of black farmers, contributed to them leaving on the familiar that goes along with being a farmer. greg francis, -- on c-span's q&a. announcer: washington journal continues. host: hawaii democrat congressman ed democratic ed case joins us now, a member that -- where 80% of constituents can trace their heritage to asia or the pacific islands and

congressman, first explain the significance of this week of congress passing bills to condemn and can bat hate crimes against asian and pacific islander's. well >> first of all, good morning and aloha to everybody listening. i appreciate the time to be on. that this was a very important and very moving week. asian americans in our country have had a long and incredible history throughout our country of contribution, of sacrifice, of moving the generations forward, of contributing to the overall health and welfare of our country and yet, they have suffered from continuing discrimination, continuing hate up to and including violence and death. and certainly in my district, you pointed out, i have the highest asian american population of any of the 435 congressional districts, close to 80% of the folks that i represent have their heritage in asia and the pacific. and there are many in the country who share that heritage

and the fact that we are continuing to see a discrimination and hatred and violence against a single community as a result of their ethnicity is absolutely unacceptable in this country. this bill was authored by my colleague, by senator -- from hawaii and this pass, in the house with my colleague a grace ming and our asian pacific caucus. and it's very important and not only to set up far stronger mechanisms to both prevent and prosecute these kind of hate crimes, but to send the basic message that, this is not okay in this country. >> congressman ed case with us this morning. the phone lines, if you want to join the conversation. democrats 202-748-8000, republicans 202-748-8001, independents 202-748-8002, congressman case, speaking of some of your constituents in your tweet from late yesterday. such a big mahalo two of our great hawaiian national guard

troops who are coming home this weekend after months-long deployment to help secure congress. i give them a personal tour of the capital to remember a spy. what did you tell them when they asked you why they were here and what happened on january 6th? >> well, we told them that some of our own fellow citizens attacked the capital on january 6th with the intention of disrupting the peaceful transition of power, disrupting the democratic process. and it was highly unfortunate that we had to ask them to come to our own u.s. capital, to help secure democracy, helped secure our ability to govern and that was tragic in and of itself. much less the loss of life, the tremendous damage to property. on that day but, that we had an obligation collectively to ensure that the democracy continued. and they were a part of that. this was a different mission, many of our national guard troops have been deployed overseas, to afghanistan, to

iraq, to the sinai, to kosovo throughout the last couple of decades. this was a different assignment but they understood, he understood exactly what it was about and many of them, although they have been here securing our capital, securing washington d.c. have not been in the capital. they have not actually had the opportunity and i figured, you know what? if you're going to come and take care of us, i want you to at least see, feel, and understand the history, the solemnity of democracy and fertility perhaps of democracy and take that home with you as some measure of thanks. >> and not to put you on the spot but whether the two statues that hawaii has in this statutory hall connections? >> we have king kamehameha and father damian. those are two towering figures from our history that we are very proud of and of course, it's always a drop from the folks for hawaii in front of king kamehameha statute, which is the largest and really the most imposing statue of any

statutory hall. it's very moving and emotional to us from hawaii that the king is here, as well as father damien, a true hero in his own right. >> your member of the appropriations committee bill on the house floor today, as the house finishes up its work before memorial day recess to supplemental appropriations bill, to secure 1.9 billion dollars in funding to secure the capital complex, why do we need another 1.9 billion dollars here? >> well, first of all, the fact an incredible attack on our capital on january 6th, of course had its own tragedy but it also was of all funds. to address that attack as well as to secure the capital and for example going back to the national guard, we mobilized our troops from across the country and help us secure it. that cost a lot of money.

we don't think that should be borne by the state guards. so 500 million of that 1.9 billion is to basically reimburse guard troops for their cost. we have many caused by many agencies. one thing that i don't think people always focus on is how many different agencies throughout the government were involved or needed to be involved in terms of the january 6th attack. we had, of course, the fbi, u.s. capitol police, we had incredible damage to our capital property that is governed by the architect of the capital. we know that our capital was not secure in a physical sense. that was obvious from anybody who watched him in his own tv how easily the folks are able to break down doors and windows. and so, much of this is just trying to get the capital more strengthened and secure. remain we have other agencies, for example, the u.s. --

not only the u.s. capitol police, but the arms, the national park service which has a piece of this from the mall perspective, as well as the d.c. metro police. so when you actually take all of the expenditures that were required from january 6th and add them up, it does come to a very legitimate and a large amount of money and that can be some lesson here in of. self several colors for you sir and will start in new hampshire. darius is an independent is it ossipee? >> oh ossipee. >> about the capitol, i didn't see what you see. i didn't see an attack on the capital. but i saw many american angry americans. i can see capitol police letting them in and my opinion is, if you start 45 capital, the americas over. but i have something important to say about israel and hamas.

it's been going on over there, for over 60 years. israel is supposedly been stopped taking their land. stop taking their land, the international community. all right, the been taking for over 50 years, they've been killing them and moving them out. so how can the palestinians protect themselves? they don't have a right to defend themselves? you keep calling them hamas. >> congressman case, two issues there. >> well first of, all asked of the capital, we do have to find the right balance and we are trying to find the right balance between legitimately securing our capital and allowing it to continue as the opening beacon of democracy. nobody wants to shut the capitol down so that the public cannot come to the capital. it's their building, it's their democracy, it's their process. nobody is interested in doing that. but the reality of january 6th and i respectfully disagree was that our citizens did in fact attack the capital. i don't know how you can

characterize that in any way, shape or form other than that. yes, of course they were angry. but that doesn't excuse an attack on the capital and violent disruption of democratic processes and death. and so, we have to face some realities here. in fact, many of the issues that arose from january 6th, as i hope will be fully investigated by independent, non partisan commission such as what we passed yesterday in the house, i hope that they will take a look at what appeared to be an assumption by many of the folks that were responsible for securing our capital, that that wouldn't happen. and of course, that assumption proved to be a great mistake. i.c.e. to israel and palestine, i don't think any of us can disagree with the incredible tragedy there. and the frustration that we feel at that after 60 years, as you pointed out, we are still

where we are here today. and frankly, i'm not going to get into, you know, who was more right or more wrong in this particular situation. israel has a right to defend itself. palestinians have a right to live and their own homeland and to be safe and secure as any of us would want. hamas does not represent all palestinians, in fact, it represents a distinct minority of palestinians. he should be faced with hamas, not with the palestinians people. and so, you know, frankly, we have to as an international community, reengage in this incredibly tragic and yo of a situation and try to hold both sides to come to some lasting solution. >> georgetown texas. this is below democrat, good morning. >> good morning. i was calling in response to the conversation this morning. and i think that the

insurrection of january the 6th is just that, an insurrection. and the purpose of it is white supremacy. if you look at what's happening with our political situation today, we say that the republican party is no longer a political organization. by trying to pass laws and other legislation to restrict black and brown voting across the country is one of the main things of political control of black and brown people. >> congressman case? >> well i think first of all, and i'm not going to indict every single republican weights

that label, with respect, sir. i do think that that element is in the republican party but i frankly know many colleagues in congress on the republican side who do not fit that profile at all and i believe, obviously, and they feel that element in their party is a tremendous problem, not only to the country but to the party itself. however, having said that, i will also agree with you that there was, in all instances, an element of white supremacy that was participating in the attack. and that is, in fact, why we need an independent, bipartisan commission to step up above all the details that, for example, u.s. capitol police, or any of the other agencies involved, step aside and take a broad look and ask a very hard

questions. why did our own citizens do that? how much of it was related to some organized effort by white supremacist to obviously are in our country? how much of it was related to just generic anger that came to a focus and was incited by events? we need those answers. we did this after 9/11. the commission that we passed with bipartisan support, including an outright endorsement by the problem solvers caucus, which i'm a member, of which is 29 republicans in 29 democrats committed to pragmatic solutions for our country, is exactly the same model and has the post 9/11 attack commission. it's completely bipartisan. it has its own mandate. and that's why we need to answer the questions you are raising, because it's not good for the country not to have a real, honest answers, as difficult as they may be, and closure about why so we can

move on together. >> about ten minutes left with congressman ed case, a member of the appropriations committee joining us. and you can join us on the phone lines for democrats, republicans, and independents. congressman, coming back to your work as inappropriate, or not your chamber today, but the senate is taking up a bill, the u.s. innovation and competition act, to authorize 110 billion dollars for science and technology research programs to compete with china. one of the amendments that will be voted on today in the senate is proposed by the senate armed services committee chairman gm in hot. it would provide dollar for dollar parity between increases in defense and non-defense spending. the debate will happen on the senate floor, but where do you see the right balance between defense and non-defense spending? should it be a one to one ratio? >> i don't believe in a strict

formula, and all honesty. if it's a direct one to one parity proposal, that's not something i think i can support. it's too arbitrary. it doesn't adjust to circumstances. i will also say we have a very disturbing trend in many parts of our political discussion that i don't believe does recognize the importance of national defense. i don't believe it does recognize the reality of china. i live in the indo-pacific. i work in the indo-pacific. i deal with china every day. if i go home to honolulu today, which i am going to do. that puts me halfway to china. i am just about equidistant between washington, d.c. and china. that's my world. what china is doing is real. it's a real, long term, concerted across the board strategy to essentially monopolize that part of the

world at least and beyond it. this is a real threat and i don't buy into that element of the political discussion, including my own party, who wants to significantly reduced defense spending. as you know, in biden's initial budget proposal to congress, it did propose a big increase in non-defense spending, and a smaller increase of 1.7% in defense spending, but in that he said no to the element in my own party that wanted to reduce defense spending by 10%, which i don't support. i think the bottom line is, as to the specific proposal, one-on-one, i don't think that's the way to do it, but the concept is there. we have to maintain a defense posture, and i completely

support that, because one of the realities that folks don't focus on either is china's incredible investment in science and technology. that's part of president biden's proposed plans that are before congress right now. how am generally supportive of that. >> this is tina impel city, alabama, a republican. good morning. >> good morning, representative case. i have a question. i watched a free, sorry, youtube livestream during the protests, during the actual gathering on january 6th. this fellow moved along from the washington monument and towards the capitol, and then i saw other feeds of the people leading that surge into the building. they used a two word vocabulary

that every protester in seattle, minnesota used the second word, and i'm thinking that's not the republican gathering of anyone i have ever heard, but it is a mark of antifa. >> what were the words that caught your attention, tina? >> the first word begins with f, the second where it is you. and when i keep hearing that and i see these fellows, i think they were masquerading as republicans, but i think they were there for a purpose. >> congressman head case? ? >> first of all, i would observe those words are not isolated to either of the parties, unfortunately. they are used across the entire political discourse, including in public, which is tremendously unfortunate. this is exactly why we need an independent commission. what you say, in all honesty,

doesn't ring true to me, but that's not really the issue here. the issue here is that you have a question about this that is being resonated throughout much of this country, just as hard similar questions in other political spectrums. these questions need to be answered, because the american people are owed an answer. otherwise, these allegations just bounce around and sad our political discourse and poison our political discourse. that's the point of the commission, to directly answer, is what you are saying true or not. i'm not defensive about a commission that asks those tough questions, even if they are contrary to what i think happened or why it happened. so i think all americans should embrace the idea of a commission that is constituted and left equally by republicans

and democrats. that's exactly what we did with the 9/11 commission, and that's why we did it that way, because we owed the american people an answer, and we didn't want that to be a political answer. that's the gold standard for commissions. no one doubted the commissions outcome on the basis of partisan politics, not then, not today. that's where i want to be as to what happened on january 6th. >> valhalla, new york, john, democrat? >> good morning. how are you? >> you. >> i'd like to make a comment about mr. murkowski. he talks with a double tongue. one minute he says trump didn't create this problem and listen, that and now he's not going to -- he's telling people not to vote. what's going on with this republican party? it's a disgrace.

>> first of all, i'm not going to try to explain leader mccarthy's words and actions and any kind of sequence. that's for you to judge. it has been a little skewed. and i wish he had fully endorsed the january 6th commission. i think the republican party has a tremendous soul searching facing it struck in the face. i won't excuse my own party. we have our own internal discussions. i'm not presenting this as a partisan issue. i'm sitting here observing a party, and i want two party system. i think that's good for democracy. i think that's good for government. i think that's good for the american people. we should have the great debate of policy and ideas, but it should always be focused on the overall good of the country.

it shouldn't always be constructed under an assumption that democracy is sound, that elections matter, that systems that we follow are inclusive and not exclusive. i think what the republican party faces is an existential question, which is whether they still buy into that. i'm sure people up there would say the same thing of the democratic party, and i accept that. the fact is that there is a day of reckoning coming in the republican party, if it isn't already here. we saw that with my colleague liz cheney and others. one on the january 6th commission -- that bill came to the floor because mr. katko, a republican, tried to work out an acceptable

complies deal, as he was doing with the democratic side. that's the question for the republican party. >> what is a hard internal question your party has to reckon with? >> certainly, we have a couple of hard internal questions that we are trying to sort through right now. one of them is the age-old question of the proper role of the federal government. it's a significant and substantially wrapped up role which comes down to the lives of american people more than anything we've seen, or is it an approach we have followed. that's a clear question that we are asking ourselves. we have questions as to our foreign policy. should we be investing the same level in the defense of our country, or should substantially reduce our

defense budget and reinvest that elsewhere? do we care about the federal debt and deficits? that's a major question we are facing. on the co-chair of the democratic blue dog coalition, which is a group of about 19 democrats who believe that deficits do matter. we have to operate from a fiscally responsible and sustainable base, in all honesty. some in my party are not concerned at all about the deficit. those are questions we have to answer, but we are not questioning the overall construct of our country. we are not questioning democracy. we are accepting that we have disagreements, even within our own party, but there is a system, and a process, and a structure, and it's set up to help us reconcile those

differences. >> the last call is tom who has been waiting in lancaster, pennsylvania, a republican, good morning. >> a morning. thank you for taking my call. first of all, sir, i really appreciate your words. i called on the republican line, because i have been a republican since 1971. i will admit, i did vote for trump. however, after seeing that display of behavior on a daily basis of tweets, the lost election, and then finally seeing what was so horrific on january 6th, our crown jewel being attacked, i immediately went down and registered as a democrat, not that even necessarily support the democrat, but i will not vote for another republican. kudos to liz cheney, the only

one who can speak the truth. i'm so disgusted. i watched that oscar award winning performance by scott curry and how he just stands the congressman? caller: it is not really a question, but i am there with the democrats. guest: you are not alone. there are many people who have been dissatisfied with an absolute presentation of it and are looking for the best answer, the most pragmatic party, the one that can actually deliver results for the american people. that is what this is about. i am a democrat and proud of it. i believe our party can do that and i welcome you, but we also

need to speak to many people through this country for whom congress is not a friend. we need to deliver for them. i believe that in the democratic party, we can. host: congressman ed case democrat of hawaiian appropriations committee member you always appreciate your time, sir. thank you so much allah. here next author.

christie pocketcaro talks about french officers in the american revolution. she argues that their experiences influenced french politics and perspectives the american revolution institute hosts this hour and seven minute event. greetings everyone i am ellen clark and i'm the library director for the american revolution institute of the society the cincinnati and it is my special pleasure to welcome you to anderson house this evening and to introduce our speaker dr. christy pacicuro. dr. pakikaro are good friend, and neighbor is associate professor of french and history at george mason university. her talk this evening the american revolution and