an excellent addition to our nation's highest court. >> washday 14 supreme court brett kavanaugh. watch any time c-span.org or listen on the freeseas radio at -- free c-span radio app. join us for booktv's live coverage of the 18th annual national book festival. full of surprise wedding author -- pulitzer prize-winning author john , florence goodwin with leadership in turbulent times, ryan withews host andrew jackson and the miracle of new orleans, the battle that destiny.erica's debt sinc

on c-span twos booktv the ethnobotany and eastern. >> "washington journal" continues. yuval levin,st is for "commentary"ibutor magazine. you wrote "congress is weak because its members want it to be weak." what do you mean? guest: first, thank you for having me. if you think about what is going on in washington, a lot the trouble has not just started in the last couple of years. congress has had a rough order century, if you look at basic

measures, legislation, committee approval,ic congress has trouble doing its work, and it needs attention, especially when we are so inclined to look at the other side of pennsylvania avenue. a lot of the problems have been a function of congress not being together,t its act not to be a to reach accommodation. host: what are the reasons for this? guest: there are a lot of reasons, and it has been happening for a long time. one way to think about the reasons is our system assumes that everybody who is in it, whether it is some of the president, the court come are going to be aggressive and assertive in seeking out or. problems we have seen over the last quarter-century is congress has ceded power. it has written broad statutes

executives yo the branch, and members do not want to settle those problems. they do not want to deal with hard issues. they want to leave it to the president andy marte credit -- in either the credit or assign blame, based on public reaction. the constitutional system, if you look in the writings of the framers, madison in particular, the court was "congress want to dominate," and everything else is built economy. if congress wants to cede power, then the system is out of balance. and we have seen that in a lot of ways. host: our guest, yuval levin, is a former congressional staffer. he was a member of the policy stuff under george w. bush. he contributed to "commentary" magazine. the phone numbers on the bottom of the screen for our guest. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. if you are a democrat, (202)

748-8000. democrats coming your number (202) 748-8002. -- independents, your number, (202) 748-8002. we will get to your calls in a more from your writing, mr. levin. host: what are those paths? guest: we see two ways that ambition of those. the first is partisan. it is sort of familiar and predictable. politics now are much more polarized in then they were half a century ago, and that means members of congress think in terms of party at least as much in terms of institution, so when the president is their party, succeed the president's agenda. when they oppose the president, there is less thinking when it

comes to institutional prerogative. the second is more novel and a 21st century problem, which is when a lot of things and of n ecosystem that is fundamentally about entertainment or fundamentally about getting on cable television getting into the , ander of american lifem it is almost as if members run for congress in order to get a better timeslot on cable news. thee it seems to us on outside of congress is very dysfunctional, if you talk to members, they feel like they are getting out of it what they wanted out of it, which is to get a more prominent place in the theater of our politics. that undermines the institution, because they are not thinking of ambitions through the channels of the institution. host: maybe all of this is due to the simple fact that control of congress is now in question in just about every election and. -- now. guest: a wonderful political

scientist has come over a period of years now, has written that changed in the 1990's, control of congress became contested, election, thery majority party thinks it might lose control and , so it does not have much incentive to cooperate with the minority, and the minority party thinks it might take over. that means members of congress are not as focused on the core legislative work as they might be. host: let me remind folks of the numbers:. republicans, (202) 748-8001 for yuval levin. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002 is your number. calls are coming in now. we will get one from jacqueline in baltimore, democratic caller. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you this morning? host: we are doing well.

thank you. caller: my question or statement is this congress we have right becauseo dysfunctional it is the product of the tea party movement and the tea party congress. it does not know political history, congressional history, rules and procedures. know,y would rather, you transfer their obligation to someone else and not function. host: any response? at think there is a winner a lot of members of congress, especially members elected in this century, have never really seen the institution function. they have not been able to see significant pieces of legislation move through the , the way that large legislation did have for most of the 20th century, so their sense of the pattern of legislation has certainly changed. i do think that means that a

sense of what is normal, but since of how congress is supposed to work, is offkilter. it is a problem that affects both parties, but there are younger members, so it is something we have seen more in the republicans that have control of both houses. host: thomas in pennsylvania, a republican. hi, tom. aller: republican senators over a lot -- these shooting of steve scully some of the -- the shooting of steve lise, the pounding of rand paul. guest: it is hard to be elected, it is hard to serve. these people work hard for the public during their families are often far away from them. there are a lot of challenges to being a congressman, and certainly my work is not to

attack the members. it is to think about how the institution can work better, how it can get better to someplace where it is obvious center of our constitutional system. it clearly is supposed to be, and the system is designed for it to be, and that is not working at the moment your question for members is really -- how do we improve the institution in a way that allows more effectively? host: we're this problem a lot. if we can get people to get do more or be more morand effective. guest: we have to think about how to put legislation again at the center of our constitutional system, not competition with the president, not even oversight -- as important as that is -- but the core work of legislation. i think that starts with the budget process reforms. the budget process is at the

center of what congress does. the budget process we have now not been working for a long time. it demands a lot of cohesiveness and coherence out of congress, so it is not well-suited to a partisan congress. the last time we had budget process that works the way it is supposed to on paper was 1997 -- a long time ago now. every year, in one way or another, we have a dysfunctional process. should suggest to members that the process is not well-suited to the institution, so it is time for budget process reform that members could take on. members have the power. the process is not in the constitution. choice.eir own it has only been around since the 1970's, and it could change to better suit this congress. host: what was that about 25 years ago? guest: that points us a little bit to francis lee, so maybe not exactly 25 years ago, but the mid-1990's is certainly looked at when something changed in congress.

one obvious reason is republicans took over the congress, particularly the house of representatives, for the first time in a generation. when we do hear this complaint, especially from democrats, is they took over and they did not know how to run the congress. if you look at what happened at that time -- and i should say, i worked for newt gingrich in the 1990's. i am a biased observer in all of this. but really changed is the sense that everything could change in the next election, so from day one, the minority party is working to regain control. the majority party is working to retain control. and neither of them is quite focused on the work of legislation. the thing about congress, unlike european parliament, for example, our congress is designed to create accommodation, to compel compromise, and not just to allow the majority party to have its way until it loses power, but to force the parties to work together somehow.

when they are not focused on that but only on the next election, it is hard to do the core workout budget, legislation, and oversight. host: how do you feel about term limits? that: i am not a fan, and is because members need experience in the institution. it makes sense to allow members to build a better experience, the seniority, to allow it to matter. you do not constantly want new members. i see the argument for it. there is a way in which the power of established members and leaders is part of the problem, but i am not a person who believes term limits is a solution. host: independent caller. good morning. caller: good morning. great topic. i would like to point out that congress, for the most part, is made up of many lawyers. i believe that is a huge problem when you have so many lawyers in one room, usually nothing good comes out of the. it is like going to a board or going to some type of

office meeting, and you talk a one1000 ways to pick up dollar bill, and then when the meeting is over, everybody just steps of the dollar bill, walks out, and the meeting is over, and everyone says "why did we even have been eating?" -- the meeting?" it also seems like we have done ed down society to such a point where all we have are dummies walking around who recite the constitution, don't have any idea of how the country operates justould operate, and looks to the next person to say "not me, not me, i am not empowered." and here is what we get -- we get a watered-down system of everybody who is just ignorant and letting everybody do what they want to do. and then when you get the lawyers in the room, it just becomes a mess. let's be honest -- society has actually gone backwards since

the mid-1990's, and you connected to the gentleman, i 1990's? --y the i think it is because technologies came into vogue and take over, and it is not a zero-sum game during you want to rely on technology? you get dummies. look at the school system. no one wants to teach physics anymore. you go to college, and what do they want to do? statues, classes on why we need transgender bathrooms -- that is important, but so is running a country. no budget for 25 years? we call ourselves a superpower with no budget? host: thank you for calling. guest: there is a lot there. i have a feeling he could have gone a lot longer. host: he included technology. guest: blaming the problem

on lawyers is a very old tradition in our country. it has always been full of lawyers, and people say where the best things about system, it originated with james madison, who oddly, was not a lawyer among the founders and framers. most of them were lawyers. in some cases, less so now. there are more physicians in congress and other kinds of professionals, but surely, politics attracts some lawyers. there is a lot of truth to that. started toe caller get to is the sense that members of congress are focused now on problems other than immediate legislative concerns, and i think that is certainly, again, it has always been true, too, but technology on the one hand and the ways in which members find their audience, find their

prominence, whether it is wanting to be visible on social media, wanting to be visible on cable news. a lot of this defines the ecosystem of politics in which they exist. we have a situation in which members think of what they are doing as working to get prominence rather than working exquisitely on legislation. i think congress is just focus on other things. you have a life members of congress behaving as though they are outsiders. they cannot wait to get off the floor of the house or senate, find a camera, and tell everyone how terrible washington is. everybody in washington wants to act as an outsider. we have the president of the united states acting as an outsider, complaining about the department of justice, which he technically runs. it is a failure to the ownership , to accept that you are an insider, not an outsider, and you have a job to do is certainly a problem in congress and a lot of our institutions. host: more of your writing --

"to some extent, this is because the members are happy to pass off the responsibility to make hard choices, but they do this not only when it comes to unpopular measures they don't want tied to them. as a white house staffer in bush administration, i frequently encountered member requests for executive activ actions in propy omains."ive d guest: during the obama years, a lot of people's expended a lot to take steps that were not fundamental legislative sense and onto require congressional action. steps, they found that it did require congressional action, and the president's acts were thrown out. we found that also in the

where a lot of republican some of whether it is on religious liberty, spent a lifetime: on the administration to do things rather than finding ways for congress to do that. host: scott is on the line. good morning. caller: good morning. having twice run for congress myself as a green, i feel that lack of leadership and certainly lack of progressive reform, which we desperately need in the united states, is due to the absence of a strong third-party. i feel as long as people continue to imprison their votes in the conservative two-party lockbox, we're going to continue to have that absence of strong leadership. thank you for my opportunity to comment. host: scott, while we have you, what led you to run in the first place, and do you think he will run again? and 2010,ran in 2008

and that was the first green in the second congressional connecticut congress to run historically. i would consider running again. we have some good people who are continuing to maintain the valid that i got through positioning originally, and we had a congressional candidate in the second congressional district in connecticut now for the last decade. i would consider running again, but i would like to see people free their minds up in terms of their votes where they are not just voting for the lesser of or evils, the democrats republicans, with both are, in my view, conservative parties. a previous guest on your show talked about women in politics and how there is a movement now to get more women and people of color in politics, and of course the green party has had its presidential candidate, cynthia mckinney and jill stein twice, so we have been way ahead of the curve on these issues.

as long as people continue to vote democrat or republican and limit themselves to that, then it is going to restrict third-party access. and of course the media plays into this as well. i notice you have independents -- you don't have green party as a third option for your calling, as an example. certainly when iran, the media did not give me the attention. i did not have the money that the democrats and republicans had. i had a position to get on the ballot originally, which the democrats and republicans do not have to do in their elections. stackedas the deck is against third-party candidates, it will be difficult for people to get into congress, and i feel like that is essential for the tie-breaking changes that we need. host: scott, thank you for your participation. interesting points. issue, therennial decision of our two-party system. the court reasoned that happens

in the united states is you get 50% plus one, and you win the office, and that is a system that creates two parties. ofre have been ideas, some them race quite recently, for trying to change that in congress in particular by having multimember districts -- having several members run to represent one district. that can actually be done without an amendment. the same can change that. there is a movement in maine. to do that. would have more proportional representation and he would certainly have a higher chance of getting the kinds of members in both major parties, more liberal republican some more conservative democrats, and also some third-party members of congress. i think that kind of reform is the considered in part because of the sins that congress is very -- sense that congress is very polarized right now, and the polarization is part of what

is creating the problem, but the dream of third parties have always run into the wall of the basic structure of our electoral system, and i think that is probably unlikely to change. host: bruises on the line in mississippi, democratic caller. hey, ruth. caller: good morning. the congress that we have has not function in quite some time, and i think they have gotten there and forgotten about the people of the country. we are waiting for them to give us something to help us, and they are only helping themselves. all they talk about is fighting each other. against thean democrats, the democrats against the republicans. what about the people? we need them to make some order of their and give us something, the jobs and stuff. they talk about they are giving us all the jobs, and we still

have people who cannot eat. they are not making anything happen. and now the republican party is the old democrats. they done switch over to the republicans. the republicans is not what it used to be. they got the old democrats done switch their party and went to republicans. they still doing the same thing they have been doing for the last 40 years. host: ruth, thank you for calling. yuval levin? guest: one complaint about congress is it is disconnected. it is not rooted in the public members do not spend enough time with voters, there are not enough temples for members to hear from voters. another complaint of voters is heremembers are not enough. they do not spend enough time in washington to be able to work together in the way that this caller would like them to. complaints these about the tension with one another. we expect members to be fully representative of their voters, but we also expect members to be

here and part of the institution. it makes it hard to be a member of congress. but the caller made an important point. our congress really exists to compel accommodation,'s work together, even when they don't .ant to parties are not what rating and finding accommodations. it is important to figure out ways to compel accommodation. not to get rid of all obstacles and majoritarianism, but to force durable cooperation. host: how would you describe the current relationship between president trump and congress? guest: it is a son fro

dysfunctional in a lot of ways. the president has not provided congress with the kind of leadership that precedents often do and say here are the three or four things, that i would like to do. i think the congress has found this president, as a lot of the country has come a very confusing and very frustrating, and so republicans run the congress, the president of the congress, sos the they are facing a very strange prospect of a government shutdown at a time when one party runs both of the elected branches. there is a very difficult relationship between the conversation the president. a lot has to do with the nature of the president's approach to his job, at least as much to the nature of the congress' function. host: what the relationship change it democrats take control of congress, and how so? guest: it would change. you would have much more of analysis on oversight of the

president. the relationship between the branches would become much more hostile and confrontational. maybe the president would look for ways to advance some ideas the president might pass, but a democratic-led congress and this particular president would have a lot of trouble. host: our next call is from columbus, ohio, an independent caller. good morning. [no audio] caller: hi. we are a nation drowning in pain. are largelyongress in congress are largely untouched with the realities of the american people. the vetting and campaigning processes keep people with experiential knowledge out of congress, and the people who are in congress are usually looking to come to congress with a probably perfect record, who come from two-parent families and subdivisions and have never

had to experience the pain that we actually are experiencing. talking about the opioid crisis, we have a huge homeless problem that nobody wants to talk about, no one cares about. what i would like to see from my members of congress is their committing to, at least trying to gain some experiential knowledge about our experiences. i read an article about a mayor who spent a week with a homeless person, and he actually went and stayed in a homeless shelter, he experienced their lives as they are. i think too many members of congress are completely out of touch and are not representing us as they should be doing in a representative democracy. are not actually addressing the issues that the american people need you to address. we need you to address the opioid epidemic. we need you to address the homeless crisis, rapes going on, sexual assault against women.

none of these things are being talked about on a national scale, and that includes race relations, which is a huge problem currently. no members of congress except maybe members of the congressional budget office are set to deal with those realities. i want my members of congress to step up to the plate to find out what life is like and what they can do to improve it. host: amanda, thank you. guest: the concern that they are not representative is a long-running concern of american life. the members of the electorate, as we understand it, they try to speak to voters, get members to pay attention to a particular concern, use the vote and be engaged. but the caller is .2 communities communities,g to making sure they are concerned .ith experiences our politics right now is

dysfunctional in a number of ways, but it is certainly true that one of those ways is we're not focused on some of the problems that are foremost for a lot of americans. host: one more passage from your piece in "commentary" magazine, mr. levin. this particularly caught our attention. you wrote "the congressional reformers should consider whether transfers he has gone too far, and whether limits might be placed on the televising of all floor and committee action. a much more robust role for committee work in setting a schedule for congressional activity and the drafting and revising legislation would also give members a more legitimate forum for prominence and therefore more of a chance." so you are saying it is t bad? guest: [laughs] i love c-span. a good thing is a matter of degrees. whichcerbates the way in

congress thinks of their jobs, as putting on a show for a television audience, and so there has to be some spaces, and any deliberative institution, there are really deliberative spaces, places for members to talk to each other, and we do so in private. for members to kind of back away from what used to be delivered if spaces, but the floor of the house has never been a deliberative space. but committee work used to be quite different, and i do think that there are reasons to think about ways of getting members of congress, a formal way to gather in places that are not as televised as the committee spaces on the floor now. that is not an argument against c-span or against transversely, but it suggests that we need places for members to deliberate in private. right now, it is only before

midnight, before the deadline runs out, and it turns out that is the way that a lot of it gets done. host: our next caller is in michigan. caller: i think congress, they are going to wrong way with this president. they need to check this president on everything he do. some of them is doing it, but the democrats, the only one that i know out of the whole system, out of the democrats -- i mean the republicans is john mccain. mccainm so glad john been checking them. i feel sorry for john mccain. i am hoping god just heals him, and he returns back to congress. even me being a democrat, i like john mccain. his views is good.

and then congress, they need to where we canools separate these kids, because pushing all of these kids up in one classroom ain't doing it for these teachers. i work in a school district, and i feel frustrated these teachers are getting. that is my comment. host: all right. final thoughts from our guest. guest: thanks very much. our system is based on the assumption that the institutions are going to resist one each congress,that because it is congress, will fight for power from the president. one of the waste the congress has gone off the rails in the last half-century, in some ways, as we said what we has partisan alignment, and we do not have enough oversight -- fundamentally, there is constitutional oversight. members of congress insisting their prerogatives be respected, regardless of party. we certainly need more of

that, and congress has let that go. host: here is the headline again "congress is weak because its members want it to be weak." contributor to "commentary" magazine, and you can read more at commentarymagazine.com. guest: thank you. host: coming up, we will take you to the democratic national committee meeting in chicago, where it is dealing with superdelegates. a major change is underway and very well may pass today to curb their influence in the future. as democrats vote. you will see the light seen here in chicago. we will join it at 10:00 a.m. eastern time, and we will stay with it for the rest of the day will do open phones in a couple of minutes. republicans, you can call (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002.

you can talk about anything that you would like. in the meantime, we would like to remind you that our aewsmakers" guest will be member of the center for american progress. questions about the manafort and gates cohen developments and prospects for impeachment. >> how should democrats respond to paul manafort, his conviction , and also the guilty pleas by michael cohen, who was the president's longtime personal attorney. how do you think democrats should respond? neeta: there are two issues here. one is both of these cases actually see the idea of a culture of corruption in washington. democrats have been talking we haveat closer, and instances that obviously the

news around duncan hunter and chris collins, to members of the house of representatives, who were indicted for basically self -dealing. i think that picture of the swamp that is invading washington, i think the public rightly feels, helping themselves and not the public. i do think this is connected party strongly to the russian investigation writ large, and that is a situation in which news seems to be accelerating and getting closer and closer. candidatesi think are supposed to really talk about what is happening in washington. i think the russian investigation is an important one. what is happening in our democracy, so i think it is vital. >> is it useful for democrats to talk about impeachment?

is it hard for them not to talk about impeachment, if it is in the back of their minds? how should democrats approach the impeachment question? neera: i think the question here is -- what are the facts? it is possible. the president himself talked about impeachment and its impact on the market. the impeachment process is one that starts with an investigation. what we learned this week is that the house and senate are incapable of holding the president accountable in republican hands. i think absolutely, democrats, if they take the house back, the senate back, they take every chamber, they should start an investigation. the impeachment process is the end, really, of that. the investigation is what starts the process. and absolutely, i think the american people are wondering why no one in washington are neither house, is going to even that we have facts

in front of us. host: you can see the entire en ofview with neera tand center for american progress, she is president and ceo, on " at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow, with a repeat at 6:00 p.m. eastern time. as mentioned, we will take you to the dnc meeting in chicago. the president tweeting this morning. but first, we will take some calls. stephanie in pennsylvania, independent caller. hi there. caller: i have never heard on the news any place about the tax scam and the overseas tax. half of the 20% that they will pay in this country, if they get their earnings overseas, they are only taxed at 10.5%. another thing is about the immigration.