driving cars with angie schmidt. we will also take your calls and you can let us know what you think on facebook and twitter. "washington journal" is next. dr. burwell: -- host: good morning and welcome to washington journal. something we are going to talk about for the first half hour of whether today, americans are concerned with the lack of civility in politics or is this something that is passe? to join and our conversation, the phone lines are now open for democrats, (202) 748-8000, republicans call independents8001,

call in at (202) 748-8002 and you can always reach us at social media on twitter @cspanwj .com/cspan.book is something that i a lot of politicians have been talking about. sarah leonard wrote this this week. activists history, have seldom one battles injustice by asking politely. can be equals, adequate essential to productive collaboration and learning. but between the in norma's power of the state and the average citizen, polite to dialogue is a charade. is arting the afflicted fine philosophy but it does not go far about afflicting the comfortable. sarah leonard seems to be on the

this.f there are been some politicians who talk this week about civility including senator orrin hatch. on thewhat he had to say senate floor this week about restoring civility. [video clip] orrin: i different times throughout our history, oh we've to -- charles represented what we could be if we listened to our better selves. and if we listened to each other. as a nation, we have much to learn from the example of charles and celebrating the life of an extraordinary man, we must do more than pay list service -- lip service. being strong in our convictions

but soft with our words. , but beingincipled respectful of other views. in a word, we can be more civil. the newspapers, scroll through twitter, or turn on the tv, and you will see this nation suffers from the deficit of civility quite unlike anything i have ever seen. the problem is that. it is getting worse, and both sides are to blame. both sides are failing to rhetoric. and ords have consequences in an age of retweets, viral videos, and shareable content, those words echo beyond their

context. host: michelle is calling dan on the democratic line. what is your question? guest: there is no question. my thing about civility is that in the whitethug house who is not civil to african-americans. he is not civil to anybody except the white race. my grandmother taught me a long time ago that the only good republican is a dead one and advise all one drop dead on the floor or drop dead in the street, let that sleeping dog lie because right now with that man in the white house, i do not care what he does, he will never

stop african-americans and he will never send us back to africa, he will not have is on plantations because of the fact that i have gone out and bought semiautomatic weapons, let the war begin. host: let's go to the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. callervious, racisst just blew my mind. when people are getting pushed and pushed and pushed, there has to be a line drawn. i will tell that traces if you want to start something, we will finish it -- i will tell that racist if you want to start something, we will finish it. host: we will go to david. ago, this kindrs

of battle was forming and it has come to fruition. civility is not the issue. we are in the fight for the republic. president.reasonous when the reports come out, who inobstructing did -- every way. it is not a physical fights. luckily, it is not that. to that point, civility is important. as i've saidf before on c-span -- thank you, c-span -- i cannot believe that as a sort of radical, i am grateful for mueller and rosenstein, and all the people from the fbi.

this is america. this is our law, the fbi. the civility is not the issue. the issue is a good fight by any means necessary. host: david, is there a line between civility and resistance that you have to watch? caller: yes. i do not believe hounding people . we can get out of hand to so we do have to watch that, but we need people in the streets right now. that is what i would like to see. time and i would 50 years later that we must understand that this is not a time for civility, this is the time for movement, organization. we are worried about the vote coming up so civility is not the issue.

the issue is fight, fight to save our republic. this is a treasonous president. this is a worst sin against our republic. go to add in jersey city, new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. i agree with a couple of the last callers. senator hatch, i disagree with. members of congress are responsible for the tone in this environment. and theyour leaders, are so uncivilized in congress. i'm encouraged by maxine waters. we need more representatives who stand up. she is encouraging all of us to basically challenge the president and our leaders. jeff from nebraska calling

and on the republican line. good morning. caller: how you doing? finally time that we get a president and some republicans that will act the same way as the democrats do when they are in office. they cannot stand the fact that somebody that will stand up to them. the press cannot stand it because he goes around them, and they cannot take it. allnow they are biased. we know on the democratic side, the education system. they are driving these kids -- i do not know whether they are numb upstairs.

you are right. we are in trouble. le want -- listen to what they are saying this morning. listen to them. that is the democrats now. what do you say to people who blame president trump for the lack of civility? they are not going to blame anybody but themselves. who went outump and shot a congressman on a baseball diamond. marta calling to in from indiana on the democratic line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i'm hearing what the issue is is the exact opposite of fighting as one of your callers said, which shows the division. i am feeling like the issue that needs to be addressed is the

drug of anger. this is all about how easy it is to hate. if you want to fix it, it has to come from the top, and by him calling people crooked or lying,and he himself au are tempted easily to take sides, or i'm going to hate to you or everything you represent, and then you have this war. how about -- i am not a religious person, but maybe we do the jesus thing and maybe loving. i'm going to hate you because it is so easy and you go on facebook and there is strolling. -- there is trolling. host: do you think of the beinglity is

called in social media. i do not see it in face-to-face conversations, but it seems to be driven online. is that what you see? caller: it is easier to hate online, but you see it more and more rampant coming out outside of facebook. that is why you're having all of these provocations. you are getting your feet wet, shooting and up bunch of people at the school. i think it goes beyond politics. up and likeis drug any kind of opiate, i can be angry. that is what i feel like. host: thank you. according to a new poll,

americans are really concerned about the lack of civility. his lackl when asked, of civility a serious problem, 91% of americans said yes, only 7% said no. calling from to ed georgia on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. by the way, i think you are doing a great job. i just want to point back to one example -- i would like to point back to a few days ago. beardin his 30s with a goes into a texas fast food restaurant, goes up to a 16-year-old child who is wearing a "make america great" hat, grabs the kid's hat, and then

threw a cup of ice in his face, laughing at him, and taking his hat and on the way out the door saying, this hat will look good in my fireplace. -- a hatcan see i and find that offensive, you need a psychiatrist. [indiscernible] -- host: going to eric on the democratic line. caller: good morning, america. it is a beautiful day. i am calling based upon the concept of illegal law. the law on the liberty bell, jubilee. maybe in 50 years, we are supposed to start all over. wipe out all debt.

everyone knows this, we do not follow the law. they would rather give you a tax break been give you debt reli ef. fundamentalstian purpose, therefore, we have not been doing it as a country. i hear a person calling about the democratic party and the republican party. call for the jubilee party. everyone needs debt relif. -- relief. this is why the liberty bell is cracked. they talk about following the law, this is why the liberty bell is cracked. everybody, it lets people out of prison, but we do not follow it.

everybody knows about it, but they do not want to let people off debt, therefore, keep you a slave, be it democrat or republican. this is what is going on, america. together underme jesus christ name, this is what you're going to get. host: let's go to the republican line. good morning. yes, hello. host: how are you? host: -- caller: i am fine. i want to agree with the guy that just called from california. i think the nation needs to get on their knees and pray about themselves instead of calling names. it does not do anything, it just

hurts people. this is not about trump. this is about our nation. a lot of the stuff was going on before trump was running for president. , if trump says it is daylight, everybody argues it is dark. give me a break. get a life. please, listen to me for a minute. i've been trying to get in for a week. they are talking about all of the kids that are taken for -- from their parents. ofive in the stock capital the world. i work really hard. all of our jobs were taken from us and sent to honduras.

iam sympathetic to the kids, had to get on unemployment. and i feelur jobs bad about it. it really ripped this town apart. now it is go. ne -- now it is gone. tim kearny looked at the cause of incivility and politics. stlture wars and elite distain. the left blames it on extremesness or the policies of the current president. things is the root. the root is a few layers below.

when all politics is moved to a anner take all stage ons is massive and human scale, the proper playing field for most people is to exercise their political muscle on the local level and a human scaled institution of civil society. as a so long as so much of our population sees national politics as the only politics, our politics will be poisoned. calling fromim denver, colorado on the republican line. caller: good morning. i have two things about civility. one is about trump. staunch trump supporter. but there is nobody that has not cringed at some of the stupid and vicious things he has said. in, the results are absolutely the right direction

as far as the things we have to take it down in this government. you arevility, when takess to each other, it them away from the concentration of getting things done and it focuses the recipients of viciousness, it changes their agenda to one of revenge. and enemity. lity.not like the incivi organizations are much more and crisis than the public is, that they are not reflecting the country as a result of this incriminating stuff or viciousness towards the other party. go, do you seeu ility in localv politics in denver, are you

agreeing with tim's idea that it is mostly national and not local? mostly i think it is national in the political elites . those in power becomes vicious. now that we can all get behind a keyboard in the privacy of a pc, they will say anything. i see this in tweets, product reviews, you will see a trail of and ats after an article responses,ensible but if you go down two or three responses, it becomes the so uncivil and wind up just name-calling.

racism, -- and it goes both ways by the way -- but we are very uncivil as a society now. no one monitoring our civility in the online world. that is part of what is going downhill. 's go to randy and michigan -- in michigan. caller: good morning. i would like to start by thanking you and the rest of the men and women putting on the show. host: thank you. noter: personally, it is doing our civic duty that is causing the uncivil activity now. if we had people going out and voting. it seems that after watching

"washington journal" for as many years as i have, people find it a lot easier to complain about something then they are to walk down to the voting booth. in this country, you have got all of the power in the world to walk down and put in the vote. none of this is going on. if you had 60% or 70% of the oting, you would not have none of this stuff. ,t is easier to tweet or twerp and play with your little keyboards than it is to walk out and do what you are actually supposed to do. when people go back to doing their civic duty, civility will come back into politics. i appreciate the program and thank you for the time. host: henry was calling in from new york on the democrat line. good morning.

are you there? we seem to have lost henry so let's go to malik calling from texas on the independent line. caller: how are you doing? host: i am doing well. caller: since the civil rights movement, the republican party has practiced the policy of inciteent. -- incitement. sectioner to a certain of white america who came through the immigration process after the civil war. the people who came here, they have nothing invested in democracy. that is why when you do a poll of republicans, one third of them say they do not believe we should have any more elections. they do not believe in true freedom.

they only came here to benefit from the institution of white privilege. they are very hostile toward the people, that is why it is easy for donald trump to refer to elizabeth warren as pocahontas and the crowd cheers. standard have a military in the street, so what local governments have done is they have militarize the local police who then act as the folk defacto border control, but this is to ensure white safety, white comforts. said peopleled and from under a sucker job. -- people from honduras took her job. no, it was capitalism that took your job. we have move people who want to move the goal post.

crack epidemic in the black community will give you year in jail, yet you've asked for it the opioid crisis and they spent $10 million in treatment. we do not have a nation. them is the fact that you have a capitalism system that no longer has a need for them. t's go to frank was calling from pennsylvania. good morning. am telling you the truth, if these people do not do not see what a gangster this president is, i feel sorry for them. he lies through his teeth. praise be to the lord that one these people will realize it.

i've seen them on tv looking connoleon -- the republicans do not have any backbone. this president is just prejudiced the day is long. look how he ripped these people from their families. he did not want him because he was puerto rican, talking about he did not know david duke and they were shaken hands. president obama, they tried to out of history. yeah, this is white privilege. --y talk about the boa vote, vote, vote. sit up theres

like they do not know a damn thing. that is not to write. host: let's go to greg calling .rom eagle good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for the show. host: good morning. onler: the lady who is just the lack ofn civility but i think she may have missed where the real call is. we gerrymandering that we have, and both sides are guilty of this, and increased degree for low these many years. can bring some historical perspective to the table. gerrymandering, not an ability in many states to have true contests. you have republican districts,

denmark districts -- democrat districts. look at sports. there's a chance, the way the system is wrought up, for teams who do poorly to move up. in politics, we don't see that kind of opportunity. , as anever going to win result, or ever have our side represented in congress or the legislative level. exceptre, what is left, to call them names and hope it will help. i realize i'm simplifying, but that's my comment. i think gerrymandering, in the long run, contributes a lot more see,e bitterness that we if not more than anything else. thank you for the show. host: thank you. coming up, we are going to take a look at the money rates in krumholz with sheila

from the sensor of -- to combat the opioid epidemic. but first, this week, newsmakers interviewed terry severino of network.ial crisis assuming that monday evening, president trump doesn't come out of the white house with someone who was not on the list of 25. assuming there isn't a reality television program surprise coming at us monday night, what are you prepared to do, and what is your group prepared to do in ?erms of ad spending are you ready to back whichever the nominee is, assuming it is not some sort of out of left-field choice?

>> i'm confident he's going to choose someone from the list. he has repeatedly reinforced that. which gives me the confidence to say, regardless, we will be able to fully support these nominees. gorsuch was confirmed, we were prepared with websites and advertisements on the various candidates. same position, where wherever he chooses. it is an embarrassment of riches. we are absolutely ready to defend his or her record here there's going to be character assassinations, distortions of their record, outright lies and deception. i'm happy to be where i am, because i know that person will need defending. is your focus, say, on swing states where there are democrats? or is it more on alaska, maine?

how do you break down the divide? guest: our focus would be the swing states. we had three democrat votes last time. i would like to expand that margin, especially given the choice, clearly in front of some of the senators, when they will be accountable to the voters in their states. supported trump on this issue more than anything else, a key issue. the supremerted -- court, more than 1/5 of voters said that was their number one reason for going to the polls. this is a winning issue for president trump. people love justice gorsuch. it is particularly difficult for democrats to put down their marker on the resist trump. washington journal continues. krumholz, what does

the money rate look like going into the coming election? guest: this is likely to be a record-setting election. another record breaker. we have already seen $1.3 billion raised by all the candidates this cycle, raising 850 million -- spending $850 million. i think that is leading in the direction of at least matching the $3.8 billion spent in the last midterm election. and we are seeing increases in outside spending. i think we are on track for another record-breaking cycle. are we seeing any trends so far? guest: i think the one important on thes keeping tabs outside spending. this is money that is not being raised and spent by the candidates themselves.

it is being raised by outside not disclosing nonprofits. secret donors where we can't see who they are. and they have no limits. they can raise and spend as much as they want and will, in many cases, exceed what the candidates themselves spend. host: democrats can call in at (202) 748-8000, republicans can call in at (202) 748-8001, independents can call in at (202) 748-8002. and you can always join us on , on twitter and on facebook. remind our viewers what the center for responsive policies is. the center for responsive politics is a nonpartisan, nonprofit research group that tracks money in politics.

we mostly focus on the federal level. though much of the outside spending is happening on all levels of the government, because of citizens united. of dollars spent, not just on elections, but also on lobbying. once the elections have decided the victors, the money turns to influencing what decisions those policymakers make. we try to cover those -- to cover all areas, all flows of money. the job is growing more complicated as the money grows. host: you said earlier, the money is not just going to the federal level. are we seeing more money flowing into state and local races? guest: yes. one initiative we are looking at is tracking that money, particularly coming from the ---disclosing political highly politically active nonprofits, often referred to as

dark money organizations. they are active at the federal level, but many of the same groups are trying to shape electoral outcomes in states, especially in those states where they are hoping to shore up an advantage that will have a ripple effect down the line and to federal elections. ocasio-cortezia surprisingly defeated -- and the new york district. these races usually run over $1 million. was her victory and aberration? guest: a stunning aberration. in addition to her being outspent -- outraised, more than 10 to one, representative crowley probably raised about $3 million. she had raised two thirds of oft money in small donations $200 for less.

that is really, i think, speaks to her power going into this primary. arrays a really unusual of facts for a candidate, especially a first-time candidate. were talking earlier about the influence of outside money on elections. do you expect to see more of that in this election cycle than in the past? if so, why? as of early june, super pac's and nonprofits and spent $146 million, a 40% increase over there spending at this time in the last election. -- especially worrisome is more spending by these outside, in theory, nominally independent groups, but very often, focused on one single candidate, and

many times, their donors are unknown. host: why is that worrisome? guest: voters need to understand where the money is coming from in order to understand the messages they are pushing. when we see political ads run by a group that is very well known. say, the national rifle association or planned parenthood. you know what their stances are. but when it is from americans for america, or some unknown group with some patriotic sounding name, people leaned in to say, who is that group? what are they saying? so we give more credibility to these organizations then we ought to. can, as much as they want, outspent the candidate to get there spending out. host: nick is calling from illinois, on the republican line. how are you? good morning, thank you

for taking my call. have ally don't really comment on this, but it kind of goes in with what you guys are talking about. i think the democrats are having a messaging problem and a fundraising problem, because of colors like that lady from philadelphia, who wasn't clicked off for calling republicans jive-ass jive-ass honkies. you can call us whatever you want. we were called deplorables by hillary clinton. republicans have been called a lot. i would like everyone to know, we can't say nearly half the things that have been said about us about the democrats. that's pretty disgusting, number one. number two, the democrats will continue to lose. if you think a democratic socialist is going to lead you to the utopia you want, you are going to run out of everybody else's money. host: the democrats have a

fund-raising problem? fact, democratic candidates have raised more than republican candidates so far, however, there are more of them. on average, democrats are raising less than their republican counterparts. host: less? guest: on average. her candidate, they are taking in less in receipts. but when you look at the money overall, there's more money going to democrat candidates because there are more democrat challengers running this time. i think we've seen a real drive for new candidates, in particular. a lot of diversity, first-time candidates, women and people of color running for congress this cycle. from washington dc -- caller from washington, d.c.. i am an african american

scientist and i'm very concerned about our politics. the fundraiser is a disadvantage to poor people. we have to be mindful of how this electoral college works, and our people have to get out to vote. the electoral college, 538 electoral fellows. and they will vote if you don't. al gore had half a million votes, and they elected bush. hillary clinton didn't lose this election, she had 3 million votes. she was sabotaged. our people must be mindful of how the electoral college works. you have two years left. call up your brothers and sisters in those swing states and make sure they vote. we have the power to do something about this electoral college. the electoral college was supposed to protect us from .emagogues, but it failed i'm a scientist, i put my hands

on a bible and i swore that i --ld protect america demagogues and foreign powers. failed electoral college to protect the united states of america. this is my warning to our democratic leadership. make sure that all of our people nine of 13 swing states. the 50us who reside in states of the union, get on the phone, call your brothers and sisters up, go to your yearbooks and look at the phone numbers. understand how the electoral college system works. the constitution is flawed in this way. what is the financial picture for the national political party? how does the republican party look compared to the democrat party? guest: we have a whole section devoted to political parties, candidates, all kinds of sources of funds, on our website, open

secrets. generally speaking, the concern with parties is that they are being outgunned by these outside groups. again, they don't have to even identify who is behind the group, who is funding it. , which do have to disclose, might disclose that they are getting money from their nonprofit arm. we might not get full disclosure with these outside groups, and that is part of the advantage for them, compared to the parties. that's why they are often referred to as shadow party committees. but it is a disadvantage for voters. when we talk about outside groups, we refer to super pac's. independent expenditure only committees. groups that are spending for and against candidates, but are, in theory, independent from those candidates. and most troubling,

nondisclosing nonprofits. a nonprofit can spring up without registering with the irs , and the money can come from anywhere, in fact. since we don't know the source of the money, there is great concern it might not even be coming from domestic sources. cycle in particular, following concerns about russian meddling in 2016, i think it is especially worrisome that we haven't gotten a grip on the secret money flowing into our elections. host: remind our viewers what the rules are for super pac's. guest: they are packs that only run independent expenditures. perhaps they are running tv ads or online ads, advocacy for or against candidates. in many cases, they spring up and go away after the election or a certain amount of time,

then they reconstitute themselves under a different name. kind of playing a game of cat with these groups. many are affiliated with the parties, though they are moretially, just before kind of shadow party element, registered as a super pac. are dedicated to electing or defeating a single candidate. we have tothe case, question how independent they are. some of these are run the parents of the candidates. laughable topretty think they are completely independent of the candidate. go to roger, calling from virginia beach, virginia, on the democrat line. caller: good morning. how are you doing? i just wanted to know if you had ever thought there would be a time when money would count less

, and that politics will return what people do and say, and what the politicians stand for? can we take that out? and we just make money not matter anymore? that is a great question. money has always been an element in american elections. we have privately funded elections. unless and until we moved to a system with public spending on elections, this is the system we are stuck with. and there are positive elements. it's good for candidates to have to get out there and introduced themselves, sell their vision to constituents. unfortunately, they are raising money often by people outside of their district or state, who can't vote for them. voters areocketed

funding american politics at an not equivalent to what most americans are giving. most americans don't give anything at all. in fact, only less than one half americans, of adult americans, provide 68.3% of all campaign donations at the head of the level -- at the federal level. hand, money is huge and increasing. hand, with eric cantor in virginia, for example, who was unseated by congressman david brett. even though cantor was a fundraising powerhouse, he was able to win because he connected with the voters and

constituents. similarly to alexandria cortez, she raised most of her money from small donations. offersnnection connections to the big money mostly fueling her elections. host: mike from north carolina, calling on the republican line. caller: good morning. you kind of just stole my thunder. is it -- i want to pronounce your name correctly. guest: that is right. caller: you made a great point look back through, i guess our modern electoral there are numerous cases where the favored candidate, most likely the incumbent candidate, both the both democrat and republican, rarely independent, does not always get the free

pass. because they are loaded down with big donors. i can't remember his name, the had hisovernor who issues with ethics and stuff in new jersey. he was just a lock. i can't remember if it was chris christie that upset him, but there'sst-to-coast, numerous examples from local to state and national level. senators and congressmen, saying my money is going to give you an advantage. we've seen what happens with campaign-finance laws. i'm 62. been following this for 50 years. every time you pass a new one, it is welcome all -- it is whack a mole, i think. i'm not in favor of publicly funded elections. the government has enough to do in my personal opinion. and if i may, in closing.

it would be nice, appreciated by constitutionalists like myself, conservatives, when people bring up -- mostly from the left -- this idea of a popular vote. that c-span would politely and professionally shut that down. there is no such animal and never has been. there probably never will be. ludicrous.o it is we have 51 separate presidential elections in this nation every four years, one in every state and one in the district of columbia. have a national election for president, and you guys know that or you should. when people bring that stuff up, you should politely correct them so it doesn't float out there into the ether. and people just continue to believe wrong things. so got bless you both, thanks. let's go to john from washington, d.c. on the

independent line. good morning, how is everybody doing this morning? listen, i have just a couple of comments to make. first of all, america, we need to pump our breaks. we have a system where money rules everything. people calling in -- someone was to -- we need to stop going against each other, left against right. -- i look at the situation down the middle. would all vote independent this go around, i guarantee you, we would change the minds of a lot of these politicians out here. we have a lot of people in america who are tired of this bickering and fighting. for us something done here. we are hungry, starving.

money in politics has ruined everything. the human aspect of elections no longer exists. big corporations are being considered as people. it's just crazy. we need to pump our breaks, backup, and start this thing a new. if everyone feels the way i do, that is right down the middle -- i agree with some republicans and some democrats, but i think we need to start finding some common ground again and vote independent, get some of these republicans out of office, some of these democrats out of office , and bring america back to the neutral stance where we once were at where we really listened to the people. the people know exactly what they need. was's with the constitution put in place for, to serve the people, so the voice and tell republicans and democrats and independents what they need to survive. you guys are doing a great job , because this forum

the american people really need somewhere to voice our opinions. nowadays, the demagogues of america don't want to hear what you have to say. have a good day. host: we've been talking a lot about money in elections. are we seeing money being spent around president trump's upcoming supreme court nominee? guest: yes, there's already a lot of money being spent these outside groups. nonprofits in particular, mobilizing to support particular candidates, and will presumably have the nominee on monday. as president trump has promised. but we've seen the money mobilize last year for justice gorsuch. and we are seeing at this year. not only coming from right-leaning organizations, groups across the aisle. host: greg is calling from

wisconsin on the republican. good morning. i have a question for sheila regarding the knowledge base about potential voter fraud in the united states. tell me if i'm correct, i'm understanding now that in some states where illegal immigrants can get driver's licenses, they are automatically put on registration rolls for voters? college students that go to school in one state, but their home is in another state? this a concern, something being investigated? i'm getting a lot of different mixed facts about what is happening. concern.ere's a lot of i think some of it is misplaced, but we do not follow election administration issues and voter fraud, that is not one of the areas we study. william from shelbyville,

kentucky, calling on the republican. line.the republican caller: good morning. the subject i often talk about is the election fraud of money used. it seems today that the one who has the most money wins, and it should not be that. we need to change our voting laws and financial laws for , that -- for candidates they get so much money allocated to them by the government and that is all they can spend. i think that would eliminate a lot of these super pac's, lobbyists. it is a sad thing when somebody goes into office making $179,000 year, and$192,000 a in six years, eight years, they come out as multimillionaires. i don't know if you are a

financial wizard, but it's not going to happen. it is coming from lobbyists and they are basically buying votes. decisions that affect all americans. the other thing i wanted to that is very bothersome to me is these candidates that say, the democrats or the republicans, those across the aisle. they don't work for the democrat or republican party, or the independent party, they work for us, the americans, and they need to start listening to us. president trump, do i like him or agree with everything he says? no, but he is doing good things. he is the president of the united states, and i'm going to support him. president, ima was didn't like him, but i supported him by paying my taxes and working. these are the things we need to take. politicians need to realize they work for the american people, not for corporations or for a

political party. thank you again for a year program. --t: how does the recent affect union giving in the political realm? guest: the janice case determined that unions will not ,e able to demand agency fees and that will have an impact on their ability to amass toward collective bargaining on behalf of their members. and on the half. it reduces their funds. unionsrstanding is that are saying it won't have a huge impact, but these judicial decisions that continue to unions'away at the power, cumulatively, do have an

impact. this is -- not friendly to union concerns. from arizona, calling on the independent line. caller: good morning, how are you. just two comments. number one, the biggest problem i see is if you keep in mind, wereongress and the senate -- 1980, the mid-70's, 75% of them were military people. and our government ran just fine. since then, we're talking about , george soros and the koch brothers involved. keep this in mind. let's look at the differences. in -- heput it all

-- the koch brothers fund a lot of republicans, but i've never seen them funding any riots. also, let's keep in mind the money. we are talking about the money. last i checked, trump isn't even taking a salary. what about hillary? she's getting a senate pension, probably getting a secretary pension. bill is getting his pension, obama is getting his pension. supposedly getting involved with netflix. all of these pensions and this money. trump is trying to clean up america, and for some reason, instead of talking about her politics and money, talk about the real money and the crooked deals. host: we would like to thank sheila krumholz for being here

with us today. up, sally satel and sandia rahman will be here to talk about the efforts of congress to combat the opioid crisis. then angie schmitt on the future of driverless cars. we'll be right back. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] fairbanks, alaska, asking people what is the most important issue in alaska? >> the issue that is most important to me is the environment. -- in terms of volume, and as you can imagine -- in the seafood industry. environmental changes in my

community, that industry has the potential to be wiped out. >> when i run for governor of alaska -- i was born and raised in the state of alaska. i have three platform issues i've been needing to take care of. one is abortion, one is the budget plan, one is protecting -- and giving the money back to from the -- that took place two years ago and the one from this year. i want to give it back with interest. i think it is the right of the people to keep the resources of the shareholders of the state. >> what has been on my mind lately is the children suffering throughout the united states, people who come in for -- i'm kind of upset with some of the attorneys general who have not taken mr. trump and others to task for creating this child

abuse, essentially what it is. ownchurch has called their attorney general plan, some of these legislators would allow this to happen. -- we have a lot to offer here, beautiful scenery, really nice people, lots of kids having fun. here, wishing you a merry christmas. the big issue for me is the future of alaska. i'm concerned, but at the same time, very optimistic. highest energy costs in the , low educational attainment in the country, rapidly changing environment,

and disinvestment in education. -- optimistic despite that we leave the world that lead the world in arctic research, and we are committed to the plan and investing in it. -- as we look to the next century. 21be sure to join us july and july 22, when we will feature our visit to alaska. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. created as a public service by america's cable television companies.

bring youcontinue to unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events and washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you your cable or satellite provider. >> washington journal continues. dr. sallyre here with satel and reporter sunday a sandhya- and reporter raman. democrats, call in at (202) 748-8000, republicans call in at (202) 748-8001, call in at (202) 748-8002, and if you've been affected by the opioid epidemic, call (202)

748-8003. about thengress doing epidemic, and are they doing the right thing? guest: the house just finished passing a number of bills over 50 -- a number of bills last month, over 50. we are waiting on the senate to put together their package, and they will come together and sort out the differences and send it to president trump. are they much money putting into this, and is it enough? guest: there is not new money coming in from these bills, really. the money has already been appropriated earlier in the year , about $4 billion. they are currently in the appropriations process to see how much money they will be putting in for fiscal year 19. host: how long has it been working to try to stop this epidemic? has anything that congress has done help? working forve been

a few years. a bill passed in 2016, the comprehensive addiction and recovery act, which made some grant money available. bills,fort is a lot more a lot of different aspects of the crisis. but a lot of experts i've spoken with have said it is not really enough. -- other types of substance abuse problems that people are having with. you are writing that congress is debating how it began, not how it evolved. what should they be doing, versus what they are doing? about a lot of the bills, half of them, are looking at prescription opioids. that is kind of how the problem began and how people become addicted. but a larger number of people are getting addicted to heroin and synthetic opioids like

fentanyl. those are becoming a bigger .roblem addressing these issues with prescription opioids, it's likely there will be problems that arise from that. guest: if you look at every one of those 57 bills, you really can't disagree with the kind of target they have. monitoring programs for doctors, more drug courts. they are all noble efforts and deserve attention. is of the biggest problems that the time horizon is so short. in two years, you have to be short of continuing funding. so it is hard to plan. it's also probably not enough money. the number i've seen is $6 billion over two years, may be subject to some modification.

some people estimate we would need $10 billion per year to make a dent. the other problem really transcends the drug problem. if you think of addiction as a symptom of larger societal ills, domain in the job some of these more depressed areas, appalachia and the they are very important. they are drivers of this. i don't expect medical or health oriented bills to address that. but i believe there's so much progress you can make when the upstream factors are still in play. we have a lot of viewers who say they have been helped by opioids and they should not be regulated. what is your response as a doctor? i'm very concerned about what has become a near climate of paranoia surrounding the prescribing of opioids, not so

much for acute pain. we know that people don't usually need more than one week, and if they do, the doctor should be able to renew it. , people whopain have intractable, agonizing pain every day. doctors, increasingly, or cutting them back on what are pretty high dosages, over 500 morphine milligrams equivalents. the fact is, some of these people just need it. to get out of bed at least, and to get to work at most there is a lot of people can be functional. the cdc guidelines are fine guidelines, unfortunately, they were taken as a mandate to ,educe or withdraw completely patients off of drugs like oxycontin, long-acting morphine, vicodin, percocet. many of these patients are doing fine and there treatment should

be left stable. let's go to mark, calling from indiana, who has been impacted by the opioids epidemic. caller: i appreciate you having me on here. this call is a dose of reality. i watched my wife go through this. it started out going to the doctor. got on hydrocodone and it advanced quickly to oxycodone. centers, thatent don't work, methadone doesn't work. just tradinghere, one for another. the withdrawal symptoms from that are even greater. then people start using the other drugs anyway, just more money for the pharmaceutical companies to make. congress isn't doing anything about this at all. the only way we can stop this problem is schedule one oxycodone, oxycontin, fentanyl.

stop making it. it's synthetic heroin. we have heroin and cocaine, let's just stick with her when. the 1920's, we figured out that prescribing heroin and cocaine is not a good idea. we have to do the same. our person on here is saying, only 2% of people are getting addicted. , andve 115 deaths that day the corners in our town are not getting the numbers right. .he's here to minimize people are out here dying, and it is a horrible situation. calle going to have people in and talk about their 37 surgeries and major car wrecks, and having these drugs. it is a bunch of bull. all you are going to hear is a bunch of addicts saying they need their drugs. functioning on these drugs. yes, alcoholics go to work for 30 years and function. people en masse -- people on

meth do. bunch of bunk. you have to stop producing these drugs. looking at news ways to combat this epidemic? guest: both the senate and the house have provisions in their bills that are looking for nonaddictive painkillers, accelerating research on that. that is a priority for both of them in the senate. said it lamar alexander would be kind of like finding the holy grail of addressing this epidemic. they are looking for solutions. host: wanderer on the democratic line. i have a situation where i'm wondering -- how come people if a person has a problem on the drug, why don't you try to figure out what the problem is with the person, and then try to help that person with their problem? we have a

problem with drugs in this country, just like we have a problem with infrastructure. nobody is really trying to find the answer and put money towards a solution. everyone is trying to put a band-aid on it so they can continue to make money. i'm wondering, do you have the other lady, to both ladies agree? in a methadone clinic part time, so i can attest to how helpful methadone and another drug, called bu pinophrene, and i'll mention another medicine -- a blocker. so if you were to use an opioid on top of it, these drugs can be helpful in the short term, especially because the first two, methadone and you can bupinophrenend

limit the withdrawal. you need somebody to stand still first. these medicines, because they had that effect, the kind of therapy the caller alluded to in the beginning, what is the problem in the person's life, so that can be addressed, that is a very long-term project for a lot of people. it doesn't mean they can't hold a job at the same time, and with respect to the gentleman who call first, people on methadone are working all the time. that's why we open at 6:00 in the morning, so people can get to their jobs. no question, a lot of people have gotten in trouble with them as well. had aend to be people who previous problem with drugs or alcohol, or are depressed, which is not surprising. chronic pain is a depressing state. or they had an anxiety disorder, these are the people at special risk. the point is, there are replacement medications that can

be helpful, but it is usually a much larger project to get a person fully recovered. while prescription opioids were involved in just over 17,000 overdose deaths since 2016, harold when was responsible for 15,500 that year. a 20% jump from one year before. synthetic drugs caused 19,000 , a one hundred percent increase, yet lawmakers remain most fixated on dr.-prescribed drugs. to limit exposure to prescription opioids specifically. should congress be changing its focus? guest: congress should be expanding its focus. it is important to look at the prescription drug problem, but there's more to it than that. there's the fentanyl coming in from other countries, being

imported. pero when becoming an increasing problem. if congress could look at ways to address those, that would definitely be helpful. to lawrenceville, georgia, on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. my wife has been using opioids as part of a problem with her and evengnosed with -- though the operation sold a lot problems, itca didn't solve the problems with the arthritic degeneration of her back. the point of my question is, where are we with the marijuana justice act of 2018? i think the democrats introduced it to decriminalize cannabis. a lot of states are adopting cbd oils, legalizing cbd oil and

cannabis for medical conditions. georgia just did so as well, that you can't really bring it across state lines because of federal laws. can someone provide an update for that for me please? guest: it's hard to imagine that in this climate, there is a liberalized attitude towards the use of marijuana and its transport across state lines. one thing to mention about the effectiveness of canada video -- cbd, a lotdon't -- of of studies have not been helpful. they've been correlational. one of the major trends shows there were fewer ods in states liberalized marijuana, that effect seemed to win over the last few years. , especiallyw that people with arthritis, can -- and this is just case-by-case -- have had some success, either in being able to lower their dose

or discontinue altogether with the use of cbd. it is something to look at on an individual level. your doctor should be pretty open-minded about it. martin from jefferson, north carolina. you've been affected by the epidemic. commenti just wanted to , especially a couple of things i heard here. for been on morphine probably about 10 years because of my pancreas. i take it as prescribed. i am slightly addicted to it. it takes away my pain, i don't get high from it. if i miss a dose, i will feel withdrawals. the problemg is, is, people just want to get high. call was just about

marijuana. how many people would take the marijuana, if they took the thc out of it and just used the medical benefits? leg,eople who break their and they take the opioid and get addicted. well, if they really wanted to get off it, they can easily win themselves off. it would be uncomfortable for a few days, but it can be done. but what they want to do is keep zero pain, keep taking more of to,han they are supposed then they run out of the prescription, buy it on the streets, and that is where it escalates. people have to take their own responsibility for their actions. it is nothing congress can do, no law that is going to pass that will stop everything, because these drugs, they work for me. as a matter-of-fact of fact, i haven't increased my dose. we cut back on another pain medicine i was on, because i

as described. there's been no problem in 10 years. all right? michelle, calling from michigan. you are calling on the republican line, impacted by the opioid epidemic. caller: that's right. good morning, how are you? listen, i've been taking fentanyl for years due to neuropathy. it anyor won't prescribe i went through two weeks with -- it's not mild, but like the previous caller said, a pretty nasty withdrawal. pain in my feet, and fortunately, i found some old pain pills that i had, but i

don't know what i'm going to do. nobody is taking into consideration the people that actually need it. i understand there's a problem people take it for fun, but this is not fun. what is your suggestion for people like me? guest: that is a very difficult problem. i'm very concerned about this highly unintended consequence of the crackdown on prescribing, which, for what it is worth, i feel like doctors are already taking care of, largely on their their medical societies. local medical centers, the v.a. is very aggressive about this. being careful about at least acute prescribing, when they don't go home with a months worth, and that extra drug that's --

drugs that are diverted. one thing you might ask your doctor about is if he would switch you to bupinophrene. i'm not saying you are addicted. people hear about it and think it is a treatment for addiction, but it is also a pain reliever. it is used in europe. with thate ok medicine, as it has a lower abuse potential. it is harder to overdose. i'm not saying that is a risk for you, but if he's wondering that it will be diverted, it is a less dangerous drug to be out there. the cdc, thesh head of the cdc, would call a press conference with the dea on one side and the ama on the other. doctor, but so iny are afraid they will get

trouble and their license is at risk. i sympathize with them as well. but if they knew the truth of what the government regulations are, they would feel a lot less nervous about prescribing. prescribe carefully. these are certainly powerful medications. see if you can find a pain specialist in your area. it is difficult. to seehen can we expect floor action on any of these bills, and are the house and senate on the same page? there's a lot of overlap, like the accelerating search for a non-addictive painkiller, something in both the house and senate, and something called jesse's law, which would make it easier for a doctor to find a consenting patient's history of abuse and prescribing new medications to them. those kinds of things are in both. the house has already acted in june and approval of their bills.

currently, according to ofublican leadership, four the big committees, senate health, senate finance, senate commerce, and senate judiciary, the ranking members are working together to put together one big bill package. that should be coming to the floor shortly. host: is this a bipartisan issue, or is it fraught with political intrigue, especially in an election year? is, on the most part, a bipartisan issue. most of the bills have a sponsor, cosponsor from both. or since they are not really making a huge impact, just sort of tinkering around the edges, it is not too difficult to find a sponsor from both houses. host: let's go to tina from worchester, massachusetts. affected by opioids as well.

i'd like to give the side of the story, often untold, which is successful treatment with suboxone, a combination of and an opiate blocker. one tablet, you get the treatment and the blocker. you can't overdose or take opioids or whatever when you are on this, it will just make you sick. and it is a prescription where you go to the doctor, depending on how long you've been in treatment, you go weekly or monthly, and you just go in and pick up a prescription like any normal person, and you go to work. you don't have any cravings, and most of all, you don't partake in the addictive,

self-destructive behaviors, which you do when you are an active addict. more like, in my view, a diabetic taking insulin so they can function properly. it is similar in that respect. it is not a substitution of one .ddiction over another it is a dependency, yes, but not an addiction. that is just my perspective. i hope it was helpful and informative. are talkinggain, we to dr. sally satel of the american enterprise institute, and reporter sunday i run on -- sandhya raman. -- our number here, for democrats, (202) 748-8000. for republicans, (202) 748-8001.

independents, call in at (202) 748-8002. and if you've been impacted by the opioid epidemic, we want you to call (202) 748-8003. now, mike from virginia, on the democrat line. caller: thanks to c-span for covering, a lot of time, a wide array of subject matter that we often don't see discussed in the media. i first comment, and i'll do several quickly. with regards to illegal -- on the streets, since 2001, when america went to afghanistan, we had a 60% increase in production of opium in that country. where does it wind up? on the streets of developed countries. that's one. two, the dea, are they doing their job?

-- had to withdraw his nomination for the head of the dea because of conflicts. prescriptionl tabs, and the doctor will attest, they have numbers on them and are supposed to be tracked. ,o the volume of prescriptions whether it is the hand of a specific doctor, or being filled through specific pharmacies digitally now, that should be able to track, in a confidential way. third, i do agree with the and know manybd's across the country who have had successful relief, whether from pain or inflammation, with that treatment, or even of cannabis. yet cannabis is still on schedule one as far as illegal drugs, even though it has been discussed in many states. i think it is 29, where there's medical marijuana.

and those with recreational marijuana legalized, and not all want to just get high. look at the relief of, whether stepsonilepsy, i have a who is a severe epileptic. ofther it is a variety specific medical conditions that have been addressed. i'm a proponent of looking at all factors and not focusing on any just one. and whether it is our elected officials, a combination of -- on one side and the dea on the other, there's so much other noise in terms of what is going andn both the media legislative level, that many personal stories just fall by the wayside. thank you for taking my call.

host: did the house address the dea in any of its bills? guest: the judiciary committee has some legislation looking at setting quotas on to the jerks ining in -- the drugs coming and inspecting them. texas on the from republican line. good morning, william. caller: are you there? -- are you there? caller: yes. opioids, most people have never been in pain, do not understand pain, and they never will, ok? goes, anr as the adage

an addictgoing to be until they are not ready to be an addict. treatmentnot accept and do not want it. they will go to treatment and get treatment, then they will go right back to what they were doing. that is pretty much my thoughts on that. host: do you agree with that? guest: i agree that for treatment to work, a person has to be motivated. there is really no question about that. one important to distant is that within a year, if a person starts a treatment program on january 1, the chances they will still be in that program six 40% tolater are maybe 50%. a minimum of a year of treatment is usually recommended. so the dropout rates are quite high. the medications are great when they do work, no question about

that. so one of the challenges is how to retain people in treatment. there are some strategies. i am a big fan of something called contingency management, a fancy word for saying, where patients come to sessions or submit clean screens,ts or tox they get an award, a gift card to walgreens. wheny sound trivial, but it is delivered quickly, it is actually quite effective in shaping outcomes. is really leveraged in the criminal justice system in the context of diversion programs, particularly in drug court, which i am a huge fan of. so a person shop lifts or of eviction or

neglecting their children or something like that, they should be held accountable, but they should not be put in jail. they should be held accountable, sent to a treatment program that a judge overseas. and even people that are not that motivated and are not internalizing the values and the goals of these treatment programs, they have that structure. it helps with retention. it is my belief, and i am waiting for data to come out to support this, but that kind of structure, leverage them a plus the medications we have, should really make a significant impact. call from chicago, illinois, democratic line. good morning, bill. caller: good morning. did drug counseling for work. you lock people up.

they get out but cannot get a job, but they can start selling dope. it is in every community. i know more people who [indiscernible] it seems to be harder to quit selling it than to be able to quit using it. continue toll it know people who got it and continue to know people who want it. it is not going to go away soon. it is a cottage industry. thank you. is the trump administration doing anything special on this epidemic or are they waiting for congress to move? guest: the trump administration has been making some moves. the surgeon general has put out kind of a call to tell people to carry naloxone, the opioid

overdose reversal drug. suffers from addiction, so it is a personal thing for him. they put up an educational campaign last month that they are putting across the board to kind of educate people on the dangers of opioids and what can be done. host: what about the health and human services department, are we seeing anything special from them on this opioid epidemic? guest: they have put us in different things related to medicaid and medicare, kind of ways to address the problem. i think a lot of what they can do and implement comes from what congress does, bills directing hhs to do certain things related to medicaid and medicare, little parts of theerent department. i think as soon as those are passed through the house and senate, we will see more action from them.

a call from iowa on our republican line. good morning, tom. caller: good morning. a neck injury, and i have been on opioids sense, from percocet to oxycodone to hydrocodone. at that time, the issue was to controld a right their pain. i'd you not know if it was done through legislation or what, but the mainstream -- i do not know if that was done through legislation or what. i have been on it since. the last time i visited the pain clinic, i saw the doctor for 10 minutes, and the bill was $297. and i have never had an issue with abusing it. at times, i go without it. cramps, and i was concerned about it. it did not become an issue for 10 years. is the beginning of the

opioid situation, when patients got the right. i have one more comment. i am an election official in my area, and i am not changing parties to democratic. i just want to make that known, too. so that is my statement. host: is it more important for congress to take action or are local efforts more effective? tost: well, congress has give the money, but i am a big fan of local action. inave been to a few towns ohio, for example, recently, and they know what they need. sometedly, there are operations with respect to treatment that may not be -- less thane pushing a rigorous system of treatment,

but that is why we have the substance abuse and mental health services administration. it is working on this. there is an excellent director setting up guidelines for treatment programs. basically, this does get done on the local level. fit no coming into this country is not done on a local level -- tanylnel -- sentinel -- fen coming into this country is not done on a local level. it is what is driving the overdose deaths, and it comes mainly from china, some from mexico, and a little from canada . it is so concentrated that you do not need to mail a lot from china to find its way into the heroin supply, and almost all samples now are contaminated to some degree. i think in vancouver, some samples are almost all that.

it could be concentrated in one part of the bag. it has really turbocharged this problem. that is a u.s. postal service issue, and i know congress has been working on that. that will help the u.s. postal service adopt some of the data-tracking mechanisms that fedex or dhl already use. that is really important. guest: the gentleman mentioned jail previously, and the addicts that come out of jail are in a vulnerable situation. he mentioned not being able to get a job, so why stay clean? there is a point there, and that is why reentry programs where they try and connect people to jobs and have heavy supervision, that is very important. the other element is that if you orinto prison, jail, even a treatment program, to be honest, that is inpatient and

you come out clean, your tolerance is much lower to these drugs, and that puts you at very high risk for overdose. it actually makes it easier for some of these patients to be medicated before they leave jail, because the likelihood they will relapse is pretty high, so they will already be protected with a level of opioids already in their body and are less likely to overeat or -- overdose and more likely to transition into treatment. a call from richmond, virginia, on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. the first operation i had to 2003 on my back, a spinal cord operation. i recently had to have two operations on my spine again because i had compressed nerves. the mostl this time,

pain medications i ever had was only for 30 days or 30 pills for like maybe two months at the most. what do want to find out is, because all that is going on to deal y'all going with the discrimination that is going on and is always going on african-americans, black, anybody who is not a ?hite male or female been going on has before i was born because we do not get pain medication like y'all. host: there have been stories in the past of how african-americans are prescribed less pain medications. is that still true? is beingw everybody

prescribed less pain medication, with some good results in some very unfortunate ones, as we said. isnderstand where the caller coming from, and some people have said african-americans, as a group, have somewhat been insulated from this problem. to this others point about who is abusing these drugs. it is usually not the patients. most patients take their medications and do well. good they have been on a lower dose if the doctor had used alternative treatments? i do not mean couple mentoring medicine like acupuncture necessarily, but injections, morphine pumps. yes, maybe they could have but they are on these long-term meds and are doing well. really climate has caused so much anxiety and some suicides among people. but the larger issue of discrimination -- i tell you, i

work in d.c., and there is a big opioid problem here, and it is called heroin and fentanyl. pills never make a big dent in inner cities. charlotte, north carolina, on the democratic line. good morning, brenda. in painlisten, i live every day, and i don't take no pain pills or nothing. andan, i have chronic pain, i suffer through the pain to get that do not want to get hooke on on nothing. every time i have an operation on kidneys to remove kidney stones, they want to set me up on paint pills and everything and -- on pain pills everything else. can't go without them.

sometimes he takes two boxes of those things a day, and that is not good for him neither. all this stuff, if people would onlyto the one that can help them, then they would not be on all this medication. every time i go to doctors, they want to give me medicine, give me this, give me that. i tell them that i am not the guinea pig to try different medicines on. i think people should get off the medicine. i know our service guys that are in pain from the wars and things, but this drug has got to go because it is going to get worse and people cannot afford it. they start robbing, killing, trying to get money to pay for it. i think something ought to be done here in the united states. and people coming over here from foreign countries, drug dealers and everything, they don't care about the people. the doctors don't really care.

all they want to do is get that money for writing prescriptions. one doctor of mine, she said, you are the only patient i have that don't want pain pills. every other patient, first thing, oh, i need some more pain pills. i look to my heavenly father for my relief. i have nerve damage in my face where a dentist pulled my teeth, such pain you would not believe. i do not want my body with drugs .nd it host: is congress trying to

learn from the past when i move --learn from the past? guest: their modeling it after the hiv/aids epidemic, the ryan white act that was enacted back then that gives a lot of money to address the epidemic. there has been a bill introduced , but it does not have any republican cosponsors. that bill is from elizabeth warren and would give 100 billion dollars over 10 years, a lot more than what is currently --ng in the edge of it epidemic. it is not likely to make any moves without republican support. is going from illinois on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have had experience with

opioids for some 20 years. what i don't understand in this situation is it seems like every time there is a problem that they call an epidemic, they don't to start with those who are breaking the law and doing things they claim are illegal. they start with the patients, pharmacists, and the doctors, and they crack down on the folks doing their best to do things legally. what effort is being made -- i from all the opioids prescriptions, if they were on the street, if the rest were taken off, that would be a huge reduction. dollars and billions of going to the epidemic. is there a tylenol epidemic? you can takeat, tylenol every day and it can be very dangerous.

i think this is turning into a political issue, and they are going after low hanging fruit. it is making the lives of people dependent on medications just terrible. this, andy wife about it finally came. now we are having to deal with it. political issue or is it a true epidemic in america? fair to think it is call it an epidemic. 13 people were 100,000 die in nationally. over 40 in places like west virginia. that is huge. during a previous heroin epidemic, it was less than two per 100,000, 1970's and 1980's. i think you are safe and calling it an epidemic. i am trying to think of one of

the points the gentleman made. oh, i think he has a point about the low hanging fruit. also, the time lag. doctors should still be cautious. has beencribeing coming down and should probably be coming down further. what is driving the overdose deaths is heroin and fentanyl. it is easy to measure pills, not that easy to see who is dying from heroin. we had a national survey that knocked on doors. hello, are you using heroin? they're not going to admit it or they are in jail or homeless. we have data on what has been prescribed, and that is much easier to deal with. and everyone wants to regulate sometimes it is necessarily to have oversight. don't get me wrong, but that is

sort of an easier way to go. of an expansion, not so much that we should not do anything about pills, but it is unbalanced. we have to do so much with everything else, like more treatment. and about the treatment, even though i did say the dropout , one, if aignificant person has been in treatment, they are likely to come back at some point appeared hopefully they do not die in the interim. and that every day a person is in a treatment program, they're probably less likely to show up at the emergency room, probably less likely to commit a crime, probably more likely to be with their kids. so it is always a social benefit when people are in treatment, even if they will not finish it, although there will probably not be much lasting effects. host: what does the medical industry and the pharmaceutical industry stand on these bills in

congress? guest: and the medical industry, there has been support for a lot of these bills. groups like the ana have stood behind these bills as a positive step and going forward. i have heard less from the firm ascetical industry -- from the pharmaceutical industry. there has been some pushback. where the crisis is really stemming from, there was a hearing earlier this year that had a lot of pharmaceutical companies and asked them to their role in the crisis. very few of them felt that pharmaceutical companies played a strong role. is it ok i talk about the treatment? host: sure. guest: there is a republican bill in the house that would ramp up the treatments for individuals with medicaid. , by representative may be walters -- mimi walters, ella patients to have up a desk allow

toient -- allow patients have 30 days a year in a facility. there are roadblocks for larger facilities with more than 16 beds. those withould cover opioid disorder, and it would include those with cocaine use, too. that would be a big dent in this treatment. guest: that is institutions of medical diseases restriction, 16 beds are more. i think we started at 60. it was an effort not to reinstitution of all the mentally ill folks coming out of institution. i am not a critic of it except to say that if anyone thinks 30 days inpatient is enough, that is the biggest worry about that. people might think, oh, you what to 30 days. then youu leave, and are at that risk again for relapse because you tolerance is down. in any case, people have to get

going. it is a good start for people who are really out of control. the best treatment is really done outpatient. that is where people live and our cam and have to learn how to control cravings. you have to recognize triggers, so to speak, and how to make their way in a new environment. move.mes people actually it is called the geographical cure. it does not help anyone because you are taking yourself with you. for others, the environmental cues are too strong and they move. it is fine to have that inpatient as an option for people who just have to be stabilized, but it is not enough. and i would like to add that we should be doing this for the mentally ill. who iset's go to jason calling from cincinnati on the republican line. caller: good morning.

for dr. satel. i was in treatment for three years and on a medication, no issues at all. never took any drugs for the 30 years. then i was placed on the naloxone. yeah, it will stop using this and all that, which i was promised, and it worked. but the second medicine they put me on with the naloxone, it beinglike an ice pick granted into every square centimeter of your legs. it is excruciating. i could quit the first medicine very easily, and it would take about two days and i would be good to go. days, medicine, 14 to 16 and then i was forced to take another. many --ld there are so as far as getting headaches if

you are taking opioids, no, that does not happen at all. i know probably 200 people that are on opioids right now, taking medication. there are so many public lies to try to make this medicine seem like some kind of wonder cure. it is not. guest: i hear what you are saying. i think they are necessary but not sufficient. they are not a magic pill. as i said earlier, the help people just, you know, with a craving and with the withdrawal from the heroin. is what iou described hear a fair amount of, that it is hard to get off these medications, as well. without getting into details, it could be that you just needed a very, very slow taper. people and methadone clinics, we take them off methadone in a year or more. they come down a milligram a

week and have been on 120. so that is more than a year. if you have been on these medications for a long time, and again, if there is a need, that is fine. the question is how well you are functioning. but your body has adapted, and he had to come off very slowly. so that might be one problem, that it did not have an slowly enough. but it is true, people are having trouble getting off. we had pill mills before were oxycontin was basically being handed out at pain clinics. there are others were people take half the amount and sell the rest. while i am a big advocate of the prescribing get a lot when our clinic begins, you cannot ignore some of these downsides. because if you do, you lose credibility completely. host: a call from minnesota on

our democratic line. good morning, tammy. caller: thanks for taking my call. about four years ago, i had a and wentisk, l4, l5, to the medical doctor. the first thing they wanted to do was put me on hydrocodone. i was very frustrated, because i do not understand why we always jump to meds when there are other things out there, like a chiropractor. the medical community will never ever talk about chiropractic care, but for some of you folks that are suffering from at least discs, gor bulging see a chiropractor instead of going to the medical community. they will help you without the meds. i have had absolutely no symptoms in the last quarter years. i see my chiropractor only once every two weeks.

he adjusts my spine, and i have no problem. my question is, why do we not use the chiropractic community for help with this? guest: well, i agree there is a cultural bias towards medication, towards not feeling any pain at all in america. but i do think that the medical community has been significantly sensitized to the idea of other kinds of treatments for pain, especially when a person is starting out. a chronicow when illness is starting, because you do not know if it is going to resolve. i believe the cdc defines chronic is more than three months. sounds conservative for me. but if pain lasts six months or so, then doctors him as i say, i think they are becoming much better educated on alternatives so that either people don't need

opioids or can manage on a much lower dose. that is being taken very seriously. school, are in medical you hardly get any training on pain management. that is changing. even with some residents, it is not that much, and that is changing, as well. all to the good. on the call from florida independent line, impacted by the opioid epidemic. caller: good morning. i have a, for both guests. first, for dr. satel, i lost a son 10 years ago to a heroin overdose. misplaced thato the focus on misplaced that the focus on treatment when there is only a 4% success rate for these opioids -- i actually

--i was going to be addicted he was going to be addicted the rest of his life. i feel it is better to put these on a work form. you are making comments that these people, they have to gradually be taken off of medication over a year. i had two anesthesiologist isdies tell me that fentanyl used in the operating room every day. operation, and my buddy said had i got out of the operating room, it would have felt like some of the chopped off my leg with an axe had they not used fentanyl. .

i was told that there was a major contribute in factor to a lot of this. why guest: so sorry about your son, try to work pharma. it was called narcotics -- prison.narcotics fauntil 1972.ics ne in kentucky and one in fort worth. if you have seen "man with a golden arm," that is where frank sinatra spent some time. ne problem with that, a lot of

patients relapsed when they came back. an n, it is going back to old environment. i sympathize with the idea of containment. where a good drug court comes in, good diversion, if a stayings having trouble clean as outpatient, then they will send them to residential is a version of containment. laces like phoenix house and people stay quite a while, as you say, it is a long, long process. but, you know, one hopes is that when people come into a system they are fragile, we know, my gosh, we have these folks and e can leverage the criminal justice system in therapeutic way. punitive, to be certainly not to incarcerate. we've heard this right now, i to say it is a cliche, we can't arrest our way out of incarcerate our way out of this, fair enough, but we can make end roads when arrest people because

they commit crimes. in these diversion programs, the news if you complete it, our charges are dropped, that is big incentive, as well. thank our like to guests from roll call, thank you for being with us today. coming up, angie schmitt will oin us to talk about her magazine article from "in these times" on the future of driverless cars. we'll be right back. "after y night on words," the book "fox hunt" coming to america detailing how he escaped death threats very far connecting jews and christians globally through ocial media, interviewed by religion reporter julie yousmer.

constantly point out all the strangers who helped in mall and large ways, people's names you mentioned you met one time in bos nia years ago and talked to them again, but you are so aware of the role strangers play in each other's lives, do you have advice for us on being good people around us? >> i tell you something, i wake up one time and found 100 e-mails from people i never heard about them, they say, i for you trying to help you out. i was losing hope every time. willyou read the book, you see how much situation, i was in a very hard situation. i know me i was -- people have tried to help me the porttime it was in waiting for the fishing boats and i thought, should i go back hotel, stay in the port, i had faith in these people. the peoplers and all who reach me and like even held

helped,ifferent ways and i want to say something that having them and without faith in humanity, there is no hope. help me because one of the four people, like what did you help? he told me something, he told e, i grandmother and my grandfather was trapped in the anyone to they wanted say yes. > watch "after words" on secretary of sta cspan 2's book t.v. >> "washington journal" continues. ost: we continue spotlights on magazine segment with angie schmitt, who wrote a story, "in these times," about the future driverless cars. what made you decide to write cars? driverless guest: actually it was an assignment the editors came up for. and picked me

i write about transportation issues on a daily basis. this is a big issue coming up. editors were concerned with what this meant for cities, how it could impact where we live we live and how it could mpact social equity in the future. host: how are driverless cars, they are still new, how do they impact city and social issues so far? host: right now, they are mostly tested, there are some cars that are available for right now that have partially automated, have automated features, that will ecome more and more common, especially luxury cars. right now, what we're seeing in cities is mostly testing, francisco, m in san testing in pittsburgh, testing maces.zona, more and more and it raises some safety concerns. had a pedestrian killed in tempe, arizona by self-driving uber car. might not be e

aware that these cars are out on they live and all the bugs haven't been worked necessarily. host: if you like to join this us about on with driverless cars feel free to call in to us. lines to n our different regions today. in the eastern and central time call in zone, call in -- angie, how realistic are driverless cars as products in 2018? bit of here is a little debate about that, i saw an article that said maybe, i know elon musk promised by 2018, the cars would be on the road, sounds like they are readjusting, that may have been optimistic. readjusting their

timeframe. again, what we're seeing right ow is the partially automated automated may be a little way off. applied company waymo to test fully automated cars in california. backup ldn't have a driver, but they have someone at a remote location sort of each car. host: the death that we saw from arizona, rless car in is this like in any way like hen the automobile first 1900? d in the early guest: yeah, some people have made that comparison. is one thing we're a little bit concerned about, people like cities, re a lot about last time when cars were introduced in cities, we sort of away and made some mistakes in how we adapted lives around them

instead of vice versa. ow a lot of people can't walk safely, for example, around bike, we e, can't devoted space to highways and parking lots that maybe could or housing in some urban areas. so one thing we're a little about, we could make the same sort of mistake with and become cars over dependent and sort of lifestyles to adapt to the technology rather than adapting the technology to our lifestyles. host: you wrote about two different scenarios, a heaven your ll scenario in article. let's read about what you said the good side could be. a.v.s usher in new age of social and civic well deaths raffic eliminated. a child can bike to school in major city without fear. some damage done n the highway area, massive surface parking lots no longer

needs, for example, that space s repurposed for parks or desperately needed affordable housing. side. eems to be the good you also talk about a bad side, a hell side. hell, however, a.v.s further entrench americans dysfunctional with cars.p social isolation, congestion and increase, less oncerned about long commutes, people industrial sprawl across the country side, establishing the communities far from masses. which way do we seem to be headed? guest: some experts i've talked to, a woman named robin chase, zipcar, she's the one that makes the heaven/hell presented that. she said right now she thinks e're headed toward the hell version because we're not -- we eed as a society, as our government, needs to step up and

want fromfine what we driverless cars and devise olicys that help us achieve that. right now tis auto companies that are really driving the -- ussion, there is almost there has been little to no regulation and so it is sort of hands of corporate entities their interest while i hink they are trying to do a good job and trying to make th do pose afe and they many potential benefits, also their interests are a little the general n public. that is why we need, we need to be thoughtful about how we these and we need to have sort of strong institution public interest. ost: let's go to bob, who is calling from aurora, indiana, good morning. good morning, thank you for letting me call in. the stupidest thing i ever heard of, it is stupid.

we do not need driverless cars. this country s straightened out. e spend money on stuff that is absolutely nonsense and senators, they don't know nothing up there, they're stupid. absolutely it is stupid our country has gone down like it has. get sick of hearing yahoos who do this and that, protest this don't need them out here. ost: what is the advantage to driverless cars? thing that is most exciteing and a lot of people cross the spectrum, there is potential to reduce a lot of bloodshed, a lot of people die. much, wethink about it are not cognizant of it in our died last0,000 people year in auto collisions and millions of people were injured. was a very -- it is a very

serious public health issue. his technology, there is other ways we could be addressing it and we're not doing a good job technology this really presents an opportunity to lower that dramatically. i said, ideally atalities could be almost eliminated or reduced by 90%. o that is one of the very promising aspects of the technology. you to join this conversation about the future of driverless cars. breaking up lines by region, in the eastern or central time zone, call in at 202-748-8000. time mountain or pacific 202-748-8001. at angie, what is going to be the impact of driverless cars on the in america? are we going to see jobs go away?

guest: yeah, that is a big concern, millions of people in three million d people driving trucks, driving uses, driving taxis, a lot of professional drivers could lose their jobs in the coming decade, concern.g that might start to happen sort truckers ith longhaul on highways. you'll see automation first on for trucks potentially. o a lot of people, these are decent working-class jobs, really could disappear and that something public policy makers should be concerned about and looking towards. host: to dave in irvine, california, dave, good morning. doing? hi, how you i want to make comment, when we and riverless cars everything, that will put a lot of people out of work there is automation coming, robots and stuff, it's coming around. he thing she said about

highways being unsafe, a car only holds up to like when they 40 milesash test, it's an hour. when people go faster, they want the t there faster, why is speed limit so high? i think there shouldn't be a if a car holds up to 40 miles an hour, 40,000 only drove 40, 40,000 people wouldn't die a year or know, the speed limit is way too high. when you talk about safety, and people about these doing the narcotics and stuff want all ey don't these people to die, why is the speed limit so high? i think there shouldn't be a speed limit, but they want to go would f it was low, it save lives. i think the robots and driverless cars will take over be no jobs, what are people going to do then? that's my question. yeah, one of the things that's been proposed by some of being this is really

driven by tech companies. tech companies are doing the work to introduce this, technology, so they are really in the driver's seat on this whole thing right now. thing they propose is this policy of universal basic income. is not just in transportation, transportation s one example and it's important example of how automation can eliminate jobs. jobs, three million jobs could be eliminated. think this won't happen for a decade or two probably, but it so they concern and propose policies like universal leastincome that would at provide a safety net, if we need less workers in the future, it sort of a scary thing to think about. talking with in, angie schmitt, who has been riting about the future of driverless cars in this week's "in ight on magazine for

these times." we'll go to tom, who is calling rom the atlantic highlands in new jersey. good morning, tom. caller: hi, how are you? specifically because i'm wondering about public how it has on and anything to do with this argument because i think people publiclly suffering from transportation and autonomous vehicles might be great, but it like it is almost supplement for better public across theion almost board anywhere you go, thank offline.e my comment guest: yeah, that is something that a lot of urban transportation officials are that is ncerned about, a really great question, i'm glad you brought that up. is a group called naso, a group of urban transportation cities s and they think should be proactive about this now and should make sure that riverless cars aren't displacing all the public transit that is available to lower income people, especially big cities because in a big

city where space is limited, in san francisco, driverless cars aren't going to olve congestion, cars are sort of big and bulky and take up a lot of space. new york could not function, if new york city subway went down and everyone had to drive a it into new york city, wouldn't work, the roads couldn't handle it, there is not enough parking. of people think high capacity mass transit is never away in big cities, but there is an open question how it could affect some of the lower ridership bus to serve.areas hard so some mass transit could go is an opportunity where self-driving vehicles ould be used to expand mass transit because the biggest expense for transit agency system labor, is drivers. so if you don't have to pay a driver anymore, maybe a bus expensive to too

operate in a low density suburban area all of a sudden again. so that is really great question, it is sort of an open is why we ut this argued in the article we should values drive adoption of this technology. cities to be -- if we ant cities to be more equal, better equality, we want better air quality, if we want to walking and biking in healthy outdoor activities, it to kind of limit, limit how much of an onslot we autonomous vehicles and start repurposing some of our street space for bus riders, for bikers, right now. so we can make sure that we of those ome alternatives that have healthy outcomes for our communities. let's go to kim from catskills, new york. morning.

caller: good morning. this subject fascinates me. 70 years old, will probably not live long enough to see how dies, but om or getting back to the idea of not a ding a human to operate thatne, how is it possible ubi would be a savior in that be e, people would encouraged to live liedel lives with that the ability to purchase fewer and fewer things? this system feed itself? guest: that is a really good i don't know if i can fully answer it. i do think when they propose basic income, you make a good point, are people going to be satisfied not working with universal basic income that maybe is less than when they were working. some people on the far left, like the young woman that was selected for congress in

new york city, has also federal jobs guarantee, so maybe there would back inhing like we saw the new deal where we -- if want are people idle that to work that can't be, we'd put them to work doing public work. question. it's a big open question right now. i think that some of the we're seeing right now in our political system are kind of to this lobalization that increase in technology and how that is displacing workers a little bit in some places. a big problem. i don't know necessarily that i universal swer, but basic income maybe jobs guarantee, those are the kind of things that have been floated as response and who knows, who knows whether people will be or sfied with that or not whether it is politically feasible. host: let's go to tom, calling mason, ohio.

good morning, tom. caller: good morning. my call.r taking wondering why formed for are being you rless cars, when already have a mean, that ble] -- i trying to why are you not let free enterprise take care of this? hey seem to be doing a pretty good job so far. sort of are, hey they are sort of in charge right now, these private companies and guess it is sort of open question, whether they are doing a good job right now. killed ase of the woman

in arizona, it turns out, so was a pedestrian killed trying to cross the road. agency that al investigating transportation crashes, they investigate plane crashes, they went out and investigated this uber's ned out that technology, they detected her before it hit her at high speed and killed her, but cars notprogrammed the to brake. the reason uber programmed cars is because sometimes the technology will an object they don't need to working about braking for, plastic bag blew across the highway, that is a false z positi wouldn't need to brake for that. uber programmed cars not to brake, if self-drieching cars braking all the time, it is a jerky ride for the passenger basically. hey had programmed the car not

to brake. they had a backup driver in the car. backup driver he was watching the television show "the voice" on her show and paying attention, now this woman was killed. the woman that was killed, she participate in a study that could potentially, a study of new technology that potentially kill her. it was government officials that made that decision for her. there are all kinds of ethical issues that are raised autonomous ing of vehicles and the question about whether they're doing a good protecting the public interest is sort of an open question because we're not even data.ed to the the federal government has not compelled agencies to even turn data from what they're tests, so righte now what you are describing is bsolutely what is happening free enterprise is totally driving the introduction of the now.rless cars right

and they are the most invested and i do think they have an investment in making sure they re safe, but i also worry that their interests aren't perfectly aligned with the public interest and we do need public entities, government, they are sort of ensuring our safety, as well. that.k that people expect host: here is part of what angie wrote in her article. of the reason federal regulators have been hesitant to a.v.'s to most expect become safer than their predecessors eventually. goal is achievable in most part because humans are such terrible drivers. americans were killed in traffic last year and millions more were seriously injured. let's go to susan in california. susan, good morning. caller: good morning. need my car.

i need it to go to the grocery tore, i need it to get to the doctor. when you take the bus, you wait hours.t for when i wasn't older, my husband nd i used to drive a friend to the doctor and back, otherwise she'd have to sit and wait for a hours, no matter what the weather was. and as far as jobs, you really to be too concerned whether people lose their jobs, dow is this social that is g of people, all you are doing. and as far as getting just so many people r so and making it equal opportunity, harder than ork others. guest: well, if i could respond, you bring up a really good point. think, that is something we mentioned in the article, about right now because we are so

reliant on cars in our transportation system, if people they can end up really isolated, that is a big problem for a lot of population groups. mention this in the article, so some low income folks that cars and are re servicesn the bus, bus are aren't what they should be in some places and it is for some people. elderly people can be captive in their home, it's a huge problem. is another, that is one other area where self-driving increase ine a huge social welfare. if an older person who couldn't their nd was isolated in house, all of a sudden, could get to the grocery store when get to the could doctor when they needed, that is potential huge increase in welfare and that's one good promising thing that could from self-driving cars. article actually

addresses some threats to jobs cars could bring. jobs, ns to eliminate truck drivers and delivery drivers alone, there are 3.2 likely jobs that will disappear. there are another half million people working as school bus drivers, 160,000 city bus drivers, almost 200,000 taxi not including uber. let's go to mike, who is calling from oxford, florida. good morning, mike. caller: i had kind of idealistic social aspect unfortunately because we are political and everything. wouldechnology coming, it seem to me that the proposed like nasa had a program they to have small that could aircraft be -- do short run type of things. driverless this, the cars would be part of the massive overall program, where rail, heavier

rail between cities, different with the ansportation aircraft, you know, the whole system could be integrated. know that would take a different vision, more in this ian, all together kind of thing, bit of overnment and private interaction with each other in terms of financing and things seems like we are going the other way. technology will drive this. have companies want it, they will go away and do away with the job and have likeatic trucks and things that. seem to be we could fit together piece and one big sane, rationale transportation actually really, would free people up. we lose jobs, things change in transportation, but we have technology that will drive better, we need a need different mind set of tribalizing and

individuals and all that, need to give up a bit of that. but just seems to me that driverless cars could have a of overall s part macro transportation system and in it robert iece lighthizer rail, local rail, long-range rail, that might be aircraft, the way the aircraft system got off a flight the our way, the way we hub system and aircraft seems like that is kind of senseless anymore. guest: yeah, i think you make a ood point, we should be thinking more holistically about lternatives for folks and how it can be -- how this technology can plug into a bigger system. invested in alternates to cars, like like peed rail, places europe and asia, have passed us up. we have been pretty overly reliant. that are people

isolated in their homes because they can't drive, we haven't much of an alternative, so in some ways, a.v.'s address hat, some ways they could make it worse. host: go to mike calling from maryland. good morning, mike. caller: hi, good morning, thanks for taking my call. wanted to pose a question regarding driverless cars. it's part ofe that of eater general automation everything and do you feel like to the ld be adding separation between the extremely wealthy and everybody else? guest: yeah. do., i i mean, this is being driven by and very wealthy individuals. the faces, one of

whole billionaire of this thing. so absolutely, absolutely. we could see a lot of, like i said, blue-collar jobs, decent-paying blue-color jobs disappear. the other question is, will the technology benefit lower income people? now, these automated features are appearing in luxury cars, pretty much exclusively. automated illac has feature that is pretty good now. people now the benefiting primarily are ealthier folks and the poorer folks, whether they drive or not, it may be a long time they can purchase or there was an open question about be her the technology will cheap enough low-income people ould ever purchase vehicles of their own. but one, one key thing could be outcome -- so one cool

could be that instead of everyone owning -- like in the nited states right now, almost every worker is sort of forced to own a car, unless they live york.big city like new if you have a job, you pretty much have to have your own car your car tis a big investment and it sits most of 95% of the rked, time, the average car sits parked. we ith self-driving cars, could see a movement away from individual ownership and there ould be instead, individual cars could be replaced with shared fleets. relatively in a large city, let's say you live for burban philadelphia, example, instead of waking up in the morning, going out to your and getting your car, potentially you could just order or could be n uber different company or could be nonprofit or government agency or whatever. no longer have to spend 17% of your income on a car,

instead you can just buy a ride to where you want to go. can you want to leave, you order a car, an a.v. drives up pretty easily and taking you need to go. there is still sort of a wide that of possibilities, but is one possibility that might be folks andit fairer to could help ease transportation costs for middle-class people transportationow costs are pretty high. like i said, about 17%. okay. guest: of household income for the average american. to mike in wyoming. good morning. caller: good morning, cspan, angie.orning, please let me be the voice of reason here. you know, this stuff is so far the future that it is just crazy to even think about example would be when you get 100-car freight train town without n to

an engineer or conductor on the , no human being on train, i don't think anybody is going to vote for that or want to say that is crazy. you know, i mean, that is just a subway train le or with nobody running the subway trains and stuff. know, they can't turn left or right, they go forward or backward, easiest way to do something driverless. until you get that one wouldn't begin thinking about cars, semitrucks or things like that. another short little comment on universal basic income, out in he west, we call that indian reservation and you give a human being land to live on, house to month , paycheck every and a local healthcare clinic to o to, that doesn't work out very well. so that is my xhep comments. thank you. guest: yeah. -- i understand the

skepticism and i sort of felt the same way, this is very far off, until i started looking at it a little bit more. they already are on the streets. are being driven around in pittsburgh. right now the federal government, congress and the looking at -- they have a bill in front of them hat is very close to passage that would allow companies to sell driverless cars to people. ight now there are some automated features, like they'll braking in ic certain situations, they are testing pedestrian detection. partial automation is starting to come online. is already starting to be here and some experts -- i talked to said he thought we'd have fully on the roads by 2030. by 2040, we might have a law cars need to the be automated because there is so many benefits for public safety. is just one person's guest,

educated guest from civil professor.g but that was his tiline, when h technology will take off. again, that is sort of a guess. we could see by 2030, driverless cars on the thing.normal by 2040, all the cars are driverless, potentially. host: we'd like to thank angie schmitt, contributor to "in magazine about her article about the future of driverless cars. so much for being with us this morning. guest: thank you. host: we're going to take more your telephone calls after the break. where you can let us know what talk policy you want to about this morning. we're going to open the phone lines, democrats call 202-748-8000. republicans call in at 202-748-8001. and independents,

202-748-8002. we'll be right back. >> sunday at 4:00 p.m. eastern the presidentca," 1968, a film detailing the june 1968 through the camera lens of the white house coveringtographic unit ctivities of president lyndon b. johnson. >> awaken by the news senator midst of nedy in the the primary had been shot and ritically wounded by an assassin. the day of the senator's death, president johnson sent letters the senate dent of and speaker of the house which urgently implored congress to meaningful and effective gun-control law. in june, much of the president's was centered on the paris peace talks. u.s. in the month, negotiator returned to washington to report on apparent

meetings. the from vietnam, reports were far from optimistic. slow down in hostility as result of the peace communists s, launched massive new wave of assaults throughout the south to front esolve on the home and grasp heightened leverage in the diplomatic struggle. at a news conference on june 26, the president announced supreme chief justice earl warren was retiring. in making his third and fourth the high court, the president knew his choices would affect the destiny of the after he himself had left office. > watch "reel america" this weekend on american history t.v. on cspan 3. >> "washington journal" continues. open the e going to phone lines for you, america, to tell us what public policies you

want to talk about today. let's get right to it. we have tom calling from ollywood, florida, on the democratic line. good morning, tom. caller: hi, good morning. to speak about our environmental policies or lack thereof, current administration, mr. trump as soon as he got in he did was thing undo many environmental protections that had been in for years and accumulation years and or 30 undone a lot of it. nd just benefit large corporations so they can do what they want, like back in the ast, when let the flu and didn't do anything to them. those are things i want to talk about. had was all done before we the current e.p.a. secretary, we just got rid of, now what are we to get? another guy, hopefully not, that

doesn't believe that humans have world, that global we've affected our world to the hotter.ere it's getting they don't believe in climate change, this is so ridiculous. 100 scientists sign off on that, that irrefutable doing it.e innantarctica rs and gre an alarming ing as rate. so many other things, you know. list.n endless host: tom, how big are environmental issues when it comes to your voting? do you vote on environmental issues when you think about environment issues when you vote? if i had somebody ho is running who says they don't believe in humans affecting climate change, i would definitely not vote for that person. that is not my only overriding oncern, but that is a big

concern. this is affecting our whole lanet, our children and our children's children's future. this isn't going to go away. emma, calling to in from stockton, california, on the democratic line. emma morning, caller: hey, how you doing? good. doing caller: i was calling, i tried to call before, the lady talking intelligence.ial i was wondering why, we were born with a mind that is created analyze our know, situations to the point where we we're being but slowly subdued into well-kept know, because even your telephone, you know, you button.ust push a you don't have to remember numbers no more. new hat is about this election, this technology is but it l in some ways, is also detrimental in other ways and for this next election

2018, i do believe go back to say, make ke you america great again, make it to where we make our mark on the don't do it through technology, put your mark on the ballot. it might take time to count it up, that is all right, we'll the stand that, this is real count because hey, we got to do something. manipulation uch through artificial intelligence. host: let's go to roy calling antonio, texas, on the independent line. good morning, roy. morning.ey, good about the call up north korean thing. i'm really ou know, retired military in san antonio, raised in pennsylvania, start of the stuff, theyall that sent our boys over there and just got run over and

everything. is, at that time, we destroyed every sea in north and those people depended they hate us. their ll never give up nuclear weapons and they would be fools not to -- i mean, fools do it because look, we break the treaties that we're in. just, for example, we consider allies saudi arabia and israel and they're not even to being a democratic and -- brought up high-speed rails, don't they rails that high-speed will enjoy all the bird life and everythi everything. ow will we get -- host: well, this weekend our -span's city tour explored the american story as book t.v. and american history t.v. traveled

texas, to feature the city's history and literary life. at 12 p.m. eastern time on book t.v., all of our programs from the city will air time block.one here shawn cunningham, author of the can politics in post-war sunbet talks about the the of conservatism in united states. >> in this present crisis, solution is not the to our problem, government is the problem. [applauspause what i hope people get from this book and one of the reasons hy i wrote this book is that historians and political scientists and journalists have trying to study and political change, especially what really has storyography in my field, this idea barry

in the r gets crushed 1974 presidential election, texan to a liberal running on great society platform on bigger government and fulfillment of the new deal we trust our government and government is good and by 1980, reagan, who begins his career as a goldwater conservative is winning just big of a landslide election in 1980 as johnson wins in 1964. do we get from point a to point b? tune in this e to weekend to book t.v. and american history t.v. as we to lubbock, texas. o watch the cities we visited on the c-span city tours go to cspan.org,/citiestour. now we'll go back to phone lines calling from hn greenwood, indiana, on the democratic line. john.orning, caller: good morning. i would like to see some

of the california fires and the environment and are they part of that. we got a draft-dodging, lying president, i don't think happen.l host: let's go to june, who is calling from wisconsin, on the line.ndent june, good morning. morning.ood serious cern is a very one. the movie and reporters, are using the tweeted as past tense for he pled and i hear professionals ay this on the show and i have hard enough time as it is, the plea is pledged, not pleaded, they don't use it correctly. for example, i pleaded with him and pleaded with him to plead

guilty, he finally pled guilty. that is the proper usage. the reason, you know, it is lost. plurals, it's er lost. it.very concerned about and i just hope that we're able getting the children educated properly because we problem in america. show, tch any television shows, maury and ll this, "i've seen this," and "i've seen that," i'm like, really? i'm praying for the young people because, you know, can't even fill out a job don't know. i let's just pray for america and our educational system. you a former e teacher? caller: yes, i want you to know

of my life, teaching was what i have always wanted to do and i tell people the english is a science, as well as an art, that is why we have a language arts, you will recall that. and, years ago, i remember editorial article, letter to the milwaukee journal, it was from a teacher who had apparently graduated from teaching college or something. why do we ter was, have to have all of these rules english. and i was shocked. english knowable and it is very concerning to me that every time and important from news people

everybody.know, he pleaded this and pleaded that and that really concerns me the children repeat what they hear. to catherine calling from california on the republican line. morning, catherine. caller: good morning. i was just reading in the paper a week ago, where a retired congress person, i think sanhsanholt, and the you believe the taxpayers paid the person who ccused him of some sex harassment $84,000. when is this crap going to stop? is absolutely ridiculous that the taxpayers pay this. i would do with the guy, instead of the taxpayers for $84,000. when did this start?

how much has been paid out of this kind of activity? thank you. who iset's go to justin, calling from newport, virginia, line. democratic caller: how you doing? doing well. caller: yes, i'm calling to talk children that's in the and why have amps they been not given back to the parents yet. justin?ou still there, caller: i'm still here, can you hear me now? host: i can hear you. calling about the kids in the fema camp and 566 walmarts why closed down this year and interment camps

across america and why a whole and of tactics in georgia kentucky, just sitting there to happen? disaster host: okay. thank you, justin. let's go to lisa calling from richmond, virginia, on the republican line. good morning, lisa. caller: good morning. i would like there to be research and further effort by our congress to reform as immigration laws because i stated earlier in the show, we'll have fewer jobs in america just can't keep growing the population. they d of the laws being catch and release them into the united states, it should be they and return them back to their country. people tand that many have problems in other countries, but america, too, has problems, as well. it is a huge financial burden

if we lose jobs in the future, it is going to be a problem. speak about universal income, where does the money come from? ou just can't keep overtaxing the middle class, because that is really who is paying the this.for all of a as one lady said earlier, some harder than k others, we need to get to fairness, middle class is being overburdened, make congress do their job get rid of them. be enforced, o just as american citizens have to follow the laws, everyone follow the laws, as well. we need immigration reform. thank you. frances, s go to calling from selma, alabama, on the independent line. morning, frances. caller: yes, good morning, c-span, the world. to talk about i guess the heart-felt battles that we have from alabama in order to move america forward and then we

come back and it seems like the people who fear that the moving too fast, we and pull, cumvent roll back laws, change things. time, it took and knowledge and people all of us of years ed for a lot for a lot of diverse education, not only n religion, in science, not only in all, a whole world around still ogies and then we continue to call our nation poor, that is r because we don't seem to educate our minds and i guess i go back the lady talking about superficial, artificial intelligence. truly going eally to waste. in the disappointed president, i am not a person of

can recall what we ere taught about nazi germany and i think what we are doing to and efugees is deplorable we are turning this into another incident.r host: let's go to christopher, who is calling in from chicago, independent the line. good morning, christopher. c-span. hello, i'm calling about the decision a new supreme court justice, i believe that this could be americans for all that to give so much power in electing nd individuals who represent our to cial system to be given the president because he already has too much on his plate as novemb commander-in-chief and making that could cisions bypass congress and now to have control over how our judicial

run, is very be concerning and it could hold a based on itical bias your party and i believe there should be a reform and change should elect our justices like having a committee of across or other judges the country to elect our new having theather than president elect them for us ecause this current administration, president trump s very fickle and very -- he's fickle and indecisive and can be americans no all matter what party you may believe in and to have him justice, even after he leaves office, can greatly ffect our judicial system and that is just something that needs to be worked on. that would you take away power from all presidents or just this administration? to er: all presidents, just make it fair, because it is just

could lead to nd a lot of manipulation in our so.tem by doing host: let's go to randy, who is calling from hamilton, ohio, on republican line. good morning, randy. caller: hi. was a a pain patient, patient of dr. paulia and us are suffering from the opioid crisis and the policy. policymakers are the laws they are passing, it is really making would like to see them go about it in a different way. dahlia from o to miami, florida, on the republican line. good morning. caller: yeah, good morning. my call is about why are democrats? mad and it is because after eight years socialist, o was a they thought we could -- you ould turn this country more to up and and because we

ay, no, we want to go back to having good jobs, not giving away everything to the whole world. come from cuba, i know what socialism is and people who are out there and the to be aso great ocialist, they have never live under such conditions, your whole life is turned over. rights, on top of you and don't you dare criticize them. is going actly what on, that is why people like and so waters is so mad upset because the people of this people who have never voted for said no more. of it, we're turning around and that is what is going on. thank you. host: let's go to craig from florida.h, craig, good morning. caller: good morning, good sir.ing,

i didn't want to vote for either one of these people, either hillary or trump. at the end, i did vote for donald trump, but this man is he president and these nprecedented attacks suggested waters and keith ellison advocating wearing a "no borders," ays it is impossible to have no welfare state. are we going to invite the ntire, what if two billion people wanted to come here all f a sudden and become wards of the state? borders, 't want open so we are attacked? i see a 16-year-old boy attacked bouncer in san antonio, had a drink thrown in his face and hat off?ipped the down here in palm beach, a man with a trump flag in his front

yard, a guy stopped his car, got out, punched the man in the dragged him down the street. for violence is absolutely -- i live through the the '60s and of this is terribly out of hand and his is going to turn into something absolutely atrocious, just like the gentleman who ried to kill all the republicans at the baseball game ak-47.is this must stop, we must have will, this y or we country will turn into venezuela, we will have riots in streets and tanks running. ratchet this way back. everybody has an opinion, your pinion does not extend the violence and chasing people out of restaurants and down the street like some seen from "invasion of the body snatchers," this is absolutely

outrageous. we all have a responsibility to bring it back. chant, what do we want, dead cops, when do we want them, end game there? host: well, that is going to be today's show, join us tomorrow, when we talk to john to talk will be here about evangelicals and president connelly to ather preview the nato summit. tomorrow morning for another edition of

>>. >> national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]. >> today on cbs, hear people who who d with larry nassa r, accused of sexual abuse of athletes. amateur and politics and race relations, and a look at veterans and and memorials. >> this weekend, c-span cities tour takes you to lubbock, texas, with the help of our suddenlink cable partners, as we lubbock's literary scene and history. book at noon eastern on tv, author shawn cunningham with in book american politics the post-war sunbelt. conservative growth in the region. ound >> billions and billions of are being resources poured into the south and create this new idea that is both

fighting communism abroad and ursuing free-market dreams at home, and it creates this kind milieu in the american southwest that just reinforces a ideas of just american ingenuity and hard work to fighting. nt anouncer: on sunday at 2:00 p.m. on american history tv, we visit the buddy holly center hear about the buddy holly center. fact that he proud buddy was number 1, born and aised here, and the center is here to keep his story alive, to keep his music alive. to the : then a visit vietnam center and archive located at texas tech university. is home to the argest collection of vietnam related material outside of the national