segment with deputy managing editor robert verbruggen, we will discuss disability and his disability."ining ♪ created by congress in the aftermath of 9/11, immigration and customs enforcement is now in congress' crosshairs as the house may vote before august on the future of ice. good morning and welcome to "washington journal." we will begin the program asking you the question -- should ice be abolished? here is how to join the conversation. (202) 748-8000 as the number to call for democrats. republicans use (202) 748-8001. independents and all others, (202) 748-8002.

we have set aside a line for border state residents, (202) 748-8003. should ice be abolished? facebook.com/c-span and our twitter handle, send us a tweet at c-span wj. this is a measure that was introduced this past week, and one of the sponsors of that legislation is mark boal can of wisconsin. says the legislation would convene a commission of experts to provide a roadmap for congress to implement a humane immigration enforcement system that upholds the dignity of all individuals, which includes terminating the u.s. immigration and customs enforcement agency within one year of enactment. just for some background, the agencies that deal with order issues and immigration, customs and border protection, cbp,

protects the nation's borders and prevents terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the u.s., facility -- facilitates a flow of legitimate trade and travel. customsigrations and enforcement is the investigative arm of homeland security to identify and shut down vulnerabilities at the border, transportation, and infrastructure security. there are three main parts, the homeland security investigations, the interior enforcement and removal actions. weekssue came up this because that bill we mentioned, and a potential vote, as we mentioned, before the august recess in the house. we are joined on the phone by lindsay mcpherson with c q roll call.

what is behind this movement to abolish ice? there is some progressive democrats who have been using this as a campaign call to highlight what they feel are mass abuses by the trump ,dministration on immigration and certainly they have also referred to the mass deportation . ice's role has changed under the trunk administration to become what they call the mass deportation forced. mainstream democrats, moderate democrats have not picked it up. they feel like it could create problems in the midterms because maybe it goes a little too far. that has divided the democrats and republicans are looking to potentially hold a vote to exploit the division. sct: what steve scully's --

alilse sent out the resolution, competingt see resolutions, one to abolish the agency and one showing it support? guest: that seems to be the current thinking, as they hold two votes on the bill you described that would terminate humanet only after more immigration enforcement system is created. the resolution that scalise cosponsored that was introduced by clay higgins, says the house supports ice and rejects calls to abolish it. host: what about democratic leadership in the house and senate? do they favor this effort? guest: they have not suggested they would support abolishing ice. i think it is coming more from

the progressive democrats on the left side of the party. is not called for a full abolishment of ice but is saying it should be restructured. that is what this bill tries to get out. -- the termg that has created a problem for democrats. you hear abolish ice and think they are getting rid of the function. the actual legislation does not quite do that, but it is just the appearance that they would totally get rid of the agency that has created problems and divisions among democrats. host: lindsay mcpherson's house leadership reporter for roll call. you can follow her on twitter. thank you for being with us. guest: i just want to point out that the democrats say they plan to vote against the bill and they will not play that political game or show divisions

among their party. i just wanted to let your viewers know that. host: lindsay mcpherson, thank you for being with us. guest: thanks. host: matthew in the keys rock, pennsylvania -- mckees rocks, pennsylvania, your thoughts on immigration and customs enforcement. caller: i do not know if "abolish" is the right word. maybe folded into a couple of other agencies it do with immigration or border security. i never thought it was something that should've been created. if memory serves me, it was created after 9/11, was it not? host: yes, 2003. caller: i have noticed the city i used to live in had ice agents. they always seemed to get in some kind of trouble.

a dui here, a car accident there. host: you say the agents themselves? caller: yes, a couple of them did. that is the problem. i think there has also been problems with some of the people that they hired and tried to ,xpand their talent pool personnel back in 2007 and 2008. host: michael is in new kensington, pennsylvania on our republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. thank you for c-span. it is wrong to vilify these people that have been put there to protect our borders, to protect the security of our country. , itow there has been a big seems like a media push or something, to make these people out to look like they are horrible people, when they are given a very difficult job. i think it is made even more

portray allen they these people as mean and nasty and whatever. i think that putting these people on the border, whether it is border agents or ice agents, it is again defending our akin descending our guys to vietnam and then when they come home, spitting on them and calling them baby killers. host: we have set up a line for the house democrats who wrote the legislation that would abolish immigration enforcement across the united states say when their bill comes up for a vote they will oppose it. validentative mark pocan oppose the- vowed to

bill, thus ending all interior enforcement of immigration. on that issue, lindsay mcpherson who we just spoke with wrote in roll call yesterday, she talked with ben ray lujan, the congressional campaign committee chair. i talked about, he said, think you are assuming that the democratic caucus is not together on this. when asked if he is worried the vote will reveal a divide within the party, he said the democrats would be united in using the debate as an opportunity to have a conversation about issues they do agree on but that are more likely to be divisive for republicans. in washington, we hear from peggy on our democrat line. caller: good morning. no, we should not abolish ice. i'm a democrat and we have got to stop thinking these crazy

things. we need the ice department. i say no, absolutely not. pick our battles. let's go for something we really should be doing. host: in anaheim, california, frank is on our republican line. caller: good morning. i believe we should support ice. i voted for the president. my grandmother was a four-star mother who was born in this country. her mother was born in italy. i agree that a border is very important. most americans do. when we talk about the border, the first thing they think is we are prejudiced, and it is not the right thing. we have a right to borders. my grandfather came here in the end of 1800s. he had $10 in his pocket and was sponsored by somebody. that is not the way we do it

anymore. we have social security given to these people who are not from this country. things are not done right. it is not right the way they come across the border. ice is very important. host: do you think the agency could be reformed, particularly with the migrant children issue at the border? the has been some call for the agency to be reformed. what do you think? caller: i do not think so. they are committing the felonies by coming into the country. it has been this administration's policy to change it to a felony. they are coming across the say theynd they always are having a problem in the country they are coming from. countries in central america have problems with layings, -- gangs, and that is true, but everyone seems to have some reason for coming to this country. done because of

the 14th amendment. anybody has a child in this country, it becomes an american citizen, and that is not fair and that is not right. my first cousin married a girl in italy and she could not become a citizen. host: when was that? caller: he died about three years ago. he married her in 1990, i believe, and he was having a hardship. he was seeking her in. host: on the line for border state residents, (202) 748-8003, talking about whether ice should be abolished. -- a bill from house democratic members may's he some debate -- may see some debate. senator elizabeth warren is calling for the abolition of ice. >> president trump seems to think the only way to have immigration rules is to rip

parents from their families, is to treat rape victims and refugees like terrorists, and to put children in cages. this is ugly. this is wrong. this is not the way to run our country. the president deeply -- president's deeply immoral actions have made it obvious, we need to rebuild our immigration system from top to bottom, starting by replacing ice with something that reflects our morality. the recent rally with massachusetts senator elizabeth warren, should ice be abolished is our question?

we showed you the news conference by the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. here is the front line of "the washington post," 12 russians indicted in probe of 2016 election. they were indicted friday on charges they hacked democrats across to free computers -- -- thets' computers indictment against members of the russian military agency marks the first time all or has taken direct aim at the russian government, accusing specific military units and named officers of a sophisticated effort to have networksthis computer of democratic organizations and the hillary clinton campaign. --"the wall street journal"

russians indicted in dnc hacking. citizenses not indict so they are not likely to see the inside of an american courtroom. the government directed an array of crimes to disrupt the 2016 campaign. in announcing the case, deputy attorney general rod rosenstein cited the deep divide between republicans and democrats, and encouraged americans to assess the charges on their merits and not through a political lens. our question for you this morning, should ice be abolished? we go to our democrats line in long beach, california, james. caller: good morning. i have seen the bush ice, the obama ice, but there is a big, start difference -- stark difference when you look at the trump ice.

they have the goal to remove every single person of mexican heritage out of this country. when i see them raid a home depot in san pedro in 2017, i was shocked. noody believed me because, way would ice just randomly select a home depot and go after day laborers. i said, this is a new ice, a new era, and nobody believed me. since february 2017 it has been like that. they have literally been trying to remove every single person of spanish heritage in california, and they are trying their best. that is a sad purge squad called ice. i think we need way more oversight. it is creating unsafe cities where people are afraid to report crimes, and we are being bombarded with fireworks like crazy because people are scared to call the police because they are blowing m 80's because they feel like ice will round them up

if they report anything. is in oxnard, california, a very agricultural area. good morning. caller: i don't think we should abolish ice. i think we should keep it. to the caller's point -- not to his point, trump's administration, i do not think he is trying to round up all mexicans. we are just trying to get rid of the people who came here illegally and not get rid of them, but make sure they go to the right process to stay here. i am mexican. you have got to somehow that -- vet the people coming in. it is getting kind of out of hand where i am from, a lot of , paying their rightful taxes. it is time we put a stop to that. that is my comment. host: here's the reporting of

"the dallas morning news," mexico wrestles with rising tide of immigrant asylum requests as the u.s. asks for more help stemming the flow from the north. exit go, for tens of thousands of central americans heading to the u.s. is becoming a destination for migrants freeing extortion,violence, poverty, and natural disasters. that is underscored by testimony for migrants in shelters and other human organizations. good morning, on the republican line. caller: let me give you a quick background. for 25 years i have been retired from the military and i see merkel come to power. i see the same business people over there.

i see business people over there wanting to put some oil back up and keep them out of russia and east countries that came in their -- there. the politics started changing and it has been changing ever since. 1983, 1984, they came in, 1981, 1982 when reagan first had the laws. host: what about our question this morning? where do you stand on immigration broadly, but specifically on the agency ice? 1996, came back here to get away from that because i

saw the violence starting up and things were happening over there. things started happening in this country a few years ago. host: we will hear from basil in north olmsted, ohio, republican line. caller: i would like to make a couple of quick points. i think chuck schumer and senator feinstein and barbara boxer and the one that they call pocahontas, they should adopt 1013 immigrants that come in. i think the republican party should adopt these people, bring them in, and house them in their own homes. they seem fine with them coming in randomly and going where they want to. what would happen in chicago with this wonderful mayor because he does not end the violent neighborhoods? look at the killings among the poor blacks in chicago. let's get rid of ice and our

police force. we do not need anyone to watch over us or protective anymore in america. i hope the democrats continue this line. if they do not want to see what happened in europe with this kind of attitude, i do not believe they care about america or the constitution. let's get rid of law and order. let everybody do what they want to do. let's open all the borders in the world and give up our constitution. host: let's look at what people are saying on twitter. about the video we just showed you, elizabeth warren ask is if she is running for president and condemning ice may work in the primary, not so much the general election. jenny writing, that is craziness, i am glad i do not live in massachusetts. admitted his brother used to sneak his foreign wife in the u.s. from canada.

repatriating immigrant children with their parents, there is a report from the associated press earlier today. a federal judge commended the trump administration efforts to reunite children separated the border, but plans to watch closely as the deadline is coming involving older children. the judge said at a hearing in san diego that the government has demonstrated good faith and largely complied with the deadline this week to reunite families with children under five. at the same time, he indicated he will be monitoring the administration's actions i had a vague july 26 deadline to reunite more than 2500 older children with their families. overall, your thoughts on whether ice should be abolished or is likely to be a vote on that, a related vote coming up

before the house takes its recess. we hear from ray in chicago on our republican line. caller: good morning, sir. before saidcallers they wanted to get rid of all mexican-americans. is he crazy or just stupid? i am a mexican-american who proudly served his country in vietnam. -- this country in vietnam. i was not afraid of being sent back to mexico. i was born here. all mexicans do not need to worry about being sent back, only the illegals. if anything should be abolished, it should be the democratic party. guy, they say things that aren't true. elizabeth warren says that aren't true. admit toleman must

warn. country.afraid of my i am afraid to walk down the streets of chicago, north side, southside, side, westside. there is no safe zones for us. only for illegals. isn't that something? build that wall. host: that israel chicago. chicago.at was ray in dixie in west virginia. caller: trump has done great. we should build a wall because they are coming over here to get the free stuff america has to offer, and that is all it is, and to cause trouble. we need this wall built big-time. it is the best thing trump ever tried to do, build a wall, and it is what people voted him in

for. we definitely need the wall. trump is the best president we have ever had. in my book, he is number one and i admire him. mike pence is great, too. host: house speaker paul ryan held a briefing with reporters, the issue of a possible vote on this legislation to abolish ice came up. >> they have really jumped the shark's on the left. pocan's bill for madison. you want to abolish immigration and customs enforcement agency. this is the agency that gets gangs out of our communities, that helps prevent drugs from flowing into our schools, that rescues people from human trafficking. they want to get rid of this agency. it is the craziest position i

have ever seen and they are tripping over themselves trying to move to bring far to the left. .hey are out of the mainstream host: asking you the future of ice, should it be abolished? (202) 748-8000 as the number to call for democrats. (202) 748-8001, republicans. independents and others, (202) 748-8002. border state residents can call (202) 748-8003. the wall street journal this morning with some of the political ripples, the congressional political ripples on this potential vote on ice. rift emerges among democrats. rosina peterson and read epstein writing since hillary clinton , the jockeying voices are who can tout the most liberal policy. senator chris coons is over it.

this weekre democrat launched a one-man campaign to exchangee party pie-in-the-sky promises like abolishing the immigration and customs enforcement agency for pragmatic policies. without naming names, the subject of his ire was clear: democratic colleagues seeking favor from the party liberal base. party are a of our fear instead taking the easy road and proposing ideas that might sound great in a tweet like free college and free health care. you can find that article in "the wall street journal" this morning. to fort lauderdale, florida we go, republican line, paul. good morning -- caller: good

morning. ice is enforcing the laws of the united states so stop blaming ice and start blaming the laws. it is unfortunate they create fear but aren't you supposed to fear breaking the law? if there is a law and someone is breaking it, they should fear being apprehended. my first recommendation for changing laws in the united states is this. if you are illegal immigrant and you report a crime that results in an arrest, you get a green card. nature,of the negative i guess you would say, even though you can report crimes anonymously and get rewarded anonymously, let's make it into a positive. tell illegal immigrants, you report a crime and if there is an arrest, you get a green card. there might be so many crimes reported they will start having

to say, the first person that reports this crying. i don't know -- this crime. i don't know. there is a remedy. let's stop blaming ice and let people fear the law. host: diane is on our independent line from arkansas. caller: thank you for taking our call. we need to keep ice because they are illegal. they enter this country illegal. they do not have our ideology. they do not have our history. my people have been in this country since 1680. i go through my house, i see people that served this country all the way back to the revolutionary war. these people do not love this country. they do not have our fundamental same thoughts about this country. they put a weight on this

country economically. they don't have vaccinations. are wanting to change our country. they are wanting to turn us into a socialized system, and take our constitution and flush it down the drain. we need to stop these people. we need to have buses, when they jump the fence, load them on the buses and send them back across the border. host: this saturday morning, at the trump turnberry resort in scotland before his monday meeting with russian president vladimir putin, this is the front page of the financial times -- trump switched tack on bed to repairn ties. -- bid to repair ties

repair ties. he withdrew his criticism made in an interview with "the sun" newspaper that mrs. mays brexit plan would kill a trade deal between london and washington. whatever you do on brexit is ok with me. what is your decision, mr. trump? just make sure you can trade with us, that is all that matters. remarks came hours after he was quoted accusing mrs. may of having wrecked their negotiations with russell's by pursuing a brexit plan that prioritized u.k. trade with the eu over the rest of the world. line.n our border state should ice be abolished? caller: i believe so, and i live in new hampshire which people do not think of as a border state.

on the canadian border and in the white mountains of new hampshire, ice are pulling people over indiscriminately and detaining them in new hampshire. there is a candidate for congress here, mark mckenzie, who is for abolishing ice. he is running in the first district as a democrat in an open seat. he is the only candidate in that race who has come out in favor of abolishing ice. it is spreading around the country, people are realizing that we did not have ice before 9/11. it was a product of the legislation, the patriot act, so-called after the 9/11 disaster. perfecthat, it wasn't but there was a system. that think was the people oversaw immigration. itdid not work perfectly but

certainly worked a lot better than the fascist system we have now. mckenzie for congress in district one new hampshire, abolished ice. host: ahead of the hearings for brett kavanaugh to be the next supreme court justice, on c-span's "washington journal" we are taking a look at some of the key senators who may be involved in that final decision to approve the nominee. we are joined by colin wondered with theould urge press herald to look specifically at senator susan collins of maine. what type of pressure in the state do you think senator collins is facing? guest: so far, she has been facing ad campaigns from the american civil liberties union, from pro-choice groups, and there have been protests, some dozens or hundreds 50 protests -- 150 protests outside her

offices. protests and large advise is what we have seen. is what we have seen. has that generally been her approach to supreme court nominees in the past? guest: correct, she has been consistent in the past that her criteria, the thing she is most concerned about is that the nominee has respect for precedent, the past decisions of the court. is would not use roe v. wade a question or a litmus test or any other issue that might come before the court. she has implied that that would also somehow protect roe v. wade because it is settled law and a lot of legal experts i spoke to said that was not necessarily the case. she has been consistent over the time on that, using that same criteria in her evaluation of all of whom she

voted to confirm. host: with the outgoing republican conservative ,overnor, republicans democrats, and an independent in the main delegation -- maine delegation, what kind of pressure issue getting from the political scene on this particular nominee? guest: senator collins is far and away the most powerful figure in maine politics. we have two house reps and two senators. she is not one who would be influenced by the other people in the delegation. she has somewhat of a tense relationship with governor paul lepage. she is from a more moderate wing of the party and he is from a more champion wing.

umpian wing. she will not be influenced by them. .ngus king is an independent he has made a statement that seems to suggest he will be skeptical of kavanaugh's nomination. we have a fairly liberal democrat who has come out and one kavanaugh, relatively conservative republican is suggesting if he were the senator he would be evaluating him and considers his credentials to be impressive. none of them would necessarily influence:. host: is senator collins planning to run for election in 2020? how does this play in? guest: everybody wonders if she will be running again, because

she was considering running for governor and ultimately decided not to. the whole state was holding its breath because if she were to make such a move or not run for reelection, there would be a scramble for virtually every seat. it would be one of those major earthquakes. nobody knows for sure. there is pressure. i asked a lot of political scientists and people, did they sense this might affect her ?olitical standing she has been enormously popular. she won reelection with like 60% of the vote. -- 67% of the vote. you need to have some support from some democrats and independents. there is the sense she may be losing some support on the margins and may not get 67% because of this nomination and

the tax cut vote and other tension points with the trump administration, and people who want resistance. she would still probably be in a good position to be reelected anyway because she has such a large base and support network and in general, it would be expected that she would still be the clear favorite to run reelection. it is a long way down the road, as we all know. host: taking a look at the brett kavanaugh nomination and what may be ahead, focusing on susan collins, we will look for more odardting from colin wo with the portland press herald. thank you so much for joining us. guest: thank you for having me. host: we will continue with our question this morning as we start the question -- program asking about the immigration and

customs enforcement agency, should it be abolished? (202) 748-8000, democrats. republicans use (202) 748-8001. independents and others, (202) 748-8002. for border state residents, (202) 748-8003. some comments on twitter, ice has become a presidential tool used to harass legal immigrants and others. is aboutid of the ice as republicans jumping the shop to get rid of medicare and medicaid. the majority of americans want ice to remain and do their job. it is just a handful of democrats asking to abolish ice. where is the segment where the republicans called for the removal of all people of color? there are more republicans who believe that then dems who want ice abolished. them, new depends on jersey, lewis on the republican line. , new jersey, lewis

on the republican mine. are you there? caller: can you hear me? host: we got you. caller: i have three points. all the parents watching right now, if you had a 7, 8, 9-year-old with you, crossed the border, and an agent said i'm going to arrest you and take your kid or you can take your kid and go back, what would you do? that is my first point. just to say that a lot of these folks bringing these kids over are not the parents, because i don't know any parent who would allow themselves to be separated from their child. second point, the sanctuary cities, who in the world will report a crime and then knowing that when this person gets out, the sanctuary city will protect them and allow them back into the neighborhoods they can go after you for testifying against them?

point, the problem with the democrats is in two years jump has done more for my nares than they have -- minorities than they have in 60 years. host: on the issue of sanctuary cities, congresswoman marsha blackburn -- blackburn with an opinion piece, why ice must not be abolished. she writes that kate steinle was shot and killed on san francisco pier. her death came at the hands of an illegal alien previously deported five times and a convicted felon. it ignited a natural discussion -- national discussion. democrats' new proposal to abolish ice is moving the immigration debate in an unhealthy direction. she writes that encouraging illegal immigration is fairer to those migrants who follow our laws and deters illegal entry if

.here is no false amnesty an average of 490,000 apprehensions along our southwest border per year between fiscal year 2013 and 2017. according to quarter -- customs and border patrol, we need more interior enforcement, not less. on the cross-border state line, concord, new hampshire, nancy. caller: i just wanted to point out that the entire state of new hampshire is within 100 miles of the border. not only do we have the canadian border. a look at the coastline is also -- as also the international border. if they wanted to, they could set up a roadblock in downtown concord, new hampshire and start demanding id and citizenship records. it is a scary precedent.

this particular thing came about during the patriot act, and i do not believe that we the people ever had a chance to talk about changing the ins system. look at the incarceration rate in our country. we have more people incarcerated per capita than any other country around the world. i cannot think we have that many more evil people, but i think it is a racket, the private prisons. i was one of the people protesting jeff sessions the other day because i think he has very evil intentions and it is scary for america. host: what brought him to the federal building? caller: he came to talk about more policing. what they want to do is prosecute on fentanyl. i think it a second or third on the opioids here. ,e is here about prosecuting and they talk about massachusetts. i grew up in the city of lawrence and i am still involved

with the community college, which is very active in the city of downtown lawrence. i would encourage you to do a program in downtown lawrence. the young woman who was just elected miss massachusetts is from lawrence, and she has incredible degrees that she is working on. host: back to the immigration thing in new hampshire in particular, do you feel like the immigration, the feel of immigration in new hampshire, the issue of immigration has changed over the last few years? caller: it has changed. we have taken in refugees. we have folks from sudan. concord, new hampshire is like 97% white so when somebody is here from another country it is pretty obvious. we have tried hard to be inclusive, and when we have negative rhetoric it is hard. congress has tried to reach out because it has been a welcoming place.

new hampshire, it is the first primary state and there is a lot of politics that go on. we can try to set a good example , but the police stopping visitors and people coming in the north country are representatives. annie kuster was recently stopped. host: i am going to let you go. i am losing your phone a little bit. we will hear from paul in west palm beach, florida, republican line. expand on whatto i said a few days ago. i am from india. [indiscernible] they asked me to show an id. they came all the way to my apartment. they wanted to check me out. i have a green card and showed it to them. i have no problem. host: i apologize, but your

phone is just a little, maybe in a tough spot. we will hear from angel next in surprise, arizona, obviously border state. should ice be abolished? caller: good morning, and thank you for c-span. i appreciate you guys. iwould just like to say that seen a lot of good work from ice. if they want to abolish ice, i think we should have e-verify for the people that are working here so then we don't have to use ice. again, e-verify for those people that are abusing the immigrants that come here. that is my comment. host: here is ray in pleasantville, tennessee, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call.

i am a 74-year-old man who was raised in california in the san joaquin valley. i saw the immigrants come and do the work in the fields and i saw them go back. that was in the 1950's. in the 1960's, it seemed like everything was turned around, and we got liberal people in government. weak leaders. it has just been going downhill ever since. we are paying these people to go to washington to make our laws and have people and force them, and they want to get rid of them. there is a segment in our country called the liberal people that have been trying their best to make this a socialist country. the american people are going to have to stand up and make it will, the silent majority

have to get out there and say, we do not want this and we do not want you trying to tear our country down. no, we don't need to get rid of ice. we need to take care of the laws we have got on the books. we are not an open country and we don't need to be. host: yesterday on this program, we asked california congresswoman norma torres about the possibility of the house voting on abolishing ice. here is what she said. >> it is unfortunate that as much as we have talked about child separation, as many people that have come out come out of republican and democratic districts and said, we are americans and we will not tolerate this, there has been no action from the republican leadership to take up a bill to ensure that first responders, law enforcement officers have resources that they need in order to deal with the

situation, and that ice actually has the directive that we give them, and are operating under those directives. unfortunately right now, ice is only hearing from the trump administration. more than lot immigration, then detaining and deporting people. there is another bureau within ice that is responsible for homeland security, such as investigating kidnappings, investigating human trafficking, drug trafficking. if we do not like the directive of ice, then we need to change that. we need to own that as members of congress, and stop allowing this administration to bully us into a corner and come up with uninformed solutions like this. when we abolish ice, what will be next? it is not going to stop.

it is the directive that we are getting personnel that needs to change. host: follow that discussion at c-span.org. starting the program asking you about ice and whether it should be abolished. we will likely see a vote in the house and maybe a competing measure as well. this is from "the baltimore ice" "a polish -- abolish urge." and others have made clear that ice is not going anywhere, but on restructuring ice or giving it new marching orders is well within the jurisdiction of congress, whether or not the democrats gain a majority. there are republicans who are clearly embarrassed by the zero-tolerance fiasco as well. how odd is it to hear trump supporters treat the fbi, the u.s. department of justice and the intelligence establishment as some sort of deep stage -- state outlaws but reserve their

goodwell for ice, the agency that rest three-year-olds from their mothers? that is the opinion of the baltimore sun. here is lady in auburndale -- lee in auburndale, florida, independent line. caller: good morning. i would like to say that i am not in favor of abolishing ice. i am in favor of common sense law enforcement in this country. i would like to make another comment, if you don't mind. host: sure. caller: when i saw the demonstrations in england yesterday and i saw the donald trump balloon flying over it, i thought, america is really great now. we have made america great. is probably canada thinking about building a wall along their southern border to keep the craziness south of canada.

that is my opinion. disappointed in where america is headed right now. host: the new york times has a look at some of the protesters in trafalgar square in london on friday as president trump met with prime minister theresa may and later had tea with queen elizabeth. in raleigh, north carolina, good morning to greg. should i speak abolished? caller: yes, sir, thank you for c-span. the idea to abolish ice is misguided. it does show you that [indiscernible] ice deal withhe imaginary lines. policed by the federal

government but they are not locals. because of that, they are equipped to deal with international matters. another, and i can just imagine what it would be like to have all of the border towns from texas to all the local police departments trying to police the international border. host: here is nicholas in hazleton, pennsylvania, democrats line. caller: hello. thank you for accepting my call. either needsice some major restructuring or needs to be abolished, because in an article i read from "the guardian," the department of justice just had to come in federal court, claim that it

mistakenly separated a father from a toddler, who are both united states citizens. i think if united states citizens are arrested and separated for their kids just for coming across the border illegally, they can visit mexico and canada and whatever, if they are separating -- and this was up to a year, it says in the article. that is disturbing. host: appreciate that. we hear from tony next, marietta georgia -- marietta, georgia. looks like we lost tony. we will take a look at the headline on the hill.com about the legislative efforts in congress. democrats say they will vote no on their abolished ice legislation. mark pro can of wisconsin, a group of democrats introduce

legislation to abolish immigration and customs againstent will vote their bill if the gop brings it to the house floor. they accused republican leaders of exploiting the legislation for political gain. while the democratic lawmakers said they plan to vote against their own measure, which would create a commission's to examine ice responsibilities and recommend transferring them to other agencies -- we welcome debate. is not serious about passing our establishing a humane immigration enforcement system act, some members of congress, advocacy groups, and impacted communities will not engage in this political stunt. on our republican line, trevor in new york city. caller: we americans should not

be surprised and looking for reasons why we have the most prisoner numbers. we are a top number in crime in the whole universe. a woman's body is more pertinent than mayhem and corruption for police forces. [indiscernible] we arrested a woman who was raped by ridiculous and childless excuses. is, because if we really believe there is no one to follow the rules, this is my comment. host: a couple more minutes of your calls and comments on washington journal. here are the comments of mike pence earlier this month as the efforts got underway for some democrats to call on the

abolishment of ice. >> the truth is, the calls to abolish ice are not just outrageous, they are irresponsible. abolishing ice would mean more illegal immigration. people being able to come into our country. 226,000r, ice removed illegal immigrants from our communities. abolishing ice would mean more violent crime. last year, ice arrested more than 127,000 immigrants with criminal convictions who were facing charges, including criminals responsible for 50,000 assaults and 11,000 weapons offenses, 2000 kidnapping offenses, and 1800 homicide offenses. abolishing ice would mean more vicious gangs like ms 13. withe already discussed you the extraordinary progress in the last year we have made removing dangerous and is 13

gang members from our streets -- ms 13 gang members from our streets. the arrests represented and 83% increase from the last administration. that is real progress. that is making a difference for the safety and security of our families and communities. host: vice president pence about abolishing irish. theireet -- ice is to do job properly and reunite families separated at the border , so yes, if they are going to be bullies we fire them and impeach the head pulley. vicki treats -- who once ice abolished. sure.eth warren bernie sanders may be. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: we can. caller: i do support ice.

they are very valuable. i would like to make a second, -- and second comment, if you will. this is all orchestrated with what is going on the border. this is been going on since 1974. groups can plan and meet and say we will not peacefully march for equality in the country, that they are going to overburden the borders and that they are going to demand, demand rights here. i don't think that's right at all. i don't think it's fair and i don't think it's fair that i am hearing the 13th and 14th and 15th amendment was for all of the people, and it was not. it was set aside for natives.

now you have every group, including people coming over the border, embracing and wrapping themselves in this group. gavean president on friday visiting u.s. officials, including mike pompeo a set of proposals on how both countries can look to address issues ranging from trade to migration. a look at some of those visitors, including jared the homeland security secretary, and secretary pompeo, and steve mnuchin. on our question first hour, this is steve on our democrats line. caller: how are you? host: good, thank you. , weer: if we abolish ice

are going to be drinking warm drinks, and we are not going to be able to preserve our food. really, if you think back to thecally, ice is akin asgard in germany. these people are rounding up people. running without any control. they are making decisions on the spot. host: you would equate u.s. ice officers with nazi ss troopers? caller: that's right. host: moorehead on "washington journal." will turn our discussion to trade and tariffs. speed with daniel griswold from the mercatus

center and joshua meltzer from brookings. and robert verbruggen will join us to talk about his piece on reforming the disability legislation. ♪ >> july 21 and 22nd, see featured programming on c-span, but tv, and american history tv. we will explore alaska's natural beauty, history, culture, and public policy issues starting next saturday at 7:00 a.m. on c-span. examine majorrnac-span will

issues in alaska. on the communicators at 6:30 p.m., the general counsel for alaskan cable provider gci, talks about how the company make broadband possible for small villages. then a child psychologist on providing health care to remote communities in alaska. on book tv saturday july 21 come the c-span cities tour explores the literature scene. of president of the see alaska heritage institute with her book on alaskan natives, celebration. of the former anchor anchorage daily news on the 1989 exxon valdez oil spill.

sunday, july 22 at 9:00 p.m. adams talkshor mark about his book "tip of the iceberg." his experience retracing an expedition of scientists, artists, and conservationists of the alaskan coast. sunday, july 22 at two :00 p.m. the c-span cities tour visits the alaskan state capitol the alaskan state heritage center, and the fort rain right -- fort base.inright a 1949, as comeau hunters in northwest alaska. centennial and the 1944 film, alaska highway. watch alaska weekend saturday and sunday, july 21 and 22nd on the c-span network, c-span.org,

or the free c-span radio app. "washington journal" continues. host: we will spend the time talking about u.s. trade china,s with canada, mexico, and we could probably throw in the eu before too long. we're joined by daniel griswold from the mercatus center, the codirector on the program on american economy and globalization. joshua meltzer from the brookings institution. i will start with you. when we are saying we have a trade deficit with china, with canada, with mexico, what does that mean? guest: the trade deficit calculates the difference and servicestips o sold between the two countries.

host: the president has used that trade deficit argument as one of his reasons for implementing tariffs against these countries and others. is that a fair thing to do? is not the right metric for judging trade. we benefit from imports and exports. or you run a surplus with canada when you factor in services. by his metric our trade relationship with canada shouldn't be a problem. even if they aren't buying our goods, they invest in the united states. the flip side of the deficit is a capital surplus we run year after year. money coming in by treasury bonds that keeps interest rates low, invests in factories across the united states. trade is a win-win. meltzer, when the federal government puts a tariff on something, what does that

mean? guest: it means as goods cross the border, an actual tax or tariff is levied on the good. if you think about it as a tax it is probably the most straightforward way. 10% tariff becomes a $15 good. host: where are we with tariffs levied against other countries. how much has been done? guest: since the administration has come in with tariffs on $36 billion so far on imports from china and $14 billion coming into effect for a total of $50 billion, and additional tariffs aluminum across all importers into the united states, except for a couple of countries like australia who have received exemptions. host: what has been the response

from those countries? guest: every country has retaliated. u.s. exports, agricultural imports, harley-davidson's into the eu, have received responses to the amount of tariffs. host: the harley-davidson ring, are we likely to see more? harley-davidson announced they would move some of their manufacturing in the coming years overseas. guest: harley-davidson caught the attention of residential because he has held the company as an example of american manufacturing. they will make motorcycles for sale in the united states, but they are being squeezed by both administration's trade actions. paying higher prices for steel, and important part for their product and automobile manufacturers in the united states. 6 million workers work in industries that depend on steel. harley is getting squeezed on

the export side. the europeans have imposed harleys. what harley davidson has done is relocating some manufacturing to thailand, not to make motorcycles to reimport to the united states, but to sell from thailand to europe, so they get around the trump trade administration actions. they don't have to pay higher prices for steel or duties on their motorcycles to europe if they are made outside the united states. you see it every day, some company laying off workers because of higher steel prices or retaliations. host: outside of steel and aluminum, are there industries benefiting? are there regions that are benefiting from the recently apply tariffs? is crucial tom think about. there are benefits for the steel

industry, and there are estimates of approximately 40,000 to 50,000 new jobs in that industry, but because it is imported for such a wide range of activities, automobile, energy, construction, the jobs throughout the u.s. economy are estimated 14 times higher than the employment gains in the industry. host: are you seeing areas outside of steel and aluminum that you are concerned about? guest: there are lots of them. nailxample, the biggest manufacturer is in missouri. they are laying off workers. time withd be a boom construction and the economy doing well. they are laying off workers is a major part of their product. it is causing anxiety and job losses in other sectors, farm sectors, manufacturing sectors. the automobile industry is worried about the president's threats on tariffs on imported

autos. the automobile industry is not asking for protection. it is coming from the administration. host: we are seeing al.com talking about alabama and the hyundai plant. it could be the first to shut down under president trump's tariffs plan, endangering 20,000 jobs. your thoughts on the trade and tear situation. we are joined by dan griswold and josh meltzer. send us a tweet @cspanwj. before we get calls, in some ways this trade and a tariff issue look at the economics of things. , it appears to be a

winning issue for president trump? guest: it is unclear at this stage. he clearly campaigned on raising tariffs and there seems to be growing support from his base, but we are only beginning to see the broader economic consequences. the agriculture sector across the united states has been concerned about the administration's trade policy from day one when they withdrew from the transatlantic partnership which would provide market activity in asia. the agricultural industry has been heaped with concerns over where the nafta negotiations are, and now agriculture and points such as soybeans. we are seeing the agriculture sector face rising costs because of steel. we are seeing how that pays out politically. it is still a dynamic process. guest: i don't think anxiety over trade propel donald trump into the white house.

trade is an important issue for an important part of his base. gallup polling has asked americans year after year about their attitudes towards trade. the most recent shows more than 70% of americans have a favorable view of trade. that is on the higher end. the composition has changed somewhat. up with republicans as they fall in line with what their leadership is saying, but i think most americans are pretty comfortable with our place in the world. a lot of american jobs depend on exports. one out of three far makers in america is for export. small and medium-sized companies are exporting. we have a lot to lose in a trade war. host: they're plenty of members that represent those farmers. the president will need that political support on the hill and elsewhere as the tariffs are implemented. guest: that's right.

the signals the president is getting from congress is slowdown, we aren't sure. it is not pressure from congress to pursue these trade barriers. if anything congressional leadership is saying this is not what our country needs. our economy is doing well. let's not put it in jeopardy. host: we are joined by dan griswold and joshua meltzer. dan griswold with the mercatus center and joshua meltzer with the brookings institution. we hear from ron in san clemente, california. taking thenk you for call. i mean, if you do give me a second -- i am so shocked by the concept of tariffs. it is a 1930's concept that put us into a great depression, as you might recall. the big thing no one is mentioning is the cost of steel and aluminum which affects directly our defense industries.

, there are atank few pieces of metal they go into that process. if it is going to cost 40% that directly affects our defense budget? same thing for aircraft, the auto industry. if we are going to spend $8,000 more for a standard toyota prius , people will be impacted dramatically in a very inflationary measure. the concept that the president is trying to push is what people in europe should be buying soy,il, gas, gmo corn, stuff nobody wants. this is the wrong way going about this trade deficit. bilaterally it is stupid.

we are talking about our best anding partner, canada mexico. i would like your input on what you think the impact is going to be just to the two closest partners of us, canada, mexico, and perhaps now england. caller makesk the wonderful points. we called them downstream industries. the steel industry benefits from higher prices. every industry benefits from higher prices in the industry come but the rest of us pay for those. higher steel prices make it harder for us to give the military the hardware they need to defend the country. the military is a pretty small user of steel. 40% of the steel we use is in construction. commercial and residential real estate goes up. infrastructure spending, we are going to get less infrastructure for our money because of higher

steel prices. industry. automobile that is an important manufacturing sector in the united states. they are about to get squeezed, like harley-davidson, from both ends. mexico.ioned canada and they are the number one and number two markets for u.s. goods. the european union, if you look at the european countries together, they are the top. number seven, great britain, i should say. china is number four. you makeness model do your self prosperous by picking a needless fight with your for best customers? customers?t host: independent line. america,ood morning, and good morning to the freedom fest going on in las vegas this weekend. i am from a border state.

in alaska. the red dog min produces china 's zinc. ridiculous. is we are spending money importing. if we make it here, you get a high-quality product every one wants. the world wants our products. china's products are inferior. they keep all of the good stuff home. they get all of our good stuff that they buy. it is not equal. immigration and trade are related, because if we lose jobs by shipping manufacturing inrseas, and we bring illegal workers by the millions, what is the difference?

do you want to take that? guest: it is a lot of important questions embedded in that. a couple of quick observations, the u.s. is close to full employment and has been trending that way for quite a number of years. the challenge for the u.s. economy is how do you allocate workers and resources to make sure the u.s. is doing what it can do optimally? that is a question. expect it is about finding that optimal allocation. there provides particular industries protection at the cost of other industries. it is the case that china has been subsidizing its manufacturing sector, basically trading unfairly. there may be good justification to responding to chinese practices, and the administration is doing some of that, but we have to think about how we adequately get to

that. one point is immigration is a trickle. the concerned about illegal immigration, if you look at the numbers now, they are down to zero. we are fighting a battle that disappeared probably a decade ago. numbers show, illegal immigration, immigration broadly, has provided benefits for the united states economy. the problem is making sure everyone has adequate and appropriate work. guest: i agree with everything josh said. immigration and trade are related. one way is in nafta. theof the many benefits of north american free trade agreement with mexico and canada is it improved conditions in mexico. they have other reforms to it has created opportunities in mexico, which has made it less attractive for

mexicans to come to the united states to seek work. they can find employment in mexico. it has become a leading automobile manufacturer. if we withdraw and raise tariffs mightican goods, we unconsciously be encouraging mexicans to come here. mexican migration over the next 10 years has been negative, more going back to mexico because there is opportunity and stability. host: where are we on the nafta negotiations? pause.it has taken a it has gotten complicated. in needs to be revised in certain areas. it is a 25-year old agreement. mexico has a new president, will have a new president. nafta, but stay in will be negotiating with the administration. there is a new team in mexico. host: on the transpacific intnership, was it a mistake

your view looking back not for .he u.s. to have joined that would that have mitigated some of the concerns president trump has expressed? isst: given where we are, it clearly a critical mistake. george h.w. bush, continued by president obama, it was widely seen as providing u.s. exporters to access of one of the largest growing middle classes in the world, in asia. the uss trade agreements with a .ot of countries and there japan was the key component of the trade agreement which would have provided access. now that the u.s. is out, like canada and australia has access. it would have been key of getting out of challenges china presents to the u.s. you have enterprises with

digital trade, issues that matter to the united states. china is not in the agreement because it would have placed costs on china to not reform, but that pool is no longer available to the u.s. host: republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. first, thank you for letting me on the phone call. we have important things happening on the show today. people in favor of so-called free trade are always bringing up the strawman of steel is getting hurt, soybean is getting hurt, individual commodities. the way we should go is 0% to 45% tariff on all products. regardless of country of origin and population. and a deficit with the country your trading with. number the last 45 years. during these 45 years, free trade has been twisted to be

something completely different. completely different and malformed. the only way to get back to real free trade is to get no trade deficit and no trade surplus with independent countries. how was that money made up? that money is misdirected from the u.s. federal budget. that is why we have a 750 billion dollar federal trade deficit, to make up from that vacuum. from our guest. a little historical perspective .n trade, u.s. trade the trade act of 1974 provides the u.s. with authority to enforce trade agreements, resolve disputes, open markets to goods and services. 1962, the trade expansion act gave the executive branch the ability to conduct investigations to determine

effects of national security on imports. this is where we get some of the rulings on the tariffs under national security concerns. do you want to comment? guest: the caller put a lot of important issues on the table. we live in a messy world. we are not going to have perfect free trade around the world. the closer we get to, the more freedom consumers have. the more we can move resources to areas where we are most high technology, commercial airliners, services, things like that. the $800 billion deficit is in goods. the way that comes back is we run a surplus and services. we have a surplus in investment capital, foreign direct heretment capital coming to the united states. i run a trade deficit with my grocery store. i spent $150 a week at the grocery store. they don't buy anything for me,

but i come out with groceries i and myes my wife and family happier and live a better life. we have to look at trade in that way. when re-raised trade barriers that gives us a less efficient economy, less productive jobs, and a lower standard of living. the company's -- the countries that are at the most prosperous i open to the global economy, not closed. host: a quick snapshot where tariffs are hitting the most. their latest addition, where terrorists will hit the hardest. u.s.-made product categories. export sales of the relevant trading partner at the top. vehicles, minerals, fuels, iron and steel in particular with canada and mexico am a plastics -related, aluminum-related.

17.6 for canada. the european union, a .2. mexico, 6.8 billion. morning.nia, good democrats line. caller: good morning. how are you? a couple of quick thoughts. seen dastardly hiss history economically, numerous bankruptcies has led to illegal -- bob mueller will prove there is illegal money coming from probably russia to sustain him. my point is now he holds the keys to the whole country. he is making these horrible decisions, in my opinion, regarding these tariffs. why can't our legislature step

up to the plate and stop this guy? that's all i want to know. question.is a good under the constitution trade resides with congress, that has been delegated in various ways under a number of statutes, which means congress could legislate to regain a lot of authority. would we are seeing at the moment, particularly as the administration uses section 232 usuallyexpand what was seen as national security defense, steel and aluminum, and a tariff on automobiles, will be a defining moment to whether whatess is prepared to act increasingly looks like abuse of executive power use. toit is in congress today rein back the capacity for the president to essentially do success so without

far. the tariffs escalated the economic cost rises, we may see action. guest: josh is exactly right. of the one section eight constitution gives congress exclusive power to levy duties on imports and regulate commerce with foreign nations. it delegated that to the under certain circumstances. by any measure the president has abused that. the 1962 trade act was meant for true national security. i don't think it applies to steel, it certainly doesn't apply to automobiles. van fromted manini canada this not impact our national security. our wto agreements allowed countries to impose duties, but only when they involve materials for national security, instruments of war, at a time of

national emergency. none of that applies. i think congress needs to take that its rightful, constitutional authority over tradeyou saw a nonbinding referm 88-11 this week. a strongly bipartisan -- it was strongly bipartisan. there are bills that would require a congressional vote before the president could impose duties under section 232. that is a reflection of the spirit of the constitution that would apply retroactively, and it would repeal tariffs unless congress endorsed them. i think it would be good for our economy and constitutional order if congress were to reassert itself in the trade area. number of republican members are expressing concerns over the recent terrace, -- terrace --tarriffs.

>> it's been 16 weeks of the president in vote the trailer a -- harrisoke terrace tarriffs on steel and aluminum. it is supposed to be used for when there is sick -- an issue of national security. the united states produces him if i percent of the steel we consume. our defense needs consume 3% of the total steel consumption. how could one possibly make the case that we do not have plentiful abundance of domestically produced steel to satisfy defense needs? that it is not only that, for the other 25%, where are the biggest sources for that steel? that would be mexico and canada. those are the two countries that

provide the most steel. with both of those countries we have a surplus of trade in steel. the canadians by more steel from us than we buy from them. so to the mexicans. where's the security threat to america when my constituents .hoose to take the steel >> that was pat toomey talking about steel in the u.s.. there is been a dispute concerning subsidies that the canadian government gives to the this has been, litigated multiple times under the north american free trade agreement. we have the construction industry in the u.s. but the

london producing side has been .ssued >> our guess this morning josh -- -- and daniel griswold. , forlcome your comments democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002. on our independent line, brian, good morning. >> under president obama we lost thousands. there is an unfair tax on american products being sent to canada, and the ideas that may be companies will come to the united states to avoid the tax. because of this trade deficit,

meanwhile, people are unemployed, and on food stamp. -- on food stamps. but people talk about the consumer. what about the trade deficit and what is the solution if it isn't s or asts --tarriff border adjustment or something. not worry about -- thede deficit, it's flip side of the trade deficit is that year after year, and it's about 500 billion when you take goods and services together, it's an inflow of half $1 trillion of capital to the united states. the world likes our exports, they love investing in the united states. in our treasury bonds and also in factories, the story on manufacturing is that america

remains a manufacturing powerhouse. employment has gone down because we have got more efficient. it used to take tenant man-hours -- 10 man-hours to produce a ton of steel, it takes less than two hour today, and under one in some factories. and about the value added tax, economists have looked at this it's not trade historic, it applies to goods sold in europe whether it is imported or made to messick clear in europe, it does not apply to goods that are madeted to europe -- or clear in your, does not apply to goods that are exported to europe. if we raise trade barriers helping other countries will locate their productive assets here, those trade barriers will make america less attractive, because they cannot input needed input into their manufacturing process like steel. free trade is the best policy

for the united states, no matter what other countries do. >> let's hear from scott, on the republican line. caller: hello, i was just i think the trade fight is about intellectual property and how china steals it and its value. that's just what i had to say, because the value is worth more than manufacturing in the long-term. thank you. host: we will pick up on that, because bloomberg businessweek wrote about that, a growing might of -- the growing might of thea's tech sector is a heart of the trade war with the u.s.. president trump the demonstration released a 35 page report blasting china for economic aggression that threatens the u.s., listing every thing from cyber attacks and fast to the government backing for startups such as ai innovation. excellentler makes an

point, one of the key drivers is innovation of wealth in intellectual property. administration actually has it right in the 301 report in which the trade representative outlined a lot of details about chinese practices that cost the u.s. jobs, particularly cyber theft and the enforcement of intellectual property rights which are clearly harmful to the u.s.. the real question is what to do about the administration's do about -- is what to it, the admin's ration's approach has been to release tariffs on chinese imports which has led to retaliation. i don't think this will get the u.s. to get china to change its practices, and the united states needs to develop new rules that create cost to china, the

transpacific partnership was an important agreement that would've gotten a lot of what the u.s. wants. and the other part of this is allies, japan and canada have similar concerns, but instead of building on them, this administration is dividing these allies, and there's little incentive for cooperation. host: do you want to weigh in on what this caller had to say yeah, -- say? jeff stole all of my -- josh stole all of my points but i will say this, we should be confident in our system. we have a higher standard of living because we have economic freedom and an open economy. there are a lot of anxiety there were a lot of anxieties about japan 30 years ago, probably on this show. that japan had an industrial plan that would take over key industries in the united states. it didn't work. central planning doesn't work. it's the same with china, they can have all of the plans but

that does not mean they will take over these industries. we need to maintain our dynamic free competitive markets in the united states, china has some huge problems that they have to deal with having to deal with debt, inefficient state owned enterprises. i think we should maintain confidence in our system and not compromise our system to be more like china. our system works better. back for calls, joseph, on the democrats line. good morning, i'm 76, and i've seen a lot in my lifetime. i retired from a high-tech company, we used to make 80% on exports. we very seldom imported anything. politicians ofo,

this country were complaining about not having any money. they did not have any money to run their campaigns, they just did not have enough money. wto,ince we went to the nobody complains about money anymore. if you are a politician, it's just unbelievable. is point i'm trying to make that people keep talking about automation, and eliminated jobs. you cannot automate everything, that's ridiculous. we have 60,000 manufacturing plants in china. that's just astounding that -- the point i'm trying to make your -- here is that politicians put us in the

position where they took away and they just keep on coming up with excuses and the only point i can make is that we have a surplus of her know how many billions, but now you have a deficit of 20 trillion -- of a i don't know how many billions, but night have a deficit of 20 trillion. host: we had a guest last week who said the problem is not trade with other countries, the problem is really automation, which is the real threat to jobs worldwide. think this underscores the key issues that we need to be focusing on, which is the challenges that workers in this country are going to be facing. technology, and the impact on the workforce. automation will be a key part of that. we want to make sure that the american workers are equipped

modernly to take advantage of automation and to thrive in that type of economy. that's a question about training , also improving mobilities of people can move to where the jobs are. the estimates are that by 2025 there will be two to 3 million will not have skilled workers in the united states. the issue is trying to use trade policy to artificially drive or bring back low skill jobs to the country is not only going to be a broad-based cost of the u.s. but it will avoid where the opportunities ultimately lie. i think it's a mistake to fear trade or technology, they create a more dynamic economy with more opportunity, for us today and for our children into the future. country,th in this about two million jobs disappear. another 2.2 million are created, so we tend to focus on the net

job creation, but there is a huge job churn going on. destruction.eative trade is a small contributor to that. maybe 3%. a technology is much -- technology is much more of a force in the turnover of jobs, but it creates opportunity. think of all of the jobs lost at kodak because of the rise of digital photography. we are not going to bring those jobs back, we would not want to bring them back. but think about the opportunities that have been created by smartphones and the internet. i think we should look to the future confidently. the key is education, job retraining, labor market flexibility. let's give ourselves and our children the tools to thrive in a more dynamic and open economy. host: here is john, on the independent line.

john, make sure you meet your television. --mute your television. our president trump is not king tromp, he does not have the authority to unilaterally set tariffs. the republican party has to rein him in. they are not doing their job, they are failing us. our president is making us in international and bears meant come -- embarrassment. and the republican party is responsible to rein him in. host: we have blaine, on the republican line. suggesti was going to to both of your guests that i think they are wrong. in their assessment of everything.

the american people can build, we are smarter than we are given credit for. automation is driven by people putting things together, i met with a guy the other day who designed a 5g internet , forction for radio towers a minimal few dollars. he is going to put that to use. peopleing to get interested in buying it. he designed other devices. this is in his own garage. you disagreeing with their assessment on the rise of automation? the need for more technology training and worker's? automation has to be repaired, it has to be put together, if there's more automation there are more people to automate?

guest: i think it's a great point, the united states has been the world leader in innovation. people doing amazing things with technology, and that's a great it is -- great example of what we will see going forward. in many respects automation is not something that the u.s. economy needs to fear. you think about automation or artificial intelligence, what will work most effectively with it will supplement or improve the capacity of people to do effective work. but the do that people need to make sure they have the right training to maximize as opportunities. i think there is a real butrtunity for automation, it's not about replacing workers, rather giving them skills to work alongside technology. says one of our tweeters

the caller is right, you cannot say automation took jobs away, a lot of factory workers would have lost their jobs. i think those numbers are completely wrong, and and away the caller is reinforcing what we are saying. there are tremendous advantages me american economy and trade allows us to do what we are best there areng -- tremendous advantages to the american economy and trade allows us to do what we are best at. to go back to the previous caller who was challenging the president's authority to impose duties. i think the big showdown is going to be over automobiles. the president has, in the works, a 20% tariff on all automobile imports in the united states. under the call of national security. that's an abuse of the system, consumers will be hurt, the price of new cars will go up two to $6,000. that will hurt poor people the

most. it will hurt the auto sector which is doing quite well, we are exporting a record 2.4 billion cars. the president seems to have a special fixation on german imports, the biggest bmw plant in the world is in spartanburg, south carolina. they employ a thousand americans earning good salaries and export 70% of their vehicles to europe and china. those jobs will be in jeopardy if we start a global trade war over automobiles. host: can you give us an example of recent history where president has used the national security clause to implement a tariff? guest: it's been used in limited circumstances, it was used in 's a couple times for oil. president reagan used in the 1980's on machine tools. very limited, and targeted. no president has ever used it in

this scope and with such tenuous connection to national security. back to your comment on the potential tariff on where's the administration in that process? is a close to being announced? guest: the congress department is studying it, i have my doubts as to how objective that study will be. i think sometime in the next two to three months, before the election and i think that's by the design, they will announce an action against automobiles. it really isn't about national security and no one believes that. the president sees it as a bargaining tool with europe and are nafta partners. i think that's a mistake. the downside risks are huge. we should not go down this road. host: let's hear from richard, on the independent line. caller: good morning.

i have a comment on the nafta and under the clinton administration when nafta came on board, we were opening up our markets so that we could sell products around the world. what really happened, what i saw happen was american businesses took that agreement and move their factories for cheap labor and turned us into a service nation. inr guest is saying we are manufacturing powerhouse, i don't know what we are , except forg perhaps flipping burgers. all of manufacturing is offshore , andsed to work for boeing they sold the whole plant to the canadians who fired everybody and offered jobs to those he to stay at a reduced wage -- to

those who wanted to stay at a reduced wage. i don't agree a lot with mr. trump, but maybe we do need to have manufacturing coming back to the states. manufacturing is a share of u.s. output that has remained 12% for manyut years. it is increasingly in high-tech and skilled workforces. of the world consumers reside outside of the united states, this means there's incentives for locating an increasing production closer to consumers. it's not necessarily that taking advantage of workers, it's about locating production facilities where consumers are. this has been shown to benefit have more states, we

high skilled and high paying jobs in the united states to run these manufacturing organizations. it's a transitional area. jobs in manufacturing have been declining since the 50's, we used to have 35% of the workforce in manufacturing and percent, itst nine following the trend of agriculture due to high levels of productivity. it's also true that other countries have not been working or treating the united states fairly when it comes to market access and exports. this is where we need to keep our focus. the key for the united states is that what is produced here can actually be sold on a competitive basis in other markets. that is where we need to focus our trade policy. instead of doing the opposite. comments onle of twitter. the people getting degrees for skill sets that are overpopulated and the workforce, we need to focus on skills-based secondary education, vocational and trade schools.

another says remember when the gop was pro-free trade? , me china shop. that wholet's not cars can import from other countries, it's that car parts, and difficult to much of supply factory in alabama, bye-bye 'bama. drums bass will eventually be hurt because his promises to help the economy of working americans will fail because of higher steel prices and lower grain prices, soybean and corn farming is not profitable. guest: farmers are getting squeezed from lots of different directions, the price of soybeans is down because of protections gearing up in china. wheat, corn, they will come under increasing retaliatory beverages.rk, they are targeting the bourbon industry and dairy products in

wisconsin. farmers are also getting squeezed on the supply side. a farmer cannot go 10 minutes without touching steel, and those costs are going up. were struggling already, the administration's response was to up farm subsidies. i don't think farmers want to go down that route and i don't think any of us do. farmers are in the crosshairs of this global trade war. and that is trump country. i think the plane -- the pain will filter up, maybe in the midterm elections. farmers have a huge stake in opel -- open global markets. let's not put exports in jeopardy. and what we have learned from the past is when governments intervene and impose trade barriers it is not easy to unwind that. once you lose those markets it can be hard to get them back. the chinese are already switching their contracts on soybeans to brazil.

they are not going to automatically switch back. it even if we resolve these issues, and i hope we resolve them soon, there will be lasting , manufacturing, and struggling american families that are paying higher prices for every good -- everyday goods. we have a report on states hit by terrorists, it says republicans give trump benefit of the doubt. out, aa picture we pull big grain field in a north dakota. john, on the independent line. good morning. caller: i agree with your guests , i just want to comment, to paraphrase you, politically, it doesn't seem to be affecting donald trump yet, but there is a lack time on this.

-- a lag time on this. if we engage in an all-out trade war, there will be a huge devastating economic impact, what i want to ask is, in effect on the global economy, even though wall street and financial markets have been very volatile , but i believe they're are giving too much benefit of the doubt to the trump administration. and to what the effects on the economy will be. let's ask josh meltzer, what do you define -- what do you mean when we say a trade war? extent, we are clearly headed into it.

we have tariffs now on countries, we have additional andbillion on china, automobiles. we see this come into effect by the end of the year we are looking at upwards of a trillion dollars, and we're talking about retaliatory measures, so i think that would be a good sense of what is a trade war. host: danny, on the republican line. why isn't he listening to his economic advisor, larry kudlow? i voted for trump not because of his economics, well some of his economics, but i wanted the chair for the supreme court. the thing about these terraces that they will not work -- these tariffs, is that they will not work. when you go to walmart everything will go double. when you buy your pickup truck it will be 25% more.

that's the problem. it will hurt us. i disagree with these tariffs. guest: i couldn't agree with the caller more. he put it well. the president really believes this, for 30 years he has been complaining about trade. 30 years ago was japan, now it's china and other trading partners. i think you getting free-trade advice from certain advisors, i think steve mnuchin at treasury, larry kudlow, but he's also getting protectionist advice. prejudices and impulses on trade are being reinforced, and i think we are going to pay the price. we are having a real-life experiment, economists and other people have been saying free trade is good for the united states.

shows in our economy and opportunities created. but we are going to impose tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars in goods and we will see the damage just before it even gets started. i don't think it has registered among trump supporters. maybe 30 or 40 billion, and we are rapidly or $500 billion . let's hear from erika, honor democrats line. caller: what bothers me more than anything for a long time was that no one, -- no one talks presidentfact that trump and his daughter make their products in other countries. mostly in china. maybe because all of his products come back at a higher prices and they make more money.

i'm just so angry about this whole thing that nobody really mentions it. countries and help that they are. i am from germany. i have lived here for 15 years. aboutthey are asking that, particularly, perhaps, the impact on ivanka trump's product line with these trade tariffs. what do we know? host: the point -- isst: the point i would make if you are engaged in business in the united states or using some point, you are in manufacturing, in order to be competitive, you are sourcing domestically, your sourcing from you essentially want to get the best products at the cheapest price, which makes you competitive. some level in the

normal course, we do not condemn but that is exactly the type of global economy. obviously, that seems somewhat hypocritical when the president's businesses are actually relying on global supply chains and immigrant labor to make his business successful. host: final thoughts. guest: i agree with the president that he should be free to import neckties and clothing for his business. that gives more affordable clothing to americans. those jobs left america decades ago. be prettyhey tend to low paying, manufacturing jobs, have neckties on this morning. i imagine most of our listeners don't. this is not the future of industry, making neckties. i think the president should be able to import them freely.

i think he should allow other americans to import the freely. interfering in the freedom of americans to buy and sell in address locally in their best interest. host: we look forward to hearing both of you. dan griswold with the mercatus center, joshua meltzer from brookings institution, thank you for being with us. it is our spotlight on magazines series next to it we go to the issue of improving the disability system in the u.s. we are joined by robert verbruggen. he has a piece in the "national review," looking to redefine disabilities in the u.s. more here on "washington journal ." ♪ got on american

history tv on c-span3, tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on "lectures in history," a university of connecticut professor on the reconstruction era after the civil war. america," a"reel french film dedicated to america's efforts in world war i. sunday at 2:00 p.m. eastern, the national world war ii museum symposium marking the 20th anniversary of the film "saving private ryan." then on "american artifacts," the u.s. education center's annual living history event featuring world war i soldiers. watch american history tv this weekend on c-span3. "afteray night on words," cnn political commentator amanda carpenter

discusses her book "gas lighting america: why we love it when trump lies to us." and then he creates suspense. amanda: all the time. i have investigators going to hawaii. there is a report coming soon. a video is coming. that generates more interest. let's see what he has to say. spoiler -- it never comes out. >> and then he selects a contractor to attract -- a detractor to attack. amanda: come out and say do you think donald trump is lying. other people are talking about this. i am just looking into it. anyone that pops up, loser, crazy, hack. startcan find a target to scapegoating and have the us vs. them fight, that is when it happens. >> and then finally, he declares victory. amanda: everyone come in, i will

have a major announcement, you can look at my beautiful, grand new hotel if you want. i cleared it up, i am the winner, but hillary clinton started it. i finished it. victory. >> watch "after" words sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span twos booktv. >> "washington journal" continues. our spotlight on magazine series this saturday morning, we're joined by robert verbruggen, leading editor on the "national review," and a piece in the "national review," "redefining disability." what made you focus on this disabilities and the need to reform? guest: what really intrigued me this time is a recent

development. if you look at the history of the program and especially since the 1980's, what you tend to see number ofry enormous growth in terms of disabilities cured part that is because the population is getting older. that is not all. if you look at workers in a given age range, they are for more likely to claim disability than they used to. in 2014, that all the sudden turned around, and it completely shocked everybody, even the social security trustees completely revamped when they thought their voices run out of money. this is obviously a fantastic development that people are able to work instead of going on disability. what is troubling about it is that is not the way the social security and disability program is supposed to work. it is supposed to provide help to people who need it. if the system working in the way it is intended to work? host: the year was 2014.

before i read your piece, i would have thought ok, there are a lot of people using social security disability. if you would have asked me, i would thought the number was right. -- i would have bought a number was right. guest: basically, the recovery started to take hold at that time, and people were able to get into jobs that otherwise would have been on disability. that should not be happening. the points to be eligible for the program is that you are not eligible to doing work. host: you write that in 1967, just 3% of these men were neither working nor looking for work, not unemployed, but out of the labor force entirely. in 2016, that number is 12%, and the women flooded into the workforce in the second half of the 20 century, since then, they have been slowly leaving the workforce. how else has the disability program changed?

if you go back to recent history, going back to 2008 have the financial collapse and the economy and the economic collapse in 2008, what was the impact of that on the system? guest: basically the applications for the system went way up. to respond to the economy slightly less than the applications do. host: among your solutions, or the problems that you point out in the article, is the current system is structured in a dysfunctional way, in particular a wing to that all or nothing -- owing to that all or nothing nature of benefits. most people are not employed when they apply for disability. one applicant rates -- one reason applicant rates skyrocketed during the recession. inl-time employment would fact disqualify most applicants, and once on it, few ever get off.

the decision to apply in many cases is a decision to effectively abandon working. guest: when we talk about reforming the program, one of the things we need to realize is we are very far behind on this. we have not done a lot of experimentation yet. we need to do it carefully and experiment with farther reforms first. it's sortt say that of the way we should approach the issue in a broadway. some of the more promising efforts of reform, though, i think, have to do with the people who are in a gray area, where they have disabled and they have some sort of impediment to working, but they may not be completely incapable of work. there are a lot of different proposals for how we handle that situation. someone is expected to benefit from rehabilitation or mental health treatment, explain that right away so they are not , a one year to

three-year process trying to get benefits. another is to change the middle ground benefit so that it may be a smaller benefit that is not taken away when you work for a temporary benefit or something of that nature. the other, i think very , it wasg, avenue successful when they tried it in the netherlands, is to give in the game.e skin right now, it is funded by a simple payroll tax. host: like the unemployment tax. guest: yes. and it is a little over 1% of your paycheck that goes and your employer matches that you're basically what you would do if you would base the employer taxes on whether they sent workers to the disability system in the past. a strong incentive to accommodate workers. host: our guest is robert verbruggen. he has written in the "national review" about the disability system in the u.s. (202) 748-8000 is the number to join the conversation for

democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. independents and others, (202) 748-8002. and if you are receiving disability benefits, social security disability, that number is (202) 748-8003. not touch on it in this article, your article "redefining disability," but did you hear any other anecdotal broader about disability programs, union disability programs, pension disability programs. are they on a similar track in terms of their commitment in the rising out of kind of people using those? guest: i looked at the trend of rising decline, but certainly all disability programs face a lot of the issues that ssdi faces, especially when it comes to defining who is going to get the benefit. it is a tricky problem to solve and something that the federal

government needs to solve because it is operating this enormous disability program and pension plans and everything else. host: we go to our first caller, leo in the bronx on our democrat line for robert verbruggen. good morning, leo. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. my question for mr. verbruggen position ons your obamacare where insurance carriers were prohibited from discriminating against patients or customers that had pre-existing conditions? guest: it is a bit of a different issue, but it is something i have also written about. it is essentially a political nonstarter, i think, to do anything different at this point. people very much hate it when an insurance company is able to discriminate against somebody thats already sick, and creates some serious problems for those programs, because if someone signs up after they are already sick, that is why they

do that, and that is why you have the individual mandate. that is what you have some of the problems with obamacare that you are seeing. i think the challenge is how to reform obamacare the qs protections for people with pre-existing conditions -- that keeps protections for people with pre-existing conditions. host: eddie is in indiana, receiving benefits, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i went to talk about how hard that is and how long it takes. i have a very bad heart. it's up me a little over three years to get my disability, and the lady who was my lawyer also had worked for the government for 29 years, and sadly, she said the government angles that you will die within that two years to three years before they can get to your disability claim and things like that. is a long timeat to wait, and that there ought to be something done to help people

sooner. thank you, guys. host: thank you, eddie. does his experience seem kind of typical? guest: it does. one of the problems with this program is it takes a long time to play itself out. there is an initial review that takes typically three months to five months. you have the initial review read on, you can appeal to the administrative law judge, you can go to the social security board. after that, you can go to the federal court. essentially what this does is if somebody is not going to get their benefits, it keeps them out of the workforce in the meantime. if somebody is going to get the benefit, it just takes a lot of time, and as the caller mentioned, someone could pass away in the time. host: for disabilities is -- the line for people with disability insurance is (202) 748-8003. we go to harold. caller: i have a three-level fusion. i wish i could work.

i have a program that i am trying to use to go back to work. guestd like to ask your -- the problem is, you have so many children with a diagnosis of adhd, other hyperactivity. these kids are getting social security disability payments. they are qualifying from a psychologist, and there are more psychologists running around out there than there are fire ant mounds in texas. would you talk about the problem? if you are 18 years old and have adhd, you should not be receiving social security disability. that is ridiculous. it is for people who have worked, like myself, and paid into the system for 50 years. i would rather not be on disability. i would rather be working. but at 62, i cannot get hired, and i have a degree in gerontology. guest: there are two different programs that were captured there is ssdi, who is actually

people withle for work history. then there is ssi, which i do not focus on in my article. there is an increasing disability claim between the mid-1980's and mid-2010's. that is one of the biggest problems with the ssdi is that a lot of the awards, more than half, in fact, are now going to orple have mental illness have muscular skeletal conditions, like joint pain. the problem is not that those things are not real, the problem is that they are hard to objectively measure, and that is where the swell in the program is. it is a difficult problem. host: tell us about the award process, the caller mentioned two years or so to get on disability. what is that typically like, and what are the typical benefits? guest: the first process is easy to apply.

you bring in the medical records, your own personal physician plays a role in this process because they provide medical records and they provide a statement about your condition am a and then processes about three months to five months. you might get benefits, or you might get denied and decide to stop, but most people actually decide to appeal, so there is a protracted process with multiple levels to appeal. on average, it takes one to two years. host: does that appeal require a person to higher legal help, or if that handled by people who work for social security? guest: it is common to hire legal help to help you with this. host: let's hear from mary in philadelphia. good morning. caller: yes, good morning. i want to let people know that we have a shortfall in both social security and social security disability trust fund. the american people are not paying into the system.

where theyese jobs are working off the books. peopleusing undocumented or people who have overstayed their visas. you have to have a valid social security number to pay into social security and medicare, and the employers are not cooperating. we are facing where people are not going to be getting their social security, the legitimate people who have paid into the system for 40 and 50 years. host: you do not address it in your article, but why don't you acknowledge her comment that there is a real shortfall? guest: there is a shortfall. the social security system -- it is very well documented that it is running out of money. fortunately, as i mentioned, there has been a decline in benefits received lately, so if you look at the past three reports, the trustees have pushed the deadline back to when

it is going to run out of money. right now, it is 2032. it is a serious problem. the program is saying out more than it is paying out, and it will go bankrupt in 2032. i do think it is important to -- youat you need to need a social security number to pay into the system, but you also need a work history document with the social security system in order to take money out of it as well, so the folks who were not paying money and are not getting money out, either. i think the bottom line is the benefit paid out have gone up any taxes have not cap depth. -- kept up. host: what is the ticket to work program? guest: if you are on disability and you desire to get off of it workforce.job to the

get sets you up with a network to help you out and try to find a job. if you make substantial gainful activity, which is $1200 a month, if you make that much money or more, you are at risk of getting kicked off. so the ticket to work program eases that transition, it allows you to work more without losing your benefits, it allows you to get back on the program if it does not work out. host: and a question for you on twitter, wild and wonderful asks "isn't it fair to say that there is a locality aspect of employment opportunities for disabled jobseekers? there may be many employers who can accommodate in a dense population center and a paucity of same in small towns." guest: that is another aspect of

the definition of disability is you will not be able to do any job that exist in substantial numbers in the entire economy. do we expect people to move to employment, or if they have a disability that stops them from doing whatever they did before and there are no jobs in the area, or the opportunities are not there because the economy is bad, should they be on disability, or should they be on some other program, or should we expect them to move to jobs that are available? host: we go to another call, louisville, kentucky, and hear from lance on our . -- my problem is people who are on disability, a lot of them do not deserve it. they get benefits that are walking around, upright, able-bodied. i am disabled. i cannot get disability, because i did not pay enough and have beugh credit to actually

eligible for social security disability, and now that it has been 15 years i have been in a wheelchair, unable to do paralyzed, and all my credits have expired, and now i don't get -- i can't get any disability or anything. either be broke and notally have nothing, i destitute in order to get anything back from the government. i do not know if you can help me there, but that is my problem. host: lance, we will get a response. guest: i think the caller raises different important questions here. the one is outright fraud in the program.

it is not something i touched on entities, and it is hard to measure, because of someone commits fraud and gets away with it, there is no record of the. but there is certainly fraud in the program. in kentucky, there was a case where an attorney was fraudulently helping his clients give benefits during that is a real problem that needs to be addressed. the second issue is that ssdi is structured as an insurance eligibleso you're only if you pay in for a certain number of years. an important question, because you have people who are able to benefit from the program, but it also raises the question of -- should this be an insurance program where you have to be in for a certain amount of time before your eligible for it, or should i just pay out? second question, for a lot of safety net programs, if you have property, you will not be eligible for the program.

the issue there is that it discourages people from building up wealth to begin with. it discourages people from saving. the other side of that coin is we do not want benefits going to people who could support themselves because they own some property. that is an issue that i have always been sort of undecided on. host: the pieces "redefining disability." --ert corrigan is the art robert verbruggen is the author with "national review." on our lines for those receiving disability benefits is lamont in princess anne, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: good, thank you. caller: i have been receiving disability. one of the flaws is that the

government has never disclosed how much money actually has been surplus over that die from people and never receive their benefits and where this money is actually going. is a fund for the federal government, and the majority of people who do not qualify or have a qualifying number of years, they have been placed into a slum because they have to have a certain number of years that they qualify for social security. we never discussed how much money the federal government has pulled from this fund. when you have someone who works 50 years of their life, they ability to receive their money, and they pass away, all of that money goes back to the federal government because

nobody is able to receive that fund. host: just a quick question for you, how long have you been on disability? [no audio] i have been on disability for 10 years. guest: that is a question i do not have the answer to. that would be an interesting study, to see how much money is saved and back into the trust fund when people are not able to get a disability because they pass away too soon. i have not seen numbers on the. host: let's go to sac next in tennessee. caller: the caller in the he could notid work anywhere -- he couldn't come and work in a call center, he was able to call you. i think that is a copout. have we done any research? is there such a high problem of fibromyalgia in north korea, russia, or resell? -- brazil? eliminate someld

of these false, phony -- i think another wordibromyalgia is for laziness or you could probably decrease the fibromyalgia cases by 80%. guest: my understanding of it is algia is that legitimate disability. as i mentioned, there are some conditions that are hard to measure objectively. that is a real problem with system is dealing with. host: what are a couple of the common? guest: more than half of disability payments are going to people with mental issues or mus muscular, like joint pain. caller: i have a question. i have dealt with people with

drugs and alcohol who have collected. i want to know where or how -- why don't they turn around and that theypulation must have a follow-up that has been locked in with a doctor. so that if they do collect, they don't fall backwards on their face. were are the doctors that need to stop the ailments, and people need to stop saying somebody else does not have a disability. a lot of people do. you cannot see inside a person. shame on you. host: what is the person's responsibility once they do qualify for a disability? in terms of checking in with social security to continue the benefits? guest: there is a thing called a continuing disability review that happens depending on conditions they have and also how backlogged system is. there is a system where they are

checked up on periodically to make sure they are still disabled. host: we have one more call, michael is in crosby, texas, also receiving disability benefits. welcome. caller: how y'all doing? host: doing fine, thank you. caller: that number that y'all give, i am a veteran. i am disabled. benefitsng to get the going, but it has been over three years, going through the v.a. got meings the going through. when i got my social security, it did not take that long. i had a truck accident. year, but the military, to threesaid, it is up years, 2013, and is still dragging on. i wonder why it is taking so long on the military side

instead of social security. host: you are trying to get your benefits from the v.a.? caller: yes, sir. guest: the answer is that the government is very inefficient in a lot of things. your claim is that it went there he quickly. most people do not. it is a serious problem that they need to address. host: the piece is "redefining disability." the author, robert verbruggen, if deputy managing editor at "national review. and you can read the piece online at nationalreview.com. thanks for being with us this morning. guest: thanks for having me. host: we still have a half hour left here on "washington journal ." we will open up the phone's ear. (202) 748-8000 for democrats, republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents and everyone else, (202) 748-8002. we will get to your calls and comments in just a moment. programk's "newsmakers"

talks with a group that wants to stop president trump's supreme court nominee, brett kavanaugh. talks the nomination and the 2018 election. >> what does the timing do for both parties? think the timing works for us, and i think it works for us because this is an for the supreme court to do a conversation and all those elections, which is a critically important conversation. in 2016,e presidential one candidate talked a lot about it. my candidate, not so much. this will be an opportunity for candidates, house races, senate races, to really talk about what the stakes are in an election.

stakes, really for this report, obviously a presidential election is even more important, because who is elected president can name justices, judges to the lower court, but i think it is a very good time. i also think if you take a look back in history a little, let's go back to daniel manion. i know that is many years ago, 1986. there was one republican senator all set to goas for a seat on the seventh court of appeals. gordonlast minute, slade changed his mind and voted for daniel gordon, -- daniel

manion, and you know what? slade gorton lost his seat. there have been a number of cases like this. alan dixon was up to try to be reelected to the seat in illinois. lost to seek over this particular issue. attention,re paying particularly at the supreme court level, and because there is so much more engagement, so much more excitement, at least on the progressive side, i think this will be a huge issue. >> "washington journal" continues. host: and it is open phones up until 10:00 eastern. (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 republicans, and

all others, (202) 748-8002. talkopic you want to about, some of the things we talked about this morning, including trade and tariffs, abolishing i.c.e., the president's visit, and more. "new york of the fentany times," the special counsel investigating russian interference in the 2016 election issued an indictment of 12 russian intelligence officers friday in the hacking of the democratic national committee in the clinton presidential campaign. the indictment came only three days as the president trump was preparing to meet president putin in helsinki, finland. first up on the republican line, pat, good morning. caller: good morning. it is not the subject you were just talking about, but i have

some ideas over the years about how to handle people who harass women in the workplace. and this sounds radical. it so happens i am a left-wing radical, and i am proud of it. i have been that way since 1968. take these guys and lock them up. five days, 10 days, whatever, irey lose their wages, ther "fellas" see that what they are doing is not permitted. i think we get t could turn that around real quick. they used to shout obscenities at me in the shop, they used to try to make me screw up. i was a machinist. i went up against the big once. i am telling you, some guys would not even talk to me ownuse i was sewing their

workplace. i want to keep this alive. that is why i am talking on tv. again,d, it is the women let them bluster," than a couple of days later, oh, they are q uiet, let's go on to something else. we will not be ignored. we will not go away. they need to be punished so they will not g do it again. host: thanks, pat. darrell on the independent line. caller: i tried to get on while john was on about social security. there was a congressman i went on, and he said there are 81,000 illegal mexicans getting social security benefits. my daughter has been fighting for social security since 2014. she has a social security doctor saying she is 66% disabled in her back alone. that is not including mental health issues. the doctor said she is disabled.

the social security administration said no she is not. host: who is the congressman, or representative, and when did he -- caller: i cannot remember his name because it was several months back. my whole point is why pay doctors to say somebody is disabled when the social security is going to deny these doctors? host: pope informs until 10:00 this morning, on the rosenstein indictments, mueller indictments yesterday, rod rosenstein made the announcement. "political" says house conservatives are pushing to oust deputy attorney general rod rosenstein am a according to capital resources, putting an andng touches on

peach met filing even as rosenstein announced the indictment of 12 russian intelligence officers for interfering in the 2016 election. john, independent line. and thank you for taking my call. i went to call about the disability program. one thing you mentioned really upset me, and that was regarding the doctor issue. personally, i am on disability. making a job $200,000 i have destroyed every joint in the body, i have had 22 concussions, i believe, and just to redefine the program means that people like us, unfortunately, are going to be scrutinized, and a lot of us are going to lose benefits. that is my fear. that is my great fear. i am so upset, i do not even

know how to define it. a hold of your guest, but thank you for taking my call. host: ok. alexandria, virginia next, al on the independent line. hi, i am ans, immigrant from syria, i can hear in 1968, and for the first time, i have become uneasy, and i feel becomee country has unstable because of an irrational opposition to an elected president. the system -- i mean, there are so many ways to fight back legally and properly, without irrationally spreading smear campaigns. i just feel on easy for the first time, and i have three children here. we were fortunate that we do not live through the syrian civil war.

i can hear a long time ago. children in this country. but now i feel it we are heading to an unstable future, and i really do not know her because of ratings, all of these news networks are just creating extreme smear campaigns against politicians, both sides. it is really activating irrational people to come out from hiding. host: i appreciate your comments, al. this is the "new york times" online, nytimes.com, blinking red lights -- "warning lights topblinking red," intelligence officer status of russian attacks.

host: dan coats spoke yesterday in washington. we covered it. here is some of what he had to say. [video clip] coates: 2001, we were heightened because of law enforcement communities, they produce what we call silos of information. at the time, intelligence and law enforcement communities were identifying alarming activities that suggested that an attack was coming. potentially in the united states. it was in the months prior to september 2001 when, according to then cia director george tenet, the system was blinking red. here we are nearly two decades say thend i am here to warning lights are blinking red again.

today, the infrastructure that serve this country is literally under attack. every day, foreign actors, the worst offenders being russia, china, iran, and north korea, every day they are penetrating infrastructure and conducting a range of cyber intrusions and attacks against targets in the united states. targets range from u.s. businesses to the federal government, our military, state and local government, elements of our critical infrastructure, just to name a few. these attacks come in different forms. some are tailored to achieve very tactical goals while others are implemented for a strategic purpose, including the possibility of a crippling cyberattack against our critical infrastructure. all of these disparate efforts share a common purpose -- to exploit america's openness in

order to undermine our long-term competitive advantage. in regard to state actions, russia has been the most aggressive foreign actors -- no question -- and they continue their efforts to undermine our democracy. host: that speech by dan coats available at c-span.org. he spoke yesterday in washington. also yesterday, the hill reporting with the headline "the u.s. officially lifts ban on chinese telecom giant zte." after it reached an agreement to revive the business, that can't came from republican lawmakers and the zte intelligence community. wilbur ross, commerce secretary, insisted that the lifting of the ban only came after severe sanctions. our next call is just from ohio

on the democrats line. facing i have a concern the democrats going forward is where we see the future of the party? i think we see it with maxine waters, a more activist approach. also seen with pelosi and schumer a more centrist direction. i think we really have to fight the urge to be centrist at this point in time. acting --ely, we are party is acting, but there are norms where we allow these intolerances to happen, and it has gone far beyond the pale. we russia investigation, should take it seriously. it should not be partisan, to say we should investigate this, especially when we see what

was.azi we cannot allow ourselves to get in this exchange with the right where we say we will give this for what we give you, because for the most part, they are not going to. instead of looking for a centrist, we have to energize folks like saying "these are the things that we need from the left." jake tapper said the tsa was .,ing for abolishment of i.c.e against the trunk, against -- trump, against brett kavanaugh, these long-term concerns, republicans are not going to give an inch. sm, ittry for centerri will have people sitting on the sidelines. host: to your point, we started to show asked me about whether immigrations and customs in enforcet should be abolished, a position taken by

several democrats. what do you think? guest: absolutely. c.e. did not exist until 2003 current george bush invented it. we were fine without it. childrenor some of the had a case down on the highway in texas, some of these immigrants that were being held, lyingvernment, i.c.e. was about whether they were there, and the texas patrol pulled these lawyers over. they are acting in a way that is out of control. host: one key democrat who does not support that is former attorney general eric holder. the argument to abolish i.c.e. does not make sense. he spoke yesterday on msnbc, saying "i do not think that substantively or politically that makes sense. i think i.c.e. obviously needs

to be reformed, but i d think we need to focus on that which is most important, and that is the separation of these kids from their parents." we hear from don in orange, texas. caller: thank you. i missed the segment prior, and my question is, nobody seems to speak about the money that ronald reagan borrowed from some trust funds, social security trust funds, and when will it ever get paid, and what has happened to the payments that are being made? because social security, what he borrow was cash money, because the social security was taking in cash money, so what happened to that? it seems to me that the interest that they should have been getting on that money all these

years would more than help the fund. thank you. you were talking about the reporter earlier, robert verbruggen. part of this piece on the social security disability, he writes about as of last month, the insurance role sitting at 10.3 million terms of people who were on it, the shift in trend has been soldier madigan unexpected, downward, that is, that it has confusion about when the beleaguered program will run out of money. predicted that 2023 would be the year of doom. last year's report put it at 2028. this year, as he mentioned to us earlier, was 2032. ourge is from new jersey on independent line. caller: i want to talk about trade. people are seeing a very lopsided issue. i think trump is doing something.

obama, clinton, nor president bush did anything. for example, tesla was forced to have a factory in china, because would put a 25% tariff on tesla's car, and so on and so forth. general electric is 2% in america, 5% in china, and many specific industries in china are protected. argues foreryone who foreign trade and keeping the american trade deficit the way it is seems to be forgetting steele are going to lose and aluminum industries if we do not do something. trum may not necessarily be right about what he is doing, but at least he is trying to do something. america has accepted one million illega legal immigrants.

everyone talks about the abolishment for i.c.e., advocates for open borders, because if you do not enforce, you get what we get now. only a small percent of illegals get caught, and everybody else just runs into this great country of ours. thank you. john is next in augustine, georgia on the republican line. good morning. you are on the air. go ahead. my father was the social security director from 1963 until 1970, and he started in augusta, georgia and moved to birmingham, and during the , he movedts and stuff to greenwood and then became the director of social security in tupelo, mississippi. just as a note, i was forced, conscripted to do claims in

little tiny towns in and around greenwood, mississippi, within, like, a 150-mile radius, driving. i could not believe the kind of people that were coming in, obviously to knots the english, many of them -- to not speak english, many of them. they had translators, and i was being forced to do the claims. back in those days, when you got social security, when it first started under lyndon johnson, it was fully funded. mississippi was one of the first states that he does that it. they had six months and they had to come back and requalified. none of them ever did. it was the same model that they use with illegals. they turned them loose and never come back. what i really want to talk yout, and i appreciate taking my call, but that the number of veterans in georgia -- i'm sure in other states it is just as bad -- no telling how bad it is in texas and florida.

population,6 of the claims sctive veteran et in air-conditioned rooms in atlanta, georgia that have not been worked on. i have been very active as a veteran. my father's brother was the union president of the va hospital in augusta, georgia for over 50 years, and two doctors from another country, i will not name them because i do not want you to cut me off, but they gave him the wrong medicine, and in, like, four hours, he was dead. host: you said in the state of georgia, that 1/6 of the population is veteran? no, if you compare the number of people who live in georgia, there are 475,000 veteran claims in the v.a., and

we have 11,000 homeless veterans. i get my numbers from the georgia veterans department, which is a separate entity from the v.a. and these two groups clash constantly. host: i appreciate you weighing in. trying to get more callers hear. ed is in baltimore, independent line. caller: good morning. i heard the discussion earlier about abolishing i.c.e. i want to say our country does need strong quarters, and i am just appalled at the number of folks that i know who claim to stillngelicals into support kids in cages. i just do not understand how you can wear that religion on your arm and support a policy that cruel. even the co-has come out -- the out against it. thank you. host: president trump is heading

to helsinki to meet with russian president vladimir putin. tweeting about the indictment yesterday, "the stories you 12 russiansthe yesterday took place during the obama administration, not the ump,p administration[-- tr administration. why didn't they do something about it, especially when it was reported that the president obama was informed by the fbi in september, before the election?" host: jerry is next. to talk abouted bias in reporting, and i wanted to specifically mention nina houlton berg, who was reporting on the latest supreme court nominee, and her reporting was very slanted and biased against the new nominee, and i am saying homein your should work at

and ensure that reporters and people like yourself don't put bias into news. the newspapers today, as you know, give no credit to the president for any of his accomplishments. the news stories are often slanted, and i think that you a good program if you talked about bias in newspaper reporting and in reporting. thank you so much. host: irvine, california. say hello to dave on our independent line. caller: i want to talk about social security. first of all, all you have to do on social security is raise the cap. the republicans want to get rid of it no matter what. if they get in there, they will cut it. there is no reason to cut it. all you have to do is raise the cap. millionaires and billionaires do not pay their fair share. for the last 50 years, they have taken out of social security and used it for emergencies and stuff, which it was not meant

for. they should have never done that. they said "well, we will put it back in there." they never put it back in. they owe the social security fund. if you are on social security, you have got to vote the republicans out, or they will get rid of it. ryan did it, now he wants to take it from everybody else. from memo to male caller texas, the social security trust fund is an urban myth. democrats says "i will have two justices on the supreme court when donald trump leaves office. from srt "if it were not for the american fighting forces of u.k. and much of the eu would be's reading german -- be speaking german." caller: i am a veteran, too.

i lost my son in afghanistan. now we have that guy, whatever we have got, talking about immigrations. all immigrants. what about american indians? come on. 12,000 years on the books. we are all immigrants. now, i believe in border some but immigrants did a lot of work care. host: the "new york times" writing about immigration worldwide this morning. the united nations on friday completed an agreement on improving ways to handle the .lobal flow of migrants it was boycotted by a huge and influential number in the united states. orderly and regular migration was negotiated.

it has become increasingly divisive in the rest of the world. it abruptly went through last december under orders from the trump administration, which has taken an increasingly hostile view toward cross-border migrants, refugees, and asylum-seekers. they report that more than 258,000 people worldwide are international migrants, according to the united nations. here is st. louis, good morning to john, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you doing this morning? host: i am doing fine, thank you. caller: i would like to say that i did vote for obama twice. my question is this -- we have over 17 million americans that have no roofs, no free doctor, no free dentists, no free lawyers, that my tax money are

paying for illegals, when my money should be going to u.s. citizens that have nothing over but we are taking care of people from other countries when we cannot take care of our own u.s. citizens? not make anydoes sense at all. and i did come from italy, and my family came here, had to pay $2000 for each person to become an american citizen. this is not fair for the people who come from this country legally, and we have illegal paying nothing to become an american citizenss. where is the fairness? host: john, when did you become a citizen? caller: in 1972. host: i appreciate you joining us this morning. colleen on the democrats line. caller: i was just wondering, like, after all that has happened in the last few days how can't the

people who support him finally can never -- he always blames everyone else but comes to russians. understand why they still support him? , i am right in there with the middle-class and poor, and he could care less about us. he said that before he was even elected that he don't like the poor. i am going to hire somebody who is rich. because those of the people i like. do they still support him when it is so obvious that he is a narcissist and it is all about himself? host: we will be covering c-span from of the events from this week of the nato gatherinan