the presidential election campaign fund. as always, we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on face book and twitter. washington journal is next. ♪ host: it is the washington journal for june the 20th, the senate votes on four gun control amendments today. they are not expected to pass, but you can see the debate on them on the floor later on on c-span two. those votes on those amendments planned to take place about 5:30 today. jamesw york times reports hamilton will begin meeting with potential vice presidential candidates for hillary clinton possibly as early as this week. the republican convention is less than a month of a way and ofre is a rumor of a group

delegates trying to stop donald trump from a nomination. we want to hear from republicans only, your thoughts on the dump trump delegates. we want to get your thoughts on not only the delegates, but the role on the nomination process they may play. four eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 four mountains and -- for mountain and pacific time zones. ourou want to post on facebook page, facebook.com/c-span. ed o'keefe in the pages of the washington post wrote about these efforts by dozens of delegates planning to go to the convention to stop donald trump from getting the nomination. theseite up saying

republican convention delegates are hatching a new plan to block donald trump. the move comes from -- amidst declining poll numbers from and growing concern over republicans that he is squandering his chance to beat hillary clinton. his recent controversies including his support for changing the nation's gun law have raised fears among most republicans that trump is not really a conservative and is too reckless to run a successful rates. a group of anti-trump delegates are convinced enough like-minded republicans will band together in the next month to change the party rules and allowed votes -- delegates to vote for whoever they like at the convention won inless of who primaries are elect -- or caucuses. -- cruz

those rules for the gop convention take place shortly inore the convention process cleveland. we want to get your thoughts. by certain select delegates at the convention to stop donald trump from getting the nomination. you can share your thoughts at guest: -- (202) 748-8000 for the eastern and central time zone the(202) 748-8001 for mountain and specific time -- pacific time zone. house speaker paul ryan on meet the press. he will oversee the convention process. the role he will see himself playing in the process. >> the last thing i would do is tell anyone to do something that's contrary to their conscious. this is a very strange situation.

it is a very unique and nominee. i feel as a responsibility institutionally that i should not be leading some canada. -- canada to divide the party. what i think i can control and what i think i can do is help unify around ideas and principles and give the country a better agenda and solution. that is in my control. all these things you're asking about our things outside of my control. so-called dump trump delegates, the role they have in the process. do you support their efforts? guest: -- (202) 748-8000 for the eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 for the mountain and specific -- pacific time zones. john from annapolis, maryland. you are on the air. guest: i think it would be on a

huge mistake -- i think it would be a huge mistake for the republican party to have a few isolated delegates try to hold a coup at the convention. andparty looks weak fragmented now. to do something like this, it's either all in our all out. it are they are behind trump or not. everybody has got to play in and they can't worry about their jobs, they can't worry about politics, they have got to think about the paula -- policies that are best for this country. host: you manages her the house speaker talking about not interfering with delegates ability to vote their conscience. do you think he has a role in this? should he have a stronger hand in encouraging people to bind together behind trump? guest: that is a tough question. i think leadership involves having someone that can move an entire group of people. -- i think he is

stepping outside the box a little bit in telling other republicans what to do, but he needs to stay on point and explain to the party that this is our last chance to save some items and policies in this country. telling them to vote their conscience, and a lot of them and worrying about their jobs and futures instead of the country. host: let's hear from brian, brian is in new york. guest: good morning, c-span. , i watchedtched you morning joe. i have never seen such pathological liars that the news media -- that is 90% of the information we got is such distorted lies. morning, theys

lie every morning about donald trump. this morning, the big lie was that trump says he wants people to be armed, everyone should be armed. he didn't say that. host: that is another network, focus on her question to stop donald trump. what you think about that effort? spineless cowards that are politically correct and political correctness is what's destroying this country. that's what i think about that. host: morgan is next in sarasota, florida. what you think about these so-called dump trump delegates? guest: the last caller has it right on. dump trump, all you are doing is making the run faster to the voting booth to vote for trump. host: hold on, why do you say that?

gordon is gone. diane from arkansas. hi.t: hi -- caller: i think it would be a big mistake for republicans to try and pull that. host: why so? caller: too many people voted for him. our voice counts. the votes count. aheadthe majority goes and says donald trump to be the happen despiteat the concerns some republicans have about him becoming the nominee? caller: i just think there will be a big problem if they try that. i have a suggestion, if i may. host: go ahead. aller: i suggest you have month or so of programs on hillary's problems if you don't

mind. host: marianne from herndon, virginia. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am a naturalized citizen, i was naturalized in 2001. i have always voted republican since then because i feel they represent my values and principles. for this time around, i'm probably not going to vote donald trump. he does not represent my beliefs. he does not act the way i would like my president to act. this idea of the delegates at the convention coming up with a third candidate, i think it will be a futile effort, i think it will cause a revolt. i'm sad to say, but i think the republican party should just forget it and just go for the next presidential election,

because they blew it. think that this group of people who are looking to stop donald trump of the convention, do you think they will have a lot of influence? caller: i don't think so. the people have spoken. i really don't understand why they voted for trump. i really don't understand. but they have spoken. do ank they really need to lot of soul-searching. i thought they did that after losing with mitt romney. there were a lot of things published about the republican party. apparently dated not do enough soul-searching because here we are again. host: that was marianne in virginia. we're asking people about the effort of some republicans at the convention to stop donald trump. my the people quoted on this issue was senator jeff sessions.

the washington times wrote senator sessions, an early loyal supporter of trump dismiss the latest plot against the billionaire businessman. saying i don't take it seriously. he credited mr. trump with expanding the gop stage and urging gop leaders to take notice, going on to say that trump true independence, democrats. that is a historic thing. he wants the republican elected officials that if they turned against mr. trump, they turn against american voters. let me give advice to my colleagues, they need to look at the returns and understand the american people are not capital -- happy with the gridlock in america. sarah is up next, she is from fort lauderdale, florida. what do you think about this effort? republican, i have been supportive of the know trump people and i

that may be replacing donald trump, people might think that is going to deny us the election. whoever they put up my not be able to support that. trumpo has been donald attacking the most? he has been attacking the gop more than anyone else. to is destroying our chance keep the congress, he is destroying our chance to keep the senate. understand how keeping him around will help the gop. becomehen did you first supportive of this effort a month the delegates? i have been supportive of the never trump movement from some of the first attempts, like in december. trump may or may not be a racist, but he is definitely a fascist.

way more of a big government person than a conservative. i don't understand how he was allowed to be part of the republican party. host: republicans only for this first 45 minutes. if you are in eastern or central time zones, guest: -- (202) 748-8000. if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones (202) 748-8001. -- bill is upt next from florida. just from florida, hello. i support donald trump 100%. this country needs him. host: what do you think about this effort for some of the convention to keep that nomination from taking place? caller: it's ridiculous. host: why is that? caller: because this country needs donald trump.

this country has been in a hole for the last eight years. host: that was phil from lehigh acres, florida. if you watch our newsmakers , we had twoerday guests taking a look at the topic of this stop trump movement with party activists who hold different views on this effort. this is from our newsmakers program. here is a discussion that took place. >> the goal of the movement is to organize the people around this country who are unhappy about what donald trump been doing since indiana. reasons toooking for support donald trump and i've yet to find one. ps that more time reaching out to bernie sanders supporters than two conservatives like myself or my colleagues. this is an effort not to deny donald trump, but to empower the republican delegates to do their job.

they have a moral obligation to nominate the candidate who is best suited to defeat hillary and advancesupport the republican platform. the republican party is headed towards a cataclysmic defeat in november. if we open up the convention with what we are striving to do, to an open debate or robust discussion and donald trump has to prove himself, he they -- he may very well prove himself as the leader he is. >> i am not in the never trump mode. donald trump and i have been friend from -- friends the last five or six years. , is that i have been willing to stand up and hold them accountable. accountable tom the point of saying everything in cleveland should be on the table. the reason i say we need to hold them accountable is it will make him a better candidate and if he is the nominee going up against

hillary clinton and if he does win the presidency, i believe it will make him a better leader. that's what i think we need to do. or notrds to what's good good for the republican party, this has been an unusual campaign. take a look at the speaker of the house, paul ryan. he really weaken his supportive donald trump, making statements that are not helpful to our party nominee, the same way with mitch mcconnell. this is happening all over the republican party. host: some of these delegates at the convention have been deemed as stop trump delegates. get your thoughts, republicans only on this effort to stop donald trump from receiving the nomination at the convention when it takes place in july. thomas from north las vegas, nevada. hi, i support the delegates that want to dump him. it would hurt the republican

party, but more than that, he would hurt what i believe him. i don't think he supports reducing the size of government. i think you so almost a duplicate of hillary clinton. host: so you are ok with this effort and you would want to see it go forward? caller: i'm more scared that he would win. you think these delegates have any chance or can it make an impact of any kind? caller: i don't think they have with the but i think situation, i'd much rather see the blameinton take for everything going wrong in the next four years. ellen from royal oak, michigan. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. support this.ot i think we should go ahead and vote for donald trump. host: before you go, tell us why. caller: i think it is against

with the american people voted for. the american people spoke, they want him as the president. host: so as far as some of these people that are going to the convention expressing concerns about donald trump being the next president, what you think about them? how do you react when they say these things? angry. i'm the people spoke and they elected him. that's the way the american people should stand. host: louise is in fredericksburg, virginia. you are on the air. caller: good morning. we hear about infrastructure and all of this other stuff, i think that donald trump is the best chance we have for structural reform, actual reform. he is definitely not a republican or democrat, he is an american first.

so i think that we should all support donald trump, it is the only chance we have for true structural reform. host: what would be the message you send to these delegates who might want to stop that process from playing out? you are making a big mistake. a huge mistake. host: why so? the peoplehink that would become so disgusted with all of it that there would a kind of a disbelief in any part of government at all. they would not be following the laws 100% and they wouldn't be -- they would be looking after themselves. it would be an uglier nation is what i think. it's already ugly, but it will get uglier.

host: that is louise in fredericksburg, virginia. republicans only, your thoughts delegates looking to stop donald trump from getting the nomination. (202) 748-8000 four eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 for the mountain and pacific time zones. we will take a few minutes though to take a look at actions that will take place on the senate floor today, take me look at gun control or at least a gun control related measure. joining us on the phone karoun demirjian of the washington post. the fourreak down amendments being debated today and basically the thinking among democrats and republicans on the issue. guest: before amendments we will be seeing are going to look very familiar to anyone who was

watching in december. there are two democratic proposals and a republican alternative. two of them have to deal with whether president -- terrorists can get there -- suspected terrorists can get their hands on exposes or guns. the others have to do with background checks. the attorney general can deny the right to purchase guns to anyone who is a suspected terrorist. the republicans are saying that is too broad. a visibility goes beyond that, they want to limit that. -- thent to limit denyney general could only sale that there was probably -- if there was probable cause. the court has to get involved basically and a government has

to prove and if they can't, it doesn't go. there are alert systems involved in both. if you've ever been a terror watchlist that the fbi gets notified when you buy a gun. the other two deal with background checks. one is trying to test the democratic proposal is trying to expand background checks and require them at gun shows and online sales. the proposal would put more money into the system that conducts background checks. what we are expecting is the parties will split along the party lines, not absolutely, but pretty darn close. it's what happened when variations of them popped up last december. host: with the expectation for any of these to pass? guest: very low. there were some discussions

about trying to craft an alternative, but dianne feinstein reached out to her death -- apart veryfell quickly. pat toomey was talking to the former mayorthat michael bloomberg talks. thing is that susan collins is talking to republicans about trying to craft an alternative, it doesn't seem like that will get done in time for the votes. about that talking started talking to them on thursday and they're not in d.c.. it does seem like things are happening tonight that are going to have more to -- of an impact

on the important -- the party for the election. there were a lot of people expressing their frustrations. host: one of their people expressing their thoughts is the nra. they put out a tweet in light of these votes. all gun owners must act now to save their second amendment rights. what if we seen as far as their influence on these votes or the advocacy and might have leading up to today? their position is fairly well-known on these things. we see these topics get addressed. none of the ideas in the proposals are particularly new. nra -- there is this thing where it's very possible to speak in a way that sounds very

similar depending on what are saying, everyone is out there saying democrat, republican, we don't want terrorists to have gun. the nra can say that. it doesn't mean the you support gun control. -- could easily say that and that something that works and garners the support of the more hard-core second amendment rights advocates. i believe the nra has backed them as well. where peopleis will and up on this despite that. talk about -- you heard donald bush and republicans to be more proactive. but yes and come out either and something.d to do

karoun demirjian of the washington post talking about today's efforts in the senate and votes on gun measures. 5:30 or so this afternoon. thank you for your time. guest: thank you. host: you can watch those proceedings on c-span two. back at this effort by some -- some republicans to stop donald trump and getting the nomination. a story by amber phillips in the washington post. republican delegates will be voting for the nominee at the july convention want to change rules to allow delegates to vote for whomever they want instead of the candidate who won their states nominating contest. paul ryan is the chair of that convention. he will effectively referee it. he said he will play it by the rules, whatever those rules may say.

mr. ryan has endorsed donald trump and told reporters he has no plans to resend that support. we want to get your efforts on this -- your thoughts on these efforts for some of these delegates. republicans only, (202) 748-8000 for the eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 for the mountain and pacific time zones. new york, go ahead. amazing that it during this whole campaign that the establishment has been trying to move trump out of the way in every situation, they spent millions and millions of dollars an advertisement, i've read newspaper articles where a lot of the millionaires and and their families are trying to get trump out of the way. yet here we have donald trump

ready to be -- is the republican nominee and, yes he speaks his mind. i like that. he has thousands and thousands of people that believe he will turn our country around. our country is in a mess at the moment and i really believe in my heart and in my thoughts and prayers that donald trump is a person and he's going to take us into a new part of our country and i just want to see who his vice presidential nominee will be. i pray it will be one that will be just like he did when he came out with his supreme court 14inees, the 12 or 13 or respective nominees for the supreme court. a lot of people saw how he felt,

solid he believed and were willing to support donald trump. you talked about the establishment, we are talking some actual delegates going to the convention. these are people who are been tapped to make this nomination process happen. what you think about their efforts? think their i effort as they are listening to the establishment. a lot of the companies, like the pharmaceutical companies and people like that know that things will change when trump becomes the president. so they are doing everything in in theower establishment, with the delegates. twisting mines and twisting rules so they can do everything in their power, they have been doing it since day one to get trump out of the way and get their man in there. host: washington, d.c. is next.

ross from washington? caller: thank you for taking my call. with calvin completely, i've never in my life seen a campaign, a concerted effort such as this to defraud the american people of their candidate. i have voted democratic my entire life, i voted for clinton, i live to regret it. i voted two times for obama and have lived to regret it. for the first time in my life, i'm going to vote republican. i have never thought i would ever get to a point where i would vote republican. i am 100% height donald trump. he is the best hope for this country. hillary clinton is nothing but a crook. the biggest liar that ever lived, so is her husband. barack is one of the worst presence ever been there.

we don't really have a choice. donald trump is the best thing that is happen to this country. host: that is ross and washington dc. clinton, a look at who she might choose as a vice presidential running mate. in part of the interview this morning, -- story this morning, st says mrs. clinton aide picked up information on as many as 10 candidates. who is overseeing the vetting will begin meeting with candidates as early as this week. senior democrats thinking about both the fall election and the potential reelection said the right was with syrup enthusiasm on the campaign trail. mrs. clinton is warm and personal one-on-one, the democrat said, which creates an easy camaraderie when she teams up with people she likes. host: walter from indiana, you are next.

caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i believe that the powers -- the republican party that has been there basically being useless for years and years that gave us the fine and wonderful choice of john mccain and then mitt romney . here came not a politician, but a businessman. a businessman that was very successful and new had to cut deals and get things done. in a hierarchy that's correct politicians and is a threat to them. he is causing a threat to the same old get along let's do nothing and get large salaries. as far as the delegates. remember when donald trump was supposedly the wild outlaw and they were saying, you better that you'll support

whatever republican nominee we get and then he finally did. all the politicians are now changing their minds. same thing with the delegates. i think the delegate system should be removed. the american people spoke, more people came out of the woodwork to vote for donald trump because they realize is not a politician. i think that it should be one vote and all the politicians at the beginning of the nomination , 17 or 18 politicians. everybody gets to vote on one day for wherever they want. by the time it gets to be 20th stayed, your politician that you wanted does not a chance. it's suppressing the vote and the will of the american people. we are getting quite tired of this of just stop and don't listen to the american people. i'm voting for donald trump. impaired to donald trump, i would vote for mr. potato head over hillary clinton or bernie sanders. paul from twitter says i

say let it go. trump or anybody they replace him with will not win in november in my opinion. it is a sad time for our party. persons as dumb trump is more evil than trump himself. they are afraid he will not be a loyal servant to the rich donors. (202) 748-8000 four eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 for the mountain pacific time zones. teresa from connecticut, hello. caller: i am for donald trump. the people spoke, the people are so tired of career politicians. they just do whatever is good for their partners. they come in pretty well average pay and they leave a millionaire, every one of them. the people spoke, the people are tired of career politicians. host: what about the delegates with concerns? how would you address them? caller: they should not be

concerned. the delegates should honor the people's choice. the people are tired of what is going on. they are tired of it. i'm tired of this whole thing. it's kind of sad, you look at our country now and you look back in the 50's, we were strong. now.country is terrible it's so weak and people don't respect us. other countries don't respect us. host: that is teresa in connecticut. the supreme court possibly could take a look at gun control issues as early as today. the wall street journal saying that courts will decide on monday on whether to take up the case of a connecticut weapons ban that resemble military assault rifles. justices tohe entertain the argument that such bans are unconstitutional. the supreme court has routinely

turned away attack some gun regulation by steering clear of the dispute, the high court would leave undisturbed one of the broadest gun-control measures enacted recent years drafting a response to another mass shooting that shocked the nation and could embolden lawmakers after the land of shooting. -- the orlando shooting. dallas, texas you are up. i don't see the huge groundswell of support for anybody other than donald trump. a they try to parachute candidate in, i think we are definitely going to lose. i've heard the previous callers. i think he is absolutely the best possible candidate this country has got. i'm 77. slowly ofthis country late go downhill.

i don't really think this country is going to survive. this donald trump, these people or either delusional incompetent or corrupt. we have to support donald trump. he is the last best hope we've got. host: joe is up next in wash .c.. -- washington d people are calling and just complaining and griping. that is their opinion. we put ourselves here. it took 50 or 60 years. as soon as we elect the first black president, every time they come on, they are complaining about everything. remember the 40's and 50's, they say. it in reduce us to segregation and jim crow law. way,things go the other nothing works.

you don't even think god for it. .our selfish you don't speak for the nation. small portion of it. we are one nation under god. we better put our minds together and love each other. usa today story take me look at japan, and effort in oak analogy remove military bases from the island. governor is a staunch opponent of military presence there expressed outrage over the death of a woman who pledge to work for their movable of u.s. forces and revision of an that under certain circumstances, limits japanese jurisdiction over u.s. troops and base workers. troops,n 25,000 u.s.

mostly marines, are based in oak analogy. our -- okinawk in a. maryland, ofpring, elizabeth. we are talking about efforts to keep donald trump from a pub -- from becoming the nominee. what do you think of the effort? i do not support the effort. i'm a moderate will put in. heon't agree with everything says. he's the only did kurt -- with the courage to have -- say what other americans want to say. i think this dump truck effort -- dump trump effort will not work.

the politicians have shown little leadership. the problems we face today have been building over decades. all politicians, democrat and republican have contributed to it. i tell all my friends, when you go to the polls, if you recognize the name, don't vote for the candidate. get them all out. if -- and get them out again if they don't do the will of the people. host: cold mountain, west virginia. good morning. caller: i'm 5 -- trump.rt donald a vote for donald trump is a vote for a better america. people better wake up. but specifically, we are asking about this effort by delegates to keep donald trump from being the nomination. are you can set her for that? caller: i want to donald trump to win. be our next

president. i'm for whatever it takes to do that. host: that is alice in west virginia. according to the united nations, 65 million people worldwide are displaced for various reasons. this comes from a new report. reporty it's the annual found that in 2015, 65.3 million people remain forcibly displaced by war and persecution. some have been displaced for decades because of protracted conflicts in country like afghanistan and come -- columbia. the bulk of these people were still living in their own countries, but never before had the united nations document so many internally displaced persons. the largest numbers were in but insurgencies in nigeria and somalia scattered millions in that country -- those countries.

that figure excluded people displaced by natural disaster. around 19015 uprooted million. a leading source of information on internally displaced -- lauren, ohio. al is up next. caller: good morning. mr. obama's policies are not about color. we know that now. it is about his policies that are hurting the country. maybe you designate talking --ut redacting the 911 calls supporting isis. it's little things like this bother the american people. you're trying to switch history and change history in front of us and it's not going to work. it's going to be a long five

months. , i'mt back to mr. trump not for the delegates changing their mind. .he american people spoke for better or worse, if he wins or he doesn't, they need to go along with it. because if they don't, you know what's going to happen. hillary gets in, we are going support any of them. none at all. it's a must like you going to pull the rug out from somebody. we still have the choice, it's not you mr. ryan, it's not you establishment. the thing that they really don't understand is this is going to hurt them a long ways down the line. republicans don't forget. they are going to have to understand that. obviously, they haven't learned anything. they haven't paid attention to what the american people are talking about. it has to be there way or no way.

maybe that's why mr. obama had a hard time getting through. the american people see this. when they change the demographics in this country and republicans go along with it, there's a problem. thank you, pedro. host: let's hear from mike in maryland. you are next. as a republican and a i totallymber, support the delegates finding someone else and voting for someone else. anyone who supports donald trump , i think needs special care. they need help. he says things continuously to hurt every minority and the american people. he continually brings down the country and brings us back to a time that we have evolved from.

he is going to give everybody nukes. it's not just the american people or the american country, the world will come to a screeching halt if donald trump becomes president of the united states. host: you think the delegates will have any influence? caller: i really, really hope that the country can come together with the idea that trump is the worst possible candidate. that's how the candidate -- country can come together by agreeing to this crazy person. courage,that he has he's stupid. he does not understand. if someone attacks in, he strikes back without any consciousness or intellect. i call him white trash. he does not have the common political correctness to know

you don't call your mother fat. he just doesn't have common sense. host: one more call from michael in salt lake city, utah. caller: i would just like to talk about why the delegates were made up in the first place. is it possible that this is like a check and a balance. i'm not saying anything about the candidates, because they're smart people, they've been around a lot. the thing i'm curious about is why they have the delegates there in the first place, is it someoneif they have perhaps as really off-balance or , they just can't possibly put them in their or her there. that they have a check and a balance for the delegates to

come along and say wait a minute and say this is really bad for the country, we can't do this. just for example, say they had somebody who was a neo-nazi or who somehow with money got enough votes to get in there in the future. i'm not saying that happen now, but i'm saying in the future. andhey have this check balance were they say wait a minute, we will stop this. otherwise, it's a straight vote, bingo. no recourse whatsoever. host: it sounds like you're ok with this? caller: yes, i am. trump, i think he is a smart man. he certainly need some education on foreign affairs and things like that. host: that is michael in salt lake city, utah. we have two legislators joining us.

-- first joining us is marks mark meadows, republican from north carolina. he will talk about efforts to impeach the irs commissioner. we will have that discussion up next. later on, marc veasey, democratic from text -- democrat from texas. new voting of the rights caucus. he will discuss voter id issues later in the program. a story today taking a look at tuesday and wednesdays testimony by federal reserve chairman -- chairperson janet yellin. making statements and that testimony before congress. to give you a sense of what she was saying, it was last week that the federal reserve chair talked about the -- talk about her thoughts. is a little bit of that event. >> economic growth was

relatively weak last year and early this year. some of the factors weighing on growth were expected. for example, exports have been soft, reflecting subdued foreign demand and the early appreciation the dollar. activity in the energy sector has obviously been hard hit by the steep drop in oil prices since mid-2014. the slowdown in other parts of the economy was not expected. in particular, business investment outside of energy was particularly week during the winter. it appears to of remain so into the spring. growth in household spending slowed noticeably early in the year despite a solid increases in household income as well is relatively high level of consumer sentiment and wealth.

the first quarter slowdown in household spending appears to have been temporary. indicators for the second to aer have so far pointed sizable rebound. this recovery is a key factor supporting the committee's that overall economic activity will expand at a moderate pace over the next few years. despite lackluster economic growth, the job market continues to improve early in the year. quarter, jobrst gains average daily 200,000 per month. just a bit slower than last year's pace. >> washington journal continues. guest of thest morning is representative mark meadows, republican of north carolina. he is the chair of the oversight government committee. guest: good morning, great to be

with you host:. there is an effort to in peace the irs commissioner. host: can you talk about your role in that. guest: there are two tracks. we passed a motion last week to censure the irs commissioner. track thatarallel tries to address some of the concerns. most of that, testimony was given -- is most of that was given in congress. we were given -- leaving no stone unturned. what we found was there were ases that were destroyed part of the investigation. it is not as forthcoming -- forthcoming as what we're led to believe. passed in was committee last week. will be hearing from experts on the impeachment process. whether the commissioner should

be impeached or not, i think that as a matter that is up for debate still. we are waiting to hear some of that testimony. it is really about the most powerful agency in the country for most americans using that power inappropriately. that is what we believe needs to be addressed. in your mind, were these actions malicious intent -- or and 10 full? about the questions intent, if it was malicious and direct. guest: much about the inspector general's report if we really look at, he has been quoted over and over again. that report was really done prior to some of the revelations that we've had. what we have found is the commissioner was talking about the fact that they had looked at hard drives, they said there were no existing tapes. the investigator for the ig went out and found those tapes a few

miles from here. he said whyd them, weren't these found before? no one had asked for them. that's the part that is most troubling. we expected transparent government. when we are led to believe one thing and we find out another, that is the troubling aspect. part of that will continue to unfold. hopefully we will take a corrective action so it does not happen again. dia think the commissioner was malicious or direct? guest: it's hard for a member of congress to make a determination on malicious. i will say that based on sworn intimony, things were said february, he knew he let the white house and other people in the administration know.

and yet did not let congress know for a most four months. i think it is that lack of forthcoming transparency that is so troubling. inve had commissioner costin -- we've had the commissioner in a number of times. we don't want to believe that we have to for someone to come forth with the truth. testimonygave sworn -- sworn testimony and what they said was not factual, they have the obligation to come back. for: (202) 748-8000 democrats, (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 8-8002 four independents. of thed editorial washington post talks about the issues involving the irs commissioner. the editor say this towards the end. congressa good reason

is not impeached and executive appointees and 1876. it would invite governmental chaos. federal agencies could not operate with the threat of politically motivated dismissal hanging over their heads. it is hard enough keeping the top runs the bureaucracy staff -- staff by smart people. guest: there are two prejudices there. you have to assume it's politically motivated which in that -- in this case, it that argument has been made. i would strongly disagree with that. we are not going after into teaching every top agency director that i would personally disagree with. on this particular aspect, it was an egregious violation of the constitutional rights. abouts not as much democrat or republican, as about the american people. that premise i would disagree with. the other aspect is one of the

checks that congress has. we see in expanding role for the executive branch. one of the checks that they have is this impeachment process. correct.r is it has not been used in the 1800s at this level. and yet, it still may not. the jury is out. we will hear from experts. , the start to look at this fundamental question is our we going to -- are we going to protect the constitutional rights of american city -- citizens regardless of any factors. when we do that, we need to make sure there is not a chilling effect on free speech. we take that seriously, i take that seriously. when we look at that aspect, it is important that the american people see that congress is doing summing about it. you've heard from some of your ethicus callers, the work

or the admiration of the work ethic of congress is not there. they believe that people can continue to do things and get away with it. this is one where we are taking it very seriously and take me a deliberate approach as we start to look at it. as far as the senate side. if you get the impeachment at the house, two thirds of the has to agree. you see support? guest: i don't see it coming. to suggest otherwise would be disingenuous. onre will be some support the senate side, but to get the overwhelming majority, i don't see that as a realistic possibility. host: so in the end, what is the value? guest: in the end is a transparency that goes along with the hearing. the willingness or the people's house, which is closest to those who elect them. we are elected every two years to act on their behalf.

that's what the american people expect. a lot of times, there's blame but put all over this town, world -- well we didn't get it done because of this or that. what my constituents want, not only what the american -- vast majority of americans want, is for us to do what we've run in campaign on. and that is represent them. i think that's important. that's maybe why the censure activity will actually catch on more. that is a house resolution. it does not need required senate be enforceable. int: we will start with paul new york, democrats line. caller: good morning representative meadows. you.e a question for there are a lot of tax -- overseas. one of the things that our tax

department is doing is getting those billionaires hiding money overseas. isn't this just a witchhunt for a guy doing his job? these guys are not paying their taxes. the press is not doing a good job about telling us who is hiding their tax -- money overseas. guy is doing his job and making sure that the wealthy pay their taxes from overseas tax havens. because he's doing it, they're going after them. could you please answer that? commissioner,e enforcing the law is not something that is actually even on the radar in terms of, if there's a lawn the books and whether it's going after four and tax havens in the appropriate manner, i would applaud him for any enforcement of the current law that is out there. we have had a number of discussions with him. i want to say this, even though this is the topic, the vast

majority of federal workers, including those of the irs are wonderful public servants. to suggest that we are painting a broad brush for them would not be accurate. at the same time, that same law you are talking about that i would applaud the commissioner for enforcing in terms of those abroad is really what we are talking about here. is the targeting of the particular group based on their ideological believe or based on their motivations to get involved in politics. it's certainly not appropriate. whether it's conservative or moderate, we need to stand up against that and really it's not a matter of him doing his job, it's a matter of him not being transparent with the american people. that's why we are here where we are today. kentucky, independent line. caller: thank you for taking my

call. caller: good morning advance for taking my call. i would like to ask about political correctness and how it got started. did make it hearted by the treaty signed into law by ronald reagan in 1988, which destroys the first amendment? are you aware of that? you for your called when we talk about political correctness, it goes well beyond any particular act put forth, by democrats or republicans. political correctness is what we or seeing as a mandate really a reaction to president -- to political correctness in this presidential year, most people have said i am tired of the same old from

washington, d.c. we want representatives who campaign on one thing and then come to d.c. and act accordingly fair we are not seeing a whole lot of that. the political correctness is changing our words so it would be better accepted by the vast majority of people. what you do is represent the people who send you to washington, d.c.. pay if you speak her mind, it is more difficult to do that if you have political correctness. whether it is in kentucky or california or in between, people

will not reward that. they want people who speak directly and speak candidly even if they disagree. whether it started during ronald reagan's time, i would say it started before that for people get elected and saying things to not offend. host: independent line. caller: two points. i would like to know why the rich are putting their money .verseas everybody knows they are hiding stuff. please don't cut me off. number two, i'm 65 years old. i would like to know about the internal revenue in the south. south, to keepe the black people's money.

i would like to know about that. black people living today in their 80's and stuff. didn't get income tax returns in the south. terms of the second point, i am not aware of that. if you want to call a member of congress and have been -- have them look into it, oversight on the treasury and the irs, would be glad to look into that. something i would not -- was not aware of. one of the outflows we are see of having the highest corporate tax in the world is people look to invest their money in companies that provide. reason we have to start being competitive. this is a global economy. obviously trying to bring the -- bring those from abroad here.

it is much easier for somebody in ireland, which has a much lower tax rate, they speak the same language we do. they could set up a company much quicker and easier and make better money than here in the united states. that.e got to reverse that is hopefully something the chairman will address in the coming months. i will read this headline. it says the freedom caucus strong-armed the house speaker to get this effort made. is that the right title? guest: i do not comment on any interaction i had with the speaker. i will say headlines many times can be misleading. arm" is not something i would characterize our conversation. it was a conversation of what might happen, what could happen.

it was taking a message and having a conversation with ace weaker. he is a very open and transparent individual who is willing to listen to all factions within our conference and within congress. you have democrats coming on here in a few minutes and i think you will see on one side of the aisle, you would admit that speaker ryan is willing to have a listening air. i have great respect to my supporters. can tell you my style is typically not one of strong-armed. it was an terms of letting the speaker know what could potentially happen. host: the way it was written, let it happen so we can move it to a procedural move. here, i will not quote

and it could potentially be a process. question, there is the ability for a privilege motion when it comes to impeachment to bring up. for any member to bring in an impeachment resolution to the floor, that is considered highly privileged. doing that would require a speaker to schedule a vote within 48 hours here that could antipater does not happen. the 1800's, it has not happened. even then, it was not wrought under a privileged resolution. those motions are designed to allow all members to have the ability to bring something forth if they feel passionately about it. it is a tool that exists, not one that has been exercised nor is it one i think will be

exercised in the future. would you say the house speaker is one hundred percent behind your efforts? guest: i would say he is 100% behind the american people. i would say no, it is not necessarily some thing that he would be 100% behind for the reasons you talked about. it has not been used in a long time. setting a bad precedent. some of those aspects of really wanting to hear the case. but i think the jury is out as well here it a lot of people are trying to make their mind up about whether they support this or not. for those of us on the oversight and government be -- reform -- in to, we have had testify multiple times, we know the nuances of the arguments for and against. as we have looked at that, it allowed us to really weigh in

and see closely on the subtleties. you mentioned the report. the first report that some people quote goes back to even a time before the commissioner was really there. they will take one line out of a and try to characterize the entire report as if that is accurate. you have got to read it as you have with headlines in the article. it is critical to look at the details of each and every argument. .ost: mark meadows rosemary, you are on. caller: thank you for taking my call. it is nice to know the voters can get you directly. i want to talk about issues voters on both parties are

concerned with this election. i am veryan forever, concerned with the fact that people in both parties have a with trying to support pay back people financially. it has been a problem for years and has started to fester and that we are unhappy with the way that you cannot get bills passed because of the fact in bills. it is time for both parties to understand you will have candidates coming in who may not be qualified. i felt this way when carter got in her he was a good and honest man and everybody liked him. he was not ready to handle foreign policy. money.f aspirations of how he could

better himself again, but we need to find these people and that them. we will let our guest respond. thank you for calling in. part of the frustration gets down to one question. that is loyalty. the members of congress loyal to and who are the presidential candidates loyal to? the money has played a chilling effect on that representation. one thing we try to do in our office, i paid no attention to who literally made no contributions. have an option in our office that if you are coming in my district, you see me first. you come from my state, second. lobbyists, third. that is not to say lobbyists do not have important things to

say. it is just that needs to be the priority. the other thing is when it comes to major pieces of legislation, whether or not i would like to vote for something really is a secondary position compared to the way that people back home want me to vote. we will send out surveys on every major piece of legislation asking if they are for or against it or unsure. we do that on facebook and dictly with e-mails. if they are calling into our are keeping not only what they say but how many support or do not support a particular initiative. get is what we have got to back to. people feel they have lost and as to big money here you know, both of the presumptive nominees, big money

is how they get their message out to the majority of people, whether new jersey or anywhere else. congresshy members of need to stay closely in tune. it is indeed the people's house and we should be closely aligned with the people we represent and thatimes, i am hopeful is awe are starting to see new wave of people being hypersensitive to constituents because ultimately, members of congress fear getting sent home. to thepay attention needs back home, it will make it simpler. our democrats line, you are on with our guest. is, why arequestion

you keeping the names of the people who have donated a lot of list, andof the irs number two, why in 2011, when the president offered to lower whycorporation taxes, didn't you do that then? it is because you did not want to give up the loopholes from the rich. he offered in 2011 to lower corporation taxes. guest: i am not sure i understand exactly your question, but as we look at ifering corporate taxes, that is what you're suggesting, that the president says we need to lower those corporate taxes, it is really not just the corporate taxes that i'm look into lower. i'm looking to lower it on all americans. the tax burden is too

great and we need to look at that. in terms of financial contributions to political activities, that is disclosed. report eachile a and every quarter in terms of the income we get and the .xpenses we have the federal elections commission keeps track of that. penalties involved. the nonprofit, which was alluded initiative,of this what we are looking at our small are smallons -- organizations that should have the ability because they are not getting a test deferral. they have to means

file with the irs but they are not evading any taxes. they are having to pay taxes. in's -- in free speech, that they should have the ability to a on behalf of dear.sues that they hold it is expanding the rules that free speech, for that is not something i would support. host: our guest is a representative of north carolina, a member of the foreign affairs committee, serving his second term in 2012 and represents the 11th district of waynesville, and hendersonville. there will be several taking a from what happened in orlando dealing with how you deal with the fed watchlist. what do you think is the best approach that congress could take on the issue? each time we have a

tragic event and they are indeed we starthat happens is to run into one type of argument or another while ignoring many others. to gofault was obviously to gun control. that, the whole terrorist watchlist and due process issues would have to be addressed. i have had some of my colleagues, tom was on the terrorist watchlist. member of argue a congress should be on that, however we know that it was a mistake. so there has been talk about senator ted kennedy being on it and his name match. but it is really about due process. the underlying question is, are we going to get serious about fighting terrorism abroad? and here on our homelands? i would prefer to fight it

abroad and be serious about it. even if we take gun control england,and say like on a single gun would be allowed ,ithout a special permit here it is something i would not support and that the vast majority of americans would not support. law will somehow make us safer? i will give you a different many cityere it illegal jugs were made illegal. ask any of your collars if they believe drugs are a problem in leave it is., most passing a federal law does not necessarily make us safer or address the root problem. problem is terrorism is contagious like a cancer

spreading from places abroad. way, to do other would not be addressing the root cause. it is a misguided and false sense of security to act on our part without really addressing the causal effect. host: the attorney general on the show yesterday said the recorded during the incidences, that pledges allegiance to terrorist groups, to make the assertions of the allegiance to the islamic state, what do you think of that approach? i would always air on the side of transparency unless it creates a very real and national security threat on our part. sometimes it is suggested we should not be transparent because it will create an issue

here. most of the time, that is not the case. .ere is the interesting thing whether it is allegiance to isis or any other terrorist group, al qaeda, if there are allegiance is being made, we need to address that. the fbi, it has been well reported, and number of interviews with this individual at the same time, we need to be vigilant with the fbi working on that front. to it should be a red flag see someone flying back and forth to syria or other places in the middle east. we have to address that.

many times, the sheer volume of what we're seeing is not really us to put for something on in a meaningful way . you are a patriot. i watch you and see you in the inse, the work you do committee, you are a true blooded american p she'd how much you love the country. the irs, what they did is they broke the law. they violated individual americans constitutional rights. that is what we became free from, dictatorship. on the appointed bureaucrats -- unappointed bureaucrats have taken over the country.

illegal aliens to use other people's social security numbers. if i did that, i would be in jail. that is broad. guest: thank you for your kind comments and thank you for being a patriot. two things. when it comes to the constitution, the reason it is so important to make sure it is foundational with anything is it protects anyone regardless of their background or whether they are rich or poor and black or white. it essentially provides the firewall so it is not who you know but the fact that you are protected by the constitution and the founding fathers. the other is we are a nation of laws.

breaks the law, there needs to be consequences with that and those consequences andld be appropriate keeping with how egregious the violation was. in this case, with what elected , held to a higher standard, the open transparency must be there on a consistent basis. when we see that, we have got to stand firm. the last issue you mentioned is in the tax code and the commissioner is enforcing the law the way it is written and it has to do with the additional child tax credit, and there is a check that goes there. we put in a bill to recognize which was suggests you have to have a social security number in order to get the check.

what we're finding is u.s. citizens with social security particular,m that rebate, 13% of the time. without aare here social security number are claiming 54% of the time. we see a real problem, one we have to and hopefully will address. thank you for your call and good morning to you in alabama. on our republican line, los angeles, california. caller: i want to make a few points. any fair-minded person, someone who understands computers and how to recover e-mails, it is next to impossible not to recover any male peer you have to purposefully destroy a computer not to get to e-mails. this story to be swallowed by the american press, it is

absurd. a lot more talk about it, including the washington post. point number two, it is not the cia or the f the. the most feared agency of government is the irs. it is a big deal. scandal that no one seems to care about. number three, the ultimate solution for this, and clay -- in case another corrupt resident like barack obama gets elected code, a simplified tax that everyone understands unlike the mess we have now. host: you say the irs is most feared specifically. give us why. caller: i will tell you why. everyone directly, i do not know if people deal with the nsa or cia or other -- all those other alphabet soup out there, but

everyone has to deal with the irs. knows if you get a letter from the irs, you are in a hassle at the least. i had trouble with them. resolved, butgot these guys can shut down your bank account and take your home. thank you, freddie. your point about the irs is what the vast majority of americans, they don't fear a lot. they may not fear a blue light outside their home or when they get pulled over for speeding, but when they get a letter from the irs, whether innocent or guilty, their heart sinks in their stomach and it is not generally a good day. that is the power you are referring to pair it if you are

actually coming in and filing your tax returns, you are suggesting you cannot find the e-mails or you have the e-mails and you look real hard and you cannot find them and then they were destroyed, if you had done as it relates to what happened here in regards to the investigation, he would be -- you would be brought up at least for fines and penalties and perhaps criminal charges. if you apply the same standards the irs applies to most freedom loving americans, and you apply that to this particular investigation, people see the hypocrisy and that is what ,opefully we will get to finding e-mails, you have to purposefully destroy them to get rid of them, but that is what we found, over 400 tapes were destroyed, backup tapes were destroyed in this particular situation. we are talking about thousands

of e-mails we are not able to review. host: democrats line, virginia. caller: i have a specific question about testimony with your subcommittee and the entire committee by the epa inspector general. on three occasions, patrick sullivan and anthony on february 3 of last year, told your committee that the epa and bpa employees are being intimidated, harassed, and even threatened by the department of defense here that there are certain epa federal facilities that the inspector general is not being allowed to have oversight of peer the washington post reported on it and said the epa has created an office of this is noturity within their constitutional purview. i asked the congressman to do this -- do something about this. it is your job to exercise oversight. why is your committee and

ignoring epa when they say the dod is preventing them from doing their job? guest: thank you for weighing in on that. that does come from our committee and i can tell by your informed question that you have not only been following that but you understand the issue. i can tell you on two different workingwe are actually to not only make sure it is transparent but to put it back. the inspector general was on my subcommittee. there is a group of people i hold an extremely high regard. mainly because they're advocating on behalf of transparency and integrity within the agency. as you eloquently put it, there to try to real issue force some of the efforts, not across the board, but in this

particular situation where they are not providing access in real some ofcan tell you that is starting to improve and there will be another follow-up hearing on that but we are giving them a chance to get their act together. morgan griffith has reached out to us. perhaps you or others in his district weighing in actually to ahim reaching out to us this particular issue. keep the cards and letters coming. until they have complete transparency. if you cannot make them see the light, they need to feel the heat where we are in the light and heat process. the jury is out which way we have to go with that. thank you for calling in. host: independent line, hello.

caller: yes. let me start with this. that gentleman knows exactly what happened with 501(c) four's. they paraded a much of conservatives in front of the answers. to get the money. all about the you sat there with that , you are smiling and shaking your head. i have got a problem with that. you all want to talk to each other and college other patriots and i have got a problem with that. i understand what you touched on

as far as guns, we know you will .ot do nothing about guns we know this. we know their cherished more than people. no they are not right. guest: obviously, we will disagree on some of this and i will say when it comes to the targeting of over quite -- over 400 conservative 912 pictured what happened was they were targeted for their 501(c) four -- or is the interesting thing. they applied and never got an answer. when you start to see that, it is one of the issues we have here, not the money we get. have really only

been involved in local politics. outlook turkey, new mexico, is really where it darted. certainly without a doubt, those who give campaign contributions, but really what we talk about with the irs. these are 15 to 20 people many times, who have put together a people tory to get vote in the voting group, where we have to address that. there were only 10 liberal groups. where is the end of the road as far as the process is confirmed? -- concerned? it becomes a decision for the leadership in the house

primarily leader maccarthy and speaker ryan to decide whether that will actually get a vote on the house floor. been reported out of committee and i think the pressure will grow. especially if the impeachment process does not go any further. the pressure will grow at least for their to be a central congress that this type of behavior is not something going forward, it is something that should be corrected and should be a message to all of those who lead agencies and if you are open, honest, and transparent, your quick to change her testimony if it is inaccurate. there is nothing to fear. if you do not, congress will take action. , thank youmeadows for your time this morning. , democrat marc veasey from texas. a complaint concerning the voter

id law. the newly established congressional id law, your money segment, thompson who contribute to the atlantic magazine will talk a lot the presidential election fund and the campaign. all that as "washington journal" continues after this. ♪ >> on tuesday, the federal court of appeals upheld a rule treating the internet like a utility, requiring internet providers to treat all traffic

equally. tonight, fred campbell, former fcc bureau chief, and that would, are on either side of the decision and they talk about their views. joined by the washington post technology reporter. >> they have gone further than the networkd applies to isp's, it opens up a bunch ofr additional regulation that was never really part of the net neutrality debate here in >> we think of this as the fcc treating it like a communications service and infrastructure and transmission system and making a distinction between the content on the internet. >> lost tonight on c-span two. -- watch tonight at 8:00 on c-span two.

road to the white house takes you to the summer's political convention. watch the republican national convention live from cleveland. mr. trump: we will go to the convention a matter what happens and we will go in those strong. >> watch the demo. national veteran starting july 25 with live coverage from philadelphia. ms. clinton: let's go forward and when the nomination and in july, we can return. sanders: then we take our fight for social, economic, racial, and environmental justice to philadelphia, pennsylvania. >> every minute of the republican and democratic parties national convention on his band, c-span radio, and c-span.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us is marc veasey

of texas. good morning. guest: good to see you. host: you were a lead plaintiff in the challenge to the state id law. could you set up what the voter id law does in your state? id law in worst voter the entire country. let me go step-by-step through some of the provisions of the law that makes it so egregious. you can have a drive or his license or a task or, a handgun license. many forms of id are x looted like students. university of texas, one of our historically black college universities. cannot use your id. when you look at the texas voter id law and you look at the

people affected the most out of the 1.2 million people in texas who do not have a proper id to vote, the overnight -- overwhelming majority are latino or african-american. would this be the first time this is put in effect in the election cycle in november or were their previous -- previous times? 2016, ite primary and was used in the primary. is stopare trying to do it from being used. right now, the law is before the -- may toy for third we want to make a decision soon or .o stop from being implemented host: when do you expect a and in a soon as short

time like we are looking for? a favorable opinion from a three-judge panel. we are hoping that after they have made their decision since they have already heard the case on may 24, when they issue their decision, it will be favorable. willnow what the courts do. if it is not favorable, we expect it goes to the supreme court. there any specific evidence to date from the primary that people do not have the ability to vote because of the law? all overere were calls from individuals that said the suffrage was denied. collecting names and evidence. .e do know it was an issue -- looked at the voter id law and says there is an avenue

voters can take in the voter rights lost should they feel their rights are violated. he says, here is the bottom line. if someone believes, including the u.s. justice department, that a state is engaging in discriminatory contact -- conduct -- guest: i do not think that is a valid argument at all. if you look at some of the things he said, it is outrageous and he is part of the problem. suppresses photo id law. i do not take any credibility in anything that particular individual says. host: our guest is a representative from texas, marc veasey. the larger issues of voting rights. if you want to ask questions --

host: the voting rights caucus, talk about its formation. guest: one of the reasons i formed the voting rights caucus was to adjust these issues. there are 16 million americans who do not have the proper id to vote in various states. in the state of texas i represent, you're talking over one million voters. one reason why the voting rights caucus was founded was to give the caucus an opportunity to try and inform the public about the laws implemented and try to stop the rollout of the laws when they come out. because people need to be is across this, that the state.

hardly did anything to inform the voters of the new changes taken lace -- taking place. that is to help individuals who live in states receiving laws that pop up and giving them a heads-up and notice to try to stop them from being a committed in the first place. host: is there a legislative effort going to and to make changes to laws? guest: there are a lot of legislative efforts to take rights. john lewis has a bill, a bipartisan bill. at anctually looking anti-pulling tax bill. ande is legislation there we need republicans to do the right thing and join with us on the house floor. republicans have joined. there is a bipartisan bill with mr. lewis, but we need for

republicans to step up their it i believe if we had a bill on the house floor, to protect the minority voting rights, we could get asked. do you think the house speaker will let that happen? guest: that remains to be seen. democrat line, betty, you are on with our guest. caller: good morning representative. i would like to tell you about my husband's case. in order to get -- in order to get the voting rights, you have to have a birth certificate. is that correct? yes, a birth certificate or a passport. my husband was poor in a rural community. the midwife delivered him and he did not have a birth certificate.

that did not stop the united states government from allowing him to serve overseas. guest: yes, you are right, that is a big issue. we have asked over and over again for republicans to take that into consideration. in texas, where i am from, i am from fort worth, a lot of the people before moving to fort worth and dallas, we started off , in very small communities outside places like marshall and longview. a lot of individuals born there, born of baby boomers, were by midwives and the proper documentation was not always provided like if you have been born in a hospital. those were times of deep times,tion and often

that was the only choice was to be delivered by midwives spirit a lot of the documentation is just not there. a lot of people were asked to serve during the vietnam war and we need to do right by that and we need republicans took knowledge that. texas, dan is up next. dan from texas. i have got a comment. people'sying that voting rights from schools, they can use school ids. the only problem i have got is we have got so many people in the united states that are going through our colleges. that means these people can use their ids to vote in the united states with that id. they are not even citizens. guest: that is not correct. sets up a voter

registration system. , and elections administrator that is in charge of make sure that people are registered to vote our u.s. previous spirit the committee serving in congress, i was on the elections committee in the texas house of representatives down in austin. there was testimony and records brought before the committee and served on to look for voter and in person to be specific. there wast county, not one instance of voter impersonation that we could find. the only person who had fraudulently voted was a white male from canada who was a resident alien and he thought that because he was living in texas and houston legally, he thought he could vote, but he

could not. his vote was thrown out but that was it, out of everyone they said was illegally registered to vote, it just was not sure at all. host: republican line, this is chuck. caller: last year, there was a report in florida that the registered voters in the county, there was 140% who actually voted for barack obama in the last election. i am 78 years old. why is there such a hardship? i was delivered by a midwife here this is garbage. it is a smokescreen. please explain it. these people get on welfare and food stamps and medicare. if they do not have proper id, how did they get on the list? i cannot speak specifically to your issue but

if you were born by a midwife and you do not have proper documentation or a birth certificate and you have never traveled overseas and you do not have a passport, you know how hard it can be to get the voter cards in different places. i would say your situation may not be the exact same as some other individuals we are talking about, but that is a big issue we the all the time. in texas, if you do not have a voter id, what other ?ptions do you have guest: cast your original ballot, you obtain one within 60 days timeframe, then you are allowed to go back down to the courthouse, show them proper id, and they will make sure your vote counted. otherwise, a provisional ballot. a gentleman wrote in his

report saying, in order to get a certificate, you can present one primary id, two secondary ids and one with supporting identification. texas recognizes 28 types of supporting identification. are you saying even among all of these options, people do not have the right identification to vote? in order to get the proper identification to vote, you have to pay. for some people, it is a huge hardship. you have to remember that particularly the lower income communities, people live month-to-month from place to place and people oftentimes take buses. they do not have the proper id and that is not something they invested in. time getting supporting documents they need, it can make it almost impossible to vote. .eople will give up

i worked on campaigns and worked for a member of congress and worked on campaigns. i met so many people who rode the bus, so many people who walk and hitch to place rides from friend to friend who do not have the id. if you do not live in one of these communities, it seems unreasonable that that can happen. you are talking about 1.2 million texans who do not have the proper id to vote. in the united states, 16 million people. it is a big problem. our guest, a cochair from the caucus. patty, go ahead. answer my question because i know people just like midwife, they have the social security card and a lot of them that.e a picture on

if they have a social security card, a lot ofre times, they do not have it. can they do anything, that has a picture or an id on there, and they have stuff with their address and everything on that, how can these poor people, get the idea to vote? old laws, voters read -- and the voter registration card. now those things are not allowed. i can tell you that in order to try to improve the voter id law, there was an offer to let pictures to go on voter registration cards. in every county in texas, one thing the administrators does is

they send out voter registration cards that shows you where to , and who represents you you used to be able to use those as an id to vote. now they send them out to you but you cannot use them to go vote. there was an amendment rejected that would put pictures on a becausegistration card voter registration cards are free and the obstacle being presented by republicans to make people less likely to vote is to pay for these documents. independent line, florida. caller: good morning. if we could be real for a let us accept the fact that voter laws that had been in overad been passed 30 states with republican

legislators and governors, and the real issue here is not voter fraud. someone once said in the entire there wasn 2012, which to voter fraud. really happening here is that republican party and its that for the most part, minorities and hispanics, latinos, asians, will not vote for them. so they are finding a way to move the suffers from them so they can get elected. back in pennsylvania, the person who headed the republican legislature said we passed the legislation laws and now romney will win. he was rhapsodizing about the fact that he had tried to

disenfranchise a greater number of democratic and independent voters who obviously would not have voted for mitt romney. why can't we just cut to the chase and say this is a republican led issue and it is trying to disenfranchise the american public from voting? guest: they will not say that because they do not want any court to strike down the laws. they know what they are doing and they have done the research. they have with that states outside of ohio and wisconsin and to deny people the right to vote, they are having a big impact. we see it happening in all of the states i mentioned and these other states i mentioned with similar law. host: here is pete. caller: good morning,

congressman. the vast majority of texans would actually support primarily because they try to disenfranchise -- people to be able to vote and allow people to use a bus pass or anything else, this could be fraudulently created. i do not think people will support that peer in my question a resident ofg texas my whole life, as you say, when they passed the voting rights act, as they did from the legislature, they basically laid it all on the person who does not have the proper phones to get an id and go to the office

and get one for free, is that fair or not? thank you. god bless america. guest: that is not true. id, you to get the free have to have supporting documents. passports and the birth certificate, in order to be able to vote. might appearcost there was an amendment that would allow pictures to go on voter registration cards that i am sent and that amendment was rejected. -- particularly very close elections. & spacemed services technology committee. our guest was previously the real estate agent -- bachelors in science at west texas university. democrats line, glenn, hi. good morning.

it is so sad and america that we are discussing voting rights. i'm so disheartened. i am from alabama where the theeme court based information on what came out of the county in alabama. , we have senior citizens who are 100 years old. because of the stuff that had still been lost. this follows that you have to have an id to get on the plane. white sisters and brothers, if you have never been discriminated against and disenfranchised, you cannot understand the feeling black people have to go through.

we had to figure out how many gel beads were in the jar to be able to have the right to vote. it is so sad in america. why are we disenfranchising our people? the is supposed to be greatest country in the world and we are denfranchising people who want to vote. fromall came about president barack obama in 2008, ran for president. old,any people, young, middle-aged, came out to vote in record numbers. the houseicans lost of representatives, and that is why they said this would never happen again. host: thank you. we will let our guest respond. guest: gwen is right. it is sad. years after jim crow was

abolished in most parts of the united states of america, we are seeing these laws creep up again. it is unfathomable. republicans have decided to try and pass these laws do orreach to latinos african-americans. s the road we're going down. hopefully with the formation of the voting rights caucus and the efforts of others in congress who have set up to the plate to bring this issue back to the forefront of americans, we can put a stop to this and we can make elections fair again. host: if your lawsuit goes to the supreme court, what are the odds of getting the decision you want considering there are only eight members? will hopefully be a new supreme court put in place soon. the evidence in our case, i feel very good. then again, you don't know what courts will do.

we present the best evidence possible and you go for it and do the best you can in court and hope for a good outcome. host: ben from louisiana. caller: good morning congressman. , i've heard you are giving illegal aliens drivers license. them there --s without given the right to vote? ,uest: as i mentioned before there were all these claims that there were people who were occupant -- undocumented who were voting. the texas legislature looked into the voting records and the voter registration there in harris county and not one of undocumented voting had occurred.

the only person who voted illegally was a white male canadian who lived in harris county. he was here on a green card. been inht he had america for so long that he could vote. scenarios andild stories that are urban legend and making its way around the internet about individuals that are here undocumented being able to vote is just not true. host: matthew from georgia, hello. caller: good morning. id when i a picture go to the va. if i didn't have a picture, there would be all kinds of fraud there. i can't imagine a drivers license about a picture and the corruption there would be in the

system all across the country without pictures on our systems -- on our drivers license. it seems to me people say they can't get the drivers license or a voting card that would show a picture. i had to pay for my drivers license, they should have to pay for a voting card. i can't believe the people were so poor that they can't pay a ,ee for a voting card picture but they can go out and buy cigarettes and liquor and things they don't need. in this country, it's a right to vote, but you still up to pay for things. you have got to pay for gas to drive to be precinct. are paying your taxes, you are paying for the electricity. host: matthew, thanks. guest: what i was going to say is what he is advocating, having to pay to vote is illegal. that was deemed illegal from the 1960's when we had poll taxes.

i have a copy of both of my parents pull taxes. she gave me a copy of her and my grandmother's poll tax. i would not want to go back to that time. host: if someone does not have a photo id and want to get some type, you said that pay for that. how much are we talking? guest: it could depend on county to county. if you are a low income person and you ride the bus every day, if you live from place to place, rent to rent, being able to pull that money together. let's say you live in fort worth now and you were born in harrison county or you were born in smith county.

the cost of that could be more of a burden. that's probably the reason why that there's 1.2 million people in our state to lack the ability to vote. host: democrats line from louisiana. caller: this sounds a good bunch of bull to me. you talk about people walking around. you have to have an id on you at all times. what's the big deal here? you go get an id and you go vote. it sounds a good bunch of garbage. about what he is talking is not necessarily accurate as it relates to most of these laws. there are very few forms of id that are accepted as i stated earlier. there was an effort to get people ids with pictures through the voter registration cards that republicans rejected. we try to put provisions in place that would allow people to use their college ids issued by

the state of texas and other universities to go on vote. that was denied. accurates not exactly what you are saying, sir. allowingre that by very few forms of id to be used, you are going to suppress people . over 69 people nationwide. -- 16 million people nationwide. caller: there are some points that i do agree with him and there are others. republicans, the what did the democrats do in california against bernie sanders and she got all those votes. that wasn't right. it's just not the republicans. democrats also. ohio and we get along with everybody when we were

growing up. there wasn't any segregation. we had them in our house, we went to their house. we went to their church, they came to our church. we are americans, all of us. there is no black americans. irish,can-americans, i'm i'm not american irish. i love everybody. guest: what i would say to that is the state that you mentioned ohio, is one of the states and's outside the old south is one of the worst states as it relates to voting rights. ohio is a state that has moved to eliminate early voting hours and early voting days and has made it harder for people to go and register for vote -- to vote and cast their ballot on the same day. many people feel that that was aimed directly at african-american -- the african-american community.

ohio is in pretty bad shape, they are not a good example to use. host: if you are on twitter who .rites texas has a poll tax is that the case? the texas bill is a perfect example of a poll tax. i have an anti-poll will i am circulating trying to get people signed onto. do is notbill would allow for elected officials and voting administrators to ask for ids that people of to pay for in order to vote. it's pretty simple. are seeing ine different states. it's a requirement for people ve an id that they had to

pay for. democrats line from georgia. caller: representative, i'm going to give you some facts about what happened to me. i was in atlanta and i got .topped by the police the guy checked my drivers license. i'm 62 years old. he said we need your license straightened out monday. the selected. -- that is what we did. i had to go get my birth certificate, it cost me $25. miles fromto go 26 my house which have put $20 in gas to my car. i had means.

i got over there. to the stateere patrol office, they looked at my birth certificate and one letter was off. they made me come all the way back to jessup, get a new birth certificate, bring it back to hinesville. for me, it didn't hurt me because i've got means. would not as much, what would you charge that -- charge them to sit there and wait for two hours and then bring them back because they didn't have the right birth certificate or the right yourmation, how much would charge that person that's making $700 a month? for me, it wasn't a big deal. host: we will let our guests respond. guest: that is a perfect example

of why these laws are so flaws -- flawed. a lot of these midwives that delivered individuals oftentimes deliver individuals again outside of hospitals. oftentimes, their literacy rate was very low or adequate at best and there were misspellings on birth certificates. i know that to be a fact because of my own family. a very big issue and it's going to prevent people from voting unless republicans do the right thing and work with democrats in order to advance legislation to put the voting rights act back in tact and come up with provisions to stop states from trying to implement these laws in the first place. janel fromis tallahassee, florida. independent line. caller: i'm american indian.

understand the problem in reference to birth certificates. we were the first ones in our family to have birth certificates. however, my parents were more , because when the midlife delivered children, everything was written down. ,hen they register to vote there were not the issues you are talking about because of you been in this country are your years, you 20 or 30 left a print somewhere. you have to have utilities or a bunch of different things. my mother has written letter -- she collects her social security and she has to show her id. it is my estimation that if

anyone serious about going on , we have twontry years in between representative voting, your two years to prepare yourself here in florida -- very self. here in florida, doesn't cost anything to get an idea get a check. guest: i would say the points you brought up are exactly part of the problem. you talked about utility bills. again, those forms of id are no longer accepted. you can't use those things to get the voter id card. you talked about the family bible, many of these midwives recorded birth in family bibles. there were no -- when there were no birth certificates. good luck finding that family bible if you're not exactly sure where it is. , you live low income

in places that charge month to month for rent and you are very nomadic, good luck finding the family bible. good luck traveling to get your birth certificate that may be misspelled by the midwives. you will be out of luck and not be able to vote. republicans efforts to suppress the vote -- clayton from new jersey, republican line. i had a question concerning the voting rights. host: go ahead, you're on. i think there's enough

time given to an individual that if it got the initiative an incentive to vote. some doctor might spend a little of your own money to do mighting -- sometimes you have to spend a little of your own money to do something. with several weeks to vote, that's enough time -- several weeks before it the vote, that's enough time. he new jersey, you don't need to show anything. we have so many different types of laws across the state. thank you, clayton. guest: when i served in the texas legislature, all of the republican organizations and nonprofits complaining that in person voter impersonation was taking place, we asked them over and over again to present proof of that fraud. proof could present any

in the eight years i was there. i served on the committee that ended up passing out that voter id bill. no one could present any evidence of in person voter impersonation was taking place. what you're saying is the opposite, it's exactly what we should be doing. we need to make it easier for people to vote. we need to allow more flexibility. we need more days and hours. by narrowing the amount of time, you make it really tough on shiftswho may work late or maybe single parents. different issues like that that people have to face. make it easier to vote. we need more options and times for people to exercise their right. host: alice in fort -- in florida. i'm going to see if i

can put this voter registration thing into perspective. we have about 30 states that .ave issue voter id laws in each of those states in every county, there is a person specifically authorized to register voters. that person is also specifically excluded from issuing the proper id to vote. like't that really seem it's already designed to eliminate voting? guest: absolutely, 100%. amendmentthere was an that republicans and water except. -- didn't want to accept. , democrat fromey texas joining us talking about voter rights laws. thank you for joining us.

our last segment is the regular your money segment. atlantichompson of the and of the washington post will be up next to talk about this fund. washington journal continues. ♪

>> on tuesday, the federal court of appeals for the district of columbia upheld the rules of treating the internet like a utility. tonight, on the communicators, fred campbell, technology director and former fec wireless connections bureau chief and matt wood are on either side of this decision to talk about their views. they are joined by brian fong. >> now that the ethics -- sec has gone further than that and --d this scheme that did not govern the monopoly network now applies to isps. we think of this as the fcc returning to that law, and to the right law for broadband, treating it like a communication service and an infant structure

and transmission system and making the distinction between the carriage and the content. >> watch the communicators tonight. washington journal continues. host: it is time for our regular your money segment. we feature an article that was in the recent issue of the atlantic, the price of public money. it takes a look at a specific fund designed to help the public funding of elections. joining us is marilyn thompson. good morning. this is called the presidential election campaign fund. tell us about it and how to get started? guest: it has a rich history. it was actually debated in the 70's. presidentidea of theodore roosevelt who proposed it back in his 1907 stated the union address.

-- the state of the union address. it took a while to get to congress. there were a lot of varying opinions on whether it was necessary and needed and if it would work. effect andwent into was used in the 1976 election. run,d a very successful funded -- it funded some of the lesser-known candidates are both parties throughout the 70's. people seemed to love it. they were contributing to the little checkoff on their income tax. peak, there was about 30% participation. campaignn to drop as finance began to change. they didn'ted that really want to give their

dollar, which ultimately became three dollars, so they are been hasecting this money which very strict rules about how it imposedsed and limits on campaigns in order to receive it. at this point, no one really wants it. it has come to be known as the losers fund because it is mainly given money to a bunch of off-the-wall candidates in recent years. major candidates can't agree to use it because they don't want to lose. host: for more specifics, the presidential election fund, how much sits in there currently? guest: it is $313 million sitting there stagnant. they are paid out very little money so far. martin o'malley filed a claim for some of it.

jill stein, the green party candidate, just got a tiny bit of it. by and large, most candidates, including bernie sanders said the system was too broken for them to even participate. host: was it broken because of the limits the amount of money they can take and the rules involved? don't reallyles recognize the change of pace and composition of the modern campaign. for instance, it said -- sets specific limits for each state. that haverly states become so important to winning out -- an election, these are very miniscule amounts of money you can spend. in new hampshire, you can spend around $1 million, that's it. so do you really want to play ball when the other candidates are saying i'm not playing ball and can spend whatever they want. candidate, how do

i become eligible and how much can i get? a process, you have to show that you have support in at least 20 states. you have to submit very extensive paperwork to the federal election commission showing that you received the --ions in small amounts donations in small amounts from 20 states. they look at that very closely and then they qualify you for the fund. 2016, you could've received up to $48 million in the primary and $96 million in the general election. it sounds like a lot of money to the average person. the truth is, not in this day and age. host: it seems it's more about the rules of what you can do with it well other sources of

money are free of the rules. guest: bernie sanders has been the biggest advocate of small donations. he was the only candidate specifically grilled about this during one of the debates. he basically said i'm not going to play with this. it would guarantee i couldn't win the election. host: $300 million sits in this campaign -- presidential campaign election fund. to it on yourbute irs form. if you want to learn about the fund with our guest marilyn thompson, (202) 748-8000 -- ,202) 748-8001 for republicans (202) 748-8000 for democrats and (202) 748-8002 four independents . let's start with bob in minnesota. you are on with marilyn thompson.

i think the time is toht for something like this happen. i think people are disgusted with money in politics. these sanders campaign is a good example of that. there are good reasons for it, hughes electronics in 93 complained to president clinton that sanctions on technology was hurting its company and they satellites onhing chinese rockets because of this. there was a technology transfer. that, we had the

tiananmen square issue. host: what point would you like to make with our guest? when it comes to the other funny of campaigns or this fund? caller: i just think it's important to get the money out of politics. it's too damaging, it's damaging for national security and everything else. guest: i would have to tell you that all the polls show that americans are really fed up with the current state of campaign-finance. they want change, that is very clear. i guess the question is, is that the way to do it or is there a better way? host: joe in new jersey, republican line. caller: i supported bernie sanders for president and i still think he is an eligible candidate.

dismissive.k it's honestly, i don't like the rather -- rhetoric of the democratic party right now. you didn't treat bernie sanders that well when he left. thank you. fund was the idea of this if it is going to come from the public was to hopefully have a pr sense of politicking? politicking?e of -- pure sense of politicking? guest: precisely. there had been many scandals leading up to roosevelt election. he gave a very vocal defense of creating a way for the smaller

donor to participate in this process and get it out of the hands of corporate money. that idea took a wild to catch fire. administration after another ran into scandals about money, it's like a good idea. -- it seemed like a good idea. it worked effectively for a number of decades. host: jimmy carter and ronald reagan both depended on the fund during their campaign. did, --.s they last week, jimmy carter was at a forum being interviewed by bill clinton, whose wife has certainly been spending quite a bit of money. carter made a passionate defense of public financing as one of the ways that you might regain public confidence in the system.

if you want to go to our website and see that exchange with the former president about the issue of public financing. marilyn thompson writing about it with the atlantic. she is a fellow at harvard on which she did research. topic? -- why this topic? the fellowship is a wonderful opportunity for journalists today again. -- i was looking for a niche in politics, i was looking for something no one was writing about at the moment. that led me to this. the core as touched i talked with people at harvard and people out in the campaign-finance world. there is a lot of activity around this debate even now with

representative david price being a leader in trying to get the fund performed and modernize. -- reformed and modernize. d. host: what kind of reforms are we seeing potentially? david prices build -- bill would make the fund more viable by increasing the max you get. currently it is a one to one match. he is suggesting that it should be a 621 match. the ad -- 6-1 match. the idea being give the candidate enough money to run a legitimate campaign and then see how it turns out. host: tom from illinois, you are next. caller: thank you for receiving my call.

steps does your guest in vision that the government can take to rid politics of money? maybe thend that person on the street may want to contribute to a bernie sanders or even a donald trump, but how can we pull the majority of the , the largeions and have the media be more -- a new bill was introduced last week to address the abuses of corporate funding in campaigns. it is a comprehensive package. the general idea is to limit

corporate and increase public participation. i had some very interesting conversations in the course of doing this paper, including one of my favorite examples of people i used in the paper was from tacoma, washington. he is just an average citizen, but he believes so strongly that americans, regular people need to participate in this process, that he gives to his favorite candidate regularly in very small amounts. he has had some problems -- despite having problems keeping a job. it is interesting to hear how passionate he was and how passionate some of the campaign-finance advocates are about public participation. that is really the only way. corporate limits on

and size of individual donations and scale it back. host: if i were a candidate and i got funds from this campaign, can i still accept superpac money or is that it? guest: you have to agree to restrict your fundraising and spending limit. we are now in the era of big money. you, by accepting this public funding and the notion surrounding it, just dooming yourself? host: andrew from massachusetts, democrat line. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my hall -- call. i wanted to ask about public perceptions around this campaign fund. himself --p has made said he is the answer by self

funding his campaign. guest: i think this may be andrew from cambridge, massachusetts who was my researchers on this researcher on the product that project. because you were deep into this as i was, donald trump, by saying he was self-funded automatically excluded himself from the public financing system and the primaries -- in the primaries because the law specifically limits the amount of money that you can put into your own campaign. restriction tight and it has not changed over the course of 25 years. from -- trump, he is a very interesting example of how financing is changing.

he is benefiting from free media. he is racking up the hours on cable television at no cost to himself. i was just checking the numbers before i came on the air. at this stage, donald trump has total spending's pales in comparison to hillary clinton. he has figured out a way to get the media attention without having to pay for it. host: john from connecticut, independent line. caller: i love that last statement. that shows you how smart that guy is. i get really upset when i see the amount of money spent. thatabsolutely nauseating the ordinary american can sit and watch television and watch this amount of money that's people and most of the

don't have a job that pays more than 10 dollars an hour. it's money that counts. it doesn't matter have what we think or how we vote. it's going to be money. it's pretty sad. i think bernie sanders should jump ship and run as an independent. i think he would get much more votes. thank you very much for your program. guest: that is a very thoughtful comment and it is very interesting. look at the money being spent on the congressional level, the senate level. the problems are pretty much the same across the board. there has been a movement throughout the state and local governments to impose new systems and public financing models in those localities.

they're beginning to show some positive effects. north dakota, this is where john is. republican line. caller: good morning. i think the party has so much money, why don't they start using that money to pay off the debt that we have got in this country instead of spending billions of dollars on campaigns . all it's about is money, not being elected and doing the job to support our people that they were elected for. people as i did the reporting for this article said there are $313 million sitting there that nobody can touch and nobody wants it. think of the national need that that could address. in total terms, it's a relatively small amount of funding.

even so, there are some very worthwhile efforts, social programs, just basic debt reduction. why do you want money sitting -- sitting there? host: could it be transferred to something else? guest: all of that could be done if congress decides to take it on. are a lot of interesting conversations about how to free that money up. i will be watching this very closely. our guest is also a fellow -- former deputy editor at politico. our guest is marilyn thompson from the washington post and a contributing writer at the atlantic. the piece is the price of public money. olympia, washington. june is next on the democrats line. caller: i am calling about two

things. one is that i've heard nearly $2 of free advertising has been given to donald trump from the media. i'm so tired of hearing about him, i can't stand it. wrote a letter to msnbc to complain about their coverage of the election. , in myve hours of time mind, to donald trump. a minute to hillary clinton and the seconds to bernie sanders. i supported bernie sanders and actually donated money, which i rarely do. it was a small amount of money, .ut even so, i was really hurt

after five seconds, they were tired of listening to him and what he had to say. i can understand young people supporting him. we have -- we give interest-free money to the banks and then the government loans that two students who are trying .o go to college the government could help students directly. host: thank you, june. guest: i want to recommend you take a look at a paper that just came out within the past several person, thenother wonderful tom patents and -- patterson. he did a paper that is getting a lot of attention really analyzing media coverage of the

candidates during the primaries and establishes with very high level of certainty how trump fared in comparison to other candidates. for those of us in this business you see how this played out. my research assistant andrew and i did an article for u.s. news & world report earlier in the season that was just amazing to show how trump basically recognized and capitalized on by getting comments amazing coverage after each one. we documented that in a series of graphs. was barack obama's position on public funding? many people feel that obama totally betrayed them in .he system

in 2008, obama said he would accept public money, he was always a campaign-finance reform advocate. again, in the midst of campaigning, realized what he was up against, he changed his position. he said no, i won't take public money. i'm going to go out and try to raise money over the internet and through small donations and the actually did with huge success. but he abandoned the public finance system. financethe campaign reformers have not forgiven him for that. that he wouldthem take this on as a cause and try soget the system refined that it could be a viable system. for politicaled reasons that he really couldn't

take it on. he had a hugely successful effort. look at the comparative analysis. could he have one with the cost of living adjusted amount that would have been available at that time? no. host: ted on the independent line. go ahead. caller: i was thinking we should probably take all the money out of the election from corporate cs.nsors and pa maybe have a $1000 donation per citizen and that's it. you're a candidate, you should be limited to about $1 million and have a public platform for debate on every night of the week and we can get together and elect the person who's really qualified. that's a good idea.

i don't see a lot of bipartisan agreement on how to address the system. there has been a divisive feeling about it from the beginning. host: jamie from iowa on the republican line. caller: hi, my name is jamie. i follow politics, i have for years and years. i'd like to make a statement. that people see having power were actually created by the federal courts and i think that those should be revoked because i think they have an unfair influence on the american public. i think they have a lot of ideas, they put false ideas out there. i think it is interesting that bernie sanders is running for

free college when the time that he served for office, they increased the percentage rate of student loans. questionsswer some runningose interesting point for the candidates? guest: i would have to say that many people agree with you that a lot of the burden for fixing campaign-finance is now centered squarely on the supreme court. couple ofmade a decisions over the past few years, most notably citizens united, that have completely changed the landscape of public finance and campaign-finance in general. fixing the system may be hard to believe as many people we have the supreme court take action to refine or revoke

citizens united. host: rich creek, virginia. independent line. joe, good morning. caller: iran for public office one time. think one way you can make it change for the states to their of electoral college where the electoral votes are delegated out by congressional district. that way, the politician not to spend the same amount of money that they would in a lower populated area. after an election, when someone gets elected, like some of the incumbents, they should not be allowed to have that money in their account. for those who don't have money to run against those who have 3 million or $4 million in the bank account.

the best way to fix it is for the states to change the electoral college system to electoral votes delegated out by congressional district. interesting. one of the original theories behind public financing touches on something that you noted. it is something -- which is how do you level the playing field? guydo you give the little as good a chance at getting elected as the well-funded guy. that was the motivating force for the idea in the beginning. it has worked when it has been effective. as we mentioned, jimmy carter was a nobody. he was a georgia governor who had very little public name recognition.

you, this system allowed them to get elected. host: as far as the fund itself. candidates take money and are no longer the race, do they have to give it back? guest: no. martin o'malley putting his claim a little over a million dollars. within a couple of weeks, he dropped out. it did allow him in that final stage of the campaign to get bank financing to show that he was going to be able to repay the loan, but know you do not have to pay the money back. according to the federal election commission, it is supposed to be very rigorously audited to make sure that there is no misuse of public funds.

i found this fascinating as i was doing my research. the program has fallen into such disuse over the years that it's relegated to a single employee at the federal election commission, that is how the fund in -- is administered. in an ideal world, they will go back and audit martin o'malley like they said they would and make sure the money was properly administered. everett, massachusetts. republican line. stephen, hello. caller: good morning. i want to thank you for answering the phone for me today. i would like to ask the lady a question. i will make it real short. -- like to find out, is bernie sanders got his money from donors, small donors.

that is great. donald trump -- i'm talking about the primaries. he got his money through himself. two questions. clinton, i see on msnbc, cnn and fox news, i watch everything. , she gets itmoney from saudi arabia, from kuwait, she gets donations. she is using that money through the foundation and so forth. that's the first one. could you explain that. andrew, how dois you know andrew? isn't that a conflict of interest? i could've sworn that you know him and he worked for you or something.

if you can answer those two questions, i'd appreciate that. thank you again and i'm glad that you are on. guest: to the first point, you may be a little confused. hillary clinton for the selection is not allowed to take foreign donations and she is not taking foreign donations. there has been a lot of press coverage about money that is theg -- that is coming to clinton foundation for its various programs. a lot of that money is in fact from foreign interests. for strictly the campaign purposes, she is not allowed to take foreign donations. if she were, that would be a clear fcc issue.

as far as andrew and conflict of interest. andrew worked with me for three months as a research assistant. he is a harvard student. he is a great guy and it was a wonderful relationship. i think he is still very interested, at least interested enough to call in with a good question. host: democrats line from indiana. caller: good morning. thank you. . have a solution i am a democrat, i am 79 years old. i have served as a legislature. -- legislator. what we need to do is bring the amount of time for campaigning down to the first of the year of the election year. limit the money from outside interests.

we need to bring the abc, nbc, cbs into this. the airwaves belong to the people. therefore, they should be forced to give a certain amount of time to each citizen who is running for office because the airwaves belong to the people. host: thank you, caller. guest: you made a very good point fair at the beginning about the amount of time spent on fundraising. that is a big concern in the campaign finance world. someone made the point in my interviews that if you look back

at when ms. public financing system was functioning well in the days of ronald reagan for , ronald reagan did not spend all of his time out on the road raising money for the party or for himself. compare that to the current situation with president obama constantly on the road trying to raise money for the party and the candidates seeking office. , a lot ofly stunning effort is being put into the sheer mechanics of raising money. host: sarah from vernon, new york on the independent line. caller: good morning, how are you? guest: hello. caller: i would like you to explain to the american public what a call center is. from what i understand,

listening to 60 minutes and different programs like that, a senator or representative is required to spend two hours a day calling their constituents to raise money for their party. , if they spent two hours a day trying to pass bills for the american public. that i've been watching news for a long time and i've never heard about call centers until this year when 60 took us into them and show them what they look like. guest: i didn't see this 60 minutes episode, but call centers are a fact of life and

they are very active in the fundraising for political campaigns. about specific requirements of two hours a day, but it would not surprise me that really prominent members of the political party, part of their mission is to raise money for the effort. it's interesting. what happens between now and the next presidential campaign in four years? guest: it keeps dribbling in as tax returns come in. april, which was of course the filing deadline for taxes. aboutwas a little bump of $12 million. in may, when some of the people dragging along like i happen to be this year, another $9

million. it will continue. the extended deadline is october, so you will be seeing little amounts of money come into that bond throughout the process. and then, you will get to the next election and you will have a bigger chunk. host: what is the participation rate like for the people checking the box? guest: it is a little over 5%. i got a tweet this morning from people actually still check that box? i think a lot of people do it without any -- without any idea of where the money is going. ec will say they're worried that there's not enough education about the fund and how it could be used. host: if you want to learn more

about the fund, you can read in the the article atlantic, the price of public money. written by our guest marilyn thompson. thank you for your time. guest: thank you, it was really nice. host: another edition of washington journal comes your way. -- comes your way tomorrow. ♪ >> the u.s. senate gavels in at 3:00 eastern today. lawmakers will vote on gun amendment's scheduled at 5:30 eastern. in session, not

members will return tomorrow to continue work on 2017 federal spending. we will have live coverage on c-span. secretaries of state getting together to talk about strategies for combating terrorism around the world. the women's foreign policy group will be starting at 12:50 eastern. with fccill be live chair tom wheeler to talk about the future of wireless technology in the u.s.. he will take questions from the audience. c-span, robert mcdonald reveals changes that he is making to his department to improve that are in access to health where -- health care. the senate meeting today at 3:00 ontern later this afternoon floor measures dealing with gun control.