derek willis on congressional gridlock. onn we speak to henry nau his article balancing nationalism and globalism. ♪ host: good morning. welcome to "washington journal." this past tuesday selection put a focus on the current divide between urban, rural and suburban voters. as the senate stays republican behind rural votes and the house democrat. we want to know what you think about this split in our country and what it means for politics. if you are a rural voter, call in at 202-748-8000.

if you're a suburban voter, 202-748-8001. voter,are an urban 202-748-8002. you can always reach us on andal media, on twitter facebook. analysts of all stripes have been looking at this divide all week long, trying to figure out what it means for the selection and upcoming elections. reid wilson writes this. a deeply divided electorate delivers a split verdict on president trump's first two years in office on tuesday. votershand, suburban delivered a stern rebuke to an unpopular president. republican incumbents who embraced trump and those who sought to distance themselves.

democrats saw big gains in midwestern gubernatorial races. on the other hand, rural voters stormed to the polls and virtually unprecedented numbers, delivering once again for the president devoted for -- they voted for in 2016. post" "the washington writes something similar. tuesday's results highlighted the fact that the focal point of the struggle for electoral superiority over the next two years and beyond will be in the suburbs. democrats dominate the big urban center and trump hitting a reconstituted party has grip ond the gop's rural america. that leaves one place of true

competition -- the suburbs. we want to know what you think about this. joeave our first call from in iowa. he is a rural voter. good morning. caller: i would like to say that all the republican rural voters are brainwashed by rush limbaugh and the progressives on a.m. radio have no counter to that. that's why they have favored the republican party. needs to be's bigger of the house because trump endorsed or -- needs to be speaker of the house. host: at a postelection discussion, william galston discussed tuesday's midterm results. he cited huge gap between metropolitan and small-town voters and its implications. [video clip]er.com/cspanw

>> i have come to conclusion based on research in the u.s. and u.k. and europe that the gap between metropolitan voters on the one hand and small town and isal voters on the other perhaps the dominant political phenomenon of our times. because iteful gap correlates with economic well-being, with education, with cultural out block. in the days of pluralist dominance in american political science, the dominant paradigm was madisonian, the technical crosscutting, you might be with people on one point but against them on another, so coalitions would form an reform because people

were cross pressured. increasingly, people are not cross pressured. where they live turns out to be community they live in turns out to be absolutely formative. here are some statistics for you. among urban voters in this election, democrats got 65% of the vote and republicans got 32%. democrats got, 42% and republicans got 56%. suburbs were split down the middle, 49% and 49%. they are the battleground. there are all sorts of indications that that split also tracks geographical lines. host: let's go to a call from washington, d.c. an urban voter.

good morning. caller: good morning to you. i want to thank c-span. your coverage during the midterms was wonderful. all the debates. i must thank you. i may 24/7 listener to c-span radio app. -- i am a 24/7 listener to c-span radio app. i think the democrats are fabulous. they competed in areas all over the country and i believe that is the way politics works. i don't think we need to worry. we need to have good policy. it should entail people all over the country. that's what democrats are doing. nancy pelosi is fabulous. she is the best. i look forward to her. she is just fabulous. host: how can the democrats do better in rural areas? caller: our message going

forward i believe will certainly be appealing and attractive to rural voters. i believe that. e believe the democrats' messag will be attractive to them. host: lee calling from west virginia. a rural voter. good morning. caller: yes. gives all theege states to votes for their senators and their house of representatives -- west virginia will be decreased from five to four. towe allow the urban part overdo the rural part, the only ones that will pick the president will be the big cities. rural,why i'm more for

an independent voter. host: what we are seeing in the country is it seemed like the democrats have a lock on the urban voters and the republicans have a lock on the rural voters. how can either side appeal to the voters not in their block? senate has thehe right to confirm the judges. doing two big and the house sends them four bills, they don't even vote on the four bills and have a debate regardless of who's in the senate. they need to actually do their job. host: paul calling from appleton, wisconsin. a suburban voter. good morning. caller: good morning. i think the reason there's a big

divide, rural voters don't have cable tv. a lot of them just watch satellite tv, the cheapest package you can get is fox news. they get brainwashed from fox news all day long, they sit there and watch trump tv all day long. host: do you think there can be anything done to unify rural and urban voters? those appear to be the two swing spots. caller: i don't know. i wish the rural voters would find other things out and every time they are voting republican, they are voting against their own interests. they lose their social security and medicare. these people don't realize what's going on. host: it seems like your area

democrats,times with sometimes republican. do you vote for one party over the other or back-and-forth? caller: i'm usually just democrat. i know what the republicans stand for. all they stand for is the superrich, giving tax cuts to the billionaires like jeff bezos. that's why we can't afford an infrastructure bill because they gave all the money to the rich. host: dallas calling from lewistown, montana. dallas is a rural voter. good morning. caller: good morning. i am a rural voter and i do have a bachelors in science. of aboutn a town 10,000 people. we were fortunate enough to vote for the initiative federal tax increase on tobacco was goingas if that

to be any kind of significant funding source for our infrastructure. it's expensive. i think the public realized that, are voters realize that and we voted that down. that initiative didn't come from within montana. that came from up above, from who knows where. it has happened in other states where they recognize medical marijuana and they want to start taxing and controlling everything that comes into a person's state. the fact that the rural voters you mentioned it only performed -- he was vote quoting percentages.

i think montana was a contributor to that increase in voting tester as into office again. it was a close race. as these things often are. the gentleman from west virginia hit it on the head. we don't look at the details of things because they are so perverse that it confuses people. all we have to do is go to that that whatever they are trying to push down our throats and his research and read for ourselves -- do some research and read for ourselves. that takes some effort. the people in the rural areas are making more effort than ever to do this. we are coming together in town , the shakers and movers

in our community who can help us get to where we need to be. we stood up and said we are keeping tester as our senator. that was a big deal for us. what a great relief. dale was our state auditor when we lost millions of dollars. our current governor was also replaced. neither one of them could give us a trail on where the millions of dollars went. know" like the "i don't kind of routine. ofyou don't have that trail who did what, it is difficult to

determine the value of the effect of funds. host: do you think you will ever have an incumbent with the urban voters in your state? caller: i should have and will have. i used to live in st. louis. i understand that urban vote. is thedon't understand give me generation. moneyy soon, if that slips out of the give me who don't, the people have the resources to pay for all the housing and all this, they will come to terms one day that guy is not doing it for me. maybe i do need to stick with

the democratic party. there is commonality between the two, but they don't have any idea. we need bridge builders between these areas. up to presentnd themselves as a candidate. when we get things like that done, we get tester, we get people like tester, we get the democrats in place that we need. we get the people that we need. host: blaine calling from michigan. a rural voter. good morning. caller: good morning. aller, wet last c all feel a little understanding of what the democrats' thought line is.

rural voters are a bit more intelligent than the urban voters because some of us actually have jobs. two or three, in fact. which is why we sometimes can 't vote. project where we have all the community services there. people came in and collected food and got information about what was available to help them in their struggling career. most of the people actually really needed it. they had certain things wrong and they were not altogether 100%. and i actuallyn volunteered my time. some people don't realize that republicans do that.

i'm offended by the fact that people say we don't care about people. that idea was stolen by the democratic party. the democrats will tell you one thing and keep -- their main thing this year has been impeach trump, raise taxes. poor people pay 20% of the taxes. rich people pay a lot more. the rich will be rich no matter what because they are already rich. republicans want a doorway to allow people to get more income. do you see any commonality between the rural votes and suburban votes in the urban votes -- and the urban votes? caller: suburban, perhaps. urban, no way.

i've lived all over the united states. i see no commonality between us and the urban people at all. look at who they vote. new york, for example. every singleario time in york city. -- new york city. minneapolis, same way. all the votes are being skewed by the urban regions. have nothing in common with me. be safe out there. host: debbie calling from georgia. debbie is a rural voter. caller: good morning. i want to say that most rural voters are considered dumb and like this earlier caller who said we must not have cable tv. what rural voters are

tired of dealing with. the reason most rural people are against democrats is their platform, they take god out of the platform, they are pro-murder. as long as the democrats are for these horrendous things, i will never vote democrat again. my father was a lifelong democrat. you would be rolling over in his grave right now. host: billy calling from virginia beach, virginia. philly is a suburban voter. voter.y is a server been -- billy is a suburban voter. caller: i'm moving back to connecticut. personally, i was thrilled to to be the elaine won

representative here because she's a democrat. really, even, though there was a lot of controversy about scott, this is a republican area and i'm a democrat, so i was very happy. plus, i voted for tim kaine. i lived in sandy hook, connecticut. there was a terrible shooting. i grew up there. i also lived in urban -- i voted the same way. since trumpn ever has been in office because the republicans refused to do anything about the horrible things he does. everthe worst thing that's happened to this country since 9/11 as far as i'm concerned. at least now, thank god, we will have some check on him.

no matter where i live, i'm going to vote the same way. that't vote for anybody isn't for stricter gun laws. this goes on week after week with these horrible mass shootings. the republicans have blood on their hands because they refused to do anything even after sandy hook. they didn't want to vote for a background check. they have got to do something. this is ridiculous, what's going on. they are not protecting the people in this country if they don't vote for stricter gun rules. charlie cookesday, did a recap of the 2018 midterm elections.

in this clip, he talked about the oklahoma fifth congressional district. [video clip] always,was -- there's and people would ask, ok, where is the surprise? there always is one. i will confess that the fifth district of oklahoma wasn't really where we were looking. this is where steve russell was first elected in 2014. it's oklahoma city and the suburbs immediately around oklahoma city. yes, it isly -- oklahoma, but it has a 41% either minority or mixed race

population there. it is the state capital, the university -- it's not just your typical southern district, but wow, i didn't expect this. -- she's an attorney. this is a district that mitt romney be president obama by 18 president obama by 18 points. president trump beat hillary by 13 points there. host: on twitter, fred writes --

duane calling from jamaica, new york. duane is an urban voter. caller: good morning, c-span. that same comment there, of course we are going to think that way. who would want to live in rural america where it takes you 25 minutes to get to the hospital? it doesn't make sense to me. urban orrural -- suburban areas paying more taxes or contributing more to the health of voters. you can call me an urban person. i don't care. i wouldive in urban, rather live in an urban city then rural america where there's nothing up there. -- than rural america where

there's nothing up there. it's a shame that we are being divided by politicians. it shouldn't be that way, but that's the way it is. if you listen to the gentleman from michigan, it is heartbreaking, and you have 45 making it even worse. host: tracy calling from sugar land, texas. tracy is a suburban voter. caller: i'm a white woman who is educated who they say isn't for trump, but actually, i am. the only divide is what your needs are. if you own a small business, you are going to be for trump because he's giving us less regulation, actually making our business is better. we had a year we didn't make any profit, first time in 35 years.

want to hear things that benefit them. urban voters want to hear things that benefit them. it's about what people need. it's not necessarily where they live. i've always been a republican and i lived in illinois. now, i live in texas, mostly republican, but have always been a republican ever since i was a young kid. host: you said that about urban and rural. what do suburban voters need? caller: it depends on their own needs. if they can't find jobs, they need jobs. if they can't keep their businesses running, they need help with that. i don't think it matters if i live out in the country, which many of my friends do, so they

would be considered rural -- they are not necessarily thinking, oh, i'm living in the country, they are thinking about what they need and want from the government. beybe better roads, may better hospitals. that is a county thing. if there's a hospital in your county, you pay taxes, they build the hospital. i don't think there's a difference. host: what is causing this divide? divide or ideological racial divide? caller: i don't think it's a geographical divide. here in texas, when i was growing up in rural illinois, race was never an issue. i had friends from all different

nationalities, color, whatever. -- i havers next door black neighbors i've been friends with for 35 years. i think the media is making the divide. i wish they would stop. people talk about fox news. listen to cnn. they are just as bad. they are all bad. you have to vote for somebody that is going to help your life and has principles you believe in. i don't know if there's a divide. , all of a california sudden i'm going to become democrat? no, that's not how it works. host: lacey calling from bristol, tennessee. lacey is a rural voter. caller: i don't really

understand the divide thing. to me, i'm sure there is division between the rural and but i calledrs, myself a rural voter, but i live in bristol, i'm 10 minutes from a hospital. , i part i do not understand lived in west virginia in the time, they at that were all democrat. all of a sudden, when eisenhower , people went republican. of course, he brought the boys home. there were no jobs. time of mye worst

life. there was a recession. now, there'shere nothing you can do with him. keep -- i voted democratic all my life. this man, nothing can be done with him. you can try, but he knew what he came for, and he is accomplishing in -- accomplishing it. this man is a thug. host: let us go from -- let us go to gym from san diego, california. here is -- he is a world voter. caller: i thought this was where we lived and not political parties. let me give me -- let me give you my view of the issue. rural person is more reliance on being

self-sufficient. we have wells and take care of our own water. we take care of our own systems that have to be taken care of. take not rely on others to care of us unless it is a problem. if you live in suburbanite or the city, you call the plumber and the plumber takes care of your problem. my point is, this is not a republican or democrat issue, issue. a cultural i take care of my house and have my own weapons to take care of me. if i cannot take care of me, i called the sheriff. it takes about half an hour for the sheriff to get there. the self-reliant, that is issue i think you should be discussing, not democratic or republican parties. thank you for taking my call. host: let us go to penney calling from -- penny coming --

calling from missouri. caller: good morning. that unitesave more us than divides us, because we all want living rage -- wage jobs, good education, to be able to retire with dignity. in my state, we have gerrymandered districts and save seats. they finally fat -- past eight voter id law. folks get the truth because they usually just watch fox news or listen to wing wing rating -- right radio. another thing about rural voters -- preach a lot of politics in the churches. that many of think

them think that donald trump was put here by god to do what he was doing. i think the fourth district of hasouri, in august missouri got to go to vote about we did not want to be turned into a right to work state. the representative is in congress trying to pass a national right to work. they just vote against their own interest. her lasthelmingly won election. i do not know. it is kind of weird. i just think that you do not get the truth. i do not think you get the truth. maybe that is the divide there. we need to have fair elections, and the truth needs to be told.

host: let us go to marry calling from pennsylvania. mary is an urban voter. caller: i think people do not defundingat we are the united states. the revenue is created in the urban areas. we supplement any benefits to the rural and the suburban areas. this is because of where they live. createduse the jobs are in the urban areas. they have to realize that we where weir tax formula and legalcitizens immigrants in this country where they can pay into social security and medicare.

we are defunding these programs that arehe people illegally in this country that are working primarily in the suburban and rural areas cannot pay taxes. and they cannot enter into medicare or medicaid. that this make sure -- these businesses are actually paying into these programs, because the only way an undocumented or illegal immigrant who has overstayed their visa can get medical treatment in this country, they have to go to the emergency under the emergency medical treatment act. the insurance companies will not

ensure undocumented people or people that have overstayed their visa. that is by law. farm or aave a suburban area that are only hiring these people, you are going against the law, federal required that is you pay into social security and medicare. -- because i am a retired state worker, we have paid trillions of dollars under the emergency medical treatment act for undocumented people, and people that do not have insurance and have overstayed their visa. this is the primary problem that we are having in this country. we cannot continue this program if people are not paying their taxes, and not paying into the

system. this is only tax avoidance. this is what we are up against. i have contacted not only republicanshat also regarding this is -- but also republicans regarding this issue. if people in rural and suburban areas want to hire undocumented people, they need to find a separate pool to pay for the people that they employ. that is my comments. host: let us go to bob from new jersey who is a suburban voter. good morning. caller: good morning. i have got to tell you a story. when i was in school they taught us to open textbook savings accounts and save money. then they showed us how interest would do. savings was 5.25%.

they showed you how it would grow. and heatching my dad made us watch the evening news. he said for half an hour we had to watch the news. i am watching the news with my dad and they showed a thing where john kennedy signed a law taxing interest on past book savings. i started to cry and he said what. my dad yelled up stones and said martin -- yelled upstairs and said we have the first republican in my house. my mom came down and asked what was wrong. she says do not worry, what ever they take and they'll give it back to you. that is how i knew i was a republican. that was the beginning of it. lady that was on talking about paying for all of these things, she is 100% right.

people need to think of the country and not the party. what is good for america and not the party. look at how they derailed bernie sanders. it is so upsetting how people are loyal. even though their party is corrupt and wrong, just like me. republican, but i did not vote for bush because -- or at least the second one. i have it in me to see right from wrong. you have democrats out there and you could tell them four and four is eight, and because president obama says it is nine it is not eight. this loyalty thing is hurting the country. host: do you see a lot of your neighbors in your suburban area who feel the same way you do, or are you unique? caller: right now i am in the

center city because i met a woman i am engaged to. i will tell you, these people in philadelphia, you cannot talk to them or reason with them. there was a time i spent in the , throughand i was able this one conversation, to convert three liberal nurses with this one story. was doinghen obama the stimulus package. i said one governor is going to take the money and one governor is not. is there a bad governor or a good governor? they all said that the one that takes the money is a bad governor. the one that takes the money has to hire 1000 people. in two years when the money runs out, guess what, who is the good governor or the bad governor? when the money ran out in two

years, the governor that took the money said what am i going to do? i cannot lay these people off. i will raise property taxes. when i told him what would happen it was like the lightbulb came on and they were thinking, i never thought of it like that. i said you would better start youking -- you have -- should start thinking about it because of your taxes. socialism works until you run out of other people's money. the other lady says it is right. the news media is wrong. at whate were to look is going on in venezuela, people are fighting for food out of the trash. stope need to wake up and thinking of the party and think of what is good for this country. host: let us go to a caller from chicago who is an urban voter. caller: good morning.

i want to say that i live in chicago, in cook county illinois , one of the highest taxed areas in the country. a have high property taxes, high combined sales tax of over 10.25% with all of the sales taxes for purchases. we get our money's worth. , whene 24/7 snow cleaning winter rolls around, the streets are never solid with ice. people get to work even if it is a blizzard out there, because our city funds snow removal. we have 24/7 public transportation and economy. people can get to and from work because the money we pay we get back in service is very the park -- back in service. the park system, the library

movies and can check books out for free because you are paying for it. we have community college for high school graduates, our taxes pay for that. they get free two years of community college. once to complain about taxes and they do not want to pay. have you expect to fund the projects -- how do you expect to fund the projects you want? democrats ofccuse being welfare queens, but chicago subsidizes the entire state. caterpillar was the longest term employer and they left and moved up to chicago because the executives wanted to be near an airport. be area provide that for them?

because they did not want to pay taxes. host: how do you get people in moral areas to understand your viewpoint, and how will you understand the viewpoint of people in rural areas who are opposite? they do not want to pay extra taxes. had you get them to understand your viewpoint? caller: you cannot. it seems like when you try to point out -- i understand there is concern about the tax money being misused, but that is why voters have to be vigilant. are constantere complaints about property taxes or if seniors or homeowners should have extension. we do not have rent control, but you can still find affordable housing in the city. just based on individuals, they want to make sure an apartment gets rented out to them for $600

or $700 a month. i went to university in a rural area. it is a give and take. you have to pay into it if you want to get something out. and all of the rural areas in southern illinois that have been decimated along the river, and the waterfront. it is beyond rural. all the young people leave. they do not stay, there are no jobs there. how do you pull and employers? you have to have infrastructure and public services. it is difficult because, if your property is worth very little you will pay a small amount in property taxes, and they need millions of dollars to improve the roads and lighting. cannot -- you cannot make

republicans in the rural areas see that. they want to say it is corruption and misuse of money, atch is true, because look the federal government. all of these congressmen last year voted to maintain their sexual harassment hush fund and taxpayers has no idea -- have no idea who are paying out settlements. areas have-- rural no money to build a high school, to fix the roofing, fix flooding. what can you do? pitted urban against rural and i blame the politicians and then the people for feeding into that. they do not realize that it is one state and the entire state has to help each other.

the urban areas will be funding the rural counties and there ofuld be an acknowledgment's that. -- acknowledgment of that. you want to blame the urban areas for all of the vine -- violence and this and that when the urban areas sustain all of these rural counties with state tax dollars that we pay into. host: let us go to woodstock, connecticut. i seem to have lost them. let us go to danny from atlanta, georgia. caller: how are you doing. i want to tell everybody about a divide:led "the great retro versus metro" by john sterling. we have to take the states of new york and new jersey and no over to california.

every dollar that those three states pay into the federal government, they get back fence -- $.50. new york, new jersey, and california, every dollar that they pay into the federal government, they get back $.50. we will take a state like oklahoma and mississippi, and every dollar that they send in, they get back one dollar -- $1.48. and mississippi, for every dollar they get close back to two dollars. it is about the only red state -- texas sends in one dollar and they probably get about $.98 or $.97 back. just like the last caller, the actual blue state, those liberal and socialist states are funding

the you -- the entire united states. ,ll of the east coast cities you go to oregon and washington, every dollar that they send in, they get less back. arkansas, mississippi, and tennessee get back more in federal dollars than they send in. go to the book. go check the federal government. this is not anything i'm making up. americanled "the great drug but -- divide: retro versus metro" by john sterling. new york, new jersey, california, every dollar that they send in they only get back $.50. are you people serious about socialism. they are carrying mississippi, arkansas, tennessee and missouri.

please, but the facts up. you can show the facts. i'm sure that c-span has these charts. show what every state pays in and what they get back. host: in her election night concessions be, heidi -- speech --di heitkamp sounds a worry a warning about the effects of rural places on the nation. [video clip] >> finally we took a something in the rural areas. i want to sound a warning. times are tough on the farm. when times are top, they of it becomeh on the farm they tough in our country. we have to have a policy that works for the farmers of our state, and that may not always

be following one political party. it may not always be making sure that you are supporting a political idea as opposed to the right idea. that the president, in particular, will not take this example of why his tariff policy is a good idea. it is wrong. host: let us go to st. paul, minnesota and a suburban voter. caller: good morning. and enjoy it hearing you you have a great sense of humor. i see that come forward in c-span. i am in a unique position. urban and i live in the suburbs now. my girlfriend lives in the country. i see different perspectives.

what i think we miss and a lot of these discussions is not looking at what we share in common. what we share in common is the u.s. constitution. point inld be a focal a lot of discussions as opposed to what divides us. part of the problem i have with questions along what divides us, and it is not just urban and rural, it is at this it he, y andion, -- it is ethnicit religion. in a free society, government at all levels cannot be all things to all people. citizens keepas asanding more of wants opposed to needs, we will have these battles.

most important about this country is the ability tovote, the chart our own course as individual citizens, and to work together. that is why local ends -- that is why i like local politics more than federal politics. if we concentrate on the constitution and what are our needs and not wants we will have this. i look forward to seeing you in the future. host: let us go to starks, louisiana. good morning. caller: good morning. i think all of this goes back to the educational system. i am 66. we hadwas in school classes like americanism versus communism. we had history and civics. kids are not taught that. once we ship them off to college

they have professors who are people from the sts, total liberals from the 60's. they do not seem to be teaching anything about socialism. that is one of the problems. as far as rural people only wanting fox news, that is a lie. i have a satellite dish where i pick up stuff from all over the .ountry and the world believe me, i watched some fox news, but i'm careful about who i watch. to me, a lot of them are just as liberal as cnn or msnbc. it stems from bad education. that -- i have a daughter is 53 years old, and back then i remember how horrible the school system was. they do not teach any truth of our history. everything is america is bad.

this is what we have created now. that is my comment for the day. -- let usus go from go to connecticut and a rural voter. caller: good morning. , all you haveide to do is look at where all the people on welfare live. they live in the urban areas. producee rural areas and pay for all of -- we pay for all of those people. producers and sponges, consumers. people who are a burden on the rest of us working class. host: are you still there? caller: yes. host: what do you think about the comment from the caller earlier who pointed out that a lot of the democratic states give more money into the federal government and do not get as much back is the rural states? is on a federal

level. i am talking at the state in itself. economics and taxes. state,ple who live in my we have places that went blue. we have -- we elected mr. rogers for governor. electedd have a let -- bob stuff now skied -- bob because he would've cut taxes and been better for connecticut. i am not sure -- i really never did take much time to look into that on a federal level. i am talking about the state. aurora,t us go to colorado. and a suburban voter. good morning.

i have been watching and listening to this for maybe 45 minutes. as i've heard some of the comments, i am shocked. you have people talking about president obama, and i think people talking about bad education. i think that is true. i think we need to start educating people. at the time that president obama assumed the presidency, the economy was hemorrhaging. no one can dispute that. president obama took us from the ledge of total financial collapse. the phone call that occurred this morning that talked about liberal policies and welfare queens and bad education, let us talk about facts. you have a president who has misguided tariff policy is that

is completely ripping apart the american farms. you have farmers who have continued to vote for the president who i guess have not had enough yet. let them continue to vote. that was another call talked about americanism versus communism and socialism. the president has been cozying up to vladimir putin, a kgb agent and a communist, and no one sees a problem with that. -- whatnd of the day is people have to do is take a look at what they believe. is there an urban and rural divide? but it is perpetuated by the media and power structure. people vote for issues closely aligned with them. wille farm you hope they believe what would be more appropriate for them to vote for. the people in kentucky and west

virginia, and missouri, their problems are no different than the people on the southside of chicago, compton, or washington, d.c.. is that theblem people that they are listening to are saying that your problems are completely different. a lot of the callers who are saying we need better education, i agree. it is not going to come from rush limbaugh. on the other side it is not going to called -- to come from msnbc. people have to make independent choices. they cannot be driven like sheep. to texas, and a rural voter. caller: good morning. i am calling a little bit about the gun debate in the rural and urban divide. when these done issues happen and they start going after

modern sporting rifles and high-capacity weapons, those are have been useful with our activities, hunting and management. that is the equivalent of telling urban people to give up their smartphones. smartphones are killing people left and right with distracted driving, and no one makes an issue after that. no one goes after the cell phone companies or tries to ban texting while vehicles are in motion. they can take away our tools in the rural areas. ban them in the urban areas, i don't care. but do not take away our tools in the rural areas when city folks cannot get along. host: let's go to been from fromgfield -- ben

springfield, massachusetts, and urban voter. caller: i just wanted to chat about some of the things people have said already. philadelphia, the retiree from a government job, she talked about the incurs ated people who burden in spending on the taxpayers. one of the things that happened and people need to realize, if you do not have proper papers, you get nothing from no state or no government. you have to rely completely on charity. touchdown is a nonprofit organization generally speaking, and they are required to provide life-saving medical care to people who show up, however the

person comes. the other part of that is, people who work, people who are who have social security cards, they work and social security and taxes are deducted from their pay. they do not generally file tax returns because they are illegal and they just let it go, year after year. they do not benefit from the taxes. they do not benefit from the sick -- social security payment. it goes to the pool. the gentleman who talked about -- host: wrap up quickly for me. caller: he talked about the toys, the high-capacity weapons that are used by people in the rural areas. that is in excess.

that is in excess that is unnecessary. the gentleman who talked about communities on the coast-to-coast that pays the bills for the united states of america, i live in massachusetts. massachusetts is one of those states that pays more than it gets back from the federal government, that most of the states along the east coast down thing.land does the same next, we willp take a look at the pre-election polling and the results of tuesday's midterm elections with cliff young, and we will talk to derek willis about a new report about how congressional leaders control debates on legislation. we will be right back. ♪

>> i thought about the forgotten presidents before i began the book, and then i figured there might be something they all had in common, not that they all were forgotten but they had something significant. >> on cue and day, michael gerhardt talks about two of his books, the forgotten presidents and impeachment. >> i think bill clinton did a lot to merit his own impeachment. i think that he knew members of congress were looking for him to make mistakes and when he made those mistakes, and later testified under oath in a way that was false, for which he was later held in contempt by a judge for perjury, bill clinton made his impeachment almost inevitable. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern

on c-span's q and a. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's public cable television. we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with cliff young to tell us a little bit about what they saw coming and what actually happened. what drove people to the polls to vote this year? guest: on the day of, we interviewed 39,000 voters with our partner thomson reuters. questionsbout 20

about why they went out. general, midterms are typically a referendum on the president. that really drove democrats to the polls. for democrats, it was about health care. for republicans, it was about immigration. independents were about the economy and jobs on one hand and health care on the other. host: what was the breakdown as far as gender requirement -- gender? guest: women skewed very strongly. we were seeing that in the pre-election polls and it was definitely the case on election day. host: was there a big difference between the last midterm election and now or did the same issues come up? guest: the issue set has changed. specifically, it was about health care and immigration. in 2014, it was about jobs and the economy. the issue set has really changed

from 2016 on. differentially from a partisan perspective, republicans went to the polls because of immigration and democrats went to the polls because of health care and independents, it was a mixed bag. host: we have been talking about the urban-world abide. did that should -- divide. did that show up? guest: on one hand, huge, high turnout, historic turnout, 49%, the highest since the 1960's. people showed up at the polls very energized. it is really a tale of two america's, very polarized along ideological issues and geographic issues. your last hour talking about outn-suburban divide came

in the polling and in the results themselves. host: we had a lot of talk during the last presidential election about how accurate polling is. how accurate were your polls, and did we do better this time than the last presidential election? guest: i would say the polling gets a passing grade, and barely pollster so i will give myself a grade. we did a great job in general. we knew the house would probably go democrat and we knew the senate would probably stay republican. we knew the democrats would pick up governorships. that was great. overall, good job. specifically in states, we had some problems as an industry. indiana, underestimated the number of republicans that would come out. in nevada, we underestimated the amount of democrats. general elections are not about the popular vote, they are about the electoral college.

you have got to get them right. that was our problem as an industry in 2016. host: if you have any questions about what we are talking about with the polls, join us by calling in. democrats can call in at (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can always reach us on cspanwj on twitter and facebook at facebook.com/c-span. one thing we heard a lot of talk about earlier coming into this election was about women voters. how did they turn out this midterm election? did women voters go one way or another, or was it split along regional lines? guest: there is obviously variability across regions. rural regions tend to vote more

republican and urban tend to vote more democrat. we saw a huge expansion of the electorate, a historic turnout at 49%. a lot more women and young people and minorities showing up at the polls. that is what tilted it for democrats on the house side. andnitely, greater turnout differential turnout in some places. host: you just brought up my next point. i was going to ask about the age of voters. did we see an increase in younger voters? did we see an increase in older voters? midterms arerage, elections were typically older, or affluent voters show up at the polls, more affluent, white powder -- voters. the profile of the electric was much more democratic leaning, much younger come up much more female, and much more urban than

in past years. host: you said earlier that you had historic turnout for this midterm election. at theee as many people turnout for presidential elections or historic for a midterm? guest: historic for a midterm. 49%, the average is 40%. was the lowest in modern history. 60% presidential elections, , 60% to 65%. it is still lower and not as important in many people's minds. foures not gender -- midterm elections, it was historic. host: duane is calling on the republican line, good morning. caller: i am glad you let me call in today. what i wanted to talk about is the polling, the election.

i am a black man down here in the south. can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead. caller: i am down here in the south and i'm a republican. what i see is like this post here and these guys that create these polls and make a determination of who will win and lose, when it does not go the way of the political leaders as far as the media running everything, if it does not go their way than they come up with a story, just like the story with why trump won the election, because of the russians. there's no proof of that. it is a sick game they are playing. they still have problems in florida and arizona, still got problems in georgia where it is going to be a mess. ,t is all created by the people the pollsters coming up with the so-called -- well, democrats

also have a blue wave. it was not a blue wave. then the russians come in and do it again. it is crazy, it is madness. people,small minded people who want to believe a lie, it is effective. they want to come up and run this news reporters houses and beat on their doors, act like they did something wrong to them, and it relate their minds. it is crazy. instead of just going to people and saying, this is how it is going to come out come the democrats are going to win it all or the republicans will win it all, i wish they would talk to people and understand what a vote. people vote for different reasons. say obamacare. obamacare is a disaster. it is a disaster. guest: great points by duane. the first point about a

pollster's job, 20% of it is to predict correctly and 80% of it is to explain why voters went to the polls. we have a very good idea. obviously it is variable across states and regions, but we have a good idea, democrats went as of trump on the one hand as well as health care. republicans were much more for immigration and smaller government. to his point about the blue wave, i absolutely agree. whether you talk about a blue wave or red waves, it is all political spin. to be quite frank and look at the numbers and the empirical, both the republicans and democrats performed about at the average. on the house side, which the democrats have taken, historic seatge is a 30's -- 33 gain to the party out of power. probably slightly outperform that in the high

30's. they are about at the average. on the senate side, because of the difficult map for democrats and easier map for republicans, republicans will hold the senate or expand their lead. it looks like we are in that range. i would emphasize a point which is both parties performed about at what we expected, about at the average. we have be very careful about midterms because often people believe they say something about the general election when they really don't. they say something about today, but very little about what will happen in the future. host: there was talk about a democratic wave and we did see in the south places like texas and georgia and florida where candidates like beto o'rourke and stacey abrams and andrew gillum did better than expected. what is going on in the south? guest: i think long-term, we

have demographic change. we know if we are talking decades long change, we are going from a majority white country to a majority nonwhite country. that is a fact. specifically with these midterms , it is only natural to have the party out of power, the democrats, getting more energized than republicans. in part, it was a function of that, that the democratic base was more energized. historic average for a party out of power is 33 seats and they are performing a little bit better. i would couch it or frame it that way. selection in these off term elections is very important, and these were very energizing, attractive candidates that wraps were able to push the needle even more. i do not believe the democrats performed much better than we thought they were going to come and we always have to be careful when we talk about lou or red --

blue or red waves. host: and is calling from washington, d.c., on the democrat line. caller: i would like to be --pful in asking you about what is the protocol for pollsters who call your home? i do not mind answering those calls and i do not mind giving out information, but they do not want to say who is sponsoring the poll, so i do not answer. i do not say anything at all about it. what is the protocol? are you hiring people who are pollsters who are not legitimate? are they not really interested -- why are they afraid to tell who they are who they are calling for? guest: when it comes to political polling, we at gibson no longer do telephone interviewing. it is intrusive and hard to get a hold of people. we do it online. people that want to participate,

can. the protocol should be a legitimate pollster should be extremely transparent, upfront about who they are and what they are doing. indeed, if they do not do that i would be suspect. best practice is always to be transparent, be upfront. you can if you want put your name on a no call record or list , very much like telemarketing. i think transparency is always key, when it comes to methodology on the one hand, being upfront with the call placers, and if someone is not doing that i would be suspect. host: is there a way normal americans can tell the way -- difference between a real pollster calling it a push poll that is trying to push them into voting one way or another? guest: that is a great question, a really good question. that is what i was alluding to indirectly or implicitly. one is legitimate, we want to

know who you will vote for and why. the other, they are pushing one side or the other with some sort of mesh again -- messaging or spin. i think you have a right to ask what the purpose is. legitimate pollsters who want to get an idea about the facts will be up front about who they are. a push bolster will be much more spin and is framed in a biased way, one way or another. it is hard to make the distinction, but i think citizen should be up front and ask what is the purpose of this poll? you can always reported. -- report it. host: kathy is calling from arkansas on the republican line. caller: good morning. florida,bout in arizona, and georgia, the lady in florida, the supervisor lady in florida was hiding votes for

the democrats. this is what needs to be on the news. rick scott took it to court. heron and they are making get them votes back. it makes you wonder if the democrats even won fair the house, because they will do anything to win an election. this is what needs to be on the news. thank you, and have a good day. guest: thank you. i think just stepping back a bit about the guest's point, talk about polarization how we are polarized along ideological lines -- immigration is a great example -- but across the board, americans do not believe this is -- and that goes to the media on the one hand, widespread disbelief that the media is being truthful.

widespread belief that parties and politicians care -- do not care about the average person. this is part and parcel of this overall disbelief, disenchantment with the system. it is important to emphasize, this is not just an american phenomenon. it is that polls across the world. we see this across the western world, continental u.k. caller's, i think the feeling of disenchantment, where he, a lack of -- worry, a lack of trust from the system is a systemic problem. host: you not only poll on the midterm election. you look through to the 2020 election. what were people telling you about whether president trump should or should not the reelected? guest: we have to always be careful polling on the 2020

election, the general election, during the midterms. we saw across the board that trump loses against any democratic candidate put up to him. on the day of the election this week -- and the caveat is that the electorate that showed up on election day is much more democratic on average than not. overall, when we ask a general question, does trump deserve another four years, 54% of americans said no, 36% said yes. that is an indicator of disenchantment. we'll is have to be careful using the midterms as tea leaves for the general election. a sitting president in the united states that has a better than 40% approval rating has a better than 50/50 chance of winning reelection. he is in a good place, not in an absolute place, but a good place.

definitely today, he is on the downside, definitely with the electorate that showed up on tuesday. host: how does this compare with previous presidents? were barack obama's, george bushes, or bill clinton's numbers different? guest: he is performing about at the average, to be quite frank. his numbers are not that different from barack obama. there is a power of incumbency. incumbents have a threefold advantage over not incumbents. he is still in a strong place. we should not read too much into this midterm election. host: let's go to lee calling from georgia on the democratic

line. good morning. caller: good morning, thanks for having me. can you hear me? guest: we can hear you. caller: i was wondering your thoughts on, the way i'm looking at it is it is more about who feels more threatened. is it the group that feels -- let me start over. it is more about cultural context, starting with the civil too,s act and the me women's suffrage, black lives matter. the country is becoming more egalitarian and i think that is the real distinction, who is most threatened by that progress? you have the older, white or, -- people who want to go back to the past and make america great again. then you have minorities who want real progress and want equal rights. i think that might be a more

accurate way to see the polarization in the country today. i was just wondering your thoughts on that. guest: i think that is a great point. let me reframe it without the value judgments of whether it is good or bad. what we do know is the u.s. is becoming a nonwhite country. the year's birth cohort was first that was more nonwhite than white. this plays into the politics as the in group starts to feel they are the outgroup, and vice versa. we are going to massive social change because of that and this politics, this polarization really comes to the floor. it is important to emphasize the point reaches, this is not just a you -- point which is, this is not just a u.s. phenomenon. we are seeing it across the western world, europe, and latin america.

this is part and parcel of our time, which is a highly uncertain, polarized period. early, but way too who is leading in your polls to be the democratic candidate to face president trump? matchups asked the well as who was more interesting on the democratic side. we have bite at 29%, bernie's -- 29%, bernie sanders at 22%. this is not necessarily indicative of what will happen tomorrow, but it gives us a good idea of the field. i would suspect, given what happened this electoral cycle, there are other candidates that have different profiles. nonwhite, more diverse, that might have a chance as well. right now what we are seeing are two candidates very well known to the general population, the

democratic base, and they are in the lead. host: landon is calling on the republican line from richmond, virginia. caller: the first thing is, my friend and i sat and watched television. my friend is an adamant democrat. , butd of sit on the fence i am more of a republican in attitude. the first thing we noticed is that we saw people winning that we did not know anything about. local, all organizations are local came into my mind. where did these people come from? where did all of these beautiful, young people come from? when you watch television, you generally see the same people, talking heads all the time. the thing that is kind of

disturbing for me when i was sawhing the democrats and i a lot of black people on television being democrats. black people are going to turn the power relationship. that is what white people -- what made white people think the democratic party is all black. i said, you have good people on both sides, but to make my conversation short, all the elections are local. you see new people. ones thatople are the are going to be the winners in the future. guest: -- host: let's see if we can get one more call. josephine is calling from detroit, michigan, on the democratic line. caller: i want to know why don't they ever mention gerrymandering of the states? why don't they ever mention

about people being thrown off the road who are not allowed to vote? that is like the reagan election and that is what republicans do. thank you. when weat are we seeing put up these hypothetical democratic candidates against president trump? how are they doing in your generic polls? guest: our same-day poll, as i was saying before, independent of who we put, whether it is biden or someone generic, they outperformed trump about 10%. i want to emphasize, that is indicative of today, the electorate that showed up on election day who is much more democratic leaning. the high turnout helped them. we have to be slightly different. we know an incumbent has a built-in advantage. what we saw with this higher turnout was much more democratic

profile and about a 10 point on average lead of any hypothetical or real democratic candidate. host: we would like to thank cliff young from it so's for coming in -- ipsos. guest: thank you. host: derek willis will talk about how the pub -- how leaders control the debate on legislation. we will look at the american role in the world with henry now. stay with us. ♪ >> coming up this weekend on ,ook tv, today at noon eastern the southern festival of books from nashville with author adam parker and his book "outside followed by a

discussion on the political divide with jennifer kavanaugh and michael rich. on sunday at 1:00 p.m. eastern, elliott gorn in his book. author bob spitz on reagan, an american journey. at 8:05 p.m. eastern, jeanmarie laska's talks about her book "to obama, with love, anger, joy, and hope." >> in greenwood, south carolina at a rally in 2007, the rally was a bust. no one but a small gathering of local folks needing something to do. obama was looking out at the emptiness. fired up, ready to go, the woman with the gold tooth abruptly shouted. and as if on cue, the people around her repeated her words, began to chant, and in an

instant the rally went from dismal to glorious. it shows you what one voice can do, that one voice can change a room, obama said at a campaign rally over a year later recounting the sick -- the story. if a voice can change a room, it can change a city. afterwards, republican senator ben sasse talks about his book. he is interviewed by arthur brooks, president of the american enterprise institute. >> i do not think political tribalism is the story of the moment. it is filling the vacuum of declining local tribes, the kinds of tribes that make people happy -- family, friendship, meaningful work, local worshiping communities, those things are being undermined by the moment we are at in technological history. >> watch this weekend on c-span2's booktv. >> "washington journal"

continues. host: we are here with derek willis, public data reporter. he will talk about the joint report they did with "the washington post" that examines how congressional leaders control debate on bills. explain to us what pro-public that is. is.ropublica guest: we are a nonprofit based in new york. we generally do long-term investigations, so we spend a lot of time digging into a particular subject. we like to take our time to understand things, and we oftentimes do a lot of stuff with data, analyzing data as a way to lead us to the story and help us tell it to a national audience. host: how are you funded? guest: donors, foundations in large part. also by individuals.

caople can donate to propubli the way they would to any nonprofit. we are also funded by individual foundations and organizational foundations. host: what made you all decide to do this report and why partner with "the washington post"? obviously ones is of our most important institutions. , theke to study the actor institutional actors in american life. it made sense to look at congress at this point because of what has been happening in congress, not just in the last couple of years but really the last 10 to 15 years. we collect a lot of data on how congress works and who does what in congress. it kind of pointed at this idea that maybe it was time to take a look at what has been happening with the health of legislative debate in congress. "the washington post" it a lot

of sense -- made a lot of sense for us as a partner because this is washington and they are a big institution, and also because of the expertise their staff has. paul kane, my co-author, has been covering congress for years and knows the people in the institution well. that provides a way for us to get into the story that maybe we would not have after that kind of participation. we are really excited and grateful that "the post" and paul worked with us. host: you came to a pretty sobering conclusion about congress. by aress has been replaced weakened legislative branch in which debate is strictly curtailed. party leaders dictate the agenda. most elected representatives really get a say. government shutdowns are regular threat because of chronic failures to agree on budgets."

how did you come to this conclusion? guest: a couple of things. when we talk about the health of legislative debate and curtailing of debate, one of the ways to measure that is through the number of amendments that get offered. the way that most people think of legislation as if there is an idea proposed by someone and other people get to weigh in and say, i can make this idea better by offering this or by removing this. what we have found by looking at the data was that in fact the opportunity to even offer legislation is not what it was. the ability of congress to actually vote on amendments has been curtailed by leaders of the majority parties in the house and senate. that has been going on for a while, but particularly over the last 10 years, that kind of opportunity for meaningful participation by rank-and-file members has been reduced.

as a sort of measure of how is,st legislative debate amendments and the ability to vote on amendments is pretty important. it is one of the few ways that is offered to every member of congress as a way to actually get involved and participate in a legislative debate. host: is this a republican problem, a democratic problem, or are both parties at fault? guest: this is a problem for everyone. house, the, in the way the legislation is debated in the house is there are rules that are set for each bill that comes to the floor. here is how we will debate it, we will allow these amendments or not, we will have this amount of time. an open role is, we will allow any amendment that is germane, any amendment that will -- that is relevant to the bill, we will offer an opportunity to present

that to have the house work its will. there has not been an open role in the house in four years on any piece of legislation. yes, the last four years have been run by republicans, but under a democratic majority there were two open rules. this is not a solely one party thing. it has been seized on by leaders of both parties as a way to actually try to get some legislation passed. they feel they need to. it is sort of done for the sake of efficiency and for the sake of avoiding what could be politically problematic votes for their members. if they can take those votes off the table and say, we are not going to have these amendments because some of them may be proved difficult for vulnerable incumbents in our caucus, then they make the lives of their caucus easier. some of those votes and

amendments may be things people feel strongly they should be voted on or that we should be considering. there is a trade-off, but majority parties under both parties have done this, engaged in this process to limit the debate. host: in the senate, it seems like if you do not have seniority, you do not have a say. is that true? guest: to a certain extent. individual senators have a lot of authority and agency and power to make certain things happen. but if you are the majority leader, you have a couple of competing incentives. one is sort of to pass legislation, but the other one is to maintain your majority or expanded. when those things come into conflict, increasingly we see the actions they take are more to the benefit of maintaining or expanding your majority than it is to allowing people, allowing the senate to work its will.

host: let's get some conversation going. betty is calling from chico, california, on the republican line. caller: hello. i just want to know number one, specifically, who are your major donors? number two, are you investigating the shenanigans that happened in palm beach and broward county where they are manipulating votes for the democrats and where they do that almost in every election and they stay in power and no one gets fired? guest: in the question to who our donors are, the best thing for me is to tell you to go to propublica.org. we list our donors in categories and publish an annual report. i could spend the time listing them, but the easiest way for you to find out is to go to our website and take a look at the

foundations and individuals that are listed as supporters. in regards to the vote counting in florida, we are not at the moment looking at that. i would say only because our projects tend to be larger in scope or lengthier in scope, and this is come up this week. we have definitely looked at election administration. we have had a project for the last several years that looks at the issue of votes, how elections are run, and how votes are counted, and under what circumstances. it is not something we are ignoring or unfamiliar with. in particular, there are places in the united states, florida being one of them, where occasionally we run into issues with counting of the votes. we are going to keep an eye on infor sure, because counting election administration is a huge issue in how democracy works. ort: if you have a question

want to join this conversation about how congress works, democrats call in at (202) 748-8000. republicans call in (202) 748-8001. independents, you can call in at (202) 748-8002. you can always reach us on social media, c-span wj on twitter and facebook.com/c-span. alan is calling from scottsdale, arizona on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i have a comment, two things to tied together. that is the elimination of talking about the cost of living index in the bush administration. they talked about it and released it all the time. that ties into the newest bursts ofith energy, energy and being a global leader in energy, i totally believe that this country, if we could

take the cost of living and lower it by taking gasoline and natural gas, and even though i know natural gas has dropped tremendously compared to regular gasoline for cars, down to $1.50, this country becomes -- it is so competitive when we reduce the cost of energy. it affects all our lives throughout everything that we spend money for. lies, runsular study into the thing of where people are today using energy units for natural gas or propane to back up their energy source in their own homes, and eventually there's technology like energy cells that power spacecraft going to the moon and our space energy and those things, where today you could almost be independent with natural gas

since we have a 500 year supply of natural gas by each individual home producing its own energy through an energy cell, which the technology is being produced right now by a company in california with energy cells in front of ebay and fedex and walmart and a whole bunch of people. i truly believe our energy source makes us not only a world leader on that side of the equation, it also just -- but dominant becomes a country to come to because of our low costs of energy. host: one of the things we saw in your report is that you said congressional committees meet less to talk about issues less, like energy. what did you find? guest: the interesting thing is

that congressional committees still meet. they definitely meet and hold a lot of hearings. up on the hill, you can see those in action. you can see them on c-span. meetings that congressional committees hold about specific pieces of legislation have declined over time. that means they are still holding hearings, but hearings that are really sort of part of the crucial work of committees where committees are the engines of legislation. those meetings that are specifically about pieces of legislation, those are declining and have declined over time and that is been going on for decades. oversight work is important for aggression -- congressional andittees, and hearings gathering information are important parts of congressional work. committees are the place in congress where you can develop legislative expertise, where you can become an energy expert or health care expert.

if those committees are not holding as many hearings on specific legislative acts, things they will do as a expertise,hen that those opportunities for expertise and legislative action are getting eroded. their capacity dwindles and that respect. host: how has all of that affected issues like immigration, energy, health this, by budget? does not being able to push through sensible legislation, is congress heeding its power somewhere else? guest: immigration is a great example. there are very strong feelings about immigration all across the political spectrum. as a country, we have been trying to grapple with this for decades. congress has been unable to reach any sort of consensus on it, and there has been attempts. we had immigration debate in the senate last year, but that

debate was really sort of already from the start, we kind of knew what the outcome was, there was not going to be a bill passed, which is not really the way you think about the way congress works. .he status quo is the default it is hard to pass legislation under our system and it should be. congress also, like the ability to work its will and try to reach a consensus, if you take that away than the outcome is going to be that there will not be a bill passed. when that happens, and congress does not really weigh in on an issue, it does provide the executive branch in particular and sometimes the courts, with the opportunity to step in and say, since congress has not .cted, we will we heard this under the obama administration and certainly under president trump's administration. if congress is not going to do certain things than the executive branch will try to

fill that void. there is a balance at play in our constitutional system. some ofess is ceding its authority or not acting, other actors might seize it and step up and fill that void. host: during justice kavanagh's supreme court hearing, this is what nebraska senator ben sasse had to say about the legislative process. what we mostly do is not pass laws and give permission to the secretary or administrator of bureaucracy to make law like regulations. that is mostly what we do. we pretend we make laws. we write giant pieces of legislation, 1200 to 1500 pieces that people have not read filled with terms that are not defined, and say the secretary of such and such shall promulgate rules to do the rest of our jobs.

that is why there are so many fights about the executive branch and judiciary, because this body rarely finishes its work, and the house is even worse. i do not even believe that, but it seemed like i had to unite us. there are rational arguments one could make for this new system, the congress cannot manage all the nitty-gritty details of everything about modern government, and the system tries to give control and power to experts in their field, where most of us in congress do not know anything about technical metals. you can also impugn our wisdom if you want. ,alking about technical matters it is true congress would have a hard time filling out every single detail. the real reason at the end of the day this institution punts most of its power to the executive branch agencies, it is convenient for legislators to avoid taking responsibility for controversial and unpopular decisions. from let's go to waleed

alberta on the independent line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i heard your guy -- i don't know his name, i am sorry. guest: derek. caller: he said -- not even what he said. news media orhow anyone is importing best reporting the reels -- reporting the real schism that happened with obama. and obama was in office mitch mcconnell and then got together and said, we are going to make it where he is a one term president, not going to help with anything. then he became a second term president and once they got control of everything, they still did not help. once the supreme court vacancy happened, they said we are not going to do anything, over a year.

instead of you guys reporting on that, that everyone can see his racism, you report and say it is both sides. you cannot act like it is nuanced situations when it is racism. an injustice to america. you need to report on what happens in top from the realist period. view, racism, guest: do your point, very clearly -- and our story says that -- president obama's election was clearly an inflection point where -- that set off a series of moves in the senate and the house to essentially block large parts of the agenda that he ran on and was seeking to implement. now, that in turn also set off a series of moves from democrats

as well, counter moves. the underlying factors, like the history of race in america, is something i think we try not to ignore because it is there. in terms of what the actual legislative outcomes of those acts are, those motivations are, in this case, when president obama was elected, the senate changed how it worked in certain respects and the house did as well. a large part of that was the tightening up of the opportunity to debate and the shutting down of the ability of rank-and-file members to offer amendments or get their voice heard. the outcome of that spurred on democrats when they held the majority, to also do the same similar things. what we have seen is one act leads to another leads to another. i think we are along this path

for a lot of reasons and racism is one of them. host: let's go to barbara from harrisburg, pennsylvania, on the democratic line. caller: good morning. that -- there's to say embarrassed to say that at age 61 -- 67, i only became aware of this action in congress while the merrick garland thing was going on. i could not believe it. are you kidding me that they are not bringing his nomination because they think he will be confirmed? confirmed,ve been had it been brought to the floor and voted upon. i could not believe it. then i decided to really pay attention. again, mitch mcconnell did not bring things to the floor that would have passed.

thatgard to the democrats controlled the obama administration, their legislation that they brought to the floor when they had the majority was to benefit large amounts of people with the health care propositions. yes, they passed that. stuff that is being brought to the floor with the republicans is to benefit once again, these large corporations. i am just amazed, amazed that this keeps going on. when i see mitch mcconnell time and time again on c-span, just , thatntly going along things are going to be voted upon that he wants to be voted upon is very disappointed. something people have come to realize is really that

the house and senate, if you grow up and go to school we learn about our houses of congress, the senate in particular is probably the most unique institution we have as part of our system of government because individual senators and the majority leader can have a lot of authority, and do things that seem -- that might seem that they do not fit in necessarily in a majority rule institution. the senate minority, individual senators in the minority have more authority than they do is a minority member in the house. one, it is a good thing that people learn about how the senate works and how the house works and how they can work. one of the goals with our pieces has been to try to show people, this is how congress is working today. congress is the branch designed to be most responsible for the

public. the more that the public knows about how congress is working and how it could work, and are able to supply their input, the healthier our democracy could be. host: the caller brings up nominations. explain personnel actions, how important they are. , ast: part of the senate specific duty reserve for the senate is to provide advice and consent on presidential appointments, nominations. that is for the executive branch positions and judges, the federal judiciary. the senate, you can interpret that a couple different ways. in the case of merit garland, senator mcconnell interpreted it in the sense of the senate can ishhold its consent, which something that is permitted under our constitutional system. that does not make a lot of people happy and a lot of people got upset about it. part of what the senate does, or has to do, or really is filled

these appointments. this was meant as a way for the legislative branch to have oversight over the people who would be filling these jobs in the executive branch. and what is happening now what has happened over the past couple of years is that the senate spending more time on doing that nomination work. part of that -- and this happened when harry reid was majority leader -- is because the majority party is insisting they spend more time doing that. nominationsove easily in the senate if you have the consent of all the senators, but if you do not have the consent of all the senators, you can force that process to slow down to a virtual crawl, where there is a specific time that has to elapse before you can have a vote on a particular nominee. so when harry reid was majority

leader of a democratic senate majority, republicans insisted on this during the last couple of years in the obama administration. now under a trump administration , senate democrats led by chuck schumer have insisted on this for many of president trump's nominees as well. nomination related votes are now more than half of the votes of all the votes that senators are taking in this current congress, which started in 2017. that is really only happen once under senator reid's last term as majority leader. for the most part, amendments are the lifeblood of the senate. now, one in five senate votes is on an amendment whereas more two one into is on an -- in is on a nomination. host: kerry is calling from

mechanicsburg, pennsylvania, the independent line. caller: i have a question for your guest concerning congressional fund-raising and the amount of time both democrats and republicans spend raising money for their party. getting on committees depends on the money they raise, it is getting out of control. that is why i am independent. guest: you raise an excellent point. fundraising is now an enormous part of the amount of time that a member of congress has to dedicate their time to. particularly, if you want to be on certain committees where there are certain committees that are considered more prestigious or powerful, or have more authority over larger segments of the american economy or over our life, so for example energy and commerce committee which has jurisdiction over a lot of things including health care and commerce.

a lot of different areas of our public life. what we heard when we were reporting the story, when we howed to people about things could improve in congress, one of the things was hey, we should be your more often, we should be in session more often, we should be in washington were often. that might be an opportunity. but one thing we have to see is when they are here in washington, they also hold a lot of fundraisers here in washington. part of sort of the fabric of is indern politics now order to advance in congress and to maintain or gain a procedures committee position, fundraising is a big part of that process. host: let's go to charlie from trenton, florida, calling on the democratic line. can you give us a quick question to end this? caller: thank you very good morning.

talking about having an open debate earlier, the problem is too many cynical people have been elected, and they always introduced poison to us to prevent any legislation from getting passed by both sides, so the problem is that we elect people who are trying not to let government function properly, and they are just very cynical. they equate the wrong things, like they equate a musket with a semiautomatic. they equate seeking asylum to invading. they will not raise taxes when taxes made to be raised. the idea that you can cut taxes and have everything -- why do we have a huge federal debt that is case?se -- if that is the they are so obstinate that we are not getting anywhere. guest: this is a good point and

this is something that lawmakers fear, they fear a vote that will set them up to look bad for a campaign commercial. is parties seeing trying to protect their members, and a certain number of people feel like that is a consideration, but maybe that is not the job of congress to protect its members from making votes on difficult issues. host: we would like to thank derek willis from republic of this great report in the "washington post." thank you, derek. guest: thank you. host: up next, our spotlight on magazine series. we will talk with henry nau about his piece on america's role in the world. we will be right back. ♪ >> join c-span sunday, veterans

day, live at 4:30 a.m. eastern for the 100th anniversary of the end of world war i with french president emmanuel macron speaking at the arc de triomphe. watch live on c-span and american history tv on c-span3 for a special call in program on what was hoped to be the war to end all wars with john mosher and michael kazen. at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span, live coverage of president trump and first lady melania trump at world war i ceremonies in paris. at 11:00, the wreath-laying ceremony at the tomb of the unknown, live from arlington national ceremony. live veterans day coverage continues at 5:00 p.m. eastern with the liberty awards, honoring former president george w. bush and laura bush. on american history tv on

c-span3, at 9:00 a.m. eastern, historians narrate the 1920 15 don't documenting -- 1921 silent film documenting the journey of a world war i soldier's remains france to the arlington national ceremony. argonne american cemetery, the final resting place in france for 14,000 american soldiers. then come up president trump in france. this is sunday on c-span and on american history tv on c-span3. retiring members of congress, republican senator orrin hatch of utah, and sander levinnator of michigan discussed what is next after retiring from politics. join us tonight at 8:00 eastern for retiring members of congress

on c-span and c-span.org. and listen with the free c-span radio app. >> "washington journal" continues. we're joined by henry nau, a contributor to national interest magazine. we will talk about america's role in the world and in rain, you wrote article called "return of the balance of power." guest: i am somewhat less nationalistut the story today. in the normal process of debate about issues, a significant number of people, not just in the u.s. but also around the world, have expressed the desire that we had too much globalism too fast. i do not think they are rejecting globalism, but they are asking for something of a midcourse correction.

i thought that this movement, which is going the direction of nationalism, seems to be rejecting globalism, is really an attempt to find a new balance between nationalism and globalism. we have been working with that issue of the balance between nationalism and globalism. host: here is how you define globalism in your article. what premise on a limited global government that protects republican virtues. what is the difference between globalism and nationalism? globalism is still not nationalism. it is built on the new nationalism. in the 1920's, globalism, to the extent that we had it, was based on authoritarian nationalism. globalism is based largely on liberal nationalism, and all of the major countries call themselves major globalism is based largely on liberaldemocracies -l democracies.

still authoritarian nationalism and the system. you see that in china and russia, but it is not the way it was in the 1920's. the world today is a lot better. by the way, we celebrate 100 anniversary of the first or tomorrow. is a lot better of a place than it was in 1914 and primarily because we have all of aroundtrong democracies the world. host: so when does nationalism get a negative connotation? guest: i think it probably happened in the interwar period. as a young republic, as a young country, we were nationalist. george washington warned us at the beginning of the republic, look, do not get too involved in other people's affairs. that will just invite them to get involved in our affairs. he stood for independents, for preserving the country, the experiment, as it was, in liberal democracy.

that served us pretty well for a century or more. it may be began is a little bit in the interwar period in the 1920's and 1940's when a barrel is some of nationalism occurred. we had monarchies and empires being broken down. that was a turbulent world. we stayed out of world war ii until the very end, with some people thought was a good thing, but have we been engaged a little early, we might have avoided some of the enormous casualties that occurred in world war ii. host: you see in your article nationalism comes in many forms -- ethnic, blood, cultural, history, territorial, soil, and ideological, but liberal nationalism requires all of these have republican values, individual rights to see parties in power, an independent judiciary. when you are talking liberal nationalism, you were not talking political liberals

versus conservatives, what are you saying? guest: i am saying over the last 100 years, this respect for republicanism or all forms of government have actually overridden the old forms of nationalism, the ethnic -- not that the ethnic has is a pure. japan, for example committed is very homogenous ethnic company, soil, thatation to hadyour homeland, a disappeared. not that people associate with strong nationalism in various ways, but what has happened is on top of that, we happen those with republican forms of self-government. comprise a competing parties, expanded judiciary, for a government that responds to the people through regular free and fair elections. that is a very different kind of nationalism. i think we have strong liberal national faith in the world today, and yes, we are going to

get a little bit of correction to globalism. we are going to pull back, because maybe we pushed globalism to fark. at least that is what some people are saying. but i do not think this is comparable to the nationalism of the 20's and 30's. host: we want you to join us conversation. atocrats, you can call in (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. and you can always reach us on social media, on twitter @cspanwj, on facebook at facebook.com/cspan. let's go to god's calling from ashburn, virginia. -- let's go to gus calling from ashburn, virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. i would employ you to use sovereign is, rather than globalism, which has a negative

connotation. guest: you make a good point, although i am not a fan of sovereignty, or the old territorial-based nationalism. we have evolved over the last that allows people of all races and creeds and religions, allows them to process of in the self-government. national sovereignty, that may be a way to combine the two, as you suggest. host: let's go to lewis calling from north carolina on the democratic line. lewis, are you there? caller: yes, can you hear me? host: yes. i would like to know

what you consider and john will ,poof, -- john wilkes booth james earl ray, what would be their titles? i think the word i would apply to them is radical. we have always had radicals in our society and today, both on the left and the right. of people inrity this country and in other liberal democracies, in europe and in asia, are willing to engage one another in debates , make their issues case, and then they are willing to accept the result of an election. that is a very important element of the liberal nationalism i am talking about. it is something you do not need to be afraid of. whereas in the 1920's and 1930's, you have mostly authoritarian nationalism, which is much more dangerous. it is important for us to

maintain a sense of stability in the way we engage one another, but i'm not a nationalists -- i think everybody, to some extent, is a nationalist. we are patriots. we support our country. we support the society in which we live. but we are open to other societies now in ways, since liberal democracies in with one another in much more intense and multifaceted ways than authoritarianism nationalism. host: an interesting line in your essay i found was you said that "localism tends to make -- regi where is president trump is sitting in the triangle? guest: i think he is trying to pull us back from the expansion of the alliances, which occurred in the 1990's and early 2000's. he is saying in effect that,

world, we doy's not need to be a aggressive about expanding democracy. theo not need to expand alliances. the war on terrorism is more localized. when you to think about the impact of trade on our jobs and our people, and we need to worry about the extent of immigration in the world. , the is trying to say look problems we face today are more national and regional rather than global, and that is the reason we're seeing him sort of pull back -- as it, by the way, president obama -- pullback from globalism and the extension of the global system that we had in the 1990's. we expanded in the trade system, is a global war on terrorism, and we increased dramatically the number of immigrants coming in, over one million a year for the last 50 years, between 1965 and 2015.

or.t: let's go to th good morning. caller: i have a question about the usual nationalism, talked linenger --ir an i have a question about luge ugouis nationalism, talked about by vladimir lenin. the parameters some of the guard rails, you could say, of a liberal democracy. they are not communist advocates feared they are not fascist advocates. they are not authoritarian advocates. it seems to me the vast majority of the american people are in the middle, so i would say we need to respect each other in that regard and listen to each other.

of course we have sort of the more leftist wings in the democratic party, the sanders group. we have been more conservative groups in the right wing party, maybe some of the nationalists now supporting trump or earlier, the tea party groups. that would be in the realm of a healthy liberal national democracy. host: let's go to carter calling from silver spring, maryland on the independent line. carter, good morning. caller: how are you doing today? host: i am fine. go ahead. caller: when you talk about nationalism and the successes for the first time in how many in ther so, nationalism early part of this country was basically formed around exclusion of others. workedh it might have for some, it certainly did not work for the groups that were excluded from that type of democracy. guest: you are absolutely right.

we have evolved. in a rather dramatic way. but we have to go back to where we were in the 1790's. we were trying to form a new type of government in which people participate in the process. at that point, we had very few democracies, only a few constitutional democracies, like england, where maybe percent or 4% of the people participated in the government. america came along and give a right to vote to some 30% or 40% of the white male citizens of the united states. excluded aht, they lot of white males, but he clearly excluded women and black americans, etc. but that is where we have to start. franchisepand in the to white male citizens. eventually those white male citizens had the views that led to the civil war, unfortunately,

but led to women, all the immigrants we have admitted in we aret six years, and still struggling, obviously, to become an all-inclusive liberal democracy, but we have made a lot of progress, and i think it is important to remember where we came from. we did not create a country that excluded. we created a country that included, but not everybody, not the all whites in beginning. eventually, we reached the stage, today, where we are trying to reach all of the people. host: let's go to victor calling on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i know time is precious. are you listening? host: yes, go ahead. caller: i want to comment on a few things i have heard today and pass shows. stick to the topic we are talking about now, time is russia's here. caller: i am not up to speed --

time is precious here. caller: i am not up to speed on that, so i will the next caller go. host: let's go to don in pittsburg, kansas. caller: in world war ii, the u.s. was dominant instead of the organizations like the world bank, the imf, and other various things and it dominated. in the period since then, the united states has become much weaker, china is rising, and it is probably economically more productive than the u.s. at this point. this whole rebalancing is because of the u.s. weakness and u.s. is a declining status quo power in a world with many others, particularly china, india, and brazil, rising insurgent wear powers. thank you. guest: you make a point, which is when we led the world to globalism, we were

preeminent, but we led with a strategy that put our own liberal nationalism upfront, not retain ourt we would dominance, but with these evils around the world, and it would become our friends and our allies, a strategy, by the way, that has worked remarkably. today, we are less powerful. we are still pretty powerful. maybe still the most powerful country in the world. but there are many other countries that are powerful. many other liberal democratic countries that are powerful. , we areare trying to do trying to get other democratic allies to share more of the burden, more of the burden on defense, more of the burden on trade, and that is appropriate. and if we can succeed in doing that, we will be able to transition to a world in which we are not dominant but a world

in which we are a very strong liberal democratic world, especially among the major industrial countries in europe and asia. host: several of our twitter followers are asking this question, whether you can help us to friendship between the nationalism we are talking about now and wife nationalism, as we have heard in negative connotations. differences?e the whiteswhen people say nationalism, they want to say racist nationalism. and look, there are going to be some racism in our society forever. we have made enormous rise in this country toward reducing racism, and i do not think we have the kind of -- think of it, in the 1920's, we had 30,000 ku klux klan people marching down pennsylvania avenue. this is a world that we do not know anymore. we need to keep vigilant. we need to keep pushing forward

toward equality for all, but i think we make a mistake by labeling nationalism as white nationalism. most importantly -- that is an ethnic nationalism, by the way. much more important is the liberal nationalism we have constructed, and that now dominates in many countries. i do not want to say there is no racism out there, but i do not think it is the dominant element of the nationalism we are observing today. it is a nationalism doesn't look, let's say more attention to our own -- it is a nationalism that says look, let's pay more attention to our own jobs in our own economy, that says look, nobody elected these global elites. states, especially we democratic nationstates, are really the only checks and balance on these global entities, and we want them to pay attention to us. we think maybe you can slow down globalism a little bit, and it would be a good deal for all of us.

does president trump affect this in regard to trade and immigration? an openn trade, it is question, although he has renegotiated some of the original agreements, when we were, by the way, much more powerful than we are today. we adjust these relationships to take into account the more equal balance of the powers of these countries. these bilateral agreements and put them together into a new usnca. he is negotiating with south korea and by the way has an agreement with south area. very much that he will succeed. americans, by the way, both democrats and republicans, at least communities, are concerned about ,he china factor in our trade so if he can reach an agreement there, i think he will have made

adjustment and trade area. i think in the terrorism area, he is probably very similar to president obama, getting involved in these terrorism problems in iraq and afghanistan. and the alliance, on the is very, the consumer important, because he is saying to the allies, you need to pick up more of the balance. we are not going to do less, and we are not turned we have increased our expenses to nato, but we say you have to do more. the only way to stay in the liberal democratic world is to participate. host: let's go to jack on the democratic line. good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. first of all, happy veterans day to all our great veterans in the united states of america. about of all, talking that globalism, nationalism, and

all of that, even going back to your previous guest -- host: jack, you are breaking up on us. can you go to a better spot? you are breaking up on us. caller: i am sorry. can you hear me now? host: a little better. caller: how this ties and as if you look at the history of russia, china, india, they have hundreds in fact thousands of years of history. we keep talking about all of these different political systems. what is going to happen in the 20 million, 30 million, 40 million illegals and all these other people here, what will it will remain one day. the remainder people, russia, if it is all russian during china, it is all chinese. america is 200 years old. it is a young country. if it is not "grow up" together, like the white, black, and so

one, just become all-american, that is what will destroy the country, because there has to be a dominance in a country, whether it is white, black, native american, whatever it is, otherwise some of the will not survive. guest: i am not sure i agree. i think our diversity has been a great strength on our part. the basis for, the competitive politics that we have. superseded in has the united states, because other nationalism like racial nationalism or ethnic nationalism in a way that is less important today. we can make our leases hurt, and we have heard arguments for a long time about how authority in howuthoritarian countries

vanished, yet if you look over the last 100 years, which country has in fact won out in most cases? it has been democratic countries. they have won out over the fascist and communist countries, they have won out over authoritarian countries. i think we should continue. record had a pretty good of that kind of america. single ethnic any path will dominate. i think what has to dominate is a common belief in the creed of republicanism and the believe in the constitution and the granting of liberty and equality of all of us. host: let's go to joe in eastpointe, michigan on the democratic line. good morning. caller: hello there. gentleman is the keeps referring to the united states at the democracy and we are a republic with it was the democratic way of life.

if we were -- waq uasi-democratic way of life. if we were a democracy, hillary clinton would be president your the are not a democracy, we are a republic, and there is a distinct difference. ancient greece was a democracy, and it worked for a little while. i thought i would point that out. country, racism in our read "democracy in america," he wrote the book on racism in this country in 1930. thank you. point, moree last than 100 years have passed since "new america," and your point is well taken. we are not a direct democracy where we this i own everything by a simple majority. we are a public in which we have representatives and, by the way, checks ande

balances. but i think we are a democratic republic, not an oligarchic republic. means that we have a divided government, and institutions of it will authority in our system of of the legislative branch, the judicial system, checks and balances among those institutions. that is, in fact, the essence of a republic. a democratic republic in a sense in which there are ways now in which the people ge can hold the government accountable. our election system was a compromise, to some extent. it has worked very well. what the rules are here in the electoral college, we have to win that in order to be resident. -- president. it has affected both parties. there have been four or five cases in american history where

a president has won the popular but not the electoral college and therefore never became president, so it is not the norm. it is part of an effort to try to balance this country between different states. we are a decentralized republic, another important characteristic , and we need to make decisions from time to time at the national level. host: let's go to renée who is calling from frederick, maryland on the republican line. renée, good morning. good morning. thank you. i love this discussion. i am just a little bit wondering about the actions of economic areems that either corollary to the discussion regarding nationalism and the way governments are formed to particularly given the fact that theave great examples of communist system breaking apart,

however, communist china is an entirely different phenomenon. married an have authoritarian society with a capitalist form of economics. i would like to get your take on that. guest: you make an interesting point, and china is of course a new challenge for us. i think china is in the throes right now of experiencing some of the contradictions of being both an authoritarian state and a capitalist economy. we have a political crackdown going on in china, while at the same time, china, at least for that part of the economy that --ates with the, has become the world, has become more open, more capitalistic. i think there are challenges that will come as a result of those contradictions.

we have phased he loves challenges over the last 75 years, and we have managed to deal with them all. we need to concentrate on our strengths, and our great strength is a very robust system, which is regulated by not overregulated, and a system in which we have a great entrepreneurial element that not only creates new products that have access to capital. this is missing in china, for example. there is no silicon valley. the would put my bet on united states, even in a new challenge that we face with china. host: let's see if we can get one more quick question and from michael, who is calling in from grand rapids, michigan on a democrat line. can you get a question for us? caller: yes, real quick, thank you very the gentleman future for him to "we americans, we yet wens, we americans,"

are a divided country with institutional racism that is not make all americans the same, because black americans are not receiving all of the benefits that the gentleman is talking about, again, because of racial -- institutional racism. thank you. guest: look, i do not want to raises nationalism does not exist. all ofwant to point to the process that we have made, and i have to ask the question -- are we better off than we were 50 years ago? are we better off than we were 100 years ago? we are not there yet. we are working to get there. but we all are americans in the way that we have moved forward. despite all of our differences in the disputes and we have hopingorward, and i'm the leadership may be both today

and in the future that reminds us that we are all americans. jefferson said that his first inaugural, after a very bitter campaign, by the way. and he said we are not the republicans, we are not the federalists -- in those days -- we are all americans. i believe in that, and i hope you will continue to believe in that. host: we want to thank author henry nau, author of "the return of power," for being with us. guest: thank you. host: coming up next, we will open the phone lines where you we have about anything talked about on show today, or anything on past shows. democrats, (202) 748-8001 republicans, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can also b reach us on social media. "newsmakers," it

includes a discussion on recruitment. here is a little bit of what he said. mark: one area that we are having trouble is recruitment, where you expect it to be, and the numbers for the national reserves are even worse, the only one that did not meet recruitment numbers this time of year. can you tell me about why that isn't what you are doing change the perception of joining the in the communities you are reaching out to? not just the army. it is across the armed forces. anytime you have a green economy, recruiting becomes more challenging. i think we will trade and what we see today and soldiers and marines. that is not required. secondly, the army has a very high annual need to soldiers.

-- need of soldiers. of being a land power. third, what we see, and this is a cultural issue, that more and more young able in america are less familiar with the military vendor predecessors. this is due to a number of things, probably most notably that few were in their families have served, their mom or dad, and/or uncle. it is an increasingly isolationist society. that is what is troubling to me and others is how do we correct that trend. greatieve the army is a place to stir. there are wonderful opportunities to learn skills, to learn about leadership, being part of a team, and our challenge is to go after the communities that may not be located next to an army base or a national or armory and tell our story to spain to the american people, to speak to young kids and their parents

about all of the opportunities that the army has to offer. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we will go to open phones in just a second, but first, we bousquet, "thehe tallahassee times" euro, so he can update us with what is going on with the vote down in florida. me?e, can you hear what is the latest? guest: we are starting to see, as we did in 2000, more legal skirmishes pop-up. the focus really is to places, broward county and palm beach county, just north of miami. every county in the state is under a 12 noon deadline to file all of their final unofficial results today at noon. there is no evil room and that deadline, so i am not aware yet whether brenda

sykes in broward or susan in palm beach will finish that. i am hearing that susan bucher anin court asking for emergency deadline extension to recent history suggests that she will not be successful. an extension for one means extension for all, and this election has to be decided sooner or later, and i think everybody wants this, again and so that is where things stand at the moment. host: what is the status on the governor race? is it in the realm for a recount? for the senate race, is that definitely going to be a recount? guest: sure. the current numbers that are posted on the state elections website plays the u.s. senate between rick scott and bill nelson, and the race for commissioner of altar,

definitely defense side of the window for a manual recount, less than .25%. the governor's race between ron desantis a democrat andrew gillum is in the machine recount threshold, which is slightly under .5%. so the two races that are closest, and i mean razor close, arsenate and after alter commissioner. it looks like -- and agriculture commission. is was like the governor's race, while it will get a recount, it looks unlikely that gillum all caps desantis -- will catch desantis. host: tell us the difference and an a manual recount machine recount. guest: a machine recount, first of all, florida has an optical system.ing

we use paper ballots here. you fill in an oval with a black pen, and you feed it into a machine. those ballots are refed through the machines, as i understand it, in sort of able situation, because it would take eons in some of these counties. that was a gaping or so to complete. recount process, there will be a segregation of two categories of votes, under votes and over votes and overflows, which is simple. where a voter is makes no choice in a race, and an over vote is where the voter appeared to vote for more than one candidate, which you are not allowed to do. these will be counted because they are viewed visually, you can clearly's you aat the voter made

preference. the problem with over votes, as with 2000, if it is open to interpretation. it is not a clear-cut thing. a voter may have scratched through the name of bill nelson and encircled the name of rick scott, for example. you are not supposed to vote that way, but in a canvassing recount, that vote may get counted. host: what is the legal status? i know governor rick scott threatened a lawsuit, and he said one the election seats were going to court. what is the status of all of the lawsuits surrounding the selection yo this election? guest: i know a little bit more about palm beach's association. ac and others have filed lawsuit, protesting the fact that they were not allowed to use cameras during some of the ballot review procedures, procedures that have always been open to full media coverage.

in the case of broward county, an order came out late last orderedat basically criticized to comply with all of the appropriate legal deadlines here for the tabulation of votes . when this thing moves into a legal realm as opposed to a vote counting brown, it gets more thelicated, and it suggests likelihood of further delays, at least the possibility of. host: right now, when will we know who won these races? will we know next week? will not know what next weekend. here is the political next step. the machine recounts will begin as early as this afternoon. te totals in the vo some places are definitely going

to change, and if they change dramatically in any place, that supervisor of elections has explaining to do. the numbers might change very fractionally, very small. the machine recount totals must be reported to the state by 3:00 next thursday afternoon, and that deadline will determine whether we have these manual wherets that i described the canvassing board looks at all the under votes and overflows and starts, you know, adding and subtracting ballots, boats, actually. beyond that, there is even more. next friday, november 16, is the deadline for all overseas and military ballots to be received by a 67 counties. they have not been counted yet. florida is a huge military state with tens of thousands of voters casting ballots in afghanistan, in europe, all over the world, and people who are overseas but have residences overseas but

have their voting residency in the state. those ballots are yet to be counted as well. host: we would like to thank steve bousquet for explaining to us a little bit what is going on in florida. thanks, steve. guest: ok, great. good to be with you. host: let's go to your calls, what you want to talk about. let's go to david on the republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. i want to talk about nationalism. i understand the gentleman was trying to explain nationalism. we talk about nationalism, globalism, but how about how much we spent protecting the airways and the sea ways, and all of that money comes out of our tax dollars. those are businesses overseas, so we want to pull back on one don't mind these

large businesses developing companies that benefit overseas, because we have to protect our military and our air force. i will take my answer off the air. thank you. host: since you brought it up, i want to say november 11 is veterans day. this earmarks the 100th anniversary of the end of world war i. vice president mike pence will lay a wreath at the tomb of the unknown and speak at a ceremony. from arlington national cemetery at 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. let's go to charles who is calling for connecticut on the independent line. charles, good morning. caller: good morning. ado not have to much of comments, but i wanted to say i was watching your show earlier on when mr. nau was talking, and i noticed in the background the american flag on the middle flag pole. at flag should be flying

half mast, but it is playing sort of horizontally about 80 eight from the flat all. has anybody noticed this? that as well.d i'm sure they will get it fixed. caller: ok. i called the washington police. anyway, i hope this election comes out ok, and let every vote out. take care. host: let's go to paris and in new york, new york on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. when we called in, i thought you said we could talk about anything we would like to. the person i was talking to, i told her i would call back later. host: you can talk but any public policy thing on the show. caller: yes, and she wanted me to tell her what i want to talk about, and i thought it was unfair for her to question me

like that when i thought we could talk about anything. back to why i am calling, one of the reasons why we often say who is going to pay for things when we don't want to pay for things, like the war, a lot of embassies in different countries some the most expensive embassy in iraq, and we have a big tax breaks for the rich. we have free housing for the mayor, governors, the president, the free traveling money for government. we never asked who is going to pay for the. we only ask when it is for schools and people who need help. why do wething is -- keep talking about former president obama? he is no longer in office. let's not talk about the past. funding, we should bring our soldiers from 8, 9 countries that we have, because taxpayers have to pay, including closing down the embassies, stop killing children and babies and innocent

people in other countries, and we don't ever mention that we are killing innocent people in other people's countries. we only talk about killing, abortion, babies in the united states. a religious person should be concerned about killing anyone anywhere. ou shall not kill, thou shall not steal. care about all of the amendments. thank you for listening and for letting me talk. let's go to perry on independent line. good morning. caller: thank you. we have to consider ourselves americans first. insinuate, here to [indiscernible] we have become a lot of country living under the protection of one roof. street. walk under one

we have to consider ourselves americans first. we live in a complicated, dangerous world right now. to survive, we have to consider that. the respect and our unity, i do not feel like we are united. we are a very divided country right now. i cannot believe how divided we really are. it is a shame. consider yourself an american first, forget our little differences underneath it all, the umbrella, discuss them, don't make them, whatever you want to do, but consider yourself an american first. host: let's go to don calling from eastpointe, michigan on the republican line. don, good morning. caller: good morning. i am calling about voting. i am not sure what state it is, but i am thinking it is oregon, i heard on the news that you get one ballot mailed to you and one valid only.

you fill out that ballot and mail it in, this way they are this iscould sa racism or whatever it can become a because of the woman said, the past is the past. if people only got one ballot, there is no way they could she, because we have a problem in florida, in georgia, and a few other states that all of a 80,000they come up with votes, and they go to one person, but none to the republicans. it went all to the democrats. host: don, i think the state you are talking about is washington state. -iny do the mail an ballots there. caller: ok. for that. the other thing -- how come trump gets into office and nobody said anything good about

what he has done? everything he has said he is going to do he has done. he gets in office, the first day in office, he signs a bill for the pipeline, and we brought 40,000 workers back to work, but nobody says nothing. everything everybody says about him is bad. they make fun of the guy and stuff. he has done more in eight years than our last president has done it eight years! the last thing i think our last up thent it was walking stairs to get on a plane and go play golf. hey, have a nice day, weekend, and thanks for taking my call. stating of president trump, tomorrow marks the centennial of the armistice of world war i. president trump and melania trump will attend a ceremony in france to mark the occasion.

french president emmanuel macron will also speak. live coverage begins at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. once again, you can see live coverage of all of this on c-span tomorrow starting at 4:00 a.m., and then for president trump's speech at the american snes americanure cemetery. let's go to william and the independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call. that caller is exactly why i am calling. when you have to get political with these republicans trying to rewrite history, there are a lot democrats, a lot independents very upset with obama, but when he was in there, i remember him inviting people over for a beer, bending over backwards to work with republicans.

that is why democrats were upset with him because he wasted two years trying to work with republicans. and nobody has played more golf then donald trump is youthis ye, these year, so do not let republicans get on here and try to rewrite history. the public knows what is going on, and that is the black population, they are not stupid, they know what was going on during the obama years. and this guy calls and says ismp can do no wrong, he doing so much -- trump is doing nothing for the black people, period. that is my comment. callingt's go to davon from forest lake, minnesota on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i really believe that would occur should not be allowed back into the building at the department of justice. everything i have read, his appointment was

unconstitutional, illegal, it is obviously meant to subvert justice. that man should not have access to the records, to the case, to mueller's investigation. he should not be allowed back in the building. the other thing i want to encourage people to do -- ask yourself -- where are all of the depleted uranium munitions made? read a whole series of articles from propublica called "bombs in our backyard." that depleted uranium that we are dropping on kids is made in america and it is killing children here in appalachia, at the army ammunition plant, a company, b.a.e. systems, a company that has production the phillies in saudi arabia, they are making depleted uranium munitions at that plant. read the propublica articles, "bombs in america," we are

killing our own children with contaminations here. systems happens to be run by michael chertoff, and yes, the first homeland security director whose result controversy and paranoia. people, you have got to get some progress in your scopes. read the facts. whitaker is a shill. we should not have allowed him in the building, these should not be in that position. we should stop wasting our blood money, position, and souls making weapons to kill people all over the country. host: for viewers who do not know what this previous caller was talking about, she is talking about the acting attorney general matthew j whitaker. here is a story from the this morning.st"

president trump distances himself from acting attorney general matthew j whitaker, amid the controversy of legal music business and take lives of the president and the justice department, with the white house scrambling to manage his trump starting to doubt speculation that he included a partisan loyalists. trump insisted he had not spoken with whatever about the investigation being led by special counsel robert s mueller t iii. let's go to tony calling from marietta, georgia on the democratic line. tony, good morning. caller: hey, good morning. feart to speak to the going on globally amongst the caucasian race.

this thing is throwing the whole world order simply because it is time to pay the piper. bannon goingteve globally spreading trump's policies and whatnot, and until the truth is dealt with, this thing is going to keep spiraling. thank you. host: let's go to marion calling from green river, wyoming, on the democratic line. marion, good morning. caller: i would like to ask why they can't pass a bill. for at least the last 10 years, for people to turn in their tax before, at least 14 days their name can be printed on balance, no exceptions. no exceptions.

host: we would like to thank everyone for calling in today and we thank our guest on the show. join us tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. for another "washington journal." we will see you then. thank you so much, and have a good day. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] up today on c-span, president trump's news conference on wednesday, the day after the midterm elections. their congressional leaders beginning post congressional briefings at 11:30. 11:50, charles schumer

with his reaction to the new senate makeup. races in florida and arizona are still undecided. at 12:10, house minority leader nancy pelosi and her comments on the democrats winning the majority and party leadership elections. tonight, two retiring members of congress, orrin hatch of utah, and sander levin of michigan, talk about their tenure in congress, the state of the political process today, the trump administration, and what is next after retiring from politics. join us tonight at 8:00 eastern, for retiring members of congress, on c-span and www.c-span.org, and listen with the free c-span radio app. c-span sunday, veterans four: 30 a.m. used done, for the 100th anniversary of the end of world war i, with french president emmanuel

macron. at 7:30 a.m., washington journalist live on c-span.and american history tv on c-span 3, for a special call-in program about what was hoped to be the war to end all wars, with guests, loyola university professor john more leisure, and -- john moser, at 9:00 a.m. on c-span, live coverage of president trump and first lady melania trump at world war i ceremonies in paris. at 11:00, the wreath-laying ceremony at the tomb of the unknowns, live from arlington national cemetery.and our life veterans day coverage continues at 5:00 p.m. eastern with the liberty awards, honoring former president george w. bush and laura bush. on american history tv on c-span3 at 9:00 a.m. eastern, historians narrate the 1921 silent film documenting the journey of a world war i soldiers or mains from france to

an arlington national cemetery -- remains from france to arlington national cemetery. the final resting place for over 14,000 american soldiers, and that 8:00 p.m. eastern, president trump at the world war i ceremonies in paris. day, on c-span, and american history tv on c-span3. on wednesday, president trump held a news conference at the white house to discuss the results of the midterm elections. he engaged in a heated conversation with cnn journalist acosta, which ended in him having his press pass revoked. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states, accompanied by the vice president of the united states.

pres. trump: thank you. thank you very much. please. it was a big day yesterday, incredible day, and last night, the republican party defied history to expand our senate majority while significantly beating expectations in the house for the midtown and midterm year. we did this in spite of a very dramatic fundraising

disadvantage, driven by democrats, wealthy donors, and special interests, and very hostile media coverage, to put it mildly. the media coverage set a new record and a new standard. we also had a staggering number of house retirements, so it is a little tough. these are seats that could have been held pretty easily, and we had newcomers going in, and a lot of them worked very hard, but it is very difficult when you have that many retirements. we held a large number of campaign rallies with large, large numbers of people going to every one. to the best of my knowledge, we did not have a vacant or an empty seat. i'm sure you would have reported it, if you spotted one, including 30 rallies in the last 60 days. we showed the candidates that i supported achieved tremendous success last night. as an example of the 11 candidates we campaigned with during the last week, 9 won last night. this vigorous campaigning stopped the bluee