and marvin a lasky talks about his recent piece examining the fiscal state of puerto rico. and later, a look at legislative efforts to combat the opioid froms with lev facher stats news. ♪ host: morning. it is saturday, june 16, 2018. a three-hour washington journal ahead. we will talk about trade relations between the united states and canada, discuss puerto rico's post hurricane maria economy, and the battle of the omitted -- battle against the opioid epidemic. with the house ready to put two major immigration overhaul bills on the floor, we are taking some time to hear immigration stories of some of america's tens of millions of immigrants.

phone lines a little differently this morning. a few have been in the united states for less than a year, -- if you have been in the united states for less than a year, call (202) 748-8000. if you immigrated between two and 10 years ago, (202) 748-8001 . -- if you came to this country over 10 years ago, (202) 748-8002. and if you are an illegal immigrant -- undocumented immigrant, we want to hear from you. (202) 748-8003. a good saturday morning to you, we -- you can start calling in now. it is about 43.7 million total states.ts in the united these numbers from the migration policy institute. of the 43.7 million, 22.2 million are naturalized

citizens. are unauthorized immigrants. 11.5 million are lawful permanent residents and legal residents on temporary visas. more stats from the migration policy institute. the size of the immigrant population as a share of the total u.s. population, that 43.7 million number represents about 13.5% of the total u.s. population. of 2016.as that's compared to 13% of the total u.s. population back in 2010. in 2000, it was about 11% of the total of u.s. population, and in 1990, 8%. these numbers from the migration policy institute. that is the universe of people we want to talk to. we want to hear your story this morning. the phone lines again, if you have been in this country less than a year, (202) 748-8000. 2-10 years, (202) 748-8001.

if you have been in this country over 10 years, (202) 748-8002. and a special line for illegal immigrants. if you are in this country undocumented, we want to hear your story too. (202) 748-8003. tell us how you got here, why you decided to, and what the process was like. last week on this program, we were joined by congressman audrey on representative -- congressman s espaillat. here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> the family reunification is very important because that is how i got to this nation. >> you were born in the dominican republic? thatwas your past way

pathway to citizenship? , get our to go back green card, and eventually became u.s. citizens. >> did you move back immediately? took a while, and we were here without any documentation when the visitor's visa expired. >> how old were you? >> nine years old. >> was there ever a fear that you would be separated from your parents? >> there is always a fear. when you're nine years old, things do not go through your -- going throughkin your parents' minds. >> how did they address that to you? >> be careful, don't approach any strangers, that kind of conversation. it was a different time in america than it is right now. you had that kind of hostile and

toxic and intolerant rhetoric that seems to prevail many times across the nation. host: in the first segment of the washington journal today, we want to hear from some of america's 43.7 million immigrants. we want to hear your immigration story, how you got here, what that process was and why you decided to come. if you have been in the united states less than a year, (202) 748-8000. if you have been in the united states 2-10 years, (202) 748-8001. if you have been in the united states over 10 years, (202) 748-8002. and a special line for illegal immigrants, (202) 748-8003. having this conversation is the house republicans are preparing to possibly move two major immigration overhauls, although the timing of when that might happen a little muddied yesterday as the headline from the wall street journal points fromfter some comments

president trump. president trump on friday upended the delicate house negotiations over the immigration legislation in an interview with fox news. president trump had indicated he would not sign a moderate immigration bill, a remark taken by many that he was ejecting a recently released bill assembled rejectingtors from -- billently released assembled by negotiators. tom price bill is aimed at giving young immigrants known as dreamers legal status while also tightening the border and moving to a merit-based immigration system. later on friday, a white house spokesman issued a statement reiterating the president's stance, saying in the morning he had been talking about an earlier effort promoted by centrist republicans and committed to signing either of the other two bills. trump's initial marks had taken a toll on capitol hill.

some rank-and-file gop members speculated that vote planned for next week might have to be postponed further. we will soon happens on that front. but as immigration has been such a major story this week, we set aside our first segment of the washington journal to hear your immigration stories. barry in buffalo, new york, been in this country over 10 years. where did you emigrate from? canada.i came from host: why did you come here? caller: because my wife is a u.s. citizen. actually, she is both u.s. and canadian, but she was born in the u.s.. host: what was that process like. how long did it take? caller: it took about a year. when we were going to get married, i was going to come on a fiancee visa but it did not work in our favor, because i did these restrictions,

like no advanced parole. so we decided to get married in toronto, because the majority of my family is in toronto. marriage conditional residency visa. host: a question people always have is the cost of immigrating to the united states. do you have a sense of what the price tag was in that year-long process? caller: it was not that expensive back then. $200, theyttle over were very nominal back then. host: what do you mean back then? caller: i'm sorry? host: what year did you come? caller: i officially got my permanent residency december 1989. host: go ahead, finish your comment. caller: i became a u.s. citizen

in 1993. host: thank you for sharing your story. ohio, also been in the united states over 10 years. good morning. caller: hi, can you hear me? n did youahead, whe come? caller: 1990, 1995 on a work visa. my sponsor sponsored my work visa, and eventually also helped me get a green card. and i worked all the way to citizenship. it took me about 11 years to become a citizen. i paid all the taxes during the meantime, you know, follow the do, did whatever i needed to to be a proud u.s. citizen. host: what kind of work do you do and why did you want to come here to do it? and youi am in i.t.,

asked me why did i come here? host: why did you want to come here to do i.t.? caller: yes, i was in the middle east at that time. i worked for the government in and betterfor bigger opportunities. in the middle east, what i found of your incomene was taxed, you did not have the freedom and liberty that america offers. so i would submit that as the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. host: and how do you think that process back then when you came compares to the process now? varies i think it country by country. i know because i come from india. because i missed a vote, i missed an opportunity -- bosat, i missed an opportunity. the work with opportunities, they fire up. come to years

earlier, i would have become a citizen in three years. because i missed the boat, it took me 11 years. so it goes up. immigrants andf applications increases, it dated back all the way. so it is very, very difficult for those who have come after me. host: and one more question for you. twitter notes that historically, the united date has turned off the immigration flow many times help the newly immigrated assimilate into american society. can you discuss the assimilation process and how long that takes? caller: oh, yes. that is a very interesting question, because as far as i am concerned, i had no difficulty in assimilation at all. in fact, i have some very positive stories about my

immigration to the united states. inerestingly, before i came 1995, i had become earlier on a short business visa, which was only for about three months. while i was here, i was told by a number of people hey, your visa is expiring, you do not have to go back. stay here. i respected the law of the land and said i will go back and come here again the right way, which i did in 1995. as far as assimilation is concerned, i had no difficulty at all in assimilating with the people. people here are very warm, welcoming, and even today i get nothing but warm send welcome -- warmth and welcome from th local population. law ofhey respect the the land and respect the country, respect the opportunity they got, they will certainly step up and become worthy

citizens of this great land. host: thank you for the call from ohio this morning. sophia in bronx, new york, also in the country over 10 years. go ahead. caller: yes, good morning. what we comment about have been seeing, the illegals coming in here. i came in 1970 in this country. it was so beautiful of everything. i had a scholarship to columbia university and because i was young and so excited, i was happy about the united states. i got married. to make the shorey short -- to make the story short, my comment is we have chinese, japanese -- international in the united states immigrants. i never had any issue or problem living with everyone, but i have

an issue -- i am sorry to say it, you know, the hispanic speaking people really, really, really demand a lot. they demand for everything. even you walk in the street on 7th avenue, they blocked the street, ever since trump has been a president, they have come down for some reason, they disappear. host: why do you say that about an entire group of people? caller: no -- i hate to say it. ago, theyrs, 10 years albanian, irish, poland, blacks. people did not have an issue how you lived, how you talk, how we act to be neighbors. every time hispanic people move in in my neighborhood, we have to complain about the music they

play. i'm sorry to say this, but they have no respect for the land. they demand about their language to be the second language. i hope -- i will be 68 in november, if i live 20 years from now, i would like to say not to change the language, make it one language forever this way. everyone from all over the world will, and live in this country -- this country is blessed, but , two people, to nationalities is dangerous for the united states. is in florida, also been in the country over 10 years. go ahead. i have been here since november of 1977. i came here when i was nine years old with my parents and was sponsored by my aunt and my uncle. host: word to emigrate from? --

where did you emigrate from? where: i'm sorry? host: did you emigrate from? caller: burma. there is a lot of opportunities and discrimination. i would like to say that america is still an opportunity, there are still a lot of good things about it. [inaudible] lot of opportunities in education that other people might not have had. there are occupations for asians , and still opportunities -- don't get me wrong, there is still discrimination, racism, and sexism and so forth. host: what is your most remembered memory in that process of coming from burma. it was long.

my parents got married and about a year later they started thinking about coming to america. or 1976 toil 1975 get approved, and we waited a year or two. we had to get our money saved so we would have money to live off of when we came to america. host: frank, thank you for sharing your story this morning. we are talking to those who have come from this -- to this rom another country. if you have been in the united states less than a year, (202) 748-8000. if you have been in the (202) 748-8001 united states 2-10 if you202) 748-8001, -- have been in the united states 2-10 years, (202) 748-8001. (202) 748-8002 over 10 years. and if you are an illegal immigrant, (202) 748-8003. we have set aside our first hour

to hear from you. oswaldo in tampa, over 10 years. go ahead. caller: good morning. host: good morning, sir. caller: how are you today? host: doing well. caller: i am watching the program and i think it is a very good program. i wanted to talk about me. i left my country when i was 10 -- i was and came to born in cuba, so i left cuba, moved to mexico city, and in mexico they offered me to cross the border, but i wanted to get legally in the united states. so i waited almost a year in mexico city, waiting for the united states embassy to give me a green card to get into the united states, and it was nice. 40,t to the united states

45 years ago, and i feel very proud about this country. the united states is an immigrant country. it seems that a lot of people that came here came from another country. that is what makes america great, you know? so many languages, so many cultures. i feel very proud about that. you: oswaldo, where did first live when you came to the united states and what did your parents do, and what do you do? caller: i went to miami, but i don't like it, you know? came from an island that is a beautiful island, so i moved to puerto rico, spent most of my life and puerto rico. tampa --go, i moved to 10 years ago, i moved to tampa

because life and puerto rico was getting very hard. i became a united eights citizen, i did my studies in the united states and high school in puerto rico, and now i have been living in the united states for 11 years. but it is a great country. have happened in this administration, i really do not like it. i see a lot of people that came , you know, south america, central america, and they have a lot of problems. legal to geto be into the united states, but if money or theve the legal, giveget here it a chance. don't separate the families. in tampa, florida. you mentioned you lived in puerto rico.

we will be talking about puerto rico's economy post hurricane maria in our weekly spotlight on magazine segment. that is coming up at 9:00 today. we will be joined by marvin a lasky -- olasky. you mentioned not separating the families. that was an issue president trump discussed yesterday in a wide-ranging conversation with the press on the white house lawn. he started with fox news and carried on with several other news organizations. the headline from the new york times today, home from north korea, trump has a few things to get off his chest. one of them was the separation of families issue that you just brought up. here is a bit from president trump yesterday. [video clip] >> the children, the children can be taken care of quickly, beautifully, and immediately.

the democrats forced that law upon our nation. i hate it. i hate to see the separation of parents and children. us asmocrats and come to they actually are, in all fairness, we are talking to them, and they can change the whole border security. we need a wall, we need border security, we need to get rid of catch and release. you catch a criminal, take his name, and release him, and he never shows up again. we end up getting him in a different way, oftentimes after he has killed somebody. we have to change our laws. the democrats have the power because we do not have the votes. i think that is why we will do so well in the midterms. and because we have the strongest economy in the history of our nation. we have the best job numbers in the last 44 years. the best job numbers and 44 years. >> you announced a zero-tolerance policy at the border on may 7. following laws.

he was following laws -- >> that was a direct order -- >> can i answer your question, please? laws, verywing simply, that were forced upon us by the democrats. >> but there is nothing saying the families need to be separated at the border. >> the democrats gave us the laws. i want the laws to be beautiful, humane, but strong. i do not what had people coming in -- want bad people coming in, i do not want drugs coming in. we can solve that in one meeting. tell the democrats, your friends, to call me. times fact check of the day focusing their fact check on the entire president trump news conference. one of them was his comments that democrats forced the law on the country that is now responsible for the separation of children from their parents at the border. the fact checked noting that no party has enacted any law that

forces immigration officials to separate children from their parents who illegally cross the border. the practices a result of the trumpet menstruation zero-tolerance policy favoring the process -- trump administration's zero-tolerance policy favoring the process. lawmakers had previously cited a 1977 settlement of a class action lawsuit in which the government agreed to detain children under humane conditions and release them promptly, but that settlement does not mandate the attainment of parents. the separation of children issue certainly getting a lot of attention this week, and one of those members of congress and took to the floor of the house to talk about it was congressman joe kennedy. this is him from thursday morning this week. [video clip] tonight,eaker, children that are 2, 3, 4 years old will sleep alone in cages on american soil. the brutality being perpetrated by the united states government is about who we are

as a country. it is about morality, it is first, it isy, but about those kids. the five-year-old boy from honduras who collapsed on a kitchen floor in michigan, sobbing for his parents. the mother who had to listen to her seven-year-old daughter frantically screaming in a detention room next door as she was hauled away. the three-year-old boy who was inconsolable, on a flight to the midwest after his mother was left behind. baby ripped-old from its father's arms. i do not care what you believe. i do not care who you vote for, or what you think about the nuances of immigration reform. these children, babies, need to

be with their parents, just like every other child in this country. anything less is cruelty in its purest form. congressman joe kennedy of massachusetts on the floor of the house earlier this week. if you want to watch the speech in its entirety, go to c-span.org. we are taking your calls in the first segment of the washington journal today. we want to hear your immigration story. there are some 43.7 million total immigrants in the united states. we are hearing from those this morning, setting aside the first hour of the washington journal. if you have been in the country for less than a year, (202) 748-8000. 2-10 years, (202) 748-8001. if you have been in the country over 10 years, (202) 748-8002. and a special line for illegal immigrants. if you are in this country undocumented, (202) 748-8003 is the number. we want to hear your story.

john is in buffalo, in the country for over 10 years. caller: [cheers and applause] -- [inaudible] compulsive liar. you listen to that man, he is sickening. i came to this country 29 years up to new york state. [inaudible] night,to school at worked in the day, went back to school, and this country is good to me. it is sad to see this. it is sad. this is not the america that people tell others about, that i knew about. this is something different. this man is just sickening. host: john, how long are the

process take when you came from jamaica at 29 years old? caller: i came on a visa, a farm work visa. i worked in florida, and then i in 1990,, came back go top to new york state, florida, go back to jamaica. i did that three times before i could stay in 1991. host: john, did you have any family here or did you come by yourself? caller: nope, no family. it is sad. [inaudible] host: john in buffalo. joan in montclair, new jersey, also on the line for those who have been in the country over 10 years. go ahead. caller: yes, i am watching you, pedro. i watch c-span every morning and i have never called before, but i am very upset at what is going

on. and myorn in jamaica father, who came to america as a ,arm worker in the early 1960's he used to go back and forth. after a while he decided to stay and he became a citizen and sent for us to come to america. and i am very disturbed at what is going on and why the president -- what the president is doing. joan, when you came to the united states, you said he sent for you, how to that process work? work? that process what do you remember about it? caller: he sent for my whole family is here now and we are all in the united states.

we love it here. i'm just upset at what is going on. host: did everyone want to come? caller: not really, my mother and father were here. i came when i was 18. afterward, i think president carter was the president and he for the family to send for kids over 21, and them except set for my brothers who were over 21. everybody is here now. 18-year-old, what did you do when you got here? did you work? caller: no. at the time i was still eligible attended a and i

year of high school here. graduated and then i went to work and also attended college and so forth. host: thanks for the call. country 10een in the years. caller: yes. i love it here. i came to west virginia. fiance wanted to be an american citizen, so we got married. host: where did you come from? caller: nigeria. host: what was that move like for you? west virginia is unique because west virginia is kind of, you can't compare it with other states.

difference.ch of a i came from a small place in nigeria. it didn't affect me that much. what i wanted to say about the immigration process is this, i live in west virginia. i noticed when i first came here, the entirety of this area -- nobody gave them the time of day. i was here when obama got elected the first time and reelected the second time. [indiscernible]

help, you helpds them. that is what america stands for. sad.has made me i see it on tv every day and it makes me sad. i wish the president would do something about it. we are christians. we believe in god. what is going on -- i work in health care. i take care of sick people. these people want something done. i go to church every sunday and people complain about this. ed from their

mothers arms. there should be a middle ground somewhere. between the law and helping people. host: thanks for the call. to legallking immigrants and illegal immigrants this morning. lines that separated by the number of years you have been in this country. we just want to hear your immigration story. here are more stats on legal and permanent residents in this country. in the or 2016, the number of new legal permanent residents was almost 1.2 million. you can see this chart showing the heights and depths of legal permanent immigration, legal permanent residents in the u.s. 1991, by far the year with the most. million -- 1.8 million new residence that year.

one more chart for you. this one focusing on illegal immigration. the illegal immigrant population. constance has been in the country over four years. caller: good morning. 1955. been here since i was going to be married to a frenchman who got a temporary assignment to the u.n. in manhattan. -- he had a special visa. i applied for a visitor's visa. we never intended to stay in the united states, but we liked it so much. we got married in manhattan.

my husband could continue on his special visa, i could not, so we were separated. for eight months. i would home to denmark. i did my paperwork, paid my fees, and came back to manhattan eight months later. home time we needed to go family,er deaths or the we had to be fingerprinted and show proof that we had paid our taxes before we can leave the country. return of course. our families were kind and sent us tickets to go home.

for instance, christmas and other occasions. every time we had to do the same thing, fingerprint and show proof of having pay taxes. on a greenyears card, we finally became citizens. now, i am about ready to move back to denmark because i feel that a country without borders is not a country. it's getting to be a problem that we don't have an immigration law that is acceptable and enforceable. as far as seeing these children fromges, the pictures

previous administrations, the people that i see -- feel to blame is the congress that was pardoned,fter reagan i forget was a 11 million or something like that? host: yesterday was the sixth anniversary of the creation of the deferred action for childhood arrivals program. the program that created the so-called dreamers. what is your thoughts on what should happen with the dreamers that question about whether there should be a pathway to citizenship for those people who were brought to this country illegally as children? caller: they are innocents. they didn't know whether parents were doing illegally. they should have a path to

citizenship. at the same time, the borders should be enforceable. ,he method of emigrating whether it be legal or illegal, should be enforceable because it feels to me as if the whole society is breaking down. what is going to happen to these children who are now separated from their parents? as they grow up, what kind of citizens will they become? they will have all kinds of anger pent-up in them about what is happened to them. host: thanks for the call this morning. speaking of those children who have been separated from their parents, so attempts to put some numbers on how many there have been. the trump saying yesterday that it separated 1995 children from

their parents his face criminal prosecution for unlawfully crossing the border. that was over a six-week. period that ended last month. new number says thousands of children have been taken from their parent since late last year. the number of children in custody rose be on his capacity for existing detention centers, the trump administration has plans to erect a tent city in texas to house them. more stats on the unauthorized illegal population in this country. this chart showing the estimate of that number over the years from 1990. in 2016, it was about 11.3 million.

that was the estimated size of the unauthorized immigrant population in the u.s. millionm about 12.2 back in about 2006 2007. you can see the increase from 1990. back then, it was estimated at about 3.5 million illegal immigrants in this country. more stats from the migration policy institute on the top countries of birth for unauthorized immigrants. about is the top country, 56% of unauthorized immigrants in this country. about 7% from guatemala. 4% from el salvador. 3% from honduras. 2% from china. those stats about two years old at this point.the latest stats have not come out yet . morningour calls this on your immigration story. we have set aside our first hour

of "the washington journal" to talk about it. caller: good morning. i have been here over 20 years.my only thing i have to say , if you are an immigrant and you come to the united states and become a burden on this country, you should be ashamed of yourself. there is no reason to do so. i came here legally with a visa. my wife had to work 72 hours so she could pay with her own education. we get our education. it's a great country, but you

cannot take advantage of it. you come here, you have greater opportunity. caller: good morning. i came to the united states as a young bride, a g.i. bride. i met my husband in 1960 and we married and i came here in 1962. i had a green card and i used to report to the post office every year to let them know where i was because of him being military, we moved quite a lot. eventually, after five years, i went to school and learned all of the history and government. i took the test and became a citizen, got sworn in and have been a citizen. i have raised two children and we have traveled the world. i really believe that we need the immigration system that we have where we have to register,

we have to come in legally because this is a country of laws. we have to obey laws. do can't just come in and think you can get a job and stay here. everybody wants to do that. the whole world wants to come here and make a good life. social services are being drained. the school system is being drained. the country can't take it anymore. host: you wouldn't make any changes to the current system? there has been a lot of criticism from a president on the visa lottery system. is that something you would keep? caller: i think we need to change everything. i think we need to start from scratch because i think we need to say apply for it and then they can find out what kind of a life you have had. we've got to admit it, there are people coming into this country to do harm to the country. everybody has to be vetted. everybody needs to come and you

have to find out the backgrounds. go through the process. everybody has to go through the process. i don't see why anybody would be against that. the system, i am not sure if it is working as it is right now, but something definitely needs to change. florida on the line for those who have been in the country over 10 years. caller: thank you for picking up my call. turned on your tv and talk to your phone. caller: good morning. i would like to let my people what i'm trying to say is everybody is trying to see one way. they don't see collectively.

we have to solve the problem. theave to get together with political issues wherever we live. [indiscernible] they make it harder for the government to do with a need to do for the country. it is time to focus. .alifornia, new york or miami we have an institution to take care of illegal immigrants. they have to follow the process. i came to the united states in 1988. i didn't like it because it was too cold. i went to chicago and came back in 1989.

still too cold. i would back. -- went back. i'm grateful for this country and i'm grateful. host: we showed you that clip of congressman last week on this program talking about his own immigration story. the first formally undocumented member of congress. here is a story from time magazine about the only immigrants in the senate. she is ready to take on trump. this story from earlier this year. mazie hirono is an immigrant from japan. the chamber's sole buddhist as well. she said immigrants come here and leave everything behind.

also, with all the news on the immigration front, especially in light of the childhood separation issues, plenty of tweets from members of congress met past 24 hours about the administration's actions and also defending the president. a white house democrat in the senate criticizing the president saying first we are going after the stock tickets a must we get our walls, now it is we are taking kids away from their parents a message our wall. enough with the political .ostagetaking already ted deutch, a democrat from florida tweeting about the president, to it is the democrats fault when it comes to the childhood separation issue.

he says 230 five republicans in the house, 51 in the senate, let's be clear about something, our current immigration crisis is it about democrats. a couple of treats from roger williams, republican from texas saying by definition, illegal immigrants are criminals. hhs is working hard to find a parent, relative or foster home to care for these children. house democrats have repeatedly shot down immigration reform attempts that would fix the separation of children from their parents. the department of justice is enforcing the laws that are in place right now. my colleagues and i desperately want to change the immigration system, but we cannot do it without democrats on board. those are just a few tweets on the immigration front this week.

you a few other headlines this morning that americans are waking up to around the country. this is the front page of the washington post. bove the fold here, stories focusing on paul manafort. the federal judge ordering him to jail on friday over charges that he tampered with witnesses. the judge said his conduct allegedly conspiring to contact witnesses in the case in an effort to get them to lie to investigators left her little choice. the other story on the front page focusing on paul manafort's lowoting that he -- new noting that he owned properties and spent money on oriental rugs and tailored suits, and raise the new position of power in trump administration.

on friday, ordered by a federal judge to await trial in jail, paul manafort reached a new low. this is the lead story in the washington post today. beijing retaliating against planned u.s. tariffs by targeting high-value american exports including cars, fruits, and crude oil. shortly after the president unveiled plans friday to impose tariffs on $50 billion of chinese products, china announced it would have penalties on u.s. goods of the same value. china expanded the list of products that would be exposed to tariffs to over 600 goods. we will certainly be talking more about the trade issue in upcoming segments. we are going to be talking about the trade relationship between the united states and canada

coming up in about 10 minutes. stories.n, taking your we want to hear your immigration story. caller: i come here over to 10 years, over 30 years. when i come in 1988 and i bring my two little boys, 14 years old, 13 years old. old, one threers years old. have the oldest one who underur is [indiscernible] he had a problem with his girlfriend. and havee scared him

them spend 15 days and then sent him home. up, we go pick them [indiscernible] was he an american citizen? citizen, but not a he has a residence card. when you brighter children to the united states back in 1988, did you come through a legal process? visa.: yeah, i come with three come in with lisa. host: you are a citizen now? caller: yet, in 1989. why didn't host: your children

become citizens? caller: i didn't know that. , 2004.ve a resident i have six kids here. all live here in florida. i don't have no family in haiti now. now, they say he is illegal and are trying to send him home to haiti. now, he doesn't know nobody in haiti. for right now, he is in jail. allpreciate to see how you this stuff now. host: what do you think is going to happen to him when he goes back to, did you say haiti or

bahamas? he said not the bahamas because he is not been there in four years. haiti, no good. he don't know nobody. he don't know where to go. that makes me afraid. he was born in haiti, don't know nobody and nowhere to go. host: thanks for sharing your story this morning. good morning. story wanted to share my about being in the united states of america. i came here with my wife to study in 2001. school in graduate connecticut.

we left after graduating and went to the bahamas and worked for like four years. while we were working, my wife was recruited because she had a masters degree in math to teach math in the states. i was allowed to return with her on her h-1b lisa. -- visa i was unable to work for three years. . i also have a masters degree. when they came back, we could've lived under one salary, but we had also saved our money and came it was like $70,000 in cash from investments and from our savings. we worked struggling. i was unable to work for three years. i had to wait three years to get a permit to work. it was the most humiliating time in my life. i was so embarrassed as a man to get up in the mornings and not have something to -- i would get

up at the mornings sometimes and put on my shirt like i was going to work and go to the library and read books all day. i wasn't able to work. my wife didn't want me to work in another country because we wanted to keep the marriage solid. the long short of it is that after three years, i finally got a work permit. in february, i went and they were telling me i was overqualified. i'm not going to stay with the company. i went to ups. that was the only place where they said we can give you a chance. i was literally loading trucks with a masters degree. it was the hardest work i've ever done in my life. i would volunteer to watch the tracks and make extra money. it was so rewarding.i would get, night and be so brutally tired. is a ig short of it

eventually got some job offers after a short while. i'm now working with a big company in south florida. living pretty comfortably. i don't believe in illegal immigration. i hate illegal immigration. however, we must realize as americans, attacking immigrants alone is not going to resolve the immigration problems we have. americans are the ones who are hiring these illegal immigrants. if we are not prosecuting the americans who hire people illegally, people are going to continue to come to this country and work. i think it is wrong to come to the country illegally. and demand that you have to get the right to go to school or whatever. i think they are entitled to that because we allow the system to percolate and get to the point where people are living here for 20 years are 18 years or most of their lives. what are they supposed to do?

it makes no sense. to say i am really appreciative of the opportunities i've had. as americans, we need to recognize that this is becoming an aging population. without immigration, we're not going to be able to build the lifestyles of those people who are going into retirement. we need to replenish the workforce. we need to be strategic about who comes into the country. this whole thing about separating families and notoiting people, is just the way we are going to resolve the immigration problem. give people the opportunity to come and work. do jobs americans don't want to do and then they can return home. host: thanks for the call this morning. time for just a few more calls.

good morning. i have been married for over 30 years to a manned, a wonderful person from haiti. i have not heard anybody talk about the corruption in these countries, the reason why they have to leave. i just feel the united states is a big part of all this corruption. this is the reason why they migrate to the united states. what they are doing to the children and the mothers, i think it is horrible. also, somebody hit on what i was going to say, a lot of these companies that hire immigrants without working papers is corporate companies that know that they can pay lower wages. this happened to my husband. after working 18 years, they let go of all the senior staff and kept the people my husband was training, and let him go. they started him at nine dollars

minimum wage, whatever it was. if they do not want them in this country, stop the corruption and violence in these other countries. i have been to haiti several times. there is no opportunity there. the people work so hard. host: our last caller in this , that is about 15 of the stories of 43.7 million total immigrants living in this country. up next, we will be joined by ipsos president of public affairs cliff young to talk about new polling and trade relations. theur weekly spotlight on magazine series, we will talk to world magazine editor in chief about the status and puerto rico. marvin olasky will be joining us. ♪

>> sunday night on afterwords, bill press talks about his book "from the left, a life in the crossfire." he is interviewed by mona chair and. >> who was one of the most record -- persuasive guests? >> john mccain. >> on what subject? >> just about everything. i admire him because he is somewhat of a maverick and i consider myself somewhat of a maverick. he was also brutally honest, willing to take on his own

party. i read a book critical of barack obama, which i got a lot of cracked for -- crap for from my federal -- fellow democrats. john mccain felt his party was not living up to what he believed the republican party was supposed to be, he would say so. >> 9:00 p.m. eastern on sunday on c-span's book tv. sunday on american artifacts on the library of congress exhibit on the centennial of world war i, which showcases ideas about the war. >> the idea of interpreting to the war through labor, dutch contributing to the war through labor, the idea of growing your own food so as to conserve larger quantities for the war effort, this is by mabel w

right, the brother -- the sister of frank lloyd wright. you see herels food conservation. i know we make everything out of corn today, but back then we didn't so this was kind of new. in world war ii, we were rationed. the government stepped in and rationed. during world war i, hoover believed if you encourage people to act correctly they would do it themselves. >> what american artifacts on sunday at 6:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span3. "washington journal" continues. host: cliff young joins us now for a discussion on nafta and u.s.-canada relations. he serves as president of ipso'' public affairs, and some people

may be more familiar with your work than the name of your organization. guest: ipsos is a made-up name, but we are a global market research and polling firm. we are really measuring the polls of public opinion everywhere. specifically in the u.s. and canada, which we will look at the data today. host: how does ipsos make money off its polling? andt: we work with media make money from media, with government, with the private sector, so when whole host of different stakeholders. some of it is more related to communications and other is more related to public policy. we work with a whole host of different cities. host: among the topics you focused, u.s.-canada relations and nafta. why? guest: because it is in the news, and more importantly, we are interested in public opinion and its relationship to leaders.

when administrations like the trump administration is taking a new course where it is really pushing back on traditional allies in terms of economic relations and the like, if we want to understand, where does public opinion fall in respect to this initiative and in respect to the trump administration? we also havenough, a poll from canada as well so we will be able to compare. host: how do canadians feel about nafta? guest: historically over the last 25 years, they supported. the majority supports it in the united states as well as canada. 70% of americans are in favor of nafta. 86% of canadians. broad-based support in abstract, in theory. you have to peel away the onion and go down deep, and what you find is a little weaker support when you ask people about its actual benefits.

only 54% of canadians believe nafta is benefiting them and 42% of americans. in abstract and theory, nafta is great, but we are not seeing the concrete benefit. there's a very interesting story . that 42% is highly variable. there is very partisan views. 62% of democrats believe nafta benefits them. republicans. that has changed over the last 25 years. host: for visual learners, here's is the chart showing the breakdown among party lines on whether nafta is beneficial. 62% of democrats, 26% of republicans. 38% of independents saying it is beneficial. talk about the changes over time. why does it seem to be going up among democrats and why the big dip in 2014 among republicans? guest: as we understand

historically speaking, republicans have always been in favor of free trade. there was always a majority of republicans in favor of nafta, but even predating the 2016 election, kind of an america first sentiment has crystallized with the republican base. there is a deep-seated distrust of institutions in general, including nafta, and that is what we are seeing. electionme of the 2016 , you have a strong america first focus. the inversion of the data is exactly that. if we want to step back and think of it, trump is being aligned with his base. pushingolicy he is internally in the united states and abroad, they are policies that align with his base. host: we are talking with cliff long -- chris young. -- cliff young.

you want to talk about nafta and trade issues how you can do so this morning. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. .ndependents, (202) 748-8002 if you are out of the country, say in canada and want to join the discussion, we have a separate line, (202) 748-8003. how do americans and canadians perceive the heated exchange? guest: very heated and almost unprecedented when you think about the relationship between canada and the united states. there is broad-based understanding that this row during the dust between the two leaders will have lasting effect the relationship. 82% of canadians think that and 71% of americans. there is worry on both sides of

the border about this conflict. the question is, how do they see the relative performance of their leaders? both canadians -- interestingly enough, canadians and americans approve of how trudeau is handling the situation. 72% of canadians, 52% of americans. when it comes to donald trump, a very different view. host: a couple of headlines about those tensions, bringing up those war of words. g7 tensions cloud trade outlook. looking at the canadian perspective, trudeau faces loss of goodwill if u.s. puts duties on canadian cars. they get into some of the polling as well on justin trudeau in the wake of that exchange. what is the value of polling about people's feeling about a specific news event? guest: what we really are looking for is to what extent our government's and

politician's parties aligned with the public? to they pushing rhetoric make public opinion where it is, or are they doing something at variance? if you are at variance and not aligned with public opinion, you may get along with things in the short term but in the long term you have trouble pushing forward your agenda. the key question was, can we understand the trump administration's behavior in respect to public opinion? are they aligned with that? yes and no. no, generally speaking, americans are fearful of the row existing now between canada and the united states. it is one of our biggest allies. when you look at republicans, republicans are much more america first orientation, much less likely to support free trade or fair trade.

he is aligned with his base when it comes to the conflict with canada and more generally with the large economic players in the world. with the answer to those same questions for justin trudeau and the canadian population? .uest: they are aligned as well they support justin trudeau and do not want to be pushed around. there is broad-based support for trudeau on the canadian side and the american side. 72% of canadians agree with how justin trudeau is handling the job. 57% of americans. ise again, in the details the changing story because when you look more specifically, only 14% of canadians agree with how trump is handling the job in respect to the row. .0% of americans the qualification is 78% of republicans agree with how president trump is handling the job. the answer is yes and no.

now in the sense that overall americans are worried, but more specifically, yes, trump is aligned with his base. host: here are some of the details about the poll we have been talking about conducted on june 13 and 14th among 1005 .dults in america 18 plus a parallel study also conducted in canada among roughly 1001 canadian adult. where can viewers go to see this poll? guest: they can go to our website, and we will be posting it on twitter after our talk. host: ipsos.com. talk about the difference between margin of error and credibility intervals, since we have some time to break down. can you talk about a credibility intervals in this poll? not a term i have heard before. guest: we typically and historically have always used "margin of error." we use something slightly

different from a different family of statistics, the same sort of concept. ultimately, it is a function of how we select respondents. in telephone and face-to-face surveys, we randomize how we select people out of a bucket of balls. that is where reuse margin of error. -- online surveys, we do not it is not technically correct to use a margin of error to talk about precision. we take from another family of statistics called the credibility interval. conceptually speaking, it is the same thing. host: cliff young, a self-described polling junkie with us for the next 20 minutes, taking your calls about this poll on u.s.-canada relations. dan is up first from tucson, arizona, republican. caller: thank you for taking my call. is,roblem with nafta

supposedly we are supposed to be getting this stuff less expensive. you are not paying these people to make this stuff as much as we do in america. but the quality of the material we are getting, back in my day, a dishwasher would last 3, 4, 5, 6 years. i am still taking dishwashers out that last forever. nowadays, you cannot get a dishwasher that last for a year. that is what i have got to say. .ost: thanks for the comments anything you want to pick up on? guest: generally speaking, both americans and canadians see that products in terms of coming from the two countries in a relative sense is quite high, especially relative to china and other countries. to the point more specifically -- and this is something we found in this poll and over the last 10 years -- the devil is in the details.

broad-based support for nafta, that many people question, how has it benefited me and my family and those i know? as a concrete, specific question and often people do not have concrete, specific answers so therefore on attenuated support for nafta. concretee is the results, 42% of americans say nafta has benefited the united states, 25% saying it hurt the united states and 15% saying it had no impact. about 18% do not know or are not responding to that question. morgan is in east brunswick, new jersey, an independent. caller: i think part of the problem lies not so much in what president trump is doing right now, but i think it goes back historically to what congress has done. whether you are a democrat, republican, or independent, one

of the problems we have politically which is very serious is we have elected officials in congress that of been there almost for lifetime, whether it is grassley on the republican side or chuck schumer or mitch mcconnell. whether they are good guys are bad guys, whether you think they are dirty, they have been in 45, 48 years. they do not really represent the average american. i think nafta has done a great deal. i have relatives in canada. i think it is a program. take a look at what the republicans did to obamacare. a tried to eliminate it and strip it. thisare changing a lot of country that will not benefit the average american, and it is unfortunate. i am 80 years old and i have been a student of american political history. i think we are at difficult and

dangerous times, and the reason i say that, you have to study the versailles's treaty dish versailles treaty. -- versailles treaty. look what happened there, and look what is happening here. all of these comments about fake news, about mueller, this is very frightening. i am glad that c-span has been doing what they doing -- what they are doing. keep up the good work. host: anything you wanted to pick up on? guest: he is pointing out a phenomena that we are not just seeing in the united states, but around the world. we have seen over the last four to five years a rise of antiestablishment sentiment, support for outsider candidates. trump represents that and why is that the case? typically, incumbency is king. the incumbents have an advantage over nonincumbent, and people

are frustrated because they do not see change. what we see in the united states is what we are seeing in europe -- we can take brexit as an example. an election to have in mexico where an outside candidate is likely to win, and the same for brazil. this is a global phenomenon. public opinion is frustrated at large and they are not saying how their daily lives are being improved by the political order as is. we can understand trump and america first in that context. host: you mentioned mexico. this poll focusing on the united states and canada, have you conducted the same kind of poll in mexico? guest: for this iteration, we did not include mexico but we have in the past, with similar results. mexicans are in favor of nafta in general. , they are less likely to believe they benefit from it directly, less than americans and canadians.

i am not seen concrete things in my hands, but in principle i agree with the concept of nafta. that is as mexicans are much more in favor and supportive of nafta and the relationship. conway, --o is in republican. caller: we just had five children burned to death in missouri and a mother injured. what i want to talk about is the product coming in here from china, like the heaters, the portable heaters. i can plug one in while i'm taking a shower in the wintertime and by the time i get out, that court is so hot you can hard -- core is so hard you can -- hot you can hardly get a hold of it. there is no inspection on this product coming in. we are buying trash. there is no warranty on anything. these productse

coming from canada? caller: no, this product is coming from canada -- china. host: do you trust products from canada? caller: i do. i had a plymouth made in canada. it is like 21 years old. i have never had any province with it. i do not have any problem with canada. the shipping in from china, i have two pages of product that is dangerous. i called my senator and talked to one of her aides, and he said, would you send me those two pages you have? i said, that is your job. i am just telling you, our congressman is failing us. as theringing up china lead story on the front page of "the wall street journal" about china striking back at terrace as the trade -- tariffs as the trade war looms. guest: my response to that?

i would say china is much more of a softball than canada. people have a very positive view towards canada. they believe its products are high-quality products like the united states. china is a different story. there is a much more negative view of china among americans, and an understanding the quality of products from china are inferior to those of the united states and europe and our closer allies. on the one hand, yes, there is greater support for conflict with china then there is with canada in public opinion. more specifically, there is generally broad-based support for regulation, regulation of products, making sure inspections are done and so, any sort of policies that would align with that, americans would be in support of. todd isttle elm, texas, a republican. caller: the products that are

being made in mexico, for one thing, you have for example a lot of kenmore stuff, you have to take out a basic warranty to make sure that they keep running because they will break down. i have had the experience. nafta in itself is just a minute thing compared to the wto. if you read wto, you will find out that all of our congress, governors, mayors, anybody associated with a fate -- state, federal, or local government is exempt, but the worker that retires after 30 years of tenure in his minimum age -- and is minimum age 55 will have money taken out of their entire retirement, and they call that the lump sum according to the wto uruguay. john, i hope you are listening. i hope this is a complete show,

and it will take about a month, and pick up a copy. you can go online and do it, of the uruguay round agreements and you will see what i'm telling you. this gentleman here with you, mr. young, when they retire after 30 years, if they are not affiliated with the government or work for the government, they are going to have a large sum of money. make, way, the more you the more they are going to take off the top. it is not tax-deductible. host: to bring it back to the poll we are talking about, the poll found 71% of americans .upport nafta, 29% oppose let me ask your opinion on polls. do you trust polls? caller: no, absolutely. polls are for the most part a synopsis of a minute category for where they ask people about this or that, and it is only a

small amount of group. when you are talking about somewhere in the neighborhood of 35 million people in the united states and growing, no, those polls, whether it is for this type of thing we are talking about today on the show or whether we are talking about politics, polls are irrelevant. host: what do you say to that? guest: let's set aside the quality of polls, and we will come back to that. what we can say is that decision-makers, both political and economic, use them all the time. politicians, governments, companies want to make sure they are aligned with it. he did not want to be at variance with public opinion -- they do not want to be at variance with public opinion. when it comes to us taking only a small sample of the population , it would be cost prohibitive to interview everyone every time we do a poll, so we take a sample. that is going to the

technicalities of how you select a sample, think of how we take your blood. doctors do not take all of your blood out to run tests. they took a small sample. that is exactly what we do with a poll. it is a small sample of the general population, which gives a good idea of where public opinion is. host: certainly after the 2016 election and people's trust in polls, the ipsos forecast gave hillary clinton a five-point national lead, 44 percent to 39% among likely voters and a 90% chance of winning the election. what is your thought on what happened? guest: first and foremost, there was a slight bias, not just our poll but polls in general. she won the popular vote by 2%. we said 5%. that was in the margin of error. polls erred -- all

towards hillary? host: why? guest: we were using a hammer and a screwdriver so most of our resources are being allocated toward national polls. in the united states, only five, 6, 7 swing states matter. ohio is where we made our biggest error. first and foremost, we should have been pulling much more in the swing state specifically. the other thing as, and we were talking about the rise of antiestablishment sentiment, it is changing politics in general. we have a new emergent political demographic group. aree, non-urban individuals beginning to vote more in unison that in the past, and all polls represented in 2016, looking forward, we are ensuring that we are representing them. if we did when the correct proportions, we

would be much closer. host: do you think in the next elections we will have closer polling? guest: i think so. the historic average, polling gets the elections right about 85% of the time. we were off a few points. we were off a few points in the obama election cycles as well, but we were on the right side of the fence. i feel fairly comfortable with polls. we have a very high bar. any time something goes wrong, the industry in general and ipsos specifically reflects a lot. we improve our method and move forward. host: what do you fear is the biggest blind spot for polling? guest: i think it is the same thing. we are in a new political time, and age of uncertainty. political calculus of the past is not the political calculus of today. those sorts of changes in human behavior make it difficult for

the method they used to capture and understand human behavior and public opinion. have to be much more doubtful and uncertain about our method. have to do a better job of triangulating from multiple sources, but that is our challenge, that politics is changing and our method has to change. host: time for a couple more --s with cliff young of ipsos. camille is in pennsylvania, line for independents. caller: good morning. i have a question for mr. young. i need to know what the , whattion percentages are part of the population is he categorizing this representative of the country and the electorate? where are the numbers, the actual numbers? i have the percentages there that i was looking at on this chart, but i see no actual

participants in these surveys, numbers that you have got to display. could you answer that? foremost, thisd is a poll that is representative of the u.s. population by demographics, by region, by age, by gender, by education, by urban/nonurban. we are not looking at photos or registered voters. we are looking at the general population 18 plus. we have a full or top line on our website with all the breakdowns of the numbers. we will go into more specifics. i think she is saying she does not want just the percentages, but the breakdown of the group numbers from our poll. that is all online. these go there to check it out. host: ipsos.com, cliff young, appreciate your time. guest: thank you. host: up next on "washington

journal," it is open phones. any public policy issue you want to talk about, the phone lines are yours to do it. you can start calling in as we show you this week's newsmakers interview, or a clip, the top democrat, congressman jerrold nadler joined us. when of the topics he discussed was impeachment of president trump. >> democrats win the majority in the house, you will be the chairman of the committee with oversight over impeachment. when he won that spot, there were a number of stories written with this is the headline that would, -- headline, this is the man that would oversee impeachment. what are you telling them heading into the election and preparing for next year, about your stance on impeachment and plans at this point? >> i think it is much too early to determine whether there ought to be impeachment proceedings

are not. the first thing is, wait for the molar investigation -- mueller investigation and see what he finds. participate innt a criminal conspiracy with the russians to upset and election or didn't he? that is one of the key questions. what about obstruction of justice? it is much too early to answer those questions. we have to see what the evidence is and what the special counsel finds. i have also said -- and i said this 20 years ago during the clinton administration -- it would be very harmful to the country to pursue an impeachment if the case were not so overwhelming and the evidence so overwhelming that by the end of the impeachment proceeding, an appreciable fraction, not necessarily a majority, but an appreciable fraction of people

who voted for the president would agree you had to do it. if you did it on a partisan basis, besides the fact that obviously you need 67 votes in the senate, but putting that side -- aside, you tear the country apart. you have 20 years of recriminations of people saying, you did not win the election, you stole it. that is only if the case is so overwhelming and the evidence is so strong that you get an appreciable fraction of the people who voted for trump to agree that you really had to do that. >> "washington journal" continues. host: open phones on "washington journal." any public policy issue you want to talk about, give us a call. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000.

independents, (202) 748-8002. we spent our first hour talking about the immigration issue. it is certainly making plenty of front pages. here is two pages from texas. fortown shelter set toigrant children to hold up 140 kids and pregnant teenagers. from the front page of "the el paso times," the bottom of the page talks about president trump "sowing confusion on immigration . the discussion yesterday about the package of immigration reforms that would be moot next week by house republicans, or sent to the house for comes some confusion yesterday about which of those bills president trump with support. the timeline for votes on those immigration overhaul proposals uncleared this point. there is some discussion about possibly having a vote next week

but it may be moot in the wake of what happened yesterday. alicia is up in columbia, maryland, independent. caller: good morning, john. nice to see you. good morning, america. what happened to the guy that was on there? host: cliff young from polling, we jussaid gdbye to him. polling, we just said goodbye to him. caller: i wanted to talk about what you were talking about. i am sorry, i get these pauses. host: that is ok. just talk through your phone. trade, anyway, with the i think one of the problems we have is all these companies have emerged and they have become and they doities,

not give consideration to the buyers. we are not getting the quality of things that we used to make here. why can't we make these things here anymore? you go to some store and all you get is "made in china." and the scissors do not work. every boards are painted ards are painted and make your hands all red, just item after item. they are not quality. host: what countries do you trust when it comes to the quality of products? caller: thank you. host: that is alicia in columbia, maryland. on the issue of nafta, which was the ipsos poll we were

discussing, mylan writes in -- i thought president trump is going to end nafta. on the topic of polling, davy crockett writes -- more useless polls, which i doubt are even true. we talked about trust in polls in that segment. be available on our website very soon, c-span.org. greg is in white plains, michigan, republican. caller: thank you for taking my call. i grew up outside detroit. most of my friends are democrats. the are 100% against nafta. i do not know where this guy took these polls from. can you hear me? host: yes. you doubt that number? i think it was 71%, they found in their survey, of americans who support nafta. caller: i do not think that is

even close to being true. i do not know anybody. historically they have been against nafta. my girlfriend works for general getss, and we get -- she the trucks in from mexico. the trucks are like garbage inside them. the quality and just the packing is trashy. as far as the polls, i think something you want to think about, there is so much hatred towards trump that people who were against nafta will be for nafta because he is trying to do something about nafta. host: you think it is anything that trump is against, those who are against him will be for? caller: exactly. not everybody. there are people that have to does not affect. i worked for an environmental company.

we had someone come out about the deconstruction of auto plants. i probably walked off of 30 or 40 plants since nafta. all of the plants start pulling up their slabs and the new plants are being built in mexico. host: john is in fairfax, virginia, democrat. what is on your mind? caller: good morning. three quick ideas. maybe people who answer the phone to check out callers should check out the quality of the call so that we do not get callers we cannot understand. second, i think you should maybe like, tellly program me something i don't know where

callers will bring up an issue, a person that is important for people to know about but is not widely known. it is an editorial invention that a man who came to the united states as a three-year-old was deported to mexico, had his throat slit, and people do not know that. third, there was a caller monday who said that obama sent aliens iran.n -- billions to it is only because people watch fox news. you need to correct people who are saying stuff that is not true. you need to say, no, that is not a known fact. iran was theirto money that had been withheld. i appreciate you listening. host: margaret, lexington, kentucky, democrat. caller: yes, when i wanted to

discuss was concerning the polling. as long as the sample is a random sample, they will be pretty accurate. host: margaret, you are going in and out, but i think we got your point. gilbert from birmingham, alabama, on the line for independents. caller: today, the topic of concern has really been in mind to the american public. as a former united steelworkers employee, i remember in the carter administration where he brought forth a thing called the trade readjustment act, if you can remember. paid for having to suffer. now, when chuck schumer come

together with donald trump on anything, it has got to be something pertinent about it. in yesterday's new york times, they said even chuck schumer said that china was our bigge economic enemy. they said in that same "new york times" article that made in china 2025 plan, that is only about seven years from now, and that we as a nation -- i am an independent -- if we as a nation do not come together now and try to stop china with this 2025 plan, made in china, everybody is going to have garbage and trash. host: how do we stop that? do you think tariffs are a way to do that? caller: exactly, whatever it takes. nafta from years, pleasant -- president clinton and before barack obama left the office, he wanted to bring this transportation -- transpacific

partnership in. are partially to blame for conditions that happen to america. what i say is go ahead with the tariffs. host: that is gilbert in alabama. speaking of the tariffs, the editorial board of "the wall street journal" talking about those tariffs. "the new tariffs are in response to the chinese intellectual property theft and other unfair trade practices. these are important to address, but the u.s. tariff threat isn't making china budge and they are hurting americans in the bargain. the u.s. economy is humming amid tax reform and deregulation, and that is so far overwhelming the damage for mr. trump's in symbian it this incipient tariff war. he better hope they are as easy to win as he claims." caller: yes, i want to to

comment on nafta. as well as yesterday morning's topic of the fbi. as far as nafta goes, i am all for free trade -- i am sorry, fair trade, not free trade. with all the jobs that have been shipped to mexico, i still don't understand why we are getting all the illegals coming across. there ought to be plenty of jobs for them in mexico. yesterday's topic on the fbi, my theion of that is that agency is rotten from the top to the bottom. if trump can do anything, i equallike to see fair and application of the law. thank you. host: karo, oxford, massachusetts, line for democrats. caller: good morning.

thank you for c-span. i try to watch her program is much as possible. i do not get to see the whole thing more often than not. have you had a guest talking about yemen and what we are doing in yemen lately? i think that is a big deal. we are causing a humanitarian crisis. , ande arming the saudis they are destroying the yemeni society. i think that is a big deal. wonderingi was just if you know. i cannot stand donald trump, i never could, but i think it is a good thing that he talked with kim jong-un. it is a step in the right direction. i also think is a distraction. people don't realize what is

going on in other parts of the world, and i thought maybe, i was just wondering -- maybe i missed it and maybe you did talk about the yemeni crisis. coveredt a topic we this week, but always appreciate suggestions. thanks for the call. david is in texas, line for republicans. say,r: i was just going to to me, fair trade should be simple. whatever tariff you have on our products, we put the same on their products. it would be pretty simple. have beenn, we selective with our immigration laws that people just keep coming. i think the main point, withholding them or not letting him in his going to send the message that we will uphold our laws. you are not going to get in. that is all i got to say.

host: morton is in boston, massachusetts, independent. caller: good morning. thanks for your show. it is always interesting. can you hear me? host: yes, go a caller: i kind of agree with many of your callers that trade should be fair, not free. , as far ashing immigration goes, we talk about immigration i never heard -- here the word "illegal" used enough with immigration. "migrant" butlike they never use "illegal." some of the statistics you are running on your boards, 56% were from mexico who are here illegally. there is nothing mentioned about white, western europe. we have had a legal system that is broken.

we haven't allowed western europeans in since 1965. it is roughly about 15% that comes from western europe, which is an entire continent. host: so you would like to see more illegal immigration from western europe? years ofe have had 50 roughly 17% coming from western europe, and roughly 83% coming from the rest of the world. -- i understand why that was done in the early 1960's, mid-1960's, to try to rebid -- rebalance things. we have had a change. all of your callers are calling from other parts of the world, and that is fine. system.just the legal one of your callers said that we need to really change the entire immigration system, and i agree with that. i think congress has failed the american people.

the presidents of the united states should not be dealing with this. daca is something that obama was dealing with and passed it along to trump. this really should be done in congress. congress should change our immigration system. as far as our illegal immigration system goes, if we do not maintain our borders, we are going to lose our country. host: morton in massachusetts. you mentioned daca. yesterday was the sixth anniversary of the creation of the daca program. i want to keep you up-to-date on other stories we have talked about on this program. a few updates in today's programs -- papers. the neighbor of rand paul was sentenced to 30 days in jail after pleading guilty to assault. the attack was fueled by irritation over a pile of debris.

the neighbor was also sentenced to one year probation and a $10,000 fine. in a statement, senator paul said he believed the conviction was appropriate and he hoped it would deter his nature -- neighbor from future violence. then to "the wall street a lengthy piece on the relationship between president trump in his personal lawyer. trump-cohen had a rocky past, the picture showing president trump in new hampshire with michael cohen by his side in 2011. one other story for you, an interesting story out of the centers -- out of the national institute for health. they announced on friday they are canceling a mammoth study of moderate drinking after germany -- determining that officials compromised the

research by soliciting money from companies to underwrite the effort. one hundredf the million dollars study without not be trusted because of the secretive way in which staff at an institute under nah met with major liquor companies, talk to the study being commissioned. recently with drew its $15.4 million contribution of the $20 million that the national institute of alcohol abuse and alcoholism was supposed to commit. $4 million had been spent. that is the story in "the washington post." wanda's in chico, california, line for republicans. good morning. caller: i would like to ask the previous caller, who is such an

expert on fox news, probably never watches fox news, he said that fox news viewers did not know that this was the ron -- returnedoney that obama to iran. all of the iran money is being used to sponsor terrorism over the middle east, so maybe he is not such an expert after all. host: john is in liverpool, new york, democrat. caller: how are you doing? i want to start by saying i'm a democrat. i am pro-labor. on everything up and down the democratic platform. except for one thing, and i am very strong on this, i completely agree with the republicans on immigration.

with half a brain and some common sense knows that everyone wants to come to america. it is the greatest country on earth. you simply cannot have all the downtrodden people in the world for the abuse people coming to america. the country will go, will become so overcrowded you do not have the money to pay for these people. i read the other day that one woman, in this policy if someone gets in, all their family members can get income is ridiculous. wanted to get she her grandmother and grandfather in from the philippines. the grandmother is in a wheelchair and the grandfather is blind. they have not paid any money into our system. they are going to come in to our country and bankrupted. as far as immigration is concerned, i am a democrat who is totally republican on immigration. host: i did want to note that this weekend, our c-span cities

tour continues exploring the american story as book tv and american history tv travel to new orleans. the city's history and literary life coming up at noon today on book tv. all our programs from the city will air together. cody roberts, author of "who do and power," -- "voodoo and power." >> marie newman on is probably the most fave -- most famous voodoo queen in new orleans. voodoo is viewed overwhelmingly with a negative lens in new orleans' history, for all us the entirety of its history. at the end of the 19th century, the negative stigma around voodoo was so pronounced that when she died and they do

obituaries for her, her daughters go out of their way to disassociate her from voodoo altogether, and will not admit to any practice. th identify her as a devout catholic and do not want to say anything or speak at all about voodoo. that is very characteristic of the way voodoo is treated for most of its history. everybody has just accepted this cultural landscape where all things black and african are negative. a lot of the charge against voodoo, a lot of the critiques of it has to do with this notion that voodoo is backward and voodoo is savage, and that the presence of voodoo degrades the local population, specifically the local white population although african americans do not want to be associated either for that same reason. a lot of the per -- prosecution of voodoo tactician is has to do with the racially thing -- ializinged in of -- rac

of the tradition. host: make sure to tune in this weekend, but tv and american history tv. watch video of new orleans and all of the cities we visited on our c-span cities tour at c-span.org/cities tour. back to our phone calls and open phones. pat is waiting in baltimore, maryland. what do you want to talk about? caller: i heard a gentleman: and he was talking about having europeans -- gentleman called in and he was talking about having europeans come in. they only represent 17% of the world population and 83% is the other people. it used to be 20% and now it is declining. according to a study, the sperm of the white male is poor quality and diminishing so you

are not having that many children. host: waiting in delta honor, florida, the line for reppo -- delta on a, florida, --deltona, florida. caller: i would like to know the credibility of -- and they keep saying they want to impeach our president. the burn center is concerned, he never took anyone job and then bang, he became a mayor. toce then, he is just trying four people. this man never took a job at all in his life. basically, he is a loser. unfortunately, they are also democrats on the republican side. the second thing, as iranian

born, i have been away since i was five years old, the money iranobama gave to a ron -- , very secretly he gave it to them. they spent it on themselves and their family, and most of it went out of iran to palestine and lebanon and iraq. host: where do you go to find out how this money was used? what new sourced you go to? caller: i know very well, because nobody knew until president trump came up and exposed that. people did not know. made iran 2, 3 times. host: david is in baldwin place, new york, an independent. caller: as any ryan american

professor, i totally agree with the previous caller. professor, ierican totally agree with the previous caller. if we isolate the population that is the lackeys and linchpin of the government that has failed its own people as well as the region, this would be the beginning of a fundamental paradigm shift for islamic reformation, which makes the religion personal and as a igiositynd not as a rel platform to exploit the people and collect money and wealth and power for the few. therefore, we have to deploy and enforce smart sanctions as best as possible, to those 100,000, while empowering the 80 million to be able to reestablish a secure, secular, sovereign, an independent and dignified iran

as it has been for centuries and millennia. this nation has no quarrel whatsoever with the nation of israel. government had elements of that from all sides that really get in the way of the people to be able to have a dignified living on this planet. thank you. that was our last call in this open phones segment for "washington journal." marvin olaskye's" joins us to discuss his latest piece on puerto rico's recovery efforts, and then stat news' lev facher discusses congressional action. ♪ on c-span,kend today, 10:00 a.m. eastern, justice and homeland security

officials testify on foreign interference in the elections. sunday at 10:30 a.m., highlights from the u.s.-north rea summit between president trump and north korean leader kim jong -un. on booktv, c-span2, former house speaker newt gingrich talks about his book. mtv'sp.m. on sunday, i host francesca ramsey talks about her book "well, that quickly." on "lectures in history," examining westward expansion and taking over native american lanphier sunday at 4:00 p.m. eastern on "reel america," the a44 film "a memphis belle:

story of a flying fortress," completing bombings in europe without being shot down. watch the c-span networks this weekend. >> "washington journal continues. host: each saturday on the "washington journal, we take time to focus on a recent magazine feature. segment comes from "world magazine," where editor in chief marvin olasky talks about an island in crisis. "san juan smack down." for reviewers who have not picked it up, what is "magazine," what is your mission? covers"world magazine" all kinds of stuff, politics, economics, and we have reporters all over the world.

our perspective is a difficult perspective. world, how ite works, why it works them and we try to follow what he teaches us in the bible. double-page spread here, "island in crisis," pictures from san juan. when did you travel to puerto rico for this story? guest: most recently in march. host: and where did you go? and i reliedan, upon the associated press coverage for what is going on. host: you write in the article " that rebuilding the economy and locals have clashed. what are the perspectives? guest: one perspective is to send a month money there and hope that the commonwealth government uses it well. other perspective is to work with the oversight board, the control board is sometimes washington set up,

which tries to look at where the money is going, try to assess why puerto rico is now $125 tolion in debt, and tries basically get the government working in an efficient way rather than in what is often a corrupt way. host: who is on that control board, and how much power does it have over puerto rico and the puerto rican government? a variety of economists, legal experts, and others appointed both by the obama administration, by congress, how much power it has is very much in dispute. according to the congressional legislation, it has a lot of power. it can actually control expenditures. in practice, the governor of puerto rico has pushed back against it. there are debates about its authority, at least as far as the puerto rican government is concerned. host: remind us what puerto

rico's economy was like before hurricane maria. maria, it was not as bad as it had been 10 years ago during the great recession, but it had never recovered, as so many states had done. unemployment, it had people leaving the island, often moving to central florida, the orlando area. had big problems, and you have the government constantly in debt, spending more money than it takes in. there are problems already, and the hurricane exacerbated the problem. how theme points on territory spends its money, you look at financial management of government benefits. walk us through what those have been. rico is a very lovely island with great climate for the most part except during hurricanes and lots of peoplecal interest, and

there want to enjoy the climate. what that is in practice is more mandated vacations than you with the in equivalent companies in the northern united states. more time off. in other words, typically in the united states, it kicks in as far as time and a half, it in after 40 hours of working a week. in puerto rico, it kicks in after eight hours in a day. if one day there is more work in the next day there is not, it does not balance out. you have to pay more for the. there are special christmas bonus is that everybody gets of $600, whether the person has worked efficiently for not it goes on and on. there are a lot of special stipulations that working contracts in puerto rico as mandated by the government that do not exist in the united states. host: what about the financial situation of the setup of the school system in the territory? guest: the school system is

overstaffed for the number of students you have there. the government has announced that it is going to be closing 300 schools, because the population has not been growing. people have been going to florida and so forth, leaving puerto rico. they have also announced that no teachers or administrators will be let off. that is their way of preserving jobs, and that is a good thing to do, but given the number of system, in the school it is over staff right now, and the government does not want to deal with the staffing, again, because of political reasons. there are strong political pressures to try to maintain every job. spiraling further into this debt, which has left puerto rico a bankrupt country at this point, and that is why you have the oversight board. the easy thing to do in the country would be too well, let's theoff the debt, let's have

federal government pay off the debt, but then what do you do with the states, such as jerseynia, illinois, new that are also on a high wire t, heading toward bankruptcy unless they get their finances under control. if you do it for puerto rico, then you do it for the other states, and if so, you have a crescendo of debt and bankruptcy. host: marvin olasky is editor-in-chief of "world ," talking to us this morning as part of our spotlight on magazines feature every saturday on the "washington journal." if you want to join the discussion, republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. a special line for puerto rico residents. (202) 748-8003. inwould be interested hearing your perspective. you talk about the easy

short-term solution, sending billions of dollars to puerto rico. what do you think would be the right solution? what options are there besides doing that? guest: that is a hard one. the rise solution would be to have a very confident government that would realize the need to places,the gulf in some and limit corruption -- as much as any government can -- that is what you really need. short of having a well working government, it is hard to know what to do. have fema that works a lot better than it has. fema has had a pretty bad reputation ever since katrina. once in a while, it does things right for the most part. a whole lot of foresight to suspect that one of these years, puerto rico would

be hit by a really big ofs would beo blown off, unless the whole house will be destroyed by further rain and so forth. to keep out the rain, you need a tarp. great not require any foresight to reposition tens of thousands of tarps there. out that puerto rico had very few will those, so during the crucial days of the rains coming down, you could put the tarps up if you had the tarps, but they were not there. it does not take great foresight to know that you need generators is electricity failed. they were not pre-positioning generators. so on the basis of generators and tarps, fema could have done better. federal officials were ill-prepared to deal with the

hurricanes aftermath, that from last week in the "star tribune," if you want to read it to jack is up first on our line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. the reason i am calling it is this. why is it that puerto rico is having all of these difficulties concerning taking care of their infrastructure> ima retired -- their infrastructure? i am a retired is in air. my ancestors came from germany. companyey have people there to fix that problem yo? it is months and months, and then they want money? somebody mentioned competence, that is an important point.

take a look at the state of texas. their situation, from the ferocity of the hurricane, was worse, but they fix their problem fast, because they know what they are doing as a worked together. this really gets my goat. the leader. host: marvin olasky. , too. it gets my goat there is a lot of corruption in government. last month, water top officials resign, including the chief of staff to the governor. maybe puerto rico is seeing that, maybe late, but better late than never. i think texas has responded better. part of it is pre-positioning supplies, but also an organization and understanding that volunteers are really in here, and we want to help them rather than frustrate them. austin, for example, where i live, has an awesome disaster relief network, where thousands of people from churches have

been trained to help in case of a hurricane and so forth. that type of training probably did not go on in puerto rico. what did go well for some of the church and voluntary associations that came forward, a carrot toss to puerto rico, a catholic organization came up with food supplies. southern baptist relief, salvation army, operation blessing, some of those groups were able to act effectively there with the resources that they had. and iasically struck out, do not know if there is any kinder way to say it. fema has made a mess of it again. host: julie in virginia beach, an independent. good morning. caller: my question is the pharmaceutical companies are there, and i would like to know how many people are wealthy in that area versus the poor in

that area. this is a prime essential of socialism gone amok, because it seems like the government is running everything, like the school systems, too many teachers, not enough kids in the class. you would think they would offer them transfers, or maybe they would just do away with their jobs. i am just curious what is the difference in wealth between how many people are poor and how many people are not. from what i understand when i was down there, it seems like a welfare state. guest: there are some wealthy people. there e a lot of poor people. playing footsie with socialism goes way back in puerto rico, in part imposed on them during the new deal. sent talkoosevelt well to be appointed -- back then, it was an

appointment, not election. of what he tried to do worked out very poorly. it has been that way ever since. congress at times has struggled with very us regulations involved in puerto rico, one point, tax incentives for pharmaceutical companies to move to puerto rico. someday. then those tax incentives ended and a lot of them moved away. puerto rico has been and around five federal government lots of ways, but at the same time, there is a lot of responsibility puerto rico has for not elected electing confident governors and allowing a lot of corruption. orlando, west virginia is next, jim, democrats. good morning. caller: hello. thanks for taking my call. electricity is probably the most important thing these people need. down, soouses was torn put the poor people back to

work. why don't they build a couple put those people to work making the solar panels, and then when you build the houses back, put the solar panels on top of the houses, and also put a wind tunnel factory up. that way you're going to have more storms, but you will be -- your power grid will be less damaged, and also, your regular power grid should be buried in the ground, that with a will not have it on again. thank you for taking my call. guest: i am no expert on varying wires in the ground. it is alsonse, but expensive. sometimes it works, sometimes it does not work. wind, those are useful things to contemplate her it may not be economically rational right now to use those, but that is something you have to move on.

solar panels to get yanked around when there is 175 mile an hour wind. those are things that should be looked at. the power company puerto rico has also been rife with corruption. a lot of these are good ideas. see need to be examined to if they are economic for rational, but even then, they only work with people work hard to get them done and do not skim a lot off the top. host: the story we're focusing on in this week's spotlight on magazines is from "world magazine," island in crisis. marvin olasky wrote the piece. he recently was in san juan, talking about the finances of puerto rico. talk about your experiences. did the people you met in puerto rico want change in the financial management of the country? is there concern that too much tough love for the mainland -- from the man mainland could

exacerbate problems in puerto rico? guest: there is a variety in terms of what people want. in terms of where they live, the city of san juan functions better than places in the countryside, but people want to protect their jobs. that is very natural. i went to one demonstration of teachers at the commonwealth, the legislative center. we have a photo, i believe, of the demonstration, march 19. guest: right. and they are complaining about losing jobs, and teachers obviously do not want to be unemployed. but the school system really is overstaffed. there are a lot of teachers who are great teachers. there are also some who are not particularly confident. they stay on, and that is a problem that a lot of teachers in the united states have, too.

the tendency of teachers is to want to keep their jobs. folksk for the most part, love the island, they are proud of the history, the beaches, the climate -- they say it is a great place to be. they do not want to move to florida for the most part, but a lot of them do so because they realize that the economy is in bad shape, and it does not seem likely to get better. so it is a tough situation for people there, but it still comes down to -- are they going to be that are prepared, are they going to elected officials who do not follow the tradition of corruption? it is in their hands, and the united states, for the most part, outside of puerto rico -- because puerto rico is a commonwealth, part of the united states -- is looked upon as "outside, over there." between theig gap understanding, ok, we are puerto ricans, we are also americans. they just have to deal with it. . think we can help

we cannot do it for them. are going to have to elect better government officials, and they are going to help\ have to hold the accountable. host: we're taking your calls. we want to hear from puerto rico residents, (202) 748-8003, that line, if you want to call in. sheldon is in new york, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i qualify as a resident. i lived in puerto rico for 12 years. mr.just appalled at olasky's ignorance of the history of puerto rico and the problems that beset that island. the people are terrific, and they have been dealt a dirty hands by the united states since 1898 when the united states invaded puerto rico at the

liket of imperialists, teddy roosevelt, admiral main, and others like that. mr. olasky's magazine is a notorious right-wing scrred. he knows very little about the history of puerto rico. puerto rico has elected terrific representatives from the beginning, and from the beginning -- when i say "from the beginning," on the time that the u.s. imposed itself upon puerto rico. puerto ricans have tried to make the best out of the poor situation. host: we want to give mr. olasky a chance to respond. guest: well, first of all, i characterization ofstic "world magazine" as a notorious screed is wrong.

pro-immigration, we want to help refugees, and we want to help the people in puerto rico. i think in some ways the caller was right in the fact that often they had been dealt a dirty hand who try toofficials, re-create the island in their image of more government, basically a socialist understanding. that has hurt enormously. in puerto rico at times has been yanked around by various laws and regulations and so forth that have worked on fairly. at the same time, puerto rico has gotten a certain amount of , andfrom the 50 states puerto rico has often had some special privileges in lots of ways, as far as labor contracts and others. so the federal government giveth, the federal government taketh away.

it is very messy, the situation. i think you will find that people who are liberals, conservatives, all over, agreeing that there are governmental problems within puerto rico itself. it is not a civil solution of either blaming the 50 united states or blaming puerto rico. there is plenty of blame to go around all over the place. certainly in terms of the hurricane, what fema should have done, fema did not do, in terms of repositioning supplies like tarps and generators. at the same time, puerto rico has gotten a lot of help from church groups, catholic groups, and that is something that would not have been accorded otherwise. we try to report accurately what is going on. host: frank is in baltimore, maryland. democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you. this is my first time calling, so i hope i am doing this correctly. my position is that maybe it is

time for puerto rico to become a 51st state. because it seems as if that is what it takes to get proper relief. just a thought. anyway, thank you so much, and have a good day. host: frank, thank you for calling. hope you call again down the line. mr. olasky? guest: you will find three groups in puerto rico with three different opinions of this point. there are people who want puerto rico to be a state, people who want it to be a commonwealth, which is the unusual relationship basically, but that is the way it has been for decades, and there are people who want puerto rico to be independent. they will have to debate it and come to some conclusion. essentially, puerto ricans should be primarily responsible for puerto rico. if they want to become a state, if they want to become independent, i tend to want to

go with whatever the majority of the folks there want. it is not our call. it is what the majority of puerto ricans want. at wo"world magazine" is on twitter @world_mag. larry is joining us. caller: good morning. my question has already been answered, but i wondered why they did not vote for statehood. it seems like that would help. host: is there anything you would like to add? help in someld ways. there would be discussed that disadvantages. they would not have a tax pressure that the other 50 states have. it seems to me like statehood would make sense, but there is some negative associated with that, too. host: gainesville, georgia,

robert, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. and thanks. i have been on some mission trips in my day, and our effort was to try to sort of focus on indigenous efforts, where people are trying to help themselves. i read a piece about a bucket truck and a little neighborhood had bought a bucket truck in puerto rico, and they were doing a real humans effort to get the wires reconnected. i would like to ask mr. olasky, what would be the best way to help the people help themselves? i think they really want to do that. thank you so much for taking my call. guest: i think the best way, the most bang for the buck comes from giving to church efforts that have proven themselves effective over the years in puerto rico and other disasters like katrina. basically 10k

years ago on the experience of katrina and other disasters that show that private groups, church groups were much more efficient than the federal government. are churches more efficient than other private groups, for some reason? guest: they do more with volunteers, so in other words, there are groups that are that are actually big bureaucracies themselves and have some highly paid officials. the church groups rely much more on volunteer effort. southern baptist have people that are reallys well-trained and have done this very times, the importance of repositioning equipment and so forth. for the most part, the church groups are much more efficient in the use of money than other private groups. this includes partisan groups, operation purse,

blessing, southern baptists , other catholic groups that are well-established. we have tried to talk to those people. on somey relying observation of my own but also interviewing lots of people and just asking what works and what does not work. what you hear for the most part is that fema just does not work, has not worked, similarly to what we heard after katrina. host: time for two more phone calls. ed in new york, republican, go ahead. caller: a good friend of mine spent almost seven months there right after the storm, and he was calling me back and forth, and he was telling me he never saw anything like it. yes, there was a lot of damage, but he said he has never seen any race that was so far behind the times. he said he worked for a tree

company, you know, and they had to remove all the trees before the electricians could come in and do their job. he has worked for local electricians in new york city, and he sees what they do. he said the way these wires are being put back together, it is like winding together your speaker wires in your car. everything is being put together not properly, you know, temporarily. and then the other thing was his first couple of weeks that he worked therek, he was in the military base, buildings were full of food, water, blankets, everything, to the roof, he said he had never seen so many goods. italy's vigor than any walmart we have in new york state. hetom line, after two weeks, got charged 10% is paid for puerto rico. we are there, governor cuomo people there to do that, so he had to pay then new york state tax when he came back to the states. that is crazy. we were there helping.

there is no reason we should have to donate money to puerto rico. host: thanks for the call. mr. olasky. guest: well, i think there are good reasons to economically help puerto rico if we can do it in a way that does not induce corruption. from what i've seen, from what i have been told, there was funny of food available. tarps andges were tops an generators, and the lack of generators really hurts. there is a debate about how many people actually died during the hurricane or because of it. the initial figure was incredibly low. figures are up in the 4600 or so. part of that is because people did not have power, and people who were very sick did not have the types of help that they needed, so i think we should all have sympathy for people in puerto rico, not scorning them. but again, they have got to find a way to develop a more

efficient and less corrupt government. the history is there of the united states often messing with the, but nevertheless, it comes down to the people living in puerto rico, we can help, but they will have to be the ones who do it. host: the last call, linda, go ahead. caller: hi, olasky. first of all, in puerto rico, because the logistics and getting everything there, we are trying to put the cart before the horse. these people have nothing, no roofs, anything. you have to at least get them fed, shelter before they can pull themselves up by the bootstraps. they do not have. secondly, sir, in this conversation, you said religious organizations are the best for donations. i use charity navigator on a

regular basis, and quite frankly, there are some very good secular organizations as well. i donate to them. in katrina, until the u.s. government came in, we really got nothing done. no one could do anything. so i respect you, but you are a little myopic in your opinions. please keep working, but allow for others as well. host: linda in connecticut. mr. olasky, i will give you the last word. guest: well, i generally work as a historian, a journalist. ago,ook i wrote 10 years "the politics of disaster," was a disaster for the publisher. not too many copies sold. history ofgo to the disasters, the crisis in response. there is a lot of evidence in the 20th century and the 21st century that private groups tend

to work more efficiently than governmental groups, and among the private groups, the religious-based groups -- again, with some exceptions, there are thelems there, too -- but church-based groups tend to do the most because they rely so much on volunteer efforts, people who really care and are willing to give weeks or months of their lives to help those in something, theis desire to help, the willingness to service something money cannot buy. host: the cover of the april 20 edition of "world magazine," sanwa smack down, island -- "san juan smack-down: pilot in crisis," thank you. guest: thank you. host:, we will hear from lev facher of stat news. he will talk about curbing the open your crisis. we will be right back. ♪

>> this weekend, c-span's cities tour takes it to new orleans, louisiana honest try centennial year. with the help of our cox communications cable partners, we are the literary scene and history of the city. today at noon eastern, hear about the life and influence of tennessee williams, best known for his play "the glassman after and"cat on a hot tin roof," "a streetcar named desire kir." >> new orleans is celebrating

its try centennial this year. we are 300 years old. centenniali- exhibition, we wanted to look at the earliest year and what it looked like after the city was developed. >> and then a cityo one of the -- a visit to one of the city's oldest restaurants. takes a much larger theme than it does anywhere else. we live to eat in new orleans. >> watch c-span's cities tour of new orleans, louisiana on c-span2's booktv and sunday at 2:00 p.m. on american history tv on c-span3, working with our cable affiliates as we ask laura explorer america. filmmakersn "q&a," discuss their documentary "hit

and stay: a history of faith and resistance," about the actions activistse and other who protested the vietnam war. >> as we understood it, the vietnam war movement was college aged, scruffy haired protesters, but here were middle-aged clergy. public thought welcome if they are against this war, maybe i should reconsider it myself, and that was the turning point. not in thetions seenam war, but i do not how you could not argue that their actions did not integrate the draft. the public said they felt like they were under attack. you control the line from what they did to the draft ending in 1973. >> sunday at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." c-span, where history unfolds

daily. c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies, and continu to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider . "> "washington journal continues. host: welcome back. is tackling the issue of the opioid crisis through legislation. with us in the studio today, we have lev facher, who covers this issue for stat news. he is the washington correspondent. lev, there is a lot of correspondence coming out on the subject. in fact, there are more than 50 bills. why so much legislation?

guest: there is so much legislation, because it is that big of an issue. greg waller said only for me but this might be the record for legislating on a single issue. it needs to be pointed out that this will be wrapped up into a single comprehensive bill to address the crisis. the fact that there are 57 bills, many of them are one-page bills that implement pilot programs. it is a midterm year, and for democrats and republicans, it is incredibly important political issues. care about this and wants lawmakers to come home and say "look what i did to help my district struggling with addiction." a lot of the girls are bipartisan, largely consensus bills that should have a strong impact on the crisis, but there are questions about whether this does enough in terms of building a treatment infrastructure for

people struggling with addiction in the country as opposed to -- i have heard the phrase a couple of times "nibbling around the edges," that there are edition treatment -- addiction treatment infrastructure at it, so we will see years from now what impact these specific bills and up happening, and lawmakers say the first thing they will do is not the last thing, either. host: are there many common names with all of these different bills? one of the top things that lawmakers are rooting for here? down to theeaks category you would expect essentially of prevention, of treatment, and the drug enforcement, so there are bills that would allow the fda to more aggressively, the food and drug administration, to more packagesely intercept that they believe to be suspicious. a huge theme over the last two years have been fent

opioid that has been used as a prescription painkiller but has been imported from overseas as an incredibly powerful painkiller that is resulting in overdoses. people are not aware that fentanyl is combined with illicit heroin or illicitly manufactured prescription drugs, replicas of prescription drugs that might be buying on the street. fentanyl is a huge focus. expanding treatment. there was controversy with a bill that would have expanded access to one of three existing drugs expanded to treat overdoses. it has been back and forth as to why the bill was held up. it was included in this house package that will be voted on. one big one i should mention what essentially require that the department of health and human services ensure that all the grant money that is goes toor treatment

evidence-based forms of treatment. that sounds like a common sense thing, but that is not necessarily the case. to treat the disease, use combine thatd you with social counseling, and that is the standard of care of this disease. there are two cases -- i would see the majority of treatment -- does not conform to those standards. they will make sure that happens. other bills that will help families whose babies are born with neonatal abstinence system, when a mother is struggling with addiction and the baby is self with an opioid dependency, but like i said, a lot of smaller bills of people broadly supportive of, if they do not question the magnitude of their impact, and then onto much bigger bills like really stepping up drug enforcement, making sure that addiction treatment informs those standards that addiction doctors

would hope for. host: we know this is an election year. are these bipartisan efforts? guest: these are largely bipartisan efforts, but that does not mean there are not exceptions. there was a republican lawmaker who held off the energy and commerce committee who had a history of attempting to regulate an opioid used to treat addiction to heroin, for instance, or prescription drugs being used illicitly. there i think is a broader theme that is less pronounced than it has been in the past of democrats favoring somewhat more treatment side, more demand-side options and republicans favoring more prevention and enforcement, more supply-side options. that does not mean there is not broad agreement on the vast majority of these bills, but there are some sticking points.

for instance, i believe a democratic bill allows all methadone, prescribe which is, again, only one of three drugs to treat opioid misuse disorder. but by and large, the house energy and commerce committee advanced 57 bills, and i believe 56 were assigned on a bipartisan basis. host: we want you to join our conversation, so we want you to call in on our lines here at "washington journal." (202) 748-8001. if you are a republican. if you are a democrat, (202) 748-8000. independents, call in at (202) 748-8002. and if you have been impacted by the open your crisis, we want to hear your stories as well. you can call in at (202) 748-8003. been some have

controversial bills on this topic. in fact, congressman dave reichert spoke on the floor about one of the pieces of legislation targeting synthetic trafficking. [video clip] reichert: i am here to stock act. the we are standing up for the health and safety of our communities and families enclosing an important loop hole of allowing contraband to enter the united states through international mail. in my home state of washington, there have been a 134% increase in opioid-related cases between and opioid16, related deaths increased by 33%.

this increase shockingly exceeds our state's population growth, as it is why the work we have been doing congress in the ways and means committee is so in orde important. in april, we held a committee with witnesses from customs and border patrol and the united states postal service. they discussed how synthetic opioids are entering the united states through the international mail system and how we can help them put a stop to this. the bipartisan legislation that we will vote on today's their work -- today supports their combiningngress electronic data and allowing the border patrol to target for opioids shipments. it also holds these agencies accountable to do so much more doing, byhave been using hardline deadlines and mandates as well as penalties. ultimately, the bill will

require the postal service to refuse packages for which this information is not provided unless there is compelling reason. the opioid crisis must be addressed from every angle, and that includes stopping illicit synthetic opioids from entering our country. we must do more to protect our families, our communities, and this bill would do just that. lev, are there any other bills causing controversy or confrontation like this one? guest: sure. i think they get to a broader heme of attempting to step up enforcement or stepping down on the brink crisis, but ensuring that it does not go too far or have a negative impact on people. i imagine we would get chronic pain patients who rely on opioids for day-to-day pain management, of which there are millions in this country. there are people who develop dependencies, developed

addictions after being prescribed prescription drugs. it is a somewhat widespread fear that the way the federal government and state governments response to this crisis is going to negatively impact them. one thing we have seen in of the opioid bills introduced, but not advanced in either the house or the senate, is a proposed three-day limit on first sign over your prescriptions, which it does not really impact that chronic pain community we are talking about, but none the less, the american medical association, a powerful group in d.c., has been staunchly opposed to that. the three-day recommendation included in cdc guidelines in 2016 is a recommendation, a guideline. in no way did the authors of the guideline attend intended for a three-day limit. likells like that, bills

whether empowering the postal service to deny entry to packages cannot fully verify, even if it is not entirely positive that there is some sort of illicit shipment within them, there is a broader theme of hoping bills like these don't go too far, and there is a natural push-pull when you enter a public health crisis that is multifaceted. host: let's go to our phone lines. our first call is from schmidt he in new smyrna beach, florida. caller: thank you. i appreciate it. topics an emotional for me because i lost my son 10 years ago to a heroin overdose. he was a great kid. i think that you should tell people that the ability to turn addicts around, successfully, is

only 2% to 5%. it is minimal. i think a lot of discipline -- brad, my son, it probably was genetic. so there is nothing you can do. i felt many times he was on the street that it would have been better -- he spent many times in jail. that put him in touch with other trouble, and more made connections for stealing and stuff like that. i would like to see something, frankly, like a work camp, that these addicts are occupied and m,rmanently committed to the where either they put them on a work farm and grow vegetables and accomplish something and have some meaning in life.

i have seen things that doctors have told me a lot of these arenesses are -- these bipolar. a lot of these addicts. i support the representative from washington, his legislation. i think we need to crack down on hand, i-- on the other have two friends that are anesthesiologists who say that fentanyl it is critical in the operating room. i just had a knee replacement. have they not used fentanyl in the operating room, i would have been in recovery that would have felt like they chopped my leg off with an axe. guest: absolutely. a few points, first of all, i am sorry for the loss of your son. we hear stories like that far too often. you mentioned the potential for a genetic predisposition to addiction.

a theme here is increase research money for the national institutes of health to better understand addiction, to better understand non-opioid or less potentially addictive forms of pain treatment that does not stop people from the prescription drug route down this road toward a more deadly substance like heroin or fentanyl. a far tooght that small number of people within a inbstance control this country are adequately treated and make a full recovery. part of the reason for that, like i said, if there is just a consensus in the public health world that the peopl treatment people receive is not grounded in medical evidence the way doctors treat any other disease in the country, so i think the bill passed by the grant moneyts hhs

to go exclusively to evidence-based grant money that prescribes medicine for the disease, as you do, and combine that with social counseling. hopefully that is something that will go along way in making sure the care people receive is really of the quality they need. you mentioned that your son was in and out of jail. there are a lot of, like i said, methadone and another -- two of the three drugs needed to treat the disease -- are themselves opioids and are themselves, frankly, potential glee to be abused -- potentially to be abused. that does not mean they should be used. focus in jail keeping illicit substances out. treatment in the criminal justice system in particular there is quite a bit by state, that it is not of the quality the reliefope, and

is also not of the quality you would hope, and that leads us to the conversation also about -- there was an interesting piece in the "new york times" on this topic about a week ago, whether if addiction is indeed a disease, and any doctor you talk to will tell you it absolutely is. that if the consensus of the public health community. if it is a disease, why did we often deal with it so often in criminal justice settings as opposed to medical settings? there you get into a conversation about how this country is in an addiction crisis that touches people of all races, particularly white people and people across the socioeconomic spectrum, it has largely -- prior to others that ofe largely touched people color, to have conversations like the one where having out. a lot of talk on that one, but again, i am sorry for your loss, and i think a lot of these bills actually would change the pathway for people like your son

to have gotten better treatment and make a full recovery. host: let's go to kimberly, who is calling on the independent line from houston, texas. caller: how are you all doing? host: just fine. how are you? caller: doing good. a lot of people talk about trump that elected for this reason, for that reason, but i firmly believe in my heart trump got elected because of the drugs, and the drugs coming across from mexico, the drug war we are in. the race and because people are tired of seeing their loved ones die on the street, in the hospital. my father-in-law got addicted on pain medicine. other people have also. that is what got him elected, bought, ands not the politicians have let this go on way too far. we need more than just this bill

passed. call let's go to another from castlewood, virginia, calling on the democratic line. caller: yes, i think that the first question ought to be asked is how you got addicted. if you got addicted out partying and stuff like that, then no, i do not think there should be any help for you. i am sorry, i do not feel sorry for those people. those people who actually go to a doctor and they get addicted, yes, i think we should help them. as far as the drug clinics -- i know several people, they have been going to them 10, 20 years. i think there ought to be a limit, like of a year or two, when you're off of the medication, that they are substituting for the hard drugs, and i do not think the taxpayers ought to be paying for it. host: what type of funding are from the for crisis

for the crisis to tackle it? guest: there has been quite a bit of funding between the 2018 and 2019 fiscal years, so we are dollarseveral billion spent, some specifically four opioids. some money exists for programs with medicare and medicaid that provide health services as they are, many of which happen to be addiction treatment. just to address that caller's point about a limit on how much treatment people with a substance misuse disorder should receive, that is something that is certainly brought up periodically. and i would say -- and i have heard, you know, addiction medicine specialists say i would challenge you to think of another disease, and other

addiction, for which that is true. if you view addiction is a medical condition, you would not really think of another condition for which you would want to at some point cut off care. which, you diabetes, know, in some cases, has dietary factors that have led to it, you would not want to save a somewhat to have government-funded insulin treatment through medicaid for two years before they cure themselves. i think it is a good example of the way that people -- very ome to haveoften -- c very different views about addiction as opposed to other ways. host: let's go to claudia, who impacted by opioid abuse. caller: i recently lost my son

to an opioid addiction. i would love to have a heart to heart with some of these people who do not understand it is a health issue. in my opinion, it is genetically-based. i also have a father who was taking opioids because he has pin -- the he has a rod from his hip replacement is loose. as far as treatment goes, that is a lifelong thing, whether it is drugs -- my son, after he died, i found paperwork, he was all set to get the injection. yet, as he put it, you do not go get the drug, the drug comes and gets you. hear from larry in phoenix, arizona, calling it on the democratic line. caller: i have had some serious experience with law enforcement who were actually pushing drugs,

and in a culture like that, no one is going to get any kind of help, and there is a lot of that around the united states. up in colorado, i was a one county where i asked the county sheriff, i said how can you sell drugs to your own people, and he said we are the good guys. it is the money that drives the whole deal, just like with the corporations pushing their drugs. let's talk a little bit about the punishment that lawmakers are talking about. are we talking about increasing penalties on opioid users, or are they just talking about treatment? guest: on users, absolutely not. i think it is understood here that folks, for whatever reason, whether they start using

recreationally, whether they start using prescription drugs dependency that escalates into an addiction, i think it is somewhat widely accepted tha higher deterrentare a duste for possession, which should be largely legislated at the state level. level, but nonetheless, larger penalty for possession are not seen as a productive tool in addressing the crisis. that said, president trump, dare i say infamously, in the last several months has spoken of a desire modeled somewhat after that rodrigo duterte, president of the philippines, executing drug dealers. president has said if someone is dealing fentanyl, dealing heroin laced with fentanyl, doing so knowing exactly what the substance is

they are selling, the odds are they are going to be pretty directly behind dozens of deaths , if not hundreds of deaths. yet, there is a certain logic that will lead you to say if you are responsible for that level of societal harm, that is why most states have capital punishment. there is a thought of increasing penalties for dealers, not really for possession. the focus is on treatment and enforcement, not necessarily specific to individual actors. more big picture drug distribution. not possession. host: thank you for being with us. guest: my pleasure. host: that will do it for today's "washington journal." we will see you tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. thanks. ♪

>> ahead on c-span, testimony from justice and homeland security department officials on protecting election infrastructure from attack. later, an interview whiskey police -- an interview with steve scully's one year after he was seriously injured in a shooting during a baseball practice. that is following representative shift on the russia investigation. , a senate hearing on securing election and the social media platforms run the tax. deputy assistant attorney