-- clean power plan. and then david french on what is ♪ good morning, it is october 3. the first monday in october, marking the start of a new term of the u.s. supreme court. live pictures on this monday morning. it is a court the remains justiceseight beginning to focus on a number of key cases. center republicans holding firm on not holding any confirmation nominee,on a ninth merrick garland. ohio for trump, in hillary clinton.

of their speeches one day before the vice presidential debate. does the vacancy on the court, as well as pastoral potential future decisions -- past or potential future decisions affect your decision? republicans, call (202) 748-8001 , democrats, call (202) 748-8000 . independents, call (202) 748-8002. if you are a member of a third party, call (202) 748-8003. you can send us a tweet, @cspanwj, or join us on facebook. we are keeping an eye on the supreme court as oral arguments begin this week. yesterday was the traditional red mass in washington, d.c. the is the headline from weekend edition of "usa today," the court on the brink of transformation.

actions president's could bring on monumental shifts in legal owner stones. from harry reid and mitch mcconnell on america garland -- on the merrick garland nomination. give us a call. david savage of the "l.a. times," is writing about this. , dividedhe headline supreme court opens a new term that could bring a historic shift. he says and evenly divided supreme court opens the new term with a few dozen mostly low-profile cases. perhaps the biggest question of the year won't even be settled by the justices. instead, voters this november will effectively decide the for thedeological bend next four years and possibly much longer. not since 1968 has the high court had a vacancy to be filled by the winner of the next president election.

let's hear from centiliters on the merrick garden -- senate .eaders on the merrick garland the senate said they would not take up the nomination until election was over. here's harry reid. [video clip] they refuse to consider the nomination of merrick garland. he was mounted 195 days ago. 190 -- nominated 195 days ago. have ignored they the fact that merrick garden -- merrick garland is extreme the qualified. he would show the american people what kind of a man he is. what kind of judge he would be. it would be very hard for republicans to vote against him. so they just decide to double

down and not even allow hearing. host: the comments of the senate democrat leader harry reid, who will be stepping down at the end of this year. and robert barnes, longtime reporter for the "washington post," covering the high court. supreme court to begin the new term shorthanded as the ideological balance hinges on fall vote. he points out that as of today, merrick garland has been waiting 201 days for the senate to act on his nomination. the president tapping merrick garland one month after antonin scalia is death. the senate will not even hold a hearing on the nomination. is the chiefnd judge of the u.s. court of appeals for the district of columbia. the next president impact on the court could go well blonde -- well beyond the choice and could be felt for decades. area senate -- here is senate republican leader mitch mcconnell. [video clip]

mcconnell: i don't expect to learn when to be elected, and we party made it clear that a nomination to the supreme court by this president will not be filled this year. host: that from senator mitch mcconnell. does the supreme court of sector 2016 vote? we're taking your tweets, @cspanwj. can also share your comments on our facebook page and your phone calls. ron from eagle river, wisconsin. democrats line. good morning. caller: yes, i think this issue is the biggest main reason i'm going to vote this upcoming election. i think -- if you look back upon 's legacy wasn't really the iraq war. it was how the supreme court was loaded. it gave us these open policies for money in our elections.

where billionaires now can control or sway our elections. it's just not fair. we need to get back to one person, one vote, and that's it. this thing about money and politics is the biggest concern. that's one of the first things we should get rid of after this election. assuming that hillary wins. this is another reason to vote for her. host: ron, thank you. a big senate race in wisconsin as well. how are you going to vote in that contest? caller: definitely democratic. i am voting for russ. johnson hasn't done a thing for the state, and he has made money -- is a business deal for him. host: thank you for the call. we are covering the key senate, house, and gubernatorial races. there's one in california this week. the full schedule is available on c-span.org.

gary is joining us from arlington, virginia on the democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am definitely going to be voting democrat, and the supreme court is definitely part of it. everything that the gop has done has been dereliction of duty to basically nullify the election. it's to the point of treason. toreally need to get back filling the supreme court, -- it'she president ridiculous in the extreme. host: thanks for the call. if you are republican, join in on the conversation that -- join in on the conversation, call (202) 748-8001. for third parties, call (202) 748-8003. we go to ed from west virginia. aller: the supreme court has

big effect on how i vote. i'm independent to the bone. i have two senators, one is a democrat from west virginia, was a republican. -- one is a republican. i love them both, i'm tickled to death with both of them. but the supreme court to me -- i used to really believe that the -- i thought that was the way it was. they voted the law, but they don't vote the law anymore. they vote for politics. i think it is a sham to even call it a court, the supreme court, the way they vote for politics. you never see one of them switchover on anything. it's always either to the left or to the right. from west virginia, thank you for the call. the court is going to a new term with a 4-4 left right split.

the anthony kennedy has been known to crossover occasionally. the piece is available on the "after cisco chronicle," website -- "san francisco chronicle," website. 4-4r the court's rules, a split allows a lower court decision to stand, though it is not considered president. antonin scalia a wrote piercing opinions. the court has had four such ties after justice scalia's death. in alabama, good morning. caller: thank you for c-span. i would just like to say that on the republicans -- donald trump is talking about opening up energy in america.

when i look for this,: dirty and dirty energy all over america, what will happen is that we will be a country that will destroy our atmosphere and everything like that. energy is what we need most in america. host: virgil from alabama, thanks for the call. foxbusiness is writing about one case, that's likely to get a lot of attention in the coming term. the u.s. supreme court to deal with the insider trading law. set to consider this week a closely watched trading case that could limit the ability of prosecutors to pursue such charges against hedge fund managers and other traders. the justices will hear arguments on wednesday. in the case of an illinois man who prosecutors say made nearly $1.2 million trading on inside

information about mergers involving clients of citigroup , where his brother-in-law worked. it's the first time in two decades the spring court has taken up a case involving insider trading. a crime that congress has never defined and his let the courts shape. sec he was facing up to three years in prison, at issue is his that the government must prove that alleged source of secrets like the brother-in-law received a tangible method like cash in exchange for tips. more details on the foxbusiness website. from a republican, carlin berkeley springs, west virginia. will they affect how you vote? caller: yes, it will. i began to think it was democrats only this morning for a little bit. vote,oing to affect my mainly for the justice department.

vote for trump just to get rid of that bunch of the justice department. they have squelched the irs scandal, the hillary clinton scandal, the gunrunning scandal. it's absolutely -- it will affect my vote. i will be voting republican all the way. host: thanks for the call. from michigan, sharing was on the phone on the line for republicans. how will the vacancy affect your vote? caller: the vacancy on the supreme court will affect my vote for these reasons. first, i find it deplorable that the supreme court does not have term limits. as soon as ruth bader ginsburg gets up to the age that she's that. -- that she is at. i don't like the way the supreme court changes the laws that were passed, like roe versus wade was passed in 1972.

and the reason for roe versus wade was passed was mistakes were made. the majority are pro-life. they should leave roe versus years to passfive by act of congress. they should leave the 1972 law alone. third, i will reiterate, i find it deplorable they do not have term limits on the supreme court. host: thank you for the call. we found this letter to the editor from the "pittsburgh tribune," website focusing on the supreme court, and the question we are asking -- whether or not it will affect your decision on how you vote in 2016. it's from john gregory parks in bethel park, pennsylvania. he says it's a shame that one of the biggest issues in the presidential campaign is the possible selection of supreme court justices. it truly shows that our elected leaders in the senate don't understand or care to understand

the very constitution they swore to uphold and defend. the supreme court is not a legislative body, and it is irresponsible for candidates and elected officials to surrender such power to a group that is likely to make a decision based on how the justices feel, their political beliefs, or some obscure law from some foreign land. our responsibility to the constitution is to elect candidates who understand the proper roles of the three branches of government. blive, the tribune website, a letter to the editor. ,et's hear from a democrat leroy is on the phone from rosedale, maryland. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. yes, it does affect how i vote. i don't want anything turned back were taken away from us that we have already received. like roe versus wade. , i think itoice should be a woman's right to decide what to do with her body.

and the affordable care act, i'm all for that. i'm concerned about who gets but they are, because i don't want to lose anything that we've already gained. host: leroy, thanks for the call. alice is joining us from connecticut, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, you were on the air, alice. vote will be for republicans, because i'm afraid that if hillary appoints people to the supreme court, we're going to have -- she is going to try to limit our first and second amendment. host: alice, thanks for the call. a couple comments on the facebook page. the question -- does the supreme court affect your .16 vote -- your 2016 vote. of course it does, the democrats injuriously use judicial activism to fort the constitution when they cannot art at the ballot box -- thw

the constitution when they cannot win at the ballot box. if it were a different republican candidate, i would say yes, since it's trump, i say no. he could do much more damage than the supreme court. donald trump speaking at the family research council event about a month ago, talking about the vacancy on the supreme court , and how we would fill the vacancy and others. here's donald trump in september. [video clip] voterump: i pledge to judges that will uphold the constitution, protector religious liberty, and apply the law as written. [applause] judges whowe reject rewrite the constitution to oppose their own personal views on 300 million plus americans. i have made public a list of judges, as i said, that will guide my selection process.

hillary clinton has refused to provide such a list. we brought it out, let's see your list. if you ever saw the list, you would walk out of your not feeling very well. -- out of here not feeling very well. because she knows the extremist judges she would pick would be rejected by the overwhelming majority of the american public. they would be rejected. clinton's judicial picks would allow her to completely take over american health care, the american economy, and american's religious liberty, not to mention your second amendment, which is on very thin ice right now, as you know. because of the fact that we are 4-4. if they think even one judge that is wrong, you can kiss the second amendment goodbye. and we don't want to see that. host: a live look at the u.s. supreme court and the comments of donald trump about month ago.

the revelation late saturday by the "new york times," on his nearly $1 billion loss in i-5, and impacting whether or not he pays taxes. janet cooke of the "wall street journal." donald trump's president will campaign has been thrown off balance by a string of controversies topped by revelations about his taxes this weekend that have left republicans increasingly anxious that he is running out of time to make closing arguments to undecided voters.

host: we will have live coverage of the debate next sunday, and live coverage of the vice president will debate from longwood university tomorrow evening. our coverage getting underway at 7:30 p.m. eastern, 4:30 p.m. on the west coast. app, if youe radio want to listen to c-span radio. including podcasts and other programming. this program is carried live on c-span radio. our listeners, including gary joining us from lansing, michigan on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have become a real "washington iurnal," junkie since retired. i absolutely love your show.

the supreme court is going to be the most critical factor in my decision to vote. i'm not really thrilled with any of the candidates that are running. but based on the supreme court, i'm going to be voting for hillary clinton. college, i was in getting my accounting degree, i took a number of business law classes. i could usually look at the case studies and pretty much figure out what the decision would have sense and on common what i knew of the law. unfortunately now, with the supreme court, when i see what cases they are going to take, i can almost tell you what the decision is going to be based on what the politics are. because --sad me saddens me because i would like

to see a supreme court that we can really feel confident that the decisions would be based on what the law is, and not with the politics of the justices are. host: gary, thanks for the call. congratulations on your retirement and sex for being a regular viewer of the "washington journal." forppreciate -- and thanks being a regular viewer of the "washington journal." from fox news, the headline supreme court cautious as a term begins thundercloud of vacancy politics. donald trump thinks clarence thomas is very strong and -- andent embraces praises his colleague of samuel alito. listed 21 people he things would be perfect companions on the supreme court. hillary clinton loved the idea of justice barack obama, but has been coy on others who might get

a nomination. --hael says liberal of them liberalism is a disease that should be kept away from our courts. we've been able to dodge much of what obama tried to do. having a left wing with no chance of a balance scotus would be harder to dodge the damage from. she says yes, no more conservative activists like scalia, thomas, and alito. we have been to thank for citizens united, the heller ruling on guns, and getting the voting rights act. garland would be confirmed in the lame-duck session in november. michael says no, but it was like hillary and donald will both stick in some corporate puppet judge who sucks. that's what's really matters. your comments on facebook.com/c-span. from parksville, tennessee, republican line. morning. caller: good morning. thank you for your show. i watch it just about every morning. host: thank you.

caller: i enjoy it. i would just like to say that it is very, very important to me who gets on the supreme court. after the judge scalia that wem very worried will have a different set of -- and on leveling of the judge -- un-leveling of the judges. i want them to be even. i want them to be able to be even, where they will be able to discuss things and have a of discussionief on both sides. host: barbara, thanks for the call, from tennessee.

pew research taking a look at the top issues that will influence people's decision on election day. number four, the server in court. democrats line, -- the supreme court. democrats line, good morning. caller: this question you are continuous of this obstructionism by mitch mcconnell and the rest of these johnny reb gop right wings try to take this country back to the 1950's. the only reason mcconnell and his obstructionist buddies are doing this is because of their hatred for president obama. i don't think history will smile on this. the rest of these johnny reb's, that's about all i have to say. all this citizens united ,usiness and the koch brothers and billionaires buying all the elections.

why don't you ever have any democrats on? all you got as these right-wingers, and they're just talking, talking, talking. spice it up a little bit. get some righteous guys on there. host: i think we do that as well, if you watch all the program. thank you for adding your voice to the conversation. it should who says not matter. that reinforces there really is a separation of powers. cnn politics looking at this issue from the prism of the senate republican leader mitch mcconnell. how the republican leader won the scotus fight for now. and bloomberg politics, when nobody is talking about the supreme court. we are here, on the first monday of october, asking you if it impacts how you are going to vote on election day. carl in pennsylvania, thank you for waiting. republican line. caller: i'm a republican, this

is going to be different. i definitely think that merrick garden needs to be confirmed -- merrick garland needs to be confirmed, because if hillary gets into office, we did have much worse coming down the pipe. host: ramona in new york. the morning. caller: i would just like to say that i would also like to see more women on the supreme court. they seem to have a little had. -- a level head. i don't want to see roe versus wade taken away, because it's a woman's right to choose. and the more that republicans get a chance, they are whittling away, state by state by state. and it is not right. host: thank you for the call. one of our viewers saying we have had a conservative court for 40 years, time for a change. hillary clinton talking about the supreme court. she spoke earlier on the

campaign trail at the university of new hampshire, one of the battleground states in this election. here's the democratic nominee. [video clip] thought ion: i never would hear someone running for president, my opponent, who says to appoint supreme court justices that would overturn marriage equality and turn the clock back on lgbt americans. overturn a woman's right to make her own health care decisions and reverse that fundamental right. host: hillary clinton the campaign trail in new hampshire. if you are listening on the c-span radio, the question is whether or not the vacancy on the supreme court and decisions that will come down the pipe will impact whether you are going to vote for the democrat, republican, or third-party candidate. join the conversation, republicans, call (202) 748-8002 -- republicans, call (202) 748-8001, democrats, call (202)

748-8000. mike, in georgia. good morning. caller: good morning. yes, it will affect my decision. , what many ofcan your callers referred to as a right-wing crazy. i view the constitution as the lens from which the supreme court should view how they rule on laws passed, and on critical social issues. i'm a conservative because again, that is my view. fan of justiceg particularthat reason. he was an original list and he was a constitutionalist. --appears from my viewpoint conservatives and conservative justices look at the constitution as it was written. it's not a living document.

it simply isn't. it's designed to be modified, that's why the founders of the constitution allowed for the constitution should be amended. but it cannot just be changed at will by a congress or by legislation. -- again, so this many liberals and democrats are just apoplectic about citizens united. but if you ask them why they are , it's money in politics, this and that. if you look at how citizens united ruling came down, it was based on the mccain-feingold law that president bush should have never signed. we have legislators, congressmen and senators, who passed laws -- totally ignoring their duty to uphold the constitution. inside that law was written severe restrictions on private parties and whomever. it was based on a movie about hillary clinton. restricting the right of the

people within 90 days of election for exercising their freedom of speech, especially political speech. and george bush should have never signed the law. it should have never been written because on the face of it, it was unconstitutional. so it gets to the supreme court and what was delivered was probably a lot harsher than the left of ever dreamed. basically, the supreme court ruled you cannot restrict speech. you cannot tell people they adsot make a movie or buy to support their candidates. citizens united does not allow for the unlimited amount of money from the koch brothers or from george soros to flow directly into the pockets of campaigns. it does allow for the purchase of advocacy advertising to further an advance a cause or canada. that has been going -- or candidate. that has been going on for a long time.

i'm a supporter of heller versus washington, d.c. and the second amendment. i will probably vote for donald trump, though i'm not a big fan. but whoever he appoints is going to be far better and far more friendly to the original constitution and the second amendment and things like that, then hillary clinton will ever be. host: thank you. you know your stuff, we appreciate it. a couple of tweets we want to share with you, this is from richard rogers who says just as obama sounds good to me. that's michelle, of course. and another viewers saying advise and consent, read the constitution, liberals. the supreme court isn't supposed to have an ideology, at least that's what we were taught in high school. and this from another viewer, we had a conservative court for 40 years, it is time for a change. withwall street journal," this headline, the presidential election will shape the supreme court and national policies for years to come. a win by democrat hillary

clinton would set the stage for liberal majority on the supreme court. something not seen since the retirement of chief justice or a arren. -- earl w a green party candidate supporter, in new york. good morning. won't: the supreme court change my vote, but it intensifies the importance for voting. say i really called up to is i think the federal court system all told should be restructured. particularly, on the supreme court. the one thing in all this world with which i agree with mike huckabee is that i don't like lifetime appointments. i would rather see each supreme court justice get an 18 year term, so the one is replaced every two years. that would ensure that each president would have as much

effect on the supreme court as every other one term president. the same would apply to a two-term president. host: robert, thanks for the call. marianne joining us from altoona, pennsylvania. caller: good morning. how are you? host: we are fine. caller: i'm going to tell you that no matter what the courts do, that's not going to affect my voting. i will definitely vote for donald trump, because for one thing, i think that no matter she will probably vote for somebody really good for supreme court. but we have to get a good .resident in there i am republican, i will vote republican for donald. he had better stop making so many comments on tv, because i'm getting annoyed. anyways, i want to thank you very much for your time. host: thank you, we appreciate

the call from altoona, pennsylvania. on the sunday before the first monday in october, a traditional red mass takes place as a masters -- st. matthew's cathedral in washington, d.c. a number of justices attending the services. this is what it looked like as the chiefal joining justice of the united states. you can see john roberts, who is catholic, joining other justices .ho attended the red mass taking place before the first monday in october in washington, d.c. we will watch that as we listen to dell from new york. democrats line, good morning. caller: good morning. i'm just so frustrated, when they are worried about the democrats are going to elect -- appoint a liberal. when you hear the republicans , they areht now trying to -- in different states, because the supreme diluted down the election

criteria to be able to vote. knowsjust so our audience what they are looking at, that is justice clarence thomas and justice samuel alito, and justice anthony kennedy, appointed by ronald reagan. this is yesterday outside of saint matthews cathedral in washington, d.c. . believei just cannot that the american people are buying into this from -- trump sing, and he is going to put a conservative on the supreme court. this, when celia passed away, i opened a bottle of champagne. passedds -- when celia away -- when justice scalia

passed away, i opened a bottle of champagne. didounds despicable, but he more harm to america. host: we go to bay city, michigan, good morning. how will the vacancy and pending supreme court decisions affect your vote in november? caller: it will affect my vote in november as well, with the idea of the appointments by hillary clinton, and her allowing all of these immigrants in that are predominantly islam. they are predominantly for sharia law. i really fear that that court will be stocked with people like that. in addition to liberals who are for abortion. host: thanks, laura. if you do get through, there's a little bit of a delayed. if you turn the volume down,

that will eliminate the echo. the affordable care act is front page on the "new york times," the next president likely to shape the health care law state. out theirle to carry affordable care act was supposed to put an end to 75 years of fighting for health care system to ensure all americans. instead, the law's troubles could make it a way station on the road to another more stable health care system. host: the story goes on to say donald trump and the republican congress would go in the direction of less congress, reducing federal regulation requirements. host: anna is joining us from new jersey. good morning, welcome to the conversation.

caller: thank you for allowing me to share my thoughts on the subject, which is so very important. important is very that everybody understands that three that should be forrate jurisdictions making the laws of our country's determining what the laws are. losshe real threat is the of decency and politics. and the failure has been the congress and senate have been nothing but obstructionist, expecting a president to never what heto achieve deserves to achieve, in his eight years that he has been elected. host: anna, thanks for the call. tj, it's very clear that judges

appointed by the democratic most take away rights from citizens and give more power to the government. a list of potential judges if donald trump becomes president. among those, senator mike lee, republican of utah. margaret ryan, a judge of u.s. court of appeals for armed services. fred riegel marino, a judge in the u.s. district court for the southern district of florida, and robert young, the chief justice of the michigan supreme court. more details at cbs news.com. maryland.us from good morning, democrats line. caller: thank you for taking my call. my comment is, i'm a lifelong democrat. democrat,rmally vote but i have changed my mind this time it. i will be voting republican. i've just been so upset with the

misstatements by mrs. clinton and her staff. the e-mail crisis, the corruption, the money taken from all of these foreign countries that filter in to the clinton , giving those folks access to the state department. the u.s. state department. i think it's outrageous. whites,sing everyone -- no matter what color you are, being racist. i'm just filled up, i can't take anymore. i will be voting republican. host: bob, thank you, from maryland. new, steve, now you have me thinking about voting this cycle. the supreme court should be talked about more. a tweet from viewers saying from is unstable and unfit. isget about -- trump unstable and unfit. forget about having a supreme court, nuclear trump would end the usa as we know it.

taxis posing a new challenge for donald trump. rudy giuliani making the rounds on sunday morning programs, defending what donald trump did. here's an. -- an excerpt of apple -- of that. [video clip] faileduliani: what you to say that this is perfectly legal. the times makes that point about 26 paragraphs into the opinion. number two, the times fails to point out that he has an obligation as the head of the business to take advantage of and use the lawful deductions and tax advantages that are available to you. do that,my clients to because if they don't do it, they get sued by their co-investors and investors. it lose jobs for their employees. and the reality is that this is rather common in large, gigantic american businesses. you might remember a few years

ago, it was pointed out that ge paid no taxes. the reality is that this is part of our tax code. the man is a genius, he knows how to operate the tax code to the benefit of the people he is serving. cnn, oney giuliani on of the five sunday shows which we carry on the c-span radio, beginning with "meet the press," every sunday. --s also heard on serious xm siriusxm. the supreme court has had a conservative majority for over 40 years, it is time for a change. kenneth says yes, hillary will appoint super liberal court justices. i choose trump. steven grant me says yes, jill stein used to appoint people that aren't bought. more from the sunday morning programs and on donald trump, here is senator bernie sanders. [video clip]

senator sanders: if everyone in this country was a genius like mr. trump is, we would not have a country. i think it's outrageous and it speaks to one of the issues that secretary clinton is talking about and i have talked about. we have massive income and wealth inequality in this country today. the rich are getting richer, almost everybody else is getting poorer. yet billionaires like donald trump are able to manipulate the tax system so they avoid paying federal income tax. in addition to that, you have by largeax avoidance multinational corporations. $100 billion every signal year. if mr. giuliani thinks that mr. trump is smart and all the rest of us are dummies because we believe in america, we believe in national defense, i think you have a very distorted view of the american people and what this country is about. abc's "this week," with george stephanopoulos and senator bernie sanders.

this is from "new york times," past taxuggles to move revelation after a bruising week. coloradoin pueblo, taking place at 5:00 eastern time. hillary clinton is in akron, ohio getting the endorsement of lebron james. this is the headline this morning from inside the "wall street journal," shifting to the understudy. coverage of the vice president debate tomorrow evening. maria joining us from columbus, new jersey on the republican line. caller: good morning. vote for mr. trump, just for the supreme court. to presidentter bush, and i said i'm very disappointed. i never imagined the you had

resentment and revenge in your heart. do you really think that mrs. clinton will be better for our country? i will give you two words -- supreme court. thank you. i will always love you, god bless you, you and your family. sincerely, maria. host: thank you for the call from columbus, new jersey. we will continue our conversation on the vacancy in the court and today marking the start of the new term for the united states supreme court. joining us from capitol hill is lawrence hurley, who is covering the court for reuters news. david doniger will be here to take your calls on the clean water and clean air bills. ons is "washington journal," monday, october 3. back in a moment. ♪

>> the notion of a vehicle that can drive itself is no longer science fiction. it's only a question of when, not if. >> on "the communicators," we look at self driving cars. tonight we talk with the head of the national highway traffic safety association. and a reporter from thomson reuters joins the opposition. >> when are they going to arrive? they are here, they are on the roads. all of us need to focus on how to we make sure a are as safe as possible, because they offer us potential -- tremendous lifesaving potential. >> "the connecticut is," tonight

at 8:00 eastern on c-span two. ahead of tuesday's vice presidential debate, we take a look back at the candidates. virginia senator tim kaine and indiana governor mike pence, using the c-span video library. the story before. i have turned on the television and seeing the bad news of a shooting or whether emergency or a famine. i've seen the stories, and there will be more stories. but there was something in the store yesterday that was different, it was you. your spirit of even in a dark day, of optimism and community and hope. presidency is the most visible thread that runs through the tapestry of the american government. more often than not, for good or for ill, it sets the tone for spurs thebranches and expectation of the people. its powers are vast and consequential. his requirements from the outset and by definition impossible for mortars -- mortals to fulfill

without humility and attention to its purposes as set forth in the constitution of united states. >> a look at tim kaine and mike pence tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span. andh any time on c-span.org listen at 8:00 p.m. eastern on the c-span radio app. >> "washington journal," continues. host: joining us from capitol hill with the u.s. supreme court in the backdrop is lawrence hurley, who covers the court for thomson reuters. good monday morning. thank you for being with us. guest: good morning. let me begin with a couple of points you have been making on the supreme court. you have to go back to 1864, when the court was last not fully staffed. how does that impact the fall term? , that's 1864cify that we went into election day with out nine justices on the court.

this is uncharted waters for the current members of the court. they never have experienced anything like this. going into the term, it means they have an incentive not to take any issues on which they ,hink they could split 4-4 because they are one just a short. -- one justice short. it's unclear yet when the next justice will be appointed. there is a lot of uncertainty. they are not really sure how this is going to play out, because they don't know when the next justice will get on the court. host: this is your story from , the court has yet to take up any cases of politically sensitive social issues in its new term. instead, as you point out, showing a keen interest in more technical cases of importance to businesses such as disputes over intellectual property. case orssue of ip, what

cases will the courts take up? betweenhe patent case sam's on an apple, -- samsung and apple, fighting over the design of the iphone. case -- patentid ip case is what i took up last week, the trademark case involving an asian-american rock thatcalled the slant wanted to trademark their name, despite it has a history as a racial slur. it's being closely watched, because it can affect a similar case involving the washington redskins football team that has -- the u.s. hadn't and trademark office wants to cancel because we historical connotations of the redskins word. the washington redskins has been a big story in

washington, d.c. what could the court decided what impact could it have on the team? guest: if they rule in favor of this rock band called the slant, it would effectively strike down a law that prevents people from trademarking terms that are deemed to be disparaging. as a free speech issue. wins this case are right, that would mean the redskins also win their case. lose, thereif they are still ways in which the redskins could win their case. there's also a case involving a woman who posted her toddler dancing to the music of prince. you are calling it a quirky copyright law case. guest: the court hasn't decided whether they're going to hear it , but they will in the next couple of months. that one comes out of youtube, people posting videos on youtube of their kids dancing to music

and so on, which a lot of people have done. when the record company told this woman to take down the video because she was ,sing some of a prince song whether they misled her, because they said she had to take it down. when in fact, under copyright law, you are allowed to use snippets of certain materials if it's not key to what the video is. host: a number of states having early voting, and one of the issues the court decided not to take up, resulting in a loss for ohio democrats. ohio is a key battleground state for democratic republicans. hillary clinton will be there later today. what did the court decide not to do? the court had three emergency actions in the last month or so involving the election. one from ohio, one from michigan, one from north carolina. theme three, the common has been the court wanted to stay out of it.

both democrats and republicans have benefited in different states from those decisions. what that shows is with the court split 4-4, with a divisive issue like election voting rights, they are keen to stay out of those. host: the me ask you about the nomination of merrick garland. let me share with you what the "washington post," wrote about merrick garland and the politics behind that. as another gop operative put it, merrick garland did nothing to inspire the left-wing of the democratic party, which was already vocal and restless. well mitch mcconnell picked a fight and united his base, it's increasingly rare in washington, d.c. that the gop grassroots is united with party leaders. but this did it. talk about the garlic -- the garland nomination and why the president chose him. and what potentially might happen after the election before

the next president is sworn in. guest: it seemed like when judge garland was nominated, there was a needle that the admin station could thread that would have got him on the court -- that the administration could thread that would have got him on the court. if they pick someone on controversial and moderate, that would put pressure on republicans to let him through. mcconnell, senator within hours of justice scalia's ,eath in february said no way we are not going to appoint anyone this year because it is election year. the next president will get to choose. and nothing the democrats have been able to do has dislodged that. most of the republicans have stayed behind that message as well. it's just been hard going for them to break through. at this point, it hasn't really worked in the short term. in the long-term, with the election to come, it bears people watching to say if

hillary clinton wins the election and the democrats gain some seats in the senate, that might put pressure on republicans to move in the lame-duck session after the election. that could be merrick garland's last chance to get on. scenario, if the republicans don't move ahead with the nomination, hillary clinton is free when she takes whoever sheck wants. she doesn't have to stick with merrick garland. she hasn't pledged that she would. his chances my go -- might go once the new president takes office. host: levy take this one step further. saying when republicans wake up and realize hillary will pick the next justice, will they try and push through garland? clock?s run out the if republicans and say we're

going to move on america garland -- on the merrick garland nomination before the next , whatent is sworn in would mitch mcconnell have to say to his report and colleagues? speculating, it may be the pressure comes more from the republican members rather than from mcconnell itself -- himself. there is already been some republican senators that indicated they would be willing to do something in the lame-duck session after the election if hillary clinton wins, because they all know who merrick garland is. he is known as not being a particularly left-wing judge. he is very moderate and well thought of. if they were to get him on the , other conservatives might think that was a better option than having hillary clinton come in and potentially get to pick someone who is more liberal. host: one other case you have been writing about, the supreme court has reasons to duck the

transgender rights fight. explain what this is about. guest: this is a case out of virginia, a national issue now. student who school was born a girl, but is now living as a boy and was to use the boys restroom -- wants to use the boys restroom. ,n appeals court in virginia including some obama appointees, ruled in his favor. it was a landmark decision for transgender rights. other cases like this coming up around the country, too. there's an appeal pending at the supreme court, and the question is will the supreme court in when they wade are sort of justice. they may want to skip it at this point, because they have other cases they can take up when i have another justice, and this case only affects this one student in virginia. journal,"l street

writing about the vacancy and what potentially a hillary clinton presidency could mean. by hillary clinton would set the stage for a liberal majority of the supreme court, something not seen since the retirement of chief justice earl warren in 1959. it led to a number of appointees by then-president richard nixon. despite that, there have been some liberal supreme court decisions in that time. especially recently, justice anthony kennedy, though he is a conservative, has sided with liberals on big cases such as gay marriage and abortion last year or early this year. in general terms, we have had a conservative leaning court. if hillary clinton wins the election, there's a prospect for her not just to appoint scalia's replacement, but one or two other justices, as three of the justices on the court now are 78 years old or older. host: our guest is lawrence

hurley, joining us on capitol hill. the supreme court is directly behind him. you can follow him online at reuters.com and he tweets. we are talking about the start of the new term of the u.s. supreme court. is joining us on the independent line from boca raton, florida. caller: actually, you stole my thunder a bit. what hasn't been mentioned is the congress, -- the senate under mitch mcconnell has done something here that is on the face of it, unconstitutional. there is nothing in the constitution that suggests that a president cannot nominate a supreme court justice in his last year of office. and i think it is important to , whoon that senator hatch is not exactly a firebreathing liberal by any stretch of the imagination, indicated file to

-- prior to this debacle that took place that merrick garland was the best nominee that the republicans can hope for. i'm also wondering about this court that approved citizens united. something has to happen to aberrations absolute where corporations now are to kowtow to have this particular situation where billionaires control our elections. i've like to comment if you would on those particular aspects. host: thank you. lawrence hurley? whot: on who gets to decide the next justice is, it's obviously the presence job could nominate a justice,

but it's the senate's job to advise and consent on those nominations. andposition mitch mcconnell of the republicans is that the president can nominate whoever he wants. we do not have to approve that nomination. in fact, what they have done is not do anything on the nomination. that it istrue unprecedented to take the hardline that no president can appoint a justice and election-year because it has happened in the past. it is happened quite a lot in the past. and sides have their points ultimately with these political issues, there was no one to referee those disputes, so it goes on to the election. host: let's go to lead in new york. caller: good morning. the supremeout court for one thing because justice ginsburg got on five different media outlets and

vehemently demonized donald trump even though she apologized later. we see where we are going there. as far as justice garland is concerned, he is well respected. i understand that he is against the second argument and he is for epa rulings. with theown the line revelation so forth when the irs was investigated. ignorancetold that and incompetence is not a criminal offense. when hillary clinton was she wasated, they said not liable for criminal offense either. it seems that it is just going down the line. even with the irs, it seems that in 2012 romney might have been the next president except for the irs with the 401 sees.

i will take my comment offline . host: thank you from new york . recordon judge garland's , he has been on the appeals court in washington from was 20 years. here's a in washington lot of administrative law cases. he has ruled on things like environmental regulations and he has been fairly supportive of government regulations over that time. it is fairly common among judges on that court of both parties. -- the gunon guns lobby has kind of seized on one vote he had, which really doesn't tell us a whole lot about where he stands on guns because he is not actually ruled or written opinion on a case that was a key case that came before him. host: the archbishop of washington, d.c., who presided ,ver yesterday's catholic mass

the traditional red mass that took place at st. matthew's cathedral, he walked down the steps with the chief justice of the united states, john roberts, joined by justices alito and kennedy and brighter. what is the history behind this mass and tradition? guest: it is been going on for quite some time where they have kind ofal community service before the supreme court term. obviously in recent years, the courts have become more and more like catholic justice for whatever reason. up until scilly's death, it was six of the nine. now it is five. it's a strong tradition there . host: now we go to new jersey as we look at the scene outside of the cathedral outside of the white house. also lined out where

president john f. kennedy's mass took place back in november 1973. go ahead, david. caller: what is considered the most realistic projection of the number of supreme court justices who could be replaced within the first term of the next president? thank you. guest: as i mentioned earlier, three of the current justices are over the age of 78. there is a current vacancy on the court. including thessaly a vacancy, one might think -- the scalia vacancy, one might think that justice ginsburg might think about stepping aside. it is more difficult to guess perhaps about justice kennedy, who is 80, and obviously a republican appointee. he may be more keen to be replaced by a republican president. justice breyer is the other one. he is 78. he is probably quite keen to probablyhe court,

because he was the courts junior justice for almost a decade. he might feel that he is just starting to become more of a court andyer on the might wish to continue doing that come as would justice ginsburg. you about johnk roberts, appointed by president george w. bush as chief justice of the united states. the question on cameras in the courtroom does not appear to change in the short-term, but has he become more transparent on it comes to oral arguments? ar, no.in particular know the camera issue has not gotten anywhere despite c-span's best efforts. they make little changes here and there, but there is no major groundbreaking changes coming our way. host: john from michigan on the independent line with

lawrence hurley. caller: i want to thank c-span. mr. hurley, the appointments for the supreme court wher were shown to us in 2000. the united states was leaving the world economically. we had no wars and we had a surplus. george bush was actually appointed. they let it happen in florida where jeb bush was the governor at the time. gore would have won. that shows how important are supreme court is. it is not who we elected. they appointed bush. look at where our country is at now. that's how important it is. host: 16 years later, still

debating bush v gore. guest: it is interesting coming into the election with only eight justices on the court or where thelike that happen, we could be looking at a 4-4 split. when people look to the supreme court to resolve these issues that can't be resolved in congress or the white house or even the ballot box, this year may the supreme court isn't able to do that. you have another branch of government that is not going to be able to resolve a dispute potential. host: sues is joining us next from collegeville, pennsylvania. what you normally consider run you are looking at the supreme court is liberal versus conservative, or at least that is what i have always thought of. think with the people we have for president this year, we need to think globalist versus nationalist.

and that worries me. host: we will get a response. thank you for the call. guest: i was not quite sure what the question was. about theme ask you collegiality between the justices on the supreme court. we obviously see them publicly or publicly hear them during oral arguments, but most of the discussions take place during the meetings behind closed doors. what is the relationship between the eight justices? guest: a lot of it is behind closed doors. -- when i say is that can say is that publicly they talk about how they are all best buddies and are very collegial and respectful of each other. bench and inthe their writings, sometimes there are strong feelings that come out. they say that's only in a small number of cases, but we can only go by what we see. somee see is sometimes

back-and-forth on the bench and some certain justices who do not see eye to eye with their .ustices so much (202) 748-8000 if you are supporting hillary clinton. (202) 748-8001 if you are supporting donald trump. you can send us a tweet at c-span wj. here is mitch mcconnell on the fact that senate republicans would not take up the merrick garland nomination. [video clip] >> first of all i do not expect hillary clinton to be elected . secondly of already made it clear that a nomination to the supreme court by this president not be filled this year. host: he has been adamant since february, you pointed out, lawrence hurley. guest: nothing has changed as far as mitch mcconnell is concerned.

the only thing is whether the election results could change that, whether it's hillary clinton winning the election or the democrats winning the senate or both. the question is whether they are whetherto hold out hillary clinton is going to reappoint merrick garland or someone else. maybe there is someone they can have second thoughts about and they have set a new precedent about the supreme court vacancies in an election year. even going the other way, if hillary clinton wins and the republicans retain control of the senate, whether they actually take their position they have now a step further and just say, we are basically going to hold fort. this is so important that we don't want to appoint any clinton justice and take it even further. host: just follow up on something we have been talking about over the course of the morning. if there is a for-four tie, how

does the lower court decision stand? guest: this happened after scalia died. this included the big immigration case where the obama administration was trying to revise its immigration plan. that split 4-4, which meant the government lost. the lower court decision , but there isfect no national president on it. in certain cases, that means you ltght get a liberal resu because the lower court decision was more liberal leaning or some cases might get a different result. in the immigration case, that was a decision against the administration, so that remains in effect. this term coming up, maybe we will get more for-four votes. so far the court is looking to avoid those types of cases where they could split 4-4. void has big of a

justice scalia's death and on deciding these cases, but his voice -- his dissent or majority opinion? guest: as everyone knows, justice scalia was a very colorful character, a very lively, commented in oral arguments. notablee was certainly by his absence and some of the big cases for the end of the last term, including the big abortion case and the immigration case. one might've thought he probably would have been dissenting in a couple of decisions that came out toward the end of the term. notable by hisso absence on some of those cases, although the abortion case, justice kennedy ended up siding with the liberals. if justice scalia was around, it would have been 5-4, so it would

not have affected that one . host: carl in florida, good morning. caller: i'm wondering if the supreme court, obama, biden took pages out of the bible where it said it's an abomination for man to sleep with men and woman to sleep with woman. we have turned our face against of that even the hypocrites the pastors is when they open up the sessions of the sun and house best senate and house of representatives. prayer, but nothing of a crime. no mention of the word jesus christ because obama is afraid we might make the muslims feel too bad. host: we will get a response . guest: i think actually the spring court in recent years has had a lot of pro-religion

decisions, which have been pushed by christian groups, including one on the legislative prayer a couple years ago. how that wouldet change by stilley is death -- scalia's death. it is possible it could continue that trend. if judge garland came on the court, we do not know his positions on these types of things. host: we begin this program asking our viewers and listeners whether they could see pending decisions affect their vote in the election. much more the supreme court and not politics, but you have a sense of how big an issue or small and issued this may be among key sectors of the electric? electorate? guest: what is clear from the debate last week was that the supreme court was not mentioned at all by either candidate and that tells you something. for as not the key issue

broad number of people. smallk there probably are groups of people who do feel strongly about this as some of the colors you have had on the show has indicated. some christian conservative people who strongly want to have a justice who will be in the same line as justice kennedy. that is a big issue for them. people are also keenly aware of how important the supreme court is because they have been following the abortion issue so long. for a lot of the american people, the supreme court is a lot less kind of front and center in their daily lives. they tend to only pay attention when there is a big decision, which only comes a few times a year. it's usually injured. people are not really thinking closely about how important the supreme court is. despite the efforts of journalists who write stories

about how important the supreme court is and what a big deal it is to have a vacancy on election day, it actually has not resonated that much with the american people. host: a live look at the outside of the u.s. supreme court on this monday morning. laurent early is joining us on capitol hill as the sun begins to rise behind him. the supreme court on our facebook page -- we are asking the question of whether or not the vacancy on the supreme court will impact your 2016 vote. you can join in on the conversation at facebook.com/c-span. -- "if theis tweet senate stays republican after the election, can they go for-eight more years before a justice is seated if hillary is elected?" guest: the assumption would be no. mitch mcconnell has said before that the next president should take the appointment. you would think that would mean hillary clinton if she was

president or donald trump if he is president. obstructionism that has happened in the senate and the way both parties have been in control the senate, they have a lot of power to stop things happening. seeill be interesting to whether there is more that to come, not just in this year but in future years perhaps when the democrats control the senate and there's a republican in the white house. they could then cite this a republicanblock president from appointing a justice. maybe not a year before the election or 18 months before the elections or two years before the election, it could go from there. host: this is from walter jackson. the senate be forced by the courts to undertake the nomination process for the scalia vacancy? guest: no. host: let's go to richard in malden, mass. caller: good morning. how are you?

host: fine, thank you. caller: i want to say something off-color from the supreme court. politicsump is using said he can burn rate his opponents. i want to tell you something. i will take all my money and put it against him and that hillary will win the election. but bothers me is that i saw mitch mcconnell over there saying that the only reason that he is postponing -- i repeat postponing the supreme court is because he doesn't want hillary to get in. the response that i got for my constituents is that the only reason that donald trump was so with at the dinner party 20 minutes -- i had never heard him speak like that. obama ridiculing -- what's the guys name?

donald trump because he knew he was right. politics couldn't save him. could you respond on that? host: richard from malden, thanks for the call. any comments? guest: i think you go back to mitch mcconnell and i think it's true that the republicans felt like their constituency cares more about the supreme court than democrats and that it was more important for them as an election issue to prevent the nomination from going through to keep the seat open for the elections. it's not just because it would help the republican nominee for senatent but also help candidates across the country to show that they are going to stick up for their principles and keep the seat open for republicans to fill. host: another comment from a

viewer -- the supreme court is not supposed to run a political playbook. it is the third branch could supposed to keep the other to enchan and check. caller: good morning. i would like to make an analogy so the liberals will understand what i'm talking about. we have rules like on monopoly. we have and playing monopoly for 50 years and you play by the same rules. then you play monopoly with a liberal and he wants to be the banker. he changes the rules for a few wants to buy hotel, he takes money out of the bank. the supreme court is supposed to be technically a conservative branch. it is not supposed to be political. we supposed to keep the same rules. everybody plays by the same rules. the person that called in and complained about citizens united, i would like to say that jeb bush proved that citizens united is not a threat. million andr $100

look at trump right now. moneyhardly spending any and hillary is spending hundreds of millions to win this. she is just tied with trump. citizens united is just a dog whistle for the democrats. it is no danger at all. thank you very much. host: thank you. guest: i think on the supreme court whether it's political or not, obviously people from each side of the divide always seems to find something political about the supreme court. it is kind of a case of what is in the eye of the beholder. host: dennis on the democrats line with lawrence hurley, who covers for reuters. caller: good morning. once again on the citizens united thing in the previous citizens united is not doing anything now, that's because they did not want

to put any money in the republican candidate now. host: thank you, dennis. lots of interest in this topic. did you want to respond? guest: it is interesting that a lot of the callers bring up citizens united. it's a decision where candidates from both parties can benefit from. there was another supreme court decision a couple years ago campaign aggregate contributions, which they are some evidence that hillary clinton is then offending from that because they can bundle totally legally. though the democrats often complain about these decisions, they benefit from them just as republicans do. host: our guest is a graduate of the university of saint andrews in scotland.

he has written for "the baltimore sun" and the "l.a. daily journal." how significant has it been? guest: that is one of the little noticed elements of any presidential administration is that they do get to shape the federal judiciary even aside from the supreme court. obama, just like every other president who has two terms, has had hundreds of judicial nominees confirmed, including many to the appeals court, which kind of set the new legal precedents and changed the law and away that can influence how the supreme court rules. in the case of the court at the 4, ift where it is split 4- those decisions are left in place, that could set a new president in that part -- precedent an in that part of the country. we have seen that in the transgender bathroom case.

two obama appointees ruled in favor of a transgender student. there is also the voting is right's case in north carolina where a court struck down the voter id law. you can see evidence of these appointees having their influence on the law. if hillary clinton was to win the election, you would get at least another four years of democratic judicial nominees. shapen really the judiciary for a lifetime because a lot of these nominees are quite young and they could be around for 30 years or more. host: jt is joining us from spanish fork, alabama. good morning. caller: great guest. he made a statement a minute ago that i wholly disagree with and the average american does not pay much attention to the

supreme court until there happens to be a decision. well, i'm shopping at walmart and the people that i talk to, every day america, i would have to say he is dead wrong. around,arly this time i'm hearing and talking to people just every day people like myself who are tremendously interested in the court. and the reason is that they have begun to recognize that the court is essentially forever so to speak in terms of politics. for quitele are there a while and can do tremendous damage or tremendous good. for the artist states of america. -- the united states of america. he also referenced the roe v wade issue, which is regardless of what obama has pretended is "settled law," which is categorically false. perhaps in his mind, but i can assure that it is not settled law at all. that is the woolly mammoth in the room and most people know it

and would like to keep it quiet, but it's here and it certainly queer and we are not getting used to it. who do we support? is it going to affect our decision? trumpt is, because donald put out 11 names of justices that he will appoint if he is elected. i don't like trump. i know a lot of people who don't. they find him morally reprehensible, but he is better than hillary on that issue. he will appoint strict interpreters of the constitution, which is the task of a super court justice, not to legislate from the bench, but to take the constitution and not find like they did in roe v wade which is the conundrum of the law. they declared -- they made it up out of whole cloth the so-called right to privacy, a right of a woman to destroy an in utero american. host: thanks for the call from

alabama. let you take his .1 step -- us take his .1 step further. elected andump is the senate is controlled by democrats, where does it put this fight? guest: it would be back to square one again. on the republican side, there are nominees similar to mayor ,arland -- merrick garland which may not be seen as ideological, but donald trump has said he is only going to take from this list that he distributed, which helped to get senator ted cruz to support him. he might be a little boxed in now assuming he sticks to the list in terms of who we would pick. obviously a new congress and a new president kind of resets the debate a little bit, but it's hard to know what would happen.

it would certainly be a big fight. host: another hypothetical -- hillary clinton is elected president and republicans keep control of the senate in 2017. we go back to the merrick garland nomination. do democrats and republicans cut their losses and move ahead with merrick garland or do you think that hillary clinton will wait until next year? when itegardless of happens, merrick garland will certainly be back in the equation if the republicans retain the senate. be hillary clinton, it would probably an easy kind of lift to get him confirmed in comparison with someone who had made even more liberal and the republicans could block. everything that mitch mcconnell and the other republicans have said about the next president, the next president or nominee would help hillary clinton that regard. massachusetts to

with lawrence hurley. creatinghen he was man, was he talking to the supreme court of the constitution? host: why do you ask that question? caller: because he gave man laws to live by. lived by his laws, there would not be this mess going on. the other one is to love our neighbor. the laws, set aside that's the reason why this court is in a mess. i do not care who is getting in there. it's not going to make no difference. look up the word. that means the laws of man. nothing's going to change. i do not think anybody should set aside beside his loss.

set us asides has from our creator. he never said to judge a man by the color of his skin. they were doing it because they want to rule over him. mankind still don't want the creator to rule over him. i do not care who get in there. this world is coming to an end. if you all caps yet, it's pitiful. i live in the country. everything is gone. look around you, people. have a good day. host: catherine from springfield, massachusetts. just a sense of the passion on these issues. guest: the call earlier mentioning the supreme court being discussed among the people he knows, i don't disagree with that at all. there are obviously people out there who care very strongly about the supreme court.

as we've seen from the presidential campaign and the debates last week where was not mentioned at all, there are certainly a large segment of the population where it's not really their key issue there thinking about. that is shared in opinion polls are people are asked whether key issues are. people care more about health care, education, and these other issues that affect them on a day-to-day basis with the supreme court is maybe a little more abstract for a lot of people, where they perhaps only noticed what it's doing when it's one of these big decisions that gets on the front page of the newspaper. host: david is next from dudley, north carolina. caller: yes, mr. hurley, i have and i wishfor you you would tell the people what the constitution says is the presidentlity of the

of the responsibility senate and the congress when it comes to appointing the supreme court. if you would tell these people what the constitution says because that is supposed to be american bible. tell them what the constitution says. let them go from there. is wrong about different things. tell them what the constitution says. if this is supposed to be american bible, supposed to be american laws, it's a bunch of bs. please tell the people what the constitution says and quit blaming obama, hillary, trump, and everybody else. host: thank you. i don't really get to decide what the constitution means.

that is up to the justices mainly. as i mentioned earlier, the president gets to nominate people and the senate has to advise and consent on a nominee. the senate has a lot of power to either reject or as we have seen this year to not do anything. there is not anything anyone can do about that. host: from little off, texas, good morning. caller: good morning, mr. hurley and the host. theybody has been aware of things going on with benghazi and all of hillary's e-mails. if she were to become president, isn't it a fact that she can pardon herself under article two, section three, clause one, which means that any related articles that would appear there

in or thereafter would be nolan would?- null and my question is -- is there a n override of a criminal use of article two, section three, clause one? guest: that's a little above my pay grade, but as i'm aware, hillary clinton has not been convicted of anything, so there's nothing to pardon for. host: good morning. caller: we were talking about the justice system and the laws and how they affect us. us who take the time to make a comment are generally paying more attention. i want to address the issue about what th wealthy people not paying income taxes pai.

it was to put money into our economy and help all this. are rewarded for that because we become multipliers for income taxes. in a previous business, i had 100 employees. toook the risk every morning make sure those people got paid and had benefits. in exchange for that, i made it possible for 100 times my ability to pay income taxes to benefit all this. host: we will get a response. lawrence hurley? guest: again, i'm not sure i can respond to that much. host: i know you have to get over to the court and we are cognizant of your time. one quick call from ashley, illinois. it is crazy to sit there and think about how we have been ruling with eight supreme court justices for how long because the republican party has had its way for eight years now.

since president obama came in, the first thing mitch mcconnell said is we want to make him a one term president and we will not vote on anything he wants. then they turn around and say look how bad the economy is. we cannot even get a supreme court justice that leans more to the right than he does to the left because idiots on the republican party will not put up a vote for him. host: thanks for the call. final comment from you? guest: it is certainly a complicated and divisive political period with the court coming back today with only eight justices. it is really up in the air when the next justice will be appointed. host: oral arguments coming up at the top the hour. lawrence hurley, his work is up on reuters.com. thanks so much. we appreciate it. we will take a short break. when we come back, we come back, we'll talk about the white house plan for clean power. the national resource defense

council's david donner will talk about what it means. david french from the national review talks about potentially running as an independent. he will be joining us as well to talk about the 2016 race. you are and listening to c-span's "washington journal" on this first monday in october as the supreme court begins its new term. we will be back in a moment. ♪ >> ahead of tuesday's vice presidential debate, we will take a look back at the candidates -- virginia senator tim kaine and indiana governor mike pence using the c-span video library. >> i've seen this story before and seen the bad news of a shooting or a weather emergency or a famine. i've seen these stories and

there will be more stories, but there was something in the store yesterday was different and it was you. your spirit of even in a dark day of optimism and community and hope. >> the presidency is the most visible threat that runs through the tapestry of the american government. ore often than not, for good for ill, it sets the tone for the other branches. it spurs the expectations of the people. its powers are vast and consequential. it's requirements from the outset and by definition impossible for mortals to fulfill without humility and consistent attention to its purposes set forth in the constitution of the united states. >> a look at tim kaine and mike pence ahead of the vice president will debate tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. andh anytime at c-span.org listen on the c-span radio app. >> as the nation elects a new

president in november, will america have its first foreign-born first lady since louisa adams or will be have a former president as first gentleman? learn more about the influence of america's presidential spouses from c-span's first ladies, now available in paperback. it gives readers into the personal lives and impact of every first lady in american history. it is a companion to c-span's well-regarded biography series and features the nations leading first lady's historians. it also offers brief biographies of 45 presidential spouses and archival photos from their lives. paperbackies" in published by public affairs, now available at your favorite bookseller. our c-span campaign 2016 bus is traveling throughout new york what isk, asking voters the most important issue to you in this election and why. >> my name is mark and i'm a

masters student at the university of albany from buffalo, new york. i'm the president of the sunnis y studentmply -- sun assembly. i like to see higher education come mental health, campus safety being now more critical than ever. what are you going to assure that these issues are addressed and that the student voice is at the table? >> my name is brian higgins. i remember of congress from the 26 congressional district of new york. the most important issue in the election is the candidates plan for economic growth and for america's place in the world. the united states is the most generous government in the history of the world and i think these are the kinds of issues that we need to discuss in a debate forum. >> my name is jonathan peters and i'm a student at the university at albany. my biggest concern is who's

going to take care of our foreign policies. both of our candidates have very opposing views on our allies and russia and china and the issues going on with syria. i want to see a strong leader take care of that effectively. >> voices from the road on c-span. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: we want to welcome david director ofhe climate at the national defense counsel. thanks for being with us. guest: things for having me. host: we want to talk about the clean power plan and look at some the highlights of what it would do. it would reduce carbon dioxide within s by 32% five years, reduce emissions from coal burning power plants, and increased the use of renewable energy. what does that all mean? guest: the electric power

generation is the biggest source of the carbon pollution driving dangerous climate change. if we want to get a handle on the risks of dangers of the weather and heat waves and all the damaging impacts of climate change, we have to reduce the pollution from these as well as our vehicles. these are the two biggest things. this clean how are plan is a big step -- power plan is a big step in the right direction. host: reaction -- "not only are these regulations unlawful, but they are bad for america." the chamber says, "the rule of drive up electricity cost for businesses, consumers, and families, impose tens of billions in annual compliance expenses, and reduce our nation's global competitiveness without any significant reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions." guest: i think that is wrong in

every count. if you look at the studies, especially as people adopt more energy efficiency in their businesses and homes, lightbulbs that use less electricity, appliances that do all the work for less electricity, people are finding their electric bill goes down and our competitiveness will go up. this has been the key to getting all other countries to agree that the united states is really doing its part and that they will then do their part. that is why the paris climate agreement is very likely to come into force this month and the precedent level of global cooperation to do with this problem. host: is china the biggest culprit of these omissions? guest: if you look at their current annual emissions, they are the largest or second-largest. if you look at historical contribution, the stuff stays in the atmosphere for more than 100 years. the united states is the most responsible over time. host: will china comply with

some of the regulations the white house is talking about? guest: china has its own programs to cut emissions. they have stopped cold and it has started to go down. save the world's biggest renewable energy industry. the united states and china are going to compete to see who rules the renewable power industry in the coming century and the coming decades. we want to be the winners of that race. host: this issue came up in the first presidential debate on the campus of half sure university. here's hillary clinton and donald trump. [video clip] >> take clean energy. some country is going to be the clean energy superpower of the 21st century. donald thinks that climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the chinese. >> i did not say that. that we gripped this and deal with it both at home and abroad.

host: your reaction? guest: i cannot comment on the presidential race. this is a real problem. climate change is a real problem. the impacts are already being felt here in the united states. look at the terrific flood in louisiana most recently. is thend of stuff scientists saying more likely more often because we are putting too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and heating things up. i'm not one who wants to put my head in the sand. i want to do with this problem and i want our economy to prosper dealing with this problem. host: we are keeping track of hurricane matthew, which is expected to hit haiti and jamaica. are the storms getting more fierce and more often? is climate change effective? -- a factor? guest: there is scientific evidence that the storms are getting stronger.

i'm not sure the evidence supports more storms or hurricanes. the ones that form are stronger and pack a more destructive punch. host: why? guest: because there is more heat in the ocean and that feeds hurricanes. host: this is stuff you probably seen, but let's share with our audience. gina first from kansas city, missouri. good morning. caller: clean power plan -- i think that it is going to seriously harm our economy. i do not think china is trustworthy. they will not do it. they're people are jumping to death in the streets. in the 1970's where we had a big problem with smog, we cleaned the air when people were really choking in los angeles. they cannot see on their way to work. we know how to handle it could

w. we know the companies can handle it. when you put in act like this in, you are restricting american clean coal production. we are the saudi arabia of coal. it is used throughout the world and it will hurt the american family with their electricity bills going up 10 times and it will hurt our country. the supreme court's decision on this is very important. i was alive in the 1970's when we were talking about global cooling. so now it has changed. it is weather patterns. we deal with them. we do not accept the fault for that. host: we will get a response. guest: well, the overwhelming view in the scientific community is that this is a real problem driven by these carbon emissions. just wishing it away will not

make it go away. the chinese actually understand that they have a terrible pollution problem. they are turning their energy economy around. they had built the biggest renewable industry in the world. why would we want to be second to that? host: this issue before the d.c. circuit court of appeals -- what is the status? guest: the clean power plan was challenged by twentysomething states and is being defended by almost as many states. my organization and other environmental organizations are defending it with the justice department. also some power company support the plan. the court held an extraordinary seven our argument last tuesday in front of 10 judges and they asked extremely perceptive, deep

questions. host: one question that stood out being in the courtroom -- what was it? guest: my biggest impression was that it's very hard for the challengers to see how they get a majority to get six out of the 10 votes to knock this thing down. the judges really understood that the power system is already changing. it is changing largely because of natural gas and clean energy like renewables becoming cheaper than coal and beating it in the marketplace. what the clean power plan does is push that faster because the whole point of the clean air act is to curb the pollution that the marketplace does not value all by itself because nobody pays to dump stuff and atmosphere. it hurts our health and it hurts our climate. host: let's go back to the spot

for the american coalition for clean coal activity. [video clip] >> the responsibility to uphold the 10th amendment is more than upholding the states rights, it's about protecting the american people. that is why the d.c. court of appeals has such an important decision on the epa power plan. americans ability to have equal access to affordable energy and jeopardizes every states ability to make their own energy policies. if this power is taken away, the impact will be felt by state legislatures that like the power to stand up for their constituents. it will be felt in communities where jobs would be lost in economies will falter. the outcome will be felt by low income families who will choose between paying the electric bill and putting food on the table. on september 27, it is our duty to uphold the constitution and the people it is designed to protect. er, as you seenig

that spot and what happened before the d.c. circuit court? guest: the arguments that have the least impact were these trumped up constitutional arguments. in this ad that we are burning the constitution. this is nonsense. the federal government regulates pollution. the federal government sets health care requirements. the federal government sets the american disabilities -- with disabilities act requirements. sometimes they have to issue permits or building permits. this is normal business. there is no constitutional issue here. the court was unimpressed. nrdc.org is the website. our guest is david doniger for the national resources defense council. he got his law degree from berkeley. joining us from pittsburgh,

democrats line, monday morning, thanks for being with us. caller: just a short question -- how do we address the situation completely when we have airplanes flying in the sky? airplanes are a growing contributor. they burning a lot of fuel and exhaust and the atmosphere. there are things that the airlines can do. there's a negotiation going on right now in montreal that will finish today or tomorrow on an international agreement that the cap and level off climate pollution from the airline industry. we're making progress on all these different fronts. host: can the u.s. president denied disaster relief funds to states that a post climate change initiatives? guest: i don't think he can do that. i don't think he will or would do that.

there's a lot of assistance going to louisiana right now. is disaster relief given to places that are hit with disaster. host: another tweet -- did congress approved this climate change treaty? guest: first of all, congress wrote the clean air act, which is the law under which the clean power plan is issued. approved in 1992 by george herbert walker bush after the senate ratified it. this paris agreement, which was reached last year and just about to go into force, is an agreement that executes that 1992 treaty. everything is being done according to the law and the constitution. host: our next call is from michigan. lloyd, good morning,' . caller: i don't think anybody

disagrees that we need a clean climate and better air matter -- management and things like that . we are being charged more to use less energy and there's carbon credits and things like this. who is making the money on these carbon credits? it is not going directly back to clean energy. people obviously are making huge profits by charging more money for less energy. so i see this kind of like the oil barons and the coal barons being rivaled by the solar and wind barons. host: i want you to respond to this point, but can you explain what is a carbon credit and how that works? this with me explain reference to a working system in the northeast. there are nine states in the northeast from maine to maryland

that have set up a regional greenhouse gas initiative. what they did is put an upper limit for caps on the total amount of carbon dioxide that could come from the power plants in the states. they auction off what they call allowances to creditors so that for a ton of co2 in the atmosphere, a power company has to buy one of these allowances from the states. what does the state do with the money? the money has gone into funding for renewable energy and for energy efficiency. it is actually building up the clean industry that the caller was talking about. impact onow that the the new england and mid-atlantic state economies is totally positive. peoples bills go down. what matters is your bill, which is the rate times the amount you use. invest and get help

to pute state funds energy-efficient appliances in your home, you use less electricity and you come out better off. this is the experience of the people in the new england and mid-atlantic region. host: that is what you would say to the caller. let's go to steve. thank you for waiting. caller: good morning. i had a question. watching the history channel, it was showing tesla's work, which has become heart machines that are microwaving the atmosphere. what is that going to the climate? guest: i'm not familiar with what you're talking about. i do not know of any climate affect from microwaves. host: let me ask you about vehicles in general. are we becoming better producers of clean energy vehicles? guest: the obama administration

in the first term established clean car standards and higher fuel economy standards. it is one package jointly administered by the environmental protection agency and the transportation department. the mileage on cars has been going up and the savings are huge for people, even at the current price of gasoline. you pay less to own a car because it uses less gas than you would have with the old technology. to doublingr way fuel economy by 2025 and cutting the carbon emissions in half with the standards. it is a great deal for the consumer. host: from round rock, texas, amanda is next. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you, c-span. i'm wondering about these hybrid and the fact that we have

open stripmining for the batteries for these and all these components go around the globe to her three times before they are put together into the cars. how is that contributing? i look at these hybrid and i go, well, their batteries have got to go somewhere. that has got to be a really --ic way of treating medical nickel or lithium and creating mass havoc. i'm just curious about that. and i'm curious about the solar panels. i wonderful exposure on my home. i could put up 42 solar panels on my house if i want to, but it would cost me so much money that it would take 19 years for me to

from theositive effect bill that i pay now. 19 years. guest: i don't think those economics are right anymore. where i live hybrid cars are have to be made the right way and there are some companies who make the batterys and source materials in a response way and there are who don't and we have to work on the supply chain to make sure everybody does it in a and responsible way. host: this is a tweet from is the ho says, what nrdc defending? basically, what is your

argument? guest: well, nrdc is a membership organization, we have more than two million members supporters, been around for 46 years. exist to represent the voice of people concerned about public environment, to counter weight the pressure that big companies have on the government. know, people say the government gets lobbied by industry and it fall intoes their pocket. reason the government doesn't fall into the pocket of the big polluters. on the clean power plant, our push the epa, o push the obama administration to them this thing, support once they did it because it is a mart use of the clean air act, to curb pollution that endangers our kids and our future. obviously, you are coming at it from a different vantage point, you were in the courtroom

the coal campaign, we showed that shot, what is the biggest concern by the industry, worried about? guest: the coal industry is getting outcompeted. coal industry is selling a product that can't compete with renewable power, wind and solar. hey're losing their market and looking for someone to blame. who do they blame? government, because if you could pin it on them, everybody can be mad at them, the market t competitors who are beating you have.ace the american counsel for clean closed up shop because they don't have funders in the coal industry to pay for space.ffice they used to be one floor above left. 15th street and they host: from stella, what is the nput in capital letter expect be in the ocieco2 should

atmosphere? why was it highener periods?trial guest: if you go back to middle minee 1700s, we started to and burn coal and cut the forests and use them to build up is at that , it point after a very long stable around -- i think 350 million of co2, it started to climb. going higher00 and and higher. if you go way back into the period, you can find periods when it was higher, it goes up and down. want to be living in 600, imes when it was 500, 700 parts per million because then.orld was different the world would be different now. the seas would rise, the ice and raise the seas, weather patterns will change, the est will dry out,

greenbelt will dry out. these are things we have to look a ward to if we don't get handle on this. host: we welcome our listeneros c-span radio. topic is clean air issue, he guest is david doniger, director of climate and clean air program. errick is joining us from delaware, democrats line. good morning. good morning. host: good morning, derrick. a question. i have i heard you mention that china heavily in clean energy. grand examine a of american exceptionalism if america lead the world in clean save the planet? which presidential candidate is positioned to address climate change? thank you. host: thank you for the call. is in our ink it interest, our national interest and global interest, to be the

energy leader and leader in solutions. can't comment on candidate. host: let me ask about leader outthere is a there we should follow or can emulate or learn from? well, the -- some countrys in western europe, west investing ave been heavily -- excuse me, germany, ave been investing heavily in clean energy technology, japan has a much more energy efficient we do. than the chinese are investing heavily in this. is a power in es these technologies, we need to bigger and nd get stronger at this. there are more people employed mineing andergy than fossil fuels. this is the future, that is the past. in this future direction. host: are we doing enough with regard to mass transit to get cars off the road? guest: steve, you and i live in

metro ton, d.c., and our system fell way behind in but when it was running at peak and when it is picked up again, it takes of thousands of commuters off the roads and that pollution y, saves from the vehicles, we need to do more of that. good from georgia, morning, republican line with david doniger. caller: good morning, gentlemen. sir, i am torn as conservative capitalist, but also -- as to scientists u know, are correct because there's only limited , history on weather patterns. we may have gone through this times, i do agree with the ne caller lady that in the '70s, they talked about a new ice age. the coin is i read almanac, they say

global warming has to be real ecause squirrels are no longer hiding their nuts. so could you tell me which one? guest: well, i do -- i am aware gardening society, i can't remember the name right now, publish a map of the zones where it is appropriate to plant different flowers and vegetables maps, they have changed the zone map because weather patterns are changing. say, well, the weather is changing. norfolk and ild the naval base on the coast, you know, we built it where the coast is, the coast is moving land now nto the because the seas are rising. the military recognizes they tremendous problem sustaining that base and the city realizes they have a problem. there are keen ties in miami and inunidate the

streets now. that didn't used to happen. what we have to look forward to if we don't curb the pollution drive thanksgiving problem. host: this is a tweet from a viewer. what laws were passed by california? they lead in clean air emission? uest: california, i mentioned northeastern states earlier, the other leader is california, law to cut back the limate pollution, the carbon pollution. they just renewed these laws month, actually, the legislature passed and governor rown signed, these laws are ery successful, the california pollution per person is way less the it is in other parts of country. their economy is thriving. ost: to steve from lewisville, kentucky, line for republicans, good morning.

morning, mr. david doniger. scientists have talked about pipeline that burst in california that put out more methane, that you could imagine, more than any coal company would of or more any coal-burning plant. -- some personst just right off the bat caught it and saw this.lens and then to top it all off, you volcanoes erupting all over you orld now, how are supposed to, you going to put a nature? mother guest: what matters, difference human activity makeos top of happens naturally. volcanoes there are from time to time, what matters is tremendous amount of our tion that comes from taking fuels that were tucked underground for millions of

and and burning them putting them in basically dioxide in the atmosphere. it is like taking hamburger out letting it er and spoil. huge.eak in california was it had to be stopped. it was no match for the from our power plants. host: a tweet from a viewer with sea of tranquillity, what is the perfect co2 concentration best weather possible, what is the target? uest: well, if we had perfect foresight and knew what we know 100 years ago, you would have started on the ologies to reduce pollution and try to keep the 350 parts per million. 250 is where it started in the 1700s. but as i said, it's going up to million and s per

we're headed for disastrous don't curb e emissions. that is why president obama's fforts with clean power plant and many other actions that were taken in the last eight years working importantly, with other countries to get the power climate agreement. go later this week kigali, rwanda, never been there, final negotiations will take place on global to phase down a set of hfc's, llutants called that are heat trapping ollutants, more powerful even than co2 pound for pound and we can do a lot to protect the replace f we refrigerants in air conditioners refrigerators with safer chemicals that work and are affordable and that are available here today. ost: the case of clean power

before the u.s. court of appeals for the district of columbia, we're talking about with david doniger. from louisiana. good morning. caller: how are you today? host: do me a favor, turn your volume down to eliminate the echo. ahead with your question. caller: i am so sorry. is -- from louisiana. is, this is basical -- okay. y thing is donald trump think people live in poverty, our black people don't live in poverty. he has some good ideas, but he hasn't laid out any plans. thing is, you know, the louisia as better in louisiana -- came up everywhere the hings were moving in

right direction because it was we didn't 6, when even have louisiana and on unemployment nd doing bad and we was in bad poverty. we have plans coming everywhere, like louisiana. e have jobs everywhere, up and down the line. my thing syou know, that i think the economy will move faster and better if we -- that is only thing i have to say. you, have a blessed day. host: lois, thank you for the call. comment. do you want to respond? guest: i just can't speak to the race given that i work for nonprofit organization. host: sure. louisiana, what impact fany, has climate change from sea standpoint had on the levels in louisiana? guest: well, the sea is eating

louisiana.rn gulf of mexico is chewing out the coastal isands and are sinking there a lot of reasons for that. one is gulf of mexico starting biggest impact on ouisiana, of course, was the huge hurricane in hurricane atrina, now tremendous rainstorm that just came out of nowhere. ut climate scientists have examined that rainstorm and concluded that there is a very chance that would -- that that could be happening without of carbon ce pollution heating up the atmosphere and changing the weather pattern. allen in port wing, wisconsin, say that five times fast. good morning, allen. caller: thank you, c-span. sure. caller: the -- ost: port wing, right?

caller: correct. host: with that that located? northern wisconsin. >> announcer: five times fast. caller: beautiful area, unaffected by climate change. this person knows very well how change fiasco is. ithout exsessive subsidy, wind and solar can't compete. period. everybody knows that. carbon credits, this whole thing will go away. carbon credits is at the heart of this. remember that. costs are going to go up if fiasco fwe credit keep it up. coal, by the way, is cheapest a power plant. thanks. host: thank you, allen, appreciate the call from wisconsin. guest: all i can say, coal firepower is down. solar are up. it is true there is a tax credit solar, congress,

the republican congress enacted -- extended that for five years in december of last year. a good thing, too. fuel industry has too many tax credits that it too.its from, so this is where the future is oing, coal is going to be part of time, picture for a long but declineing and not competitive anymore. can stay eason it halfway competitive is that the y's having to pay for health damage and climate damage that the emission from coal doing.are the coal -- says coal energy. military music. there is one way you can make safety use and that is to

capture the carbon pollution and underground, carbon apture and storage, there is a saskatchewan doing it now. t is being built by southern company to do the same. this technology could allow us using some amount of coal if you can put the co2 in in the nd, instead of air. host: for those who work in the and mines in west virginia pennsylvania and parts of ohio, replaced with be equivalent jobs in the so-called sector?ergy guest: there are a lot of clean employs bs growing, it more people than in the fossil fuel extraction and industry at point already. at the same time, we owe those those parts of

the country, we owe it to them invest in transitioning those country to getting to the modern economy and to ive people their new opportunities. nobody wants to leave them behind. host: gretchen says big agriculture is the biggest destroyer offer planet. -- there l, there are is a contribution from the agriculture industry to the problem.hange emissions methane that feed lots and other you can do mit and things to control that, reduce that. and there's progress we can make on all fronts. glacier melt seems to be happening at an astounding rate. stop?ill it

guest: if there is some reason to fear it won't stop. ice-free have an lanet basically, there is no ice left in many glaciers and in greenland, it is a huge ice cube out of thethis water ocean. if all that stuff melts, the sea around the world goes up feet. to six and that's disaster for coastal areas, especially in the world where people live on the coast and they don't of funds we have even here to build sea walls or things ngs back, raise up. this is why it's so urgent we eal with this problem before all that ice melts. host: david doniger, viewer from chris, republican line, good morning. caller: good morning, you guys.

hi, david. couple questions. ne, when you say that china is falling behind, cutting coal, they are not supposed to cut 2030, they are pushing the coal industry to the max until 2030. i don't understand how that helps us, maybe you can respond to that. refrigeration and technology, if we don't have the technology to go ahead and make things cooler, you think that maybe the heat and uisiana and arizona texas might kill a couple people? big : well, look, i'm a believer in technology, that is why i know we can have cooling less warming. we can have refrigeration and that are th chemicals safer and use less electricity, produce less power and pollution the power plants that run the air conditioners. to go. where we need china, they actually have paemed topped, al, they have

reached peak of coal, not in 2016 or 2015, it's going down now, running ahead of talking that you're about. host: gary, good morning from franklinville, new york, line.endent caller: yeah. this whole thing is bogus. a forked peaks with tongue. i'm 73 years old and i've got a in power and und other industries related to power. talks about 300,000 years ago was measuring parts per billion in the atmosphere of co2 300,000 years ago? years years ago or 50 ago? we had no way of doing it. ven temperature, you think the russians were giving us their temperature information from south america and the south pole during the cold war? collecting all

this data? host: thank you, we'll get a franklinville, new york. community scientific is most honest straight-up people that i know about. they are extremely worried about this. beside themselves in alarm at this. there are scientific techniques to figure out how dioxide there was in the air in these time periods. trapped, ice bubbles air trapped in ice cores and you can see what the air was like 10, 20, 100,000 years ago. out because e this scientists are really quite smart at this. trust the scientists to tell is.traight what it host: mentioned earlier, you were traveling to rwanda.

is what? guest: montreal treaty was 1987 to curb the cfc, in air that used to be conditions and aerosol cans layer.g the ozone that treaty has every country in the world a member. success. they phased out those kem cams, chemicals, stitute hfc's have problems, as well, we ave better chemicals, better substitutes for them now. it is time to move on. protocol, the countries in the world are meet nothing rwanda, to finish negotiations on schedule to hfc's and these replace them with safer that are more equivalent. all.l victory for us everybody will be better off for that. host: to viewers and listeners,

information by log og natural resource and defense website at nrdc didn't org, guest has been david climate andector of clean air development project. thank you for being with us, we appreciate it. thank you very much. host: we'll take a short break of national nch review, considered briefly unning for president in 2016, "washington journal" continues, we're back in a moment. >> ahead of tuesday's vice presidential debate look back at candidates, tim kaine and mike using the video library. >> i've seen this story before, and d on the television seen the bad news of shooting or weather emergency or famine, seen the stories, there

will be more stories, something in the story yesterday that was different. was you. your spirit of even in dark day and timism and community hope. >> the prez dense semost visible that runs through the tapestry of the american government, for good or ill, it tone for the other branchs and spurs expectations of the people. powers are vast and consequential. t is requirements from the opposite and by definition impossible for mortals to and ll without humility insistent attention to purposes as set forth in the constitution united states. >> look at tim kaine and mike the vice d of presidential debate tonight on c-span. time on c-span.org and listen at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span radio app. go to c-span.org tuesday evening

for the vice presidential debate or our desktop, phone tablet, watch live streams of the debate and video on demand question to the candidates and answers. use video clipping tool to clips of your favorite moments to share on social media. to thee to watch, listen debate live on c-span radio app. download from the app store or google play. coverage on c-span.org and the c-span radio app. >> "washington journal" continues. frus nashville, tennessee, is david french, writer for national review, earlier this year, considered his own independent presidential bid mrchlt french, you for being with us. guest: thank you for having me. i appreciate it. host: your assessment of this race with a month to go before 8th election?

guest: short assessment, for a rief time, donald trump had momentum that, momentum came to a crashing halt when he failed debate.re for the when he failed to prepare, he trap nto every single hillary clinton laid for him. i tweeted that night, like the i'm going burg, backed up and hit it again just because. unbelievable. 20 minutes to start the debate, thought it was trump at some of his best as debater, trump is not always the best debater, but it was trump at his best. he fell apart and compounded it taking the bait again and gain and again on dealing with the miss universe controversy, giving rambling speech in pennsylvania. had momentum, had he delivered on the debate stage, having a completely different conversation, talking different race.

he didn't bother to prepare, we're back to where hillary once again hink, emerging as a clear favorite. host: can governor mike pence tomorrow night or in the second presidential ebate a week from yesterday in . . loh, uest: can mike pence turn it around? the short answer is no, two personalities people don't care much. that barring something completely unexpected, the vice i expect to debate, be kind of a nonevent k. trump a second ound with snchls he's put the bar so low, that i think he's got a good of performing better the second time around. this is 2016. anyone who says, i know what is going to happen from this point we're just know, speculating. this has been one of the our est election years of

lifetime, probably have two to three more big twists and turns day.re election the "new york times" is hinting it has more tax documents. wiki-leaks cancelled big event reasons.rity will they reschedule? more leak? in the air gs up right now tis difficult to predict. hillary tum is on clinton's side. she manipulated donald trump and trap.l for the host: in the publication, you wrote the following. sentence i never thought i would type. after days of prayer, reflection study of the possibilities, i am not going to run as an independent candidate president of the united states. how close did you come to making would run?on you guest: i came very close, i really did. i looked it this way, at what the two major party his nominating mocrats, hillary clinton, who i believe

to be corrupt and dishonest, bad america. then the gop in an election year, they had historic win back the white house against a candidate so many igh unfavors americans feel is dishonest, nominated donald trump, who i unfit for the presidency. ou had two unfit candidates running against each other, highly unusual circumstance, large number of americans were for a third option. i came very, very close. i looked closely, i looked it, studied hard and i just didn't see the path to be me, for me, to be anything, but a spoiler and i spoiler.ant to be a ra nader want to be the of 2016. someone with larger constituency, more name good ition would be a

choice. host: david who? indeed it was. it is funny afterall this blew and looked at news coverage and somebody put youtube montage of news anchors saying who is david it was kind of funny, but one interesting thing that is, as in all of that people dug into my background nd they saw my background and compared it to some things donald trump has done or not done, they begun to make sense to people, not enough sense for it, but there was a path there for somebody with a arger name recognition, larger constituency, somebody that wouldn't have to spend tens of millions of dollars to get their name in public. host: david french, author of threatk "rise of isis, a we cannot ignore," graduate of harvard law school, joining from live necessary

columbia, tennessee, an hour away. he is an army veteran. your service in the u.s. military. guest: well, i joined as an old guy. i was 36 years old, got an age waiver to join. felt a sense of conviction, this was in late 2005, i decided to join. a sense of 2006, got conviction we were in the middle of a long war, i was a healthy a family who loved me and why was i not doing my part, contributing and sitting on the sidelines saying, i bless the troops or support the troops. i got an age waiver, went to 37, which ning at age was let's just say no one will of my basic montage training efforts, and deployed armored cal third vary during the surge in late into iraq00 seven got in november of 2007, serveed heroes, people who are now

brothers and than we had a tough deployment, we really did. a hard experience where we were. we did a lot of good things. when we landed in caldwell in the area 007, all of around us was held by al qaeda isis.raq, precursor to when the unit left in late held all of 2008, we the ground. we had taken it back from isis. proud of what our guys were able to accomplish. high cost,a terribly but serving my country in uniform overseas is the proudest life.ence of my host: if you are a member of a to call ty, the number is 202-748-8002. f you are undecided, 202-748-8003. otherwise we are dividing between supporters of hillary donald trump.

catherine from new mexico, good morning, welcome to the program. of hillary clinton. caller: good morning. watching everything and in regard to the republican choosing to pick onald trump over any other republican politician, i think it suggests to the republican they need to do a reality check and realize that ll the things the republican party has told them in regard to climate change, in regard to obamacare, maybe been lied to and that is why they did elect to run and maybe they just need to change their party to democrat. you, catherine. well, one thing for sure, they did actually nominate somebody is more democrat than republican to head the gop this year. you look at donald trump's positions, he's been all over left-wing adopted positions time and again on

issues like trade, on issues he's ational security, been a big donor to hillary clinton in the past. and let'sublican base be clear about this, it was a republicans, donald trump was selected to lead the smallest with percentage of the vote of any republican nominee in the era.ry as a minority republican running against a big field, nominated a i believe is truly in his heart more democrat than republican. in his heart , more self-interested than anything else, to the extent he actual live policy decisions, they veer more toward the left than to the right. wake-up call for the gop is couple of things. underestimated y how many millions of voters really, really dislike the gop and wanted to cast protest vote, that much is clear. they cond thing is,

overestimated how conservative he republican base was, people are attacking donald trump not being conservative and i think shocked how many voters either didn't know that or didn't care about that. somebody who was strong, who came across as tough know, me across, you against somebody, came against the establishment in a strong it they wanted to burn down, blow it up. there was just enormous amount a lot r in the base that of republicans missed and never igured it out until it was too late. host: a tweet from didi, who the guest was part of never trump. were you and are you? yes.: were, am i? yes. here is no information that donald trump has given me since that id -- since i wrote was never going to vote for him that has changed my mind in any shape or form.

everything he does only confirms that i will never vote for that man. now, to be clear, i will never vote for hillary clinton, either. vote for unfit candidates to the candidacy and he is unfit. thing that should be just incredibly sobering to the supporters, i keep hearing supporters trying to convince me to vote for donald trump. me, this is the most important election of our lifetime f. hillary clinton wins, america is over. this is the critical election, other in the ny last 50 years. even own candidate didn't bother to prepare for a debate, did not bother to fully prepare one of the most important events in this political period. he didn't bother to prepare. they are telling me this lection is most important in their lifetime. their own candidate isn't acting ike it, that is just one of

10,000 things that disqualify this man for the highest office lead the most powerful nation and greatest nation on earth. is unfit, 2016 lost, election is fortunately america is resillient and there will be future.ctions in the host: who will you vote for? guest: i haven't decided yet, i likely write somebody in, if i don't, i will refrin from the presidential election. it is a right of mine to refrain from supporting anyone if nobody been put forth as nominee i believe is fit to lead this country. minnesota, akeland, a viewer undecided. derrick, good morning. america.good morning, good morning, c-span. ya, you know, this .s exactly what is wrong he brings out donald trump, turnout ut the highest in primaries in gop history.

then you have a bunch of people, the never-trumpers here, the ctually are worse than worse liberal progressive democrat because you can see all who lost to in the primaries who don't support him, ho put their word out there they would support the candidate and yet they do. kasich in ohio didn't show you up for the convention, you guys throwing so much foeder on the table against the gop, you ruinning your party and don't even know it. host: we'll get a response, derrick., guest: i hear people saying hat, i am ruining the party, the party is ruining itself. a party is supposed to stand for principles, not like a sports team that just dawns uniform and wearing the jersey you root for because they are in that jersey. political party is supposed to

stand for principles. hear people all the time say, well, by me not voting for donald trump that means ffectively i'm supporting hillary, i would ordinarily support a republican. wait a minute. ordinarily support conservatives, i ordinarily support people who, for example, are uphold american alliances and don't try to threaten they troops to american commit war crimes. i don't ordinarily support the free are against market system in the way that donald trump is against the free market system and international trade. i don't ordinarily support candidates who are dishonest. supporting donald trump and by not supporting hillary clinton, i'm behaving as i would ordinarily behave. a political party has to be held to a certain set of principles it to be viable going forward, it is not just a bunch f people getting together and vying for power. to be honest, if the republican party is going to be a party nominates people like

donald trump, nominates peep i values of donald trump, would like to see it be destroyed. forward purpose going in this country, except destructive purpose, if these will e people who it continue to nominate and will continue to support. a the extent a party, when party abandons principles, it is no longer a value. party shoulds organize around principles. host: glen following you at french says the following. david french is undecided? he is not alone. guest: no, i am not alone. number of kable the eople who will talk to me and they are just at a loss, they are at a complete loss. is an election where the arty elite of both parties failed utterly. think about the democratic party, we've talked about the republican party. there are very many talented

progressives and i'm not by any mean, i'm conservative. progressives could have run for the nomination, many looked at hillary clinton turn.id, it is her it is nobody's turn to be president of the united states. here is a person who is tainted scandal. i can tell you as former jag officer in the military, handled classified information, responsible for nvestigating and prosecuting people who mishandled classified information, had i treated information the way she and her aides did, i would be right now negotiating a plea to avoid a court marshall, that is what i would be doing right now. elite dragged her over the finish line. he combination of super delegates, large dollars, that pulled her past bernie sanders, think a lot of people on the democratic side of the aisle are resentful of that. people from both sides

exactly to me and say, what is happening? our two choices right now? of the pe at the end day, when the wreckage clears from the election cycle, both a valuable learn lesson. that lesson is, you focus around principles, not personalities or family dynastys. harry ext caller from trum an's hometown, janice, nce, missouri, supporter of donald trump. good morning. good to ood morning, hear you, steve. one day you will get your own debate. want to ask mr. french what the subscription rate looks national review after they have gone on the tirade see now are all i begging for money and they don't take questions anymore. let you make on't comments because they are all i'm not the i mean,

biggest fan of donald trump, but hillary really detest and i would do nothing, nothing elected.er get these are the two choices we have, i'm not fond of them this is what we've got. this is what the republicans the us and you can look in mirror to see why. because it is people like you to do this, need you have given up crappy, crappy candidates for the last -- i don't know how many years and fortell us, you got to vote them, they are the republican. we have dutifully done that, don't like, ne you my god, the world will come to an end. i'm sick of it. death of it f. we lose, culook in the mirror to see who is responsible. janice, can you stay on the line? caller: i can. a t: we'll have david french chance to respond and cufollow-up. facebook you have a account, you can comment on

national review. if you don't have a facebook facebook e do commenting as point of correction. who is the "we," here? who is the "we," that would lose? i am not part of the trump movement. he is, does not speak for me in any way, shape or form. belong to is t to the team who produces condidates people who have integ rit and he have principles nd shown them and demonstrated moral courage in their lives. ost: david french, who is the candidate? guest: ideal candidate, i don't ideal candidate. we had 13, 14, 15 people running who had better values than donald trump and majority of republicans recognize that, majority of republicans didn't vote for trump. preferred rubio, kasich,

over broken glass hillary or kasich over clinton. it wasn't donald trump wasn't my favorite candidate and i want to and fw home because guy.s a cruz the problem with donald trump, he is not fit to be president of the united states. anybody who sits there and threatens existence of the nato based on understanding of america's trateejic position interest that a sixth grader should know that he knowledge, level of is somebody who is not fit to be president of the united states. repeatedly for weeks argue that he is and to order american troops to commit war crimes, not the o be president of united states. go down the line. his guy is wrong outside the normal parameters and i did not

give this candidate to the stop the tried to candidate. i didn't give previous candidates to the caller. urged, conservatives like me in the never-trump consider rged to character, consider integrity. consider moral principles when a candidate. donald trump has one primary moral principle, advance the of donald trump, a man with those principles is not fit the united ent of states, neither is a woman, hillary clinton's principles are similar. focused around advancing her power and position. onesty doesn't matter, character doesn't matter, integrity doesn't matter to either of these individuals. my view, if you vote and you are gop and selecting for donald there are t forget two election cycle necessary play f. donald trump were to him in are tied to 2020, as well. two full election cycles, your tied around a man

with no character, no integrity, of the be president united states, that could do permanent harm, not just to the country.t the host: one other point, you wrote nato trump's insistent could be absolute, music to so?n's ears, how trying to n is rassert dominance and reassert russian dominance in the middle and many other areas, many ther areas of that matter in geo politics. the primary check against russian power is nato. the primary check against russian expansionism and nato.ary aggression is if you undermine nato, if you give off a signal there are some partners that we will not honor treaty obligations with, encourage russian aggression, give russia greater freedom of action in europe. this is already a

nation invaded and annexed part a nationraine, already that demonstrated military aggression, reminiscent of the power rivalries than the new century we're supposed to be a part of. any time there is american weakness, this is just something need to icans understand, when there is american weakness, that creates vacuum that somebody will fill and that -- the entity that will fill that power vacuum is almost always not one of our one of our enemies. if you create a power vacuum in russia fills , that vacuum, russia grows in recede and r as we have lesser power. that is not good for the good for eople, not american interests, not good for the american way of life. threatens that, in spite of the fact we've had since 1945, not had a global that means millions of

lives saved, prosperity for undreds of millions and billions of people. you threaten that world order child's understanding of geo politics. 've met children who are smarter in geo politics than donald trump demonstrated deeply to be and that is upsetting. host: our guest is a former reserve and past president for individual rights in education, currently staff review, or national own ly considered his independent presidential bid. give you a chance to follow-up. caller: he certainly is long-winded, if nothing else. acannot understand, we are in much weaker position than we were eight years ago. ecause some people think it is okay to have hillary in there and you're saying, you don't either.r you're going to get one of them, whether you like it or not, one elected.

in my mind, hillary is going to do more damage than donald trump. do some damage, what i'm ind of hoping for is that he's going to -- just wants to win nd then he's going to maybe, hopefully turn over to mr. pence and let mr. pence run the and he'd be better than any of the four up there. f he doesn't, i'm sick of the spineless republicans who spent more time out of office this year than -- because they have money and don't do the job they are there to do, everybody says they will come in this year they will get it done, they never do. we're sick and tired of that, of the games they play and it being looked down on members. tea party you are all disgraceful. host: ladies and gentlemen, one have reasons why we donald trump. here the problem we have candidates are upset.

people are extremely angry, this angry and they look at donald trump and there's in of absolutely zero vidence, this guy listens to advisors over the long-term, this guy's ego allows anyone shine, this guy will allow anyone else to lead him, anyone else to advise him strongly, they say -- well, he s going to win and he'll succeed to mike pence, that is thinking, it is sad to see. how many times does donald trump listens emonstrate he to no council other than himself. a man was up tweeting about miss universe at 3 in the morning, a couple days ago. ridiculous, that is absurd, that is not somebody who any any form and under kind of control of what they do. look, between hillary clinton nd donald trump, i honestly, the reason i'm undecided, i

honestly don't know which is worse. are things where i do think donald trump has a chance to be better. here is a chance he will nominate better judges than hilt hil hillary clinton, a chance he'll be better on second amendment than hillary clinton. is a chance hillary clinton will be better than in -- i don't think she will be as destabilizing in as international sphere donald trump could possibly be. for every one thing there is a trump could be better than hillary, there is another area hillary could do better trump. not because hillary is good, it is because trump is that bad. a message people want to hear. people want to hear, go vote for to be y in america going better. sorry, we're past this. america, these are the chose.tes you don't give me the you forced this on me, you made me do this. no.

you chose these candidates. the american people chose these candidates. they might be angry about it, but they did it. now they have to live with it. is, we have to maintain and we have to preserve a core this country who understand that party is about -- parties should be about principles, not just power. then we have to rebuild from the election.of this from the wreckage of this election, we'll have a choice, double-down on pure power politics, family ynastys or double down on principles, and courage and conviction and character and this -- hy i think there is a necessity for never trump movement on the side, those who not bowed a knee to donald trump, 2017, ll stand up in regardless of who wins and says a party o rebuild around certain principles, not around personalities, not around

celebritys and not around blind pursuit of power. he, donald trump doesn't listen to advisors now. tommy's tweet. valdez in illinois, supporter of donald trump. good morning. good morning. i'm not as angry as janice, but thinking, i'vere heard mr. french talk about principles, morals and that kind thing, i would like to ask him in addition to a comment. when is the last time we had any principles at all? he people at the top are ruining everything, american history has shown that. it is the elite. my point is this, i'm not the supporter of donald trump. i believe he's made promises that he can't keep and i sit retired state police from california, army veteran, have, in perfect shape, no worry what issoever just living, i will

watch people believe we can bring jobs back. to happen. going i'm hoping the american people explode and have enough of this 240 years of promises that have never been kept, so that is my point. like to see somebody do something, but when you have eople in both parties with complete corruption, here in illinois, we have a former nobody of the house talks about, homosexual serious, is et's be this the kind of people we snpt mr. french, please go ahead. guest: one thing that i think we are all have to look at mirror here.the because america -- in america, for our leaders. and i've heard this said again and again and again. the elite failed. the elite failed. yeah, they did. fail.lite did they made series of blunders that have put us in terrible internationally,

there is been series of blunders hat put us in bad position economically. you know what, responsibility runs every direction in this country. voters are responsible for their vote, leaders are responsible way they lead. 14 million people voted for onald trump, 14 million people made a mistake. 14 million adults have capacity to make decisions, made mistakes. more people than that voted for hillary clinton, they made a putting those two people as standard party, they made a mistake. now we often in this country say, it is the great and good american people, they are never wrong, they are never wrong. people are people. we make l fallen, mistakes, we have responsibilities to each other. what we are seeing in the lkdz 2016, mutual failure. elite failed and the people failed. i would disagree with the notion the working class is never countries to -- that

there has never been failure of harmed ing class that nation in history. we are dealing with a collapse this country, n that is horribly negative for the future of this country. making people divorce, nobody is making people commit drink y or pop pills or too much, we're having -- we have a culture in this country now particularly in the working class of the country, leaking into middle in this country and below, people are making terrible their that are harming future, harming their children's future. here's not a lot of great news culturally right now in the united states of america. the elite is not that elite. millions in the voting public have put forward two candidates for the presidency, that doesn't happen because there is a small group handing down bad candidates. that happens because you have making of people

choices, in this instance, millions made bad choices. resilient and capable of bouncing back, our nation is capable of making choices. i believe that it will in 2020. we just have to preserve enough are focused on integrity and courage, courage rebuild from to this political disaster, frankly. french, half a minute left. quickly, what is your assessment next trol of senate in congress? guest: you know, so much depends on what happened on the top of ticket. there are indications, there could be split-ticket voting this year. republicans have a better chance to hold on to the senate than they thought six weeks ago. call it a pure toss-up. the house looks like it will if hillaryican, even clinton wins, appears likely, but not certain, there will be her power. host: david french staff writer review, considered

a presidential bid. his work is available at com.nal review dot joining from nashville, thank you for being with us. will have live coverage of the vice presidential debate from the longwood, university in farmville, virginia. tomorrow evening 7:30 eastern time. debate 9:00 eastern time, we will repair at 11:30 eastern on and after the debate this network. you are the pundits, we want to you.from what happened of course second presidential debate is next sunday, our coverage is on the website at c-span.org. thanks for joining us on this monday. of your week. continue to watch our campaign coverage with a month to go the november 8 election.