"washington journal" continues. host: joining us is ted hesson from politico. can you talk about the homeland what is secretary and homeland security's role in border security? guest: as homeland security secretary, she is the chief cabinet member responsible for immigration enforcement. with this particular administration you have president trump, illegal immigration is a major focus and he wants to make progress. there is an enormous amount of pressure for her to deliver. that has come to a head in the last week or so. in particular, reports that during a cabinet meeting on wednesday, president trump went

on a rant about it illegal immigration. sheng that cabinet meeting took it personally. she even considered quitting. to the point where according to fox news, john kelly actually and imploredielsen her not to quit. it came to a point where there were tensions between her and trump, and it almost seemed like she would have to leave her job. the president is rightly frustrated that the loophole has prevented this administration from securing the border and protecting the american people. i share that frustration. are complicated issues. why do you think about that response and arguments that she makes? the tsa spokesperson

tweeted it was not true that she was close to resigning and drafted a resignation letter. two days later john kelly told another media outlet that he asked her not to quit, which seemed to confirm the story to begin with. in a tight spot with the president. there is so much that a secretary can do. some of the changes he would like to see have to be done by congress or would require an agreement with mexico, for instance, on immigration issues. she can act within a certain sphere of influence, but has limitations on what she can do. host: that hearing will have an earlier. -- will happen later. if you have questions about her role in national security, (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans.

independents, (202) 748-8002. for did the president use nothing has been being done? she was previously john kelly's deputy at the white house. the expectations are high from president trump. during his first year in office, border arrests dropped to the 1971. level since that has not been maintained. it has started to pick up. the president is saying that border arrests are increasing. there was a caravan of migrants traveling through mexico that caught the president's attention. andresumably saw them on tv tweeted about them repeatedly. this issue was on the forefront of his mind and he was not abc

and the progress that he wanted border arrests were dropping. when it comes to the hearing, what is she being questioned about, and what kind of responses to the topic of border security will happen? guest: the hearing is supposed president'sthe budget request, $1.6 billion for a border wall and $80 million over a longer time to build the border wall. the justice department, homeland security department, announced they wanted to refer 100% of people crossing the border illegally for persecution. it means families could be separated when they are crossing the border. that is also a topic she will face at the hearing today.

host: overall strategy, is it still based on the wall, or are there other aspects homeland security could use? guest: they still think, the administration, thinks the wall is a central component of their border strategy. they are trying whatever they can do to bring arrests down, to bring crossings down. this policy, referring everyone for persecution at the border, is meant to be used as a deterrent to keep people from crossing. they are encouraging people, for example, who might want to request asylum to not try to cross the border illegally and go to a port of entry, which is committing a crime, and request asylum when they get there. -- : guest: she at least has some time in this position. come out withrump

cabinet secretaries, and there may have been tengion, but he hasn't taken action for some time. if the relationship doesn't seem to repair itself, it might be months before he decides to let her go or she decides she doesn't want to be in the role. that she isyou say a loyal supporter of president trump? how would you describe her? guest: there seems to be a campaign amongst advisors who are painting her in the picture of a never trumper. that she was not an original trump supporter. i cannot say for sure, but i can't say she was part of the george w. bush administration and she worked at the homeland security department before that. that is the case for many people it vhs. some people were with the -- dhs. some people were with the obama administration. execute theble to

president's mission and work for previous presidents, certainly. "ost: ted hesson from "politico joins us. teresa from columbus, ohio. caller: hi, thank you so much for c-span. is, as a border security policy, isn't this a property rights policy, too? if i was in my backyard having a barbecue and 20 strangers started rolling through, i would be appalled. i don't think that people have a put that on people's land because they have a goal that is in their interest and i forgo my right to have my private property. thet this just as much of

whole makeup? i certainly wouldn't want to live next to the border with this going on. i wouldn't want to live in columbus, ohio with this going on. can you talk about private property rights and where people fit in? a good question. there are plenty of people you would talk to you at the border that are concerned with people crossing and paying on their property. part of the mission of what homeland security is asking for pushing people towards ports of entry is to discourage it regular crossings at the border. the private property debate goes both ways. they are talking about building a wall, and plenty of people would not like to see that and are not willing to surrender their property for that. host: beaverton, oregon. say in of it like to terms of the overall -- i would like to say the overall border policy is repugnant.

it has increased potentially in 2019 up to 52,000. in terms of the justice department declaring they have no problems separating families, i just do not understand that. a couple of weeks ago i went to the head of catholic charities. she talks about -- he talked respectingicians her. they will be a point where the people of faith will not simply want to be respected. they will want to be heard. guest: i know you raised the detention bed question. the 52,000 or so is what the administration is requesting in their fiscal 2019 budget.

i think it will be a question of separating families, of course, some people have ethic issues with that and what it could mean for kids psychologically and years to come that they were split from their parents for may be months at a time and placed in restrictive settings. that said, the administration is considering this a deterrent. host: you can see this hearing on c-span.org. if you go to our website you can get all of the information on the hearing and border security topics at c-span.org. san antonio, texas, republican line. yes, sir. i think president trump has hit the nail on the head. we need to secure our borders. we are still a nation. borders without is eroded over time.

a lot of people want to come in -- and you know, but they have to come across legal. we don't want riffraff, we want people that want to work and make an honest living. secure our borders because the drugs are pouring across. americans deserve it. we pay taxes, we want to live secure and our homes. i think president trump is heading in the right direction, whether we need a wall, a wider river,, whatever it takes to secure the north, south, east, west, whatever it takes time for it and go president trump. i thought ofestion is where border arrests stand. vocalesident has been that they have increased and he is not happy. through march and

april. last year they reached the lowest point in decades. a report inut out september are the border is harder to cross illegally than it ever has before by all the metrics they have. i think the border is quite secure. whether some people think it could be taken further is another question. host: (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. independents, (202) 748-8002. host: the ninth circuit court of appeals takes a look at a case involving the daca program and the trump administration. what will happen? guest: this allows young undocumented immigrants to apply for work permits and have some deportation relief. not renew the program.

a federal judge in san francisco in january blocked trump's decision to and the program meaning that the administration had to keep accepting renewals through daca. appealed, and now we are at the ninth circuit where therguments, administration hopes to convince the appeals court to overturn the block on the decision. host: you can see the hearing live at 4:00 this afternoon. if you miss it, it will re-air on c-span 2 at 8:00 this afternoon. we will get you to respond. [video clip] >> more than two months have passed since the administration the daca program.

during our meeting last week, when the senator: i was encouraged want to work on this. daca include huf th sands of individuals and servingcolleges in the military. every day since that announcement was made and before terrified.p every night they are afraid there will be a knock on their door at midnight removing them from their home and tearing them family.om their do you agree that legislation must be passed to protect these young people before the end of this calendar year? >> we owe it to them to find a permanent solution. it is no way to expect anyone to live 2 months at a time. >> hopefully we will be working in a bipartisan way.

if confirmed, will you commit these young people will not be ement priority while congress is working to fix this problem? >> yes, ma'am. host: the secretary's role in daca overall as the solution is being sought? is forced tourt continue accepting renewals. they are still seeking to end the program as they originally intended. what you heard in nielsen's comments about wanting a legislative solution, the white house says they do want some kind of law passed in congress to solve the daca program. very high.price is they are not just wanting to pass a law to legalize dreamers enrolled in the program, they would like other things that involve a border wall and funding for that, cutting legal immigration in half, which is

not palatable to democrats and many republicans, and what they loopholes,g asylum which would reform asylum laws. though they say they want administration to deal with dreamers, they want that and a much grander package of laws. host: looking at the larger issue of daca, is this part of the permanent solution or is there reality to this effort? >> we are going live to the homeland security ski and secretary nielsen is taking her seat. and expected to talk about border security as well as counterterrorism and other efforts her department is undertaking to protect the united states.