representative. with, of conversation congressman glenn thompson and representative raja krishnamoorthi. ♪ host: secretary of state mike pompeo sat before senators for three hours yesterday, answering questions on russia and north korea. he defended the president's foreign policy and pushed back against bipartisan criticism.

we heard from those lawmakers yesterday, we know what they think, so now is your turn? -- now is your turn. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. find us on facebook and twitter. start dialing in now. we will get to your thoughts. let's get to key moments from yesterday's hearing. >> you come before group of senators who are filled with serious doubts about this white house and its conduct of american foreign-policy. to end its occupation of crimea. >> i understand the game you're playing. respect, i don't appreciate you characterizing my questions. my questions are to get to the truth.

we don't know what the truth is and the only way we will know what the truth is, what transpired in those two hours, and amazing period of time to understanding at least if you were briefed by the president what he told you. i do not think that is unfair. >> i think back to reagan talking to gorbachev. i do not imagine reagan sitting down with gorbachev and shaking his finger and saying murderer, i think there is a difference for anyone who has ever thought about this, sitting down and how diplomacy would occur, and reciting a litany of human rights abuses. >> it is the case. the president calls the ball. it is the case that when all of us speak in informal settings in questions, we are

not covering the full gamut of things that impact the world. that is what i intended to say. state miketary of pompeo on capitol hill yesterday before the foreign relations committee, answered questions for three hours. we want to know your thoughts on the president's foreign policy. harold, a democrat. did you watch yesterday's hearing? caller: yes, ma'am. i did not get much out of it. it did not seem like he wanted to be forthright with the public and i do not know if he knows the truth. i do not think the president told him the truth to where we could know the truth, and that is the big problem, our president is not telling us the truth at this time. i think if a president will lie to his wife about infidelity, if he will lie to the american public even while he was being elected, that we cannot trust a single thing he is saying right now. if something important come up,

i am pretty sure we would be left in the dark until it was too late. i am scared something is going to happen as this case starts closing in on him, that he might get scared and do something stupid, and nobody is there to check up on him. host: what did you want to learn yesterday from that hearing? caller: i would like to get the interpreter in there, and actually see what was said in the meeting, because i do not trust putin to tell me. . do not trust trump to tell me i do not trust either one to tell the rest of their constituents what was going on in that meeting, so i do not know. i thought i heard pompeo say "regime" yesterday. host: say what? caller: i thought he called our government a regime and i think i heard trump call our party a regime. i do not think we are a regime.

that is our party. i don't understand. host: if you want to check the transcript of that hearing, we have that on our website c-span.org. we covered the hearing yesterday , and you can play the video out. below the video player is also a search function. "regimetype in the word " and it will bring it to that part of the hearing. eric in white plains, maryland, independent. caller: good morning. thank you very much for taking my call. i have two things to say. the president is not a politician. that we need to understand . he does not have all these good manners. however, he is trying. the obama administration docked a lot. a lot.bama -- ducked

under obama, he did not do a lot of russia taking over crimea, so at least the president is trying something. there is a difference between talking, and another difference between action. he is taking action. i want you and others to listen to the chair of the foreign relations committee, bob corker, republican from tennessee. this is why he said lawmakers have concern yesterday. >> why does he do those things? is there some strategy behind creating doubt in u.s. senator'' minds on both sides of the aisle, doubt by the american people as to what his motivations are when we in fact have tremendous faith in you? i think you are a patriot. tremendous faith in madness. -- mattis. actionse president's

that create distrust among our allies. is there a strategy of this, or what is it that causes the president to purposely, purposely create distrust in these institutions and what we are doing? >> senator, i disagree with most of what you just said there. you somehow disconnect the administration's activities from the president's actions. .hey are one in the same every sanction that was put in place was signed off by the president of the united states. every spy that was removed -- >> go to the point i just made. talk to them. i know what we are doing. talk to the point i just made. , thish respect to russia administration has been tougher than previous administrations and i fully expect it will. are he isent's words happy to get it figured out but their, he will be

toughest enemy. i think i can prove that is the case today. i think i have. somehow there is this idea that this administration is free-floating. this is president trump's administration. make no mistake of who is fully in charge. it is these activities that caused vladimir putin to be in a difficult place today. >> you handle yourself in exactly the way you should as it relates to comments. i noticed that you are not responding to what i am saying. >> i think i responded to everything you said, senator. >> no, you didn't, you just didn't. >> we disagree. >> we do not disagree. let's run the transcript. >> let the world decide. publics the president's statements that create concern among senators on both sides of the aisle. host: do all of you have

concerns? we want to hear from you this morning. secretary pompeo on capitol hill yesterday for three hours, defending the foreign policy bill. bill in myrtle beach, south carolina. caller: unfortunately, what we are seeing is a president who is doing what he thinks is right, and when it goes against both parties in congress, both parties get upset. upset and question his motivations, his strategies, and everything else. interestingly enough, we are talking,the democrats trying to get pompeo to talk about the president. they are using the great tool of oversight, which is the exact same thing that the republicans the institutions of our government, to try to get to the truth as well.

when it comes to the situation of pompeo, he is doing the same thing that every secretary of state has done. what he did do yesterday in that it is muchd i know to the chagrin of the democratic party, what he did do was create and show the contrast between barack obama and president trump. in every instance, barack obama was passive. he was complacent and not aggressive. now, look at what is happening. our economy is coming on. we have changes in negotiations on trade deals. we have got dialogue and an agreement with north korea. thing is, i think yesterday the democratic party had their lunch eaten, is the comparison was made that over

the last eight years they did nothing at all except just wake up and go through the motions, where now we have a president that looks like he means business. it looks as though it is positive for the country, and unfortunately the democratic party, to have been a part of, is going so far to the left that it is showing everybody in the country it is almost like pulling the mask off of what the democratic party is really about. people,re i talk to this is not the democratic party that my daddy and granddaddy were part of. it sure as heck is not the democratic party that i was a part of. that is probably why i will be voting independent or republican in the next election, because as far as i'm concerned the democratic party is a marxist socialist takeover out of academia. host: when did you leave the

democratic party? or when did you start voting -- let me ask you this. did you vote for president obama? caller: first time. host: not the next time, and it sounds like you voted for president trump this last election. caller: yes. the reason i saw that, democrats believe more in -- true democrats believe more in thevidual rights, but at same time using government to help on social programs. , the second, you know, administration of obama we had benghazi. we had all this other stuff which i thought, even though i am a democrat, i do not like to be held in the dark by my party. it is one of these things where as it started progressing on, i

just started moving toward trump , and now we are starting to see basically obama ,n his second term unfortunately the republicans are bringing out all the evidence and now the democrats want to try and deflect or project onto trump so the american people will not see the evidence. it breaks my heart. host: deborah in south bend, indiana, republican. caller: good morning. what the i agree with gentleman just said. me, too. a lifelong democrat. here i am 67 years old, a lifelong democrat. kaine talko tim about, when he started out, the , all ofing he said was

my constituents are from the cia and i am supportive. that took me all the way back to why i left i did -- left the democrat party. i can see how this rush investigation got started. is on the cia, what makes you think -- this is ugly. i wish we were just cut this out. host: michael in suffolk, virginia, independent. caller: good morning. reasonsthat one of the -- and nobody seems to bring this up -- i think one of the reasons that president trump had a face-to-face meeting alone is because he did not want weeks. leaks.--

then it is leaked and spun by the news media whatever way they want to spin it, and i don't blame him a bit on having a one-on-one. i used to have one on ones with my employees. host: if that is the case, why not let the interpreter, the translator testify in an open hearing on capitol hill about what she heard when she sat in the room? caller: the same rule applies. if you tell a senator something, 99 other ones will find out about it and then it will be leaked by one of them to the news media. congress is trying to destroy donald trump. i understand that. i don't agree with it, but i understand it. they are not doing a really good job of it, becausei understand y they looked like fools. mike pompeo is a very intelligent guy.

you are not going to push him around. host: robert craig on twitter /trumphis -- putin toldnki summit, has potus anyone about the details? policy -- trump's foreign policy is not a policy. until he can quit flip-flopping on which countries he support and what issues he agrees with there is no policy. the president did yesterday struck a deal with the european union on trade. yesterday, the eu commissioner was at the white house. here is the headline -- the u.s.-eu call a truce on trade. they agreed to begin discussions on subsidies and to resolve steel and aluminum tariffs the imposedministration had , as well as the retaliatory

tariffs the european union imposed in response. the eu would buy more liquefied gas and soybeans from the u.s., and they would begin a dialogue to reduce differences. no schedule is set to complete the talks, meaning what amounted to a temporary truce could become a permanent one, or fall apart. here is the eu commissioner in the rose garden yesterday with the president. >> when i was invited by the president to the white house, i had the intention to make a deal today, and we made a deal today. we have identified a number of areas on which to work together. work toward zero tariffs on industrial goods, that was my , for both to come down to zero tariffs on industrial goods.

we have decided to strengthen our cooperation on energy. you will build more terminals to import more liquefied gas from the u.s.. this is also a message for us. we agreed to establish a dialogue on standards. as far as agriculture is concerned, the european union can purchase more soybeans from the u.s. and it will be done. we agreed to work together on the reform of the wt a. course is on the understanding that as long as we are negotiating, unless one party would stop the negotiations, we will hold off and reassessfs existing tariffs on steel and aluminum. this was a good, constructive meeting. host: the conservative wall street journal editorial board says, some good trade news.

europe has a 10% tariff on u.s. made cars and a u.s. charges only 2.5%, but the u.s. charges a 25% on imported trucks which europe will want the u.s. to take to zero. and will not please ford u.s. companies that make the bulk of their profits from trucks and suvs. but perhaps they will be willing to consider zero on trucks as an alternative to the disaster that would come from mr. trump's threat of 25% on cars. the car terrorists would certainly have punished germany, the locomotive of europe's economy. on the front page of the business and finance section of the wall street journal, forecasters trim their forecasts. the big three automakers lowered tariffsofits, saying are weighing on their bottom

line. second-quarter results for general motors, ford, and fiat chrysler made clear that elevated costs will linger through the year and into 2019. one other headline, the washington post -- this tentative eu-u.s. trade deal may heed rising gop election angst. let's go back to the hearing on capitol hill. independent, go ahead. caller: i just wanted to say, i am from kentucky and i'm really proud of the job rand paul does. i have never voted for him. i will . -- i will next time. he was right on yesterday. he is often demonized, whether it is for domestic surveillance

or torture or the wrist of foreign intervention or the war on drugs or john brennan. he seems to be exactly right. sometimes he is the only one saying -- a lot of times he is the only one saying whatever he is saying. host: debbie in flint, michigan, democrat. what do you think? caller: i did watch the hearing yesterday and when i was struck with, a couple of questions that pompeo talked about obama. his hatred for obama is visceral , so now i understand where him and trump are coming from. they share that visceral hate of obama. what the president is doing, his foreign policy aside, what they are doing and our white house with not checking out caitlin collins, not allowing the transcripts to go out on foreign phone calls, they have not let the visitor logs go out in over a year.

three of his cabinet members have been accused of keeping dual calendars. at the end of the day, these people do not get it. they work for us. about,this crap everybody has secret meetings. do people have secret meetings with people they are investigated about colluding with? i cannot believe these people call in. you have democrats calling in on the democrat line that are distant democrats. if you are not a real democrat, stay off our line. host: i will just reference what you talked about, and that is caitlin collins, a cnn reporter at the white house yesterday was the roseom attending garden event with the eu commissioner and president trump after the white house says she shouted inappropriate questions at the president when he was in the oval office with the eu

commissioner. if you go to our website, c-span.org, you can listen to the president in the oval office and the eu commissioner, listen to the reporters when he is done giving his statement, the questions that were asked. >> thank you very much. >> we are done, let's go. >> this way. >> we are done. as you can hear, many reporters are shouting questions. if you go back into our library and look at many of the meetings that the president has had in the oval office after he is done delivering his statement with other guests, reporters, almost all of them in their started

shouting questions -- in there started shouting questions at the president to see if he would answer. sarah sanders sent out the statement -- a reporter shouted out questions and refused to leave. staffstaff -- our informed her she was not welcome to participate in the event. she said she did not care because she hadn't planned to be there anyway. to be clear, we support a free press and ask that everyone be respectful. news stands for early with at cnn on the issue of access. that is the issue yesterday about the cnn reporter. jeff in eden, north carolina, republican. go ahead. caller: good morning.

i would just like to say off the top, president trump, when he handles our enemies and our with,, he handles them you know, he doesn't approach it the way obama did or any other president. he approaches it -- i mean, all we have to do is examine the results of donald trump. he just made the eu, and mexico -- mexico is going to obey, just become fair. candidate is going to be fair. in the trade deals, he is getting results. in iran, we will get results. results,korea, we got and that is in less than two years. the result in any comparison are a slamdunk win for president trump. obama, is unlike mr. not hiding stuff from the

americans to hurt us. he highs it because half of america or a third of america actually does what previous caller said. they lie. he cannot negotiate when the other team gets to see his cards. obama, on many occasions, showed the enemy our cards by telling them about the arab spring. when democrats in a run tried -- iran tried to overthrow the dictator, he did not help. obama tried to unseat netanyahu in israel. this president has nothing like the lies president -- last president. it is obvious, with the support donald trump is receiving. something i want to ask you. you said to one of these callers about the interpreter being questioned. the deception that you all are

, it was is revealed obvious when obama sent to the dictator in russia he will have more flexibility, no one questioned, what flexibility are we talking about? crimea, thate and is probably the deal he struck with russia. nobody talks about that. you cannot ignore the good results. host: i heard your point. when i was doing was posing the question that democrats asked. take a look at the ranking member of the senate foreign relations committee, bob menendez, democrat of new jersey. this is a question he posed about getting details of the private two-hour meeting. >> did he tell you whether or not, what happened? >> if the predicate of your question implied some notion

about there being something improper about a one-on-one meeting -- >> i did not ask your predicate. did he tell you what transpired? >> i had a number of conversations about what transpired. i was present when he and it.ident putin discussed i think i have a pretty complete understanding of what took place. >> did you speak to the translators who was at that meeting? >> no, i haven't. >> have you seen any of her notes? >> senator, i have been in lots of meetings and had lots of translators, and i have never relied on the work they have done. >> did the president discuss relaxing u.s. sanctions on russia, including cats is sanctions? the u.s. policy with respect to sanctions remains completely unchanged. >> i asked a very specific

question -- did the president tell you he discussed relaxing russian sanctions are not, yes or no? >> presidents are entitled to have private meetings. >> you told me you had a conversation in which he told you what transpired. i think the nation and all of us who are policy makers deserve to know so we can fashion policy accordingly. did he tell putin that he would relax or release sanctions? need toor, what you conduct your appropriate role i will provide you, that is united states policy with respect to the issues you request. you asked about the sanctions and i can confirm, no commitment has been made to change those policies in any way. is what happened yesterday in washington with the secretary of state on capitol hill. we want to know what all of you

think. lloyd in miami, a democrat. caller: good morning. that was perfect. host: why do you say that? caller: that was perfect, the last caller plus what you just played. that was not congress doing oversight. that was a contentious battle. there is no information coming out. according to what we are hearing from the administration, russia has gone from an adversary to a cloak and dagger, what, ally? we do not know what is going on. we cannot get information and anything we ask is an automatic battle. a question was asked yesterday, can you recall a time where a secretary of state had a private meeting with adversaries and the american people did not get to know about it? the answer was no, never. not in my lifetime. can you think of one time? no.

the whole problem is we can't get any answers. posed to question is any part of this administration, all we hear is talking points. the talking points you are hearing is, yeah, another thing -- can you hear me? host: yes. intern,if you have an can you assign them to do troll research? the people that are calling in on a democratic line who are trolls, i can tell what they will say before they say it. i walks fox at night and i can get online in the morning. before 9:00, you get all the talking points. they are going to talk about obama. they are going to talk about what trump has done for the economy, talk about what he has achieved. there is nothing concrete, just platitudes. now they are calling in every

single station that has democratic representation and every newspaper that has democratic representation, and they are trolling us. the simple fact of the matter is -- forget about the overarching russian investigation, forget about that part and focus on what is going on with russia as far as the meeting goes, that is a perfect example of what is going on in this country. he is contentious with everyone else but all the sudden russia is our buddy and we have no idea what is going on, cannot get any information about what is going on. something is seriously wrong. host: bob kingwood, texas, a republican -- bob in kingwood, texas, a republican. caller: the question about having the interpreter's notes being explained or brought to the public is ludicrous. that is unbelievable, as pompeo said in his presentation.

he has been in lots of meetings before. that has never happened. you do not use those kinds of things, and a private meeting as a private meeting. if the u.s. public wants to know a little bit about what goa -- went on, they will find out. i believe mike pompeo pretty much ate the lunch of the democratic party yesterday trying to grandstand. say, cnnthing i will continually tries to make news, not report news. the woman shouting and whatever, i have heard that before. it was proper and appropriate for the white house to say, look , that behavior in front of a foreign dignitary is not acceptable. cnn makes news, they don't just report news. host: vicki, new york, democrat. caller: i would like to contradict the caller that just called. cnn is news. he needs to wake up. .ox is the liar

all fox does is life, just like trump. host: your thoughts on the president's foreign policy? caller: he doesn't have any foreign policy. all he does is lie and cover-up. the people that called in on the republican line, they followed trump down this rabbit hole. hello, are you there? host: we are listening. caller: they followed trump down this rabbit hole. jump is putting this country at risk. we should know what happened toputin -- we should know what happened. putin is not our friend. the people who call c-span should know that. headlines,other politico has -- how conservatives have moved to impeach rod rosenstein. this move, they did this last

night. move by these two trump allies came as the house is set to depart for a five-week recess starting today and it is unlikely to pass. , thesentative adam schiff top ranking democrat on the intelligence committee responded in a tweet, saying these articles of impeachment were filed in bad faith and will show the extraordinary lengths in which republicans will go to protect trump. history will record these members as willing compasses and the most serious threat to the rule of law in a generation. "cash flowing into the treasury corporate taxes are falling and it is pushing up the deficit. there is also the story and the papers, other papers as well, on the front page of the new york finding take on mars starters hope for life -- lake

on mars finding hope for life. the body of water appears similar to underground lakes found on earth in greenland and antarctica. let's hear from dan and massachusetts, an independent. go ahead. caller: thanks for having me on. reachedwe have kind of a point of hysteria in the country here. you know, our president is going peace,trying to spread as far as i can tell. people don't like it. i think there is a group of people in our country that have been determined to go to war , and they keep

messing with them. like under the obama administration. people are unwilling to look at actions. they are just kind of going on feelings, and a lot of these feelings have been predicated by news stories that are hit pieces against our president. it is very obvious what is going on. trump was not supposed to get in there. he has been kind of a surprise, and the deep state, yes, people, the deep state is worried, worried because a lot of bad, bad things have been happening with this deep state. you look at things with big been -- marks we have

around the world, things that have happened with very questionable investigations. these people are hiding bad things and i would say these people in the deep state are fighting for their lives. host: we are going to switch topics. when we come back, we will talk with two lawmakers, glen rock -- glenn thompson and roger krishnamurthy. we are going to discuss jobs, careers, and technical education. we will be right back. ♪ >> sunday night on afterwords,

sean spicer discusses his book "the briefing, politics, the press, and the president." he is interviewed by michael steele. >> ronald reagan and donald trump are about 180 degrees apart from each other and yet, here we are in the space. how did you navigate that? we are both reagan conservatives in that regard. was it a little bit of a dance everyone's in a while? how did you do it? the president is not traditional in terms of how he speaks, he has his own vernacular, but he also connects to people in a way that most politicians never have. he talks very bluntly in his own style, but i do not think he would have won the presidency if it were not for that style. there is always this balance with elected officials.

they say all the right things but do not necessarily get anything done, and in the case of trump, he is getting all of these things done and people are saying, i did not like his tweet or how he reacted. i am a results oriented person. i look at the country, are people doing better? net-net, most people would agree if we can get the right things done for the country, that is a better place than someone just talking about the right things to get done. sunday atfterwords 9:00 p.m. eastern after book tv. saturday at 10:00 a.m. eastern on american history tv, live, all-day coverage of the confederate icons conference from james madison university in harrisonburg, virginia. speakers include christy coleman , kevin walker, ceo of the

shenandoah battlefield association, and james robertson, offer of the book "after the civil war." watch the confederate icons saturday morning starting at 10:00 eastern on american history tv on c-span3. "washington journal" continues. our table, two members of the education and workforce committee, republican glenn thompson and democrat raja krishnamoorthi. we had you on about a year ago to talk about legislation for career and technical education. tell us what has happened since then. guest: since then, our really aon, which is transformational piece of

legislation for american families, businesses, really for the nation when you look at the economic impact, has been voted on five times. three times in the house, two times in the senate. now it is going directly to president trump's desk for a signature. host: what exactly will this do? it is transformational, it is historic, it is a landmark, bipartisan piece of legislation. it does at least three things -- modestly increases funding so that more students can participate in a career technical education, two, it shifts authority from washington to local authorities, community colleges, high school districts to spend the money, because they know the local labor conditions best, and then three, it makes sure if any federal dollars are companiest private

and businesses are at the table to help validate the skills that are taught. becausevery important, at the end of the day we want the students to end up and what i call the greatest anti-poverty program created by human beings, a job. host: what we are talking about, career and technical education, and the term applies to schools, program created by human beings, ainstitutions, and educational programs that specialized in the skilled trades of modern technologies, sometimes called locational education. the programs offer internships, job shadowing, industry certification opportunities. who qualifies? today actually, there are , there is more than 6.7 million jobs open and available in this country that employers are not

able to fill because of what we call the skills gap. there are people out there bank looking for greater up -- out out there, and there is employers desperately needing employees. this piece of legislation fills that skills gap. you talk about what career and technical education is. thethe beauty is the tools of career and technical education are so diverse. it can be a welder. it can be a hammer, wrenches, or a paintbrush, a keyboard for coding. there is just so much. this bill fills that skills gap and provides better access to more effective skills-based education or career and technical education. guest: i agree with everything congressman thompson said. .he common denominator is this

maybe a four-year college degree is not for everyone but a post secondary education has to be. you have to gain a skill, a credential, something to equip yourself with the tools to get one of those 6.7 million jobs congressman thompson alluded to that remain unfilled. career technical education, two thirds of americans, the vast majority of americans who do not have a four-year college degree, are not going to get one. if we want them to get on the road to a middle-class lifestyle , we have to get them into career technical education and other similar programs. yesterday, people were lauding this is historic and bipartisan -- as historic and bipartisan. we have to take advantage of this moment. host: i want to invite our viewers to call in with their questions and experiences in this field.

i want to know what sort of stories are out there and how you respond. not get thatid next education after high school? instead, you went to work and now your job is gone and not coming back. guest: it works for those who are kids. it really does. two stories were killed -- shared yesterday. we had 24 innovators involved in workforce development of career in technical education around the country. a local career and technical education teacher talked about two kids briefly that were in high school, one was in his landscaping program and this young lady had down syndrome. in the greenhouse, the curriculum of his program, she excelled. she showed up on time, she was reliable, she was a high performer. when you graduated -- when she can imagine and you

the stress of parents with a special needs child, what happens after she graduates -- joe went through a lyrical greenhouse and said, -- local greenhouse and said, i have an employee you have to hire. she is a superstar. another young man was in the welding program, and had some challenges in the regular classroom learning in traditional academic ways. when you put a welder in his hand, he was inspired. languageled with skills and science and all the traditional things, but a welder, he was an all-star. he came back a year later after he graduated. making?, what are you the boycott of caused and said, last -- the boy kind of paused and said, last year i made $185,000. those are obviously exceptional cases, but this works for folks. it also works for folks, at any

point in their age, this is a chance to go back and get a certificate, a little bit of training. we are not talking about four-year degrees, for people to get a better job. people may be that have been living on welfare for generations. and youring to g.t.'s point about students who go into career and technical education, the alternative is worse. if they do not get equipped with the skills, they are unlikely to get a job. of course, markets change in industries change, but employers are much more likely going to invest in these people and make sure that they are equipped with the relevant skills to stay ahead of the modernization that is happening in every industry, and basically stay relevant. that is the key. i think this is going to help spur not only a career technical

education revolution but kind of a lifelong education revolution. even students who get a four-year degree, it is not one and done anymore. you have to continue educating yourself so they may end up getting career technical certifications and so forth, and vice versa. students may go to get a four-year degree, but the cool thing is their degree might -- their employer might pay for it. this is a great way to avoid debt. students are choking with post secondary debt and we cannot go down that road. host: david from gaithersburg maryland, independent. caller: i am so glad you guys are having this conversation and it is being brought in the mainstream. i am 28 years old. when i was in high school we had a program called thomas edison high school of technology. it is a great program.

you can do nursing, restaurants, all of the construction trade. i ended up planning in ninth dropout -- to drop out. license,journeyman's my master's license. i am making six figures. i have a rental property. i have my own house. not everybody needs to go to a traditional four-year college. yes, you do need to get the skills, but a lot of those skills do not even need to be attained after high school. i do not know what europe does, but i think we need to -- people can identify certain kids that are just not going to be cut out for it, and there is no need to really started after high school. we can start this stuff in high school, kind of like a half-day

program like edison had going on. more of this stuff would be great to this country. host: let's talk to your point about starting early. guest: congratulations to david, first of all. this is the example of how if he had gone the other path, dropping out or leaving the educational system altogether and not equipping himself with the skills to get a job, where would he have ended up? he has gone a much more prosperous route. the other point i want to make his i think we will be rethinking our educational -- is i think we will be rethinking our educational system. we will be on and earn and learn path. it goes back and forth. i think it will be kind of a virtuous cycle where you are basically making yourself more and more productive and at the same time, doing it in conjunction with an employer so it is relevant.

our businesses will benefit too. they will have a skilled workforce and they will not go to other countries searching for that workforce. it is a win-win. host: joe is in new orleans, a democrat. you are on the air. too, am happy to hear that there is bipartisan agreement on the need for vocational teaching. the used to be, back in 1950's, i do not remember when it started fading out in public schools. my father taught at a school that had vocational training. let me also say that i can makingr president obama this point to congress when he was in office, of course, it went nowhere because republicans

were not going to authenticate anything that he proposed. i am happy that now you are coming together to do what is good for the country. host: i will stop you there to get a response. guest: thank you very much, and thanks for your father for his educational work and leadership. actually, this bill did pass the house once before under president obama. my legislation passed then and it passedactually,, although weh better this time. it was unanimous. we had five members in the house vote against it. got caught up it in the politics of the 2016 election in the senate. so this is something that has been bipartisan. very strong bipartisan career and technical education caucus. we have had it for the 10 years i served in congress.

a couple of things, in terms of age, our legislation actually providing exposure to career and technical education down into the middle schools. now we will start to see kids in fifth grade get exposure to possibilities, what is out there , what are the job openings, what are the skills? ,e start the training there although i was just with one of my elementary schools and we had google and we were doing coding. they are getting exposed to it. this law -- or when it becomes law -- is pushed down to middle schools, and we provide flexibility. what happens when the industries change? today it is like, to change training, to add a new program under the current law, it operates at the speed of bureaucracy. using the opportunity has passed. we provide the opportunity to

pivot so local and state leadership, if an employer comes in and says i want to build a factory and hire 500 people with this skill set, we provide flexibility and the ability to pivot to wear those programs can change to meet the need of that emerging opportunity. host: rod is in henderson, kentucky, independent. caller: real quick. glenn thompson has alluded to it, but i just want to stand that point of getting this through to the high schools. what are we doing so that they withraduate high school some of those licenses, certificates, and maybe even become a masters employee before going the college route? host: i am not sure if he gave you a promotion or demotion. guest: thank you for that question. great point. there is going to be additional funding for high school

districts to do career technical education, and in my district, for instance, and the suburbs of chicago, we are ready have certain high school districts that are now having welding certification in the high school. basically, you can graduate is a certified welder from high school and get a job immediately. depending on how that district is doing, depending on how much collaboration it has with private industry, it can get more funds through this particular bill to put that type of program on steroids if it is successful. the cool thing about this particular bill is that there is tremendous flexibility, and it is something that congressman thompson mentioned. we are encouraging innovation. we are encouraging experimentation. we are encouraging localization, and let a thousand flowers bloom. that is what is going to happen.

this is not necessarily the sexiest issue on tv these days, but it is definitely the most important, in my opinion, in the educational space as of right now. it will be a huge win for our economy and will take us to new heights. host: you mentioned the numbers of jobs out there. the hill newspaper has this column written with the headline -- retraining the workforce is not enough to make that labor demand. what they write in here is that the united states needs to address its workforce pipeline on three fronts -- immigration, retraining and lifelong learning , and an education system that prepares future workers. american businesses need skilled workers now. retraining our workforce cannot meet our current labor demand. only a robust immigration system can meet our needs. guest: absolutely correct. one that the columnist max -- people ine number of

this country that have unfortunately been placed on the sidelines. it is just not about retraining. we will have an opportunity with that, with a farm bill vote. folks who with the have been struggling financially . our neighbors, friends, maybe loved ones who have been struggling financially and they are on the sidelines because of unemployment, underemployment, because of intergenerational poverty. there is a significant number of people, millions in this country, that we need in the workforce and they need a part of this country. chair the nutrition subcommittee, so this is something i'm responsible for is well, people who are receiving snap benefits be able to benefit from this legislation that will now become law. we are going to give them access. we are going to provide training

slots, up to 20 hours a week for these individuals between the ages of 18 and 59. if you have a disability or someone you are caring for, you would not need to do this. for a lot of these families, that is transformational. host: this will be a requirement, correct? guest: one of three requirements. if you are working 20 hours a week, you do not have to do the training, however if you are working 20 hours a week and struggling financially, you need a better job. there are some places in the country, perhaps some cities that are just deteriorating economically, where there is not a lot of jobs. there is a third option. there is 20 hours of work, 20 thes of job training, career and technical education we are talking about now, or 20 hours of volunteer work.

that will frequently lead to a job opportunity. it is all hands on deck. , one of myate enough industries is powdered metals. how that got into rural pennsylvania is a long story, but it is sort of the epicenter in the world for powdered metals. they determined if every child it just speaks to the need that we have so much demand. as we see business is growing now, they only grow it may have a qualified, trained worker. that is the number one asset. host: sydney is in forest hill, maryland, republican. caller: good morning. minus more of a comment than a question. it was in the late 1970's when i was in school. we had a metal shop, electrical

shop, different trades. when they give the trades out of school, everything kind of what south. i'm a blue-collar worker. i make over six figures. , butuggled with school they kind of puts you through to get you out of there. everybody is pushing college, college, college. all my friends now have gone to college, they make half of what i make. i don't understand why the democrats are insisting on everybody going to college really set fort everybody. rep. krishnamoorthi: i think you make a great point. takinge the point about what i call career technical education programs out of the schools and sending them elsewhere. we stigmatized the people that went into those programs, and two, we didn't

allow the people who maybe were going to go to college to experiment with these career technical education programs and find out if they might have another skill or calling. iswhat we end up having perhaps some people who are going to four-year college you might not be taking advantage of all the skills they have been blessed with. maybe they are mismatched with the employment they have now. they might be underemployed. they might not have a passion for the job they are end, and they may have a lot of debt on top of that. what we are trying to do here with our bill, congressman thompson and i are trying to give people at many choices of possible. whate not here to dictate line of profession you are going to go into or whether you should go to four-year college or career technical education. however, this should be made

more available to more people so they have the option. there's 1.i wanted to mention as well, which is this bill -- there's one point i wanted to mention as well, which is this bill will unleash billions of dollars in private investment into our career technical education system because now private companies are going to be more knowledgeable about the rules of the road going forward and know that they are going to have a seat at the table. i think this is going to leverage a lot of outside investment. that is another reason why it is so important. host: sam is in new york, democrat. question is that i would like either one of the what entatives to state what the ash

program is. host: are you familiar? rep. thompson: can you give me that acronym again? the ash.t is abe and host: what you are referring to? caller: it they are promoting certain changes the can help young adults and also the young kids, i would like to know what the acronym means. host: adult basic education? caller: you got that portion right. host: ok. mean?: what does ashes host: do you know, sam? caller: it is auxiliary services for high school students, meaning these kids who are high school dropouts, to get them back on track to be focused and

try to develop that initiative whereby they can focus more on -- it is a two-part. the foundation of education and what the demands are within certain aspects of opportunity. host: ok, sam. will take your point. rep. thompson: is speaking about adult education and talking about these exhilaration services that these auxiliary services -- these auxiliary services. we believe that because we are making changes to take the sigma off of career technical education or skills-based education, making it more accessible, more responsive, i was invant because the late 1970's in high school as well, and we had basic programs that were always the same. we are talking about a program

that evolves, that responds to robotics and new emerging trends. a program at a press conference that was a partnership with caterpillar, and the largest manufacturer of natural gas compressor stations. they created a new program because of the natural gas boom of technicians to work on those, bring the business industry to the table. our last caller, what he was talking about, those people that are left behind because they struggle in traditional academics, and i really believe the changes that we've made with this legislation -- it is going to become law, i hope. i can't say that often enough. it is transformational. a lot of kids and adults were

not be left behind in the future. we are going to meet them where their skills are and with what inspires them. host: a want of you to respond to the direction the economy is heading in, if you have any concerns with two headlines. "cash flowing into the treasury starts to ebb. the reason is president trump's tax cuts." that is in "the new york times." than the front page of "the wall street journal," "u.s. and europe call a truce on trade. it is a temporary agreement right now." you have concerns about where this economy is headed with the president's tariff policy and the tax cuts? rep. krishnamoorthi: i think a lot of people have been concerned about our trade relationships with our trading partners. for instance, china often comes up as a source of concern.

obviously i have a district with a huge concentration of manufacturers. my state has a huge concentration of farmers, so i basically get a lot of visitors who expressed concerns about trade. here's the issue, which is i think that a lot of people want to see changes in our trading relationships for sure. however, a lot of people are also concerned about unilateral moves, and they are wondering can we do this in a multilateral way to make sure we bring our concerns to the table, we avoid rhetoric that might cause a trade war and might leave everyone worse off. i think with regard to the other ,ssue, with regard to our bill ultimately what we are trying to do is make the economy stronger.

we want to get more people into these vacancies, the 6.7 million vacancies, to do two things. one, to allow these businesses to do better, and also those people that are going to be generating large incomes by getting into high skilled professions will be paying taxes as well. boost foris is a huge our long-term revenue picture and our fiscal situation because when you equip these people with the skills at these incredibly high paying jobs commodity not everyone is going to make $185,000 in the first year. however, a lot of other people are going to be making good money and living wages and being able to take care of their family. they are going to pay taxes and the reliant less on government programs as well. rep. thompson: let's start with the tariffs.

trade has been i think for yearsy accepted that the u.s. hasn't gotten the best deal when it comes to trade. many times our trading partners take advantage of us because of our sheer size and how much we consume and the strength of our economy. i think that is pretty universal. i will also say that i don't think there's been a past republican or democrat president who's had the courage to really strike at that the whip president trump has. i look at it this way. it is a dance. i'm not going it wrapped around the axle until the music stops. i was shocked yesterday that the european union was the first to come to the table and talk about zero tariffs. i really thought it would be the u.k. or somebody else, not the european union. i'm also cochair of the german-american caucus.

withl with the bureaucracy not just the german bundestag. they make our democracy look easy with the european union. the way that was announced yesterday was pretty amazing. we will see rebecca's death we will see where that goes -- we will see where that goes. in terms of the corporate tax, we got this done just in time ,ecause if you are a business your number one asset is qualified and trained workers. has promoted job growth, you look at about three weeks ago, the national association of manufacturing surveyed 14,000 members, and the optimism in growth, but there's a limiting factor. it is having qualified and trained workers. raja did a great job speaking to what those entering the

workforce, that is tax revenue that will come in. host: we have to leave it there. you two need to go. the house is coming in early. thank you both for being here. we appreciate the conversation. rep. krishnamoorthi: thank you. rep. thompson: appreciated. host: we are going to take a break. when we come back, we turn our attention to cancer and give an update on cancer treatment and research in this country, and of course, the cancer moonshot initiative that was started under president obama and continues under this administration. we would like to get your thoughts on it. we will be right back. ♪ announcer: this weekend on "oral histories," the first of our eight part series on women in congress.

sunday at 10:00 a.m. eastern, susan molinari. >> i was forced to be tougher. that is sort of the secret. at least it was back then. we were constantly being underestimated as females. sometimes being underestimated is a good thing because you can always add the element of surprise. i was debating didn't take me seriously until i got up there, and then it was too late. i think the same thing happens when you're negotiating. announcer: we will hear from pat schroeder, sue myrick, eva clayton, helen bentley, barbara tonelli, nancy johnson, and lynn woolsey. watch "oral histories" at 10:00 a.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span3. there are lots of people who

feel like i don't want my kids to read stories that are sad, disturbing, downbeat, whatever. right? that is not a totally illegitimate thing to say. i want to jews as a parent when my kid understands stuff -- i want to choose as a parent when my kids understand stuff like grief. but they are 14 now. when are you going to introduce themthem to the idea that not everything is perfect outside of your all-white suburb? all of those factors i think swirled together to create the perfect toaster fire -- perfect dumpster fire of mass censorship of books by marginalized people. live sunday, august 5 at noon eastern, discussing his latest book "walkaway." owteract with corey doctor on twitter or facebook.

" from noon toepth 3:00 p.m. eastern on booktv on c-span2. "washington journal" continues. -- mr. obama: last year, vice president biden said that with a moonshot, we can cure cancer. national have this resources they'd had in over a decade. [applause] obama: well -- [cheers and applause] mr. obama: -- so tonight i'm announcing a new national effort to get it done. to it fore

so many issues for us over the years, i putting joe at mission control. for the loved ones we've lost, for those we can still say, let's cure cancer once and for all. that was president obama and his last state of the union address and out to be cancer moonshot initiative. it has continued in congress under this administration. yesterday on capitol hill, lawmakers heard from the national institutes of health, the fda director, as well as the national cancer institute about where others cancer research and treatment is, as well as other diseases. this morning, we want to show you what we've learned yesterday in the hearing, but also get your thoughts on cancer and how it impacts you. this is how we divided the lines. cancer patients and survivors, (202) 748-8000, medical

professionals (202) 748-8001, and all others (202) 748-8002. you can join our conversation on wj and ons well @cspan facebook.com/cspan. cancer is the leading cause of deaths. cases --50 7% of new 57% of new cases in less developed regions with 65% of cancer deaths here. members of new cases are expected to rise to 23.6 million by 2030. from 19922014, the overall cancer death rate in the united totes fell by -- from 1990 2014, the overall cancer death rate in the united states fell by 25%.

there was an update on the cancer moonshot yesterday at this subcommittee hearing. >> the cancer moonshot is aggressively pursuing a very ambitious goal to accelerate advances in cancer prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and care. such advances include immunotherapy, and which a person's own immune system is taught to recognize and attack cancer cells. after years of research supported by nih, immunotherapy is leading to dramatic cures for cancer such as lymphoma, melanoma.and lymphom but some have proven much less responsive. i'm thrilled to tell you some of those barriers seem ready to come down. 'sst last month, 18 led by nih dr. steven rosenberg announced and immunotherapy approach that

led to a complete regression, most likely a cure, of widely metastatic breast cancer in a woman with previously universally fatal form of the disease. as always, i have to counsel patients this exists only for solid tumors like breast cancer, involves very few cases right now, and must be replicated in further studies, but without a doubt, this woman's life saving experience represent hope for millions more. as exciting as potential cures like this can be, in authorizing and funding the cancer moonshot, withisely tasked nih advancing with advancing that just cancer therapies, but also cancer care. let me tell you about a funded trial that beautifully demonstrates the progress we are making in this area. each year as many as 135,000 american women who've undergone surgery for the most common form of early-stage breast cancer face a very difficult decision, whether or not to also undergo chemotherapy to improve their odds.

thanks to a large nih funded clinical trial, we finally have some answers. and they are good answers. it turns out about 70 percent of such women actually do not benefit from chemotherapy, and a genomic test of tube or issue can rid identify them quite reliably. thean steer women from potential toxic side effects of chemotherapy, if that is possible, and still have a good outcome. on top of that -- and this will probably warm your heart because it certainly does mind -- this basically makes it not necessary to go through chemotherapy for and willhose women produce significant cost savings for our health care system, maybe up to $1 billion a year. host: that was dr. francis collins, who heads up the national institutes of health. yesterday on capitol hill, giving an update to the cancer moonshot initiative. we want to hear from you this morning. tony is in georgia.

what is the impact on you, and what are you hoping for that the government can do to combat cancer? caller: i think what of the biggest problems we have in this country today is the fact that --rybody wants [indiscernible] i think the real problem is we want cures for this. i go to a place in atlanta, university.ry i'm under what they call a clinical trial program. it is an excellent program. a lot of people don't understand it. a lot of people are qualified for this program. it doesn't cost me a dime. no out-of-pocket expense other than i have to go down there and

be monitored by these doctors, which is a great thing. they use this radiation , and they've almost killed the cancer cells in my body. now i'm waiting for an operation to have it taken out of my body. i appreciate you letting me speak. host: tony, why is this a study?l radiation as a therapy or treatment that has been used over the years to treat cancer, so why is this a clinical trial? program that's a been instituted by the medical association. it's been funded by big business. you know, ibm is one of the great contributors to this. you know, people have hope with

these clinical trials. it's more or less funded by big business. i know that don't sound good, but that's the way it is. host: ok. caller: i appreciate the tax cuts that have been given to these big businesses where they can contribute to these organizations. host: ok, tony. amelia is in covina, california, a cancer patient. caller: good morning. i was originally diagnosed in 2013 with fourth stage -- third stage breast cancer. in november of last year, it came back, and now i'm fourth stage chronic metastatic breast cancer. i have a golf sized tumor in my left lung. i have a 1.5 centimeter in my right. eye have a centimeter tumor on my liver. i have a small growth on my

tailbone. the challenge with this is i am a mutation which mutates the cancer to override any kind of chemotherapy that i'm doing. i'm on my fifth chemotherapy drug in six months. is a horrible mutation gene i inherited not from my mother, but from my father. this is the stigma with the mutation. the stigma is if your mother or grandmother did not have breast cancer, you cannot get tested for the mutation. in 2013 when i brought it up, the oncologist denied it because my mom and my grandmother did not have breast cancer. i went to another oncologist. the same thing. the national cancer institute

says. it is in the woman guess what -- says it is in the woman. what?- guess it is and the men, too. but the men are not being diagnosed. i told my sister's they needed to get tested. one of my sisters had to ask for my test results because her oncologist did not believe that i had the mutation because my mother nor my grandmother had cancer. i have another sister who is waiting for the results. her genealogy counselor saying that the stigma right now is women who don't have grandmother's and mother's -- who don't have grandmothers and mothers who didn't have it.

well, their father has. law. there should be a host: what you want government to do? caller: i want the government to give all women who were aagnosed with cancer or go to ob/gyn for pap smears to take the test regardless of their mother's and grandmother's history because my dad has the mutation. he's 78 euros old -- he's 78 years old. he does not have cancer. but i never smoked. i lead a clean life. when i found out i had third stage breast cancer, it blew me out of the water. but what was worse was when i found a out i had the mutation. only when my sister went through gene counseling and the stigma

of only being in women and not in men. host: before you go, how much does it cost you to combat your cancer? caller: of my god. one of my drugs is $23,000 a month. i thank god for my health insurance because if i did not have health insurance, i probably would be dead. there's no way in heck i could afford a $23,000 drug. it only worked for them month because my mutation overrode it and continued to let these cancer spread. u.s. i ask that because news has a story on their 'ebsite, "prescription drugs price increase last year. 32.6 billion, about 9%, was spent on oncology drugs.

another $11.1 billion was spent on treatments that help with the spy affects -- the side effects of strong chemotherapy drugs. not one oncology medication cracked the 20 most widely prescribed. cancer drugs are just extremely expensive." but go to herb in alabama. good morning to you. you are on the air. caller: yes ma'am. i completely agree with the extremely expensive. i have lung cancer. through 45 days of , four weeks of chemotherapy. , two years later, i'm going

treatmentgh the which will not cure the cancer, but will prolong my life. is -- it started off one hour every two weeks. now it is down to 30 minutes. -- that bag of up tivo bag is $18,000, and all i have is medicare and i'm on disability. host: so how much do you pay? caller: i can't pay nothing because i have no money. i mean, i have people calling me for bills that i have no money to pay. -- cancer facility

[indiscernible] is paid byrest of it my medicare, but that still leaves me about $700 per treatment every two weeks. host: ok. u.s.l add to that from the news and health story. "just a decade ago, the average cost per month of new drugs was about $3500. on average, a years worth of new drugs would cost $24,000 to $36,000 in addition to health insurance premiums. drugs aren't the only expense. also pay for drugs that mitigate the side effects of chemotherapy, pay provider

and facility fees, and lose income when they miss work or lose their jobs." patrick in modesto, california. go ahead. caller: yes, i'm calling about my wife. she passed away from uterine cancer about a year ago. cancer ism with her that these treatments they gave they wereeatments giving patients 30 years ago. they haven't come up with anything new. or just haven't been any moves forward in that type of cancer. terrible. when through 18 months of chemo .nd radiation they pretty much gave up on her because they knew there was no cure for what she had. host: patrick, you said there's no money given to work that type of cancer for treatment and

research? saying?what you're caller: for research, yes. host: the you know why? -- do you know why? caller: no i don't. i really don't know why. i'm not sure why. many of it goes towards breast cancer, which is important also, but like i said, the treatments they gave my wife worked since they were giving patients 30 years ago because they haven't come up with anything new. host: ok. on capitol hill yesterday, the director of the national cancer institute talks about the work that the group is doing defined treatments for rare cancers. take a listen to what he had to say. >> i think this is a very for patientsw

with cancer, and i think it is impacting in many ways. we artie talked about the response. maybe i will talk about the rare tumor initiative. many rare cancers are hard to study for some of the reasons that came up. they are hard to do political trials -- do clinical trials. we can have patience come to the nci and get their care here. this paradigm works, and the moonshot is trying to build on that experience. for example, in the area of a disease where different mutations that activate a driver protein in cancer, those patients are generally presented with childhood tumors. the nci has a recent trial we just presented. on the left is a slideshow in one of our scientists showing results of a trial in these patients. my executive summary was the

tumors shrink, the kids feel better, and the drug seems safe. then the parents contacted me and the responses have been marvelous. this is philip aftertreatment. his windpipe is not being compressed by the tumor anymore. it is not have the social distress of going to school with a big lesion like that. this is a sort of precancer syndrome. kind of study is a great thing for nci to take on because of the mentioned program. sayinge started off by this law, referring to the 21st century cures act, a bipartisan act signed into law in 2016, designed to help accelerate product of element and bring new development and advances to patients who need them faster and more efficiently. we are getting your thoughts on

cancer and how it impacts you. we will go to linda in fort worth, texas, a cancer survivor. good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say that i had cancer in 2013. but the doctors found out at the hospital and did surgery on me. then i had a cancer -- i mean a radiation doctor and a chemotherapy doctor come into my room every day for two weeks trying to talk me into taking them, and i told them no because i had a cousin and an aunt that went down real bad until they died from taking radiation and chemo, and that was in 2013. have my energy and my health. mow andet out and everything. i'm almost 70.

i figure if cancer is going to get me, it's going to get me. thank you. i just wanted to tell you that i've had people with cancer that took them treatments that went down. didn't come up in health. host: ok, linda. let me follow up on the national cancer institute. you heard from the doctor testified yesterday. on their website, this is what they report on their budget. "the fiscal year 2018 consolidated appropriation act foruded a $5.665 billion $275,000,471 increase aer fiscal year 2017, and $300 million in fiscal year 2018

for the beau biden cancer moonshot which was authorized in cures act.entury " caller: i had a tumor the size of a grapefruit inside my large intestine. they took away one third of my large intestine. that was 30 years ago. what got me through, i took the for aboutpy treatment a month, and i told them that i would rather die than to take these treatments and put that poison in my body. when i walked out of the chemotherapy treatments, i felt like i was 12 inches off the earth. think the only thing that got me through that is that i did use marijuana at that time.

that is what they should be checking into. i didn't lose my appetite. in fact, i gained weight. they used to call me about every five years to see if i was still alive. in 1988.30 years ago thank you. host: what would you like to see the government do? well, i would like for people not to have to go broke when i had a disease like cancer -- when they have a disease like cancer. host: ok. irving there in las vegas. more of your calls coming up. want to hear your stories this morning about cancer, the government's role, how it impacts you. ,oining us is raffaella bernal

a staff writer with "the hill" newspaper, giving us an update ontoday's till deadline reuniting immigrant families. who said this deadline? guest: good morning. the deadline was set by a judge in california. the question right now is whether the government will be able to the filthy deadline. democrats that to fulfill the debt -- to fulfill the deadline. no way itsay there is is physically impossible for the deadline to be fulfilled. host: what does that leave? how many left are there to reunite? 600 may well be reunited by today, but there are two

numbers that democrats pointed to. over 400 parents have been deported to their home countries without their children, and of course those parents will not be reminded. reunited -- be reunited. there are 37 children in custody of the government -- and this is according to democrats. the government has disputed this claim to an extent. those children, the government doesn't know who they are. they don't have positive id on them, they don't know who their parents are. clearly those children will not be reunified with their relatives. host: for the kids that will be reunited, how are they reuniting them? where are the parents? where are the kids? how are they getting them together, and then what happens? guest: that is part of the

problem. family's that the were separated were put in different types of detention. they were sent all over the country. there's no master list. the complaint against the administration has been that the family separation policy -- which is not a policy in itself -- was carried out in a way that made it nearly impossible for all of these families to now be reunited. assue is there wasn't master list and there wasn't a master plan to get them back together when they were separated. host: so what if the government misses this deadline? what will the judge do? guest: that is up to the judge, is that the

government will be in violation of a court order. many activists who were keen to point out the judge can find any sort of punishment for the government, but that isn't going to help the families that haven't been reunited. the judge can't magically make that happen. host: ok. rafael bernal, thank you for the update. you can go to thehill.com to follow his reporting. guest: thank you for having me. host: back to our conversation with all of you. cancer, theng about role of the government, what you would like to see washington do, and the health care industry's impact on you. michael is in new york, a cancer patient. good morning. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. we are listening. caller: thank you very much,

c-span. i appreciate it. i'm a cancer survivor. i go to syracuse upstate medical center. that is a cancer center. i am going to the chemotherapy and everything. it draws me right down to nothing, but in a week or two i'm right back to where i'm supposed to be. i'm getting good medication. but i think the government can do more. host: what more can they do? caller: they cannot down these prices of the medication. this is unbelievable, the prices for some of these medications. i'm covered by the state of new york, but still these prices are phenomenal. i can't believe it. intoedication they pour me, just for the pain, is thousands of dollars. i like to see the government do more about the pricing. as far as the cancer center goes in the studies of it, they are doing well. they're doing very well. they just need more support and

more money, i believe. host: what do your doctors tell you about immunotherapy and precision treatments to try to deal with your cancer? caller: i'm getting precision treatments because they irradiate me, but they should just one spot and it goes away. -- they shoot just one spot and it goes away. 9ve had i think 8, chemotherapy treatments. i know that takes my life expectancy down, but it seems to are allng in the cells over me. i will have to do the chemo until we get to another stage where i can use these other therapies and stuff. host: ok. , who heads oflieb the fda, was also at this

hearing yesterday we covered. he spoke about the benefits of precision technology for diseases like cancer. take a lizard -- take a listen. our aim is simple. develop at advanced therapies. new technologies are enabling us to track and your conditions -- and cure conditions. these advances are not cheap. there is some question as to where this advancement -- as to whether this investment is financially sustainable. new advances like regenerative medicine and gene therapy can displace costs associated with serious illness by restoring function and reducing reliance on costly medical care delivered in hospitals and nursing homes. host: if you missed yesterday's

hearing and want to learn more about where the government is in treatment and research for cancer and other diseases -- they talked about alzheimer's, other diseases that yesterday's hearing that you can go to our website, www.c-span.org. fda was there, along with the director of the national cancer institute, and dr. francis collins, who heads up the national institutes of health. we are hearing from all of you this morning. bill in wisconsin, cancer survivor. caller: hey. thank you. yes, i'm a cancer survivor. i had some kind of skin cancer on my face, and they removed it about three years ago. they said that there's still a 50-50 chance of it returning. so far there hasn't been anything like that, so i'm grateful for that. cost toll, what is the

try to treat your cancer? or what was it? caller: fortunately i'm a veteran, so the government picked up the cap. host: did you go -- picked up the tab. host: did you go to the the a for your treatment? -- to the v.a. for your treatment? caller: it was contracted out. host: what kind of treatment did you receive? what did your doctors tell you about where treatment is added and what they can do for you -- is headed and what they can do for you? caller: in my particular case, surgery was required. there's new fields of technology. host: ok. caller: i'm just hoping they continue with that. host: ok. frank in indianapolis, medical professional. good morning to you. what do you do? caller: i am a cervical

oncologist. host: what are your thoughts on the moonshot initiative and where research is headed in this country? researchgain, i think is going to be extremely costly. allersk all your c really bring up the importance of being able to afford the cost. access to medication i think is extremely important. i'm surprised that cms wasn't available as part of the panel discussion. i think it was mentioned by one of the members. i think there's always in a wall between the fda and the cms. i think the cms should be a major part of discussing about the future, especially when it comes to precision medicine. dr. gottlieb, throughout several comments -- but there was really ofdata support on the value precision, gene editing.

there's no data presented. host: can you explain for those that don't follow this and don't have a background in medicine about gene therapy? when they hear that word, what are doctors talking about? what our researchers talking about? caller: well, i'm a surgeon, but generally what they talk about is that they want to look at the cells.tent of cancer cancer cells have something wrong with the dna. right now we can monitor and record the dna. cells and to tumor there may be something that sticks out, that there is a medication to specifically target that specific defect. that is what he's talking about, the ramifications. these are dna defects. so drug companies have, for a long time, used clinical trials

to determine what drug will work with a group of people. but you look at the individual level and you have a look at finding a drug for each individual. that is precision. that is certainly a more expensive approach. think, as ao you surgeon, about the nih efforts with their all of us research program? caller: that is interesting. i signed up to participate in that clinical trial. host: what did they ask of you? caller: it is various steps. they ask for various demographics, number one. then they have a consent process. it is fairly straightforward to understand. they can use their information.

they will contact you if they want to use it for another purpose, and you cannot doubt if you -- you can opt out if you would like. host: and the goal? caller: the goal is to look at data, look at everybody's dna, the environment they live in. it is a fishing expedition to see if they can find something that pops out. there's no basics very that they are operating under, as far as i can see. host: francis collins, the doctor from nih, talked about this yesterday. if you go to their website, this is how they describe it. together data from one million or more people in the united states to accelerate research and improve health. researchers will uncover paths toward delivering precision education -- precision medication."

this is something they recently launched, and they talk about it at the hearing yesterday. for all of you interested in learning more about it. annalise in connecticut, good morning. you are on the air. caller: good morning. i have a 34-year-old grandson who lives in orlando, florida. he is on medicaid. career hunting disease. he can speak no more. he can swallow no more. he can only trek liquid. my daughter takes care of him 24 hours, seven days a week. she gets very little help from medicaid, and he is not able to get medicare because he has not been able to work for the past 10 years because of his illness. of a clinic in

tampa, and he was also seen by the mayo clinic in jacksonville. there is no treatment whatsoever for hunting disease. if you have any influence with any medical or pharmaceutical companies, please check if there is anywhere out there who could help joey. he is getting very, very weak. they tell my daughter is in the third stage that my daughter he's in the third stage -- my daughter he's in the third stage. no operation, no treatment, no medication. absolutely nothing. and she gets no help from medicaid. he needs a hospital bed. he needs a power lift. none is available. she had to get a toilet seat for him.

he needs help desperately. annalise there in connecticut. greg, what do you think about the government's role in treating and researching cancer? caller: well, i think it is an excellent source for funds, of course, on the research and. end. the research no doubt there would not be a hep-c drug if we did not have the small companies earching chemicals to do that. the others worth would be the patients themselves and how they react to the different methods and drugs.

i'm glad i could help you on that, if i did. host: ok. how is cancer impacting you? caller: i'm a terminal cancer of yeah, turn them all -- terminal cancer in my liver. it in my system for probably 20 years. i quit drinking a long time ago. the doctor was able to eliminate hep c from my system, but like i said, the damage had really already been done. tried radiotherapy and chemotherapy and all kinds of tests and stuff. that's just a tumor about the size of a tennis ball .n my liver

it's probably too big to remove, but even if they did there's so much cirrhosis that it would just be a miserable way of life for the rest of my life. so i just chose not to. right now i'm in hospice. host: and sorry to hear that. caller: that's all right. i'm not sorry. i just accepted. -- accept it. that's the best thing to do. don't cry about it. don't moan. just accept it. host: frank in illinois there. illinois come you are on the air. caller: yes, i just have one quick point. and please do not cut me off. i just want to tell everyone out there listening in the world if you have cancer or any other disease they say is not curable, they are lying. and african guy back in 1988 won 's supreme court case when he proved there is a cure for

cancer and every other disease like diabetes, high blood pressure. bi.name is dr. se the supreme court held it down. i just want to let people know that the fda and the american medical association are a bunch of liars and that there is a cure for cancer called the high alkaline diet. you can google it and research sebi, inlso google dr. african dr. who proved there is a cure back in 1988. the government is a lie, just like the president. host: we will leave it there. the house is coming in at a clock a.m. for their legislative session. before we bring you there -- at 9:00 a.m. for their legislative session. before we bring you there, jim jordan of south carolina decided to go forward with articles of

impeachment against rob rosenstein, the deputy attorney general. here is what jim jordan had to say on fox. rep. jordan: we sent numerous letters torosenstein, the deputy general. mr. rosenstein. they have been redacting information they should not have redacted. we know rod rosenstein threatened house committee intel staffers when they were trying to do our job of doing the constitutional oversight we are supposed to do. and we all know what the justice department did with the dossier. never forget, rod rosenstein signed the third renewal which was based on the dossier, which we know came from hiring individuals. the whole ordeal. we are tired of the justice department giving us the finger and not giving us the information we are entitled to to do our constitutional duty. post import, the american people are sick of it. host: that was jim jordan last night on fox.

it comes as the house is set to depart for a five-week recess and it is unlikely to pass. "meadowswrites, sidestepped a procedural move that could have forced the issue to a vote this week and laid divisions among republicans. instead, the house is leaving today for a five-week recess and it is unclear whether conservatives will attempt to force the issue when lawmakers return and september. the decision to file the articles of impeachment came they huddled with top justice department officials at the capital to discuss lingering demand for documents. other lawmakers at the meeting described the process and rejected the notion of impeaching rosenstein, but meadows and jordan said they remain dissatisfied." we will leave it there.

thank you all for the conversations that morning. we will bring you now to the house, gaveling in for their morning session. 26, 2018. i hereby appoint the honorable john r. curtis to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, paul d. ryan, speaker of the house of representatives. search the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroifment -- conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. dear god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. as the members of this people's house return to their respective districts for the august recess, grant them the again rossity to serve you as you deserve. to give of their industry and not count the cost. to fight for their convictions and not heed the political wounds. to toil and not seek for rest. to labor and not ask