alaska. c-span.org, or, listen on our free c-span radio app. wednesday, the house returns at 9:00 a.m.. at 10:00 a.m., they will release several bills to combat the u.s. opioid epidemic. a.m., the, at 9:30 u.s. senate continues to debate on a federal spending packet for water projects, military construction, and veterans affairs. on c-span3, commerce secretary testifies on the trump administration's tariffs. the houset 12:30, begins to markup the 2019 budget .esolution coming up in about an hour, sarah pierce from the migration policy institute joins us on

washington journal to talk about migrant children and family separation of the u.s.-mexico border. until then, join the conversation as we take your phone calls. washington journal is live now. ♪ host: it's the washington journal for june 20. tomorrow, the house is set to vote on to immigration bills. the bills are designed in part to deal with streamers, the wall, and in part children who are separated from their parents at the southern border. trump did not officially endorse either of those bills when he visited the capital yesterday, to the national journal as of late last night, it is reported he is slightly byning toward one endorsed house leadership. we are to our program before the house comes in at 9:00. our first our dedicated to your

message to congress on the topic of immigration. we'll talk about what is going on at the southern border and you can talk about dreamers and the larger aspects of these bills being voted on this week in the house. your message to congress. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. if you want to post on our social media sites, you can do so at our twitter feed, @cspanwj , and also at our facebook page, facebook.com/cspan. if you go to the website of national journal, this is a story you will find by staff writer daniel neuhauser. the president getting mixed signals on what he wants to endorse when it comes to one of those immigration bills. daniel neuhauser joining us on the phone. good morning. guest: how are you today? host: fine, thank you, and think you for joining us. so the president suggested what

he might support -- can break down the bills that are up for consideration? guest: the big difference is that the more conservative, the does not provide a pathway to citizenship for participants in the daca program. the bill that leadership is trying to press, that was the result of a compromise brokered by moderate members of congress who were trying to force a vote on immigration bills. another big difference, of course, is that the leadership bill does deal with the separation crisis happening down at the border right now. and there are other minor differences, for instance, the more conservative will mandates a nationwide e-verify program and the leadership backed bill

advanced appropriate border billion,money, $25 where the more conservative bill only authorizes that appropriatn and leaves it to appropriators to actually fund the money later. host: do either of the bills directly take on the administration's euro tolerance policy? policy?tolerance guest: yes. the one that leadership is backing would include a provision that would basically keep families together by childrenice to detain for longer than they are now currently allowed to be detained and saying may have to be with their families. of course, the problem with that is this could lead to children being detained for long periods of time, so it is an a or that is really much better as a solution, but i have talked to

some members last night who said the worst thing that could happen is children being separated from their families. this is not perfect, but we would rather this than that. what level of support has the president given to either of these bills? confusing last night. members got the impression that he would sign either, but then president trump in this meeting, an hour-long meeting last night with house republicans endorsed are onlypolicies that in the leadership bill, and he talked about those policies. some of the ones i mentioned earlier, and also the trigger mechanism that would basically not allow daca participants to get visas until the border security money is appropriated. members said well, he did not specifically endorse this bill. it was not a resounding endorsement, but he did talk about specific policies in the bill that he wants to see on his

desk, so we got the impression that he would sign it. whether that will be good enough for members who are sitting on the bench right now, i'm not sure. i talked to some members last night who said that they talked to other members who had been leaning no and now they are leaning yes. but leaning yes is one thing and voting yes is another. we will have to see later this week whether the president's halfhearted endorsement did the trick. on capitol hill yesterday. what did the president hear from republicans specifically about what is going on with the child separation issue of? -- issue? guest: he did not hear anything. the president talked for 45 minutes and nobody said anything in that meeting. there were no questions, so no one had anything to say to the president specifically. that said, the members of congress are obviously very worried about this policy, more

and more members of congress, including republican members, are coming out and saying that the president should stop this debateshile congress this process, because frankly, congress is kicking around all kinds of different proposals to do something about what is going on at the border, but this process could take months to pass something, and this is going to keep going on. until then, it looks bad and the president himself acknowledged that it looks bad, that he said crying babies is bad politically , that is what he told members in the meeting, but as far as anyone directly challenging him on that process, i'm not sure that happened. host: if either of these bills , what is the likelihood of the senate taking up a similar bill and endorsing

it? guest: that is a tall order. a few months back, mitch mcconnell put it few -- put a few senate bills on the floor and they failed. they were not exactly like these bills, but they were similar to them, similar enough that you might think that if they came onto the senate floor again they would fail again. that comes next. first, the house has to pass it. wrinkly, i am not even sure that is going to happen. a group of conservative members, the republican study committee are going to meet today to discuss the bill. the house freedom caucus met last night. i am not exactly sure of the results of that discussion, but they were going to discuss the level of support in their bill, of that -- in their group the bill, and that group usually votes as a block. if they decide against it, that will be the end of that. we will see -- but mitch mcconnell has indicated that he

thinks the separation process should end. at a bare minimum, i think we might expect that congress could pass a standalone build a stop the separation policy. whether that is good enough for trump, who seems to be using this policy not just, as he said, as a deterrent at the for immigrants coming here, but as a spur to spur congressional action on broader immigration reform. i am not sure that a stand-alone bill will for the president's needs. the: keeping an eye on process. he reports for national journal. mr. neuhauser, thanks for your time this morning. guest: anytime, thank you. host: we can take those things that mr. neuhauser spoke about into consideration as you tell us your message to congress on immigration. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. for democrats, (202) 748-8000.

independents, (202) 748-8002, and post on our twitter and facebook page. robbins from new york, democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning, and thank you for c-span. our elected officials have no backbone. they have no business in prison infants and toddlers. imprisoning infants and toddlers. it is just plain wrong, and e-verify is a great deterrent. it has to be put on to companies and businesses, and that is where our spineless elected officials should be focused. company has business liability insurance. , anou exclude from coverage exclusion in the insurance policy, any undocumented workers from incidents and accidents and

workers compensation, etc., if a business liability insurance polity -- it is the foundation of a company being in business. host: anthony in arizona, independent line. caller: good morning, pedro. for helping -- to facilitate yesterday's republicans. you didn't job, especially when certain attacks were directed towards you. in america, we have never had 0 -- i mean, we have never had total enforcement of zero-tolerance in any legal matter. never. dot is why they plea-bargaining when you are charged with a criminal or civil crime. i want to share one song that and itbrings some hard,

is called countdown of love by the isley brothers. trump, about six months ago, brought up the subject of there is this caravan from south america. i also want to share a great movie on pbs, the great war. i will take your questions now. host: so your message to congress on immigration, what would you like to see them do? caller: i am letting congress know this will be my last call as an independent. i am going on the website for my state and changing to democratic, because i am getting off the fence. democraticto vote principles and i challenge everyone else to get off the fence, because the independence divide the vote. host: romney in texas, democrat

line. y in texas, democrat line. caller: when it comes down to it, the family separation thing is nothing but political theatrics by this piece of feces maggot president. he cares nothing about humanity, he cares nothing about children. this is all red meat to his idiot, dead zombie base 35%-40% base that he knows will , and he will never get the rest of the country on board with him. he is a disgrace to this country, he is his grace to the world. host: as far as the message to congress when it comes to overall immigration, what would you deliver to the legislators? caller: congress is spineless.

they are not going to do anything. they have not done anything. why would they do anything? it is a midterm election year. they are not going to do anything. let's go to glenn in maryland, republican line. your message to congress? go ahead. caller: hi, unfortunately, there is so much misinformation flying around. when the order asians have been injured -- border agents have been interviewed, they are specifying if you come to a port of entry and are seeking asylum or go to an american embassy in another country and seek asylum, you are not being separated as a family. this is only happening to people who are trying to sneak into our country. agentsnately, the border said there are so many instances where the children are not with the person -- they are being picked up along the way to get

into the country because they know that within 20 days, the families will release -- in the past, they have been released into society with a promise to return to a hearing, and only 3% of them are returning. don't stoply, if we this, this is just flooding our country. it is costing $35,000 per child, they said. host: so what is your comment to do about it? caller: i really believe they withto concern themselves maybe getting a few more judges to expedite things. they need to build a wall to secure parts where the people are coming in a legally, and they need to get the message out that there is not going to be this constant breaking of the

law and then people being allowed to stay. host: glenn from maryland. "stop this madness and inhumane treatment of separating families." --ther, "secure the wall build the wall, secure the border, and throughout all illegals in the united states. we followed representative will heard to run of the centers -- one of the centers were children are being cap in -- kept in texas. entry was named for a mexican immigrant to a joint the army -- who joined the army to avoid deep rotation. he said the facility appears to be safe and well run, it houses the minors and air-conditioned

tents with 20 boys per unit. the facility has one adult for every 10 children and offers health care services, including emergency mental health screening of nexus very- if necessary. the refugee and immigrant center for education and legal services, has access there, and they prepared for a flood. they have two pyrogen's, a clinic manned by six emergency professionals, and this place is being run by emergency management professionals that have been improbably every disaster you can name in the past decade. if you go to the texas tribune, a story there -- separated migrant children are heading to oflters with a history abuse and neglect, and taxpayers have paid $1.5 billion to private companies operating these shelters. this is over the past five years to companies offering -- immigrant youth

shelters accused of serious lapses in care, including neglect and sexual and physical abuse. the federall cases, government has continued to place migrant children with companies even after serious allegations were raised and after state inspectors cited shelters with deficiencies. since 2003, the u.s. health and human services department has awarded nearly $5 billion in grants to the office -- through the office of the refugees to mostly religious and nonprofit organizations. the program grew quickly in 2014, when 70,000 children crossed the southern border alone. again, your message to congress on immigration. harrisburg, pennsylvania. caller: hello sir. host: go ahead. caller: i would like to make one comment. the republicans, nationally or they do not fear

trump, they do not fear death, they do not fear god. they only fear losing their seats and their electoral privileges. i am the one who wrote the black oath. thank you very much. host: before you leave, a specific message to congress on immigration? what would you like to see them do? caller: act humanely, as america has always acted. it is despicable that they would separate children from parents. think, think, think, think. you love your mom, you love your dad, you love your family, you love your people. don in maryland, democrat line. caller: good morning, i was hoping you would have the same program you had set up today for the democrats, but i wanted to colin just to say that the gentleman before me was talking about killing a congressman. stop worrying about being

before, and the day yesterday i was watching a program called democracy now. amy goodman had a young man on there who resigned from one of those private organizations, and he was saying all that people need to do is follow the money to see what is really going on. but this thing is so evil, pedro, and when they try to get the president to do what is moral -- this man has no morals, so how will he have a moral hearing about these children? and jeff sessions? this man living through this culture and socialization process, but this is not the first time -- my people were sold off in front of each other. the children were sold off, the mothers were sold off, the fathers were sold off. host: with the current congress, what would you like to see? caller: what i have heard from c-span, msnbc and from fox news, we the american people are so confused about what these people are trying to do, what they want

to do because everyone has to build, and donald trump does not know what he wants to do as long as he keeps the spotlight on him. to give them a message, i would say they have to answer to almighty god when they die. they better wake up and realize just --t they do are what they are doing is just evil and there is a moral road to take this civilization. attorney mentioned general jeff sessions, who has an op-ed today about separating migrant children. the headline, we don't want to separate parents from kids. -- anyone who brought a child with them would not be prosecuted. a form of immunity. word got out about this loophole and with predictable results, with the number of aliens illegally crossing with children between our ports of entry went from 14,000 to 75,000. these trends undermine the integrity of the system, that is

that is causing them must end as well. ending this blank and immunity means prosecuting adults for illegal entry, whether they have children with them or not. that is what we are doing at the department of justice. but we will not put the children in jail. instead, the department -- the children must be cared for by the department of health and human services, as the law requires. and these children are well catered for -- cared for. in fact, they get better care than a lot of american kids do. are provided plenty of food, education and a language, health, and dental care, and transported to their destination city at taxpayer expense. again, usa today is where you find that this morning. donna and illinois, republican line. go ahead. glad you am finally are letting a republicans be. -- republican speak.

it has been all democrats and independents. host: we had a republican on, but go ahead. caller: these parents are illegal. what part of that doesn't the democrats understand? these children -- who is going to take care of all them if they are just turned loose in america? we have children going hungry in america. mexico haveda and borders but if we want borders, then we are inhumane? host: so what would you like congress to do, then? caller: i would like president trump to get some cooperation from the democrats, build the wall, and come up with a decent plan. and hetarted all this did not clean up anything. from flushing, new york,

hello. caller: yes, good morning. would like to not use children in any form. someone telling me that this president is in human -- inhuman --this is a problem that has been going on for a long time. the solution is we have to protect the border and find a way to punish those who illegally cross through the auntry, but not give symbolical thing that the whole world is telling us that the united states is the most inhuman country. the fact of the matter is the mored states is paying money to refugees all over the world than any other country. so this is stupid. separations ofd

families and children crying. it has now become symbolical. smugglers are using the southern to bringntinuously children into this country. this is the worst thing to happen, believe it or not. children coming alone -- what do we do? we hold them. parents coming with their children, we separate them. this is nonsense. host: tyrone in pennsylvania, democrat line. caller: good morning, pedro. we could end this tomorrow. even today. all paul ryan has to do is get to congress" on stopping this right away. vote on stopping this right away. we do not need trump to do anything. between the senate in the house, they could stop this immediately. but they are so busy cowering down to trump they cannot do

what they supposed to do legislatively. do is sayss has to they want to put the bills on the floor, all the republican are not that say they about separating these children, cruz and all of them, vote on it. the senators and the house. host: two build being considered by the house tomorrow. whether the senate takes up two of those bills, one of those bills, or whatever form it takes up of either of those bills will be debated as we talk about that. again, your thoughts on the message to congress on immigration. you have heard a lot of topics under the umbrella of immigration. you can add to that by calling (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. florida, republican line, tom. caller: good morning.

i have a question for all the hispanics. emigrated to the united states. do you want the concrete do you left -- that you left to follow you here to the united states? without good immigration laws, that is exactly what will happen. and i have another message as well. law enforcement is never clean and beautiful. it actually is pretty ugly. and to think that laws can be equivalentth the of a beauty parlor appointment or a tea party, with the same images, is pretty ridiculous. .o here is another major point we have 6 million jobs available. they cannot be filled in the united states. what are we going to do with all of these unskilled people? not only are they unskilled and

uneducated, they can't even speak our language. what are we going to do with all of these people? the reason we can't fill the jobs with people already in the united states that can speak english and have some education? they are not skilled enough. host: tyler, texas, republican line. bob is next. caller: yes, pedro, this is eminently simple and we keep repeating the same problem. we have a supreme law, we have had it for 230 years, and article for section four says the united states shall shall guarantee every space protected against invasion. that is our constitution. we need to be protected against invasion. and every other problem we are having is because we don't

follow or we don't know the constitution. and tyler, texas, one of the people talking about the topic, your message to congress on immigration. in the new york times this morning under their fact check section, they take a look at some of the statements that have policy, theout this zero-tolerance policy and what has been going on because of that. they analyzed one of the statements made by kristen nielsen, who said in a comment on monday "the obama administration, the bush administration all separated families. they absolutely did. the new york times concludes this is misleading. while previous administration's did break up families, it was rare, according to former officials and immigration experts. the trump administration, by contrast, has knowingly enacted the practice that some officials have characterized as a deterrence against illegal entry.

bush president george w. introduced operation streamline, which referred prosecution immigrants illegally crossing the border. spokeswoman for the department of homeland security could not provide data on how many children were separated from their parents and previous administrations, but jeh johnson under president obama said in a recent interview on npr that it was possible families were separated, but not as a policy or practice. speaking up, sanitary -- secretary kristen nielsen. secretary kristen nielsen. the local news station here, and nbc affiliate, saw her -- had on their website this morning video of her eating at a mexican restaurant yesterday. this is what happened during that meal. [video clip] >> and family separation. end family separation.

if kids don't eat in peace, you don't eat in peace. [chanting] >> not in bc, not -- d.c., not in the u.s.. in a mexican restaurant, of all places. secretaryecurity kristen nielsen is in a mexican restaurant, of all places. host: next up, jean, hello. caller: yes, this is jean in louisiana. boone i would like to speak to my representative steve scully's

-- steve scalise. if you would take the god-given life given to him and use it to separate families is an abomination. i have been writing every embassy, every country that has an embassy in this country and begging them to boycott all american goods and services. and as an abomination for president trump, people talk about taxes being used for supporting people? president trump doesn't pay taxes. his family doesn't pay taxes, and probably half these people who complain don't pay taxes either. go, have youyou made any direct appeals to either representatives police -- representative scalise or record

of -- representative kennedy? sent a letter to representative kennedy, who i personally voted for, and he represents the people of louisiana. not donald trump. do your job. host: sheila in oklahoma, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. you know, i am concerned about kids being separated to, but from what i hear, a lot of them are unaccompanied. what do you do? you have to put them in a center? who pays for it? we do. i don't know how to stop the kids from coming but i do know it says it costs $35,000 a year to house a kid. if they are just keeping it in and we have to take care of them , what is going to happen to our country? we will become like a third , and we will not

have the services we have or anything else because we have to pay for these children. host: so what is the message for congress? say take up the peace and take care of the kids. i don't know what to do about the and companies. i have no clue on that. for those that come with parents, they need to stay with the parents. but i have listened to the news and they say if they do that, the democrats are going to vote it down. so congress is not -- they say let congress pass it, but they can't come together and they can't pass anything. all i know to keep trying and try to get it that way. sheila in oklahoma. a couple of tweets when it comes to the issues of the last couple of days. this is house minority leader nancy pelosi, directly addressing the homeland security secretary, saying she must resign. this is not an immigration issue, it is a humanitarian issue. children are being used by the trump administration to create leverage with the goal of trusting -- passing trump's

anti-immigrant agenda. i struggle to think of anything more by derek -- barbaric. another from representative nagler, today introduced the keep families together act along -- 190 of my democratic colleagues so we can and the horrific family separation happening at the border. protecting our borders does not mean tearing apart families. we have decades of border procedure that proves it. this is a new policy that she is dutifully carrying out for president trump. it was representative vargas himself who had an encounter with president trump while he was on capitol hill and as he left the meeting with house republicans. [video clip] [inaudible] quit separating the kids, you

are separating the children. mr. president, don't you have kids? don't you have kids, mr. president? how would you like to hahe taken away. stop separating our children. it is wrong. this is not the american we know -- america we know, and it is not biblical. show me where. host: a couple of tweets from republicans, including marco rubio from florida. a finalizingucing families toll allow be held together pending expedited hearing. he goes on to say that releasing those who unlawfully enter that with children bring they cruel incentive to bring children on a dangerous journey. let's change the loss of we can hold family together while awaiting expedited hearings. senator ted cruz of texas saying my legislation will fix the

backlog in immigration cases, remove legal barriers to switch processing, and resolve asylum cases on an expedited basis. ayers my democratic colleagues to work with me to solve this problem. and senator jeff flake from arizona, you will remember a couple really days ago first lady laura bush penned an op-ed speaking out against the zero tolerance policy, in particular with senator flake giving endorsement of that policy by saying thank you. for the remainder of our time until 8:00, we want to get your thoughts on the message to congress, specifically when it comes to immigration matters. for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. and for independents, (202) 748-8002. and you can post on our social media. on twitter, @cspanwj. you can also go to facebook at facebook.com/cspan. san antonio, texas, democrat line.

carmen, hello. caller: good morning, i am calling from texas, from san antonio, and this is so evil. i really blame the president and sessions for this. they are the ones that are doing all of this. congress really can't do anything because they are so afraid, and to me this is a racist issue. you know? they areone says invading the country -- it is like they are bugs or something. they are coming in from canada or from europe. do you think they would do this? no, because they are the right caller. they are not browner black people. this is what is coming into the country. they are refugees, and i am so sad that people in the united states are following these people, because of this president and sessions, because all they think about -- oh my gosh, it is going to cost so much money. what about all the money that the president is wasting on

giving tax breaks to the rich people and all the money he spends not even paying his taxes? i am just so sad about this. i really, really am sad. host: ivan in massachusetts, independent line. caller: hi, good morning, pedro. i have not called in so many years. it is nice to here from you again. i have been a supporter of democrats for the past 50 years, blindly, faithfully, and i am a trump supporter now. immigration is actually the main issue that caused me and many other independents and democrats to support president trump. we have reached a point with immigration where what we are doing is not working. it has to change immediately, dramatically. i do not want the congress to give any amnesty to anyone who has broken the law. they don't deserve to go to the head of the line. it is really very simple. i have kind of become a single

issue voter, like many other people. this is -- we in a democratic republic absolutely have the right to decide who comes into our country, who we want to admit into we don't, and if we want anyone want anyone in, wee that right. we got together, we voted, and we made our choice. unfortunately, since president trump has gotten in, it has been one thing after another trying to undermine what he was elected to do. the voters, we are just united. we want this done. host: frank in florida, republican line. good morning, pedro and everyone. yes. i support keeping families together. i want to get an immigration bill passed. i think that if they would make the law out of the solar panels, which presidentush advocated

for initially, and even the wall street journal did an article about it, it would be much cheaper and it would produce revenue from the solar energy. i think that will attract a lot of democratic support. maybe we could get a bill passed. florida, giving a message on what the message to congress should be on immigration. you can add your thoughts as well. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. ,nd if you go to c-span.org particularly our twitter page that is following our 50 capitals tour. for the first time in 22 years, the bus is in alaska. the bus will be there, in the state for two weeks. s in juneau, fairbank,

and that is all part of our 50 capitals tour. if you want to see what is going on and the interviews done along the way or learn more about the tour is health, that is the website you can go to. you can find out more on our community page. asheville, north carolina, independent line. hi. caller: hi. i remember when the democrats had the senate and the house representative, when obama was president. withoutsed obamacare run republican vote -- one republican vote. if they really cared about these children, why didn't they cake or of it then? then?e care of it and a member when it was fashionable for hollywood elites

pick up ar to africa, black baby and throw some money at the village. they had these huge compounds. brzezinski -- she is loaded with money. i don't hear her saying i will sponsor these families? i will take them into my home to take care of them? host: sheila in massachusetts, republican line, on the message to congress about immigration. caller: good morning, pedro, thanks for taking my call. happy to heard -- that another massachusetts voter feels the same way i did. he just called two minutes ago. i wish that the republicans would have the nerve to get up in congress and stop replaying some of the stuff that chuck schumer said and hillary clinton said and barack obama said and bill clinton said about this immigration issue.

i think it is a very sad thing if people do not realize in 2014, chuck schumer and all of them were up there talking about how bad immigration was getting an the system was broke and we had to do something about it. it is very unfair that you don't show what the democrats were all about in 2014 before they decided that they needed more as potential voters. it is a sad situation. i think to be fair, we should play some of those former clips of schumer and clinton and obama talking about the problem with immigration. host: riverview, florida, democrat line. claude, hello. you doing? how are thank you for taking my call. a pointanted to make about my outrage concerning the kids being separated. i do here and listen to a lot of c-span and i hear your callers talking about what obama did and

what clinton did and what others did. we really need to be concerned about what trump is doing and how disingenuous it is for him to separate and his rhetoric concerning these families. i think it is important that we understand that the republicans in congress only fear one thing -- they do not fear god, they do not fear outrage, the only fear is losing their seats in congress. they do not care about the children because, as so many have pointed out, trump could end this in one day. let's think about the history of trump. recently, where he has met with that he-un and has said has gotten a lot -- she has gotten absolutely nothing. if you look at his history -- host: only to bring it back to

the topic at hand, if you think about legislators concerned about their seats, do you think anything will get done in congress about this issue? nothing willutely get done. they don't have the votes to pass it. this issue will continue. families will continue to be separated. side, do have god on our because they're a republicans will lose the house. i am praying that they lose the -- the senate, and trouble come to face his indiscretions and all the 40 people, i think, that have been fired or let go because of trump. mean, the man touts that he is a great negotiator, he can tell people, he would know when a minute what kim jong-un was thinking -- host: ok, ok we will leave it there. alabama line -- alabama, independent line, leonard. hello. caller: what is wrong with

america first and putting americans first? why are we so much political play on immigrants? their crossing our border illegally. illegally. they should not be allowed to enter our country, period. thank you. host: so the due bills being considered by the house -- two bills being considered by the house -- you have gone. dan, louisville, kentucky, republican line. caller: yes, this is dan? yes. what i can't understand is congress, senate, they want getting a vote, wise -- why are the democrats always resistant? i heard something the other night with chuck schumer, where he was for, against all these illegals coming over.

-- you know, we don't need that again. i just, i can't understand all these people calling in and crying and peoples coming over the border. if they are breaking the law, we have laws for a reason. you get locked up. -- itn't feed your kids is the same thing. the democrats need to get off the fence and do their job. i'm not saying all republicans are perfect, because mitch and paul need to get with the program a little bit better too. host: dan in kentucky. if you go to the az central

website, daniel gonzales of the arizona republic reports that a mother who crossed the border illegally with her seven-year-old son's has sued officials, for taking away her child as punishment from the u.s.-- for coming to the to seek asylum. she was describing being taken to a holding cell of her son by -- after being apprehended by border patrol agent. the 39-year-old woman told agents she was escaping severe violence in ball -- in guatemala includingthreats, death threats by her husband against her and her son. two days after, men in green uniforms told her they needed to take her son but would not tell her why. the boy was screaming and crying as the agents took the boy away, even though she told them not to and demanded next one nation. -- demanded next one nation. explanation.

caller: what we have is a case where -- trump is not going to pass a bill without having the money for the wall. what congress needs to do is have a stand-alone bill that denies the separation of the families and just make it vetoproof, because even in the republican caucus, the freedom caucus will not pass money for a wall. republicansrats and get together with one standalone bill and they can veto -- and make it veto proof, we can solve this problem. if trump does not obey that law, he can be impeached. the washington post on other news that has happened over the past 24 hours. it report that it is the trump administration who withdrew from the united states -- u.n. human rights council on tuesday, for what is perceived to be an entrenched bias against israel a willingness to allow

vittoria's human rights abusers as members. deprives israel's chief defender at a forum where israel's human rights record comes up for discussion at every meeting. eliot engel of new york, the debt -- democrats, saying that by withdrawing from the council, we lose our leverage and allow the councils bad actors to follow their worst impulses unchecked, including running roughshod over israel. here's the ambassador from yesterday. [video clip] long, the human rights council has been a protector of human rights and full of political bias. regretfully, it is clear that our call for rich warm -- reform was not heeded. human rights abusers continue to serve on and be elected to the council.

the world's most inhumane regimes continue to escape scrutiny, and the council continues politicizing and scapegoating countries with positive human rights records in an attempt to distract from the abusers in their ranks. therefore, as we said we would do a year ago, if we did not see any progress, the united states is officially withdrawing from the u.n. human rights council. host: see more of that on our website at c-span.org. to congress. from texas, independent line, rocky. go ahead. thank you for taking my call, pedro. i have the answer to all of these problem. number one, you build every family a brand-new condo. you give them the keys to a brand-new pickup. you build all those condos in new york, southern new york, massachusetts, connecticut, delaware, maryland, and

washington, d.c.. and the way you fund it all is by decreasing the pay of all congressional members to the point where they can have them living next to them, in looting -- including donahue at the chamber of commerce. host: mike in rochester, new york, republican line. caller: yes, can you believe the abject hypocrisy of these democrats? --y have this famed concern feigned concern for these kids, yet they all stand around and applaud when an abortionist sticks her hand in a meat grinder and shoves it into the brain of a child in the womb and liquefies it. gail in buffalo, new york, democrat line. gail in new york, hello? caller: oh, hello. i was calling because i agree with the caller about not

separating the children from their -- children from their families, because one is that the border control is mostly supposed to be to stop drug cartels and terrorists from coming over the border. it was not meant to separate families. likenk this is just slavery, the modern slavery. york, giving new her thoughts. one person giving your thoughts the pope, who is supported recent stay since by the u.s. catholic bishops who called the separation from children -- of children from their parents contrary to catholic values and also immoral.

as saying "it is not easy, but populism is not the solution, francis said on sunday night. in a wide-ranging interview, the pope said he was off but -- optimistic about talks that might lead to the appointment of bishops in china. the reuters story saying that one of the most pointed -- one of the messages concerning the immigration policy by causing the mexican border illegally and holding adults in jail while their children are sent to government shelters, the colosseum has caused an outcry. u.s. catholic bishops had joined other religious leaders in the united states condemning the policy. i am on the site of the bishops conference, the pope said. he went on to say let us be clear in all things, i respect the position of the bishops conference. reuters is where you can find that story. massachusetts, independent line, diane. hello. caller: hi, thank you for taking my call.

i have a solution to the problem. when you catch these people coming over the border illegally, with children, offer them a deal the same way our legal systems offers other criminals the deal, because they are criminals, they are doing this illegally. tell them they can go back with their child and come in the right way so they won't be separated from their children. host: diane in massachusetts. shirleyshirley -- sitka, alaska, republican line. caller: hi, i'm for trump, and i voted for trump. when i was growing up, i was democrat. but i changed because of the way that the democrats try to get their votes. first it was all native, then it was all black, and now it will be all spanish people or

mexicans or whatever. it is just not right. is what hes doing said he was doing before and the people voted for him. i think it is only right. chance.ive him a he has had the worst 15 years -- 15 months i have ever seen. i can't believe people are doing this to him. host: so when it comes to the zero tolerance, you support that? caller: i happen to know many, many people that came to this small town from the philippines and from other places, and they came and legally. and two years, they had to wait for their wife to come because they had to earn the money to get their lawyer to do that. i think it is wrong that they come in a legally and get money and get food and all that stuff. illegally and get money and get food and all that stuff. come here legally. host: what major city are you

near? juneau.to kno -- host: our c-span 50 capitals bus tour will be cutting through there. anyone else in alaska is welcome to do that as well. roger, independent line. caller: how are you doing, pedro? i am 64-year-old, and i have heard a lot of strange things francis't of so-called uth over the years. here is one thing on the top of my head. i have witnessed -- i was not here when it first started, but i can imagine that a lot of these american people, especially these ones that are so against these people that are running for their lives, i know how the indians felt when we took over this nation many, many years ago. and i am so tired of all the

people voted for trump -- no, the college people voted for trump, and i know how much college people lose a sense of common sense when they go to college. i only got a sixth grade formal educatn, but i am not stupid. i have had trump supporters threaten landscape guys that cannot get a decent job, cutting grass is the best they can do, threaten me to get my rear end in the house or they are going to kick my ass. why? the landscaper's truck was parked in a place that was illegal. if youk to do things are a trump supporters that are immoral. few things to know, the president will be in duluth today, duluth, minnesota for a

campaign style rally. if you want to see that later on, that coverage will start later on. go to our website -- actually, the rally will be at 7:30 this evening. you can see that on c-span2. we will also monitor it on the radio and web services we have. you can go to our website at c-span.org. this is international, theresa u.k. british prime minister, making comments on migrant children, border security, and addressed the issues going on here in the united states. here are some of the thoughts from theresa may. [video clip] speaker -- mr. speaker, many of us in the house are aware of the deeply distressing audio of children separated from their parents in u.s. detention centers. as young as 18 months, they are being caged like animals. babies of eight months have been

less isolated in rooms. last night, the former head of u.s. immigration and and customs enforcement says he expects hundreds of these children never to be reunited with their parents. lost in the system. by the u.s. government. is the prime minister still intending to roll out the red carpet donald trump? to reason may: can i verse a to the honorable jim and that i'm pleased to see him in the chamber. on the very important issue he has raised what we have seen in the united states, the pictures of children being held in what appears to be cages are deeply deserving. -- disturbing. this is wrong and not something we agree with. this is not the united kingdom passes approach. have a long enduring

relationship, a long-standing relationship with the united states. there will be a range of issues i will discuss with president trump, our shared interest, and it is important to make sure of the see the president united states here, we have a discussion. leakers -- disagree with what they're doing come with a self -- doing, we say so. >> a disappointing answer. we should all condemn the actions of donald trump and i asked the prime minister to do that. we will continue on the conversation about immigration related matters specifically with things going on alumnus seven order. hollis the analyst with my --ion hollis the institute -- thatnstitute

discussion is coming up on "washington journal." ♪ >> the c-span buses in the -- in alaska for a stop on our city capital tour. that his thrilled band, a longtime programming partner, has chosen to visit for the first time in 20 years as part of the cities tour. for decades, we have offered c-span to our customers because and weeve in the mission

proudly support c-span plus's efforts to educate the nation on policy,, history, and current events. the cable companies around the nation make c-span plus. there is no government mandate, funding, advertising. sees and is a service always funded by us and other companies. c-span calls self cable proxies give to america. thanks to a lack -- a long-standing special art -- partnership with c-span, we get to showcase our state, the largest in the nation, to the rest of the country via sees them. well, there finally here. thank goodness. a deal for us. it gives a chance to show his

the city nationwide. have you had you this don't want to come in and sample what we have to offer hope you take it back and we're open for business and we like the idea here, it is like -- in the summertime. us in december when we visit alaska. listen on the seas than radio app. >> washington journal continues. host: lawrence hurley -- , talk about the migration policy institute. what is it? guest: it studies the movement of people worldwide, a nonprofit here and i have them looking at

everything related to u.s. immigration. host: i imagine some of that would deal with the topic of talent separation these days. guest: absolutely. throughn you walk us what policy has been when it comes to family separations for those entering the united states illegally? guest: anyone who approaches our southern border who does not have a come into the united expedited placed into removal proceedings. andviduals are detained removed from the country typically within a few days. individuals can express a fear of returning to their home country, which triggers a credible fear interview, where we assess whether they have a claim for asylum. then they are placed in long-term proceedings and treated differently. prior to the new policy, families were treated as ingle unit when they were going

through these press the seas. now families are being separated because of this thing happening to individuals when apprehended his prosecution. the children's do not follow the parent into the test the of federal marshals to follow through the criminal past process. instead, children are operated and i, and we have entirely different infrastructure for helping to deal with them at the border. is that you say the children never have and set it is meant previously? guest: there were some separations but mostly quite limited. families may have been separated under president bush and president obama, because of a and send. individuals are claiming a parent-child relationship. otherwise, they were not used for illegal entry and generally were not separated. host: what number are we talking

about of children step -- separated? and what happens in the meantime from the point they are separated to the point they are united. ? guest: 2500 children over the course of a month and we know it is sickness can we higher than that probably. we do not have the numbers coming out from the administration yet. when children are set rated on the parents, they are read last ride as unaccompanied migrant. we have a whole system or on the company child migrants, transferring them from the off resettlement, and office obligated to try to find children sponsors to the united dates, parents, families, and close them and their it the children continue to be held at they can't. in the meantime, these children are based into a long-term deportation proceeding that our immigration system is quite back to.

over 700,000d with cases. the children are set up in the system and there really is them for -- for unit time and the children. once the parents get out of terminal crossing issue, their place in expedited removal. they will tip to be removed from the united states with the today's here we have not in anything coming out of the administration yet i would allow for the current to be reunified with the children. host: sarah pierce will be with us until nine authentic or questions about children being separated from families in the process involved. if you want to ask for russians -- -- four questions. --for questions typically, how long does the child stay there and is it a

long stay for transferring? -- before transferring? i do not know. they are scrambling to find places to put the children. are a temporary measure but we do not know how long they are there. host: to what extent does that take waste? what does the united states provide? guest: meeting educational needs and health care, everything may need. but the reality is no matter how good the service is, the child has still be forcibly separated from their parents. these children are undergoing major trauma that no good services will help make up for. host: does that include psychological services and counseling? guest: i don't know it i hope that is some ring they are providing but i do not know if

they are providing the service is and to what extent. host: when a child is placed in a home or a facility or otherwise, -- >> if the office is able to locate a potential sponsor for a child, the individual undergoes a slew of other tracks before they will release that individual. questions to you starting off joyce, in alabama, republican line. you are on with sarah pierce. caller: i was just wondering how many parents and children at the obama administration separated when they were doing this and why there was no outcry for that . and the children coming across the border, are they with their parents or are they just with a set stress for or someone who wants to get into the united dates and it is not the child,

so how do we know this is their children? when they are allowed into the country, are there not illegals, that the children are staying with him osterholm's and claiming as children? guest: joyce was really asking a three-part question. under the obama administration, there was no policy that resulted in the mass operation of parents and children. there might have been some family separation, in a case you rest ernst, where there was , butcion of that otherwise, there was no mass separation of families at the border under the obama administration here you referenced this situation of fraud and that is when the trump ministration is very done about, whether or not parents are just laming to have children with him and that is something the trump administration is addressing in the policy.

but the main driver of family separation is zero drive -- zero policy where parents might have legitimate relationship with the children and their press cunanan separated on their children after entering the country. finally, you referenced a situation where this monsters who later claim the children coming out of the office of mightes -- resettlement the unauthorized but a lot of times, they have had the policy that it is ok if those sponsors are unauthorized there it there have been new policies coming down from the trump administration that have had a chilling act on individuals willing to come over and he sponsors of the children. all sponsors now undergo fingerprints and they are now shared with department of homeland security. there is an enforcement risk against the sponsors. it is likely that we will see less people willing to come forward and fonts are these children, which just voices further stress on the office of

resettlement. host: if a person comes in with a child, they do not have to provide proof and they just claim it as their child? guest: it is a good question. i'm not sure what kind of proof we're seeing or accepting. host: this is karen. caller: hi there. i am really trying to respect and support this president, but every part of the solution is ridiculous. just take away the fact that is children are being separated and let's just kind of play on the that that we have thousands of american children that need protection and need to -- need help. we're taking on a response believe someone else passes child who want to be with their parent. and then the mere fact that you have things that would even

address child trafficking or the administration means they are subconsciously trying to find another way to say this stupid but i really want is what the president. i just cannot understand how we did here as a entry and we want he respected and we want to call ourselves a nation of missions and a nation of policy and we turn around and disrespect the very poor that we live up to. i am so annoyed and i'm trying to get my head around how we can do something better every day. this is the most ridiculous was africa to do and it is embarrassing. host: do you have a question for our guest? where does this end? end, really andn seriously? we cannot do this anymore. rephrase.me what is the sustainability of

the ticket literally with children? thisstainability of particularly with children? creatingis is administration created orphans. we do not have facilities to continue to house the children for long times. at the same time, the parents are removed from the country in large part. we have an awkward situation where we have a responsibility for the children who we have effectively orphaned. that is not sustainable. it is hard for us to see where the policy could possibly end because to spread the public outcry, the administration has really doubled down on the policy and there is really no good end in sight at the moment. host: we hear next from ralph on the line. thanks for calling us. go ahead. caller: what i would like to know is what is the legal status

of the folks in custody? have theyetained or been arrested? there areknow, different legal circumstances regarding both categories. previously, people who entered the country without documents and who were not guilty of any crime were simply detained. the trumpms as though administration has changed that and now the folks are possibly being arrested. secondly, it would be wise for someone to remember that if they are arrested, they are entitled to legal representation and all of the privileges that folks who are arrested are entitled to. that could be very costly and time-consuming. so i wonder if you could clear up the situation and let me know, are these folks arrested or are they detained? guest: i think that is a great

question. what president trump'zero policy -- zero-tolerance policy does is takes anyone illegal in the they are transferred to the federal marshal, where they are in criminal custody and effectively arrested as you put it. when they go through that , -- process, the problem is these are mass hearings. maybe 40 immigrants are prosecuted at a time. there isn't a lot there for the defending counsel to do when they are trying to defend the individuals. the defense counsel is given may a few minutes before they go to the proceedings. migrantsost part, the are just pleading guilty to the crime to try and get out of

criminal custody as quickly as possible, especially if they are parents separated from the children. their idea is to get out as quickly as possible and be reunified with her children. unfortunately does not work like that get what they go through these proceedings, they are transferred back to the custody of the department of homeland security. host: a viewer on twitter asked the question -- we don't have proof. like a said earlier and explained, the way the system is set up, i do not see how the parents could possibly be reunited with the children. we do not have a system in place to do that. it is unfortunate the administration did not think ahead about how the policy would be implemented and what the after effects would eat. because there is no system in place to reunite parents and children. host: if there were a situation created by the department of homeland security or the administration on families, are

there new problems that stem -- stem from that? guest: we could imagine a scenario in which maybe the families are housed together at the border, the parents are taken away briefly to go through the federal prosecution at the trump administration and then possibly reunite with their shelters.n the family the problem is logistically, the administration does not have those resources put in place right now so they can't do that. there are also legal cases in prevent the administration from housing families in any long-term capacity. the administration is limited to about 20 days. so if the family gets out of expedited removal proceedings and they are in long-term proceedings in which they can apply for asylum, the administration cannot detain the family. this issue really bothers the trump administration. host: anna is next, in delaware

for our guest from the republican line. caller: yes. i have heard of deportation, whatever happened to that? when the haitians came over years ago and they got to the shores, they turned them around and sent them back. why can't they do that with these people? half of them probably don't even have fathers, so i do not know how they can be so up in arms about how they are being treated now. the majority of individuals who do not have authorization to enter into the united states are deported here they are placed interest dated removal proceedings and detained pd deported for a few days are the only individuals who get out of these expedited removal proceedings, families included, are individuals with legitimate claims at asylum. vermont, democrats

line, we hear next from mary. go ahead. i am wondering why this is not considered child abuse? i consider this child abuse. is this a tactic to ship -- tech to show immigrants not to come to the country or their children will be taken away? that weresorted so low will hide behind children and use children as pawns? i find this disgusting. i think mary raises an interesting point here the administration appears to be using this policy as a form of deterrence. not want individuals approaching the southern border and effectively, as you put it, they are using child abuse to deter parents from trying to enter. again, our guest is with the migration policy institute. pierce is joining us, a policy analyst from the

institute are from a viewer in west palm beach florida, independent line, we will hear next from john. hello. curious, many countries allow people to just come into the country the way these people are trying to come in. guest: all countries have an obligation to hear asylum seeker -- seekers and allow them to apply in the country. that is something we have to do on international law obligations. as representation from central american countries, are they advocating for the folks on the border as well do you know? do they have the opportunity to do that? guest: i am not sure i heard a lot of statements coming out of these countries and yes, that is something i would expect to see. could you describe the flores settlement?

children who arrived at we border without parents, were placing the children at shelters and there were concerns about quality of the shelters. the united states government was obligated to hold on accompanied child migrants in the least possible,e setting which is why now the office of refugee resettlement is first trying to find the sponsors pos, which is why now the in the united states. that is of course the least restrictive setting that you have. the aftermath,n really just recently in 2015 and 2016, federal court decisions said this agreement not only applies to on accompanied child migrants but to accompany child migrants. in the obama administration, it created a difficult situation because president obama want to keep them in detention and the federal court system effectively said he could not do so. helen in california,

republican line. hello. in 1997 when clinton was president, i worked at the juvenile hall for los angeles county. was, children of immigrants who entered the country illegally, they incarcerate them in juvenile hall like there were criminals as though they had broken a crime instead of their parents coming across illegally. i don't understand why now, all of a sudden, trump is the really bad guy. how come no one said when clinton was president, that they were putting children of immigrants in juvenile hall with a bunch of criminals? they had to keep them separate because they would've been even alive by the gang bangers in juvenile hall. it was terrible. so that is my question. this isn't new. this has been going on, over 20

years ago, this was going on then. how come all of a sudden, it is an atrocity? it was an atrocity then but nobody gave a damn. this was clinton's foreign policy treatment of illegal aliens entering the country. guest: it sounds like you witnessed what was occurring settlementat flores taking place and the children who were detained were not typically released to sponsors in the united states. as far as why so many people are more up in arms about what is going on now than what was going on then, i think there is a two-part reason for that. first, there was no previous policy under any prior administration that results in the mass -- resulted in the mass separation of children from their parents. this has not happened before. immigration is something that is very much present in the public consciousness. president trump guarantee that

when he ran on this and really continued to push that issue toward the forefront of his policies. and his politics. it is not just president trump p are have had a lot of albums with the immigration system in recent years and have not had any reforms to it. it is generally an issue that ts a lot of attention from the public and i believe that is another reason why there has been a huge public outcry over this he. host: a viewer on twitter asked how likely various legal challenges will be invoking the policy? guest: i don't know p are i am aware of maybe two cases where individuals are trying to counter the administration. in the past, president obama had a legal challenge to his policy of detaining families, and he was told he could not detain families as a form of deterrent. so he could not detain them for the purpose of deterring from approaching the united states p or while it

might sound like president trump doing some exemplary, he is having these parents undergo criminal prosecution. it is quite legal to prosecute individuals for the purposes of deterrence here in that legal avenue to my assessment is not available but maybe there are others and we will have to see in the coming weeks. host: the president sent out a tweet with larger issues going on saying -- host: walk through that. guest: i have trouble with that. anyone who cannot enter the country is placed to expedited proceedings and is deported from the country. the only individuals who are permitted to enter our unaccompanied child migrants not from mexico, or individuals with valid asylum claims.

this administration actually has made those interviews harder to get. jeff sessions had something last week that tightened this or they have already increased the likelihood that no one will get past the expedited proceedings. what was considered croaker -- credible fear and what has changed? the attorney general made it so individuals who are trying to gain asylum, he has made it much more difficult for them to qualify for asylum. he removed individuals who are claiming asylum based on their placement in a domestic violence relationship from what we call a particular social group, one avenue for asylum. kathy in north carolina, democrats line, you are next up. is married toter

a mexican guy who is legal now but i could not imagine how it if they took the kids daddy away from them. right. just not another thing, who are we to judge who comes into the country? your history, when columbus came, he was lost. the native americans were here, they was killed, wives, kids, it didn't matter. i just think they need to settle it down and leave these people alone. if they have like a bad history of crimes or something, then, you know, send them that paper -- people don't understand, if they take them all out, it will make more and cost everybody more money because they are the

only ones who will do the job in the fields. she is touching on the fact that this affects a lot of immigrationed to and unauthorized particularly in this country. the fact that we have as individuals inside the united congress and the administration haven't done anything to resolve the issue either. from san antonio, texas, independent line, peter, hello. go ahead. hader: ok, now, if congress done its job, russian agent donald trump wouldn't still be in power. number two, how come we are not charging jeff sessions and donald trump with crimes against humanity? guest: there have been international bodies that have raise concerns over these policies. we have also heard from

religious leaders, internationally, we have heard from political leaders from reallyountries who are participating in the public policy policy.the as far as any particular prosecutions or individuals in the government, -- government, t individuals in the government, i have not seen it rise to that level. host: information you will get from the department of homeland security, step one, you're currently in custody of homeland security customs and border protection, you have been charged with a crime of illegal , and within the next 48 hours, you will be transferred and resented before judge for violating this law and step three, how do i locate my children? three separate actions per it was to call the immigration center, call the hotline, and action three, friends, family, or, or staff, can adjust the issue by email.

i think there are two major issues with that. we have heard of a lot of people having problems with those steps. the first time a piece of people -- for to a tip line immigration customs enforcement. there are a lot of problems with the implementation of this. this piece of paper just tells you how to locate your child. it does not lay out how you could be reunited with your child. it has really just enabled you to establish phone conversations and maybe know where they are geographically. next 48 hours, you will be transferred and resented before judge for violatingif it doesn'r issue, how do we get the parents and children back together? host: from new york, democrats line. caller: glad to talk with you today. i am wondering what kind of parenting allows the parents who just ring children knowing that there are all the these issues going on across the border?

robbing ao me like bank and bringing your kids with you and expecting no repercussions, i just don't understand it. , ibe you could tell me why believe they are coming here economically more so. i have into mexico and mexico city and such. people obey the laws there. think they can come to our border, known way, cross the border illegally, bring the children knowing there is danger, or giving the children to the coyotes using these, especially the little girls, in horrible ways? why is that ok? did they not give them parenting lessons, maybe? guest: i think you bring up a lot of issues in the forefront of the american public consciousness, as far as this issue goes. would say is most of

these individuals are from central america. not mexico. the second is, a lot of them are scathing gang violence and different ones of violence in the countries. these countries have had aot of's dirty problems and individuals are escaping that and as evidence, i would say the journey to the united states border is an arduous one. it takes weeks or even months for individuals to, all the way through mexico and arrive at the border. so i don't think the families would undergo the -- this journey, which means me to my third point. to turn the individuals trying to come to states, in reality, if they are escaping gang violence and syrians threats -- serious threats to the lives and home, i do not think this policy will actually deter them.

i do not think it will deter a lot of parents from coming in. what do you think it does forall, what would it do the issue of families doing with the separation issue but they tolerance issue. it is a policy from the trump administration and he can at any time. both pieces of legislation would rollback protection for children, with we talked about earlier. under both pieces of legislation, it would enable families to be detained together. ideally, that would incentivize the trump administration to rearrange how they are going about this policy. one is a piece of legislation out there for a long time. the other is a so-called .ompromise bill

yesterday, a draft -- a trap was circulating that changed that bill a little further and would mandate that families be held together at the border even as parents might go through a prosecution, and that arrangement may not be ideal when you are considering the welfare of the children, it would at least guarantee the children stay together with their parents. steve is next from wisconsin. from rich bill, wisconsin? we will go to george, republican line. caller: you make it very easy to stereotype. you haven't said one good thing about president trump yet. i have a four-part question so maybe you want to jot it down. asked you ally

three-part question and when another lady did, you acted as if it was a long question so here it goes. what ages are considered the drop-off oink for these -- point for these "children." wass five times the way it .efore if they come from central america and get to mexico, they are already out of harms way, correct? why would they then continue to the united states? there are no words in mexico. wars in mexico. pedro, maybe you should because you are of that persuasion. thank you very much. question, heret

we go. i am not quite clear on the age question as far as what the age of the children are. to be clear, i am not sure what you're asking about their ages. we have heard from the administration they are not take babies from the parents, so we assume that means that children are being separated from their agedts as long as they are one or up to another thing that is relevant to the age of the children is we are suspecting that the children are quite young. in the past, the office of refugee resettlement was tasked with housing unaccompanied migrant spirit with the children that are arriving alone, those children are naturally older and 10 to be between the ages of 13 and 17. but when your talk about children taken from their parents, that will naturally be a quite younger age group. we are expecting once the administration releases data on this, to see that they are younger children which has created a lot of issues for the office of resettlement as far as how they go.

your second question was that you think this is not working as a deterrent because i think you set arrivals have increased by five times, but there is one in -- interesting and problematic thg the ministration is doing with the data. fiscal year 2017 was one of the lowest years on record as far as individuals arriving at the southern border. we kind of think this is because of all of the rhetoric president trump had on the campaign trail. he really talked about how harsh he would be on immigration. so it seems as if during 2017, there was a wait and see approach on the border. but because all of the factors are still there including concerns about violence, individuals started coming again in 2018. the 2018 numbers we have actually compare quite closely to what we saw in 2016, 2015, and 2014. rather than considering 2018 has served in illegal migration, in

reality it just seems to be a return to the normal we saw prior to 2017. #, the thirdestion question is legitimate or what about mexico? should these individuals be declaring asylum in mexico? that is something the republican party in particular has been very concerned about. the two peaches -- pieces of legislation would enable our government to declare unilaterally a country agreement with mexico that any asylum seeker entering through mexico who did not have a fear of persecution in mexico specifically, could be pushed back into mexico. i think that is an open question. the advocates side for immigrants, i think there are a lot of gang concerns in mexico and concerns about violence in mexico but that is definitely a topic currently being debated before congress. as far as foster care, it will be interesting to see of the

office of resettlement opens up a wider foster care network for these children because they do not have the ability to continue creating orphanages in the united states. host: what response have we heard from them generally? guest: we have not heard an official response yet. they are undergoing this presidential election, so generally we have heard a lot of negative things in the presidential election against president trump and his immigration policies, which is not surprising considering how much president trump has been pushing for the wall along the mexican border, but i do not know that we have had a specific response to this policy just yet. host: if the bill passed declares mexico a safe zone, how open to you think mexico would be to that? guest: i think it will create an awkward diplomatic situation. typically, the agreement with canada, that is a multilateral agreement between the countries. enablesacted this that

us to unilaterally declare with mexico, pushing migrants back into mexico, if they were trying to declare asylum in the united states, mess code is obligated to accept any non-mix in nationals. we are not actually sure how that would play out. we actually saw this in 2017 in one president front -- president trump's executive orders. he wanted to push individuals going through proceedings of the united states back to mexico. so they would have to wait in mexico while the proceedings are going on in mexico was not receptive to that at the time. --t: lawrence hurley sarah pierce is a policy analyst. michigan is next. go ahead. america hasnow that

a lot of racism here and a lot of data files. pedophiles in america. all of the people in the border, little kids are coming, we know they are coming now, and we know it is full of racism and hate for black he went people of color, they cannot wait to get their hands on some of the little girls and probably a lot of those little girls and boys will never be accounted for and the parents were not -- will not never going to see them again. host: i think we get your point. thank you. guest: you are touching on an issue that definitely is a major concern related to this policy, what is going to have into the children? where currently in the custody of the off this, which is obligated to hold the children in the least restrictive setting possible. it usually means releasing them to sponsors but we saw the last

time when we had a crisis related to children in 2014, when the office is trying to deal with this issue quickly and is overburdened, and working it preventsapacity, the office from doing really good vetting of these sponsors which definitely created concerns the last time we had a crisis of these proportions here that will be a concern to lockley, the office of resettlement put new policies in place the last time it was a concern. we will hopefully see vetting of sponsors but i think that is definitely a very relevant concern. host: are you saying the current office of refugee resettlement -- what is the capacity currently, give us specifics if you can. guest: the trump administration resourcesg to ramp up prior to this.

office of refugee resettlement is really just doing with whatever it already had. as of the last time i was on this program three weeks ago, the office was already at 95% capacity. they are scrambling to increase capacity to hold children. the border is an open question. money and housing. florida, it you are next. go ahead. caller: thank you and good morning, everybody. over 20 years now, i have been hearing all about the e-verify program. a lot of illegal immigration problems, and now they're doing with refugees and i am curious why this is verify has not even been implemented. it has not even been talked in the newsnybody

organizations. i'm curious what you have to say about that. thank you. guest: things in the past were definitely economically driven. when the united states went through the recession, they decrease but in reality, these tend to be more refugees, individuals to -- asylum in the united states trying to escape. , maybe program operating .p to half it is mandated up half of the united states. but you're right, a lot of attention on this issue.

most of this instrument by humanitarian concerns. the viewer who asked if families will be able to sue the united states over all of this. guest: it is possible. it is hard for individuals who are not present, but the family is already here and they are entitled to rights under the constitution. it is very possible they will be able to bring these claims. guest: -- host: next, washington state republican line. caller: hi. it is very possible they will be able to bring these claims. can you hear me all right? ok. i have a couple of questions to ask you. a huge illegal immigrant problem here where there is no housing and a place for nobody to live,

now we say we need to have open borders. i'm wondering what the philosophy is about a sovereign nation. are we a sovereign nation or an wen border nation? guest: are not an open border nation to we don't and we never have. individuals who are authorized placed intoded and expedited removal proceedings where they are detained for a few days and then deported in the country. we definitely do not have open borders. the only individuals to enter the country -- individuals with asylum claims. our democrats line in virginia, to -- john is next. caller: i can only think of one -- that isuld create

separating parents from their children. imagine how scared the child is? ok. . bys is an act of terrorism our own government and our own readers and how dare our leaders be quoting passages out of the heart -- out of the bible. they are the least people qualify for that. thank you very much. guest: i think you touch on an important issue, that these children are undergoing serious major drama. how this is causing trauma in the children and rising to the level of child abuse. host: when do we know when we have hit critical mass on this issue? guest: have we not already? i'm not sure. the fact that we have over 2000 , no possibility of being reunited, and any meaningful scale, that is critical mass.

host: what happens to accommodations and everything else that goes on that 2000 march -- mark? if all of a sudden, the office can't accommodate -- host: independent line, you are next. usaer: about a year ago, today newspaper had an article on the front page talking about private prisons paying for trump's inauguration. know, who is paying for these people to be incarcerated? is it a moneymaking scheme? how much money to private prisons get to incarcerate? the truth of the matter is i think this is a moneymaking scam actually and this is a pay that to the private prison industry

to trump for paying for his inauguration. have you ever looked at this before? one other thing, ok? when it comes to wanting to deport people for having misdemeanor crimes and stuff like that ok? why are people that are america claims andld create everything, why aren't they deported back to with immigrants came from? on the first issue, i cannot speak very well to the relationship between the prison industry and the trump administration. andnow that many immigrants i cannot even say whether or not it is the majority, but whether or not increase in shelters we have been talking about is tied up in the private prison industry, i am not sure and i do not believe that is case. i cannot even say whether or not it is the majority, but whether

orhost: here is jeff sessions himself in an op-ed us morning. the children are well cared for and get better care than a lot of americans to. they provide plenty of education all at transported taxpayer expense. guest: i think it is great if they are getting full and holistic services with the government but the reality is they have been separated from the parents so they are undergoing trauma. in a matter what care we provide, it does not change the fact that they are taken from their parents. it says what we want is a safe and lawful system of immigration and we want to build a law to prevent illegal immigration. the way he phrases that, it sounds as if they are using the separation of the parents and children as a way to manipulate, which i think is unbelievably irresponsible. host: he says this --

we have heard that statement out of the administration a lot to it we are hearing mixed reports about what actually happens. when we heard of parents inc. separated from their children at the port of entry, we have heard more widespread support staff reports of asylum seekers trying to declare asylum and being turned away from the ports of entry beyond their capacity. the asylum-seekers are going and being turned away at one, 2, 3, 4, 5 days in a row. it will incentivize them to trust the border illegally and like down the custom border patrol's officer. the administration is saying that but they haven't increase the capacity of the ports of entry to accommodate the asylum-seekers. they are saying one thing but in reality are doing if our different in on the border. host: texas, republican line. a couple ofve

questions. first, what happens to an american when they cross into met the co-illegally? they get jailed, if i am correct. why can't mexico stop these people from coming from other countries into their country and stop them from them into hours? secondly, i feel that for the children, i really do. but what it boils down to is, where is the outrage for the children who are taken away from our owninals here in justice system? there is no outrage and those children are just as much traumatized as the immigrants are. and thirdly, wakeup, america. we are creating a whole daca because it is the law that they can turn back the parents, but they cannot turn the children back. therefore, the children were brought here illegally and they are dreamers. guest: ok, that was a lot here

and i am not sure -- it is an interesting question i would be interested in -- to know the answer to it. mexico does have enforcement oh the southern border and it is ramping up that. so that is something that is half thing. there are a lot of people comparing the issue to parents who have been taken away from their children who have committed crimes within the dates. it is very relevant to compare those two things. what i would say is that it is unnecessary to prosecute these parents and take them away from their children at the border. the way is best the systems are set up, you could not just deport the families. you do not actually need to separate them. we are kind of creating a very unnecessary trauma based on the as far we have in place

as the united states, we decided that it's a nessus or evil of the criminal is the system. as far as the border, many presidents decided it was not a necessary evil to separate parents and their children in this administration has changed that. finally, i think there are a lot of misunderstanding with the as farof the children as the united states, we decided that it's a nessus or evil of the criminal is the are. if a family arrives at the border and they are unauthorized, they are placed in excavated removal proceedings. there is not an obligation for the u.s. government to separate his children. there is confusion related to a called daca, a program created by president obama that authors -- offers authorization and deportation for children brought to the united states -- i am sorry, for immigrants rot to the united states as children but those immigrants have been residing in leastited states since at 2012 here and i believe they have to have been here since 2007. that policy is not relevant to the children arriving at the border today. from houston, texas,

democrats line. caller: yes, hello, good morning america. god bless you. [indiscernible] [indiscernible] added on to you. we are running short on time. if you have a question or, for the guest, go ahead. uh, what do ladies think about children to be abused? guest: i think there is a lot of concern about whether or not ladies think aboutthis policy rises to the ll of child abuse. the american academy of pediatrics came out and said it does rise to the level of child abuse, the trauma inflict on these children when their

forcibly separated from their parents. host: from florida, republican line. caller: hi, i would like to know why they changed the rule about ellis island. it was so nice. you had to speak english, you had to have a job. why did that all stop? because we wouldn't have had gangs and all here. they had gangs because they are not doing what trump is doing. because wethey are keeping the s coming over, those are the ones that have them 13's. we should put them and policy and all the politicians that want them, they should put them in their area, their hometown, they should put all of these and 13's and these illegals. already, -- already, -- host: got you, thank you. guest: it is probably important to repeat who can enter the

united states. individuals can enter the united dates if they have higher approval, maybe they have a on a job, orsed maybe they have a family on a job, or maybe they have a family relationship with the united states or maybe they received a temporary visa to to visit the united states. as individuals can enter legally. individuals apprehended at the southern border and to not have the authorization to enter, all placed into expedited removal proceedings in which they are detained and deported from the country within a few days or only individuals who get out of expedited removal proceedings are individuals who have a credible claim that asylum. our special procedures put into place for on accompanied child migrants, those were put into place in 2008 under the protection act because congress decided if a child was arriving at the southern border, and the child was alone and they were from a non-contagious country, any country other than mexico for ample, the countries of central america, that child

deserves special protection so they can enter the united states. is a policypierce analyst talking about policy for are set to vote on two pieces of legislation. taking a look at the topic of legislation. stay tuned. we take you to the house. >> the house will be in order. pursuant to the order of the house on january 20. house of january 8, 2018, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties. all time shall be equally allocated between the parties and in no event shall debate continue beyond 9:50 a.m. each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the majority whip shall be limited to five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from kansas, mr