essentially build a carpark on top of his house. all of the residents have shown incredible dignity and courage over the years against intimidation and pull yang -- bullying. they haven't gone anywhere and have stood up in a quiet, dignified way to the environment they believe in. it has been destroyed, and for what? one golf course for the superrich that is losing millions of dollars according to the latest figures and is hiring only a tiny fraction of the people donald trump promised. thom: it is an amazing story. the movie is "you have been ." mped2 thanks for stopping by today. anthony: thank you. thom: i appreciate you being

with us. we will be right back in 15 minutes. >> this is the thom hartmann program. thom: we will be back with more after this. ♪ thom: welcome back. here. -- let us see -- no, she dropped off the phone. let's talk to barbara. what is up? i was watching the news report from a me this morning -- amy this morning and watching the military buildup against the

indians at standing rock, and i that even at 72 years old, i think i'm going to go stand with them. more important, you talked a while back about that the airwaves belong to the people of , and yet the corporations have taken over the know whatnd i want to we can do and what i personally can do to start a process of getting those airwaves back. the people of this country get ignorance. politicshink that really is -- people are ignorant

in this country. thom: i think the way to do it is to contact politicians in office or running for office and ask if they support a return to the ownership rules that existed before the 1996 telecommunications act? it used to be that if you wanted to own a tv station in a particular town, you cannot also on the radio station or the newspaper. you had to pick one. now you can own all three. 1970's,gone from in the literally tens of thousands of owners of newspapers, radio stations and television stations. i started as a teenager at a local radio station in michigan, doing weekend country-western dj .

was.68, i think it that station was owned by a local guy. anotherrom there to station owned by a local guy. i went from there to another station owned by a local guy. all of the stations were locally owned. idle think any of them are locally owned anymore. story inot just the michigan, that is the entire united states. it used to be locally owned, because the law used to state that you could own a couple of stations you can't own the whole thing. right now, the whole thing -- basically if you look at the major radio stations and the country, they are owned by two companies. this is all consistent with reagan enforcing the sherman act

in 1980 two, which led to mergers and acquisitions mania. 1990's that it got applied to the media in a big way. problem, ittical was created by politicians and can be fixed by politicians, but you have to get them aware about it, concerned about it, on the record. we will be back. ♪ ♪ >> healthy circulation is critical as we get older. we have to get enough dietary nitrates in our body.

one scoop in water or a smoothie and you are all set. it helps support healthy circulation and blood pressure levels. it works three times faster to get the results you can feel and taste great. day, i can feel the energy and stamina it gives me within 20 minutes and i want you to feel it, too. get a 30 day supply, free. there is a money day -- moneyback guarantee. you will love the results you feel with your first canister free or your money back. ♪ thom: welcome back. coming up on 22 minutes past the hour and jim in tennessee. what is up?

the trump circuit that was talking about health care. it is amazing to meet these surrogates always drop these truth bombs that are hard to detect and less -- i don't know, they are very slick edit. she was saying someone was getting treatment for health asked about the medicare expansion, she said you can get 10 care here -- tenncare here. that is not part of the medicare expansion. it was for people who could get health care to save their lives. when the republicans started taking control of the state, they cut it to the bone.

a $3000-$4000ve for your income to get it right now. thom: i remember tennessee was one of the states, you had a democratic governor, who had adopted the medicaid expansion part of obamacare, correct me if i am wrong on this. you are saying that when the election two years ago happened, you got a republican governor and he did away with it? caller: this was back in 1990, they got a waiver that created this program. thom: i'm thinking of kentucky. tennessee never expanded medicaid? caller: no. form that bastardized really means nothing, but they act like it is a big advancement.

thom: thank you for calling from tennessee and setting the record straight. we have the smartest listeners on earth, i'm grateful to you all. scott in california. you, i good to talk to don't get to call very often, but i know you're out there and i'm glad for it. wondering,t i am since the talk is about health care, in this is a serious uestion, it sounds kinda edgy. republicans and right-wingers want people to die or do they just not care? the reason i'm asking is because they apparently don't care if we don't have food if we are poor, they don't care if we have jobs because they send them overseas, they don't apparently care if we

have adequate housing, and the list goes on. by extension it would make sense if they either want people to die from lack of health care or they do not give a damn. thom: i think there are a couple of things at play. i don't think people are trying to create a system where people will die. i'm not that machiavellian. but i think there is this her evasive mythology that seeds the right-wing machine that is used as a justification and excuse, that essentially says we are all , it says in the declaration of independence, and if you don't have good health care or whatever, it is because you are -- fill in the blank.

the calvinists, the whole idea was if we are going to have kings or queens or leaders, we have to figure out who wants us -- who god wants to be, and it would be the rich people. obviously, they have been blessed with wealth. it has transferred to our culture appeared the privilege of where you were born, what opportunities you have, all of these other things -- gender, male privilege. all of these things that actually do influence the course of your life. and in this weird, right wing theory, because everybody has the opportunity -- well, everybody should have a job or they can set aside $5,000 per year, they should have relatives they can borrow from your church

that can give the money. it is a convenient rationalization. i am of the opinion personally that the senior executives of most of the health insurance companies are probably sociopaths. knowing that people are dying because of the financial decisions you're making and still being able to sleep at clinicalvirtually the definition of sociology -- soc iopathy. they have lived in this bubble of privilege their entire life and they don't get how it is for so many people in america, and some of them are starting to lose the privilege as a result of our trade laws, which donald trump has pointed out to some extent correctly. except he filled a point out that is hitting principally the white middle class. , we are notproblem

having a conversation about if we are going to protect your house, where we protecting your body? thanks for the call. >> you are listening to the tom hartmann program. back after thee break. >> edit want to interrupt you, you were on a roll. today we are reading about the crash of 2016. the way that our show is organized, we are on the air monday through friday, three

hours per day, 12:00-3:00 eastern time. i do a lot of debate with conservatives on this program. i know a lot of liberal hosts don't like to have conservatives on their program and i think that is mistake. i have a lot of respect for my viewers and listeners. i believe the people can make up their own minds, i think if people are given the facts, they're smart enough to figure out what is right and wrong. so having somebody like scott on, saying here is the conservative physician, she made a good argument and had talking points and said here is what i would do. i was able to rebut them, at least i think so. supportersome trump thought that she kicked my butt.

i'm sure there are partisans on the left who thought the opposite. i'm not concerned about me -- winning or losing. with highlighting the issues on both sides and letting people make up their own mind. thomas jefferson said that if america is to hope to be a functioning republic with an electorate that is neither educated nor informed, it is hoping for something that never was and never will be. i think that is true. typically at least once a day, i have a conservative on that i debate with, sometimes every hour. the other formatting, if you are , when i don'tw have guests. , mes mostly just me and you talking to the people and the

.olks who calling -- call in should we really be having this war in iraq? what is going on in syria and lebanon, we will discuss that. we will start with a debate or not. when i don't have a guest who will debate me, i will try to present both sides of it as a starting point. so the folks who are saying, this is what should have, this is why we shouldn't have, this is what we should. i think there is a level of integrity and that. starting in radio in the 1960's and 1970's, and back

then news was news and we actually saw both sides pretty much in every issue. we had an educated electorate, and therefore when crazies came along like george wallace, they were viewed as crazies, marginal. who is --e a guy donald trump is in my opinion far to the right of george wallace. saidepublicans in michigan let's all vote for george wallace and embarrass the democrats, and they sent him to the convention. in any case, the point i think is that it is important to have these kinds of dialogues into discussions. the fact that so much of this discussion -- i remember when i was a kid, i watched buckley

show with my dad, who was a republican. we would argue politics. we must buckley would have liberals on. they would have discussions. we don't do that anymore, we have dueling bumper stickers. it is not digging into the issues. i'm trying to get back to that time, not to that time so much, but back to that ideal that we really need to be well-informed, to understand the worldview and perspective of both sides. >> we have one minute. thom: let people make up their own mind. that is the goal of our show. we have a little less than a minute before we start so i'm going to check the news one more

time. we also have a live chat room that is free and has no advertising on our website, and i check in with the chat room, there are a bunch of people who comment and it gives some instant feedback which is useful. >> we have a report coming in here. thom: thank you. sue who runs the chat room is in england and she set the clocks of already changed. ♪ >> all the important stories we cover and the issues are at our

website. members of the community can comment and join the conversation. thom: tom hartmann here, speaking the truth about multinational corporations. where did my mouth go, there is. mary in georgia, what is on your mind? seen mr. baxter's first film six times. there are three things i wanted to bring to people who have not seen it. first of all, you have never seen an uglier american than donald trump was to those people in scotland, he basically decide -- destroyed their lives and homes and then kicked their interface -- faces. fromdn't get permission the local people to destroy the dunes, which was ecologically

protected. he went over their heads, the state of scotland. the british and scottish government, i am not really sure, but i know there are scottish representatives in british parliament. thom: that has changed over the last decade or two, that relationship. caller: because of the film, there were 593 people signing a petition in great britain to ban donald trump from their country. it was on c-span last fall. they had hearings about it, and most of these representatives said, we can just ridicule him, like that would do any good. ,he other thing about this film es to made promis representatives from scotland that he would bring thousands of jobs and millions of dollars to the economy, it will be

wonderful, you know how he hypes everything. but it has not happened. there is a law on the books in this country and in great britain, i can't remember what it is named in great britain, but what it says is you cannot bribe officials of foreign governments to do business with you. you cannot say, i will create 6000 jobs and then not produce them, otherwise the people, i think the three families they canin the film, bring a complaint to the united states department of justice. thom: perhaps. there is a difference between lying and writing. you are right, the foreign and corrupt practices act makes it a crime to bribe foreign actors to do business, but lying to people

-- and frankly, i cannot say, i have not seen the movie and i'm not that familiar with it, i cannot say absolutely he lied to them, maybe he planned to build a hotel that would have had those jobs and circumstances changed, but i get it that it is a good movie and worth seeing. do not forget, the website is trumpedfilm.com. in new jersey, watching us in c-span. caller: thank you for taking my call. the reason i'm calling it has to do with health care. i worked for 30 years in the pharmaceutical industry and i was a director of regulatory affairs dealing with the fda. i wanted everybody to know, because i used to be part of putting in the drug applications to the fda, most of our drugs are made in foreign countries,

and the only thing they do is to put a different package on it, so when congress and the fda come out and say you cannot import drugs because they are cheaper, because of safety reasons, it is nonsense. thom: the vast majority of drugs are made in china, india or europe. caller: not even in europe. france was the last country that produced aspirin. all of the aspirin you buying this country is made in china, there is not one single producer anymore that makes aspirin. and so it goes for most countries. in india, there are several large companies, pharmaceutical companies, and they are still selling stuff over here. thereend consultants over

because they have been lying about test results and all of these things. the only thing that stops us from importing drugs from other countries is because they don't want the prices to drop here. thom: thank you so much for sharing your experience with us. i used to live in vermont, in montpelier, about 7000 people. bernie sanders, this was back in 1998, he was our member of the house of representatives, and he organized classes. every saturday downtown there would be this bus, and you would see mostly older people getting on these buses. montpelier is- two hours south of montreal, and they were driving up to montreal to buy their pharmaceuticals,

because it was illegal to ship them. they were so much cheaper there. as you correctly point out, they are the same drugs. the exact same drugs. this is a scam. it is a scam that is done at law , the law is providing -- this is a government monopoly essentially. the pharmaceutical companies have bought politicians. untileorge washington 1976, giving money to a politician to try and influence their vote was considered bribery or at least a behavior that could be regulated. powell wrote a memo to the chamber of commerce saying, we have to change this and take over all of these things, take over the schools and universities, take over the

political system and whatnot because american business is under assault from ralph nader and rachel carson. in 1972 he was put on the supreme court, and he authored this decision that giving money to politicians is not a behavior, it is a speech. i have some money in my pocket, i'm not saying anything, but porting to the conservatives on the court, it is and therefore you cannot regulated anymore. you cannot get a restaurant in washington, d.c. on a weeknight when congress is in session. the best investment right now. is buying politicians -- right now is buying politicians. you get a 10,000 to one return. margie in wisconsin.

caller: hello. be alive todayd if he had health insurance. thom: who is this? caller: my ex-husband. he lost his job during the recession, and he lost his health insurance. he was living with friends of mine. he had been feeling not well for about a week and a half but he did not have insurance so we could not go to a doctor, but was -- it was not an emergency so he could not go to the er. one night, he had a massive friend performed cpr until the ambulance got there. by the time the ambulance got there, he was dead. thom: i'm so sorry to hear that.

a feelinge can have that, those are the early warning signs. caller: exactly. if you been able to go to a doctor, he would probably still be alive today. thom: but if your house had been on fire, the government what it shown up with a fire truck to put it out. but if your husband's body was on fire metaphorically, forget him. ron paul, let him die. thank you for sharing your story with us. my condolences. kurt, what is on your mind? caller: it is always good to listen to your show. if the content of this discussion was not so serious, it would be funny when you have your exchange with scott hughes. it harkens me back to the old abbott and costello, who was on

first. no matter how many fax you gave her, she could not find a way to connect with what you were saying and continued along her train of thought, it has to have been brainwashing. one of the policies i have on the show is that i don't trust people when they are not here to defend themselves. so let's not talk about her, let's talk about the issue. caller: the issue is -- congressman alan grayson, he articulated it better than i ever could, so if you have an his ifnity to look up you get sick, die quickly speech. thom: i remember it well, he has been on the program many times. he said, here is the republican health plan, number one, don't two, if youd number

do get sick, die quickly. kurt, thank you for the call. hi, darlene. regardingwas calling medical insurance. policy and itht a had its guidelines and everything, which was fine. and when i was about to retire, i figured i will not be able to keep that insurance any longer because i would be going on medicare, so i started paying it every three months for the last , anderiods -- to wind down then i would be on medicare. when i sent the first quarter in, told me -- they did not say anything. when i sent the second quarter in, they called me and asked if there was a problem, because i

have been paying every six months. so i called them, was because i was going to go on medicare, and this was a private policy and i didn't take it keep it. thom: did they dump your try to flip you over to medicare ?dvantage darling, i am sorry, we are out of time. hartmann.com for audio archives. --ice to colors to get to callers to get to the point quickly. ♪ thom: welcome back. bob in new york. what is on your mind?

caller: we are really thankful for the affordable care act. my wife was recently diagnosed with breast cancer and she was able to get treatments. you mentioned in the past how expensive it can be. i don't know what would do without it. i would like to explain how the congress and senate and president gets their health insurance. i'm going to hang up now so you can take other calls, but if you could address that, it would be great. thom: my understanding, and thanks for the call, is that prior to the institution of the affordable care act, they basically have an employer-based insurance policy where the federal government -- there were a bunch of insurance companies and you could pick one that the federal government contracted

with, and they were pretty good policies. acalieve that during the negotiations, the republicans put in a thing because they were convinced it would be terrible, that members of congress had to buy their health insurance on the exchanges. i'm not sure if that stuck or if it is still the law. they torilla jones will be jones will- victoria be reporting the news in a moment, she might be able to tell us. basically, they have employer-provided health insurance. at the senior level, the president and vice president, i don't know about the cabinet, but the president and vice president, they are basically in the military program. they go to walter reed, it is a separate thing, they are treated as if they were generals.

i don't know if that is because the president is the commander-in-chief of the military or what the rationale is, but he has very, very good health care. anytime there is a motorcade the goes flying down the streets here, the last car is an ambulance just in case. that is all i know about that, we will see if anybody else knows anything. doris in colorado. caller: about the employer-based health care. it is just the same thing as a private insurance corporation. they are paying into it for you. the company i work for has been doing this for years and my insurance is through private corporation. that is another reason why we need single-payer. companies cannot come to this theiry and set up factories, offices, what ever without factoring in the cost of

health care. thom: i think it was toyota, we talked about this yesterday, that had been planning to build an auto factory in america and they were negotiating with three different states that were offering them -- we will offer dollars, and i think that they ended up moving to toronto because of the health ofurance built into the cost building in the night states in canada it was zero. it was one of the advantages of moving there. doris, thank you for your call. we will be right back. ♪

thom: let's check in with talk medianews. brought to you by our sponsors. one is a charity and south sudan, it is a great thing. jones.line, victoria what is going on in the world today? victoria: president obama is campaigning in miami for hillary clinton and he is talking about obamacare. he is hitting congressional republicans and then he was poking fun at donald trump who recently said he was going to go for a special session of congress.

he said, what you realize if they don't have a plan. they want to repeal because ideologically they are opposed the idea, but it isn't like they don't have a pretense of a plan, they don't have a semblance of a plan, there is not even a hint of a plan. there is no plan. thom: has he pointed out the marco rubio was the author of the writer in the budget bill last year that did away with the a -- ensureds that that would raise their rates this year? because if he is in florida, people should know, if your health and insurance prices are going up, marco rubio is a large part of the reason why. victoria: interesting, no i don't think he went there. he also went to florida international university and was saying that donald trump would abuse his presidential power.

he was also saying that people should vote early and gave them the address of the polling place. they can go right now. capary clinton is going to her campaign with a big line up in a final rally in philadelphia. bill clinton, chelsea clinton, president obama and michelle obama. hillary clinton and president obama will both speak at night -- that tonight. caseylvania senator bob is calling on the department of justice to ensure every american's right to vote is protected after reports of white nationalists planning to intimidate people at the polls on tuesday and suppress the minority vote. this is after a report in thousands ofat poll watchers are being rounded up across all 50 states and they

are partnered with an oalt- ght website.-ri thom: remember in 2003, there was three black guys who showed up at a polling place with a stick, they said they were the new black panthers. last eight news has been assessed with this. now we are and talking about thousands, tens of thousands of white guys showing up at the polls in mostly minority neighborhoods with badges and an organized effort. are they hysterical about that at fox? victoria: i don't think they're talking about that, they are talking about the clinton foundation. thom: you watch fox so i don't

have to. [laughter] victoria: the fbi has begun the process of opening an investigation into one of its own twitter accounts that was quite for over year and then released a bunch of documents of political impact this week. they referred the matter to the euros inspections -- bureau's inspections division. thom: did james comey have anything to do with that? victoria: nobody knows who had anything to do with it. thom: that is not a good thing. victoria: is there something up? they are looking into it. u.k.nteresting vote in the by the high court this morning. the high court said, you cannot just brexit. thom: really? victoria: yes. thom: on what basis?

victoria: they ruled parliament must vote on the decision and that the government, two different things, cannot just trigger brexit with article 50. thom: the people's referendum is not enough -- england doesn't have a constitution. under common law? victoria: it has an unwritten constitution, and what the court ruled is that it would be unlawful for the prime minister to cindy article 50 notification without an act of parliament. thom: you are a pretty good observer of you take -- u.k. parliament -- politics. howdy think they will vote? victoria: theresa may has appealed and it is going to the supreme court, a relatively new institution, and he will sit in early december.

all 11 have never sat before. they will hear the argument. it is a major deal. thom: it really is. victoria jones with talk medianews. thanks for the update. we will be back right after this. ♪ >> you are listening to thom hartmann. from united nations headquarters in new york, this is your world news minute. [indiscernible] thom: danielle? it occurs to me that when i am on camera to, it is way away from that. maybe we should do the whole show on camera one.

does that make sense to you? >> it works for me. a break, going to take i've been sitting here for two hours. i'm going to run to the bathroom and get some more orange juice. thing, that is one of our advertisers, and this stuff actually lowered my blood pressure. >> all this week we've been providing live coverage of political talk shows national radio host. new york we wrap up in city with the mike gallagher show, live coverage starting at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span two. >> election night on c-span. watch the results and be part of a national conversation about the outcome. the location of election night headquarters and watch victory in concession speeches in key races.

starting live at 8:00 p.m. eastern and throughout the following hours. listen to our live coverage using the free c-span radio app. this mornington on "washington journal," discussed the integrity of this years of voting process. the integrity of the voting process is our discussion. joining us is kristin clark, resident and executive director of the lawyers committee for civil rights under law as well as john mccloskey, welcome to you both. answerhave both of you this question, what is an election lawyer? guest: where i work is one of the nation's historic. civil rights organizations we were founded in 1963 at the

behest of john f. kennedy, who 'sought to mobilize the nation civil rights laws and defend access to the ballot box and promote voting rights for disenfranchised communities. is paramount to what we do. one of the main activities we do at the lawyers committee is run election protection. the nation's largest, nonpartisan protection program. operate a hotline where we field calls from voters a costs -- across the country, and the goal is to make sure that all eligible americans can cast a ballot and participate in democracy. guest: i am a lawyer at ashby law. a component of practicing political law is not only campaign finance law election law. when i represent my clients on

election law issues, the participation that i provide and counsel i provide to my clients really ranges the gamut in terms of conducting training sessions and working with clients to prepare for election day, and especially preparing for close elections. ast has serious implications to what you can do after election day. the things that we advise and counsel our clients on for election in preparation reference poll workers, working with election and magistrate or's, working with lawyers both in their state or around the country in some circumstances. also working with judges in many

instances, to be as prepared as possible for when the issues arise that either need to go before court on, before or after election day, or to do with issues in front of election administrators. our clients are able to do that. host: let's get into that a little more, but first let's take the issue of whether or not the electoral process is rigged. guest: i find the suggestions that our elections are rigged to be false, a myth. in many communities, you have officials who represent both parties who are tasked with operating elections. of real issue that i see evidence that we are wrestling with voter discrimination and suppression, rather than

suggesting there is somebody looking to distort the outcome of the presidential race, i think it is more important that we look at the real voting discrimination with the at the local level. states like texas, who haven't -- have adopted a discriminatory photo id requirement. states like north carolina who fought to cut voting hours and eliminated early registration opportunities. communities like hancock county, georgia, that removed african-americans from the rolls. but is the real issue i think we face and it requires focus if we want to strengthen our democracy. host: your take. guest: i have a real problem with using the term rigged to define our election system.

when ever utilizing that term, it seems to me to imply that the outcome of our elections are predetermined, which simply is not the case. it also does a great disservice to not only do voters who are participating in the election, but it does a disservice to the private citizens and election administrators facilitating the election. if you are in my practice, frankly, if you have participated in elections frequently, either as a voter, watcher, your understand the process is built in such a way that really prevents the system from being rigged. it is a decentralized system. it provides for numerous checks on the results on election day. friendly, the public process in and of itself, both at the polls and after the polls, because of all of the records that are maintained in terms of the vote counts, the whole books

and every thing else, are maintained and publicly viewable after the fact. to get to the point about the issue kristin mentioned about discrimination and preventing voters from voting, i think the term rigged and some of the rhetoric we've been hearing in voters fromter turning out on election day. i think that rhetoric does a great disservice, as i mentioned, to voters in that circumstance. in terms of the actions of certain states, the intent of ande actions can be debated certainly we will talk about some of those today, i am sure, my overall, what people on side of the aisle, republicans, really look for and strive for in terms of administering our elections and changing laws is

voter integrity. that is to make sure the voting process is as clean as possible, as transparent as possible, and as fair as possible. host: the center for justice together a piece debunking the voter fraud myth. they note that "the washington post" found 30 instances of credible fraud over over one million the -- ballots cast. investigations found negligible cases of fraud. does it happen? guest: yes, it does happen. center does their work and studies the issue and produces reports. area, practice and this

you can understand the fact that there are arguments and studies on both sides of that particular issue. the heritage foundation come a for instance, found hundreds of instances of voter fraud. topic that is right for for debate and partisan in many instances. i think what the heart of the voter fraud issue gets to is that as long as people, and we are all human, participate in the voting process, there will be those who want to cheat the system. there are safeguards we can put in place to ensure that the system remains with a certain level of integrity, and that are fair to all, and we should proceed and adopt those reforms. host: do you agree? guest: no.

data shows that you have a greater chance of thing struck seeightning than you would vote fraud on election day. when i hear the term vote fraud, i view it as essentially codewords. about makingwords access more difficult. when we see lawmakers around the country invoke the need to fight vote fraud, what we have seen is barriers. idh as texas is voter requirement. there were 600,000 registered voters who were essentially disqualified because they did not have one of the limited forms of id required under the law. 47% of eligible americans turned out to vote in 2014.

that was the lowest turnout rate we have seen in this country in more than 70 years. we are at a moment in our democracy when we need lawmakers to focus on how we make the process easier? how we make it easier for people to participate and turnout? one of the unnecessary hurdles we throw in front of voters to make it more does the cult -- difficult to participate. texas.ean in austin, independent. caller: i have a background in technology with computers, and my focus is in a different area. very serious concerns. we know how much corporations and governments have been hacked . there was an hbo documentary done some time ago, and you can still get it on

youtube, it is called "hacking democracy." the person that was involved in did a new filmy called "fraction magic," and you can see that, too. they have discovered there are ways to hack into the elections because the people who have to service the computers can login and change the code or things like that in the computer itself, and alter the vote counts proportionally by a lot. it doesn't matter how we people vote any -- in each precinct. there are also concerns about the centralized computers where all of the memory cards are taking into the main precinct, and other computers count these

things. host: i'm going to have both of our guests answer. guest: 80% of ballots that are cast in our country are paper ballots. we haven't seen evidence of hacking of elections, certainly not on a scale that would justify making it harder to vote. guest: i have to agree. the way that technology and our elections are facilitated does not allow for widescale hacking of our vote. the instances that the caller was referencing in terms of manipulating the final count, like that would certainly be caught when votes are reconciled against the voters who checked in on the poll books. i don't see it being a real issue. both parties have people on the ground that are

watching that sort of verification that happens the day of, and election night? guest: if history tells us anything about what candidates will do, the answer is yes. i cannot speak for the trump campaign, i can only speak for clients are represent, and those clients are forward-looking and prepared for election day and beyond. it is a con practice for republicans -- a common practice for republicans. place in a system in terms of volunteers, in terms of lawyers on call to facilitate issues like the one we just discussed. host: kristin, if donald trump is saying he is going to have poll watchers, it doesn't sound that is unprecedented. guest: i think it is important

to distinguish who are the people who are allowed inside the polls and the ones without authorization. typically on election day you oftenave poll workers, poll workers on behalf of both , and depending on state laws, you may have workers serving on behalf of the candidates. they are to be held accountable, they are not there to disrupt the conduct of the election. they should not be subjecting voters to intimidation or harassment, but the entire system has checks and balances built into an sure the outcome is a fair and smooth one. ces built in to help ensure the outcome is a fair and smooth one. what we want to focus on closely on election day is what is happening in the lead up to that point, making sure everyone enjoys equal access to the ballot box, making sure people are able to cast a ballot free from intimidation or harassment. was: what john mccloskey

referring to is a story in the national journal that says the trump campaign is not working on a poll watch pine. -- plan. so this is something that both parties agree to three decades ago. nathan in connecticut, a democrat. good morning, welcome. caller: thank you very much. you are doing a great job. ms. clark is very brilliant. --question is for mr. moore mr. mccloskey. his presidential candidate is urging early voters to change their vote by election day to a vote for him. this is kind of a new topic for me. awski explainwacl

why it should be legal to change your vote? to be clear, i don't represent donald trump and i'm not his lawyer by any stretch of the imagination, so that being said, the notion that a voter can change his or her vote if they had cast in early is permissible in some states so long as that vote has not been processed already. or is a procedure under state law in no states it is permissible that you have to go through in order to ensure your vote is not double counted. in many instances, the early voting procedure is therefore people who have made up their mind and are ready to cast their vote. it really shouldn't be an issue, you probably will not be seeing many people change their vote. host: have people change their vote in the past?

mr. waclawski: historically, it really has not been a big issue. host: next phone call or in olympia, washington. we have paper ballots in washington, mail and only. when my mom died, or to terms, she got ballots in her mailbox. owned a a relative house, so they could not use the ballot. the other point i want to make, when i bought my house, there was nothing to indicate i was a citizen but i automatically got a registration for voting after i bought my house. the other thing i have a concern about, when i took a class for the state, social class, social gave thatthe seiu class, and they automatically

gave out these things to sign up for voting. but a third of the class were illegal aliens, they had only been in the states for three or four months. easy to sign too up to vote. so, for decades, the way that we handle voter registration in our country, people meet the eligibility criteria, they are of age, they are a citizen, and then you sign under penalty of perjury that the information is accurate. this system has worked. we have not seen evidence of people impersonating the dead, evidence of undocumented noncitizens participating in our elections. i think it is important that we not create hysteria or rely on

data that is simply is not there to disrupt the way we go about handling voter registration and elections in our country. americans of eligible turned out in the last midterm election, and we want to figure out how we can get more americans to participate in the process. i think thei: caller, in the first example that she referenced, raised an important issue that needs to be identified, and that is the incorrect or outdated that are on the books in many of the states. unless there is an effort to maintain accurate and updated records, we will have problems with registration. did a reportr finding 27 million records in

our statewide voter registration database that is outdated, has inaccurate residents, etc. i don't like to use the word has a negativeit connotation, but to clean the data at the state level, but that would be a problem. people always allege, rightly or wrongly, that voter fraud results because of that bad data. host: that caller was from washington state, where it is all mail-in voting. any concerns from your viewpoint that that could happen when you have all mail-in voting? mail-in voting is not the process where you have to physically mailing your ballot. drop boxes where you can take your ballot and drop it off in those jurisdictions that

have mail-in voting. while there are people that raise concerns about not being in person when you are facilitating your vote, overall, we have not seen vast amounts of voter frauds or issues related to that. host: you are not in your head, you agree? mail-in ballots are an important election reform, but not the end-all be-all. utah is another one. we have an interesting voter rights case pending in utah because the mail-in ballot system there in place today this in voters. the unique barriers that native american voters face are often ignored. to cast an effective ballot requires many in the community receive language assistance. reallyil-in ballot

disadvantages them. we have seen higher participation rates with mail-in ballots. it is important but not the end-all be-all when it comes to election reform. host: let's go to south carolina where there is no early voting and you need an excuse for absentee voting. phil in summerville, south carolina. independent. caller: i think it is more of a reason rather than an excuse, and there is a distinction there. first of all, i don't want jon to be left out. i think you are brilliant, too. i thought it was unfair of someone to call in from massachusetts to throw in the other positives and then hit jon with, why should i be allowed to change my mind? kristin, i have to tell you, i think you are wrong that you think voting needs to be made easier. the problems we have in this

country is not that it is not easy to do it, it is that not enough people pay attention to what they are doing. we are more worried about kim kardashian's rear end than we are about who is running the country. that is shame on all of us. making it easier for somebody spending their time playing on youtube, fiddling around with the social media things, and who care more about who won the grammy awards or whenever last night, it is crazy for us to make it easier for that individual to go out and vote. i don't disagree, i think the caller raises an important point. we do have to figure out how we can restore focus and attention on democracy, encourage civic participation. there are a few states that have tried to move to preregistration

of 16 and 17-year-olds, so the moment they turn 18, they are ready to go and eligible to vote . there is a lot of noise today, and i think it is important to instill inhow we can young people in particular, millennials, a sense of importance about what is at stake when we have elections in our country. host: connie in new jersey, democrat. caller: good morning. i have a question and a statement. 17ame to this country at under the fascist government in spain. government, by themselves, said we had to have identification with a picture and everything. if that is the worry about voter

fraud, why is that an issue? they have to go to the centers were nobody is there. i don't have a problem because i have a passport and everything. but i am talking about the other people. host: we will have jon waclawski answer the question. mr. waclawski: i believe the caller was referencing voter id, had different feelings about implications, how voter id is processed in certain states. yes, if it causes problems for voters to obtain a voter id, that's an issue. the arguments made against voter id laws is it is discriminatory and rates a disparate impact among voters. to the extent states are able to as available as

possible, make it free, and create timelines that allow for both the voter and election administrators, who have to toilitate the elections, provide adequate training and information regarding the voter id process. yes, you will have allegations that the voter id is hard for others to obtain. historically,, voter id has been a popular issue among americans. there was a gallup poll not long ago that showed 80% of americans favored voter id for people going to the polls to vote. that included republicans, democrats, and independents. host: we are talking about the integrity of the voting process this morning. roundtable discussion for all of you to call in. you have heard this out on the campaign trail, that perhaps the election system is rigged.

what are your questions about it? you can also go to twitter and join the conversation there, or go to facebook.com/cspan. another issue that has come up is recounts and when they can happen. 19 states and washington, d.c. provide for automatic recounts if the margin between the top candidates is within a certain margin of error.

kristen clarke, what do you make a recount laws, where are their there concerns, where do you think they can benefit the american public? ms. clarke: i started my political career on the eve of bush v. gore. i think everyone is hoping this is an election where we will see finality, we will not see endless debates about the outcome. it is interesting how much the world has changed since 2000. is no longer a part of our election vocabulary. there are so many checks and balances built into the system. my hope is we will have some finality and clarity with respect to the outcome on tuesday. that said, we have seen in recent times recounts in local races, state races that are very

close when it comes to the outcome. all of this underscores the need to ensure that people are able to easily participate. every vote can make a difference in our elections. ecountslawski: r happened. as you noted in your description of state laws, in some states it is automatic. it is actually a very good check on how our voting system runs. it is meant as a check, a reconciliation of the votes tabulated on election night. in many instances, it is meant to provide some sort of finality to the situation, and i agree with kristin, i hope there is finality on november 8. but we should not think of the recounts as a bad thing because of bush or igor -- v. gore.

they are an important part of our election system. if it so happens that we had to go into a recount, people should have confidence that it will garner a fair result. any predictions where we could see a recount, either in a recount, either in the presidential race or tight senate races? mr. waclawski: your guess is as good as mine. the races are closing every day goes fore -- it polling numbers. certainly, the senate races certainly have more of an opportunity to go to a recount, historically more than presidential races. in the house, as well, which are more frequent. it is frankly impossible to predict which states are on the-bound

presidential level. the strategy that goes into determining that not only has to play into the closeness of the vote that the electoral college numbers. ms. clarke: i will put my money on no recount on tuesday. i think there is the possibility that we could see election day , if there are communities that legitimately purchased voters from the rolls, other issues that arise on election day, long lines, malfunctioning equipment. we could see election day litigation that could complicate the picture, but no recount on tuesday. host: steve in canonsburg, pennsylvania. independent. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: it is more of a comment than anything else. i have been voting roughly four 30 years now, every election, whether it is state or local, and every time the specter of

voter id is brought up. i have never seen it turn out to be anything. now all of a sudden you have a candidate crying foul, the system out to get him long before it starts. how do you prevent this from affecting the voters who want to turn out and stop them from thinking that it will not matter because no matter what the system is screwed up? host: kristen clarke, i will have you take that one. ms. clarke: we have to change the discourse. i think it's important that we reject these claims that vote fraud is something that looms over our elections. when we her about efforts at the state level, in our communities to change the rules, to put in place laws that make it harder supposingcause of vote fraud, i think it's important that people speak up and reject that, make clear there is no data or evidence,

just as the caller suggests, that vote fraud is something we are wrestling with. whencan democracy works people are participating, when we take the hurdles down, and when we promote the importance of exercising the right to vote. john is in gresham, oregon, supporting an independent candidate. thank you to c-span for this topic. i want to go back to a previous caller's comment about the hacking of electronic voting machines. i am disappointed that the ofsts were glibly dismiss it the reality of a possible hacking of electronic voting machines. it is real, it's possible. congress has held hearings on that very matter. john conyers famously questioned ere participants

in the hacking of voting machines. i would also suggest that the purging of voter rolls israel, it happens. famously, letters have been sent to servicemen serving overseas by political parties, knowing that those people are overseas, and also knowing that they are not home to sign for the letter and return it. thereby losing their ability to vote in an election. host: we will take your last point. ms. clarke: i think the caller raises an important point. purging ofe the minority and african-american and latino voters in some communities. overseas voters, a person who served in the military, citizens living overseas or in foreign service are also vulnerable. when we hear about efforts to

"clean up the registration rolls" they see that as an invitation to potentially purge legitimately registered voters. ,t is a deep area of concern when people have taken the step of registering to vote, we need to be sure that we are not stripping that important right away without grounds. to agreewski: i have with that last sentiment 100%. we don't want to take away, through cleaning our election rolls, the ability for somebody legitimately registered to vote. however, there are records on state voter lists that have not been updated since people have moved to different states, have elections,n numerous not just talking about one or .wo, or who have died

it is an important facet to maintain updated voter lists. host: republican line, diane in minnesota. there is early voting there. have you done so? caller: i am a republican and i will vote on tuesday for trump. he is our guy, all right? i am not ashamed to tell anybody that i am voting for trump. i think you will see red in minnesota. read in minnesota, guys. what it is, nobody trusts you. the reason is, number one, i tried calling him before with the voter id. there is nothing wrong with voter id. you are talking about purging and cleaning up the voting. there are people who are 200 years old voting. they had been voting for years and they are dead.

and let's please just discuss this here illegally that should be voting are voting. they are taking social security numbers. if you allow this to happen and you allow this to continue, how can you possibly think we are going to trust you again? host: let's get a response. is this happening, as diane says it is, and what is the percentage of the voting electorate? less than 10%? is impossible it to tell because so few cases wind of being prosecuted. ast of that reason is, kristen may argue, that it doesn't happen, i disagree, but to what extent -- host: do you agree that it is inevitable as the studies show? mr. waclawski: i don't know the answer.

without knowing, i wouldn't feel comfortable answering that in the affirmative. what we know is that prosecutors who have looked into voter fraud evidenced the reduction very difficult to do. frankly, the other component to that ms. it is a politically charged prosecution at that point, which makes many prosecutors apprehensive to bring voter fraud cases. opponents of voter fraud rights have been successful in promoting this hysteria around vote fraud which does not exist. again, a greater chance that you will be struck by lightning than you will see voter fraud. the last place you would find someone undocumented is inside a polling place on election day interacting with government bureaucrats. photo id, i want to underscore one point here. for those of us around a stable, we travel, we have driver's

licenses, passports. what we are talking about our people on the margins in our country, the poorest of the poor do not drive, who do not get on planes, and who function every day without a government id. , theeral appeals court most conservative in the country, rejected the texas photo id law, because it would ,resumably advance vote fraud and because of its discriminatory effect on african-americans, latinos, students, and the poor. host: to the caller's point, when it comes to trust, why not have some form of identification so that people like that caller in minnesota trust the system and that every vote is a valid vote? ms. clarke: there are mechanisms in place to verify identity. .here is signature matching in texas, they are putting a remedy in place that allows for

voters to present a far broader range of identification to confirm their identity. they can bring utility statements, student id cards, they can sign an affidavit where -- and gettingng a government id would serve as an impediment or challenge. there are ways to confirm identity. the system is not broke, so these proposals to fix a problem that does not exist is problematic. host: janet is in michigan. a democrat. caller: thank you for c-span. this is a comment and i would be interested in the two guests speak to how we get younger demographics engaged at a younger -- earlier point in time in their lives. i am from a generation when i saw voting machines coming into my schools, students were being

engaged in that process at a very early age. by the time they were old enough to vote, they were connected to the process and understood the importance of it. we are living in a social media-driven age where there is opportunity to engage young the mechanisms and technologies they are most connected with, and at the same time, helping them understand what are those issues that will be important to me when i am ready to vote. i have shared with my niece on a number of occasions, that while you may not vote today, there will be people voting for issues that will affect you. and you need to weigh in on that . so five or six years from now, when a law or regulation is in place that is may be affecting

your ability to get funding for school, other resources that you may need from the system -- host: i will have both of the guests respond to that. important point, no doubt about it, getting the young folks involved early in the process of voting is vital. the caller mentioned polling places in schools. you see that across the country. that is a great way for students in that case to be introduced to how the system functions. i would encourage people with children or with nieces or theirs to bring little ones to the polling places -- there is nothing that prohibits you from doing that -- and show them how the process works. ms. clarke: i love the question, how we make the process easier for people to participate. online registration is something

that we have to move toward. there are a few states that have online registration, but in the computer-driven world we live in, we need to figure out how we can integrate that into the process to capture the imaginations of young people. i cast an early vote on sunday night, i brought my son and four nephews and nieces. i think it's important that we engage people in the process. think about preregistration opportunities for 16 and 17-year-olds. think about allowing them to serve as poll workers as well. host: in florida, chris is watching as an independent. caller: i have to comment on ms. comment about squeezing voters out with voter id. in this day and age, you need have an id to buy food. so your comments are just laughable.

, you stack the court system with these liberal judges that enable bad behavior. the reason i called, i have a three-step plan. first, it shows the incompetence of government in whatever we tackle, that we have have recounts in this day and age. you don't need to have an intimate-based system. diebold could make the voting machines and you would not have any difficulties. you have all of these individual states and all of this incompetence. technology could handle it. i have never had an error in my check in in 30 years. second, requiring a fingerprint and birth certificate.

i am a retired investment executive. inancial analyst, phd economics and finance. i have absolutely no confidence that we don't have thousands of illegal aliens voting. host: let's hear from mike, wyoming. republican. caller: thanks for c-span. you do a great job. i guess i have a comment for , ifan, for a future guest you have not had her on before. her name is bev harris. i think her website is black box , if you have not had her on before. voting. she has been studying voter fraud, electronic voting for 10, 15 years. just a comment there for maybe a future guest. i was going to say to kristen,

if you want more voting, just a thought, we could get a bunch of billionaires to pay people $20 to vote. you could get a lot more people to vote. then we will find out if there is any voter fraud around when you stand to gain some cash. those are my comments. host: washington, d.c., independent. you are next. caller: i am calling because i'm tired of these people calling in and saying illegals are voting. first of all, most of these people do not know any illegals. in this country illegally, you are not going out to vote. you don't want to be in the system. so that a low profile you can get your papers in the future. why would you jeopardize that? host: let's see if jon waclawski agrees with you.

beenaclawski: there have instances where noncitizens have participated in the elections. that has been documented. the frequency of which, i don't think anyone would argue, is tremendous. many times, it is more of an issue of not understanding the process than it is somebody's specific intent to manipulate the system. this election cycle, in the last year, there is an interesting case that jumps out and is discussion.that there was a noncitizen alien in votena who registered to and decided to not check the box -- rather to check the box that he was a u.s. citizen. then he went around to various news agencies, and talked about how he could participate in

elections and how easy it was. if you did participate, he would find himself in trouble, i can tell you that. the fact that people can manipulate the system is real. that is one instance of how that can happen. ellis in florida. democrat. up thathe brought interesting example but it is interesting he did not bring up that woman in florida who voted twice as a republican. the lady that called an earlier, and may be because of her accent , you missed the importance of her call. , why doesn'tsaying the supervisor of the elections issue the voter id? if there is no intent on state legislators to make that discriminatory, why do you have to have a second registration? in other words, you fill out a registration form, it goes to

the supervisor of elections. he approves that and places you on the role. if there is any fraud, that is where it starts, because he is not doing his job if you are not a citizen. have talked about these one or two obscure examples of somebody who may have accidentally completed a form the wrong way, but we do not talk about the actual data that shows that there are hundreds of thousands of people that are sometimes without the id required by these laws -- texas is a prime example of that. courts are now rejecting these efforts, finding that discriminatory in their affect on minority voters in particular. again, there is nothing broken about the system other than we have low participation and the low turnout. we need to focus on how we can get people more invested in the process and increase turnout and

participation in our democracy. host: sherry, new roads, louisiana. independent. caller: ms. clarke, i have to ask you this question, why is it discriminatory when we would all have to get these voter registration cards? you say there is only one or two or three. san francisco is it registering illegal aliens to vote. i'm sure you have heard that on the news. you say it is one here, two here. bank, welfare, to get a you need a birth certificate. how is this so hard? we would all have to do this. why is this considered against the black community? with texas, it is

that they limited the range of ideas that voters could provide. passports and drivers license, conceal and carry permits, a student id card for somebody attending college or university did not qualify. these laws were adopted with the intent of locking certain people out and making it harder for people to vote. the caller, i think, raises a good point. there are a few communities around the country that are exploring the idea of allowing the idea of people with green cards being allowed to participate in local elections. around the country, we have stated requirements and you have to be a citizen to vote in federal elections. we just don't see any evidence that undocumented people are turning out to vote. there in the shadows. immigration reform is not a topic we are talking about today, but just no evidence that

vote fraud is a real problem in our country. jon waclawski would you agree? mr. waclawski: i know the litigation has been ongoing there, but the fact of the matter is, we now have voter id in many states that will be in effect for this election, and has been in effect for other elections. although there have been attempts in other states to litigate those issues, it has been found that those states have produced a voter id system that does not discriminate, or does not treat voters in disparate ways. it is also interesting to note, after the 2004 election, there was a bipartisan commission to study how elections are performed in our country. jimmy carter and james baker were the cochairs of the

commission. they overwhelmingly endorsed a form of voter id to facilitate our elections in this country, with the caveat that it is enforced in a way that is fair, equitable. they promoted free ids, timing allowances to provide for people to understand the system and abide by the new law. maria in columbus, new jersey. i want to tell you, i am coming from puerto rico. had had voter, we id for the past 20 years. we take voting very serious. i think it is the only place where people will -- about 90% of the people that are allowed to vote go and vote. idrybody has to have a voter to vote.

not only a voter id, but election voter id. cannybody in puerto rico find a way to the municipal building to get an id to go and , i don't see why in this country we should have so much progress and cannot do the same thing. john in new jersey as well, independent. caller: thanks so much for c-span. in the democratic primary, it is clear, at least 150,000 voters in brooklyn, the home of bernie sanders, were purged from the rolls. clear, at least 150,000 this is our democratic party no longer being democratic. the second thing, in electronic voting, if the images are not saved, if those images are not

saved, then they cannot be checked. talk about certification of the results. how does it work, jon waclawski, why don't you go first. the results areclawski: tallied at the individual polling places. those results are then provided to the next level of oversight in that particular state. between county andks, municipal clerks, then a few days after the election is when those clerks will engage in cannabis -- canvas. that allows for the first check on the precinct level results produced on election night. process,s a public people can monitor the process.

really dig inl and reconcile all the materials that were facilitated on election night, on election day, make sure the poll book jives with the end result, and look at incident locks. -- logs. is done, thenas you get the certified result that is then broadcast as the certified result. from there, candidates and other people who are able, can decide whether a recount is right. publichen you say the can observe, that is when lawyers are there? if they're able. lawyers have to go through the same steps as poll watchers in

order to participate as a poll watcher. the canvas, things are typically a little more loose in terms of the permission to have people there observing. at that stage in the game, if it is a close election, and the candidate is prepared, they will certainly have lawyers there. host: let me ask you, kristen clarke, about observers of this process. who is observing, government, nongovernment? ms. clarke: the u.s. department of justice had long in place a federal observer program, pursuant to the voting rights act. this is the first presidential election cycle where we are without court protections of the voting rights act. most significantly, the justice department announced they will not have federal observers in some communities. they were an important check on .he system

the watchful eye of the federal government, something to deter mischief that may occur in some communities. they help to ensure that voters were treated uniformly, fairly, and evenly. so there is some question about what will happen in some communities where we have seen voter intimidation and harassment, particularly of minority voters. one thing that we are doing through our election protection program is we are making our hotline available for voters to alert us to problems that they unfold. but the reality is, we are still living with voter intimidation, harassment of minority voters is not something that is confined to the past. these are still problems that we see in some local communities around the country on election day. host: is it happening in early voting?

we have not heard reports that it is widespread but we are seeing an uptick in voter intimidation complaints. we have heard from voters in palm beach, florida about loud who areith bullhorns screaming at voters as they go into early voting sites. we reported that incident to local election officials who ordered that those folks move beyond the immediate perimeter of the polling place. but we want elections, when people turn out, that they are able to freely cast a ballot without being subject to intimidation or harassment. in oak ridge, tennessee. a democrat, our last of the discussion. caller: good morning, i have three questions that i would like to ask the gentleman and young lady. who investigates the republican party as far as voter fraud and

so forth? filipinos they have living in miami and so forth, who investigates that? words, which party investigates the other party more, democrats or republicans? i listen to all of this cuba,sation, and we have which has always voted republican. then when barack obama came in, it went over to the democrats. the indians, pakistanis, they all used to vote republican. who investigates their fraud? said, i am ag lady part of that civil rights movement with dr. king. i stood in greenwood, mississippi, when we were put on school buses. dr. king was left in the middle on the lawn there. if we kill the body, the head would die. ont means that they put us

the bus and they left dr. king in the middle of the road. all i'm saying is we fought hard for the vote. with a regular chauffeurs license. then i had to go to a cbl and then a specialist. it was crazy what they were doing, knocking a lot of people off the roads from driving heavy trucks. but with the government doing all of their regulation, they took a lot of jobs from people. will leave it there. our conversation is running short on time. i want to ask the guests to talk about what you are preparing for this time around that you did not have to prepare for in elections past. jon waclawski. is aaclawski: i think this right circle to come back to because it cuts back to the rigging of the election that we talked about at the beginning of

the program. the clients that we are advising have concerns, probably different than those that kristen has, relating to the .igging rhetoric we need to make sure our people are allowed in polling places, that they are qualified and everything, that they are trained and though the process, that they are not there to intimidate or harass. frankly, their biggest service to us lawyers who have to service clients postelection, is to be evidence gatherers on election day. to the extent they are thrown out of a polling place, that is the worst thing that could happen in the programs we administer. ms. clarke: there has been a lot of toxic rhetoric this election cycle. this is the first presidential election in more than 50 years without the full protections of the voting rights act in place. we have been litigating cases .his election cycle

in virginia, we moved to extend the voter registration deadline after the online system collapsed. we have cases involving the purging of voters. we are working on efforts to move polling sites to hospital county,s, like in macon georgia, where they sought to move a polling site from the school to the sheriffs office. so this election cycle is a bit darker, but on election day, we are very hopeful that people will exercise the power of their ballot turnout and focus not just on what is at the top of the ballot, but focus on all of the races going down the ballot, because they have great implications for the way that we want our communities to operate. host: kristen clarke, jon

she will talk about the start of open enrollment for the affordable care act and what to expect. she will discuss what could lie had or the law under a new administration and then jeffrey on to talk about the history and roles of the electoral college. also a professor of political science from the university of scranton obion talking about pennsylvania as a key out of ground state. be sure to watch "washington journal" friday morning. join the discussion. antonin scalia will be honored at a special meeting in the court great hall. we will hear from current and former solicitor general. 1:45 eastern.s at

hillary clinton joined the stage with bernie sanders in north carolina. this is about one hour 15 minutes. ♪ [applause]

[pharrell williams's "happy"] [crowd chanting "hillary"] >> raleigh, north carolina. i love you guys back. today.cited to be here to help get out the vote for hillary clinton, the next president of the united states. [applause]

i've got to be honest with you guys, i feel odd because this is a political rally. this is my first time doing something like this. i'm a little nervous. i am a musician. politics is not my field of expertise. i am a human. i am a human being with a family . a human being that shares this earth with other human beings. this election is too important. i could not sit on the sidelines and be quiet. for me, the definition of me, i am a look at leader. the new definition should be, actually, look at you, i am listening. [applause]

that is what we have in hillary clinton. be honest, i am not here to defend hillary. she is a big grow. she can do that by herself. [applause] i am here because i believe she is going to fight for us. don't you? [applause] she will work hard for america to fulfill a promise of a country where all men and women -- [applause] and women -- [applause] women -- [applause] were created equal. always been has not fair to all people, especially my culture.

not always been fair to us. i think hillary is going to help fix these wrongs. fact, she has made some .ommitments she made some commitments. whether it is pay equality for women. free college tuition if your family earns less than $125,000. me,very important to addressing the mass incarceration in 1994 by sentences.g she has made a commitment to me. three strikes, all of those things. isn't that right?

it makes me angry when people , she can'tn't be lead our country because she is a woman. [boos] how dare anyone question a woman's ability. every person, every person on this planet was brought into this world by a woman. [cheers and applause] women carry so much every day. including us for nine months. women of the reason why our species even exist. don't we call the planet mother earth? i want to live in a world where a woman's ability is respected and not ever questioned. and for once, let me just, let me dream. for once, when it comes to the nuke buttons, i'd like to see it

commanded by a woman who knows what it's like to physically bring a life into this world. [cheers and applause] and who will think about the world holistically before she decides to take millions of them out. [cheers and applause] i want to see a woman break the presidential glass ceiling on november 8, guys and girls. i want to see that glass shatter on the floor, and i want us all to stomp on it together. you know why? because my mother is able. your grandmother is able. your aunts are able. your nieces are able. your daughters are able. i've seen amazing things happen when women lead. i've personally benefitted when i've worked with a team of all ethnicities, colors, religions, and sexual orientations who come together for a common cause.

so i'm excited to see the halo effect on young women, seeing a female in the highest position of power in the history of mankind. [cheers and applause] young girls will then be unstoppable. so i'm calling on all of the women in this nation -- i don't care if you're democratic, republican, libertarian, i don't care what -- if you are a female, think about what you can do on november 8. you can be part of a very big number that changes things and show everybody your power when women come together and galvanize galvanize. [cheers and applause] and last but not least from my culture, my culture, i know they sometimes call us minority, but

you see our influence everywhere. we're not minority. we are majority. [cheers and applause] that's my culture. we're black, beautiful. [cheers and applause] so if you've ever been called a minority ever in your life -- and i'm saying this for the standing rocks too, if you've ever been called a minority, go out and vote and show everybody that you're actually really the majority. [cheers and applause] that's all i have to say. and right now, i want to bring up somebody who is closely associated with the word "fire", senator bernie sanders. [cheers and applause] [chanting "bernie"]

sen. sanders: thank you. thank you very much. pharrell, thank you very much. pharrell began his remarks by making a very important point. he said he's not a politician, he's a musician. but he understands that in this moment in american history, it is imperative that all of us be politicians, all of us be involved. in the political process. thank you, pharrell. let me begin by thanking all of you for coming out. what a fantastic turnout tonight. thank you so much. [cheers and applause] and i want to begin with a startling revelation. are you ready for a startling

revelation? >> yeah! sen. sanders: all right. i knew you would be. and here is what media may tell you this campaign is not about , hillary clinton. it is not about donald trump. it is not about donald trump. it is not about bill clinton. it is not about melania trump. the not about their children. this campaign is about you and millions of other americans. [cheers and applause] and this campaign is not a personality contest. we're not voting for high school president. we're voting for the most powerful leader in the entire world. [cheers and applause] and what this campaign must