theou watch television, high price could be a result of the television ads, which are cheap. and of drug representatives that hospitals. sometimes they get benefits and a good car for being a salesperson. that could be a result of the higher prices as well. not so much for price but for induced demand. what to dos has been "washington journal" continues. host: each week, we take a look

at a different aspect of your money. this week, we are focusing on the u.s. debt and deficit and to do that we are joined by christopher mihm, who serves as the strategic issues management director at the accountability office. and maybe just define those terms, debt and deficit, and the difference between them. is the annualicit number, the difference between the revenues and actual expenditures that go out of the federal government each year. the debt, like in our personal lives, is how much you are building up over a long time of what you owe that you are not paying down each year. host: the report we are about this money from the government accountability office, the fiscal health and action needed to address the physical feature of the government. we have a phone lines for democrats, republicans and independentss. .

a good place to look at is the u.s. debt clock.org. the national debt approaching $21.2 trillion, the deficit expected to be over $800 billion, which two of those numbers concerns you more? guest: they are both of concern in a sense that -- our report focused on the end of 2017, taking us through last september, but as you said the numbers you have are both big and the real concern is they are both growing. our concern and what we have been urging congress and the executive branch to do is to put in place a plan that will deal with both of those. we are on track to hit our historical high of jet to pdb -- to gdp ratio. we are on track in a few short years, depending on which assumptions you use between 14-22 years, we will hit 106% and keep going.

so we need to manage both of those. host: are there lessons to be learned from looking back to that time when we were in the fiscal position to maybe bend the curve we are seeing today? guest: very much. the report you mentioned has a chart that shows from 1790, the founding of the republic, debt to gdp ratios. and what you see consistently over time is that as, during the wartime, economic downturns, recessions and depressions, the ratio goes up. we spend more than -- we spend more. during peacetime, historically, and economic upturns, we pay down that debt. and so we had that 106% after world war ii, then over the next, into the mid-70's or so we were paying the down. we did go up periodically over time, but postwar it has been about 45%. the concern is, over the last two decades, the historical

pattern has been broken. we have not been paying down the debt during better times, and as a result we are on this, but we would refer to as an unsustainable fiscal path. those are the hard decisions we have to make about spending and revenue going forward. we need to get back in place and put a plan in place to deal with long-term challenges. host: the term you referred to in the report available at jdo.gov, but i can show it to viewers, the percentage of growth domestic product, the debt held by the public as a percentage of gross to meta-product. you can see the changes from 1790 to 1800, to the 1900s, through to today. in the report, if you take a look at it, you will see numbers from jdo, cbo, explain the gao?rence -- what is guest: we are, like cbo, we are

part of the congress and legislative branch where an independent nonpartisan agency an independent nonpartisan agency. we are basically the congressional watchdog. we do program evaluations, audits at the request of congress. we do about 800 a year. the overwhelmingly majority of those available on our website. people pay my salary and this out of my colleagues, so that information is there information. people can search, find basically the valuation of or assessment of anything the federal government does, virtually everything the federal government does on the website. host: is the power in the tell an to, can gao stop spending money a certain way? guest: i wish we had enforcement authority, but we do not have direct enforcement authority, but fortunately for us the power of what we have, over time, close to 80% of our

recommendations are implemented, so the authority we have is through the quality of the work that we do and in the gao we were closely with congress and getting action on our recommendations, whether they be actions for those agencies or legislative actions that need to take place. ofend up saving tens billions of dollars each year in the american people, thousands of other benefits like management improvements within agencies, so we are a good return on investment. host: if you want to join the conversation, lines for democrats, republicans and independents. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. christopher mihm will be with us until the bottom of the hour. this chart shows the three biggest drivers of long-term fiscal spending, health care, social security, interest on the debt. which of those is the easiest to

bend down? guest: it would be great if any of them were easy to bend down. the viewers with the last segment saw the challenges we have on health care costs. medicare, just on social security and interest on the debt, we are projecting a $3 trillion increase in federal spending over the next decade, two thirds of that increase will come from those three kind of broad program areas. and so, you know, i would not characterize it as being easy, but to the extent we can begin to pay, or piling less debt on and decreasing the ratio, we are about 76% debt to gdp now, that is money that comes back without any other different choices that need to take place. host: what is the tipping point? you talk about using hard decisions, these fiscal pictures look decades into the future. when did these decisions need to be made? guest: we need to put in place a

plan of against the start dealing with it now. the sooner you start dealing with these challenges, the broader array of options you have and the less painful decisions you need to make on that. let me give you context. we often talk about using a device called, something called the fiscal gap, the amount of either spending reductions or revenue increases that we need to be taken immediately and permanently in order to achieve a certain target by any given point in time. as an example, say you wanted to keep for over 75 years, where we are now on jet -- on debt to gdp. that would require, it would probably end up being a mix of them, it would require a 37% decrease, or rather increase in revenues, or 27% decrease in spending. that would have to be permanent. we are not going to do that, but it would have to be a mix of those. the sooner you take action, the

broader the array of options we have and the less people any decision needs to be made. host: on a day that the debt is $21 trillion, $184 billion and rising, we are talking about the nation's's fiscal health. michael is up first in illinois, the line for independents. good morning. caller: this is a mobile number. woodbridge, illinois. host: go ahead. caller: ok, thank you so much. mr. mihm, i want you to comment on why is it that every time, you are not the only person that is talking about this, the concorde coalition, i do not know if it exists, but they used to talk about these things and you know, there is this a equation in front of us -- we

are spending more than we are taking in -- the only solution i ever hear is, we have to cut social security and cut medicare and yada yada. look, the fed has been managing the economy with low interest and thathelp the rich, is why the debt has been manageable. it is all smoke and mirrors. tell me, why don't we talk about putting the maximum tax bracket back up to 90%, like it was i think in the 1950's after world war ii, and squeeze the top 10% in the nation that has profited from all of this "economic growth," and led them pay for this stuff. because i earned my benefits. host: that is the revenue side. guest: i completely understand where the caller is coming from and that is why we have been saying the solution will have to be a mix of spending and revenue

issues. you are not going to get a lot of spending, not all out of entitlements, for exactly the reason the color was mentioning -- caller was mentioning. those are difficult policy decisions, the how and where and how big on each, that is something that is not a question i can answer, it is a policy that is up to congress and up to voters. host: the report from gao, viewers will not find a specific tax bracket that you are recommending to solve the problem. guest: absolutely not. that is a policy call. and tickets to political views and values that is not appropriate for an audit office to make. host: new york, good morning. caller: hi. i have a comment. , my firstntleman question is how old were you in

wasral -- when greenspan concerned about the biggest problem that might be paying isn the national debt, which why i supported the bush tax cut ? host: why you concerned about age? caller: because he has been watching the money for it is why i supported the bush tax wh. guest: i am a proud member of the baby boom generation. host: do you have a follow-up question? caller: my point being, $21 trillion is a very large chunk of change. it was about $5 trillion when they cut taxes. and at that point, that is when it started to boeing. - -- balloon basically the money has been transferred out of the treasury and into the hands of the top 1%, maybe 1.5%, maybe 1.25%. so you cannot just rip that

back. said,ke the caller before what is the problem with raising tax rates? not to mention the fact that the people before talking about drug prices. donald trump talks about how we are getting ripped off by other countries. meanwhile, other countries are mostly ripping us off by letting us pay the high price of drugs that they get reduced prices for. host: we will take thehost: point. i will show this chart, showing the total u.s. public federal 1966 through the -teens. this from business insider story on the rising federal debt. guest: one of the things, the c aller mentioned international dishes, but one thing to keep in

mind is over the $20 trillion of that, about 1.7 chilean dollars of that is debt held by the public. what that is is that held primarily by international investors, the message investors, the record is of that is the two categories, and some held by the federal reserve and state and local governments. of the $14 trillion, a large and growing share is held by international investors. in fact, in about 2001, about public debtebt was being held by international investors, now it is around 39% and it continues to grow. host: explained debt held by government accounts. guest: that is primarily intergovernmental, intro governmental accounts. ans that the government is making to itself. it gets repaid, so it is not a subsidy on that.

it is a concern and is legitimate to talk about the entire 20 drilled -- the entire ire $20- ent trillion. host: 5.6 train dollars held by the governments. eddie in massachusetts, go ahead. caller: i was interested in your ratio of debt to gdp. trillione a $21 deficit and to be at 100%, does that mean our gdp is $1 billion? trillion for goes to mr. product? -- gross domestic product? guest: if we get to 106% within 14-22 years, the amount of debt that is owed by the federal government is about the size of the economy. so back to the earlier discussion that we were having come it does not mean that there is some sort of apocalypse or

tipping point that happens there. world war ii, we were able to take actions and worker way out of it. but what it does mean is that that the array of options that will be available to congress and the market people in terms of spending will decrease or be more constrained over time, flexibility in terms of meeting new priorities will be constrained. this is what we mean when we refer to an unsustainable path. host: this is a chart from your report. the important part showing that it goes all the way out the 2090, and various lines showing the baseline for malaysians by the gao, alternative simulations, how flexible are all of these lines? how much do they allow for cushion in case of something unexpected like a natural disaster, some sort of war? guest: that is -- there are a couple things of concern. on the direct point, they are all about the -- it is a

simulation, not a projection, in the sense that we believe the country will take action before you get to those ciccone and really -- draconian really bad situations. so our point is that the sooner we take action the greater the array of options, less typical it is those decisions we need to take. host: certainly a point you have emphasized throughout the report. guest: even using different assumptions, basically the models -- they work off of each other. using different assumptions, they all point in the same direction, whether it is ours, our baseline versus , where ines, the cbo the fiscal report of the united states, that comes from the treasury, they all show -- facts are facts. any all show we are on unsustainable path. host: caller from ohio, good morning.

caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. to set up my question, correct currencym wrong, ithe in this country is the federal reserve notes and it is not actually money. we as it predicated on the confidence we have to purchase with it. it seems like the debt you are talking about is correlated to money, but the federal reserve notes are just securities. there is really no substance. so the substance is the value of the labor pools that brings the value into existence, in a matter if you are paid $5 or $50. help me gain a perspective on how the debt-based economy represents the value of labor of individuals and how it is reflected in the $21 trillion debt. thank you.

guest: one thing that is consistent with the point you are asking about is that, right now we are borrowing and a lot of money. we are borrowing it generally by historically standards, low to moderate and just rates. a spike in interest rates would cause us, it would obviously increase our debt costs, interest costs, quite significantly. it gets to a point, the confidence point the caller was raising, was in 2011-2013, when there was a question as to whether or not the congress would raise the debt limit, we did quite a bit of work on looking and talking with the investor community and tracking interest rates, and found there was a decline in confidence in u.s. securities. investors were not willing to hold them, that they would mature in the short term. it led to the increase in borrowing costs.

so playing with the fate of the federal government, making sure that investors have confidence in treasury securities, is absolutely vital. not.t costs us if it does that is why in our report we've advocated that congress change the way it deals with the debt level, solely with appropriations and budget decisions in the congress and i am an article i guy in terms of constitutional issues. keeping those spending decisions with the congress. but not, but better joining debt and it spending decisions together rather than separating them artificially the way they are now, which leads to a reduction in confidence. host: less than 10 minutes left. if you have a question as we talk about physical health. we have lines for democrats, republicans and independents. good morning, william. caller: thank you for taking my call. you said earlier, somebody said that obama pretty much the book the national debt, but in

reality a lot of that debt came from tax cuts, two unpaid wars, there is art b, and lot of spending that goes towards vets as it relates to their injuries and benefits as a result of these wars, so how much of that debt really did come from barack obama, and not with previous administrations did and chose not to put the debt on the books? guest: in terms of more recent numbers, that i am more familiar was, is the debt in 2017 the deficit rather, was $666 billion, that was a $23 billion increase from the preceding year. cbo has estimated because of legislative action, including the tax cuts, bipartisan budget agreement, the appropriations

taken at the end of last year, this was after 2017 when we finished the work on this report, that there will be an increase in the and a deficit in the coming years on this -- debt and deficit in the coming years on this. this is a long-term, bipartisan issue, which is why it is so difficult. if it was just a matter of either one party or one set of decisions or one set of programs, or easy fixes we could make, we probably would've done that moment of. the challenge is for a lot of very good reasons this is very hard to deal with and again, it is because of good reasons it is hard to deal with, because we have priorities we want to spend on and things we want to fund. host: the top economic advisor, larry kudlow, made statements about the deficit that raised eyebrows. there is a headline from the hill newspaper. lyric of the claims the rising deficit is coming down. he is quoted as saying, as the

economy gears up, more people working in better jobs and careers come as revenues come rolling in, the deficit is coming down and it is coming down rapidly. growth solves a lot of problems. is the deficit coming down? guest: obviously, i saw the press accounts of that and i also understand that he later clarified and talked about some of the comments that he was making. projected is we are looking at a big increase in the deficit and debt in 2018, including the 10 year window as well in the neighborhood of in the trillions over the next 10 years. obviously, the larger point he was making is economic growth is obviously very good, and it reduces the size of your challenge, but i should underscore that just like we are not going to tax our way out of this problem, or cut our way out of this problem, we will not grow our way out of this

problem. there is no scenario that lets us know we will be able to get sustained economic growth at the levels that would have me back here in a couple years saying, it was overblown, sorry. host: the projection has the deficit over $800 billion this year by 2024, 1 $.2 trillion. those are some of the numbers from cbo, fox news research on responding to mary kudlow. and -- larry kudlow. and we have dave on the republican line. good morning. caller: first, a quick,. comment. it would bother to work if the government to 90% of what they earn? a question about medicare. once therstand it, biggest contributor to the growth in our national debt, tens of trillions of dollars in

future liabilities for a program that people pay into for about 50 years and take out of for about 15 years, yet i hear more and more democratic politicians composing -- proposing medicare for all. what do you think that we do to our national debt? guest: there are a couple things on medicare. i made a reference about being a member of the baby-boom generation. i am on the backend of that as it were, but beginning in 2010 is when the first of the baby-boom generation became eligible for medicare. 65 years old. we now have for the next 15-20 years, between 10,000-11,000 per day that turn 65 and become medicare eligible on that. that is putting enormous pressure on obviously federal spending. and i do not say that as being a bad thing, this caller and a number of others have indicated

that people have paid into that and they have made a life assumptions that that would be available to them, but the accommodation of demographics, the retirement and baby-boom generation, and on the whole we are living longer, although obviously very sadly we have some racial interregional disparities on that, but life expectancies are going up. the cost of beneficiary, which you heard about earlier, that is also going up because of new technologies and health care inflation. that is outstripping the general economy, but new technologies and procedures -- so dealing with health care aspect is very difficult on that. now, the second part in terms of medicare for all or any changes we would make in terms of general national health insurance coverage, it is very difficult to say exactly what the implications would be, because of just the complexity of all the moving parts that would have to be put together and really understand what the relationships of the moving parts and when they would be. host: ok, the land of lincoln.

robert is a republican from illinois. am in marion at park. quick question on a follow-up. i heard rand paul say if you took a penny from every dollar we spend you will get knocked down quickly, although i do not have much confidence in our congress nowadays, but is that true, just one penny you would be able to knock down the deficit pretty rapidly? guest: i would have to see the context of the senator's comments on that. obviously even small savings can make big differences for you. one thing that we outline in the report is some opportunities to really make improvements on that. for example, each year at the request of -- based on statutes, the congress has this release a

report of duplication overlap fragmentation, and also cost savings and enhancement revenue opportunities within the federal government. over the last few years, it has resulted in over $100 billion in savings that has a ready taken place, as well as a combination of those that are booked into the future. the point is that that is tens of billions of dollars in additional savings that if congress and the executive branch acted on a recommendations, already costed out, that that could come to the federal treasury. likewise, there is the each year we have a $400 billion in all tax gap, the difference in that, the difference between what is legally owed and what is actually paid. that is money that is out there that would not require any conversation about, we should increase taxes or not increase taxes, this is already legally owed. and it needs to be recovered. host: what it costs more to

collect those taxes, to get the people out there to make sure that the taxes are actually being collected, will there be an expense on that side? guest: in some cases, yes. we have shown that you need a three-pronged strategy. first, clarity in the tax code. we find a great deal of the problem is people wanting to do the right thing, intending to do the right thing, but just making a mistake because of the complexity of the tax code. the lower hanging fruit on that is actually two elements, one, better customer service. making sure that the irs is answering questions quickly and accurately. increasedird is enforcement action where those are needed. to the extent integrated third-party information, that is information from mortgage dealers or whatever, that goes into the tax system, that will help people pay their taxes and will help with enforcement actions. host: last call.

gregory, republican. go ahead. caller: thank you. mr. mihm, secretary mnuchin just served our gold reserves. know am just curious to how the gold reserves of the united states, which is the greatest of any nation on earth, 80 some hundred or thousand tons, plays into this deficit. and are we buying gold at prices today in order to enhance our holding, or is it going out, how does it work? and what comes to mind is hillary, how could she possibly drop the sale of uranium to russia? it is unimaginable. i appreciate your comment on gold as it plays into her deficit and debt. need ai'm not sure i minute or so on that particular

question. that is not something we are particularly looked at. we are focused on the combination of spending and revenue decisions that need to be made. it requires us as a country and congress to come up with a long-term plan on how to deal with that. we have had short-term needs, whether it is another economic downturn, or a catastrophic weather event, hurricanes, those have to be dealt with. so our point is the sooner we get a plan in place the greater array of options we have, the less draconian we have. at some point we begin to see big problems because of this. host: the report is the nation's fiscal health, gao.gov. easy to find all these reports. we appreciate it, christopher mihm,

>> c-span's "washington journal" live every day with issues that impact you. coming up tuesday morning author and msnbc host lawrence o'donnal discusses his newly updated back originally published in 1983 which chronicles the 1975 police shooting of an unarmed black man in boston. then our guest speaks about foreign policy shaping the current age. be sure to watch c-span's "washington journal" live at 7:00 eastern tuesday morning and join the discussion. >> this week book tv is in primetime. starting tonight at 8:30 eastern senator bernie sanders talks about his book "where we go from here." tuesday at 8:00 p.m. eastern newt gingrich with his book "trump's america, the truth about our nation's great comeback." wednesday at 9:00 p.m. in depth fiction edition with best

selling thriller author brad th osm r. thursday night at 8:00 eastern michelle obama on her upcoming memoir "becoming" and on friday at 8:00 p.m., "afterwards" with barbara ehrenreich with her book "natural causes." killing ourselves to live longer. watch book tv in primetime on -span 2. >> at the white house briefing sarah sanders took questions from reporters on a number of issues including the president's meetings with potential nominees to replace supreme court justice anthony kennedy and reports that north korea was still working on its nuclear program. his is about 20 minutes. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. >> this morning the department of justice and the federal bureau of investigation's joint

terrorism task force announced the arrest of an ohio man for providing material support to al qaeda. on sunday the suspect explained to an undercover f.b.i. agent that he was planning to conduct an attack in cleveland on independence day and a future terrorist attack in philadelphia. president trump commends the work of the d.o.j. and f.b.i. for helping stop this would-be attacker. to continue the ongoing and important work of denuclearization on the korean peninsula secretary pompeo will leave for north korea on july 5 to meet with the north korean leader and his team. the state department will release more details about his upcoming trip. one item that some of you may have missed last wednesday in the midst of a busy news day was the confirmation hearing for v.a. secretary nominee robert wilke. mr. wilke has been twice confirmed by the senate, most recently last fall by unanimous consent for his current position as under secretary for personnel and readiness at the

department of defense. during the hearing mr. wilke not only demonstrated he has the leadership and experience to lead the v.a., he also spoke in depth about how he shares the president's vision to put veterans first. senators isaacson and testor, the committee chairman and ranking member respectively, have expressed their support. the white house expects the senate to move quickly to confirm robert wilke as the next v.a. secretary upon his return. with that i will take your questions. >> sarah, you call on me before my husband? >> it's a tough battle. i did. yeah. record, let the record show. >> ok. >> i will say i'll take a question. >> you got it. >> i think this is a big moment. so i had to give it to -- yeah. >> if the president would tweet about it then it changes the whole dynamic. i digress. during the campaign, the president said i am pro life and i will be appointing pro life judges.

is the president still committed to appointing pro life judges? >> as the president said last week he is not going to talk to judges about specific cases. he is looking for individuals that have the right intellect, the right temperament, and that will uphold the constitution. >> senator susan collins says she wants a nominee that will respect precedent and that roe vs. wade is settled law. does the president agree that roe vs. wade is settled law? >> again, the president is not going to get into asking the candidates about specific cases but he is looking for somebody that meets those qualifications that i just outlined. >> is it important to him --? >> go ahead. >> sarah, is this any concern the president has based on over the weekend reports out of north korea that it is either continuing on with this nuclear program or making efforts to enhance it and in any way seeking to deceive this administration about the

denuclearization intentions? >> we aren't going to confirm or deny any intelligence reports. what i can tell you is we are continuing to make progress. ambassador kim had a meeting just yesterday with members of the north korean delegation and secretary pompeo as i just mentioned will be heading to north korea later this week. we'll continue those conversations. >> you say you're continuing to make progress. how can the public evaluate that progress? what has happened? >> i think a number of things. one, in the last eight months you haven't seen missile launches. you haven't seen nuclear -- the nuke lear detonations -- nuclear detonations. again, these conversations are continuing to evolve. i am not going to get into the details. i can tell you progress continues to be made. >> sarah, who are the four judicial candidates the president has? >> well, it wasn't me. so i can clear that up. i know you were really curious about that. again, the president is being

very thoughtful about this process. he is looking for certain characteristics which we've outlinedment beyond that i can tell you he met with four people today. the meetings lasted roughly 45 minutes. e is going to continue meetings through the rest of the week with a few other candidates. >> can you comment on the cbs report today that judges kavanagh and barrett are now at the top of his list? >> again, i'm not going to get into any more of the process other than what the president stated. >> the president last thursday wrote on twitter "house republicans should pass the strong but fair immigration bill known as goodlatte 2 in their after nan vote today." on sunday you wrote on twitter i never pushed the republicans in the house to vote for the immigration bill. why would the president lie about something like that? >> he didn't. the president has talked all along, we've laid out the priorities and principles we support that we wanted to see reflected in legislation. at the same time the president wasn't aggressively lobbying

members because he knew democrats in the senate still were unwilling to actually come to the table and focus on solutions rather than playing political games. we could have gotten it through the house but that doesn't work if we can't get it through the senate. democrats have made it abundantly clear they don't actually want to fix problems. they just want to talk about this all the way i guess for some reason they think this is a good issue for them, although it isn't. frankly, i think it is outrageous democrats have not come to the table and tried to help fix this problem. margaret? >> thank you, sarah. there was a report that it is even kind of maybe on the table --. >> kinda maybe. that sounds solid. >> -- -- chairman kim to new york around the u.n. i just wanted to get on the record, if you can put that in context for us. number one, is that in play? i mean a number of conditions have to be met but is that really something you would consider doing? >> we don't have any

announcements or plans to roll out at this point. >> so without getting into all of the four words the president said two of the five he is looking at a for the supreme court are at least women. were any of the people he met with today women? >> i'm not going to get into those details. john? >> thanks a lot. following up on that question is this an important consideration for the president getting a conservative woman on the u.s. supreme court? >> again, the president would like to see somebody who meets the qualifications that i've laid out. and that is what he is focused on. >> sarah, if i may, on trade, on canada responded to the steel and aluminum tariffs that the president has imposed already on imported steel and aluminum. what is the response from the white house from the president to that action by canada? >> we've been very nice to canada for many years. and they have taken advantage of that. particularly advantage of our farmers.

and at g-7 the president actually proposed they get rid of all tariffs and drop all barriers and have really great trade. and they refused that. and escalating tariffs against the united states does nothing to help canada. it only hurts american workers. the president is working to fix the broken system and he is going to continue pushing for that. jordan? >> thanks, sarah. the national security adviser john boldin appeared to leave the door open to the u.s. recognizing the russian situation with crimea and his upcoming meeting with vp -- with vladimir putin. will you rule out that, the u.s. recognizing the and ex-ation? >> we agree to disagree with russia on that front and our crimea sanctions against russia will remain in place until russia returns the peninsula to the ukraine. >> is it a possibility in the future? would recognizing the and ex-ation be on the table if russia agrees to certain

concessions? >> i am not going to get into any negotiations a the this point. >> following up on north korea president had declared on twitter there was no longer a nuclear threat from north korea and even putting aside these reports about the intelligence material, there's also commercial satellite imagery showing activity going on at these north korean sites related to unanimous processing as well as the missile -- uraniuim processing as well as the missile facilities. does the administration believe there is no longer a nuclear threat? also, john bolten yesterday on "face the nation" said the overwhelming bulk of the program could be dismantled within a year while experts say 10 to 15 years. could we get clarity on that? >> we are continuing to make progress. we had good meetings yesterday. as i said, secretary of state will be there later this week to continue those discussions. i'm not going to confirm or deny any of the intelligence reporting out there. as far as the one-year

timeline, the ambassador said if north korea makes a decision to denuclearize their ballistics programs could be dismantled in a year. there is great momentum right now for positive change and we're moving together for further negotiations. beyond that i don't have anything for you. >> on friday the president said that one of the topics up for discussion with president putin would be elections and we don't want election meddling. does that mean he intends to raise the possibility of russian interference in the mid-term elections? does he have any proposals or anything specific he would like to hear from president putin about that? >> i'm not going to get ahead of the president's conversations. keep you guys posted and updated as things develop. jill? >> i want to ask, the president-elect of mexico, does the president believe the election will have an impact on nafta negotiations or change the terms? >> they had a very positive and constructive first call. it lasted about a half hour.

they talked pretty extensively about trade. the willingness for both parties to come together to make a deal. we're going to continue focusing on making sure we get a good deal for the united states. >> after the president's comments this morning -- [inaudible] . >> as you know i am not going to answer questions on this topic and refer you to the president's outside counsel. blake? >> the eu has responded with retaliatory tariffs. canada did so over the weekend as well. mexico has done so as well. china has put their tariffs on as well. some of them. and some are expected to come to $34 billion in the next few days. is the united states winning this battle? if so, how? >> again, the president is focused not on the short term but the long term and he wants to make sure we're doing things that help protect american workers and protect american industry. and he is going to keep pushing to make sure we have good trade deals. we have been in trade deficits

with nearly every country across the globe for years. the president wants to ensure that doesn't continue. >> how long is the long term? for the folks who are actually impacted by this, and they just hear, well we're in it for the long term, is the long term weeks, months, years? how long is the long term? >> we're not setting a timetable. there are a lot of different negotiations going on. we've made progress on a number of fronts. and the president again is committed to making sure we have good deals. he'd be happy to get rid of all tariffs and all barriers. if there are countries out there that want to do that i'm sure he'd be happy to sit down and make that happen right now and move this process forward a whole lot quicker. >> with the 34 billion on friday? >> i don't have any changes right now. >> two clarifications quickly here. number one, would the president like to see roe v. wade overturned >> once again i am not going to get into any specifics that we would be looking at. >> i'm just saying does he

himself as a matter of how he feels, his own policy, does he want to see roe overturned >> as this is ongoing i am not going to weigh into anything specific on that front. >> i'm not asking about the conversation. >> i understand. i am telling you while we are in the middle of the process i don't have an updated comment. >> on north korea does the president still trust kim and believe he is a credible negotiator? >> again, we see progress and momentum in the process. and we've had good conversations as recently as yesterday. we're going to continue those conversations later this week and push forward. jeff? >> the president said today the w.t.o. treated the united states very badly fan that doesn't change he'll do something. is he considering anything other than leaving the w.t.o. and does he have a timetable for that? >> as secretary min chinn and the president have said, that is not accurate that the u.s. is leaving the w.t.o. he certainly voiced frustration. he's been clear that he has

concerns there are a number of aspects he doesn't believe are air. china and other countries have used the w.t.o. to their advantage and we're focused on fixing the system. that would include that. >> if the w.t.o.'s treatment to the united states doesn't change he said he'll do something. what was he referring to? >> i don't have a specific announcement. right now he'd like to see the system fixed. that is what he is focused on. >> does the president feel senator mccain should resign so there can be a new member to vote on the supreme court nominee? >> i haven't asked that question. >> this is such a pivotal choice for the president and is going to affect his legacy for decades to come. why is the white house moving this so quickly? when he announces on monday just a little over two weeks since kennedy announced he is retiring. >> the president put out his list nearly two years ago of what those individuals would look like and has continued. he made updates to the list just last year.

these are all individuals that have been looked at and considered not just for the last week but for the last two years. and something the president has been very thoughtful in and is going to make the right decision when that moment comes on monday. >> just to follow up on a question jeff asked. what exactly does the president want to see from the w.t.o.? what actions does he expect them to take? >> the president would like to see just an overall more fair trading system. and we're going to be continuing negotiations with individual countries as well as organizations and we'll keep you posted on any details. francesca? >> thank you, sarah. two questions. one domestic and one foreign. back on michael cohen can you at least tell us wh the president watched the interview this morning and potentially how he feels about the idea his ormer attorney said he would quit his wife and family and country first but not his president. >> once again i won't weigh in on this issue and refer you to

the president's outside counsel. >> and you made very clear sanctions for russia as it pertains to crimea are not on the table going into this meet wg vladimir putin but what can you tell us about election mdling? are sanctions for election meddling on the table in this discussion? >> i am not going to get ahead of the president as meeting but we'll keep you posted as it occurs. john? >> thank you, sarah. two questions please. one foreign and one domestic. >> starting a new trend. >> a week ago you told us that e president intended to call the president of turkey following his re-election or his election as president and we never got a read out on that call or whether or not he congratulated him. would you elucidate on the call that he made to the president of turkey? >> always a zinger in there, john. i know that they spoke last week. i'll get back to you with details of the call. >> could you put out a read

out? >> again, i'll check into it and get back to you with details of the call. >> the other question i have is regarding the president's position on roe v. wade in the third debate with secretary clinton the opening question was about this very subject and he did say the supreme court will overturn roe v. wade and the issue of abortion would be returned to the states. is that still his position now? >> the president is pro life. but in terms of the process of selecting a supreme court nominee, as the president said last week, he is not going to discuss specific cases with those nominees. >> a question on china. you said a lot of negotiations are taking place right now. is there any reason to assume or see that there has been progress with the chinese before the deadline to implement tariffs this week? >> we're continuing those negotiations. i don't have anything further at this point for you. > thanks, sarah.

now that 1 and 2 are dead in the house is the president open to any stand alone bill to stop family separation at the border permanently and reform the u.s. asylum process led by gop senators and some members in the house? >> we have to see the specific legislation before we wade in directly but certainly would be open to legislation that fixed the broken system if democrats would actually show up to do their jobs and participate in solutions we would be happy to discuss those and, again, support things that help fix the broken system. >> let me follow up. what is current u.s. policy at the border? is it zero tolerance or catch and release? >> the president's executive order has bought some time for congress but the clock is ticking. congress needs to act to fix this process. because we're running out of time on what we have the ability to do particularly with the district court that weighed in just last week. >> the u.s. chamber of commerce which generally works very well with the republican presidents,

launched a campaign today to oppose the president's tariff agenda. they are saying the administration is threatening to undermine the economic process it worked so hard to achieve. what does the president make of that? >> the president is focused on helping protect american workers and industries and create a fair playing field. that is what he wants to do and is hoping to achieve. we're confident that he will. >> the former prime minister of canada was here today. can you tell us what steve harper was here for? [indecipherable] >> thank you. >> 1.2 billion indians are ready for him to go to india. >> i'll keep you posted. i don't think we have a trip planned but once we do we'll certainly make the announcement. one last question.

>> there are people who came here legally and are living here legally, waiting at least . years to get a green card 500,000 green cards are back logged that. would take 17 years. l so any plan to clear the backlog for the legal immigrants who are going across the u.s. and asking the presidential help? >> certainly the president has talked many times about fixing the overall system both illegal and legal immigration. we want to certainly address illegal immigration in securing our borders and protecting american communities. however, at the same time there is a process that people should follow and we want to look for ways to fix that process as well and expedite that. come back here for the last question. >> just continuing on immigration, vice president pence was just in central

america. telling leaders that they need to do more to control immigration. president trump has threatened to cut foreign aid to central american nations if they don't do more to address the outflow of immigrants. can you tell me what specific steps the white house has taken to carry out this threat? have there been any meetings with u.s.a. id, state department, to outline what could be cut? >> frankly we'd like to see that not happen because we'd like to see them step up and do more to stop illegal immigration into the united states. we'd like their help and participation in making that happen. thanks so much, guys. have a great day. >> what is the administration doing to ensure the children are brought back for their parents, sarah?

>> tonight on c-span, lawmakers, scholars and activists talk about the american dream. president trump meet with the dutch prime minister. the state department holds a policy briefing on re-imposing sanctions against iran. later, the chair of the securities anthe state departmea policy briefing commission testifies an oversight committee on capitol hill. tourrt of our 50 capitals and with the help of gci cable, this he spent us visited alaska. anchorage, the final stop. >> making sure a critical role that american democracy is functional. it provides a common understanding of what is going on and a window into washington

, d.c. that those of us can see what is occurring. it isreally believe it i important to be in unfiltered and trusted media source. we probably support their effort to inform and educate the nation on policy, history, policy and current events. 22 whenus july 21 and we will feature our visit to alaska. c-span,aska weekend on c-span.org or listen on the c-span radio app. next, the atlantic magazine hosts a conference examining the meaning of the american dream today and how it might change in the future. it runs about two hours and 45 minutes. [applause] >> take it away. >> thank you, everyone, and good morning.