asked. it's just up the road from the university of arkansas, you've got walmart, building their new corporate headquarters and in their announcement they said they would build it out of sustainably grown arkansas wood which is good for local economies there too. so it's -- for instance, that walmart facility will have about 17 million pounds of carbon sequestered in it when they complete it. it's a building for 15,000 employees, it's more like a college campus. >> bruce westerman our guest, congressman from arkansas. we're talking about climate change more broadly.

we welcome your calls and comment comments. how can u.s. -- first of all, what's the number, this is a trillion trees worldwide, what's the estimated number this act would propose planting in the u.s.? >> there's 300 billion trees in the u.s., that's about 10% of the world's population of trees. if we were to do our fair share which i think we'll do more than that, it would be 100 billion trees over 30 years or 3.3 billion trees a year. the cool thing is we're already planting 2.5 trillion trees in the u.s., we're talking about 800 million more trees to plant. we're going to do this and get the public involved. we've got a fifth grade forestry challenge. we want to help youngsters understand how photosynthesis works, the benefits of sustainable forestry management

and good building practices. part of that program will be to supply seedlings so this cannot only be a classroom experience but a hands on experience. we're opening that up for non-profits and corporations and ngos, they can come together and help supply these trees. we're getting an overwhelming response from groups that want to participate. >> in that 3.3 and 5 billion trees that are planted newly, who is the largest -- is that the federal government, is that industry? >> industry by far plants more trees than anybody else. when you talk about sustainable forestry in my home state of arkansas we plant three or four trees for every tree that we harvest. and something we forget, trees were reproducing long before we learned how to plant seeds in a nursery and transplant those seedlings. trees naturally regenerate. you can do certain forestry practices which will skaus

natural regeneration to occur. you can get exponential more trees sprouting than we can ever plant. we can get more trees just by doing natural regeneration, especially on our federal lands. >> i know it's more of a worldwide issue, but when you as a forester look at issues like the amazon and the rainforests and clear-cutting and fires that happen, how concerned are you that that sort of thing might happen in the u.s.? >> we've seen that in the past in the u.s. you know, we didn't understand forestry. it's kind of a new science, really. you mentioned i went to the yale forestry school. it was the first forestry school in the country, started by gifford pinchot. relatively speaking, for science, that's not that long of a history. we figured out the science behind forestry and how to do it correctly here. but part of the true and tree act is to help across the globe to provide technical assistance to countries that may be behind in understanding how sustainable

forestry works. we want to stop deforestation. again, forests are the best carbon eating mechanism that we have. it's an amazing science when you think that sunlight can shine on a leaf that has a chloroblast inside the cell, it excites the water and carbon dioxide and causes the hydrogen to go over to the carbon dioxide, releases oxygen back into the atmosphere and stores the carbon in the tree for as long as that tree is there, as long as that wood is maintained. now, when that tree burns up in a forest fire, the carbon goes right up in the atmosphere. when it falls over and dies and insects chew it up, it goes back usually as methane when it's chewed up by insects. we can intervene in that, use the wood for a lot of different projects and reduce the carbon

in the atmosphere. carbon dioxide, since we've been measuring atmospheric carbon dioxide, in 1958 in hawaii, 315 parts per million, now it's 411 parts per million. using air pockets, we know that going back thousands of years, it had never been above 300 parts per million. >> so you're fairly concerned about man made climate change? >> yeah, there's no question that since 1800, we've put more carbon into the atmosphere. so you hear a lot of ideas about, we got to quit putting so much carbon in the atmosphere. people rarely stop and think, what do we do about the carbon already in the atmosphere? how do we get it out of the atmosphere? a tree, and that's the most effective tool. >> we'll go to linda from minnesota. hi there. >> caller: good morning, bemidgi, i'm up in the sticks in northern minnesota, i live in the forests.

i'm 65 years old. both my parents worked in the forest industry. i planted my first tree when i was 1 year old and i have continued planting trees every year since then and i must say that, hey, after 65 years, it's finally great that the republicans are on board and think that this is a good idea. but trees are not the only thing that are causing climate change, right? and so let's talk about trump turning back the clean water. so you want clean air for your kids to breathe but you do not want clean water for your kids to drink. my suggestion for you if you are serious is get ahold of greta, because you want to talk about what the young kids want in this country, they want greta. so listen to her. get some ideas from her and let's try to move forward, and thank you, sir. >> thank you, i've been to beautiful bemidgi, minnesota, even in the wintertime when it's frozen and cold up there, but

i'm glad you mentioned water. we think about trees in terms of teddy roosevelt called them the lungs of the earth. but if you look at some of roosevelt's early speeches, i just went back and reread where he addressed the first american forest congress in 1905 and he talked extensively about how important trees are for water. and i've said all along, we think of trees as the lungs of the earth, they're kind of like the kidneys of the earth as well. roosevelt talked about how if we wanted water in the west, how important it was to protect the watersheds and the timber around them. we know that's good science. if you look at new york city and boston, their water comes from sustainably managed forests. over two-thirds of the drinking water in the united states comes from forested areas. so you're exactly right on taking care of water. and that's the beauty about forests, is it's not only good for clean air but we get clean

water, wildlife habitat and all the other benefits that go along with a healthy forest. >> we go to texas next, john, the republican line. hi there. >> caller: good morning. i'm in east texas in the piney woods. they take out the trees and they put more in than they take out and we've always had that and it's good for our environment here. but listening to the caller previous, on climate change, they blame trump. they want to make it a political issue. where i come from, background, i'm 50 years old, but i've studied the bible, and the earth is the lord's in the fullness thereof and this is his planet. he's not going to let anything happen to it. he holds the deed to it. so it's always wanting to do one thing to one industry and think that's going to help. the problem is, you're not going to get the rest of the world to do anything. china and india will not do nothing. and if they don't, we can do all we want to and it won't do one

bit of good. and i would like to hear your comment on that. thank you. >> thank you, john. you're a neighbor there, my district borders in the state of arkansas all of where arkansas borders texas. another beautiful part of the country down there in east texas and piney woods. but i agree with you that god is sovereign but he also tells us that we're to be good stewards of what he's given us to carry carrycaretake. that's what we should do, regardless of what others do, and we can be leaders in showing them how to be good stewards. that's what the act is about, it takes care of our responsibility here at home to take care of the forest land and the timber that we have, but we've also got programs in there to help educate other countries. i can tell you, ethiopa planted 350 million trees in one day. so you can plant a lot of trees if you have the gumption to do

that. and i think we can see changes around the world. you're exactly right, the most greenhouse gas emissions are coming from china and india right now. and people don't realize that the u.s. is leading the world in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. we've reduced our greenhouse gas emissions more than the next 12 countries combined who signed onto the paris climate agreement. so there's a lot more we can do. but trees are the obvious answer, i think, as the first big step in addressing this problem of carbon in the atmosphere. >> you remember the natural resources committee, how much traction is your proposal getting among democrats on that committee and more broadly in the house? >> i'm getting a lot of good feedback about the bill, talking to the democrats about co-sponsoring the bill. it's really something, i think if people will look at the science behind it and what we're trying to achieve with this bill, you know, we're in washington, d.c., somebody's going to disagree with it, but i

think it's solid on the facts, it's sold on the research. this is -- i can bring you stacks of research papers. and it's interesting, since i've been working on this, i've been reaching out to some academics, i've just showing that the most effective thing we can do to mitigate carbon is to have healthy forests, where we're not burning them up in forest fires, where we're growing more wood on the forests, where we using the products off of the forests and generate these residual chips and sawdust when you saw lumber, and that's energy that can be used as a renewable source of energy. so think about, instead of, just imagine that instead of saving between millions of acres of timberland in the west going up in flame, we thin out some of the overgrown forests and we capture the energy and that

changes what we use with the fuels in the ground when we do that. it is a great first step. >> let's hear from betty from elsworth, kansas, good morning, democrats line. >> caller: good morning, sorry for my voice. my husband is 75 and he has been a logger for all his life. we have just a little one man saw mill. so we're just a small operation. but our passion right now is that our cities, our counties, and our state, when those utilities, when those companies, i mean when their workers cut trees, after a storm, or for whatever reason, they just take those to the landfill. he has asked them, why don't you try to get some use out of that timber, let people come in and cut them for firewood or something, take them to their little sawmill and use it for their woodworking prompt, projects and they say oh, no we can't do that because it would

compete with our lumberyards, our businesses, i think if we would do something on a city, county, and state level, it would show a message of conservation, it would show a message of caring for the environment. that's just our passion right here. it is just a small issue. but we think it could be big if you think of it all over the united states. >> glad you brought it up, betty. thank you. >> thank you, betty. and you know, conservation starts with the individual. and what you're talking about is an issue that needs to be addressed, and there's a lot of technology being developed, where people can take municipal solid waste that is often what goes into a landfill, and they can make a bio crude out of that, it can be refined, right along with petroleum, there's other ways that you can use wood residue to generate electricity and heat. and we need more research in those areas. and the really exciting thing and we're promoting this in this

legislation is more research and development on the biodegradeable plastics, and bio-chemicals. there's a world of opportunity out there, to make a lot of the things that we use on a daily basis, and make them a lot more sustainable by using wood as the resource or the input into the process. >> you mentioned, this is washington, and people are going to, or somebody is going to disagree with you, this is a pushback from the technology review from m.i.t., their headline, a tree and trees is a great idea, it could be a dangerous climate distraction, they write in that piece that yes, trees can and will need to play some role in sequestering carbon already in the atmosphere, at least for a while, but that's all the more reason we can't rely on trees as a stand-in for the separate monumental task cutting emissions from our energy transportation and agriculture system. it is hard to read republicans sudden enthusiasm for tree planting as anything other than

a cynical effort to damping calls and look at regulations to bring about those changes. >> it is a great institution that we have here in the country, i would love to debate whoever wrote that, because i don't think they're seeing the whole picture. and again, i go back to what you do about the carbon that is already in the atmosphere, show me a technology or a tool that is more efficient or more economical than a tree to pull that carbon out of the atmosphere and store it for long periods of times. but one thing that people are missing, that have made the argument that we're not doing anything to reduce emissions, look at the sustainability tax credit that is in the bill. it provides a tax credit, that is based on a score of the sustainability of the building. the inputs of it, how much energy went into manufacturing the product, and transporting it to the job site. that's going to cut down on carbon emissions. and it looks, it explores it on how much energy does it take to operate and maintain the building. how do you put more efficient

appliances in, it more efficient lighting, more efficient heating and cooling, that cuts down emissions of fossil, or carbon, and finally how much carbon is stored in the structure over time? now, i would love to debate with anybody how that does that reduce the amount of cash than is going in the atmosphere, and we focus a lot on transportation tools. transportation, all of it combined, planes, trains, automobiles, ships, farm tractors, 27% of the greenhouse gas emissions from the u.s. come from transportation. 50% of it comes from industry and electrical generation. so we always think it's easier to see cars moving around and think that is where all of the emissions are coming from, but it's not. and this bill directly affects the amount of carbon that is being released into the atmosphere, and it does more than anything i've seen to pull carbon out of the atmosphere. >> you obviously come to this with an expertise in forestry. what first got you interested in the field? >> i grew up in arkansas, where

we're the natural state, and forests everywhere, spent a lot of time in the forests, but my sunday schoolteacher, when i was a young man, was a world war ii veteran and he had come back from the war, and he had been the first graduating class of the university of arkansas at monticello school of forestry, which is the only forestry program in the state, and i just had great respect for him, spent time hunting and finishing with him. and he knew everything about the natural environment around us, and i think i just, i wanted to be like mr. cullpepper, and you know, i studied engineering in undergraduate and got an opportunity to go to yale and study forestry, and it's a passion of mine. my wife called me a tree nerd. so i guess it has its drawbacks as well. >> glad you're here for that. michael from our democrat line. how you are? >> thank you. >> caller: i really find this is

another con by mr. trump, i find it pretty curious that this is happening during an election year. why hasn't anything been done the last three years? and what is trump going to do, plant these trees on top of the pipelines that he's allowing in america? how about that, sir? give it a little bit of an understanding why this is happening nine months before the election and what's been done the last three years which i know is absolutely zip. >> michael? >> thank you, michael. this is something i've been working on pretty much my whole time in congress, i've worked on sustainable forestry issues, since i've been elected in 2014, so it's not, for me, it's not something that just started. and you bring up a great point. there are places, we can plant trees that need trees, and part of this bill looks at urban forestry. we can do a lot better job of planting trees in our urban areas, you know, urban areas,

used to be, most of them used to be forested and we cleared those forests. we can look at marginal agricultural land and we can look at things like wetlands and we've got to make sure we've got the right species that we're doing the proper science and planting these trees, but again, you can theorize, why we're doing this, and what's the motive behind it, but i'd ask you this question, what is a better alternative? and i don't believe there is a better alternative this removing at spheric carbon than to, atmospheric carbon than to plant trees and keep our forests sustainable and use those products in every day products. >> we have the u.s. house coming in shortly for work at 9:00. we have a couple more calls. sunderland, maryland, larry on the republican side. >> caller: trees give off oxygen but one thing this big global deception is crisis from god and

arsonists in california and australia setting fire so the greatest threat we have is nuclear winter, not a global warming, storms and erks and whatever, and floods and tornados, they're unnatural. >> in your experience, in terms of forest fires for a second, as you see the forest fires out west, in your experience, is it worse than it used to be in your experience in the last 20 years ago. >> you look at the data, it is exponential. it is not just a gradual increase. you can almost tie in, when we stop managing our forests, i like to use the term we loved our trees to death. trees are dynamic, and forests are dynamic. they're living organisms. they grow until they fill the growing space, they get stressed because of lack of water or lack of life, and then you get things like insects and disease infestations, and you see stressed timber and lightning strikes and it goes up in flames. that is a natural process. fire is part of the natural

ecosystem. and part of the culture in forestry forestry understanding how to mimic natural processes and do it in a controlled manner so we can do a much better job of taking care of the federal lands we've got. i mentioned the founder -- >> the founder of the forest service. >> the founder of yale forestry school and the forest service, he said we need to do the greatest good for the greatest number for the long run. and we forget that sometimes, and we want to just do what seems prudent for the moment, and some people think that if you cut a tree, it's bad, but it's really mimicking a natural process. >> let's see if we can get one quick call. the house is about to come in. congressman westburn is with you, amy in richmond, virginia, yes, go ahead with your comment. >> caller: i applaud the congressman for wanting to plant all of these tree, but i want to point out that the trump

administration is wanting to move into the tonga national forest which is the largest rain forest, national rain forest in north america, to have drilling. >> we'll get a response. what's your thought on the efforts by the administration? congress? >> i haven't heard anything about drilling in tonga, but it is the largest national forest in the national forest system, and if you look at when timber was being cut out, if you think of the tongas as a football field, the amount of timber that was cut was less than a six inch strip off of a football field. so you've got more natural mortality taking place than n-a forest like that than, in a forest like that than what you're ever going to cut out of it. and we've got plenty of trees in places other than the tongas and areas like that, and we can do a much better job of being sustainable with the working forests all across the nation.

>> hate to cut you short but you got to get to work here. the house is coming in next up on the hill. congressman, from arkansas, great to have you here. monday, president's day, american history tv is live at 9:00 a.m. eastern, from mount vernon, the home, library, and museum of our first president, george washington. for the story and ceo of mount vernon. also the start of museum week, highlighting washington, d.c. area museum, with exhibits exploring the american story. watch american history tv, and be sure to watch museum week, all next week, at 8:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span 3. up next, the discussion on election security. this panel looks at preventing voting machines from being hacked. and talks about some of the benefits of paper ballots. georgetown law's institute for technology, law and policy, hosted this