will connect everything in your environment. 80's, so weructure, can see what is going on and automated. energy will be automatically managed. your car will be driven for you. the cloud has to move into the network to make that work. i think cloud will come of age. the network will become valued again. i think that is when we will see the increase in bank productivity. morning, a reporter's roundtable on the week ahead in washington. gerard walczak of the tax foundation talks about a provision in the new tax law which sets a $10,000 limit on state and local tax deductions

or federal income tax. we take your calls and you can join the conversation. ♪ .ost: good morning it is monday, january 8, 2018. the house and senate are both in session with the house meeting for its first session at 2:00 p.m. senate is scheduled to convene at 3:00 p.m.. we begin at the intersection of hollywood and politics. the 2018 hollywood awards season kicked off last night with a focus on standing up to sexual .arassment and inequality celebrities took the opportunity to express support to the news -- a few a few sweats

swipes taken at president trump. we are asking for your thoughts on hollywood's influence on politics and the debate in this country. give us a call. you can also catch up with us on social media. a very good monday morning to you. you can start calling in now. we are asking on your thoughts on hollywood's influence on politics, especially a year after the beginning of the trump administration in the year after hollywood was rocked by allegations and cases involving sexual misconduct. last night at the golden globes, that issue of sexual harassment was lifted up by oprah winfrey

which he gave her acceptance speech for the system b demille award. here is what she had to say. >> i will all the girls watching to know that a new day is on the horizon. [applause] >> when that new day finally , it will be because of a lot of magnificent women, many of whom are right here in this room tonight and some pretty phenomenal men. fighting hard to make sure that they become the leaders who take us to the time when nobody ever has to say me to go -- me too again. host: that was oprah winfrey at last night's golden globes.

a tweet from several members of congress last night after she received that award. one from all my items saying, thank you, oprah. time is up is what she tweeted last night. several members of congress waiting out oprah's statement. an axis, the headline we are going to be showing parts

from that speech and other speeches last night as we ask you about hollywood's influence. you can see from the front page of the style section of the washington post, the outfit just in black yesterday. oprah winfrey along with many others. the headline in the usa today notes the fashion on the red carpet has little to do with style as stars came out in force to stand up against sexual misconduct and gender inequality. usa today focuses on some of the other causes that some of those celebrities were advocating for in their dress and statement.

susan sarandon, the nominee for best actress in a miniseries brought attention to puerto rico noting that after hurricane maria half of the island is without power. britain,e was time in the 911 star stood out with a "poverty is read, sexist." time is up, she says on

discrimination, harassment and abuse. times up movement as the new york times reported last week by 300 something prominent actresses, producers and others in the entertainment industry. among other initiatives besides being able to be seen in use that platform at the golden globes, the initiative talks about a legal defense fund backed by $13 million in donations. they want legislation penalize companies that tolerate persistent harassment and to discourage the use of nondisclosure agreements to sell its victims. -- to silence victims.

one to get your thoughts this morning. the question is about hollywood's employed -- hollywood's influence. changes up first. independent. caller: thank you. this starts at the top. this is the reason why donald trump is the white privilege president. arnold schwarzenegger did this. go back to jefferson at all these people had sex with people who were subordinate. what we are going to end up with is a situation like him until. black men cannot look at white women but the white women, they -- not going to continue -- hollywood emboldens themselves over the people who work for them. a lot of the women in hollywood, it was a mutual situation they went into.

it is a such thing as a casting couch. what is going to happen is this, that people are going to realize that this situation is unintelligible. it is want to turn men away from the democratic party. i am a black man. i don't have the power. i'm not over anyone. were doing this to boys, not just a women. thank you. host: elvis is in clearwater, florida. democrat. agree. yes, i that sexual harassment, that stuff has got to stop. these guys have to learn to treat women with respect. the only thing i don't agree with his sometimes, a lot of guys hungry woman because they might be afraid they might be

charged with sexual harassment. i think that is where we have to learn to respect. permission ask for so they don't get charged with sexual harassment. sometimes it comes down to being ridiculous. nobody wants something like that to happen. i come from an italian family. we are talking about the intersection of hollywood. how much influence they have on politics. a year after the presidency of donald trump began, especially after year in which allegations rocked hollywood. when is in atlantic city. your thoughts. caller: hollywood's influence has given us and try to give us social justice. this country was founded on

equal justice. there is no flaws in equal justice. none. go trump. host: marshall is in marietta, georgia. democrats. caller: hi. yeah, equal justice is the reason why you can -- hollywood is trying to change. the thing about it is the arts have always been the vanguard of social change. is, does itout it bury how they interact with women? yeah, i think it does. the same when i am a black man and the same way you know, you

would go and i have come from pretty mixed -- i went to an all white catholic school, privileged. the thing about it is, i am 65. when i was in high school, i say, iave friends always have a black joke for you. they won't say that now to my face. arts help change that? caller: yeah, i mean it has. like the gentleman before was talking about, there has been a casting couch. there has always been a casting couch. , it is thing about it is

changing because there needs to be more women, the same way it is to be more black people behind the camera. change.st social as in the same thing, who would've thought in 2008, we would've had a black president named barack hussein obama. , why can't we have a woman as president? a p grabber in the white house now. peggy stang on the issue of oprah. -- peggy staying on the issue of oprah.

one were tweet from american journal about the times up movement, an issue that was talked about last night asking whose time is up? and who is making this godlike judgment? in the wakesk you of the golden globes, your thoughts on the intersection between hollywood's influence on politics and political debate. one other headline on this from the life and arts section of the wall street journal. meryl streep had the director of

the national domestic women's workers -- domestic workers alliance at her desk. in with thealked actual ms. king. phyllis is waiting, live for independents. caller: hi. i wish i could agree with a lot of the callers. i'm afraid i can't. hollywood has always been a mirror of our society, and i am 81 years old. i have always -- there was never a time i would miss watching the academy awards or any awards. but it has changed. if thismething now --

is a mirror of our society, i'm very disappointed. i know there's a lot that has to be improved in our country, and the world, but there was a time we went to the movies to get away from it. to enjoy ourselves, to laugh. musicals, like it took us away from our problems. i don't see that anymore. host: when did that start changing? caller: i really don't know, but all i know now is hollywood is trying to change the way we think. they are the last to talk about sexual harassment. it was obvious they kept quiet when they should have spoken much more earlier about the subject. now they get on that stage and they are a pack of hypocrites.

i had to shut off the show last night. i couldn't stand the hypocrisy of it all. louisiana.in acadia, democrats. caller: i hope they are a great influence. hollywood has the right to express their opinions. they are citizens. these people did not start out rich. of course, oprah is everything trump is not. she is up on all the issues. she has all awareness. she reads. she is very smart and intelligent, compassionate. she is a person for all people no matter what your race, religion, gay or straight. i hope she does run in 2020. she has my vote. as an african american woman, i am very proud of her. host: talk about exposing

opinions about oprah, here is a tweet from an nbc account. there is oprah winfrey. matt is up next in new york. go ahead. caller: how are you doing? , i go back andnt forth between the various issues i have to say that hollywood is themtle weird when you see trying to be the social conscience. they are once said ands and horse -- pimps whores. they have been on the forefront of permissiveness. then coming out trying to be the apostles of something is a little bit disingenuous.

host: met in new york. headline from the washington post noting barely a mention of donald trump during the golden globes. the story noting last year was the feud that again between meryl streep and has an elect donald trump. -- and president elect donald trump. that is in the washington post, their wrap up in the arts section this morning. a few comments. president trump including by host seth meyers in his opening

monologue. >> in 2011, i told jokes about our current president, jokes about how he was unqualified to be president and some have said that night convinced him to run. if that is true, i would to say, oprah, you will never be president! takes!not have what it where is hanks? you will never be vice president . you are to mean and him relatable. now we just wait and see. host: we will show you more from last night's golden globe. we are asking your thoughts on hollywood's influence on politics and how has it changed in the year since donald trump took office and a year after the entertainment industry were rocked by the sexual harassment and allegations. springfield, massachusetts.

for democrats. -- line for democrats. caller: i am an old dude. i heard the lady say she was 81. i-84. -- i am 84, black american. i have seen hollywood through many changes and i think that what happened and what is happening since trump has been president, hollywood's reaction to some of the kinds of things tape, id about in that think that is help people to open up their consciousness to the abuses that have happened when people have power over others in some job-related situations. related talked about going to history to relax but some of us remember the birth of a nation one of the worst depictions of

african-americans that ever conceptualized on camera. a lot of stereotyping happen through hollywood. america,ial group in you saw the negative depiction early on of irish people, italians, african-americans, mexicans, all kinds of people. hollywood was very bad at serotype in and picking people in negative ways to satisfy and give influence to the people who felt they were superior based on colored skin. i'm glad to see the change that have been made. i hope it continues. i endorse what happened last awardst the golden globe and the expressions that were that made and the people made an effort to pull in other people and to share our nation.

host: when you talk of those changes that have happened in hollywood and the issues they have pushed for and how they depict people and issues, how long does it take that to translate? the question is, if the focus last night was on sexual harassment and standing up to that issue, how long do you take it that's how you think it will be for that translates to the culture as a whole? caller: in the coming months, i think you'll see movies, writers who write scripts dealing with screenplays with the issue of sexual harassment. to try and shed light on it, to try and help put it in a way that people can understand it and we can overcome it. host: thanks for the call. dorothy is in michigan. democrats.

caller: i agree with hollywood. the hollywood people also vote. the sports people vote. even back in the day when the -- we are in ad different era based on the president in office. i feel government should feel -- should be every race in their for every person of color or whatever should be an office. i'm glad the women -- the women would be more better political than the men are now today because we still are in the same rut that we are in from over the years. i'm glad they are out there speaking out and have a right to speak out because they are voters also. they love this country just as well as anybody who isn't a

star. i don't understand why some people cannot understand that. they need to vote. have a platform to speak out and i'm glad. several speakers speaking out on twitter. hollywood influence on politics. two words -- ronald reagan. rich, marion ohio. go ahead. caller: a lot of interesting points coming up. people trying to reframe this into a different way than taking care of problems that exist today. italians were less than to separate the good from the crime people and they knew the difference. they didn't go out and defend the people committing crimes.

currently, oprah with two words of soft problems -- [indiscernible] take care of your wives. do not kill them from oj. just two words could straighten out other people. i will hang up. .ost: we want to hear from you phone lines are open as we approach 7:30 on the east coast. we are talking about the intersection of politics and hollywood. we do want to hear your thoughts. phone lines are open. we also take you through some of the issues you will be hearing about today in the world of politics and policy, including president trump's schedule. he will highlight the administration's efforts including expanding broadband service. at a speech at the 99th american farm convention in nashville,

tennessee. that is where the president will be before heading to the ncaa championship football game tonight. the visit today to take to see sittingirst by a president to address the farm bureau and more than 25 years. the president's address book on side with the release of a report by the department of agriculture. we will look for that for you today. certainly see what the president has to say. another issue happening today to keep you updated on the trump administration faces a monday deadline to decide the fate of nearly 200,000 salvadorans who have been living under temporary immigration status. usa today noting the department of home a security said on friday --

we will look for what has happened with that program today. back to your calls as we talk about hollywood's influence on politics and the political debate. how it has changed. how -- al is in ohio. caller: it does influence me. just like the one tweeter said, they make their money on fake. is thatant to say hollywood -- i haven't been to a movie in 23 years. i don't support this kind of garbage. i don't need this cheap entertainment that they put on us. that is for the emotional people. you cannot run the country on emotion. they try to get everyone's

emotion. that's what liberals and democrats do. they need to lead a whole bunch of immigrants in because they need voters. we can live without them but they cannot believe that they cannot live without us. host: do you think politicians can live without them? are they to influence by hollywood? caller: i see parents who have to take the kids to ball games, to movies. i don't care that is playing football, hockey. he doesn't need all that stuff. he needs to get back to all the basics. here, the ones that voted for mr. trump, we are real people. we know what it is all about. we don't need any of that stuff. ahead.onya, go caller: i wanted to make a

comment in reference to hollywood in the political situation. for addressing the issue with sexual harassment and inappropriate manipulation of actresses, actors but i believe some of this went a little more political -- on purpose, because i question the authenticity of some when they have not addressed how children, the ones who are least protected have been sexually manipulated. inappropriately. that is a deep issue as well. thath they would address at some of the ceremonies like last night to bring that out. those are the voices that later on in life, the end up drug addicts and in terrible situations.

also, we need to tell the truth. evangelicals with his political situation acknowledged instead of saying that everything that hollywood does is wrong which i don't agree with -- it is not all wrong. it is wrong to totally deny that things are happening. thank you. host: atlanta, georgia. go ahead. caller: hi. host: good morning. caller: happy new year, everyone that i am calling because what i that people in hollywood have a right to voice their opinion like everyone else. they pay their taxes. they are u.s. citizens like all of us so we have a right to voice our opinions. i really thought that over was

great. her speech was wonderful. i am such a fan and she is truly a self-made millionaire. she didn't inherit anything of anyone. to address one of the ladies who called and said she thought hollywood was hypocrites because this has been going on for years. yes, she is right. they're not hypocrites but it has been going on. it has been going on for years everywhere. people who are actors, they are still people. they have livelihoods that they are try to protect just like we are trying to protect our livelihoods if we worked on a factory floor. they are no different than anyone else. they are not going to come out and because of their .ivelihoods, just like people when people do come out, look at what happened in alabama, none of those women will hardly -- were even believed by republican

voters. take you for giving me this opportunity. caller: the president has yet -- host: the president has yet to tweet about the golden globes. a few tweaks to keep you updated on, including this one. the president had promised the fake news awards will be taking place today pretty sent out a tweet yesterday that his fake news awards, those going to the most corrupt -- we will keep you updated on what the president tweets throughout the morning. this is the time of day where he often tweets. when it comes to news media, oprah winfrey also had plenty to

say about the press and also its role in the country. the would like to think hollywood foreign press association, because we know the press is under siege. we also know that it is the insatiable dedication to uncovering the absolute truth that keeps us from turning a blind eye to corruption and to injustice. [applause] tyrants and victims and secrets and lies. i want to say that i valued the press more than ever before. navigate these complicated times which brings me to this. what i know for sure is that speaking your truth is the most powerful tool we all have. i am proud and inspired by the

women who have felt strong enough and empowered enough to speak up and share their stories. each of us in this room are celebrated because of the stories that we tell. this year, we became the story. it is not just the story affecting the entertainment industry. it is one that transcends any culture, geography, race, religion, politics or workplace. i want tonight to express gratitude to all the women who have in georgia -- who had endured years of abuse and assault because they, like my mother, had children to feed and bills to pay and trains to pursue. host: a few more headlines coming out of the golden globes last night. here is the new york times.

headline from the critics notebook column in the new york times. your thoughts this morning. ralph, augusta, georgia. democrats. caller: what i want to say and please him coming off is that we hate all this money to see these actors and entertainers and now they are coming forward to explain what they went through to get their job. now they are speaking out and saying what really happened, we've got so many negative people that are still speaking .ut yes, we can go back and talk about the kids but first of all, we've got to accept what they are saying. i want to move over to the

politics. we can see what happen in politics. remember there was over $15 million spent to keep people quiet when they had a sexual harassment complaint. now that these people are coming out and saying how the government is reacting toward women. it is time for us to get on with, make a change, start working with the actors and entertainers and move on over to the government, because these are the people that are making sorry --ions -- i'm that affect our lives. we talk about a woman president. germany have a president woman. still, president woman but the united states is still arguing do we want a woman president. it is time for us to get on board. host: do you think oprah winfrey could be the person? caller: i would like to see someone in that but oprah

winfrey, she would go through the same thing that obama went through. we will not admitted but there was a lot of things that were held at simply because of his race. if she gets in their, whether it women are clinton, going to catch hell until we come to grips with ourselves. until we deal with these problems right here. oprah winfrey is doing what she can. let her continue to do that and speak out. host: maria in west virginia. go ahead. maria? caller: thank you for having me on c-span. host: what is your comment? caller: hollywood's influence on politics.

i am not sold on that. i think it is great that we have role models but i really don't have a role model out of hollywood. i think our country has gotten away from god. we've gotten away from the local things. -- from biblical things. politics get in and we give them -- they stay in for years, their corrupt. i look at my own state here in west virginia. we have a county which was the richest county in the state of west virginia where all the coal came fromme from. if there had been investigation, you would see how the county cap raped. we got people there who do not have proper water supply. things that people in hollywood take for granted or other people in the united states take for

granted. ,est virginia's total poverty we had a mega product such as coal. it got shot down. money that should have been taken and put into our county and our state -- we were robbed from politicians. host: bring it back to the hollywood question. do you think there's too much distraction from these issues that are affecting you and people surrounding you in west virginia? caller: i don't see how anyone in america could sit back and think that hollywood could run our country. did god, they are so corrupt. i am not for oprah being the president. i'm not against a woman but i don't see oprah. she would not be where she is today if it had not been for the

kennedys. that might make a lot of people mad but it is true. oprah does not give scholarships to white people. host: how do you know that? where have you read that? i am not for race. god made us all. doesn't matter if we are black or white. host: that is maria, west virginia. a few more comments on oprah running for president. one more tweets. 20 minutes left in this first

segment. get your thoughts on the intersection of hollywood and politics, the influence one has on the other. want to hear from you this morning. walter, the line for republicans. caller: thank you for taking my call and i wish everybody a new year. i have started to sound like my father and mother as i get older peer. easter member watching television and there were these wonderful shows on television. it was about family, god, country. it was a beautiful country -- it was about heroism and all those different things. through the years, hollywood has regressed or crest into a cesspool. what they put on television and on the airwaves, what they try to do is a deviant, discussing culture from lesbians, homosexuals, interracial marriages, just disgusting.

what i really think is you have a lot of young nitwits that think that people that act and sing have some more of a talent than acting and singing. yet people like liam nelson was made millions of dollars on guns and protection of the family and he comes up ripping apart the second amendment. i really pray that people are smarter than that. out here in indiana, people, their heroes are there moms and dads working hard for the family. we don't pay much to these snowflakes. i don't think it has too much of an effect for people that are enlightened but for the young, they really go on. yet the singer area omicron date that was ripping apart america. they don't do anything except for the false fantasies. i hope america is smarter than we have. who knows? host: you talked

about interracial marriages. sounded like you were into -- you are against interracial marriage is. it is horrible. is the worst thing in the world. if you love your race, if you say i love black people and you are a black person and you mix with a white person and have a half month baby, they are no longer a pure heritage. that is the extermination of a race. multiculturalism is called white extermination. you can't turn on the tv show without lesbians, homosexuality -- host: got your point. client is in sandia -- clyde is an san antonio. caller: how can you get past that? that is the basis for a lot of these so-called conservatives. for the most part, they are

people who want to conserve what? .hey can't handle progress the arts have always been in the vanguard of changing america. remember the civil rights movement and all the people that were hollywood types. that contributed money, put their bodies on the line and they were poor people as well. can't -- when you have a mindset like that man that just went off the air, it is very difficult for them to see hollywood types as being just like him. many of these people come from very poor families, a lot of them are well educated. why couldn't they be a president at had reagan, now you got the -- the principal entertainer in donald trump. so, reagan didn't destroy the

world. trump is on the road to trying to. to satisfy his mood disorder. hollywood types can participate in any segment of society just like everybody else. thank you very much. host: larry, life for republicans. in the first place, hollywood is one of the reasons why people don't think right. but it would come as a surprise that i like her fair to george bush junior when hollywood was bad mouthing him. she had lunch with bush at the ranch and she spoke really nice of him. that was not in the news.

hollywood is one of the reasons why people don't eat well, don't look at films correctly. we had issues about slim women with bright teeth and big smiles. some of whom have went through the casting couch and now they want to tell us how to live and vote. , the vanguard of progressiveness, i don't think so. the most successful artists ever, picasso who was a wife beater. so many examples are coming up. misconduct, sexual

harassment comes from illness that has to be addressed by a ,sychiatrist, not by feel-good producers. host: that is larry in california. last night's golden globes relatively light on references to president trump, ceci compared to last year but yesterday's shows certainly not light on references to the president. here's a headline in today's your times. -- in today's new york times.

stephen miller was on the state of the union. >> not only do i think they help it, but in a toxic environment that you created here which is a real crisis. with the before extremely fake news he reported about the donald junior and the wikileaks story. it was a huge embarrassment. just like the huge investment you had when you get the kobe testimony wrong. and i'm getting to the issue but the president's tweets absolutely reaffirm the plainspoken truth, a self-made billionaire, revolutionized reality tv and tapped into something magical that's happening in the heart of this country. people that you don't connect with and understand, the

people whose manufacturing jobs have left who have been besieged by high crime communities and a policy of uncontrolled immigration, those expenses don't get covered on this network. to prove the point, i was brought on to talk about the but you don't want to ask about them because they are not interesting topics to you. no, don't because the sending. -- the reason why i want to talk about the president's experience at what i've seen within traveling to meet dozens of foreign leaders with this incredible work. day ofe 24 hours a antitrust material and your nikon to give three minutes for -- american people >> there is one viewer you care about right now. about.know who i care

the interview ending right there between stephen miller and jake tapper. the headline from the hill newspaper -- 10 minutes left in this segment of the washington journal. timmons left to talk about hollywood's influence on politics at the intersection of hollywood and the political debate. want to hear from you after the golden globes and the beginning of the 2018 hollywood awards season. robert, massachusetts. thanks, c-span, for taking my call. it is obvious on the playback uses showed to see how the country has gone.

look at a guy who represents -- hello? the guy who represents the president. he come on a show, really looks stoned and really condescending, telling jake that your condescending. one focus is to come to embarrass jake. the discussion of hollywood in politics. caller: hollywood would be a great influence because people do come out to see and love movies and different things. i just think people do not understand. as we live in a world right now that hollywood can be such great influence. -- we as a has to be world, we have daughters now. we have daughters that is going to be raised in a world that is -- we have a president who was

in the entertainment business and who is being charged by a woman for salt and different things. i think hollywood could be such a great influence but the focus has to become positive. a lot of people who are calling a very upset of the kind of money hollywood are making but their focus is wrong because we playing politics by saying hollywood is this, hollywood is that. it is not what you said, it is what you do. hollywood can be a great influence. i thought people would stop the fighting between us and between hollywood and different things. host: illinois, life for democrats. -- line for democrats. caller: that last caller about

three cosa go about the mixed race in calling babies mutt babies, this is the half of the problem with trump voters. most of them are ignorant. hollywood in the format, it is some good and bad. you go back to the 1950's and 1960's, when you had sammy davis pack, thesehe rat guys wouldn't go to a hotel in less it was integrated hotel where the staff and people could come. so, hollywood can be a good thing and it can be a bad thing. the most problem we have -- host: in what ways is it that thing -- is it a bad thing? caller: you see some programs

where there is a lot of different things that i think should be rated r, where you should send your kids to the room. a lot of kids have too much axis to television -- too much access to television so they get brainwashed like a lot of trumpeters. they have been brainwashed with a lot of inaccurate information and things like that. race, nocall a whole , a much babyace because i am married to a white woman for 33 years. me and her, we have a multicultural family. voters talktrump

like this, and you see them in church sunday morning. people need to wake up and realize we are all here for a short time. we are going to die and we are going to meet the creator and he is going to be the color of the people you hate it. people wake up. start thinking about america first. host: dan is in new jersey. life are independent's. caller: i got a little cold. hollywood is used as a tool by bankers. they use sigil magic. they use these frequencies in front of the children and in front of these people so that when they have a choice to make, they don't think for themselves. they think what they teach them to think and they pick what they want them to pick. and yout get on tv

don't get distribution and media without bringing the messages that these people want to bring people to take over this country. host: who are these people? caller: these people are the bankers, ok? kyteou ever hear of albert ? he was a democrat. he was the general started the kkk. he was a democrat. if you read the letters that he wrote, they tell you exactly how world war i, world war ii and war three are quick start and end. host: will go to timmy, riverside, california. caller: i want to say, hollywood is a good thing. they need to leave them think hollywood instead of ring up politics because we turn our tv

is on to watch things about hollywood, movies for that reason at that time. i would spend a lot of money so how come they just look at together -- and sit of using their platform for that reason? , iause i have daughters wouldn't want them going to sexual harassment or men. that is not just hollywood. that is all jobs. we do need to see something about it but you can't let go and everybody's got stick together so we can get something done. that is about all i want to say. host: this headline from the new york times.

this issue of sexual harassment, not just confined to the entertainment industry in the past year. other industries and sectors including politics, al franken resigning his seat in the united states senate after sexual harassment allegations. the story on al franken and the fallout from that in today's new york times. a donor to the democratic party says she is considering withdrawn support from senators who urged --

that story, if you want to read more in today's new york times. time for one or two more calls. bolivar, virginia. -- fort belvoir, virginia. caller: can you hear me? good. i've got two points. i want to make these points clear. as far as hollywood, hollywood could be a great influence but we got to understand one thing people we allowed -- our system of selection, we allowed a person like donald trump to become president. think about this.

what is the requirement to become president? 35 years of age, born in america , be here for 15 years or born of -- you know, american dependencts. considered an american citizen born in germany. that is all the qualifications you need. you don't need to have qualifications being a politician. andle dump on ronald reagan said he was an actor and he became the president, but he became a governor before he was the president. so he had some residual experience. that is the difference in donald trump. he had never been in politics at all. think about this for just a second. i want to finish my thought. are you applying -- let's say you took a course in engineering

, 101, a course in engineering and you get a certificate, then you go into the ceo of boeing and lockheed martin and said, look, i want your job. host: bring us to your final point. caller: let me bring you to the point. the point being is this. americans,t we, as we need to ensure that we have theseenced people who run positions. especially the top position in government, the president of the united states. host: got your point. one news story that we are keeping an eye on. the fire department of new york saying it is at the scene of a fire at trump tower in manhattan. the department says it was called around an hour ago this morning for the report of a fire on the top floors. firefighters on the roof with smoke billowing from one corner of the high-rise. some videos posted on social media about that. we will keep our eye on that

story and what is happening at trump tower. that is going to do it for the first segment of the "washington journal." up next, bolton -- alex bolton and jason dick join us to discuss the week ahead in washington. statee will look at the trying to protect the state and local benefits despite the recently passed tax law. ♪ >> tonight on "the

communicators," we are on location in murray hill, new jersey for the first of a two -part interview series. bell labs is one of the premier communications research facilities in the world. president discusses what is new in communications technology and research. >> the problem we have is we presented you with a ton of data , but not necessarily knowledge. in the next era, we will actually connect everything coming your environment, you, infrastructure, buildings, bridges, cities, so we can see what is going on and automate that. your house will be like "the jetsons." your energy will be automatically managed for you. it requires a massive change in how you build networks. the cloud has to move into the network to make that work.

the club will come of age, the network will become valued again, the devices will be everywhere. on you, in you, in your car. >> watch "the communicators" tonight on c-span2. c-span'sadline for studentcam 2018 video documentary competition is right around the corner. it is january 18. we are asking students to choose a provision of the constitution and create a video about why it is important to you. students are in the final stretch and are sharing their experience with us on twitter. this group wrapped up an interview on climate change. this student learning a lot and having fun while editing. our competition is open to all middle and high school students grades six through 12. $100,000 will be awarded in cash prizes and the grand prize of

$5,000 will go to the student or team with the best overall entry. for more information, go to our website, studentcam.org. itshe c-span bus continues tour this month. on each visit, we will speak with state officials. 16n us on tuesday, january for our stop in raleigh, north carolina, when our "washington journal" guest is the north carolina attorney general. "washington journal" continues. host: as the senate and the house get back to work, we take a look at a busy week ahead in washington with jason dick and and bolton of "roll call" "the hill."

the looming government funding deadline is going to be the focus, the january 19 deadline. republican leaders on the hill huddled with the president at camp david over the weekend. what do we know about what they talked about when it comes to resolving this budget impasse? guest: well, they are talking about with the priorities for 2018 should be. as far as the budget goes, what they are concerned about is what they see as a lack of military spending. they feel the military is overstretched. all four branches. that readiness is that an all-time low. speaker ryan put out a statement last week, if you look at military readiness in the early 1990's compared to now, it is much to grated. i think they want to focus on boosting that defense spending number over whatever increased

other programs get. there is also talked on the hill about getting an immigration fix is part of the spending bill is probably not going to happen. the immigration negotiations are not as far along as the spending deal is. behind the scenes, democrats and republicans said they were pretty happy with how things went last week. they seem to be moving ahead. host: democrats are willing to punch that immigration discussion a little bit farther down the road and not included in this funding deadline? guest: that is a good question. last week, they were saying that the meeting that they had with mark short and mick mulvaney went pretty well and they are insisting that there be a global -- what they are talking about is a global negotiation. they may be willing to split the issues as long as there is an understanding that something will be done on immigration along with the spending bill, even if it is not in the same package.

they should be a little bit cautious because the president and the republican leaders promised susan collins health care would be taken care of before the tax bill moves and that did not happen either. i think the democrats should have trepidation as to whether they really want to take republicans at their word that this immigration bill will be dealt with even not as part of the spending package. host: jason dick, i want to bring you in on this. what are you hearing as far as what might come together by january 19? guest: it is sort of oscar and golden globe awards season, so i think a lot of democrats are asking what their motivation is to cooperate? on theuld not get in negotiations of any kind of substantive level with the tax reform debate because the capacity through the procedures that allow the republicans to not consult them. it is different now with the spending bill, with immigration, with any of these health care bills that alex is talking about.

what do they get out of it? before we left for christmas break, nancy pelosi said there was no way we were going home for the holidays without an immigration deal. they went home for the holidays without an immigration deal. it sounds like their supporters are getting a little antsy on this. keep in mind, this is a crisis that the white house created. they are the ones, the president himself is the one who set this march deadline for taking care of this deferred action on childhood arrivals program. democrats have some leverage and i think there is an internal debate, at least that is what our reporters hear, that is what we here in the capitol about just how hardball they are going to play. at this point, the possibility of a government shutdown by january 19 if a deal does not come together by then, is there talk of another continuing resolution to buy more time?

guest: even if they do get a deal today, they will not have time to put together a trillion dollar appropriations bill. republican leaders have been very clear, mitch mcconnell has been clear that there is not going to be a shutdown. they guarantee it. they had the experience in 2013. it was very bad for the gop brand. the last thing they want is a government shutdown. two democrats want to precipitate a shutdown and hope republicans will get the blame? traditionally, they have not played that game. they have not been willing to take government operations as a hostage in high-stakes talks and i would be surprised if they did that. host: the week ahead in washington with alex bolton and jason dick. what do you want to talk about? what are the issues you want to hear from these two folks who are very connected on capitol hill? a great time to call in. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001.

independents, (202) 748-8002. jason dick, remind us of some of the other deadlines we should be keeping in mind this month, specifically what is happening with the chips program and some of the other ones? guest: so, the children's health insurance program, a bipartisan program passed in 1997 with democrats and republicans alike, it is meant for children who are not poor enough to qualify for medicaid, but who otherwise would not have another option for health care, it expires september 30. several states exhausted their cash reserves in order to keep kids enrolled in it, but then they started sending out that they didces not know where the money was going to come from. they got a little bit of cash infusion with the continuing resolution we are operating on 19.that expires january

that will not last that much longer into the new year without some sort of -- i always hesitate to use the word permanent -- extension, but a long-term extension, at least a couple years. they have that to deal with. there is also the foreign intelligence surveillance act authority, part of the patriot act. host: the section 702 program. guest: the house is going to consider a long-term extension of that on thursday. they are operating on a short-term extension. as alex mentioned, these health care stabilization measures. susan collins made her support for the tax bill contingent on passage of two market stabilization measures. that is a lot. we are three and a half months into this fiscal year. we are already past the deadline. ,ost: a lot of constituencies

for each one of those, is there a possibility of some kind of grand deal coming together for all of that or are we more likely to see these things taking place piecemeal one at a time? guest: i think it would be challenging for the most adept president and congress to get all of this wrapped up. we saw barack obama and john boehner failed in their efforts to get a grand deal before john boehner left. this is tough for people who are really good and this congress and this president have shown that they are not -- they will probably not be regarded as the most competent, best at their jobs. i can't help but think it is going to be a series of short-term things. host: alex bolton? guest: i think they can get the section 702 reauthorization, the chips down as part of the spending deal because those are

relatively routine. i think the health care component is a lot harder than anyone anticipated. they are very quick to make the promise to susan collins they were going to pass this marie-alexander which subsidizes insurance companies to keep rates low and this bill sponsored by susan collins and bill nelson to keep premiums from getting out of control for more expensive people. but that is very controversial in the house. people are facing primaries next year and this could be painted by challengers as an obamacare bailout. i think that part is going to be hard. i think the immigration component is going to be very hard. i think those things, i think immigration is not going to be part of the spending deal. health care, we will see. host: why do people keep underestimating how hard it would be to make changes to the health care system, to the affordable care act? the halls of congress,

when they look at it as policymakers, i think some of the prescriptions are pretty straightforward. there is bipartisan consensus. patty murray, the democratic ranking member, they say look, this needs to be done. but once you start looking at it through a political lens, then it changes completely. i think that is why they underestimate it. i think the policy solutions seem pretty straightforward on the hill, but politically it goes topsy-turvy because there could be -- because people are worried about tea party challengers and how this gets portrayed in gop primaries later this year. host: plenty of time to talk about campaign 2018 in this hour. the roundtable with alex bolton of "the hill," jason dick of "rollcall." let's get to some of the callers. irv is in bloomington, illinois. independent line.

caller: yes, a couple quick comments. one is why are we even bothering to try to balance the budget if our politicians are going to give away the cash coming in? it would be like me walking into the office and telling my boss, i don't mean the extra money, i'm going to let you have it back. the second comment is why should i vote for either party if, according to the courts, they are an independent corporation and not beholden to the people? i will listen to your comments off-line. host: that is irv in illinois. thatof the issues politicians are thinking about going into 2018 in terms of getting people to vote for them. guest: it is interesting. the budget is not balanced. the tax reform bill is projected to add $1.5 trillion to the deficit.

they are talking about an infrastructure plan adding more. if they do and immigration deal, that will cost more money. it is difficult to explain if you made your career saying we have to bring deficits under control. frustrationevel of that if you're expecting that from your member of congress and they keep voting for the deficit. host: do you think that gets in the way of what the president wants, a grand infrastructure investment? guest: some of the stuff we saw from camp david this weekend, the president said he does not know how the public-private infrastructure partnerships would work. it.s sort of disparaging

i think they would like to get something done. contractor, he likes to build stuff. you can go up there with a shovel and cut a ribbon and say we are opening this bridge, that is a nice ready-made campaign thing. the cost, if they actually get some sort of agreement, they will make that down the line. what is the incentive for democrats to want to join in on on what would politically be seen as another victory for the president before the 2018 election? guest: in the senate, you have 10 democrats running for reelection in states that trump won in 2016. they have incentive to look as

people who can work with the president to get things done. polls show voters are tired of the partisanship, they want solutions. if you are joe manchin or joe donnelly, if you can vote for an infrastructure package and work with the president and get a photo op, then that is good, that is good for your general election chances. but the problem is is this going to be something they can support. let's go back to tax reform, democrats at a press conference last month where you had almost 20 of them saying we want to work with the president on tax reform, but this is not something we can accept and they have a real problem with the corporate rate going all the way down. if the infrastructure package is not what they kind of envisioned or not the classic infrastructure package that the democrats want, where you have a big contribution from the federal government, if it is mainly reliant on private sector fundraising, if it is going to be building things like toll roads and things like that, i

think the president is going to have another hard time swallowing it. how do you pay for the infrastructure package? the plan was always to use corporate tax reform, the repatriation of money overseas to pay for that infrastructure. that is what paul ryan and chuck schumer had been circling around the last you years, but that money is out the door now. it is really hard to figure out how this infrastructure package happens with anything significant. host: west chesterfield, new hampshire. ron is a democrat. caller: good morning. good morning, washington journal. awesome guests as usual. i love this show. i think everything comes back to the haves and the have-nots on just about every issue. i would like to move to sexual misconduct and hour laws in this country because everything is geared toward the wealthy.

you could wipe out decades of misbehavior by just paying money if you are wealthy. and you pay some money could misbehave for a decade, pay some money, you are off and out and running. bill o'reilly, you know. there are so many examples. host: let me bring you to congress. do you think that can happen for politicians in this day and age after the year that we just saw and the #metoo movement and the members of congress that have left in recent months? caller: absolutely, so long as the wealthy have the option to just pay a fine, pay a payment, were accused- if i by eight women over the last 10 , irs of sexual misconduct would be in prison for 10-20 years because i just would not have the money to pay the millions of dollars and pay

everything off and be done with it and that does not work with just sexual misconduct, it is with all of our laws. host: got your point. jason dick i want you to pick this up. movement that seems to be happening now and your expectations about what it will mean for 2018? guest: it seems like the issue is here to stay. the house is looking at policies and procedures for how people come forward with allegations of sexual misconduct. i think people admitted late last year that the code is archaic, overly complicated. especially when we saw that in contrast to the way that media companies and other businesses and so forth were dealing with the accused.

they are updating the procedures, but the house and senate move a little differently. i would suggest that they will get their act together too. in terms of a political issue, because it has been fairly widely dispersed among the parties, younger members, older members -- the fact that the president himself has been , itsed of sexual misconduct seems that it would not be a political issue to the detriment or vantage of one party. host: patricia on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. conspiracy means to plot together. collusion means, "a legal agreement, to lie." live tv, mr. trump said,

"russia, if you are listening, get me those 30,000 emails." that's it. investigation.a what is happening on capitol hill this week and next? bring us to the immediate future here. guest: people are really just waiting on the robert mueller probe. meanwhile, the two investigations that matter the most right now are the senate intelligence committee investigation, pulse of the senate judiciary committee investigation. they are looking at a little bit different things. the judiciary committee is focused on the circumstances of james comey's firing and looking at his role in dealing with the clinton campaign in 2016, as well as the trump campaign. as far as the senate intelligence committee, they are moving ahead with interviews, they expect to have principles come before the committee and answer questions, but i have no timeline on that. that is to be figured out.

the bottom-line is both of those congressional investigations are moving pretty slowly and i think lawmakers really want to see what robert mueller comes out with before they speak on the subject. he has all the investigative power. they are pretty much waiting to see what he does. host: some news on that front this morning. nbc news reporting that anticipating that special counsel robert mueller will ask to interview president trump. the president's legal team is discussing a range of potential options for that format, including written responses in lieu of a formal sitdown. according to three people familiar with the matter. lawyers have been discussing with the fbi investigators a possible interview by the special counsel with the president as part of the inquiry into the russia collusion of the 2016 election.

obviously, we don't know when that would happen or what we would find out about it, but your thoughts on if the president were actually to sit down for that interview. guest: i would be surprised if he did because it is a constitutional question and i think if he doesn't want to, he does not have to. it might look bad, but on the other hand, is going to want to put himself in a position to delegitimize this investigation if it comes up with anything negative, so that is a reason for him not to sit down with them. i would be surprised if he did, but it is hard to guess. host: did you want to jump in? guest: i'm having flashbacks to the clinton administration when president clinton was interviewed. it was over the secure line. they sort of answered and asked questions. the crux of some of the obstruction of justice claims against the president. there is huge risk. host: in that format? guest: in that sort of format,

particularly somebody who can kind of bill off-the-cuff like donald trump. this would not be his first deposition and he has sat for a number of them over the years, but there is a huge risk there, but it also may be kind of enticing to him, particularly if he thinks he wants to clear things up. i just remember like how kind of diminished clinton looked in those sort of crane -- screen captures when you saw him in this weird windowless room on a secure line. obviously telekom was a little different back then, but it was a weird moment for the country. host: coming up on a: 30 on the east coast, a half-hour left with our panel. alex baldwin of "the hill," jason dick from "rollcall." terri is in canton, north carolina. what's on your mind? caller: good morning. good morning. bolton, over your

right shoulder is a flag. they've got it flying upside down right now. you've set me off. host: we are still here. you are talking about the flags outside union station on capitol hill in washington dc. one flag has been twisted in the wind. it is flying upside down. that is disrespectful. i'm looking forward to the fake news awards. host: who do you expect to get an award? i thinki tell you what c-span should be in the running. let me give you an example. the last day of last year, you run the thing on charlottesville and the president talking about both sides. then you went on to show

neo-nazis with tiki torches. you show the klansmen. you refused, like every other news organizations, to show antifa destroy public property. you refused to show the communists carrying the red flag with a hammer and sickle. your thing on the introduction, the republican independents. it should read communists. that is the you've got running the democrat party. alex bolton on the fake news awards this week and what you're are hearing from news organizations around town, how much interest they will happen with the president has to say in whatever format this comes out on wednesday. guest: yes, i don't know whether people will see it as a badge of honor or as an embarrassment. i guess it depends the u.s..

i don't know how you are going to -- he is going to justify these things. "the failingalling new york times" fake news for a while, similar cnn and abc. he has been very critical with the press. it does not seem to have phased "the new york times" or "the washington post" or cnn. there was an interesting interview between cnn -- on cnn between stephen miller and jake tapper that was very contentious. dear getting to the point where the administration and the media elite are talking right past each other. as far as trump and his inner goode goes, they see it as politics to diminish and delegitimize the media. that is part of what this is all about. i don't think that news are goingons in d.c.

to take those fake media awards that seriously. that is not to say that they shouldn't. president trump does have a lot of supporters out there. i think people should be receptive and at least pay attention to criticism. that does not mean they should stop doing what they are doing. host: jason dick. guest: i have mixed feelings about this because i'm kind of quick to be defensive, knowing how hard that we all work. caller my message to the within our editorial meetings. , it is hard to get everybody on the same page in a small newsroom at rollcall. the idea that there is a sort of the concerted effort among media, whether it is cnn, c-span, "the hill," to delegitimize the president is simply not true. we are all doing the best that we can. we are working like incredibly

hard. most of us are not in this for the money. it is certainly nice to be paid, but this is something we feel is important, it is an important part of the democratic process, to cover what happens in washington. that being said, having somebody sort ofmp insult us is like sometimes you are blessed with good enemies. "the new york times" has done quite well under president trump. people feel very strongly about subscribing to that and to "the washington post." host: you think the news media has gotten sharper because of the criticism in general? that they will double check and triple check more than they did in the past? in fear of being called out for something like this? guest: i think certainly there is an awareness and every newsroom that you need to make sure that you have got your p's and q's straight.

we have always taken it seriously, we always take the fast -- fact checking, the seriously. you have broken quite a few good stories yourself, john. how many times have you had to withstand a withering amount of criticism from somebody who's bys has been embarrassed legitimate reporting we are doing? obviously, the stakes are higher when you have the president making these noises, but this is not new to us, being criticized and people saying you're not important or you are making things up. i feel it we are doing the same job that we have been doing all the way along. host: the president announcing on twitter that the fake news awards are happening on january

17, wednesday, rather than what was expected to be today. washington, douglas, republican. caller: good morning, mr. bolton, mr. dick. two comments and three questions. real quick. i don't think america has any place for neo-nazis. it is an embarrassment to our country. secondly, black or white, republican or democrat, we all should realize we are americans first. , when it comeson to infrastructure and you talk about rebuilding roads and iuff, i thought that was, thought there was a federal gas tax and stuff to fix all of our roads? if they douestion is fix the daca for the 800,000 people that came over young,

they said it would cost $19 billion -- now i could be wrong just process them and also say the wall is about $20 billion -- so don't you think that maybe they could come together -- i mean, they won't, but if they did, trump gets his way, plus they get daca because they are both going to cost about the same? my last question is, what do you think about the alabama election where roy moore was accused by all the women and girls, so it was a big deal, he lost because of that, i believe, and now, you don't hear a word about the accusations and stuff, you don't hear a word after the election is over? it seems the kit was all used because of the election --like it was all used because of the

election. host: alex bolton, i will let you start on the infrastructure, gas tax issue and the daca fix and the cost of that. needs well, the gas tax to be increased, but there is no political will to do that. people are talking about a mileage tax now. because you have electric cars out there. host: when was the last time it was increased? guest: the 1990's, i think. the early 1990's. it is not indexed for inflation. the money it generates goes down every year. guest: while mileage standards have gone up. mileage standards have gone up and they have not indexed for inflation. guest: there are really only two guys calling for a gas tax in greece, tom carper -- increase, tom carper and bob corker. i don't know why it does not have more traction on the hill, if they tax, it is

something that can be campaigned on. people are afraid of that. he is talking about some sort of deal where if you have. cut and infrastructure paired -- daca and infrastructure paired, therefore maybe they should be paired together, i don't see that happening at all. for one thing, the infrastructure package is going to take a while to hash out. they don't have any ideas right now. they are two there a veryoversial subjects -- controversial subjects. host: jason dick on the daca fizx. do we know what number it would be for the dream act? guest: i'm blanking a little bit on what the congressional budget office estimated. it would not be cheap, it would

not be free. things rarely are. in terms of a solution where trump gets a little bit of what , there are these happening about, why do we sign off on part of a wall? if there are a few miles of all outside tijuana, what is the big deal? saye are other people who -- given to these demands. i'm used to large swaths of my state being walled off, so to me, it would be a distinction without a difference and that it is trump's wall versus a wallet

has been there for a while. there would be the problem of paying for the fix, whatever that may be and i apologize for not having that number down from cbo, plus the cost of the .ecurity measures it would be a double package at that point. the accusations against roy moore in alabama and what has happened since the election. guest: i think part of this is that the national media has moved on. there is a question of resources. toward the end, every major national media organization had people down in alabama reporting on the story. they have moved on because the election is over. however, there is still news coming out of that. it is a little more difficult to find if you don't have al.com and so forth bookmarked. accusers -- one of his

-- there has been a defamation suit. another woman, her house just burned down. tragic circumstances. things are going on. moore, even though doug jones has been sworn into office, still not conceding, he is still holding ground. but there is only so much news that comes out of that because we know the doug jones is a senator and roy moore is not. host: a follow-up on the cost of the dream act. mid december cbo came out with their score on it. this is the "daily caller" report. cbo finding it would increase the federal budget deficit by $26 billion over 10 years mostly from conferring eligibility for federal benefits on amnestied immigrants. cbo also has their scores available on their website. guest: and the president says $18 billion is what he wanted initially for the wall, for this round of wall building.

he came out with those principles on friday. host: martin in salem, oregon. line for democrats. caller: i was wondering why nobody is talking about social safety nets. i work three jobs and i was going back to college and then i had a disabled son, so he had to go on disability, i had to go on disability, we had to get housing, now he is homeless. hello? host: yes, see you want to know what is going on with social safety nets? caller: it is life or death for me and my son and if they put a work requirement in medicaid, if your job and you are mentally ill, you have to be seeing a doctor to get social security and anybody disabled without a job and the did not have medicaid, they would never be able to get disability. host: entitlement reform. alex bolton. guest: that is something paul ryan wants to do. he said it at the tail end of the tax debate last year that welfare reform was going to be a priority next year.

cohn said that they would be moving and infrastructure package and welfare package simultaneously and i'm sure that was discussed at camp david this weekend. however, mitch mcconnell has already shot that down. he said he does not see a whole lot of appetite for entitlement reform in the senate. i don't think they're going to be using reconciliation. get democratico by an on it welfare reform entitlement package? i don't think so. this is something some republicans want to do. this is the graham cassidy legislation that came up in the fall which would convert obamacare funding into block grants for states and that would fall under the rubric of medicaid reform. i think we have a ways to go. already, mcconnell has signaled there is not a interest in doing

that. paul ryan, since he is the speaker and he controls the house and he can rule with an iron fist, he cannot be the one saying we are the ones who are going to do this. it is mcconnell on the senate side pointing to democrats saying, we need by and, we need by and, we're not going to get that, let's move on to bipartisan things. i think welfare reform, we are going to talk about it this week at the retreat in camp david, there is going to be a joint house-senate republican retreat later this month. i'm sure it will come up for discussion. host: jason dick. guest: that seems to be where we are heading here. one of the things to look for this week is that the house republicans are going to choose the next budget committee chairman. black is stepping down from that position to focus on her run for governor in tennessee, so this has opened up. there are three candidates, all for the most part say the same

thing. that they would love to tackle entitlement reform. this is something you hear over and over again. of the candidates have an inside track or supportive leadership? guest: rob lytle, steve womack, bill johnson have all been here roughly around the same time. they seem to believe that the is one thing that they do consider. it is a remarkably similar things about how they work. bill johnson seems to have the most spread. he is that of the tuesday group,

this moderate group of republicans, and part of the republican study committee. it is the vast majority of the republican caucus, but they consider themselves of the conservatives of the republicans. he likes to talk with everybody, he says. it is difficult to say how this would go. with all things being equal, you might go with seniority, but they also remarkably similar things, that they would love to tackle entitlements, but they don't know if they're going to get to it this year. host: 15 minutes left with our panel. you should follow both on twitter. good follows on twitter. alex bolton of "the hill" newspaper. l call."ck of "role south milwaukee, wisconsin, line four republicans. go ahead. caller: good morning, gentlemen. how are you? host: doing well. caller: great.

i have a couple of things i would like to reference, in particular the infrastructure thethe daca, as well as medicare reform. host: gimme one or two questions because we are running out of time. caller: first of all, the daca to me as illegal immigration, so let's call it what it is. canadianughter of a who came over with a green card, i would let you know that our infrastructure, our justice system has failed. when we going to get these judges in? i was refused welfare, we were told to go back to canada if she wanted to divorce my father. we never received an ounce of help in the 1970's. i was born in detroit, my father is the 10th best civil engineer in the united states. look him up. lake michigan is the only body of water the united states owns.

amazing a amazing -- that the states surrounding it have the highest taxation of the public, the people. our medical is not going to wipe out in the way of genocide because we are not paying attention to the medicare system. toare not paying attention the justice system, the criminal and the family courts are divided. , husbandstances arrested, taken out of the home by the state, these manager here, and apartment manager, have dwelling is together. guess what? is to protect me as a domestic violence person, correct? as a victim? i'm being read victor might because the criminal court cannot touch the family court and the family court won't touch the criminal court. host: alex bolton, pick up on the first part of that and the focus on the potential daca deal and what sort of pressure republicans in congress are

getting from immigration hardliners and how much pressure they can exert on this process. guest: i think senator james lankford of oklahoma is one of the negotiations and a think you summed up the republican position well. he said his point is that this may be the last immigration bill for the only immigration bill they consider in the next five something needs to be done about the system. if we are going to take care of the dreamers, illegal immigrants in the country as a young age, they did not break the law themselves, they were kids, if we are going to give them a path to citizenship or legal status, then we have to do things to take care of the broader immigration system. so we are going to have to tackle the diversity visa lottery program, get rid of that. we are going to have to tackle this issue of family-based immigration, or chain migration as some conservative critics call it. we are going to have to do as much as we can to shore up the immigration system writ large.

democrats are saying, no, let's keep this narrowly focused on dreamers, any sort of immigration enforcement provisions we pass along with dreamers should be focused on immigrants who fall under the daca program. they want to narrow it. i think the border funding is less of an issue. $18 billion is something that i think is palatable. they are not going to build a 2200-mile wall. that is probably not what is going to happen, that is not what trump asked for. the negotiation is over how brought is this immigration bill going to be and, right now, republicans are taking the position, don't tell us we are going to deal with the rest of these problems a couple years from now. immigration is on the table, let's deal with these global issues. i want to make the other point that chuck schumer always saw daca as kind of the candy that would get the broader immigration reform across the table.

well, it is no kind of boomeranging on him because that is what republicans are doing. host: jason dick, you've got great in maryland. a democrat. caller: good morning. i love your show. thanks for giving us a voice. this is concerning fake news. university of maryland did a study that found that fox news was 79% not factual. so, i think they should get the award. thank you. host: that is greg's comment. anything you wanted to pick up on? guest: i would say that the comment should probably be directed to the president. he seems to be a great fan of fox news. ont: i will give you gene the line for democrats in st. pete's, florida. go ahead. are you with us? go ahead with your comment or question. caller: my question is about

paul ryan. can i give it now? am i on? host: what is your comment about paul ryan? caller: paul ryan asked us to give trump a break, he was new in washington, just give him a chance. well, we have been waiting and waiting and it did not turn the oval office into a classroom and make trump and apprentice, but who was going to teach him, the chief of staff, john kelly? is he going to stand behind donald and say, no, no, donald, don't touch that button? governor of ohio said the same thing, give him a chance. how long do they expect us to give him a chance to learn to be more diplomatic? guest: i would say that you will probably hear paul ryan say give trump a chance for as long as trump is an office or as long as paul ryan is in office. host: the headline from "usa

today," "fitness debate asetracks trump and aides the president defends mental capacity." alex bolton, how much are you seeing the agenda get sidetracked in the past week, with this book that came out, "fire and fury"? guest: the house was out last week, the senate was only in for a day. this week, we will see if there is any fallout. you know, i think questions about the president's mental fitness are not new. we have been feeling -- hearing them all year. guest: during the campaign. guest: during the campaign and after the campaign. lawmakers have been grilled on that subject and usually, they just dodge it, they don't really want to talk about it. in fairness to them, they aren't mental health professionals and they don't see it as their job to be assessing the president's mental fitness.

the pushback would be for psychiatrists and psychologists making judgments without having examined the president, there is professional propriety as far as that goes. i don't think his mental fitness is something that will be discussed on capitol hill. however, when he does say things like my button is bigger than your button, that stokes some concern on capitol hill. does it stoke enough concern that republicans would support legislation that would put some sort of safeguard to the nuclear arsenal? i don't think so. he's still the commander-in-chief. people think it is his job. that is the commander-in-chief's job. i don't think anyone is going to try to curtail that. host: a reminder on the president's schedule today, he's headed to the farm bureau federation convention to address that group in nashville, tennessee. that is happening earlier in the

day and then the president expected to be at the national championship game, the college football championship game in georgia tonight. jeff is on the line for republicans. go ahead. caller: yes, if there was a bill that would attach the daca people that are trying to come into the country that stated you are not allowed to vote for the next 20 years and then after that you can vote, you can bet the democrats or the progressives would care less about those people and the reason we want a wall so badly is because every time the democrats are progressive's get in office, they come out against the agents to our assigned to guard the wall. the arm ofwe have the progressive party, which is the press, everybody knows it now because it is absolutely so, so obvious.

the shows are all identical. on homelanddick, security funding and where it has gone in recent years and where the president wants to take it. guest: it has gone up, it will continue to go up unless they don't get some sort of budget deal. one of the things to keep in mind as we look at this january 19 funding deadline is that years ago, in 2011, there was an attempt to deal with the debt, an attempt to deal with spending and they formed this supercommittee, they called it, which we all sort of like, let's see something super now. the supercommittee did not get any kind of agreement and, as a result, they instituted across-the-board cuts going on for years and years. , as it was called in some circles. every couple years, they get a deal. this was john boehner's parting

gift when he retired, to negotiate a budget deal. paul ryan has negotiated one of these deals with patty murray in the senate. host: that list these caps. guest: what the deal, the framework usually is, that everybody gets their priorities. they raised the caps and the get a dollar for dollar increase in terms of defense programs and the mastic programs. obviously, there is more defense spending than domestic spending outside of the mandatory spending on social security and medicare and medicaid, but that has been the deal. if they don't get some set of deal on that, which they probably will, those cuts go into effect. for the most part, homeland security spending has gone up and will continue to go up, just like everything goes up in the government. host: santos is a republican. good morning. caller: good morning, fellas. how are you today? host: doing well. caller: i find c-span very fair. i don't agree with a lot of your

guests, but i find it very fair. about this fake news -- host: appreciate that. caller: as ridiculous as the stake news awards sound to me, i just -- fake news awards sound to me, i just wonder is there going to be a rebuttal planned for him? some newsnd that media is a little slanted here ,nd a little slanted there but throw some facts out there, defend yourselves. i'm not saying you lay down for everybody. don't stop now. because we need you! we need you. get some facts, use his own words against him. i'm not anti-trump, i voted republican this last time around, but i'm saying that the ability for america to speak out loud is on you. host: that is santos, his advice in illinois. let's see if we can get to tam in owings mills, maryland.

tim, go ahead. caller: good morning, gentlemen. happy new year. my question is how come no one trumpll -- pull trump's card on this? we want the wall, yes, who's going to pay for mexico? mexico. over and over, he said the american people would not have to pay for the wall. host: alex bolton? guest: i don't know how he is going to square that circle. is going to emphasize the positive and say look we got unaccomplished done and he will gloss over what he said in the past. he has an ability to rewrite history. even on the "access hollywood" take, there was some revisionist history as to whether he was on the tape in the first place. he does a really good job of changing the narrative and the focus and i don't think he is

going to lose any sleep over the flesh that mexico will pay for the wall. host: i did want to get your thoughts on a tweet from last week. "rather than listening to another destructive, divisive speech by trump, i will not attend this year's and he will address to congress, instead, i will be working at home, listening to oregonians, and what they think about the state of the union." democratic congressman from oregon earl blumenauer. are we looking at a boycott by democrats of the state of the union? guest: too soon to tell, not to be a political prognosticator. there are always a few people who choose to stay home or they will go watch football or something like that. host: as the bennett large-scale boycott in your memory? -- has there been a large-scale boycott in your memory?

guest: maybe during the obama may be during the obama years. the pageantrythat takes over, the office of the president takes over. blumenauer is the first one to say he will boycott. it would be pointing -- it would be different if there was a wide scale, significant numbers. host: alex bolton, to end it here. sost: politics have changed much. there is a resist movement. i could see a number of house democrats who want to make a strong statement. i just do not know how productive it would be. let's go back to the polls. voters want people who work together. not even listening to what the president says by his agenda does not fall into that category. alex bolton with the hill, jason dick is with roll coll. up next on the "washington

journal," our weekly your money segment. we look at the efforts to preserve state and local tax directions despite new limits on the recently passed tax law. ♪ >> c-span. where history unfolds daily. was created as a public service by america's public television companies and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. tonight on "the communicators," bell labslocation at

for the first of a two-part interview series. bell labs is one of the premier communications research facilities in the world. discusses president what is new in communications technology and research. >> the problem is we present you with a ton of data but not necessarily knowledge. we wille next era, connect everything. your environment, you, infrastructure, buildings, bridges, so we can see what is going on and automate that. jets will be automatically cleaned, your energy will be automatically managed. all that requires a massive change. you have to move into the network to make that work. cloud will come of age. the network will become valued again. the devices will be everywhere

-- on you, in you, your car. that is where we will see it -- an increase in technology. host: watch "the communicators" tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span 2. itshe c-span bus continues capitals tour. on each visit, we will speak with state officials during our live "washington journal" program. follow the tour and join us tuesday, jennifer 16th, at 9:00 a.m. eastern for our stop in raleigh, north carolina. our guest is north carolina's attorney general, josh stein. "washington journal" continues. look each week, we take a at how your money is at work. today, we look at the future of how you pay federal taxes, more specifically one particular tax

deduction -- the state and local alt"deduction, or "s deductions, as it is known. we are joined by jared walczak. taxnd you is what the foundation is and where your group stood on the tax bill that just moved through congress and is now in law. guest: good to be with you. the tax foundation has been around 80 years. we are a nonprofit, non-partisan tax policy group. our aim is to educate. we have certain principles that inform what we do pay we want a neutral -- inform what we do. we want a neutral tax code. we promoted certain policies. we do not take positions on legislation, but we tried to inform the debate on what the tax bill could entail and what the goals are. host: the salt reduction was a big part of -- the salt

reduction -- deduction was a big part of the debate. ? what falls under the header? guest: what falls under the header has changed, but the last couple of years, it has been the ,ncome tax or the property tax and that has been enjoyed by higher income taxpayers. about 88% of the benefits have flowed to those with incomes over $100,000. that will change with the cap. host: what changed? atst: it is now capped $10,000. previously, you could take whatever state or local deductions you had. now, you can only claim $10,000. for the majority, that is more than they all in state and local production's -- deductions. host: you have noticed several

states are looking at ways to forerve the full deduction folks who live in those states. talk about what is happening in california, to give an example. guest: california is doing a contribution in lieu of taxes proposal. where you make a voluntary conservation to the state treasury. then you claim $80 per dollar credit, then claim that charitable deduction on your federal tax return, since that is not capped. they probably will not work, but that is the effort. host: another effort happening in the state of new york. in his recent state of the state address, andrew cuomo, the governor, talked about this issue and specifically what will happen in new york. [video clip] >> we are developing a plan to

restructure our tax code to reduce reliance on our current income tax system and adopt a statewide payroll tax system. taxes are legal. the federal government currently has a payroll tax system. we are also exploring creating additional charitable organizations so that contributions to those charitable organizations would be taxed deductible -- tax deductible. we are also addressing the carried interest loophole, which is another device to give away revenue to people who do not need it. host: jared walczak, walk us through more of what that means, what the governor is trying to do, and what issues he may run into. marks forst, creativity. we have not seen much discussion

of payroll taxes at the state level the only one state has a payroll tax -- nevada. the proposal is he would create a new employer side payroll tax, paid for by your employer. your employer would then lower your wages in the amount that they are increasing this payment on your behalf. then you, as a taxpayer, seat a credit dollar for dollar against your individual income tax liability. it is convoluted. the idea is that the employer side payroll taxes remain deductible. on your state and local taxes. this is very complex. there are legal challenges. if the irs determines your employer is paying your income taxes, they will disallow the direction -- the deduction. new york has a progressive tax code. there are multiple tax rates.

no one has addressed how to handle this. if you receive income from multiple streams, how do you have a progressive payroll tax that captures all of that? there are a lot of potential issues here. host: we are taking your calls and comments with jared walczak of the tax foundation. you are a policy analyst there. we want to hear your questions when it comes to state and local .ax deductions phone lines -- in the eastern or central united states, (202) 748-8000. mountain and pacific regions, (202) 748-8001. jared walczak will be with us for another .5 minutes or so. we talked about california and new york. any other states pursuing various efforts here? the only twoare where senior policymakers have actually seriously discussed doing this. there is legislation by the senate president in california.

governor cuomo has said he would like to do something on this. there are other states where there have been rumblings. there has been talk in illinois, although there are constitutional limits. host: so if the trump administration or the irs makes -- pushes back against these efforts, would it have to be legislatively, or could they do it through an executive action? guest: the irs has significant authority to make -- most of the rules on what constitute a legitimate tradable deduction are not in law, they are in irs rules and regulation. i think those would be sufficient to say those are disallowed, but the irs could clarify that with guidance. host: charles is in maryland.

go ahead. caller: i wanted to ask a question about the current tax rules. the tax reform that was supposed to help everybody seems like it is hurting the poorest people, because they got a 2% increase, and it is helping the wealthiest people, because their tax bracket went down 3%. and the two brackets in the middle are basically up. i do not get where the president is saying that it is advantageous to everybody. host: jared walczak? guest: you ask a very good question. of coarse words like "everybody" are difficult. you can always find a taxpayer that has a different incident than the average taxpayer. thatow income taxpayers -- is very important. what we see is a dramatic increase in the standard deduction, almost doubling it. we then see tax rates decline

across the schedule. this means that taxpayers across all income brackets will see a with a few small exceptions, mostly at the higher income ranges. 81% of taxpayers will see a reduction. 5% see a tax increase. practically everyone in the bottom half of income will see a duction.ction -- tax re host: michael is in new york. caller: and my own air? host: yes. what is your question or comment? caller: very simple. blueis one -- this is a state. second, they will end up having a higher tax rate. host: can you pick that up and the recent history of how salt

were incorporated into the overall tax bill and the motivation behind it. guest: the state and local tax existed -- has existed as long as we have had an income tax. effectively, it serves as a subsidy to some states and, therefore, as a burden or cost to others. high tax states with high income tax residents have benefited from this deduction. half of the benefit flows to six states. 1/3 goes to new york and california, which is why they go -- recall that this is a subsidy that benefits the highest income taxpayers. the tax only affects 2% of taxpayers within the first 80% of all taxpayers. do we have a more than 50-50 chance of actually reaching the cap? around 214 income of

thousand dollars. this is not a penalty for any state. they are reducing, but not eliminating, any subsidy that exists for high tax states. how stateslk about like new york and california are working to preserve the previous benefits that residents received it has there been any thought in those states to just lower state tax rates? guest: thus far, we have not heard that. that is a solution. one thing we are hearing, especially from those states -- we heard people do not care about the tax rates. that taxes do not drive migration. now we are hearing that if these relatively high tax rates -- california, the 13.3 percent top marginal income tax rate, if we are not subsidized by the rest of the country, they cannot sustain those rates. with the state and local tax 13.3%ion uncapped, that

rate is around 8.5%. it is a big difference. it is unclear why wealthy california needs to be subsidized by other states. there are a lot of great programs they can offer, but does it not make more sense for them to pay for it and for california and new york taxpayers to determine what the appropriate level of spending and taxation is in their states, rather than having it paid for by others. host: we go to milton, new york. eric. caller: i have to take issue with some of this. this plan was outrageous from the beginning. breadcrumbs are being given to the middle class. party benefits of this are going to the top half of 1%. trickle-down economics. in defense of new york taxpayers , you are making out new york to be wealthy, but the point is there is a lot of middle-class , and californians,

who bought their homes a long time ago, whose taxes have gone up. middle-class new yorkers living in modest homes who pay property taxes that are very high. the reality is this is very unfair to those people. and this whole notion that new york has been subsidized -- new york subsidizes the rest of the country, because of the wealth it generates as a state. on many different levels. the governor has accurately brought that out. is do you see you a situation where this can, in fact, be remedied? are there going to be any solution so that people in new york can get back these deductions, number one. number two, if the republicans lose the congress, which i think they will, what kind of a

difference could that make to remedy some of the nonsense in this trump tax plan? guest: there are a couple of questions. let me try to address them as best i can. firstly, you speak about the issue fusion of benefits. individual, the bulk flows towards the middle class, not the higher income individuals. that is why we are talking about the salt deduction. that is a cap on the higher taxpayers. if you eliminated that cap, then you would benefit the wealthiest taxpayers. 82% of the value of that deductions flows to the top 10% of all taxpayers. that is limiting the degree to andh it benefits concentrating the benefits to the middle class. on the question of what states can do, i do not believe there is a lot they can do other than the expedient of lowering their taxes. you mentioned the high property

taxes in new york. that is true. of the highestme property tax rates in the country. there are reasons for that, a variety of reasons, including the services a lot of new york provide.s there may be a pushed aside what services are essential and changes on how to push down those rates, because they will no longer be subsidized as much by the rest of the country. host: he had a question about 2018 did he believes the democrats will take back control of, let's say, the house and senate. could they legislatively overturn this specific issue? of 2019, thest as president will still be in office. i do not know how strongly he feels about this particular provision and whether he would be amenable to changes. i will say a few did nothing else but lift the salt cap, you

would make the tax code regressive and provide a benefit to high income taxpayers. it was -- it is hard to me to imagine a democratic congress would do it on their own. i suspect they would package it with other changes that would make it difficult to get the votes. host: tax foundation's jared walczak -- if you want to check out his work, taxfoundation.org. i want to point you to a particular paper -- strategies to preserve salt deduction's for high income taxpayers. a question he is poses in his paper. that is the subject of this your money segment today on the "washington journal." phone lines -- in the eastern and central united states, (202) 748-8000. mounted and pacific regions, (202) 748-8001. for michigan, john. good morning. caller: good morning.

this is after the fact, but i had my property tax for 2018. i do not get the bill from our township until march. the tax is going into effect in february. i was told they -- i could not pay ahead until i had the bill from the township, so i did not pay it. i would like to know what the law really is and if i could have done that. guest: the advice he received is correct. it actually goes further than that. according to irs guidelines, the bill needs to be issued -- it is called a tax warrant. the tax work has to be issued before the end of the prior calendar year. -- your property property needs to be assessed. in your case, i doubt that they had done the assessment. certainly, they had not issued the tax warrant yet.

so there was not an opportunity to do so. i do not know your individual circumstances, but broadly speaking, we are talking about the deductions. those are paying downgraded options -- paying down rate deductions. had a couple of statements. blue states pay for more into government and they pay back. is that true? guest: it is true for new york, california, other large and wealthy states. this is a product of a social contract we have had since the new deal. the idea of a progressive tax and transfer system, where wealthier individuals pay more and create programs that benefit lower and lower middle income individuals. social security, medicare, medicaid, welfare and housing assistance programs. these flow from wealthy individuals to the less fortunate. there is not anything in the tax

code that is penalizing a state like new york or california. the salt deduction has been disproportionately benefiting them. what if you have wealthier people in your state, they are paying more under the progressive tax code and receiving fewer benefits under the aggressive transfer system. host: harvey in virginia. caller: good morning, c-span.. my question is on these charitable conjugations to the government. that are supposed to go to nonprofit organizations. i live in the town of amherst. they eliminated the property taxes in the town, but i am still subject to the county's property taxes. as far as contribution is concerned, to a charitable organization, what is the legal aspect concerning this so-called "charitable contribution" by that can ber

deductible from your income tax? explain that, please. guest: i think we may be and 22 different concepts. what would be paid by your employer is a payroll tax -- that is the new york proposal. the contribution that charitable countries and would be paid by you. that would be seen as a conjuration to government through taxes. it is not the idea that you would choose voluntarily to one organization. -- what is being proposed here is you are a california taxpayer with $20,000 worth of state tax liability. you write a check to california charitable as a contribution. then, you take a toy thousand dollar credit against your tax liability, meaning you have zero

dollars tax liability. structure, soe you claim it as a charitable contribution. simpleblem -- the most one is the irs requires a charitable conservation to have charitable intent and not to benefit the donor. thehe degree it benefits donor -- for instance, you go to a charitable ball or dinner, and there is market value associated with that, you are required to subtract that out. the irs will pay close attention if people are writing off their entire tax liability, because they are not giving to charity, they are getting a benefit. host: suzanne, good morning. have a comment. you guys are supposed to close the loopholes. i am a homeowner. i have been paying taxes 40 years. as a mechanic, i can deduct my

tools. as a g.i., i could deduct my uniforms, etc. if my house burns down tomorrow, i can no longer deduct that $10,000, $15,000 that will come out of my pocket. but big business, there plot burns down, they can deduct all of that. they have taken away all of my deductions, but not theirs. comment on that please. no one talks about that. host: but we will. net.: businesses pay individuals pay gross. the reason for this is to avoid double taxation. businesses then pay wages, and investors then pay taxes on the investment income. of thepay on the profits business, then pay taxes on what is distributed, then you have a

tax on gross income. that is how corporate income and individual tax structures -- that is the case in this country and every other country that has a corporate income tax. there were changes to a number of deductions at the individual level. certainly a lot more of the corporate level, but some on the individual level. there are changes, as your referenced, to put casualty loss and others. these are losses. i recognize that. i am not here to take a position on that. most taxpayers will be far better off in terms of their own liability because of the higher standard deduction and the change of the rates. there are unique circumstances that some taxpayers may experience, where this version of the tax law divides fewer benefits than the old one did. host: to the mountaineer state,

william. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question. standardled the to 24,000from $12,000 dollars, but they did away with the personal exemption, which is $4000 per person. let's say, for example, in west virginia, if a man makes $50,000 a year, has three kids in college, 17, 19, and 21, last year, he got $32,000 deduction. this year, doing away with the personal exemption, he will only get $24,000 deduction. so he will pay more taxes. in my opinion, it would be fair to lower the top rate from 39.6% down to 38%. peoplee the middle-class

the personal exemption back. that would be a real tax cut. thank you. host: what do you think about that plan? guest: moving from 37% would not come close to paying for the cost of bringing back the personal exemption. is very costly. what you see within the bill is this trade off. you get a much higher standard deduction you do get the elimination of the personal exemption. the personal exams costs more than the standard deduction, where taxpayers then benefit is andmuch higher tax credit the family tax credit. the family tax credit is $5,000 per person. the child tax credit is $2000 per person. for children living at home, you could take that $2000 out. the $6,000children, credit. this blows the personal exception out of the water. when they are in college, it is true that it is lower.

you still get a $500 credit. credit is worth way more than a deduction. credit fore the $500 each of those dependents you still claim on your returns. that individual you cite would be having substantial tax relief as long as the children are at home. it may be somewhat less when they are in college. when you combine that with the standard dax -- tax deduction, you are still paying more in taxes. host: put state to want to preserve the full salt reduction, could they pose a legal challenge to the federal government? been somere have suggestions, but they have not been fleshed out. the only thing i have heard claimed is an equal protection case. the idea that some states are disproportionately losing and others are disproportionately benefiting, and therefore it is unconstitutional.

it is hard for me to imagine how this stands up. almost anything the federal government does on taxes and spending and anything else that affects individuals is going to be tested in some way against and these things will have different effects. social security, medicare, medicaid, the tax code as a whole. do not know how you could have graduated income taxes either. host: jackson has been waiting for a while from iowa pay good morning. caller: isn't what grips -- gripes people is that trump said one thing, namely that the tax form would not benefit the rich, but then paul ryan and his congressional gang give virtually the same tax breaks to the rich people? and those rich people lost a few minor exemptions, because they

drain the swamp, or whatever they call it, but they really gave most of the giant refunds to the rich people. whathat disparity between trump said and what he did, isn't that what makes people mad? guest: the president, during the campaign, issued vague statements about what his tax reform proposal would be. even one in tending to release a plan only released a one pager. are people disappointed about what they thought they would get from the president different from what they got out of congress. vagueesident had somewhat and realities and made statements that perhaps did not hold up. in terms of the distributional benefit of the bill, on the after class -- after-tax income of middle-class payers will increase at a higher rate than it will for high income taxpayers.

so, disallowing most of the state and local tax deduction. so the higher child tax credit is not matter all that much for higher income taxpayers. although it is now available into the upper middle class in a way it was not before. on the individual side, you are seeing benefits concentrated in the middle class. middle-class taxpayers will benefit is changes that could have higher returns on investment. the investor class will see benefits. host: jared walczak is a senior and elsie -- is a senior policy analyst at the tax foundation. we appreciate your time this morning qb will and our program with open phones. any public policy issues that you want to talk about. the phone lines are yours to do so. lines were democrats, republicans, and independents.

you can start calling right now. we will be right back. ♪ the deadline for c-span's studentcam video documentary competition is around the corner. it is january 18. we are asking students to choose a provision of the constitution and create a video illustrating why it is important to you. students are in the final stretch and sharing their experience with us through twitter. these students participated in a studentcam film festival. this student wrapped up an interview on climate change. and this student talked of our having fun while editing. our competition is open to all middle school and high school students grades six through 12. $100,000 will be awarded in cash prizes. the grand prize of $5,000 will go to the student or team with the best overall entry. for more information, go to studentcam.org.

bus continues its 50 capitals tour with stops in columbia, atlanta, and montgomery. on each visit, we will speak with state officials during our live "washington journal" program. follow the tour. join us tuesday, jerry 16th, at 9:30 a.m. eastern for our stop in raleigh, north carolina, where our guest is north carolina attorney general josh stein. "washington journal" continues. host: on the "washington journal ."democrats , (202) 748-8001. republicans, -- democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. one update on a story we mentioned earlier in the show on that fire at trump tower this

morning. the "washington post" reporting that that fire is now under , notingin their story that around sunrise, the new said alice department call came in about a one alarm trump tower.oof of there were no evacuations. a spokesperson said firefighters were on the scene within minutes. , saying theeted blaze, which was located inside an hvac system was "under control." the phone lines are yours. what issues you want to talk about -- it could be any issue we talked about today or other public policy issues on your mind. penny is up first, look -- kenny is up first, line for democrats. caller: i wanted to point out, the guy speaking about the tax

foundation -- those guys are not a nonpartisan organization. they are very right wing. they are funded by the koch brothers. their founder is -- the tax ofnder's president is part "alec." i think, maybe in the future, i have a recommendation. i know you ask these guys wear their funding comes from. about it.lways blase they do not exactly say. i think it would be good to sourcewatch, so you can find out where the money really comes from. host: who would you have preferred to hear from on this issue of state and local tax deduction's? -- deductions. caller: to me, it is fine.

i like to hear both sides. but i do not like these guys who hide their leanings. and they actually called themselves "nonpartisan." that is the thing that confuses people. host: you can always check them out for yourself at taxfoundation.org. if viewers want to check them out. thanks for the call. mike is in indiana, line for independents. what is on your mind? caller: thank you for taking my call. to see a flat 5% tax. it takes less than 1% to pay for what the government is spending. everybody -- no deduction. not for charitable or nothing. take the cap off of everything until this national debt is paid for. host: do you make use of any deductions yourself? caller: no.

i am retired. i have not had a raise in about seven years. host: in terms of the tax reform thethat was just past, in end, in its final form, were you supportive of it? was it better than it was before? caller: no. ok.: judy is in north carolina. republican. go ahead. caller: hi. why theseke to know big corporations get such a big tax break. with it, but all of my bills that have started coming in have increased. up for myill went phone. i tried to find out why. they said because the taxes were rising. the satellite company said the same thing. that these big corporations are getting these big tax breaks.

why are they raising their prices? why do they pass that on to the consumer? host: is there anything in the tax bill that you think will benefit you? do you think it will help you at all, in north carolina? caller: no. i agree with the man who spoke before. i am retired. it will benefit me absolutely none. there are a lot of people i guess it will benefit. but in the long run, these big corporations are getting these big tax breaks. why pass it on to the consumer -- they are not really paying it. host: we want to hear what is on your mind did give us a call. here's what i was on the president -- here is what is on mind.esident's tweeting out african-american unemployment is the lowest ever in our country. the hispanic unemployment is close to the lowest in recorded history.

dems did nothing for you to get your vote. never forget. the president tweeting @foxandfriends. eleanor is in florida. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i heard a woman called in earlier upset about north korea and what is going on. we all should be very concerned. but i was 11 years old when the cuban missile crisis occurred. i recall distinctly how i was sure i would never live to my 12th birthday. that we were all going to die, stands --hn kennedy stance was exactly the same. his demeanor may have been different, but his stance was the same. host: how would you describe his stance? caller: touch. -- tough. having a sign in washington, d.c. we have been paying north korea at least since the 1990's,

paying them not to bully us. blackmail has never worked. thomas jefferson stood up to tripoli and the pirates in the 1800s. we need to remember these and not let people take advantage. host: will is in north carolina, line for democrats. caller: i would like to make one correction to the latest who just spoke. -- she said trump stood up to the north koreans. but the russians made a heck of a statement to tell trump to stay out of it. he has not responded. let me get back to the taxes. it seems the funniest thing occurs whenever those republicans -- we get the shaft. when reagan was in there, he said we need to get rid of these manufacturing jobs. we will be a service economy. that is all he talked about.

a service economy. as soon as they turn around, all manufacturing jobs go away, you say china stole our manufacturing jobs. how did they steal our jobs? we gave them away. then, they turn around and say we are giving you a tax cut. we will give you a big tax cut. it will be a middle-class tax cuts. 80% of the tax cut goes to the rich. the republicans keep doing the same routine over and over. over and over. and the people keep voting for them. the funniest thing i have ever seen. i am an old man now. i am in my 80's. but i have seen the same routine over and over. i am hearing trump talking about we will get our manufacturing jobs, because they stole them -- but we told them to take them. host: we got your point. we will head to our line for republicans. dominic's from new york.

go ahead. caller: good morning. i am changing the subject and talking about 54,000 people dying of heroin overdose last year. thanksgiving at a funeral home and christmas at a cemetery. we need a wall. i agree with that. i also agree with the president about people going back to work. it is not just black americans, irish-americans, german-americans, polish americans. everyone is going back to work. you say wee you go, need a wall. does it need to be a 2200 mile wall across -- all the way across the border? caller: we need to stop the drugs coming into the country. we need to protect border agents. they shot and killed a border agent to get heroin across the border. unacceptable. host: what would be acceptable?

what is the minimum you need to see from the administration and congress on protecting the border and people work at the border? caller: we need some kind of wall. i do not know how long the wall should be. i dod it be 1100 miles -- not know. but we have to protect american kids who are dying of heroin overdoses. noannot even talk to the guy more. he is brokenhearted. his only daughter, a teenage kid, died of heroin overdose. she was telling her dad, i do not want to be a junkie -- i cannot stop. we need to stop heroin coming into the country. i think that has more coyote than anything else. the wall has to be part of the deal. if you want daca, we have to keep it on the same bill. other than that, i do not know how long the wall should be. then is in new hampshire, independent.

good morning. -- ben is in new hampshire, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i was calling in to say how the united states representative -- government is not a representative from it. i know it was intended to be a constitutional republic. but it would be really helpful if the media would stop talking about it as if it was still a representative government, stop talking about it as if it was anything else other than an oligarchy. will notnfortunately, change the situation we are in right now. only things like civil disobedience, because it has gotten much worse than what the media seems to talk about. host: why won't voting fix it? because of the people running? caller: yes. because we need systematic changes in order to actually have an effect on the system

itself. the people who are going through the system are not going to fix the system. int: so there is nobody congress right now who you think should remain in office? is not the right question, actually. what i am saying is there needs to be systematic changes to the u.s. congress. before we can have the right people in office. things like ranking score voting, at least having six political parties, publicly funded elections, ending redistricting, having a no-confidence vote, having a election day be a national holiday, so everyone can actually vote. until basic systematic changes get made, that will make this into a democracy, this is not a representative government, and the people who talk about it as if it is have a motive. needhe people in general

to rise up. thank you for your time. host: ben in your. we spent the first hour of our program talking about intersection of hollywood and politics, particularly hollywood influence over the political debate in this country. that coming after last night's golden globes. the headline from the golden globes come out of the "los angeles daily news." billboard and messages. a big night of solidarity, call -- talking about the time's up campaign, the effort to show solidarity against sexual harassment. a few other headlines on last night's golden globes from the "philadelphia inquirer." seth myers and oprah winfrey were the big winners last night. another headline from one of the new york tabloids, from the "new york post." lobes.g

globes go dark to protest pervs, is that headline they went with. -- "sloppye bannon steve says sorry." the "daily news" with a sidebar about the golden globes as well. those are just a few of the headlines from around the country. we want to know what is on your mind in this open for section. jim in new york, line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. as anasically going more independent on this, but there is a movement to make municipal taxes replace that program with charitable the reduction program -- charitable deduction program. that would be a good thing for

seniors, those over 70, who have to take out of their ira's and 401(k)s, if they are retired. those moneys can be transferred from the ira directly to the charity for the meanest polity, and there would be no taxation whatsoever on -- directly to the charity from the municipality. right now, seniors are taking money from their ira's, then pay tax, then pay a municipality tax. if the charitable strategy can be established by municipalities and states, individuals would do better, because they would avoid payment of income tax on their iras, because terrible institutions do not -- because charitable institutions do not pay income tax.

host: sandra come independent. what is on your mind? leave anythingt in the book. just another person -- i do not believe anything in that book. just another person trying to sell a book. i'm tired of the democrats. we need to get things done in this country, and the democrats just keep giving the president a hard time. if you think about it, when president obama done the walk-through with nancy and -- how the presidents go back? i think you just keeps giving the president a hard time and everything -- host: what did you mean the walk-through? what were you referring to? when you said president obama and nancy's -- nancy pelosi, you said they did the walk-through? caller: right after the

president got inaugurated and everything, obama, the next day, he calls and gives -- has a meeting with them. host: you think president obama laid the groundwork to undermine his successor? caller: yes, i do. none ofhe did not want his policies gone. that is what i believe. i think the democrats need to grow up and think of america first. host: to muriel in florida. go ahead. caller: hi. what i would like to talk about is the same thing that lady just talked about, plus what the man said about the wall. don't they realize if they do something with the wall, less drugs, we could save children's lives and people's lives? and another thing is these actors -- they come out now when

they had a movie about the two coreys, that they were molested? if it came out when it happened, these children would have been saved from all that has happened. they got where they are today because they kept their mouths shut. now, they are opening their mouth, and they're putting their politics, which they should not be. years ago, actors were so nice. movies were clean. today, they are so -- i do not understand what is happening to the actors today when did it all ?tart changing in your mind caller: maybe about when trump came in, which they are so evil with the "i'd like to bomb the white house."

these evil people. all i understand is that the wall needs to be built. how long? who knows it whatever they feel is right. that no one can get in and destroyed our country -- host: who is "they"? you said wherever they feel is right? caller: whoever wants to build the wall. whatever they feel and whatever the people that protect the wall , that they are getting killed -- they are the ones that know where the wall should be. host: as we said, the president's tweet this morning, coming in around 9:20. it was a tweet directed at @foxandfriends, the morning news show on fox news. a story getting a lot of attention is about the president's schedule.

it involves how much the president watches cable television. jonathan swann put it out last night for axios. "trump's secret, shrinking schedule" is the headline. the president starting his official day much later than he did in the early days of his presidency, often around 11:00 a.m., holding far fewer meetings, according to copies of his private schedule shown to axios. this is largely to meet demands for executive time, which means tv and twitter time alone in the residence, officials tell axios. he usually spends a good man -- amount of his time making the and watching cable news in the dining room, and then he is back to the residence for more phone calls and tv. axios with a comment from the white house press secretary.

"the time in the morning is a mix of the residence time and oval time, but he always has staff, cabinet members, and foreign leaders. the president is one of the hardest workers i have ever seen, putting in long hours and nearly every day of the week all year long. " isew minutes left -- terry on the line. line for democrats. caller: good morning. as to the subject, one about trump's wall. he said the mexicans would pay for that, not us. two, i understand that trump's lawyers are negotiating with the special prosecutor about the president possibly having an interview.

his attorneys are trying to get it written? i think we have the perfect solution for that. broke bill clinton. we got him under oath and asked him what did he know and when did he know it? son,donald trump, and his and steve bannon backing it up, with treason and being unpatriotic -- we, as americans -- and i served in the military for 10 years. look over at east germany, and the russians looking back -- we are not supposed these -- to be fooled by putin. kgb officer. he is playing the president. the president needs to be put under oath. he needs to be answering questions for the american people. host: the story you are referring to, and nbc news's

story, anticipating that special counsel robert mueller will ask to interview the president. teamsesident's legal discussing a range of possible questions, including written questions instead of a formal sitdown. lawyers for trump have been discussing a possible interview by the special counsel as part of the inquiry into russian collusion in 2016. if you want to read more on that , out from nbc news. susan, line for republicans. caller: i am really happy to see this hashtag #metoo movement. it is overdue. i was happy with what oprah said, standing up for adult women. but i also have listened to corey feldman. i think that the child sexual abuse in hollywood needs to be

addressed. host: are you confident it will be addressed, in the wake of this movement? the attention that is being brought to sexual misconduct in hollywood and other sectors? not see theally do push for that, other than i have seen corey feldman out there. but i really have not heard of anybody else speaking about it. it is abhorrent. ast: do you think -- is there member of congress that could be a leader on this issue? should it come from hollywood, should it come from the realm of political leadership? caller: i do not know. it would be good to see it from both areas. host: steve in dallas, texas. line for independents. what is on your mind? caller: i am calling on behlalf

of steve. i am the person who monitors your channel. i am quite surprised to see you ise taken a call, because it obviously a monitored line. it is a monitored system we have in the world, not only the u.s. it is actually the entire planet. monitored by a certain kind of oligarchy -- individuals will have decided that, based on white supremacy, that reality, their existence is more prevalent than other life forms. this has to come to an end. you have to bring the whole thing to a halt. you are on a timeline. -- your timeline will and very shortly. my -- byrna is from

washington, d.c. caller: i wanted to make two comments. first, i think your earlier caller, ken from maryland, i wanted to thank him. i have never looked at your program before. i did so this morning. it was very interesting. i want to thank him for calling in and letting people know who funded the organization that the young man who came on and talked about taxes came from. i think it is real important that people know when groups like the koch brothers, who certainly have a vested interest in what happened with the tax bill and, probably, behind-the-scenes had their ingers all involved legislation as it was being pushed and, ultimately, past -- passed. i wanted to thank him for telling people who backed that. the other thing i want to say is i saw what you put up about the

tweet that trump put out there about african-americans and their unemployment rate. the "washington post" printed an article probably a week ago and talked about how that information is an alternate truth, one of those kind of fake news things that trump does. not realize is, according to the "washington post," trump is counting just a certain group of people in that unemployed rate -- host: we will have to end it there. we hope you have a chance down the road to watch us again to we have public policy groups from around washington and around the country on to discuss their positions on issues. keep watching us. we want to take you now to, and progress of the workings institution, a discun