immigration legislation this week. they are in at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span two. treasury secretary steven mnuchin testifies about the president's 2019 budget at the senate finance committee. that gets underway at 10:30 a.m. eastern. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's , and television companies today we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington dc and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. coming up on washington journal, georgia republican congressman rob woodall discusses the trump administration's 2019 budget and infrastructure plan.

then, california democratic congressman john garamendi weighs in on president trump's buzdget. and then we will talk to professor catherine moon about the olympics and north korea. ♪ host: both the house and the senate will convene at 10:00 today. they will be dealing with the topic of immigration on the house side, republican leaders will take the polls of their party to see if a bill sponsored by bob goodlatte of virginia could pass, thereby offering the chance to keep the daca program from expiring. the senate is attempting to vote on an immigration bill this week that meets the president priorities, including funding for a border wall. a skinny version of immigration reform, which scaled back from the presidents preferred immigration principle, is a contender to win 60 votes, but

that is not even certain. with the senate actively working on an immigration bill, we want to get your thoughts on how they should proceed. should they give the president what he wants when it comes to funding, should the bill keep the president from the border while, or is there a compromise to be made between the two? here is how you can let us know on our first hour this morning. (202) 748-8001 four republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. and independents, (202) 748-8002 . if you want to give your opinion n twitter, you can do that on @cspanwj, and on facebook as well. one would provide a pathway to citizenship for 1.8 million people, so-called dreamers currently under daca. it would include money and funding for securing of the border, including a wall.

it would end the visa lottery system and and chain migration. those were the four principles laid out by the president. reporting this morning that as ing into its go third day on immigration, a so-called "skinny plan" has emerged. it has language that scales back the presidents were heard bill and is thed bill, only bill that has a chance to pass the senate. republicans and democrats said tuesday that a plan that pairs legal protection for streamers with significant border security funding might have the momentum to win 60 votes in the senate. such a bill would exclude reforms to and chain migration and the visa lottery system. while that only includes two of trump's four pillars, the plan could provide the only viable pathway to it in a court ahead d- two in accord -- to an accor

ahead of the march 5 deadline. if you go to the axial's website, a story that was posted about eight hours ago including the president talking about what he was seeking when it comes to immigration, saying that he would threaten a veto if all of those pillars were not met. this is the website, saying it was a senior administration official on tuesday that said the president "will veto any advance hises not commonsense immigration reforms, a hardening of the white horse -- immigration reforms," a hardening of the white house position as the senate begins .nd early debate the president is laying down a marker. he will not approve a squishy bill that will most likely come out of the senate. again, the senate deliberates on issues concerning immigration in an effort to pass immigration bill this week. we want to get your thinking on

what should be the final products, whether it means keeping to the president's principles, what he was looking for, meaning a compromise position on those principles. you can let us know on the phone lines. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 four democrats -- for democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. if you want to let us know on cspanwj. you can go to @ wewill take your input as go. marissa, montana, democrat line. what would you like to see the senate produce when it comes to immigration? caller: thank you so much. i am so thankful for c-span. thank you for booktv, thank you for c-span. good morning america. i am so grateful for c-span. it is such a wonderful opportunity for all of us and

incredible platform that brings light to these troubled times. should --e senate's senate should update this and vote on these people, because we need her member that all of us immigrants.s -- without these people, they are so important to the american foundation of freedom and democracy -- please, let's put aside our political differences and get this vote out so people can live in peace. host: should the final bill include border wall protections, as the president is seeking? caller: you know, trump -- i have a couple of questions about trump. and no, that is absolutely ridiculous. if you want a parade -- if he wants a parade, he can pay for it out of his own pocket. if he wants a wall, he can pay for it himself. i would rather see the money to

education and school. host: james, mississippi, republican line. caller: yes sir. i do not exactly agree with president trump's plan, but i think there should be less of tay thent get to s there did. host: when you say less, you mean the president is asking for protections for 1.8 million people. that number should be less, is that what you are saying? caller: that number should be less, yes sir. host: why is that? caller: they should get the wall and we should send them back, the illegals. morning, aitter this writer says anything have to citizenship for dreamers, a path, but a tougher one for the parents who brought them here, and tougher southern border security, but no southern border wall. again, those thoughts can be .ade on twitter, at @cspanwj

loretta, cleveland, ohio, democrat line. you are next. caller: good morning. on immigration, trump's whole immigration plan is one big racist note. comment to the mexicans are murderers -- i do not understand this. the: loretto, sticking to plan, what is wrong with the president's approach to immigration, specifically? caller: because i do not see what is wrong with it with the way it is? explain that? host: what do you mean by that? caller: he has not explained what is wrong with the current immigration plan. if you want to talk about criminals, there have been more deadly attacks on americans by

peopleical, white racist ihads, mexicans, or ms 13. host: let's go to gary in new york, democrat line. your next. caller: let me throw out something in this immigration verythat we have here that few people are talking about. i am disappointed, frankly, that the president did not include that in his four pillars. that is making e-verify withtory in every state strong penalties for employers that ignore e-verify. for some of those listeners, they might not be familiar with it, e-verify is a simple computer system that would show an employer when somebody applies for a job whether they

are here legally or not. it is very simple for the employer. but for some reason, the president has not included that. i think that is more important than even building the multibillion-dollar wall, and i people fromause if mexico and central america cannot get a job, they are not coming. even those that are here deportly, many will self if they can't find employment. host: so you are saying if you cut off that avenue, immigration will drop as a result of that? illegal immigration? caller: no question, pedro, in my mind. host: and that is one of the things you can bring to the conversation in this first hour. the senate is currently debating an immigration bill. the senate majority leader

saying three days were committed to that, and something should be able to be produced in that time . you can agree or disagree to the level that should adhere to the president's principles or not. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. and (202) 748-8002 for independents. this all comes in the second federal judge weighs in on the daca program it off, saying it should stay in place -- in itself, saying it should stay in place. "under this ruling, the government will have to maintain daca as it was before the summer for the announcement, but it tos have to -- does not have accept renewal applications." while the judge says he was sympathetic, he added the induction would not apply to those who were unable to apply before september 5. the judge wrote more than 100 daca recipients a day have been losing their protective status.

a number, he noted, could rise to as many as 1400 and eight as the -- a day as the program officially ends. some say this not only adds burdens on the immigrants themselves, but on hospital. this could result in staggering adverse economic impacts, which could include up to $800 million in lost tax revenue. charles, indiana, independent line. europe. -- you are up. caller: i think the immigration -- our country is fully populated. when our ancestors came here, it was not overpopulated. -- yes.nk give it less host: as far as the senate effort, what would you like to see ultimately? this immigration is --

we cannot have any more people in this country. we are overpopulated. when my ancestors came here, it was not fully populated. , weink in order to have it need the big wall to keep out the illegals. that is all i have to say, sir. host: so you are saying a final bill should include funding for border security, and that should include a border wall then? caller: yes. the wall needs to be there because there are so many illegals coming in here. host: why do you think a wall is the most effective way to stop that from happening? they can't get over the wall, can they. robert, arkansas, democrat line. caller: thank you. i think you just heard the problem. i am in construction, i have worked in the northwest part of the state of arkansas, and 20

years ago, this debate might be a little different. sites all on job throughout that area, they are covered with undocumented workers. i call theple that rogue employers, the people that are hiring them, are being completely left out of the debate. i had a friend that had a concrete company. he worked five guys for two years, the department of workforce came in, and these were american citizens. he owed $75,000. and if you need to find financing for the wall, we should be going to the people who have been hiring them and taking advantage of the disadvantaged, but this is even inn -- this is not the debate. we need to fix our payroll , where simple contractors can meet the requirements that are simple abide to make legitimate payroll tax --

simplified to make legitimate payroll checks. unfortunate to claim it is on the undocumented workers. to worke been hired here, much like the pharisees who called jesus an adulterer. i am a sinner in the hands of an angry god. host: the previous caller had mentioned if you toughen e-verify, this would naturally take care of the problem of illegal immigration. caller: e-verify is for companies that do legitimate payroll systems. if you are not paying any payroll tax, these guys do not even know what fica means. it is a shadow economy. that is why construction, how setting, you mowing, they are shadow economies. when we send the jobs overseas, we sent payroll jobs. robert in arkansas. the wall street journal takes a look at the employment situation, particularly when it comes to farms in california.

"after reports recently ripped across california's agricultural heartland that immigration agents might harvest an email a set of thousands of farmers to not run afoul of a new law governing governingractional -- their interactions with federal immigration officials. the law requires california officials to ask immigration agents were warrants were subpoenas before allowing them access to private areas of the workplace or confidential employee records. employers three days to provide documents showing workers are eligible to work in the u.s.. agents often but not always carry warrants that are in full and the california law requires employers to ask for those documents before releasing more detailed information. the senaten as

continues its work on producing an immigration bill. one of the people who spoke about this effort yesterday was the minority leader, senator chuck schumer in the senate. on the floor, talking about the approach that the republicans ffortaking to this e and his thoughts on that. [video clip] addressedes not rumors or border security. the senate must focus on finding a bipartisan solution that addresses those two issues. a partisan proposal offered by the republican leader, i suggest we consider to proposals in the scope of debate, one on inside -- each side. championed by the president, and the democrats will offer a bipartisan bill. legislation that protects the dreamers, boosts border

security, and adds resources for immigration courts. each of the opening foray, one for democrats, one for republicans. they can start the process and let us know where we stand. our legislation is ready to go, and we would be happy to vote as soon as the republicans have their proposal drafted and ready for a vote. theegin this debate as republican leader suggest would be to get off on the wrong foot. unrelated to daca, very partisan. movedtfully, i suggest we to the bills offered by senators koomsley and senator cru instead. senator schumer is one of those people to watch, according to usa today, on this date in immigration. also add senator mitch mcconnell is one of those people to watch, saying the republican leader is the reason this week's immigration debate is happening.

-- a reversal after the republican resist demand for a free-flowing debate. so many democrats deeply mistrust mcconnell, and it was monday when he endorsed the president's approach to immigration, saying it had the best chance of passing the house and winning trump of the signature. "i believe it deserves support of every senator who's ready to move beyond talking points and actually making a law." rally, north carolina, independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning. ofshould not be a country immigrants, we should be a country of nations. african-americans did not come here as everybody else did. everybody knows that. second of all and third of all, [inaudible] they did not [inaudible]

african-americans have had some of the worst terms in this country out of anyone in this world. how can we let them come in and say they deserve this right because it is all they know? host: because of all of that, what should the senate ultimately produce? caller: what i think they should do, ultimately, no parents can stay. all parents have to go, because they broke the law when they brought the kids over here illegally. at the jobs here. i have a business, and i cannot get the kids anymore because they are under bitting me. homeowners are the problem, not the government. they only care about how much they want for the job. that affect me personally. i am so tired of everyone talking how hard they work. african-americans couldn't go to school, we could not get that education. host: ralph, republican line, go ahead. caller: good morning, pedro. look, my grandparents came from

italy in the early 20's. -- early 1920's. my grandfather had to come by himself and earn the money to get his wife over here, three years. it was not as easy as everybody thinks it is. to this problem, the immigration now is starting to make a mockery of this country. we are a passionate people and we want people to come here, but we cannot let it run rampant on us and expect everything to go well for us. as far as the wall, people keep complaining about that. i heard you just the other day say it cost us annually $143 billion for all the illegal people here. it costs $25.9 billion just for the daca kids since they have been here. host: so with all of that, the senate ultimate conclusion should adhere closely to what the president wants, or should there be a compromise made? caller: no, i think we need to tighten the reins.

of.re being made a mockery i know people from russia who came in here and overstayed their visas, and next thing you know she is pregnant and staying here. you are on, go ahead. insecurityo believe on the borders, i do not believe a wall is the answer, but what i is the security threat to america is a false narrative. if you think the border wall is going to help -- most people who come to this country overstay their visas when they come in by plane, ok? and the other thing about that is if you want security -- and i -- aroundlding a wall the white house.

the insecurity of this country comes from a president who refuses, even though the senate passed a russia sanctions bill nobody agrees -- host: we will leave it there, only because it is far off of what we are talking about. tj says there should be no immigration reform. we have laws and start enforcing them. writer says we only should get rid of part of the visas so people with free college behind them can take skilled jobs. on our twitter feed, you can make posts there as well as our facebook page, facebook.com/cspan. and the phone lines. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8002 independents.

democrat line, high. caller: good morning america. again, this is a joke. since america was created, christians had the right to move in north and south america anytime you want to. for some reason, the united states -- europeans have came over here and decided that they own this place, and that is not true. host: to the immigration issue, what do you think about the senate's current efforts and what should ultimately come out of that? caller: they are using that to manipulate us and keep us divided. it is going to happen. these people have the right to move, like everybody else. i was born here and we moved. they are using it to hold over our heads to manipulate money. host: ok. yolanda, north carolina, durham, north carolina, republican line. caller: hi. i would like to say trump is taking a commonsense approach to

dealing with this immigration problem. for buildinglly go the wall. that would stop the flow of immigrants coming to this country and deal with the parents who brought their children over here illegally. you know, just continue to do what he is doing. i love what the guy is doing. he is protecting america and the mexicansd what are going to do -- the reason they feel they are entitled to this country, because they are the original native americans, and what they will do is eventually take this country over and enslave the white population and free enslave the black population. re-enslavelave -- the black population. host: yolanda, what will you do

if you see a bill come out of the senate that does not endorse everything that the president wants? caller: you give some, you take some. as long as the wall is built, the flow of illegal immigrants in this country stops. and you can do with the people that they are in the house -- that is there in the house. even people from the middle east are coming into this country from the southern border. so we don't know who is in the country at this point. on twitter says that daca needs to be done immediately or suffer the consequences in november. no wall can be discussed, that should be done with mexico ahead of time. another writer said if giving problem,zenship is the permanent resident status should be fine. but the wall needs feasibility studies and a realistic budget. if the writer says even

senate passes an immigration bill, there is no guarantee the house will have it or take it up. they should have done the clean daca, as donald trump said he would sign and take the heat, and work on the rest. from the washington post this morning, one of the key people involved in this debate this week, chuck grassley of iowa, saying most republicans tuesday appeared to be rallying behind the proposal by the senate judiciary committee chairman other gopsley and six senators that the phils trump's calls to legalize 1.8 million trainers, immediately authorizes spending at least 25 billion dollars to bolster defenses along the u.s.-mexico border -- $25 billion to bolster defenses along the u.s.-mexico border, make changes to family-based legal immigration programs and and say to bc -- and a to be the s a diversity visa

lottery program. [video clip] >> senator mcconnell has honored his commitment and allowed us to have an open and fair immigration debate this week. the key word is an immigration debate, not a dock only debate -- daca only debate, not an amnesty only date. an immigration debate. an immigration debate has to include a discussion about enforcement majors, and an immigration debate has to include a discussion about how to remove dangerous criminal , and afrom our country real immigration debate has to include discussions about how to protect the american people. morning,facebook this steve rogers said how should the senate act on immigration reform? first, secure the border and build a wall, second come around

of everyone who is not in our country legally and heal with them. for creating more accessible and affordable path to citizenship for those who have already built roots in our communities. you can read those comments on the course of our program, and throughout the day on facebook.com/c-span. reports on our twitter, from @cspanwj. robert, maryland, though ahead. caller: look, please give me a moment. our predatory, parasitic corporate cultures exploited in conjunction with our government all of the south american governments and left those people hungry. those same hungry people come to america, and these same corporations welcome them at the time to exploit them here.

they are called guest workers. as soon as they get off the job, they have the police outside calling them illegal aliens, criminals. this is the same thing that happened in germany. the german government blamed the jews for their problems, just like our government is blaming these poor people. host: how does that apply to the senate work and how should apply? aller: i'm sorry, as the question again? host: how does that apply to the senate as far as a bill is concerned? caller: these people are making a mockery of my country. they are destroying this country. we are going to take and say these people are criminals, maybes, murderers -- canada should build a wall along the canadian border. let's go to jeff, castlewood, virginia, democrat line. caller: good morning.

i am 100% for a pathway for these children to become citizens, but what really bothers me is that i am a lifelong democrat. president clinton talked about legal immigration and illegal immigration. president obama talked about illegal immigration, and that is the reason our party has been made a mockery. they have done nothing. i am 100% for this law. i am retired law enforcement. we need a law to control the border and control our country. you hearjeff, when democrats like chuck schumer say that whatever ends up in the senate should move away from this idea of doing a big about chain migration, dismantling the visa lottery system, what goes through your mind? caller: i think they should cancel the visa lottery. let's take care of these

dreamers, and let's have legal immigration, not illegal immigration. the previous caller was talking starved -- let's take care of the millions of people in our own country who are starting. host: john is next, pennsylvania, republican line. caller: how are you doing, pedro? thank you for taking my call. i have a couple of questions for a lot of people here -- these people -- anybody in the world can come to our country and run freely? find another country that lets you walk into their country. there are no other countries there. if it is americans walking into illegally, we are in some deep craft. host: as far as the senate, what should be the result? and if you believe that, what should be the result of the bill of the senate when it comes to

integration? -- immigration? caller: the bill in the senate should be everything the president put forward. i think there is a republican bill there with the forelegs -- four legs they want to do. 1.8 million, let them in, build the wall. host: why do you think that is the best approach? caller: that is the only way to protect it down there and keep our enforcement officers safe, and keep the people that live along that border safe. these people are going to keep filtering in. host: let's go to red bank, new jersey, independent line. good morning. caller: how are you doing? good to talk to you. listen, this is pretty simple. first of all, if all the laws need to enforce immigration, second off, the statue of liberty has a saying on it that is not from this country, it has nothing to do with the laws, and the third thing is this country has been taken over.

the democrats are communists, the republicans are not these -- nazi. far: wait a minute, too off. what do you want to see come out of the senate immigration bill? caller: what i am trying to say is this government is a democratic government and it is illegal, and you should be calling it out. host: ok, we will go to gary, independent line. hi. caller: hi, how are you doing? my answer to this is like a couple of other people who called in. go after the employer. i am 70 years old, and 45 years ago i worked for a business. around chicago, and two or three other guys from the engineering department went up there. the whole place was surrounded by customs. it was all taped off, and they told us while we were going in

there, as long as we were sitting, he told us that they had hired illegals prior to this -- this is his second offense. as we were talking to him, they were marching the ceo, about four people from hr out. they indicted them and convicted them of hiring those people. that is what should be done. the reason why republicans do not holler about this -- the republican party has always been for corporations and business people. so when corporations and business people can hire people for low pay, it is good for everybody except the working class in this country. it is very simple. both laws are on the books. . have seen it happen when that corporation -- that foundry was in business for 70 years at that time, 65, 70 years. host: gary in illinois. says "i amr, a tweet

fully in support of this wall as the copper hence it immigration reform bill, as long as it is funded by mexico as promised." we have spent an hour on immigration bill. you can let us know on the phone lines. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. we will continue getting your thoughts and show you some other news in the making as well. the washington post takes a look at a hearing that took place in the senate yesterday, featuring the director of the fbi when it comes to the timeline about rob porter, the alleged abuser in the white house. the story says the white house struggling to contain a burgeoning crisis as a real

doctors more testimony by the fbi chief that directly contradicted what the president's aides had been presenting as the official version of events. christopher wray told the senate intelligence committee that the bureau had completed a background report on then staff secretary rob porter last july and closed out the case entirely last month. here is a bit from fbi director christopher wray, talking about the timeline and what the fbi's role was in it. [video clip] >> i would say the background investigation process involves a fairly elaborate set of standards, guidelines, protocols, agreements, etc. that have been in place for 20 plus i am quite confident in this particular instance, the fbi followed established protocols. was the white house informed that this could affect his security clearance? is that a yes or no? >> i cannot get into the content. >> but with the white house

informed? what i can tell you is that the fbi submitted a partial report on the investigation in question in march, and a complete background .nvestigation in late july soon thereafter, we received requests for follow-up inquiry, and we did the follow-up and provided that information in november. we administrate we closed the file in january -- fileistratively close the in january. earlier this month, we received additional information and passed it on as well. host: that was from the hearing yesterday. watch the whole hearing, featuring the fbi director and others who were called to testify at our website, www.c-span.org. here is another headline to show you from the washington times this morning. no plan offered after two

days of debate. the washington times paper say democrats knocks down republican amendments on immigration reform . let's go to rubin, virginia, democrat line. caller: good morning. i want to say that i think the daca and dreamers should be allowed to stay. they have been in this country for years. had background checks, they have had to do everything under the law to be here. the parents who came to this country came as a result of nafta and other things like that that have caused a crisis in their country, so they were brought here by demand. and the republicans are basically going to build another bureaucracy. they are talking about small government, but here they are going to explode the government.

we will be paying billions and billions were not only maintaining and building a wall, but also enforcement of those things. they are being big government and they always talk about wanting to make it smaller. and we are seeing also how incompetent this white house is. every day, there is something that comes up that they are unethical,is wrong, paying off -- host: back to the immigration debate, when the president offered 1.8 million dreamers a pathway to citizenship, what do you think about that number, and i guess you would want to see a larger one than that? caller: absolutely. we have a right, everyone has inalienable rights -- unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. frederick douglass makes a comment on that, and he said

when there is a conflict between national rights and human rights, we need to fall on the side of human rights. he was talking about a human's rights issue, people who are coming to this country because in many times, these american power policies have created the myth. host: dominic, republican line. good morning. caller: you had a lady on the other day talking about the immigration. what she said was that there are 11,000 ms 13 gang heroin in this country. someone had to protect the american people, and those families that lost their loved ones and the border agents being killed by the drug cartel. we need the border. and we need a wall. we need a wall and we need to let people come in here who we

can talk to. you cannot have people pouring into this country, and nobody is protecting americans. .s 13 is a big problem host: that was a segment that featured a documentary on ms 13 that took place on our program yesterday. you can watch at our website, www.c-span.org. doreen on twitter says when it comes to the efforts on the senate that daca should be dealt with first, border security next, border security now, and deal with visas, you're -- e-verify, lottery, family unification in a different bill. let's hear from duke, baltimore, maryland, independent line. caller: hi. i would just like to comment that i think it is difficult to say for certain if we need a

wall or not. if we as a country decide we need that wall, ok, but then we have to pay for it. we just went through a huge tax cut, and now we want to build a huge expense of wall, -- expensive wall, and i do not see how that makes sense. have a wall, but we should take the taxes to pay for it. republicans during the primary consistently argued with trump that the mexicans were never going to pay for this wall, but they still voted him in, and now look at the situation we are in. it is probably too expensive, but if we decide that we needed, let's also decided to pay for it. that is what people in congress should be discussing. host: we are talking on the house side as well, even though it will take up other issues amongst to them, this idea of immigration reform to preserve the daca program. the hill writing "house gop leaders wednesday will with a

conservative immigration goodlatted by senator . this fulfills a promise ryan made to the freedom caucus, but there is no guarantee the bill could garner enough votes to come to the floor. freedom caucus members agreed to back a funding bill to avert a government shutdown. moreoodlatte bill is conservative than proposals being considered in the senate, as well as president trump's own immigration framework. it calls to a path for legal status, not citizenship for the daca dreamers, authorize funding for a border wall, and and family-based migration and tyrapped the diversi lottery program.

arkansas, democrat line, david. caller: i am a republican, they actually got it confused. i wanted to straighten that out. i think eventually, how this is going to go down is a bill will , and i dof the senate not think they will disturb the i hatelion that trump -- to say, because this makes me sound unusual, but i do not his brilliant ability to negotiate, which he shows every day. taking the pressure off him and putting it on the democrats. they have a real problem if they do not approve this, because they are the ones that could have pushed through daca during the first two years of obama, and they did not. i do not think they will go along with all the elements of chain migration.

i do not think they will go along with the visa thing completely, but there is a possibility on that. and on the wall, i think that will go through, and they will fold it into the laps of the house, and the house, i think they will pass a bill, but it will be more conservative. and then they -- i do not think they are going to pass the bill they get from the senate, but they will pass something. on the senate side, if they do not go fully into the visa lottery system or chain migration, are you ok with that? caller: well, we have to take advantage right now of the fact that we are in control. and we simply have to draw a line. having one million immigrants coming a year, and 900,000 ,ommon through illegal means

either the visa or this lottery system, which is beyond stupid. we ought to do it, like trump said, by merit. that is the way most countries do. there is not another country in the world where you can walk across the border, and all of the sudden you go to a city and you have a good deal. host: robert is next, florida, good morning. caller: good morning, how are you doing today? host: i'm fine, how are you? caller: i'm a little more liberal than most people. i would like to see full citizenship for all dreamers, a pathway for their families, and a pathway for citizenship streamlined. i do not know why it should take 10 years to become a citizen. if you want to belong to the country, be a citizen, it should be easier than that. you could put in more security

if you want, but i do not think that is necessary. what brought you to the place where you would want to see these things happen for dreamers that you listed out? caller: i see a lot of poor andle in my volunteer work stuff that i do, and they are hard workers. if someone is here through no fault of their own, brought by their parents, if they have not done anything wrong, this is their country. give them that citizenship, one time only. for everybodyrule coming in. secure the borders, but they should stay with their families. that is ripping people apart. we reported somebody down here in tampa, i think, who had seven kids. he had a driver violation, they find out he is illegal, so they just sent him to mexico last week i think. his seven kids, wife and family -- that's terrible. host: so you would open it up to

not just the 1.8 million dreamers that are under this legislation, but those who fall under the category, generally 4 million or so? caller: first to find a dreamer, make exceptions, people have criminal records, they are disqualified. and let their family get on a pathway to citizenship. i do not know numbers. host: robert in florida, giving us his thoughts on what should be done. concerned, theis senate is working on this, the houses within a bill that might see action on the house floor. for 12 up for discussion more minutes or so on this hour. another hearing took place on the topic of russia and its role in the 2018 midterm election. the nation's top intelligence chiefs were united tuesday in declaring that russia is

continuing efforts to disrupt the u.s. political system and is targeting the 2018 midterm election, following its successful operation to sow discord in the most recent presidential election. their assessment stands in contrast to president trump, who repeatedly voiced skepticism of russian meddling in the 2016 election. one of those leases they heard was dan coats, who talked about russia vias about the internet. [video clip] >> the united states is under attack, under attack by entities that are using ciber to ber to penetrate virtually every action that takes place in the united states. businesses, the federal government, to state and local government, the united states is threatened by cyber attacks every day.

other nationstates, terrorist organizations, transnational criminal organizations, and ever capablehnically groups and individuals use cyber operations to use strategic and maligned objectives. some of these actors, including russia, are likely to pursue even more aggressive cyber attacks with the intent of degrading our democratic values and weakening our alliances. persistent and disruptive cyber operations will continue against the united states and our electionsllies, using as opportunities to undermine democracy, so discord, -- sew discord, and undermine our values. host: dan coats from yesterday. www.c-span.org if you want to see that for yourself. this is a graph that shows the illegaloccupations of

immigrants. that includes drywall installers, agricultural workers, roofers, painters, brick masons, house he burst -- house keepers, florence dollars, sewing machine operators, construction workers and landscapers rounding up that list. on, go ahead. what do you think about the activity in the senate when it comes to immigration? caller: i think the result should be that the daca kids, the original 700,000 or so should be given a pathway, but only after the border is secured . other measures have been put in place. parents should be deported. people keep talking about the children are innocent. they are, mostly, although a lot of them came here older. deportt the parents -- the parents. the democrats are selling everything out. we should end birthright citizenship, we are the only major country that allows that for foreigners, and and the

diversity lottery and end chain migration. host: why do you think separating children and parents is a good idea? caller: it is not, but when the people came here originally, they separated themselves from their families where they came from. i am married to a hispanic girl in south america, and she came here on a fiance visa. it took a long time, about a year or so, and it was expensive and a lot of trouble. but we wanted to go by the law. wanted to come here and work, but did not want to break the laws of the country to come here. people like that deserve to be here, not those who jumped in front of everybody else and took advantage of the system by overwhelming it. people that you described, how much time did it take and how much money did cost? caller: which people are you talking about? host: the folks to work -- who the right way.in

did they become legal immigrants? if so what was the process? caller: to bring a fiance here, you had to fill out a bunch of documentation and pay a lawyer to do all of this for you if you do not want to do it yourself. i did most of it myself, but it took a long time to get it all done. it was a lot of trouble. for my brother-in-law, who wanted to come here, i cannot remember what it would have cost him, but he had to stand in line behind everybody else. he came here and worked a while on his visa, but when that expired, he went back home. host: to the topic of out oficting, this is johnstown, pennsylvania. the governor of pennsylvania plansing redistricting drawn by republicans after being ordered to do so from a court, saying that the governor rejected the redistricting plans

limited by these leaders, saying the plan suffered from the same shortcomings found in an earlier plan the supreme court determined was unconstitutional. "the analysis by my team shows that like the 2011 map, the map submitted to my office by republican leaders is still a gerrymander." "there map clearly seeks to benefit one political party, which is the essence of why the court found them out to be unconstitutional." this clearly diluted the right of democratic voters. in a state where there are more democrats than republicans, the gop holds 12 of the 18 seats in the congressional delegation. salem, new york, democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i wanted to do a reality check on the wall. to my understanding, this was on

tbs, that only one third of the wall that was approved during the bush administration and funded has been in place. the other two thirds are tied up in court. the federal government has to own the property before they can put the wall up. -proposedr as the bush route, which is 700 miles or whatever, only 20 miles is owned by the federal government. the remaining has to be bought and paid for, and most likely the bush administration's are an indication it will have to go through the same court. host: gordon in new york. this is the front page of the sarasota herald tribune in florida. it talks about a victory in a statewide election, what it might mean for the upcoming election this november. democrats these the national

spotlight was another victory in thategislative district donald trump carried and added more momentum to the midterm position. good beat republican james buchanan and libertarian alyson that morphedrace from a sleepy special election into a national bellwether, one that attracted attention from high-profile political figures and likely wrote the -- broke the voter turnout for similar florida elections. not close, were adding to the narrative that democrats are on a roll nationwide. good one by seven percentage point, claiming 52.2% of the vote. that is a huge swing from 2016, when trump won the district by 4.4 percentage points. in louisiana, richard, republican line. thanks for calling. go ahead, you're on.

caller: thanks, happy valentine's day. i have not heard anyone say that yet today. my problem with this is i had my house roofed, and only one out of the seven that could roof good speaking much. -- could speak english. i think we need the wall for the future. if we are putting out all this money on the daca people, then we need to stop them from coming in. these bills being attached to each other -- i have a problem with that. why don't we have them separate? why do they need to be attached to pass them? i think trump is a great president, and he is doing a fine job. the media has a problem with him , but we need the wall to help america stay america. host: wanda will be the final call for this meant.

-- segment. maine, independent line. caller: thank you, victor. i do not know where you are from, but i love you -- are you cutting me off? sorry.o, go ahead. caller: i'm glad you are in america. in a bordern texas town. i know it was a long time ago, but we got along with the people down there. i went to school with those people, worked with those people, worked in the zoo with a man -- they wrote a great in a sanbout him antonio newspaper. the way your callers called an earlier about daca, i think our mexican workers should go on strike. then we can listen to all of our eastern callers complain about the lack of food to eat, because

mexicans work in the fields harvesting crops and in the slaughterhouses that provide a lot of meat. jobs that whites do not want to do. those that do not want immigrants should put a wall around their state to keep everyone else out. host: that is wanda, the last call on this topic. we will talk about matters of budget and infrastructure with our guest, coming up in this program. two members of congress first up to talk about the president's efforts on these matters. we will your from georgia republican rob woodall. later on, we will be joined by representative john garamendi, democrat from california. those conversations as washington journal continues on this valentine's day. we will be right back. ♪

>> sunday night on afterwards, former u.s. trade negotiator and senior senate after irish of schapiro with his book >> politics was supposed to be about finding a way to overcome some of those differences through extended discussion and a real legislative process, through principled compromise. it wasn't supposed to be about one party winning on their own. the times, as you know, if history when one party has been able to do this on their own, are very few. dealing33 and 1934, fdr with the depression. lbj, 1960 four and 1965, but even lbj reached out to

republicans and fdr had republican support the first two years. >> watch "afterwards" sunday night at 9:00 p.m. eastern. >> c-span's history series -- series returns with a look at 12 new supreme court cases. live at 9:00 p.m. eastern. landmark cases, it 95 plus shipping and handling. -- $8.95 plus shipping and handling. go to c-span.org. night, the book "crash

back." >> first off, there is a public shaming. it is hard for westerners to get an idea of what it means to the asian culture, especially someone as big and proud. with the never again mentality. with the mindset we build up our navy and missile defense forces in a way that we never lose face like this again. >> sunday night on c-span's q&a. >> "washington journal" continues. good morning to you. president'ss to the newly released budget, what do you think it says about

spending? guest: he is aware of the challenges going forward. this year, the budget he epic --, similar economic functions cannot get a balance. that is the impact of waiting on the tax cuts. it is a reflection of the challenges we have on the discretionary spending side and the entitlement side. host: you have seen the analysis of the budget, a blueprint, $17 trillion of the deficit, what do you think it is that a concern for fiscal conservatives? guest: of course. the president's's budget is not binding or we will write our own budget on capitol hill. it is all just a roadmap of how to hear.-- get number one is his commitment to transportation. he said he would be focused on transportation and he is. he said he would not touch social security and medicare.

to in her 40's, because we know it will be there. he didn't touch it. bad, it ishe news is good news that he is trying to do what he told people to do. medicaid has always been a different category. has paid a nickel into medicaid trust fund to protect him. we all paid our dollars every single paycheck of our lifetime. put those in different categories. the medicaid system is in trouble. the samedent try to do thing we tried to do on the house side, provide the authority for states to reflexively do that plan. the plan will not work in my home state of georgia in rural areas. do not think anybody cares

more about the citizens of georgia than the government of georgia. programsis one of the where we can say we care about it but if we do, we have to invest and protect in it -- invest in it and protect it. medicare can only be effective by providing consumers with choice. the one-size-fits-all will not work today and we know the trust fund cannot survive under current policy. if you will qualify 10 years from now, you want to know why congress cannot moving forward, we passed those in the house budget. to house has not decided take on the house. spending, aing -- lot of spending. is the gauge over? >> it is not.

but the age of gridlock is over. the whole point of cap spending is to make sure the programs are solved going into the future. i voted for the budgets every year. we have never had a white house take on the challenge. the age of fiscal conservatism is right upon us today, if anything. i voted against a disaster bill. dig into to do is to your pocket. more going forward with tax cuts in the same category. that produce a deficit is not a tax cut.

it is a delayed tax. we will grapple with that together. if you want to ask questions -- is it fair to say some of the will comehe savings out of the safety net program? what they need is transportation assistance. the point is to catch folks and lift them back up again. are there savings by putting people back to work? there are. you know workforce participation is historically low. workforce redevelopment will put

.ore people back to work we're looking to see what is effective. virginia foxx, a chairwoman, and they have gone year after year consolidating scores of programs down into two or three that will be more effective and more efficient. i see that commitment. snap,when it comes to developing food boxes to supplement payments, what do you think of that as an innovative way to look the problems and what do you think the reception will be question mark guest: i expect that to be poor. the town pooh-poohs everything.

certainly if it comes out of this white house. aggressively. it is not a new idea. it came out you actually. out days ago. if they had places folks could go and have access to all of those staples. that is what american people want and what we are trying to do with our big hearts and open while it's in terms of helping our neighbors who are in need. program ad stamp subject today? you know it is. i'm glad we're talking about the ideas. it didn't make it 40 years ago and it might not today but i'm glad we're talking about ideas. host: rob woodall, our guest. questions from ron in florida. democrats line. good morning,

representative. i am wondering why it is taking so long. the first thing they did with say they obama was would not do anything. you didn't do anything for eight years. progressive,tive and i am a religious guy, i do not know why would take you people this long to come together, and now you're spending my money like a drunken sailor and being a marine, i have seen a few in my lifetime. you are going on and on and on and the -- and you have no fiscal responsibility whatsoever. much fraud and abuse, why not just stop and rid of that? guest: a couple of answers. i'm relatively new to congress and have been there for six years.

you have seen trillions of dollars cut from the budgets in those years i have been in congress. i am not talking about nonbinding budgets. i am talking, if you go back and look at what america is expected to spend, and what we have actually spent today, it is trillions of dollars less today. that commitment to fiscal conservatism is alive and well. if you go to the 1990's and look at what newt gingrich and no clinton did together, they balanced the budget not by historic tax but revenues coming in. finding an agreement on spending people's money is easy. cuttingan agreement on programs is hard and that is why you see some discord that you do. illinois is next, ray, independent line. caller: good morning.

there is aring why cap on social security. we're worried about it running out. why is there a cap and how do we remove it? on earnings on if you arerity, paying into social security, you only have to pay about $120,000 of earnings. the reason the cap is there is because of how much you can get that on social security also cap. it would raise the amount of money going out the door. conversations on how to make social security solvent, raising the cap is always a discussion. do we continue to raise benefits as we raise the taxes, or, to we

raise taxes on workers and not ?aise benefits of the same time but you are right on target of the four major pillars of social security reform, raising cats would be one. host: kansas city, democrats line. yes.r: you know they say, social security. medicarento that in and social security was supposed to be a trust fund. whenever they want to fund like 20 million people with insurance, they pull the money out of medicare and social security so they can give illegals free benefits education, medical, i mean, so really, it is their fault our

country is in this mess. >> there are a lot of legitimate complaints in the town. i tried to do my best to dispel of the ones that just aren't true. we just promise people more money in benefits than we ever collected in taxes. it was true and democrats and republicans had to come together in 1983 to reorganize the trust fund, and it is true today. for medicare, the same thing is true. you do not get it unless you have eight intuit your entire life. thing i did not realize until i got to congress is those dollars you and i paid, that was only for medicare part a or it if you have part the for your as most americans do, you have not paid a penny for that nor have i. same thing with medicare part d. there are no trust funds for medicare part e.

of that plust out what you paid. are inrust fund dollars the trust fund, the government bonds, and those dollars are there but it is simply not enough for expenses in the store. president's approach to the economy, they take a look of the 3% growth and the possibility of an economist in the story, they highlight the fact that is not a realistic goal in the long-term. do you think it is realistic and why? >> historically, it is more common than what we have seen of late. private economists have said 2.2% growth over the long-term. we had 1% growth during the obama years, the budget would be balanced today. growth really has a dividend, not just quality of life.

on our way closer to three than years past, we are. is the house budget committee going to use 3% growth rate, we are not a that is optimistic. the american people voted for this president because he has the optimism about america. i will be a little more conservative in my estimate. >> what is the rate of growth you are banking on? guest: we are just getting into the conversation. year, without the cbo is a little too paths -- too pessimistic. data has shown that to be true. is there a danger with the president banking what he wants to in the economy in this growth? the president has said he cannot get the balance even with this growth.

he understands if he wants to bring more americans back into the workforce and make a worker the most productive on the time., it will take some we did not anticipate the growth we got in the 1990's and we are optimistic we will get back. it will make productivity changes. we have got to have big productivity changes. you see that in the transportation budget as he is promoting innovative projects for the first time in my lifetime. host: is it realistic for a state to come up with this money? guest: it absolutely is peer that is a great fiction here, that the federal government has all the money and the states don't hear it we all get it from the same place, the american citizen. i am still the one paying the bills and you are still the one paying the bills. we passed a new transportation bill bringing initial $2 trillion worth of revenue.

the president put down a 20 billion dollar down payment for the entire nation. a billion by itself. states can do this. thehfully, citizens in state of georgia trust local and state government more than washington. where does the projected money come from? to talk about the revenue stream. the gas tax has not been raised since 1973 and that is the dominant source. it has been the graded by inflation since 1983. taxes, carbonfuel what the president has said is americans haven't been getting value out of the transportation taxes. he will change a regulatory

environment so we can get a dollars worth of value, which will make a big difference when i have to go home and talk with my constituents. host: a raising of taxes to pay for these things? is folks experience are willing to pay for things they want. they just do not want to throw money down a rat hole. that is what people are doing when they send their dollars to washington, d.c. initiatives toid raise transportation dollars into high impact back home. on the idea transportation, what is the goal of the meeting? guest: we will have the track -- the committee there to find that we spot of agreement. we will have a great product in the house and a great product in the senate. the white house wants something entirely different. that will not get america where it wants to be.

getting on the same page early is producing a tax bill for the first time. a budget agreement for the first time in several years. a major transportation program for the first time in a decade as well. host: our guest served as chief of staff for 16 years on capitol hill. democrats line, joe, thank you for waiting. go ahead. morning.ood i'm concerned. you talked about the treasury and soernment money forth and you mentioned that money comes from american citizens. that is my comment. what impact do you think any on thecing has possibility to grow?

i pick up my telephone and call with digitalknow jobs, americans have made the transition. affect, a lot of jobs growth in america. do you think we can do anything to temper outsourcing from a major corporation? thank you. we have with this tax bill. they are now going to stay in america. they have been overseas and now they will come back to america. we have to make it easy for the american worker to be the most productive in the world. will there always be low skilled jobs that will be easy to outsource or to do in this country, there are.

that does not mean we have to give up on the entire economy as a result. about high skilled workers in the computer programming field, we have to have the work done here. we can have the management team stay here or we can have the whole project move overseas. there are predations of what we get outsourced. the more we keep your, the better off we will be. that is making the worker as competitive as he or she can be. with rules that make outsourcing unnecessary. republican line, florida. budgets,sually with the money is always pocketed up front with lobbyists and contractors. nothing gets done. to bring inay private contractors like elon ?usk to build a wall and roads

i do not think anything will be done. because it is going to contractors and defense contractors, in general dynamics, i just do not see anything being done. you seem trustworthy but like everything, nothing will get done. parkway, under construction for over two years, blocks.s is quatro from hurricane irma, we have potholes all over the place. everyone should be concerned. puerto ricans, but no one seems to be concerned about what we need desperately to it need to fix the roads. host: got you, thank you. guest: great hope you are $81

billion is part of the bill the president signed last week to deal with the fallout from irma. we have had those dollars already, they are coming to florida soon to help. you are right about the distressed folks have. district,roject in my two point five mile roads, we have been working on it for more than 12 years. folks are set up but it is not the contractor itself. it is the regulatory framework we have here. we have a bridge collapse in downtown atlanta, and we put up three spans of highway six weeks . the fastest we have had in the state, it is now a national model of how to get things done. president wants to make the projects faster and absolutely, in fact, he mentions elon musk in the hyperloop transportation plan. he wants to make dollars available and make a regulatory

framework possible for innovators outside of government to succeed. thet $20 billion in president's transportation budget dedicated to those innovative and transformative projects that shape the world different tomorrow then you and i yesterday. of the present process plan for infrastructure, according to him, five troy dollars of infrastructure over 10 years. half of those would go to an , and there isram a story in the wall street journal about private equity funds. let me read you a couple lines. fund managers say they are mainly looking for assets privately owned, not the deteriorating government owned infrastructures. is that a concern at all? >> anytime you put together a large pot of money, smart people will look at it and see how to

game the system. my job is to make sure they can't. president is fair the wants to reflect that those communities that have done a good job, communities like georgia that have raised their own taxes to preserve the assets, we do not want to just focus transportation dollars on dilapidated assets. there is a stewardship responsibility to take care of those. we want to reward where we know those assets are taken care of. and at the same time, revitalize communities where those have followed in disrepair. host: independent line. caller: good morning. i don't know where to begin listening to you. it blows my mind you're talking about how you can't raise the cap on social security the cousin have to raise the money. i don't agree. a cap on unemployment. immigration, you did a little experiment at 2012 if i'm not mistaken.

most of the immigrants out of your state and farmers lost 40% of crops. now you want to do countrywide with immigration? come on, be truthful. 60% of the people who come here come by airplane, not over the wall. i think you are being disingenuous to the people listening. i will take your comments off-line. thank you. i prefer affirmation then constructive criticism but i welcome that as well. the truth is georgia has the largest in the country. i am focused on folks coming in and out. a great point about infrastructure. anytime i had a conversation with folks at home, i asked the question, are you raising a son and daughter to be the best ?aretaker ever seen if you are not, we need to get them out of the field and we need an immigration program that allows folks to come do the work

we need done. there is a disconnect between what people say about immigration and what people say they want at grocery stores. can dispel some misconceptions and bring folks together on a package that will solve both problems. host: report this morning about -- about the immigration bill. is it something you can support? guest: it is. what the chairman has done is say let's cake -- take care of daca and codify that and take it out of executive order status. focus on enforcement. we have laws in the country to we should enforce those laws if we have them. the chairman's bill focuses on those issues. he also focuses on the issue that has been raised.

the ad committee to create a visa program that will be robust enough that american agriculture will continue to thrive. he also goes after current immigration policy. are we focused on skills or not? are we trying to grow the economy or not? those include the four pillows -- pillars president trump had. one call earlier today is mandatory e-verify. it is true it is -- the problem is not people who want to work but employers who want to game the system. present's's the proposal. it is in the proposal today. richard in virginia. republican line. caller: raising taxes on , toing-class people

advocate social security and meet different things. he just had a long speech about how he frivolously wastes money in our military budget. wouldn't it make more sense to reallocate the money to a proper direction instead of raising taxes on working-class bank people -- working-class people? guest: two answers. the primary responsibility of the constitution gives congress that ability. protecting and defending the nation is job one. $700 billion is what the secretary of defense general mattis has asked for and told us we need to stay safe in a dangerous world. that is what congress has provided here that is $100 billion lower than what was expected to be spent on national security when i got to congress in 2011. at squeezingking the defense budget as well.

social security is a program you pay into and pull back out of. the short answer is the math will simply wrong when that program got started. we overpromised and we are under delivering. by 2032, the trust fund will not meet its obligations. is immoral to pull the rug out from under retirees think it is immoral to ask them people to paint to a system we know cannot meet the promises for the generation. cap thisl security north of 100 thousand dollars. one of the highest earning in the nation. $100,000 in the great state of georgia is a lot of money. raising theg about cap north of $120,000 a year with income. jerry, democrats line.

go ahead. caller: alabamians contribute quite heavily to the education system. congress was frozen in 1912, 435. today, 435 members. don't you think representation hadd be much better if they 1200 members of congress, maybe 500 senators, and have the centers responsible every two years, make had congress accountable and they do things and more accountable to constituents, instead of choosing who you want to represent, that the represented choose the representatives. guest: you are thinking about the united states senate. that was a big compromise between small and big states,

that every state would have yeae same number of representatives in the senate. i never hear anyone discussing changing that. i think that is working as intended by our framers. is -- you hear the conversation by the house from time to time. we have constituents today and i thatstand the concern folks are getting more disconnected with the constituency as it gets larger and larger. the flipside is 435 members is a lot of members to manage. we had a 1200e if person congress that it would be more effective. it would be less. we want to find the ways to enhance representation. you id not honestly tell believe her number of members in the congress will be the answer. host: do you think there is a

future running a government under acr? as the lastch budget deal spent more money than i wanted to, it bought us .ore certainty we shouldn't have to do it next time around. it is not the right way to run a government. jerry's's point about representation, we have an electorate that seems to reward intransigence more than it rewards progress. the question is, when the american voter decides that we need longer budgeting, they will make it clear to the member of congress. it is a bad budgeting decision but seems whether it is the media or the voter, rewards those folks refuse to let any appropriation bills come forward. don't believe they have done a single one in the six years in congress.

, thank you forll joining us. we will continue on in our discussion with a member, a democrat from california, a member of in frustration -- of the committee. that is coming up. ♪ >> this weekend, the c-span cities tour brings you to lynchburg, virginia. we will explore the rich literary scene and historic sites. watch this weekend beginning at 5:00 p.m. eastern on book tv on onpan2 and sunday at 2:00

c-span3. >> sunday night on q&a, michael on his look "crash back." public shaming and china has lost a lot of face. it is hard for westerners to get an idea of what that means to an asian culture, especially one as again proud. ourhey start building up navy and forces such that we never lose face like this again. >> sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a

public service by america's cable television companies. today we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress. the white house, the supreme and public policy events in washington, d.c., and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable satellite provider. >> washington journal continues. host: our next guest, john california, good morning. when it comes to the approach the president wants to take on transportation, a fund, a pool of money to allow states to gain access to it, what do you think of the road? guest: first of all, thankfully, he made this plan a major issue. the bad news is it is really not a plan at all.

it is a repackaging we are already using. water systems, he has taken that money from one program and put it into a new program i think he wants to put in gold letters across it, trump. is nottom line is there a nickel of new money here. it does not even come close for the nation at all. in addition, the federal government on many of these projects is the big heart and her. 80% of the money is federal. state and local. the federal government will be 20% and state invoke will is 80%. it simply does not work. comes to the programs that could be affected by the proposal, what are we talking about? >> out the window, where are the buses and the metro?

it, that money and remove some $200 billion program in which the administration selects programs that it wants to fund. it rips transportation systems out of the urban areas and sends it over to a new agency within the department of transportation and other agencies, for how that money is to be distributed. blueske the money from states to red states. it is gross and its obviousness and does not meet the needs of the nation in any way, shape, or form. maintain what we have, we have no new money here, repurpose thing existing money under new programs he gets to control.

they were ok with raising , he said that approach .ould apply for a larger scale >> give me a break. if you want infrastructure, you have got to have real money. there is none here. governments raised eight gas tax and many cities have increase or maintained that infrastructure projects. they still need help. you cannot rely just on local governments to do this. is this willng give local governments the priority, as though that is not what happens now? it is exactly what happens now. all of these projects started the state and local level. they design these programs through the transportation agencies. they then come to the federal

government that -- government. based on criteria for decades, they are selected or not. what will take place at the meeting and what would you like to see, particularly from democrats? will be a meeting at the white house, the big for, plus the committee chairman and ranking members of the transportation infrastructure, commerce committee. they will go to the white house. i suspect nothing will come out of it. they will go round and round. the federal government, bottom line, is reducing its role in meeting him a structure needs of the nation. a fine point not to be lost is while the federal government is shifting from 80% to the small player, 20%, except for, guess what, private investment, if you

are at wall street and want to buying dulles airport, the federal government will put up 80% of the money. if you are a private wall street guy. if you want to build a new airport or extend the runway, the federal government will put up 20% of money. this is a wall street play. host: representative john garamendi. if you want to ask questions -- we tend to think of infrastructure as roads. what do you think needs to be addressed? guest: all of it. the water systems, think flint, michigan, think california. cities across the nation, we just talked about it. old water systems broken down and breaking. water leaking and contamination of all times -- all kinds.

we probably have the most flood prone area in new orleans. we all talk about that, risking their lives. across the nation, air corps -- airports. goes on and on. we don't have broadband service. where are you guys? in the urban areas where the folks are. services.oadband mark is in arkansas, independent line. good morning. thank you, gentlemen.

right next to i-55, the main amountr in memphis, the of traffic is astonishing. semi's mostly with 40 foot containers on them. the caliber of roads is something you would think from 1910 in 1920, i am never seen on an interstate system so pathetic with such high volume of traffic . to other thing i wanted mention is i like harry said the money will be taken from blue states and given to read states. here is a perfect example. i think thereadd is a problem -- i am from massachusetts. have raised important points about the transportation system. at president's proposal is

interstate highways and it could become toll roads. private investors owning i-55 or i-5 in california or interstate 80 or 90 here on the east coast, and tollbooths up. keep in mind the way in which is thatg is structured the federal government is only talking about 20% rather than 80% on those roads. traffic, come see to california. we have the most backed up in the nation and quite possibly in the world we need to build infrastructure of alt -- of all kinds. the program in the current transportation bill disappears and the president's's proposal.

trucks and containers, as you said, all of that would be under the new program and have no idea how that will work. host: democrats line in brooklyn, new york. caller: thank you. one thing i haven't heard is the proposal to invert and put most of it on the states comes just at a time where they are getting rid of the state and local tax deductions. citizens toing the contribute larger shares of their tax revenues to what is basically a federal priority and not giving them any deduction for serving a total priority on their taxes. just stopped right there. can i put a big exclamation point on what you just said? absolutely correct. we are required under the president's great the beautiful on taxes. pay taxes

you are correct that the effect of pushing to the states, the responsibility only at to the pain. you had a second point. caller: if you have time for it. the structure of a highway system that need infrastructure with investment is basically the systemwer era highway that basically reconfigured city and suburbs around the country. problemxtent we have a with highway versus transit access in the cities, that is a responsibility caused by federal programs that set it up this way and put a premium on highways over transit and development around highways that cost more congestion. guest: that is a good point and there is a lot of truth in what you say. quite correct. we have a serious congestion and transportation problem.

california is probably a great example of that. thank you very much for your question. next, ronald is on our independent line. caller: thank you for taking the call. yesterday, the intelligence agencies testified to congress and what they said the number one threat to national security is today, they said it was a dire threat, not isis, not homegrown terrorism p the number one threat to our national security is the deficit, the debt, the national debt. what brought down the soviet union, it was not terrorists or tanks. it was corrupt politicians who drained the treasury to our national security is sitting in your c-span studio right now talking to us through the tv. that is the number one threat. guest: you may or may not be correct but where did the deficit come from?

the deficit was certainly increased substantially in 2000 with the bush tax cuts and ofing them in the wars afghanistan and iraq, neither of which were paid for except borrowed money. then the great meltdown and pulling ourselves out of that recession. significantlyed to the deficit. big beautiful tax bill that the president likes to take credit for, where he went to the christmas party and mar-a-lago and said i've made you so much richer, indeed he did. he also created 1 trillion and a half dollars, in addition to the deficit and now his budget just $1e out on monday and adds trillion per year for the next seven to eight years to the deficit. raising the deficit total to

somewhere between 29 shall he and dollars, does not work at all. to spend money and drill a huge hole with the tax cut. 83% of the tax cuts went to the top 1% of american corporations. in america?esting if you consider stock buybacks and dividends investing in america, you can say yes. building new equipment? no. we have a deficit problem that we have to address. coming out of the deficit, the great recession, yes indeed. significant deduction as unemployment went through the roof and companies failed peer the result was a

ramp-up of the deficit. should do in the recession, stimulate the economy. it cost a pile of money. $700 billion for the american recovery act. another 17 hundred billion and --n there was host: illinois, republican line. for taking myyou call. it is the first time i have spoken with my congressman and neither party so this is cool for me personally. so thank you. quickly point out that bush was not the president of the united states into -- into thousand he was not elected until the next november. what happened to the summer of recovery? hundreds of billions of dollars were supposed to go into the infrastructure but not of it happened.

i have been driving over my whole life. st. louis has some of the worst infrastructure. it is terrible around here. majorityhad a super you guys didn't do nothing about immigration or anything about a budget. have never heard anybody on the program talk about our liability deficit. guest: you covered so many issues i will not have a chance to respond to all of them. recovery act and the stimulus program that began in 2009 and 2010 actually built many projects. theexample in california, new tunnel between concord and that was built. i know on the northeast quarter,

70 new electric motors, these were electric built as a result of that. they are 100% american-made. across the country, there were many projects that went into place. and i think this was a mistake made in 2009, there was a significant tax deduction that went into the stimulus bill. that was a mistake. it should have gone into andastructure of all kinds so forth. it did not happen. there is in place today numerous thatcts around the nation was paid out of the stimulus bill. was it enough? you could debate that forever. were policies correct, you could debate that also. an ongoing has been issue p we will hopefully get this thing done. i suspect there will be order security.

the president's's great big beautiful wall will not be paid for by mexico. of that,will come out american taxpayers will have to pay for it, another promise not cap. host: the previous guest talks about raising the tax -- gas tax. what do you think? guest: would have, could have, should have. gave 80t tax scam that percent of benefits to the super wealthy and big corporations, what if that had included in the -- funding forng infrastructure of all kinds? there were ideas that were presented on the table. they were not taken up. do not just ring it back to america so the corporations could give it back to buybacksers and stock and dividends, but invest it in america. invest inney to america. those ideas were not included in

the bill. infrastructurehe that opportunity is gone and now we have to finally to deal with this lack of money. why are we spending $1 trillion over the next 10 to 15 years rebuilding the big beautiful nuclear bombs that the president wants? we do not have to have the most to defend ourselves and indoor any aggressive -- aggression anywhere in the world. submarines and airplanes and rockets and missiles and bombs. $1 trillion. not needed? guest: no, we do need them, but we do not need to spend one jillion dollars as the president thinks we need to we do not need a new nuclear arms race, which is what is happening.

our guest service on a subcommittee. one of the things that came out of the hearing with security folks yesterday was the idea russia's involvement, concerns about their influence in midterms. what is your committee looking into as far as that? >> i was shocked by testimony yesterday. every one of those six gentlemen responsible for our national security said the major threat is russian involvement in the up coming election. this is our democracy. russia is meddling once again in our election or they will do it for the next eight or nine months as the election goes along. the shocking part was not that russia was doing it. we knew that here the shocking part is the president has not instructed our defense agencies, not just the military but the fbi in national security agency's, the cia to push back.

the law said the president must impose sanctions on russia. we passed that law. he signed it. he had to two weeks ago impose those sanctions. all guards hit by those sanctions. he did not do it. three letter word. why? why did he do it? i would like to know. host: in arizona, chuck is next. caller: good morning to her you are great. just hard to get into. i lived in southern california all my life. i remember one a little older than you, riding a red light. we had a great system in that time. if it had not let the oil companies and the budget

companies, let them turn it out like they did, we would've had a great transportation system. companies, let them turn it out like theythat is in the past ane have to look in the future. i think what he wants to do should be $500 million from the federal, and 500 from private. when they do private and put a toal road in, monitor them make sure if they get their money back, we do the maintenance on these roads and they do not own them. you raised a good point about southern california, the elimination of red lines in los angeles area. that is all true. imposed california has the sales tax to rebuild its public transportation systems. clearly, we will continue to

invest in highway systems. another thing i talked about a moment ago is los angeles, the two largest ports in the nation. most of what comes from the pacific goes into those two ports. the transportation system into and out of those is critical to the nation's's economy. in the president's's proposal, for his transportation ever shush her proposal, he removes those programs and does not provide a movement alternative that is at least able to replicate. so yes, we need to look at this. there is a place for private investment in many different types of infrastructure. if you are ais government agency investing in some kind of infrastructure, the uperal government will put 20%. if you are investing in some

kind of infrastructure, the government will put up 80%. what is that about? host: let's go to nancy, big bear city, california, republican line. hi.er: i guess i am talking more about the budget than the infrastructure. but, people are whining about when,llion for the wall through the democratic guest: excuse me, that's just not true. true there are 11 million illegal immigrants in his nation voting, there is absolutely no truth to that. this has been studied over and

over again. studied in california and other places, it just doesn't happen. what other points you'd like to make, i will point out in big bear, california, you are surrounded by national forests. and a major fire hazard this is another infrastructure issue, another funding issue. got ederal government has to begin anew maintaining forests and to reduce the fire hazard risk in those forests. that is going to take money, but i want you to keep in mind that the tax bill that the the republicans put together ripped the money out of the u.s. treasury and to the super wealthy and to the corporations. at all economic sense and certainly makes it very, very difficult for the federal you in theto protect big bear area as those forests become overgrown. for your question. host: mike in china lake,

california, independent line. yes, good morning, john and pedro. good morning, america. off, , please don't cut me let me finish my comments. how good re espousing for president trump to push it through and criticize it for not helping your state fix the traffic problem. sir, you are the problem, you california. you should listen to -- for your toll roads squeeze everybody into three lanes while a private company your the profit, high-speed rail from jail to jail is a bust, you're not going penny from trump for that. you guys are all bums in get arnia and you need to life. host: instead, do you have a specific question or comment, please? caller: yeah. do you think you're going to get money for the high-speed rail? thanks.ay, guest: well, the federal government is not providing rail. for the high-speed there was some money in the

stimulus program that started arly work on the high-speed rail, that money is gone, the state of california will have to high-speed rail out of its own resources and that is ongoing issue in the state of california. no doubt about it. since you're out in china lake, have a great deal to do with the military and installations out there, those are important. we do need to maintain the military w. regard to the other well, you covered a lot of ground, maybe we'll move on. thank you. wisconsin, n democrat's line, running short on time, jump right in. gentlemen,od morning, i appreciate you putting me on. i might be behind, my comment is about elimination of the snap rogram and i believe that this brings us back several hundred ears to the government istribution of commodities so native americans in the united

stat dietary needs nt of families these days, do you eally think sending a box of food to these people that are low income would cover the the people s of all involved in the family? host: thanks, rick. not.t: probably it's a new -- not a new idea, dates back many, many years. the u.s. government under its food programs did distribute past, that in the has lapsed and now it's a cash program. it has worked. it is necessary to supplement the nutritional needs of particularly low income. incidentally, some of those happen to be in the military. yes, we need to deal with the snap, which is the food stamp program, whether it's boxes, that is going to be an interesting debate. doubt that it's going to work. i'm thinking about the suspense i suspect amazon white want to do this with one of

their drones. comes of it, t interesting debate. host: our guest represents the of california, epresentative john garamendi, thanks for your time. we will do open phones until 9:30. republicans.for democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. we'll take those when we come back. >> this weekend on american history t.v. on c-span3. saturday, 8:00 p.m. eastern on former in history, virginia governor douglas wilder at virginia commonwealth university. have a one-word definition i use for politics, can anyone is?ss what that i said, one word would define politics. money. ive me something that's a proposition before any tribunal

that doesn't involve money. sunday 10:00 a.m. eastern from the west point center for thomas,story, henry hank a combat medic during the vietnam war. served in father world war i. y father served in world war ii. always for a black man, whenever served, it was your military would confirmope, bonafidize as first class red-blooded american citizen entitled to. >> at 4:00 p.m., on reel merica, with the cpac conference in washington, d.c. next week, look back to 1988, aen president reagan spoke at cpac dinner. >> the american people know what cuts, government, tax deregulation and the move toward privatization meant, it's meant the largest peace-time expansion

can r history and i guarantee you they won't want to throw that away for return of the liberal special interests. >> watch american history t.v. on c-span3.d >> "washington journal" continues. host: besides the phone lines thoughts on open phones on twitter at c-spanwj. one a. today" reporting person was injured today in a shooting outside of the entrance to super secret national in maryland, y just outside of washington, d.c. a ording to authorities, in video taken by local news s.u.v. is shown slammed near the gate of the nsa. spokesperson confirmed one person injured in the shooting "nsa police and local law enforcement are addressing an place this t took

morning at the entry gate, the situation is under control, no ongoing security or safety threat," in the pages of "u.s.a. today." the washington examiner website this morning on the front page of the website, a congressional correspondent takes a look at senate when it the. to good morning, susan. you talk in your story about of an inny version immigration bill that is emerging, can you give us the details? right, as you know, the immigration debate slowed down a little bit because there democrats ons by the ver which amendment put on the floor. the larger problem, the two parties don't have agreement on 60 votes, at can get that is behind what slowed this down. hat has come out, the andibility of a very narrow

uous items.content talk about a bill for the don't have specific numbers on what that would be, i don't think that's worked out, for border th money security, which is something the president has wanted. it would leave out are provisions dealing with chain or with what democrats call family reuniification, it andng how you look at changes to the visa lottery system, a system, a drawing who can come into the country and it is about 50,000 annually. so those two items would be left ut, those appear to be what is slowing down consensus on a bill. what i heard yesterday from democrats, we may not be able to do the broad er immigration deal, may not get

including proposal, all the things i mentioned, but perhaps once those items get to and don't garner the 60 votes, people will be ready more ike a deal on this narrow proposal. it's in a very early stages, the [cuttingpeal that i -- out] -- often in the senate, and lawmakers e, too, look ahead beyond votes they know aren't going to pass and pass, and , what can the other challenge this week, placed.p. and maskrority time limit on this debate. it's wednesday morning now here the capital and they haven't gotten to the amendments yet, decided, the republican majority, this is oing to wrap up by the end of this week. there will not be a lot of time. a lot of times lawmakers look dealing on what going imately pass, even

through the exercise of taking up measures that may not get the 60 votes. need 60, not you just a simple majority in the house. it would be 10 democrats because we're missing mccain.john host: susan ferrechio, on the we hear there will be whipping done when it comes by bob goodlatt, what is the purpose of that exercise? talking about en that for a while. it follows up on what leadership has been saying all along. going to see what kind of support they can get for a doesconservative bill that limit the chain migration and visa lottery, provide protection some eamers and include other immigration reforms that conservatives are seeking in the house, they want that bill on the floor and see what vote they can get for it. has not leadership fully committed to get the bill

passed n. my estimation, that the only path they would take initially, there would be quite a backlash if republican leaders didn't attempt to put that on the floor. thense that may get a vote, fact they say they are whipping it, they are trying to see how is for it on here the floor so they are going around and checking with what icans and i think conservatives want, they want there to be a push to get that passed. want to have republicans say, do you like this bill, they want them to this, et's try to move let's try to advance this measure. in that way, the house would be down marker on immigration. they are concerned, house onservatives, that the senate will pass something that's too moderate for their likeing and that will influence the that will put pressure on the house to take up a bill they don't like. a lot of agreement between the house and the senate. ifs is a multi-step process, the senate is able to pass something this week, perhaps

that skinny proposal i talked about, it will put pressure on the house, but it won't you ntee it, the house, know, long been the sticking point on immigration. passed te has immigration reform measures in the past, the house has not up, conservatives warned this would be something that would cause them to lose their own rt for leaders. so tricky political situation in the house. ferrechio, chief correspondent with washington examiner giving us the latest on the senate and immigration. thank you for your time. >> thanks again. host: to open phones, joanne in california, democrat's line. go ahead, you're on. thank you, c-span, for taking my call and also pedro.ou, i have a question about john information that he shared with us today and i will

take my answer off the line. happened to of shovel-ready rograms obama put in place for infrastructure? , d also, what happened with wanting to have a parade, what housing for some military, rebuilding housing for them, making sure that there is place for when they come home. offline.ake my answer thank you so much for taking my call. website at our c-span.org and watch the interview with john garamendi, that reference spending was done during the obama administration, particularly hen it comes to stimulus money and other matters. go to c-span.org and watch that interview, you can find out what about that. from georgia, independent line,

augustus, hi. caller: how you doing today, thank you for taking my call. i think a lot of problems we're having today -- host: uh-huh. caller: as a whole, can be augustus, hi. aller: how resolved if we go back to the first congress. hey passed congressional appropriations amendment. atified by some states, but it fell short and didn't reach two-thirds necessary. it requires now one in congress for very 60,000 citizens and i would say that if you're not familiar with it, you can read and it, read federalist anti-federalist paper, amendment of the constitution and i think would resolve all the problems we're having and we will be able to take and move a country. that's all i got to say. georgia, this is tim calling on the line for democrats. tim, hi. doing today, u pedro? host: fine, thank you. caller: how you doing c-spanners. my concern is concern about about bla oncerned

white, i'm concerned about chinese, i'm concerned about all children who are being deceived and they are not reading their bibles. mean, you go to church. let the pastor read one quote and talks the rest out of the bible. okay. janice from florida, democrat's line. hello. caller: hello. thank you for taking my call. happy valentine's day, everybody. couple of comments. of them is paying for the wall, the wall is fine. paying for it, too, i'm paying for it now because we illegals that are on food stamps and medical, i when i worked se until i retired a year ago, not and when i ago, went down to the social security, they flat told me they them social security cards, written not for hire on,

what is the point in giving them a social security card, he says it allows them to get food medical, that is the only things you need them for. host: okay. in florida. this is landon nusio, responding susan ferrechio. ere we go again, skinny repeal of a.c.a., call it what you want, robing from social medicare.medicaid and if you want to post on our twitter feed at c-spanwj. abraham, baltimore, maryland, republican line. calling i, pedro. i'm regarding about yesterday's democratbout why being to republican and i'm in this here in 2007, but it took me four years before i my visa from the time i apply, even though my dad was a u.s. citizen. don't know why these democrat

much time about daca people wait nothing line to come here legally and came here, i went to school, i paid for my college didn't get t, i financial aid for it. that is why i switch from republican. host: paul, by the way, if you show yesterday, we did a couple segments on this republic an es you and democrat, if you want to see back to le said, go yesterday's program, courtesy of our website there it is. arkansas, enwood, independent line. caller: yeah. illegals are voting, okay. how do i know? hemorrhagic d stroke, went to arkansas state police headquarters and the mexicans. full of okay. you can't blame the state police

for giving them a drivers because otherwise be out there driving without licenses, untenable situation. giving them drivers license, takeing that drivers license and getting voter registration card because all that is required is a picture i.d., now also, in the in new york city, been done and demographics was illegal aliens, that is how hillary got the vote.ar thank you very much. host: paul in arkansas. "new york times" talks about convention raising funds reconstruction. the headline, iraq asked for allies for $88 billion, pledged $4 billion, adding iraq fundraising conference in kuwait attended by dozens of potential

donors, headed for failure with pledged, none from the united states. the conference does not end president trump is leaving nation building to others and they are barely responding. humiliating blow for the iraqi government, can't afford for war that was outcome of the 2003 to occupation.an-led the state department emphasized 2014 hased states since iven iraq 1.7 million in humanitarian aid and more in economic assistance, during the obama administration. the secretary of state tillerson their on others to do part, everyone has opportunity to contribute to iraq's long-term development. he admitted "doing business in iraq can be complicated," and virginia, hear from warren, democrat's line. caller: yeah, pedro, i had a

question for the congressman you had up there. would just like you guys to, you know, people can go to right your website and look the nformation there and they can determine for themselves what was exactly going on. what i want to say to the that norquist has been on your show three instructed all of america what his intentions congress sign those pledges, not raise taxes. him to make s for the government small enough for them to kill it, drown it in the sink. then he came back again and he said, all they need was the econd part to get a president who was going it sign legislation to help them attain their goals. steve bannon, what you see now in the process of

happening is them tearing down america. tearing down america as we know it. to an is going to come end. i'm more than anything, concerned about that than the as far as s immigration and stuff goes, to me, i think that is a side issue ultimate goal, to pretty much destroy america. host: okay, hear from carl in democrat's line. morning.good you like that washington examiner a lot, don't ya? you're on. go ahead, he's gone. the new york times this morning, a story taking a look at michael cohen, president trump's long-time personal lawyer, said $130,000 y he had paid out of his own pocket to pornography film actress who have an affair with mr. trump, most detailed explanation of the payment made the actress stephanie

clifford, cohen said he was not reimbursed for the payment. campaign was a party to the transaction with mrs. clifford and neither for the payment directly or indirectly, he said "new york ent to the times," the payment was lawful and was not a campaign expenditure by anyone, adding mr. cohen said affair with ied mrs. clifford, who goes by the said tormy daniels, she the affair took place after barron.gave birth to here is bob, republican line. bob, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call, pedro. the other night i was watching a on frontline, i didn't see the beginning, i caught somewhere in the middle, near end in reference to 640,000

cases of illegal immigration court system. now if that doesn't shock you, it shocks me. heard a story in south lorida, way back when elian gonzalez deal was going on, some lawyers behind the scene were making a fortune. taxpayers should know this, that is all i have to say. coming out of -- when does a break? get and for pelosi to stand there hours and get a gold tar for high heels and never say one thing about our kids, our legal citizens, my grandchildren, insane. host: let's hear from william on our independent line. ohio.from toledo,

willi william, you're next up. you, pedro, good morning, america. i say i'm independent, but i democratic because i appreciate their comments and you know,t and their, their desire to do better. they are more approving and they -- they are great for america. republicans trying to kill everything. america. republicans rump, he's crazy, extremely crazy. excuse me right now, i lost my train of thought. hangup, america, have a great day and be more loving and supportive. host: okay. howell, from washington reporting a look at done on the opioid crisis when it comes to cost estimated with the crisis.

$1 trillion price tag from 2001 the crisis from will cost another $500 billion in the following three years concerted and sustained action is taken to stem prescription pain killer and nonprofit e, consultant estimated on tuesday alterum, researchs health systems, about cost who ose wages, private sector suffers loss productivity and health cost of state and local lose tax revenue and spend on healthcare, social criminal education and justice activities says that calculated lost productivity from overdose deaths were the biggest factor estimating es, average loss of $800,000 per person and average age of 41 for those who die friday opioid-related causes, revenue for federal, state and local tax collectors and the as people turn

from opioids to heroin and no nent /* /-ke fent fentanyl. this is jc on open phones, democrat's line, go ahead. hi, i want to make a comment about running of the office. in an office, our boss had told three ladies to their decision about some work that needed to be done and was chaos.ed i went in and said, listen, you designate what our responsibilities are so we don't amongst eachghting other to plan that. we do not have that in the white house. a man who -- and golfs leaves it up to everybody else. hollow man who doesn't have the a decision, take criticism or to anything. puppet for the fascists

that are trying to overtake our country. he is as bannon said three years going to make sure america gets run into the ground are, hatever his factions they use trump as their front the nd if we don't get on ball, we're going to be a poor, sad country. in schoolkill haven, pennsylvania, republican line. morning.good host: morning. caller: i just wanted to comment, you know, what is going that everybody, the democrats are saying trump has ot to do this and got to fix that, this and that, he's giving all these e rich and corporations and stuff. anybody ened, can answer, what was going on before trump became president? stuff didn't just happen overnight, the roads didn't fail overnight, the these people didn't

get rich overnight and all this other crap. to be trump's ms fault all of a sudden. i don't understand why. host: politico reporting this morning, the story by louis house oversight committee investigating trump's employment of rob porter, accused of domestic abuse, to trey gowdy, he said on cnn this morning, asked if committee would launch investigation into porter's employment at the white house. ofinistration was made aware the allegations against him, we did last night, trey gowdy said, official, unofficial, i will direct questions to the f.b.i. that i expect them to answer. answer, they will need to give me a good reason. that is in politico this morning. talk about st will the geopolitical going on behind olympics particularly between north korea, south korea the united states.

katherine moon is joining us for when onversation "washington journal" continues. afterwords, ht on with his book broken," he's interviewed by ormer senate majority leader t tom daschle. > supposed to be overcoming differences through extended discussion and real legislative principle rough compromise, it wasn't supposed party winning on their own. the times, as you know, the history when one party has been able to do this on your few. are very maybe 1933 and '34, f.d.r., the depression,

'64-'65, even l.b.j. reached out to republicans and support d republican the first two years. afterwords on c-span2's book t.v. >> c-span history series landmark cases returns this at 12 new a look supreme court cases. historians and experts discuss onstitutional issues and personal stories behind significant supreme court decisions. beginning monday, february 26, live at 9:00 p.m. eastern and elp you follow all 12 cases we have companion guide written by court journalist tony morrow. volume two, to get your copy go to c-span.org/landmarkcases.

"washington journal" continues. host: joining us from wellesley chaire is katherine moon, of the asian study department brookings fellow at for east asia policy, thanks for joining us. hi.t: host: professor moon, tell us what you are seeing from the olympics on the diplomatic front. we saw a lot of talk over kim jong-un's sister, the reception she's having, what away from all that's happened over the last few day? guest: i think the presence of im yo-jong, the sister of the north korean leader kim jong-un, hat is probably the most surprising aspect of the last month or so of preparations and evelopments between the two koreas. she actually also is the only or only deliverer of an is a tlifrable, which letter, written by her brother, inviting president moon jae-in,

korea, to a summit in pyongyang. on that level, the last few days have been very, very interesting. whether or not president moon we take up that offer, don't know and i think much will depend on north korea's behavior of the e closing para-olympics.he as far as south korea goes, i think the president of south moon, has sident really been working hard and has this regard.n in he wanted, since he became to put t last spring, south korea in the so-called driver's seat, that is what he it.led the driver's seat of korean eninsula issues and issues dealing with north korea, not to eed territory and not to seed power to mr. trump who has hostile, oward very belligerent rhetoric regarding

weapons, nuclear surgical strikes, military north and destruction of korea. so in that sense, the two doing i think are interesting dance, but by no eans does this mean that any substantive change has occurred. lot of symbolism and so far not much substance. as far as the united states i think mr. pence, vice president pence on his return ceremony in ing korea, he let out to reporters that the u.s. may be engage in some kind of dialogue without any pecificity, so it is unclear whether washington will actually withup to the idea to talk north korea or whether president or vice president pence was trying to be a good guest as he departed.

with us, if you want to ask about geopolitical issues at the olympics with north korea, south korea and the united states. 202-748-8001 for republicans. democrats.0 for independents, 202-748-8002. professor, to the point the vice resident offered as much as it was this idea of possible dialogue, were you surprised by that? guest: yes, i was surprised by that. but again, north korea can be full of surprises, but it is not as unpredictable as people love to say it is. the north ve that koreans had been planning this offensive, this korean shared claim of victory through the ceremony, events, i'm sports sure the north koreans had been wishing this and plan

thanksgiving for sometime. i don't think this is a spur of he moment decision on the part of the north korean leader. where he intends this to go, his intentions are, of course remain unclear. think, then on the front it is more surface than long-term s far as building of relations between countries? guest: well, you know, it is hard to say because the north and etween the south have been so bad in the last 10 years or so and in the last several years when president park, the of the current president moon was in office. and she hadrd-liner asically served in an antagonistic role for the north kim jong-un's perspective, of course. this is a real see change, at

what i think we need to watch is how serious is of twping in terms its economy, which is the flip policy, ts national word chung-jen, korean means parallel progress, parallel advancement. is military strength, including nuclear weapons and he other side is economic development focused on welfare of the people. so since mr. kim, back in december, announced he's satisfied with the development nuclear weapons up to this tont, maybe this is a chance probe how serious the north koreans could be, might be in focusing on the economy. but again, we don't know for sure. for you comes l from danny. danny is in ohio, republican katherine e on with moon. go ahead. caller: hi, katherine moon, i'm here, i'm a buckeye.

-- warm bear, how they pulled his teeth out of his treated him in such an ill way. man over in zy north korea, apparently, only people, starve his own malnutrition, you know, just so weapons, younuclear know. people in america, we don't have in it. we have stake in the game to use we lost men trying liberate a country that was under ommunism and tyranny. you have cnn, and these other you know, ut there, our president wants to have a of de, they put pictures up americans goose stepping and americans don't goose step, we liberate countries cht host: danny, thank you.

professor moon? yes, thanks, danny for your heart-felt thoughts. an extreme is violator of human rights and it absolutely stake that does foremost e first and for the welfare of its people. interesting lso about north korea is that it actually has many divisions its society. so we have to be careful not to ook at the society as one monolithic entity, not lump everyone together. here are people in the elite circles who fair very well, eat well, trifrng well and they have the hottest consumer goods that we can buy in the united states and then there are those bottom who are really struggle og a day-to-day level. so i would hope that if the orth korea leader has the sensibility and has the its ness his regime and

existence really depends on his to bring that bottom up to provide food regularly, healthcare, etcetera, and to everyday e kind of choke on normal people's lives. kim jong-un has to sober up on that level and i do that in re are signs north korea people do know that the conomy is really answer. host: 202-748-8001 for republicans. democrats.0 for and independents, 202-748-8002. oxford, massachusetts, democrat's line, carl, you are next up. good morning. thank you d morning, for c-span. i just want to say, i mean, kim tyrant, but ibe a don't think he's a nut case that portrays him to be. and i just want to say, we should -- united states should

back, you have to be vigilant, step back and let the fthey want le unification, they should have unification, they are one people you got to remember, after all, when we liberate, so-called the 1950s, we in killed, i believe 20% or 25% of the people in north korea them.ating so i think we should rethink our policy and be cautious. thank you. host: thanks, caller. what about the idea of perception of kim jong-un versus reality? the perception is that he unpredictable, all that. yes, the perception is that he is pretty , and he ruthless, but i don't see him as unpredictable, crazy or irrationale, this is a man and a enior leadership that he has

that have been very calculating, ery strategic, as well as tactical in their public nnouncements, in th domestic politics, in their nuclear development and so far planned things so well they've been able to, i orchestrate mewhat the direction of u.s., north relations, sorry, as well as the north, south negotiations past month. so this is a very, very savvy we need to think take -- keep that in mind. if he were irrational, even if he were mean we t doesn't shouldn't try to deal with a that y and a leadership has nuclear weapons or a leadership that is so difficult.

the united states has been friends in the past with crazier people, with less responsible people and the united states is with people ends of the dutertey, philippines who absolutely is brutal and is proud of it in people, in murdering left and right for trug abuses and other problems they ever been prosecuted or convicted of. dialogue, i hink don't think diplomacy of things that are restricted just to so-called sane people. f we care about an issue, we need to tack telein every possible way, including diplomacy. ost: st. louis, democrat's line. caller: professor moon, what do you think about the back and

orth between the president trump and the north korea leader? constructive,that is there any advantage or aredvantage to the way they going back and forth at each other? good question and i think you have your own answer, actually, the way you asking me. no, i don't think it has been constructive at all. two gentlemen, mr. trump, mr. kim, they have been playing words are and the very dangerous. dangerous?y because efk latory rhetoric, emotional, careless rhetoric at times can lead to distrust, increased perception of serious military hostileities that then could let were perceptions if there accidents and interpretations of

sides that could lead to military engagement and that is that all sane people should want to avoid. also think that the two guys basically have been play thanksgiving game of, you know, who is tougher, who is the bully and that is just not the right approach. it is highly unprofessional. it is highly irresponsible, in doesn't solve anything. it actually exacerbates the problems. lebanon, new jersey, michael on for our guest rofessor katherine moon of wellesley college, he's on our independent line. you're on, go ahead. caller: thank you. professor moon, the current as madman leader he they claim mr. of north korea, i would submit that he is not a manmen are in ly washington, d.c., because the

world now are -- is killer nation. years of perpetual regime changes throughout the world million killed 3-1/2 people in the middle east and as of today, they started their to overthrow ria assad.vernment of the reality is, korea deserves reuniifiy chance to and their conditions, not conditions of the united states. and then until the united states and you from korea, lity, ve peace, tranquil everything. host: okay, michael. guest: michael, thanks for your fellow new i'm a jersey-ite, that is where i grew calling in.s for

i think the issue with nification, it's a very important one for the two koreas, but also really complex most americans don't have a pulse on. south korea and north korea, both countries have onstitutions that mandate the pursuit of unification. nification is written into the law of the land of both countries. emotional se on an level, give that millions of families were torn apart through refugee experience, through traumas during the war, it is a very, very heart-felt and painful thorn in koreas psyche, the memo ogical history and memory. but unification by both the

playednd north also gets up as instruments of politics and i think that is where it dangerous. in my view, this past month of negotiations, there has been too symbolic unification being touted becauseng substantively nothing has hanged to bring the two countries seriously together as collaborative, cooperative playmates, in a way. hand, south korea people's notion of unification complicated. the younger generations do not recall the korean war and they familiar with the south korea that does well on its own, thank you. they do not feel this need for unification as strongly as some people who lived through the korean war and also a lot of wary, they are nervous about the economic and

social social, many are practical about this rather than being simply motional about nostalgic sense of a nation. on the other hand, if you go to peninsula, 38th parallel tis an unnatural where one land mass and a people that had been one people for hundreds and hundreds splitrs, are artificially and so it is a tragedy in that sense. ou're absolutely right, two koreas have to determine own genda about unification, no unificati unification, reconciliation, hat kind of reconciliation on their own. host: professor moon, is there a starting point, low-hanging comes to dialogue between the two countries? guest: well, the low-hanging fruit has always been between the two countries, the family

reunions, so arranging the ivided family from the north and south to meet for several filledd there are always with scenes of tears and really excruciating pain when a 90-year-old mother has been reuniified with her 70-year-old they also know it is bittersweet because after two or three days, they have to part never to see each other again. that is one of the low-hanging almost on the agenda when the two koreas want to try cooperation. also, the two koreas had broken off regular military to military talks for many years. those talks helped stabilize the ituation simply by informing each other of different exercises and informing each these hat there are activities are not intended to ofate any kind of escalation

a situation and so that kind of direct military to military would be helpful and then i think when it comes to this unification, we have to bring in what some callers have in on to, that the war the peninsula never ended, never treaty, this peace is something that would be very difficult to negotiate because china, ves north korea, the united states, the united as south korea. and this is something that erhaps we need to think more eeply about and not just as some kind of a goal way down in the future, when everything else is done. north koreans have been seeking peace treaty with the united tates for a long time, you know. the united states is wary and question is , the how much is north korea willing to give up, especially in terms

weapons in order to get a peace treaty, how much will the united states and other to give up in terms of economic aid and access to institutions if north korea were to become a of the ed member international community? it's really complicated. host: let's hear from anthony, easton, pennsylvania. republican line. aller: yes, thanks for taking my call. immigration this policy that is going on, three was, when i guess it the republicans in my opinion, in to the -- host: anthony, our topic right is north and south korea relations. caller: oh, well, all i wanted say was about the immigration republicans is -- host: we'll have to leave it

anthony, sorry. bob from heightsville, go ahead. yes, i'm glad -- cease-fire ask reuniification or peace treaty, rather. the professor why the two koreas never decided to each other as separate, independent nations embas embassiess on each other's side and line of and -- you know unpredicted crisis between the countries? host: okay, thanks, caller. uest: that is an excellent question and the answer is that because ple, the two koreas are still enemy and both of them, especially during the cold war,

the cold war emnitty between the east and by the soviet union, china and the united the s and western europe, cold war basically divided the maintained cold war division of the koreas and even when the cold war ended on the continent, it never nded on the korean peninsula, in that sense, the two koreas they both y states, have national security laws, side, if a south korea wants to visit the north, technically ally illegal and same thing, of course, north to the south, defecting, so it and ofbeen a possibility course because the two koreas hold in their future vision that day be unified, to contradictory to

legations ssies or that would symbolize the koreas, ness of the two rather than the jointness, koreas.edness of the two host: eddie lives in massachusetts, on the republican line for our guest, katherine wellesley college, hi. caller: hi. was underering, korea protection of japan after first harry tr nd i blame truman after the second world did he agree, allow koreans be split up between 38th and south at the parallel? what was the logic there? a good question. i love these callers who care about history. wish our young students in colleges today would care so much. logic was very simple, that hen the united states and

soviet union were cooperating together at the end of world war germany and europe and japan in asia, the u.s. and soviet union agreed that the the ts would take over demill tarrization of the north, above the 38th parallel and that americans would handle the demilitarization of the south demilitaryizing on also creating and law and order in both parts of peninsula. the problem is that and this is koreansg that the south and north koreans remain very pset and resentful about, the problem is that the division at the 38th parallel was a very made by two on the r level officers of

u.s. military looked at a map and said, okay, we're going to the line here and that is where the division will be and care of ts will take the north, the americans will take care of the south, some day might have elections to decide how to determine their future and then what happened that the north and the soviets reneged on their part of promised elections and then he south went its own way and had its own election and established the republic of the north went ahead and established the democratic people's republic of we are, many decades later, with these divided countries. running short for our guest. y, in connecticut, independent line, go in with your question or comment, please. caller: just had a question, do you think kim yo-jong plays in unification of

regime change? especially in light of her ather essentially being assassinated? guest: oh, that is a complicated question. hiding, of course, worried about his life. is impossible it to say heville any role, there north koreans and defectors around the world who him take up see some kind of a position, ossibly as a counter-point to the current regime, but i think that is not a likely situation. any time in the near to mid-term future. mr. kim is a very young man and i think we have, you americans celebrate youth and for good reason, they have reat vitality and energy, but we have to admit, when it comes to running countries, as difficult as north korea and peninsula as complicated as

peninsula, perhaps people with more seasoned knowledge and better.ce might be any rate, i think you ask a very probing question and the answer is we don't know. host: professor moon, we have about a minute, what would you as positive first step in reunification between the two countries? guest: before i answer, i have i don't know if reunification is the right thing the agenda right now. eople talk so glibly and i studied this in my research and a ting a book on it, it is multi generational project, just look at germany. germany still has ifficulties economically, politically, socially, culturally, because of the unification. i don't wish for abrupt unification on peninsula, it would

be chaotic and dangerous. the rms of reconciliation, two sides have to just really peacefully, living whatever the political structures might be, whether it federation or or separate states, that at least or the time being, living peaceably is the only option. host: got you. that, professor katherine moon from wellesley college, talking about the between north and south korea and related matters. thanks for your time this morning. you very much. host: now we take you to the house of representatives. pro t pursuant to the order of the house of january 8, 2018, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties. all time shall be equally allocated between the parties and in no event shall