discusses the subsidies given to amazon. at 9:00, our spotlight on magazines as k. sabeel rahman from the new republic details their article on the future of the democratic party. host: good morning and welcome to "washington journal." president donald trump this week gave his support to a long stalled criminal justice reform bill, spurring hopes of passage before the end of this year. the bill is championed by both democrats and republicans in the senate and faces entrenched opposition and a shortened legislative clock that runs out in december. what do you think of the reform bill? we want to know your opinion. if you have experience with the criminal justice system, whether

that means you are incarcerated, you have a family member that is incarcerated, or a prosecutor, criminal defense attorney, or judge, we want to hear what you think. call in at (202) 748-8000. if you have something to say about the kernel justice system, and you don't fit into that earlier category, we want you to call in at (202) 748-8001. can always reach us on social media and twitter at c-span wj and facebook. gave ant donald trump major push to the first step bill at a white house event where he and advocates for this legislation came together to talk about what this bill would do in the push to get it done before the end of the year. here is what they have to say. [video clip] >> throughout this process, my

administration has worked closely with law enforcement. bill backing ensures this remains tough on crime. it has to remain tough on crime, and supports the tremendous work of our police and the tremendous job law enforcement does throughout our country. we have great respect for law enforcement. we are honored that seven of the major police organizations, including the fraternal order of police and the international association of police chiefs have fully endorsed this bill. we could not have gotten here without the support and feedback of law enforcement and its leaders. they are here today, two of them, chuck canterbury of fop and iacp. thank you very much. [applause]

these are two tough cookies. they want what is right. interesting, if you look at texas, georgia, if you look at andissippi and kentucky other states that are known as tough, they are supporters. my administration will always support been credible men and women of law enforcement. we will continue to pursue policies that help the heroes that keep us safe. they are truly heroes. more than 2000 liters in the faith community who have signed a letter of support. we have tremendous support within the faith community. americans from across the political spectrum can unite around prison reform legislation that will reduce crime while

giving our fellow citizens a chance at redemption. and theying happens make a mistake, they get a second chance at life. host: one of the reporters who has been following this issue is the hill's george cardi, who will join us by phone. good morning. guest: good morning. thank you for having me on. host: can you tell us what the major provisions are in the first steps act? guest: yes. it takes a house bill and as three or four changes to sentencing laws, which would apply the fair sentencing act, reduce mandatory minimums for

firearms used during a crime, reducewould expand mandatory minimum sentences that a judge uses when sentencing someone. host: does this affect both state and federal, or is this only affecting federal? guest: advocates will acknowledge that this is aimed at the federal level. it is limited in scope. how important was it that president trump came out on wednesday and threw his support behind this bill? does this mean we will see action in the senate and passage in the house? guest: this is a symbolic victory for advocates who have been pushing criminal justice reform for years. senator grassley has been

working on this issue and not really getting anywhere. they were hoping the president would endorsed the bill to help them overcome conservative opposition in the senate and maybe win over republican leadership to the point that they could get a vote. there still seems to be obstacles. senator cotton came out yesterday and said he did not support the bill. senator kennedy from louisiana told me this week that if they tried to move the bill quickly , if they triedk to get unanimous consent to get over some of the hurdles, he would object. week toldthis supporters that they need to whip ite the bill and

to show him they have 60 votes. then the leadership will weigh it against the other things they have to do in the short amount of time they have. they have to fund the government, a farm bill, and nominations. it is not guaranteed to get a vote. host: you said senators like cotton and kennedy are in opposition to the bill. are there any senate democrats in opposition? guest: there are not any publicly in opposition yet. when you talk to outside groups areorting this bill, they working with the absorption -- assumption that there will be a handful at the end of the day that will not vote with this bill because it does not have the sentencing reforms, or there may be some political jockeying

going on ahead of 2020. it was notable when they released the bill on thursday that senator cory booker was supporting it. maybe that will help win over that section of the caucus. host: we talked about the opposition of the bill. who is in support of this bill? is it truly bipartisan? this is a bipartisan issue. , senatorus congresses grassley and senator durbin have been the two negotiating this with whitejunction house. they view it as bipartisan. they rolled it out on thursday. whitehouse, sheldon mike lee, chuck grassley, jerry

moran. it has supporters on both sides. who is pushing this bill at the white house? is this jared kushner or someone else in the white house beside him? guest: no, this has been something jared kushner has been closely involved with. the senators gave him a lot of credit for working with them and trying to get this bill moving along. aroundwith mcconnell september to see if they could get the bill moved earlier, before the lame-duck. white house officials told us this week that mcconnell shut that down. let's wait until the lame-duck. this has been an issue for kushner and the president acknowledged that during wednesday's press conference. host: we talked a lot about the

bill's possibility in the senate. what is the house action looking like? will the republican-controlled house, which will flip in january, will they consider taking this up if the senate passes it? they are pretty confident that if they can get this past the senate, the house will pass it. they seem pretty confident that if they can get this bill, which hospital and asked senate reforms to it, the house will easily clear it again by the end of the year. the question if they cannot get past this year, does a house democratic majority want to renegotiate and start over again? host: does it look more likely

that this will pass in the lame-duck session, or will this roll over to next year? point, ithink at this comes down to if they can win over majority leader mcconnell and proved to him that it is either worth using up the floor talking or they can get their colleagues to play nice and let them move this quickly. he made it pretty clear that they have other things to do at the end of the year. they don't have a lot of time. he has -- he has not yet guaranteed them a vote. host: is there anything else we need to know about this bill? guest: it will be an interesting congressional fight to watch over the next couple weeks to see if they can get this done. host: thank you. we have been listening to the hill's jordain carney.

guest: thank you for having me on. host: we want to know what you think about the criminal justice reform bill going through the senate. if you have experience with the criminal justice system, if you were incarcerated, have family members incarcerated, a lawyer, a judge, law enforcement, call (202) 748-8000. if you don't fit into that category but still have something to say about this bill, call into (202) 748-8001. let's go to mike in california. how are you this morning? caller: doing fine. i feel different about this bill. the timing is necessary because it is bringing americans together, especially in terms of race, and it is positive right now. i don't think it really serves the passes at large very well --

large very well when you reduce minimum sentences. it comes down to value. orientals, at the you see very few of them in prison. why is that? in a social sense, they put a high premium on honorable behavior. valuesly comes down to and getting your values right. positive think it is a that you have both republicans and democrats working together this closely after a tight midterm election? caller: yes, i think it is a positive. i really do. it was a pretty acrimonious election we had. pretty divided right now. i don't think the elite liberal media helps matters in terms of their bias. host: thank you. we have a tweet from one of our

viewers who says, i think it is good news that many on both sides like the bill. let's go to james, who is calling from pittsburgh, and who has experience with the kernel justice system. caller: good morning. good morning, america. it is embarrassing. i have experienced. you are going to have to ask the questions because all i have to tell you is i grew up in juvenile detention centers and ended up getting in trouble and going into the prison system. i am 52 years old. i'm a different type of person. do you have any questions? host: the only thing i am curious about is one of the things this bill talks about is reducing mandatory minimums. what do you think about that idea? caller: the thing with the guns, guns are bad. if you do a crime with a gun, you are going down.

the drug war is ridiculous. it is ridiculous. it is ridiculous. the guns are bad. especially if you use them for a crime. go ahead. . -- next question, sir. host: really quickly, one of the things the bill will do is reduce the disparity between the different types of sentencing for crack cocaine and potter cocaine, ispowder that something you think they should be working on? caller: people who smoke crack cocaine is stupid. the people are stupid. it is ridiculous. i cannot believe it. it is stupid. all it is is cocaine. more awareness. drug awareness. drug awareness. it is stupid. cocaine, baking powder. e calling's go to heff

from indianapolis. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. can you hear me? host: we can hear you. go ahead. caller: my name is jeff. i think minor or mid-level first-time offenders should be given a break so they can work on getting themselves together. offenders, they deserve prison time. if this criminal justice reform initiative is going on to reduce the number of low-level or minor offenders going to prison so you can save space for the higher offenders,nt drug

then it is a good idea. let's go to monique, calling from washington, d.c. caller: morning. the bill does not go far enough from you. it does not address the three strikes outlaw in california. those people who are locked up for three minor convictions or whatever, they don't get the as minorrtunity today convicted persons. the same judges are in play. you have all these republican judges on the bench is that will lock continue to african-americans up more proportionately than white

criminals. it will always be like that. ump is flooding the benches of our federal system with republican judges. ink at what is going on texas, arizona, mississippi. it is sad. the bill is not for african-americans. the bill is specifically for white americans. point blank. thank you. let's go to raymond, calling from pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning. host: we can hear you. go ahead. caller: i think they should take pro se defendants more seriously, and the summary disorderly conduct, i think there should be jury trials for those. i think they are destroying people's lives by putting stuff

in papers or on computers, and if you get a conviction from a disorderly conduct, that could ruin your life, but you never get a chance for a jury to hear it. some local judge and a cop doesn't like you can destroy your life, and you never get a chance for a jury because anything can be disorderly conduct. as soon as you get convicted for a summary, he made an obscene gesture at a girl or something, all of a sudden people think he was convicted of something with a little girl, but he never had , a chance to talk to a jury, they just convict him of disorderly conduct. there are a lot of people with the way the media is that could destroy your life. the whole world will know in two minutes. you never have a chance to defend yourself because a local judge will say i find you guilty.

it is just one person that doesn't like you. that is my issue. you can destroy somebody with disorderly conduct summary. you don't even have to go through the trouble of jury trials. do you think the senate is doing the right thing by talking about this though, or should they move onto something else? no, they should absolutely talk about it. there are a lot of people that do something wrong. you just can't convict somebody that you don't like of something. that is why a lot of people are angry. i did not do this. life isn't fair, but there are too many things that are just so egregious that let it be fair for people. we live in a great country. we have so much, but you cannot just let people destroy other

people. there are a lot of people that are really smart that never get a voice. you are shutting them down with these disorderly conduct summaries. you are giving them a bad reputation because you don't like them. people who could maybe be important people, but they never get a chance to be heard by a .ury they destroy them before they even get started. i think you are destroying really smart people sometimes that never get a chance to see a jury and say this is what is going on. host: let's go to jamie calling from the bronx, in new york. jamie has expense with the criminal justice system. good morning. caller: good morning. first of all, there is a huge discrepancy, at least in new york state for how women prisoners are treated compared to men. the women don't have televisions in their cells, whereas the male

prisoners do. too, we don't have access the athletic equipment that the men do. we don't have working weights. we don't have basketballs that are inflated or soccer balls that are inflated. statehe women in new york don't have access to the same type of vocational programs. the only programs right now, i believe they just added the greenhouse. which ifbeauty shop, you get a felony conviction, you cannot get a license in new york state, so that does not make sense. there is computer repair, so you are working on computers with flat screens that are 30 years old. that makes no sense for women. secondly, the bill system needs to be overhauled. i am in a situation now where my

fiancee has been trying to decide a case for more than two years. he is an rikers. we have had the bail paid since august,nd however we still cannot get him out on bail because he needs a certain amount of signatures, and the court is rejecting the signatures. it is a whole process. just because you have the amount of money for the bail does not necessarily mean they will you out. that whole system needs to be overhauled. if you are poor or don't have connection, it does not necessarily mean you can get out on bail. it is not fair. host: let's go to north carolina. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: just fine. go ahead. caller: my comment is about --

remaining the same. [indiscernible] that the crime he remain up tould the judge and those [indiscernible] that's the way i feel about it. host: let's go to rhonda calling from new jersey. rhonda has experience with the criminal justice system. caller: good morning, america. all my beautiful sisters and brothers that are up this morning. i love you all. i have experience in this matter. i have a son who is incarcerated. he is doing 15 years for drug trafficking. i got to be honest with you, i was truly blessed with my son.

i hope you have a minute for me. in april i had 15 f ei agents bust through -- fbi agents bust through my front door to arrest my son. it was just like zero dark 30 when they walked into get bin laden. that is how i felt. i have never had anything terrified me like that in my entire life, nor did i have any firstborn was ringng a drug trafficking in three counties of new jersey. down in as very park area.

i got to be honest with you, and god was with me, they did not care of my house. y house.up m i made them coffee. they were very nice to me. they were nice to my family. my husband was curious. he was so mad they came in our house. to make a long story short, and im saying this as a mother, think the fbi for saving my son. i had no idea what he was doing. they showed him mercy. they were going to give my son 35 years. lawyer that just beat a capital murder case in trenton who took my son pro bono. he was not a violent offender. as a matter of fact, the fbi had

him under surveillance for the last six months, and he said in court that my son was the godfather of the vote. -- hood. he was buying chris this and taking care of everybody in the neighborhood. kids,e your son with bad don't feel sorry for them. don't allow them in your house. they will corrupt your child. host: thank you. let's go to barbara in missouri. good morning. caller: good morning. host: we can hear you. go ahead. caller: i was just calling on all others. what the woman said in washington, d.c. good morning.

can you hear me? host: we can hear you. go ahead. itto what the woman said in washington, d.c., how the system is set up for women. the justice system has become a multimillion dollar -- you can't hear me? host: i can hear you. go ahead. barbara, we can hear you. go ahead. caller: i hear myself. at any rate, i think this system re, youo be changed whe know, they are saying when a black person does something, he is just out there. you cannot hear me? host: barbara, go ahead. we can hear you clearly. caller: ok.

when a black person do something, they get time. they get life without parole and all this. of necessarily the type crime where they need to get life without parole. they need to come up with a program to rehab the people that are incarcerated. host: let's go to laura in florida. good morning. i am a former prosecutor in florida. i also worked as an attorney with the department of corrections. i think the criminal justice reform is long overdue. what the public needs to realize, and the woman that was just on pointed out, it is extremely expensive to house inmates. what has happened with the mandatory minimum sentencing is that the judges are forced to put people in prison who occupy

, when the prison is so overcrowded and underfunded, and i think we recently took away the funding for mental health, when the system is so underfunded, the state has to release people in order to be in compliance with the law so that they are not overcrowded. they need to release those that should be kept in for violent crimes and sexual offenses because they cannot release those that are on the mandatory sentencing. it and allowing those individuals to be released and not the force judges to impose mandatory sentences, we can have a safer environment, safer community by keeping those that are violent offenders housed. post the washington

pointed out that the international fraternal order of police gave the bill significant momentum by endorsing the latest compromise. reform hasustice been on the agenda for the last two administrations. it seems like the trump administration is going to be able to get it done. drop was the with president of the international association of police." let's go to my calling from -- from california. caller: i was watching public television. public television is different from your channel. what i am saying in california is it is criminals and crime.

i voted republican this year. the legislature just in this state. the crime rate, the thing about it to me is we have had how many years of obama in office? i mean, obama. i'm going back in time because i am 70 years old. the criminal justice system is one-sided on the thing about race. it is a racial thing. i have spanish american people living behind me that don't even speak english. they are racist. i have indeed people around here. they are racist. people walking with bandannas on. you wonder where they come from. this is california. what i am saying about the race is the criminal court system, the defendant has to defend himself. isit is street law, it hiding out in the street almost. it is like a boxing match out there with a guy.

guns are out of the question. drugs and don't is out of the question. i have been in jail one time. i learned my lesson. it was a minor thing. they coming after me again at my age. been a very good driver, and i was married. system, ifl justice he goes to court on a minor charge, it depends on what the charge is. police, that is like a police state. a policeman, that is why if he is not here, they race, fire trucks and all that. they are in a hurry. they do what they want. it is a one-sided thing. it is one-sided. it is not fair to the victim. it is not fair to the one who

did the crime because he is defending himself. host: let's go to joe calling from new york. caller: good morning. good morning. i spent 30 years in the criminal justice system. one of the most egregious aspects of it is the lack of availability for people to exercise their constitutional right to a speedy trial. the lack of availability of court houses, courtrooms, and all personnel needed to ensure their constitutional right has not been addressed in all the years i spent in the criminal justice system. in the courthouse is, i have seen people incarcerated longer than their sentence would have ,een if they were convicted just waiting for the opportunity to get into a courtroom. that is just not right. are not going to be serious until you start opening

up more court houses, more courtrooms and utilizing all the personnel needed to ensure their constitutional right. things one of the major that always gets overlooked. it is frustrating for people to wait for a trial to determine their guilt or innocence. and to be told there are no available courtrooms for you to have your trial. if you are waiting in jail because you cannot make bail, you could be waiting longer than the sentence you would have gotten to be convicted of the crime. it is one of the most important aspects of the criminal. that is one that has never really been addressed and needs to be addressed. thank you for the time. be well.

one of the major sponsors of the bill is senator chuck grassley, who tweeted this after the president made his announcement. the bill donald trump endorsed yesterday would be the most gifted criminal justice reform in decades. civil rights groups and the fraternal order of police support our bill. white house support for the first step act positive step in the right direction. mass incarceration. representative doug collins, initiative shown today by donald trump as he endorsed the first step act to make our communities

safer and give deserving americans a chance at redemption. representative of texas tweeted this, many have been waiting for relief. i am presently reviewing the proposed criminal justice legislation that has added sentencing reduction relief that will help. many families with their loved ones. i hope this will be a bill that will seize the moment and effectively combine prison reform with needed sentencing reduction reform. let's go to david calling from maryland. david has experience with the criminal justice system. good morning. caller: can you hear me? host: we can hear you. go ahead. convicted oru are sentenced to a crime that is

that,lent and stuff like why put him in prison, put him in the military. make him do military training to where you get rehabilitated during the military. let some of these people who have been overseeing this get a break and come back to their families. send these people sitting in prison to get nothing. they come right back out to the street. what is your experience with the criminal justice system? caller: i was incarcerated when i was younger. as i got older, i wised up. i stayed away from them. in the inner cities, it is hard to do. without jobs, you go right back to what you know. host: let's go to herbert from georgia. he has experience with the criminal justice system.

good morning. caller: good morning. i was incarcerated 30 years ago. you come to find out when they ,end you to get that cash money and they give you a little cash money, you don't have any type of training. that is what they do. there are all kinds of reforms in the prison system. give him a trade. get a school set up like mechanics. i did go get a trade. when i got a trade in maintenance, i got a job with the county. from miami.lly that is the thing they need to do. when you send the person out there, you give them enough money, and they are doing the same thing he was before.

he doesn't have any money coming in. they go back and do the same thing. if they have some type of trade, they can use that trade. go get them a good job. another thing, the justice system, when i was incarcerated, there are more blacks and for minorin there crimes. conviction, they give you probation. if they violate the prohibition, then that is your second conviction. then you come back with another crime, and you got third or fifth. you a habitual criminal. they force you to plea-bargain with some time because they say you are they habitual criminal. is messedy the system up. we got the guideline. that guideline does not help

minorities in this country. host: here is a tweet from one of our viewers, jodi says america needs to make up our mind. his prison going to be rehabilitation or punishment? it seems a shame that we want to punish them when we have their undivided attention to rehabilitate them or $20,000 a year per prisoner. christine, good morning. caller: can you hear me? host: we can hear you. go ahead. caller: my daughter was in trouble two years ago, never got in trouble before. now she has a felony. she cannot job. they will not hire her. what i experienced in the system is that got the bill bondsman stocking the hallway. they have no public defenders except maybe a few. the prisoners have to work for

two or three dollars a day, and they are working for the state cleaning highways. i understand that, but were three dollars today, they have to buy their own personal items. food and shampoo and all that. another thing i wanted to say is you have to pay fines, counseling, and all the other things they come out. why don't they offer this while they are in their? you wait for trial, and you lose your job. people are making a lot of money on this. the sentences are invested to these reasons. it is terrible how you have to wait. i have a young man i speak to. he is just waiting to go to trial. e four been in ther

months. it is terrible. the whole system needs form. the reason they did not do it is because you are making money on it i tried to look it up to see who has estimates, and i could not find anything. from let's go to frank south carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. i am 60 years old. pass when i was 20 years old i got an arrest record. misdemeanors. i can remember the day in the 1980's. it was a handshake, and once we got our internet databases running these arrest records, they are on file. they never go away. have to ask the governor for a hard. -- pardon.

to apply for a job you have three or other people competing for that job. they use things like this to discriminate against you. haveld not be surprised to databases on how many times you have been forced, bankruptcy, -- divorced, bankruptcy. this needs to be squelched. there needs to be a mandatory time or that drops off your record automatically. host: many state governors have started to do this type of is anything like that happening in south carolina? caller: not that i know of. happened like 20 years later. they were not to give a license to practice because of something that happened go. i served two years in the military since that time. i know it interfered with me

getting promoted in the military as well. offensesor nonviolent and stuff like that, it needs to be squelched. there are people out there that are going to discriminate against you for little things. if they got something on you, he is out. that is the problem i have with it. i am 60 now. i know it is preventing me from getting certain jobs. host: let's go to detroit. because iwas calling like to know about someone that committed a crime, and than they are with that person, i want to know what there was going to do with that if they did not commit the crime? host: there are several

different provisions in the bill, though i don't know if they have anything that addresses that. are there any provisions in the bill that you think should be pushed forward over other ones? caller: yes, if you did not commit the crime, but you are with somebody that did come i should you have same thing as -- did, whyrson should you have the same thing as the other person? let's go to margaret from massachusetts. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm so glad i can talk about this problem. my daughter went into a building 19 and bought a plant. the price was not on it. the clerk went back to get the price.

three women that were angry about waiting in line came over pulp.at her to a they ran down the street and got a policeman. in, and sheame back was sitting on a chair, and they jumped on her and threw her on the floor and took her to the station. the reason i found out about it is a man called me. he said she did not throw a punch. he said that three times. he says i cannot do anything because he has some problem himself with the law. obama, thevideo to fbi, the actual video of her being beat. when i went down to get her, she was a mess. she had to walk home without any shoes on. you call that justice? d a lawyer all i had at

the time to thousand dollars, he said if we you are -- time, $10,000, he said if what you're saying is the truth, we can clear it. nothing. that was the result of it all. whye she did not do that, is she suffering? she went to school for years to try to have the right to go to school and get a good job. she cannot get a good job. i just heard a lady the minute ago saying her daughter had the same problem. i felt so bad for her daughter, no matter what she did. my dollar did not commit any crime. put an ae, i finally complaint against the police, and i have not heard a thing

from thim. -- them. host: let's go to ronald in south carolina. good morning. caller: yes? host: ronald, you are on the air. criminal think this justice reform should be tackled from many different aspects. not just the jobs in the prison and the way you are integrated into society. iny send you back out there the street. this is a real world with no training, no money, no family support. guidelines are also read this. horrendous. you have murderers getting less time than drug offenders. you have to look at the spectrum up and down the line. it is never going to be perfect. you have to look at every

situation differently. guidelinesjust have and expect for these things to correct the problems going on. include morel does programs for prisons to train people for employment to help you transition to society. do you think that is a good idea? caller: yeah, that's a good idea, but this is the thing. you say they have programs to help people transition to society. these programs can a lot of limited.ese programs what are these programs designed to tackle? these be like basic programs to meet quotas. we don't need programs to meet quotas. we need programs to get real results. thatn't need programs

people are just going to take inside prison to get by. we need programs that people are really going to be interested in and that are really going to help people do things in society with -- let me give you an example. you do a program in jail. househave green programs. you get out, and there are no greenhouse jobs. how can a person come out in society and say i did a greenhouse program in prison? what kind of job are you going to get out here now? from let's go to victoria oregon. good morning. caller: good morning. i went to a presentation given prison reform. in oregon, they are doing more sentencing.

you have the option of the victim meeting with the perpetrator to talk about things. there is arbitration. the perpetrator takes responsibility for whatever they have done. there is a negotiation. a lot of that goes into the sentencing. they talked about how the whole bill problem starts this cascade of events where a person just cannot make bail, and the money situation, everything is compounded. lot about the statistics of lower income and minority people having the bulk of the experience in the prison system. it was very interesting. oregonf the justices in are looking at more restorative type sentencing. we just had elections. on the local level, people don't vote for your judges, but we all

found out about who the judges were and what they were doing. that is how you really change the system because a lot of it starts with the attorney general's in your state and the judges. let's go to our calling from california. good morning. caller: good morning. i am 67. i have a 16-year-old stepdaughter. she is in school. her friend and her were the only one on the softball team that did not have long sleeve shirt. they were playing in the rain. i asked if i could buy her one. i bought both of them want. while they were in the store, they were trying on the shirts. a young lady said i need a baseball bat. i said no. i'm not buying you a baseball bat. you have a mom and dad, they should be able to do it. she goes to the police department and tells him that i kissed her on her neck.

they did that test on her neck, and it came up negative that i did not do it. the policeman so rude, they wanted to convict me anyway. i don't know what they told her. five months later, i got a restraining order, she goes out there and talks to one of her friends and guess her friend to say i put my hand on her but and her breast, and she's turns put hands says he on my butt too. i don't disrespect women with that. now i am a registered sex offender. i don't like that. i am in the process of trying to get into court with this. everyone tells me it is $7,500 just to do this. of course, i don't have a record as a teenager were a grown person. it is upsetting.

i swear, it makes me want to kill somebody. host: let's go to glenn from arizona. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you doing today? host: just fine. go ahead. caller: i just wanted to talk about the mandatory minimum sentences. i have had friends who have had scrapes with the law before. nothing life altering or anything. what ended up happening was, because of mandatory minimum sentences, first-time offenders were getting put into prison for long sentences. it does not make sense to me. i have heard judges in court on the record apologize to people that there is nothing they could took powerthe laws away from the judges. i thought that was the whole point of the judicial system

that the judges were in charge. that was my only comment. i appreciate you for hearing me. host: let's go to elliott from south carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to share with you, workedoys and girls -- i in the prison for a long time. those boys and girls who stepped onto the evil side, the dark side of our society, have changed their brains so they ir criminal ways are appropriate. how are we going to change their criminal ways? being part of a gang is a lot of fun. you get good drugs, good women, have a great time. the rest of us slobs are working. i think we should have something called the blank test. every african-american should have five get out of jail free

cards. thank you. host: let's go to richard from south carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. i was calling on account of a claim i had against the state of north carolina down here. my daughter is a nurse. toothas having a lot of problems. she went to the dentist, and they gave her a prescription. on the prescription, it had 30 pills. the tech went in and took the , then hehe doctor went and got her out of work. she missed six months of work on account of the drug related charge.

you cannot work in a hospital that handles drugs. eventually we got it to go to the district attorney. she came -- i even went and got handwriting expert, and he proved the prescription had never been changed. we have been trying to get a court date for this thing for about four years. we cannot get a court date because every time we run into a judge, he rules against us. i guarantee if it was an individual, we would have gotten an individual. we are working against the sheriff's department down here. arrests doing illegal because we have gotten all kinds

of documentation that they live and everything else. -- lied and everything else. still, i cannot get in there. i got her record clean. i got her record expunged. they were supposed to do it. i had to hire a lawyer. it has cost me and costly. it should not have cost me anything. host: let's go to linda from connecticut. good morning. caller: good morning. i have experience with the judicial system as a juror. we tried a felony murder case. the jury itself did not want to convict the person of felony murder, but because deathime happened -- the happened during the course of a felony, we had to convict. we wanted to convict them of

reckless manslaughter. we deliberated and deliberated, and finally we kept going. the judge said we had no choice. that was -- i was a young girl, 22 years old at the time. that was 33 years ago. that has haunted me my entire life. that is the flipside. sometimes even juries are handcuffed by mandatory minimums. it is a shame. it is well past the time it should be addressed. host: coming up, aaron mehta discusses the new report on the u.s.'s military edge. later, the newly announced headquarters for amazon and the subsidies the company was given. michael farren will join us to talk about that.

this week as democrats think about their new role as the house majority, newsmakers will aboutith peter defazio what he will do if he becomes chairman of the infrastructure committee chair. the prospects for infrastructure legislation to rebuild roads and bridges. >> i was at the white house. the president did not seem to be on board with his own advisors. he expressed an interest in a recognition that we need real federal investment and new partnerships with the states in real building america's infrastructure. the before the election, head of white house congressional affairs came to visit me. i did not know they had a congressional affairs office, but maybe they had their finger in the wind. we talked about areas i could agree and potentially work with the president.

infrastructure and trade. recognitionre is a on the part of the president, and there goes the year peace to rebuildat we need our infrastructure and make real federal investment. i think it is doable. there were a few colleagues that said you don't with the help trump. this is about the united states of america and the fact we have been ignoring this problem and these needs for a very long time. the country is falling apart. the americans get it. we have three examples that show it is not politically toxic. california. kevin mccarthy and amy walters -- mimi walters. they failed miserably. waltz turned

the state from red to blue. he got one of the largest margins in history. the new governor of michigan, red to blue. she said fix the damn roads. it is not politically toxic. i think there is a bridge that mitch mcconnell is interested in and costs a couple of billion dollars. the federal government can't help. >> washington journal continues. host: we are joined by aaron mehta of defense news, talking about america's military edge. guest: the report is a mandatedonally report. together,put people take three people. they sit down and talk and give it definitive document about the

state of america's military. eric edelman, a former republican under bush, undersecretary of defense for policy, the other cochair was the head of the navy for several years, a democrat. they lead this group and put this report out last week. isot of what is in there stuff you heard flirting around -- floating around the pentagon. this is a definitive document that will influence the next congress in january. host: from the report you have in your story, the u.s. military could sever high casualties and loss of major capital assets in a sex conflict. in a its next conflict war against china or russia. the u.s. is at risk of being overwhelmed should his military be forced to fight on two or more fronts simultaneously.

what does the military think about this report? guest: they are kind of of two minds. they think we will get it done no matter what. well, you can cut the budget and people. at the end of the day it might not be ideal, but we will get it done. people say this is a sober look at the fact based on the personnel we have, the technology we have and where we have been investing to deal with china and russia after a decade of only focusing on the middle east, which is a very different type of fight, they are people that say yes, that is about right. if we had a fight two wars at the same time, we probably could not do it effectively. if the u.s. -- could the u.s. go to war the great power and the and fight the

smaller conflicts around the world the west does every day? -- the u.s. does everyday? host: is the u.s. military stagnating, for are the other superpowers getting better? guest: you have heard -- the with the u.s. military has operated since 9/11 has the focus on this one specific region and a specific fight. that is an antiterrorist fight. those are fairly low intensity in terms of the technology you have. the stuff the u.s. had on 9/11 effectively was so good for that fight. upgraded and changed since then based on tactics. cant of the older airplanes still be used because they can't be shut down. the investments went there because that was the fight of the day. at the time russia was a partner.

things have changed in the last several years. russia particularly since crimea in 2014, and china spent the time going we should be thinking about our future. what does the u.s. have now? how can we try to match that? it's a combination. there is the focus down here and the stagnation in terms of technology development. the other countries said while they are distracted let's investing in technology. hypersonic missiles, a new concern at the pentagon. nuclear capabilities from russia and china. unmanned systems, which we have had a complete locke on. you are seeing these competitors really investing in areas the u.s. has ignored the last couple of decades. host: we want you to join the conversation about america's military readiness to fight two

wars at the same time. if you're in the eastern or central times and, call (202) 748-8000. if you are in the mountain and pacific time zone, call (202) 748-8001. and if you are active duty military or retired military, we want to hear you on this report. you can call in at (202) 748-8002. you can always reach us on social media. we are at twitter at @cspanwj, and on facebook. what was the white house and congressional reactions to this report? guest: the white house has not really reacted much. they have been distracted with other stuff going on. been weagon's responses are aware of the concerns. we agree with some of them and disagree with some of them. the pentagon does knowing to come out and say we cannot win.

there is a certain amount of pride and you don't want to tell the enemy to can't win the war. congress' reaction is been interesting. with the new congress there is a lot of politics at play. the democrats taken the house has the possibility of defense spending being cut. timeschiff has said many if democrats take over, we will look to cut nuclear spending, look to increase oversight of america's activities abroad, and see of defense spending needs to come down. the president himself surprise the pentagon -- surprised the pentagon. the president at a cabinet meeting announced they would have a $700 billion budget. now they are scrambling to basically redo the budget. finding $33 billion to cut.

that will come from things like systemsics or high-end that need to be developed for the future fight. that will be cut or delayed under this budget cut. there are a lot of moving parts to this. when congress comes back, especially in february when the budget drops, this will be something referred to by both sides. democrats met with ticket -- republicansy will say this says it needs more funding to make the strategy work. we need to increase funding. host: does the report from the commission relate the amount of funding and budget cuts to america's military readiness? guest: it does. this goes back to sequestration back in 2012. the way that was implemented was what the pentagon called salami

slices. everything took a 5% cut. that meant there was not a strategic thought about how to cut things. readiness was cut where it should not have been cut. modernization had not kicked off. training dropped off. you are seeing the fallout of the effects and we will continue to see that for the next decade in certain areas, particularly training and readiness. everyone is trying to get back to where they want to be. the issue comes down to the fact they are still heavily involved in the middle east in one specific type of fight. we are trying to get ready for a different kind of fight in the pacific and europe. there needs to be investment. host: larry from indiana. larry is retired military. good morning. caller: hi. i was wondering who made this report.

i don't think they know the heart and soul of the american people, about fighting wars. i was a vietnam vet. we have a heart for this country. i am 71 years old but i was still fight for this country today. thank you very much. guest: the report is from 12 experts. several are retired military and others served in the pentagon. the cochair was chief of naval operations. the report is not questioning the heart and soul of the military or the will of the people to fight. it is more a question of if a fight happens, logistically in terms of materials and moving people back and forth and actually doing the fighting that he happening, are those capabilities there? they are careful to say we can't fix this. if thisy are saying is

is going to happen in the next couple of years, the u.s. needs to prepare for it. at this point the conclusion is the pentagon has not done a good enough job in preparing for that, with technology or basic strategy for how to deal with that. host: don from new jersey, good morning. caller: good morning. -- limit itto just to just russia and china? why not prepare for every country in the entire world? the entire universe? why don't we prepare our army against fighting everything, every possible enemy there could ever be in your imagination? guest: some would say the space force is designed for everyone in the universe. why prepare and talk about countries -- china is a major trading partner. i don't think this is a, hey,

let's get ready for war. fundamentally many things china and russia are doing are at odds with america. has claimed territory other countries in asia believe is there's. -- theirs. there are a lot of potential flashpoints in which the u.s. could find itself. is a building designed to come up with plans and strategies for the worst-case scenarios. probably the best but look at this is this is kind of what this is. host: there was an audit done of the pentagon recently. guest: it failed. it failed in a way that is more complex than that answer. a law was passed that

all government agencies have to be audited. the pentagon said we know that is the law but we are complex and you guys don't need audit us. we are fine. the trump administration said that is not really good enough for us. we will actually do an audit. they brought in david norquest to essentially be the ceo of the pentagon. he did the first audit at homeland security. he had some experience starting on it with a government agency. not quite this big. this is $2.7 trillion in assets. it just concluded a couple of days ago. there were 21 individual audits. you have services, defense agencies. some got two different types of audits. five are given green light's. two were given yellow lights. everyone else got the equivalent of red, but the pentagon expected that. when you talk to david norquest,

he says we knew this was going to happen. we are doing this on purpose so we know where the problem areas are and what to go after next year. every year there is an audit. are coming they down, coming down until it is manageable. long as the pentagon cannot account for trillions of dollars i have no said that the and will support -- will not support another penny for defense." new congress comes in people see a lot of questions about this. we asked norquist and the deputy secretary of defense that question. what do you say to the mix people who say you were asking for billions of dollars and you can't pass an audit? essentially, we sympathize with that. this is a complicated building. we are now doing it and trying to get better and find savings.

there are a bunch of different internal reform packages to try to find little pockets of money. at the end of the date the pentagon's funding is tied up. pay.t of it is based in there are certain requirements they can't get rid of. that veryon top of expensive systems and things get complicated quickly. host: jason from eugene, oregon. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you very much for taking my call. love the program. today you have a really good program. i want to talk about military readiness. there is too much emphasis placed on the military and not enough placed on the states. we need to up our timetable if we are going to make the world safe for democracy. democracy is failing. authoritarian governments are taking advantage of this. we are under attack right now.

that is how we need to win the world. we need to start upholding our principles. we need to send our sons and daughters to other countries so they can come back to america and help build our readiness so we are able to win the world's culture on their terms. what i see is if we give everybody in the world citizenship, and that way everybody is americans. guest: that is an idea. i don't think i disagree with the core concept 30's to be funding for state. if you look at the u.s., there has always been a balance of the military and the political. jim mattis said a couple of times if you get rid of the state department, you have to buy more bullets. he said many times, especially when secretary tillerson was there, the state department has

the lead on all these issues. they happily on dealing with the situation in syria, on russia. the military is there to support the state department. the state department needs a big stick to threaten people with and that is the military's role. not everyone sees it that way. era, thest-9/11 military's funding has been a lot bigger than the state department's. there were people in the pentagon who say that is an issue. ceremony forgning the defense authorization act, president trump had this to say about the strength of our military. we willpresident trump: increase the size and strength of our military by adding thousands of new recruits to active duty, reserve and national guard units. including 4000 new active duty soldiers. we will replace aging tanks,

aging planes and ships with the most advanced and legal technology ever developed -- lethal technology ever developed. hopefully we will be so strong we never have to use it. host: do expect any legislation from congress and the fine duck session or coming up with a new congress in january that deals with this? guest: i would not expect much in the lame-duck session. they managed to pass defense spending bills a couple of weeks ago. the coast guard funding is the only thing up in the air because that is under homeland security and there was the fight about the border wall. it seems like there might be a plan a place for that. in terms of the new congress, absolutely. the budget will get dropped around february. then you will have the annual fights over defense spending. with the democrats taking over

there are a couple of things to watch. adam smith said nuclear weapons specifically with something president trump is invested in. under the nuclear posture deal they came up earlier this year, the pentagon saying this is our nuclear goals, they said we will make two new nuclear weapons. thinks that is not only strategically a bad idea but a waste of money. another one that will tie things increaseys he was to lgbtq writes in the military. president trump has put a ban on transgendered service members. smith said that will be a big issue for his committee. you start time is up, and you have senator inhofe who believes social issues should be part of the discussion. you can see some situations were a budget fight pops up in the

military's budget is tied up in if transgender service members can serve. host: michael from illinois, retired military. good morning. caller: good morning. i agree with the report for two reasons. one political and one military. on the military side the situation is we would exhaust all our active duty people. we would exhaust our reserves thenational guard people in initial conflict with russia or china. theust simply do not have wherewithal to gear up a big draft to start to pump in people into this particular conflict. on the political side you are not even going to get a draft army to fight when you have got

this income discrepancy in society. plus, you keep constantly cutting the taxes on the wealthy so who is going to pay for all of this extra military stuff? and they do waste a tremendous amount. i can't see us winning against russia or china. they have too many people and they are too determined for us to beat them. they should have brought back the draft years ago. they should have never turned the military into a bureaucracy. guest: i think the point about the active-duty numbers is a really good one. it is one of the pentagon is struggling with. you hear about people going for 5, 6, 7 to nine it's and it is causing burnout. it is at all levels. a lot of people are saying i would stay in the military but i have been deployed downrange seven or eight times.

it is completely emotionally draining and i need to get out. you can imagine the situation that would develop if there was a bigger war and everyone had to get activated at once to deal with it. it would be very complex and draining. even if they were was successfully completed, whatever that may look like, it would leave the military fairly depleted and plenty of other issues around the world at the beak up with. host: laura for michigan. caller: good morning. first of all, with regards to your question, i don't think we could win a war against russia. the people are too determined. it was russia that allowed us to win the second world war. 28 million russians were killed. otherwise hitler would probably be in washington. with regards to the armies that we have, something by 26 suicide today.

those poor soldier still see their families, are in constant there.t here and it is terrible because i have families that are in the service. back in iraq when the soldiers them tothey drugged speed them up so they could go -- i can't imagine people being treated that way. let's get back to the united states. let's take care of california. only 3% of that land is governed by california. the rest is federal land. this is people not paying attention of global warming. it is a farce.

is -- withink there the fires recently there is a role for the national guard and the military to help out in these situations, which is another example of the type of -- what happens if a wildfire breaks out in california and you need national guard assistance? that is the fundamental thing we keep coming back to. there is only a finite pool of resources. the u.s. does a lot every day all over the world. some of it is humanitarian missions, fighting fires, fighting isis. all yourve to pour resources into one specific issue, those resources have to stop. host: janet from tacoma, washington. good morning. the war is the saddest thing i ever knew. i was just a young little girl.

i could see the family, how they were so sad and cried so hard. these boys that are getting , i know jimmy carter was very peaceful. john kennedy. he negotiated with cuba to prevent a war. when clinton was president there who killed other people in other countries. clinton went and talked to their president and said i know we were wrong, we apologize. he says we will do anything you want us to. they asked for money and clinton gave it to them because we were wrong and it did not start a war. i think there should be something done.

we should do anything possible not to have a war where our boys will get killed and these families can never get over it. it should not have to be. i would like to see china and someday they will understand how to treat people. it has to start with united states. the killings in the united states are terrible. guest: i don't think there is anybody in the pentagon or the government, or hopefully people aware of the situation that think war is a good thing. being inside the building is ideally the last resort. the u.s. decided our global role since world war ii has been to maintain peace around the world and to spend heavily on the military to have a big stick to try to enforce that peace. viewe whole the pentagon's

is if we have to use force, we will, but we don't want to. host: lilly, good morning. caller: i was on your defense news website yesterday. i was writing a letter to my senator, pat toomey. sequestration did not happen by magic. they had this committee in 2011. they did not take the deadline seriously. they were supposed to come up with budget cuts. instead they went home for thanksgiving. i hope my senator responsible because they just gave up and sequestration came in. they knew it would hurt military readiness. now we are just supposed to forget who was on that supercommittee and how they abandoned their responsibilities. why don't we hold these people accountable? guest: thank you for reading defense news. we appreciate that. it is a really good point. when this committee can together

the idea was we will set it up so it is so awful we will never let it happen. we all know it is so bad. -- everyonel agree will agree. and then it happened. people seemed surprised by that on the hill. absolutely. the effects wend are feeling now in the military you will continue to feel for some time. it was a self-inflicted point by congress. host: john from new jersey. can you get a quick question and for us? caller: and the age of social and economic interconnectedness and usually assured destruction, what is the viability of the idea that china and russia can take care of their own country and they will take over america? what are we scared of? guest: fair question. people say it will never have a war with china because we are too connected.

with russia we have seen them take territory from other countries. the u.s. is supporting ukraine a little bit. isrussia decided estonia right across the border and if we just took estonia, that is a nato ally. china,an is invaded by we have an agreement that we will defend time one. -- taiwan. thes more a question of calculus of various countries, their personal goals and interests, and whether those accidentally trips a wire and the u.s. feels obligated to take part. host: we would like to thank aaron mehta for coming in and talking with us today. guest:. thank you for having me -- thank you for having me.. host: up next, michael farren

talks about the new headquarters for amazon and the subsidies given to them by new york and virginia. will talkabeel rahman of the future of the democratic party. stay with us. ♪ >> in the view of the war and commission, they describe the circumstances of the assassination of president kennedy. is there more to this story than the ward report discovered? >> this weekend on real america on american history tv, the 1967 special news series, a cbs news inquiry anchored by walter cronkite investigating questions

into president john f. kennedy's assassination. tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern, lee harvey all's well and if he acted alone. >> it seemed evident we should try to establish the ease or difficulty of that rapidfire performance. hence, our next question. how fast could the rifle be fired? >> tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3. >> listen to c-span's weekly podcast. part one of a two-part interview with three nationally known presidential historians. medford andkley, ed richard norton smith share historical context for the trump presidency. >> i see in andrew johnson-like president.

someone who s&p impeachment swirling around him and someone who is not able to close or heel of racial divide in the country. >> there is a real animosity between the president as early as john adams. the is the person who is pushing for this edition act of 1798. of 1798 totion act prevent criticism of the government and the president. app forree c-span radio wherever you go for podcasts. washington journal continues. host: we would like to welcome michael farren. we will talk about all the economic subsidies that arlington, virginia and new york city gate amazon to build a second headquarters in those cities. you did a study of the

large-scale bidding war that went on around the country for hq2 for amazon. guest: what i found is the average size of the bid was billion, at least the probably available bid. many were secret. if you look at the academic research, it finds they don't actually change the location decision. the vast majority of the time cities and states are wasting aliens of dollars every year. host: what is a company like amazon book for? what were they looking for and what it arlington and new york city have that they would have with or without the subsidies? guest: the number one thing firms look for, and the research is clear, is a skilled workforce. that is exactly what amazon said determined its final decision. said theyrent places

were making the decision for virginia and new york city, in addition to nashville because of the local tech talent. host: you think arlington and new york city would have won if they offered nothing? guest: absolutely. if you look across the d.c. metro area to montgomery county and across the hudson river to newark, they both offered much larger subsidies in virginia and new york city eventually offered. if amazon was chasing subsidies rather than talent, they would have located in those places. host: join in on this conversation about virginia and new york making amazon or about virginia and new york and the amazon headquarters. call (202) 748-8000. if you were in the eastern or central time zone, call in at (202) 748-8001.

if you're in the mountain or pacific time zone, call in at (202) 748-8002. again, you can always reach us on social media, twitter at @cspanwj and on facebook. heard the things we have from both the york in virginia is that what they call performance-based direct incentives. guest: cities and states have gotten a little bit better over time in structuring their incentives and how they are offered, even though they are generally a waste of money. performance-based incentives apply that rather than giving a large cash handout, they offer subsidies based upon each individual job created or dollar of investment offered. the problem is these jobs in investments most likely would have been created without it.

some of the best research at the upjohn institute finds only between 2% and 25% of the time to subsidies actually sway where a firm decides to locate. three out of every four subsidies, at least three out of every four don't actually matter and are a waste of taxpayer dollars. host: the politicians in both new york and virginia have been talking about all of the jobs, gainhe money, they -- the gain in reputation their cities will get. this that make up for the incentives the state gives amazon for coming? guest: absolutely not. give your at the grocery store and are offered a free sample, it is just something you get is part of shopping at the grocery store. it is part of having a skilled labor force that draws these companies to you. if you were to pay five dollars for the free sample, it would be

a waste of your money and your spouse would look at you like you were crazy and say we could've spent that on the family. why did you spend it on a free --ple you have gotten anyway you would have gotten anyway? host: amazon will build the exact same amount of jobs, 25,000 in each location but new york is paying twice with virginia did. betweenthe difference the negotiation in new york and virginia? guest: we will never know that because they are protected by nondisclosure agreements and all of these operations and these rooms, the deals in back rooms that are safe from public eyes. something that would help cities and states a lot in this process is to come together and refuse to sign nondisclosure agreements so that they can actually compete on the same playing field rather than have copies like amazon or tesla or bowling -- companies like amazon or

tesla or boeing play them off against each other. host: good amazon know where they were going to put their headquarters? guest: i think they had a good idea. i think amazon is too effective and efficient. it is through a from a humble but ambitious online bookseller, and 20 years later it is one of the largest companies in the world. furthermore there is an industry behind location consulting. the decisions that go into that. i imagine amazon probably had a good idea of what they were going to be offering for locating from the beginning. -- or locating from the beginning. host: the cities of put out all these incentive packages, they never really had a chance of winning this headquarters? guest: given that subsidies most of the time don't affect the final decision of the company and given that cities have not changed that much over the course of this past year, it is

not like their tech talent workforce has suddenly grown or suddenly become more appealing in other ways, the answer is yeah. a lot of the 238 cities ended up wasting public resources chasing amazon. host: bob from salt lake city, utah. good morning. caller: how are y'all doing? i had a question for you. i'm curious if any of the labor unions have anything to do with moving companies to certain --as and whether or not hello? host: go ahead. caller: are you still there? guest: -- host: the labor unions have anything with amazon decided to go to virginia or new york? guest: as far as i know labor unions did not have anything to do with amazon's decision.

there was some research on this issue. sometimes corporate executives the idea that taxes are too high or the need incentives or some other problem to disguise a less politically correct reason to change where their firm is located. one of those reasons could be the presence of unions or moving to a right to work state. host: mike from rochester, michigan. caller: good morning. folksstion is, do you everything places like detroit ever really had a chance in this? it seems to me amazon really just wants to be your wall callersnd the political . my second point is are the losers in this deal really the winners? i will hang up and listen.

thank you. guest: that is a great question. i'm so glad you asked it. that is the title of the paper we released earlier this week, that amazon hq2 is the only competition where the losers are the winners. with regarding your first question regarding detroit having a chance, with all apologies to detroit, i don't think they had a very good chance. you always have a possibility, i suppose, but from the beginning new york city and virginia have some of the highest number of tech talent in the entire u.s. washington, d.c. offers an advantage that no other city does. the access and closeness to political policymakers that could ensure amazon is actually regulated away from growing in the future or amazon could

ensure its influence is used defensively because it is expanding into a lot of other industries. those industries may try to keep amazon out to keep themselves protected from the additional competition. it is slightly possible that d.c. caninfluence and lead to additional economic d.c. can lead to additional economic growth the competition is kept accessible rather than closing the door behind themselves. host: andrew from white plains, new york. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span and your guest. it has been a great program this morning. my question is what can be done to encourage companies to start rebuilding into the center of our country? i think back to a c-span program on infrastructure where a lady from cleveland complaint, saying

all the money for developers is going to the east coast and west coast. she says we need some for cleveland. break point i would think. -- great point i would think. guest: we are working on research that you can broadly look at as innovation in public spaces. we need to allow companies and communities greater ability to find the best way to coordinate to work forward. uber astions over say few years ago and if they would be able to operate parallel the questions regarding scooters now and airbnb and housing regulations and the probability of higher housing costs because of regulations. and education as well, innovation in education. the cities at the center of the country transforming themselves by allowing more innovation in

the things we normally take for granted like transportation or education. they will make themselves more appealing to tech companies and the growing industry going forward. report,cording to your all these incentives offered did not do any good. what is the better way for the cities and states going forward to attract these huge companies? better education systems? better transportation? what are we talking about? what can a cleveland or st. louis do to get the companies to come there? guest: they need to encourage entrepreneurs to do what entrepreneurs do, which is reinvent and re-create the economy in the spaces we live in. to build further off of your question, another think we can look at is right now cities and

states waste about $90 billion a year on economic development subsidies. that is not even counting the federal amount of waste that goes from the federal government to the local governments for this. $90 billion a year to do a lot -- could do a lot to stimulate local economies in more beneficial ways. when you to craft an agreement between cities and states to agree not to compete for companies relocating because it does not work. it wastes public resources and redirects them away from genuine public need like transportation or policing or education. they could actually reduce corporate income taxes. what we found was for the average state hq2 bid, you could reduce corporate income taxes for all companies across the state by 29% rather than giving one large subsidy to amazon.

at the end of the day for need to find a way to get out of this back competition, this dirty game that is wasting money. host: gina from alexandria, virginia. good morning. caller: hi. i understand jeff bezos has -- that's a good reason for him to want to have -- to be located there. and theff bezos president have an ongoing dislike for each other. why would he put his headquarters in one of the red states? that makes no sense. host: what do politics have to do with this? guest: politics has a lot to do with the d.c. decision. conjecture, --n my own conjecture, amazon is

looking to set up in d.c.'s backyard and become a hometown company, to have regulators and politicians and policymakers look at amazon and say, oh, that is just amazon. we don't to overly regulate them. they are not a danger. they want to normalize amazon and policymakers' minds. there is an enormous amount of tech talent in the area but i think that is a major application or side benefit that d.c. offers that no other city could offer. and the fact that jeff bezos has homes in both new york city and d.c., that ish what people were saying at the beginning about motivating the decision. i think a corporate executive finds himself line to a given city very often.

rather than staying in a hotel constantly, he says why not go ahead and build a home in the city and have a second home? it is a signal of the company getting ready to expand into the city. host: if you are a politician, a mayor or governor, and the state next eu is offering all of these incentives that you know you should, how do you explain it to your constituents? what is the excavation they can give? they are politicians. they need to get votes. how would you say they should explain it to their voters that this is why we are not trying to drop his company hereby offering them incentives? -- draw this company here by offering them incentives? they find thatk, is the reason why politicians offer these subsidies. if they don't work, why would you do them?

politicians can't claim credit for the jobs created without offering subsidies because they would be created anyway. there are a lot of politicians and economic development officials around the country that are not happy of what they were doing. one official in kansas city said i know it sounds like i'm talking myself out of a job, but there ought to be a law against what i'm doing. how can we do this? one idea we propose is an interstate compact. an agreement between the states, part of the u.s. competition -- constitution. there are over 200 interstate compacts and exist -- in existence already. they can congratulate -- they agreentractually to do or not the something. we will get out of this crony ward we have found ourselves in and struggling to get out of. host: kathleen from dayton,

ohio. good morning. caller: good morning. i went to encourage your viewers to go to the washington journal segment and post this on their facebook page and elsewhere. this is an important issue. as i was out counting on doors were knocking on doors for the dems, i purposely selected old manufacturing areas in dayton, ohio, where the housing, the access to stores, people without cars is huge. i will use this as an example. mary frances, who retired from gm in 1997, making $17.50 an hour. in 1997red from gm making $17.50 an hour. -- we're celebrated $15,aced the waste of

but taxpayers are basically subsidizing again a multibillion ire like they did with walmart. they were paying their workers under 40 hours a week so they can go get medicaid. absurd -- absolutely this is absolutely absurd taxpayers are paying for these subsidies. is there a way they can release these nondisclosure agreements? i want to encourage manufacturing to candidate in, dayton, ohio, and tell to close thenka factories in china and give these people a living wage. guest: what can cities and states do? i mentioned the interstate compact.

a lot of states already have something on their books called constitutional gift clauses. this was research by a couple of my colleagues. most states already went through something similar like this in the early 1800s. there were about eight states and one territory that defaulted on their debt in the early 1800s because they have given up massive subsidies to railroads and the canal building companies and ended up going into default. the state legislatures passed constitutional gift clauses that say public funds cannot be used for private purposes. whatthe intervening years has happened is we just kind of drifted away from this in the legal interpretation of what a public use of money is. it has become more watered down to the point we are able to use anything as a public purpose for purpose. -- for

the public purpose. company condemned agricultural land to say it was blighted so they can use eminent domain to move people out of their homes to build a new foxconn plant. that is an egregious example but it is the worst example of how public use has gotten water down -- watered down for private enterprise. host: what is the worst thing people can expect in virginia and new york because of amazon moving their hq2 headquarters? i your rents? -- higher rents? what are taxpayers looking at? guest: probably all of those things. higher rent, worst traffic. that comes in the city growing over time. higher taxes than otherwise would be possible certainly. even for smaller subsidies,

smaller than average subsidies virginia offered to amazon, we calculate corporate income taxes could be dropped by about 7% instead of offering that subsidy to one particular company. companies all throughout virginia would actually see the benefit of this and contribute to local economic development in their own areas rather than economic development in the d.c. area, which is already the richest part of virginia. host: what is the best thing taxpayers can expect now that the states are given all these incentives amazon? guest: the best thing they can expect is not from the subsidies. the subsidies likely did not change the location decision. the best thing they can expect from amazon being there is continued economic growth. growthtoo much economic

is inuoye a good problem to have, especially compared to not having enough economic growth, as many parts of the country realize all too well. continu -- ag is continued surging economy. d.c. should take to heart stories like detroit and other industrial hubs. 100 years ago, 50 years ago they were booming. in the manufacturing left those areas -- then the manufacturing that those areas. the same thing could happen to d.c. and silicon valley. how do we keep allowing companies to innovate rather than try to hold everything down and say this is our industry and we will just rely on this industry? host: paul from fort edward, new york. caller: good morning. my question revolve to take on the data collection that amazon

just received for free. city's future the expansion, tax policies, etc. with amazon taking over brick and mortar stores, in a way they are getting free data that other cities were not have access to. within moving into different businesses isn't this a form of monopoly? guest: i wondered if we were going to get the monopoly antitrust questions this morning. for the first question regarding the data, there is already a location consulting industry for businesses that would have a lot of locations that amazon already got. one of the jokes and eight is with the special information to the extent that was not available to the general industry, amazon might be able to open its own location

consulting firm of the information. the issue really is that amazon has got every city and state to show them their cards and is now able to command higher subsidies as result. alabama paid about $50 million in subsidies for a distribution center in birmingham. amazon needs distribution centers in order to service its customers. there is no real reason to subsidize something they need to do anyway. furthermore, oklahoma had just given about $2.5 million for a similar distribution center. you could argue alabama overpaid by about 20 fold as a result. regarding the antitrust question, it is understandable that people look at a company getting really big and start worrying it will have too much economic or political power. being big does not by itself

make a monopoly. economics has contestable markets. the economic research shows even in a case for you only shows tht even in a case where you only have two or three major companies servicing a particular market, that is enough for competition to ensure that those companies are not able to act like monopolies. problem with monopolies is not the size. problem is the large company actually acting like a monopoly. and to the extent that that company is worried about competitors coming in. even as amazon has all of the online space and was completely the only online retailer, as long as it did not act like an ugly in order to not encourage other companies to enter and compete with it, it still would be ok. host: we would like to thank michael farren from the data at georgecenter mason university.

thank you so much. guest: thank you for having me. host: coming up next, sabeel rahman will join us for our spotlight on magazine segment, and we will talk about where the democrats will put their focus congress. republican stay with us. join us this weekend for live coverage of the miami book fair starting today at 10:00 a.m. eastern with journalist michael -- isikoff and david corn. been supreme court justice sonia sotomayor. and then the book "mad politics." with hish goldberg

book "suicide of the west." sunday at 11:15 a.m., guardian columnist alissa quart on the middle class with her book "greed." then the book "every man a king." former secretary of state john kerry with his book "every day is extra." watch the miami book fair this weekend on c-span2's booktv. ," california"q&a democratic congresswoman jackie spear talks about her memoir "undaunted." airstrip: i was on an in the remote jungles of guyana, having finished a tour, and we were ambushed and shot. congressman ryan was shot and i.

-- and died. members of the press died. i was shot five times on the right side of my body. leg the size of a football. god, i am 28 years old. this is it." >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back to our weekly spotlight on magazine segment. today we will talk to "new republic" contributor, suzuka sabeel rahman, on his new piece "do not cooperate with trump." can you tell us about your group and how it is funded?

guest: it is an advocacy organization that advances policy for economic policy and process.nomic we here to advance these ideas for the better economy. host: since the democrats are going to take over the house in january, president trump headset said that he- has will be willing to work with whoever the house speaker is, possibly pelosi. willing to find common ground with the president. you think democrats should not be compromising with donald trump. guest: let's take a step back for a moment. this is an election with historic turnout with new wave of women's candidates, women voters, women's of color -- women of color turning out, and

this is a resounding opposition thehe kind of america that president represents. i think we see this in the new congress. most of the new congresspeople elected for the democrats did not think incorporate pac money. new women leaders, and this to a pretty clear story that this is a about a turning point in what the democratic party is about. we are looking at a long-term in favore aggressively of transnational changes to our democracy, our economy, and our society. that is a long game. that is about the next 5, 6, 7, 20 years. short-term compromises between now and 2020, we are not going to move much legislation. the real battle, i think, is

about what those ideas, what is the real vision for america that we want to advance? host: are you saying over the next two years, whoever is leaving the house, possibly nancy pelosi, they should not look for major legislative pushes from inside the democratic party or consider legislative pushes from the white house or the senate/ ? guest: absolutely the house should take advantage of its authority to pass legislation, but it matters what kind of legislation. the goal should not be to seek a middle class compromise with a republican senate, the goal should be to pass legislation that stands for something that advances a democratic idea. you saw candidates campaign along medicaid for all come on fixing a broken democracy. we had an election that was basically rigged in georgia. those are the kind of ideas house democrats can put on the table. to hard to find

something that will get signed by the president, that leaves only two that but also that -- to not only that policy but also bad politics. host: were about when the democrats take over in january? guest: whether they can pick up old democracy reform and anticorruption agenda. we saw voter suppression in this election. we sell republicans using their power in the secretary of state's office, control over the ballot system to suppress the vote, and that cannot stand in a democracy. i think the first set of questions around fixing our voting election system, making sure everyone can vote and everyone has a say, dealing with money and politics and corruption, we have to tackle the core issues in our democracy. then we can move into other key issues as well.

health care, different drug prices, jobs, and the economy. for each of these bills, you can imagine a watered-down version if you are trying to get through the senate, and a boulder, straightforward version that says what we want to say. i think we should go for the bolder version. host: one of the things you talk about in your article is about the democrats doing work on her own party instead of trying to proposed what the republican party is doing. you write "another lesson this congress might take from history is the importance of changing party structures from the inside. the labor more movement achieved some of its important political gains in the century only after it gained a foothold in the democratic party. similarly, it helped make the nra potent political force in yesterday."

about a change happening inside the democratic party. my understanding you correctly? guest: yes, absolutely. if you look back in history where we have these big moments of policy change and civil civil rights and protections for workers, where it starts is whether those ideas can become mainstream within wha one political party. part of what we are seeing now in his last election and now going into congress is the fight over the center of gravity in the democratic party. i think for the long-term future of the party committed can move to a more progressive direction within the party, that will set push for more-- recipes in 2021 or 2024. that is how it has happened before. the thing i would put on the hard here is it is really

to pass big ideas under a short timeframe, so it is important that policy like democracy reform issues, these get tested that coalitions within the democratic party, so when they do have a more favorable administration or a more favorable senate, they can move quickly on a more transformative version of these ideas. host: we want you to join an honest conversation about the future of the democratic party in the house. if you are a democrat, we want you to call in at (202) 748-8000 . if you are a republican, we want you to call in at (202) 748-8001 . if you are independent, we want you to call in at (202) 748-8002 . once again, you can always reach us on social media, on twitter @cspanwj, and on facebook at facebook.com/cspan. let's go to scott calling from thomasville, georgia on the republican line. scott, good morning. caller: good morning. of course i am a republican, and

i have loved what i have seen in the marketplace. i just came back from injury from dallas, texas, and i can tell you toyota moved there not long ago, and at&t did as well, and they left california because taxes were high. what can we do so that this democratic party does not take us back and get focused on taxes, taxes, taxes, which we know when that happens, the development just is not happen. any that you talk to from the uber drivers to the texans, they are happy with the money being produced. i am happy with things donald trump is involved in. at the same time, i like a lot of things that has happened economically. i would hate to see the democratic get in there, take us back to whe where we were when we did not have that. all of us need to make money for our families. agendas are

great, but we all need money. guest: thanks for the questions, scott. bread-and-butter economic issue is important for so many working families, for us. the key question here is not some us about taxes but about where our public dollars are going. a big issueis such for so many families, not just because it is important, but it is also a huge economic burden. i think the question is not just about what the tax level is but where those dollars are going. investments that are actually going to help families and communities to have the opportunity to be able to support themselves? when we are talking about economic policies for the democrats, i think the attention to health care, and the structure, jobs, all of those can help our economy be more inclusive overall. right now, there are some parts

of the economy that are doing very well, absolutely, but that is not widespread, and we need to do better to make sure that our whole economy is working for everybody. host: do you think nancy pelosi should become speaker of the house, or do you think someone else should step in and get deposition for january? guest: i think there are two things going on here with the party. we needhat i do think to have the leadership front and center, not only for the speakers positioned but for the party in general. we have a new wave of leaders, and they need to be front and center for the party. they have done a great job setting the agenda in these early weeks. i think it also matters when the agenda for the party is.

if pelosi becomes speaker, that is great, but what is the agenda ? the debate is about both of those things, what the leadership is and whether the agenda is setting up the ideas going for. host: let's go to robert: from athens, alabama on the democratic line. robert, good morning. to get yes, i am trying the democrats to offer a .ational holiday for voting maybe they can take columbus day and change it to a national holiday for voting. and flipped the nafta issue. nafta needed to be renegotiated. let slip that issue by thinking 21% corporate tax rate and only offer it to people who have factories and businesses here in the united states. thank you so much. guest: yes, thanks so much.

absolutely, on the e-voting even though there turnout, thatus was despite many barriers placed between them and being able to exercise their rights as members of our democracy. it is not just the holiday piece. i think we have seen in a lot of states -- georgia chief among them -- that there has been a concerted effort to keep people from the polls. we need to make sure everyone can access the ballot, making sure people have time to go vote, that workers are able to go vote without losing too much of their paid to do so. there are a lot of things that we can do so to ensure better access. on the trade section, this goes to the previous caller's point as well. our economy is not working for many of us, and the democrats really need to address that set

of issues, but it is important to do so in a way that we are serving everyone in the country, not just a few. colleget's go to ted, from cleveland, ohio on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. ask how youearlier were funded, and i guess i just -- i never heard it. george,u mentioned, there was nothing illegal. all of those were counted, and everything went through, just like florida. i will wait for your answer. god bless. thank you. guest: thanks for the call. we do not take corporate money. we take donations from individuals, individual donors and foundations. we are an independent organization. on the vote in question, i think

we have to make a distinction here. there is a counting of the votes, but a lot of the really problematic policies in a lot of states in the country, not just georgia, has been about keeping people from being able to register in the first place, measures that are assigned to make it -- designed to make it harder to vote. i do not think that is good in a democracy. are there enough holding machines -- polling machines? are we making sure that everyone is able to sign up to vote in the first place? georgia as well as in kansas and a few other places, there were efforts to disqualify many voters based on their registration paperwork, and those efforts were targeted particularly at communities of color to suppress those votes. these are really big problems

that really challenge the legitimacy of our election. host: you earlier talked about the democrats having this new, energetic,. fresh faces coming into congress. . who are some of the people you are talking about, and will they help the democratic party appeal to the young, multiracial constituencies that they said they needed to move forward? guest: absolutely. this new cohort of leaders has been tremendous, both in the campaign and in the early days of the new cohort. like au think of leaders ocasio-cortes, sharice davids, they reflect the coalition that is the modern democratic party.

that is why it is important that those leaders the fincher -- intured in committee, an leadership, in driving the agenda of the house. the more they are represented, the better off the house will be. to renée, who is calling from rosen parker, texas on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. the gentleman articulated a lot of points to make, but the main one is everyone hones in on the split,ty and why it is but i would say that the democratic party is probably more split, and i wanted to mention you talked about voting integrity. i am talking about two to three different cases of voting fraud, people getting criminally charged here in texas. are the numbers in the thousands? note, but i've seen a number of people being prosecuted for voting illegally, and this is

just in texas. want every say they vote count, we should clarify that every legitimate, lawful vote counts. thank you. guest: thanks, renée. just on that last point, the data on voter fraud indicates there are very few cases overall. it is a miniscule amount, a fraction of a percent. when you look at the efforts to disqualify rifle voters from their ability to exercise their right to the ballot, we are talking tens of thousands of voters who have been barred from being able to exercise their right to vote. in georgia, the numbers could be anywhere from 50000 and up for a race that was very closely decided. if you go back even a few years earlier, scott walker in wisconsin, who lost his race this election, the data now shows that his efforts in wisconsin to restrict

access to the ballots affected even more people, several percentage worth of the electorate were not able to vote going back in 2016. so the scale of the voters pressure problem is absolutely enormous, and it has been going on for a long time. now we have a spotlight on it. it is something that needs to be fixed. host: in your article, you layout some plans for the democrats. "it mighte, you say start with an economic plan that focuses on the public good, like medicare for all, free college, and democrats can think of ways to protect workers in areas of proposeus important, changes to infrastructure, more affordable housing, focusing on modern areas of concern with public accommodations and environmental justice completed segregation of cities in schools

-- justice, the segregation of cities and schools, -- desegregation of cities and schools, independence for puerto rico, and statement for the district of columbia." things sounds like they did end up on a 2020 presidential run platform. how much of this is about legislation that should be passed now, and how much of this is for some was presidential 2020 election? guest: is a great question, jesse. i amto part of what arguing in the piece, which is that those two things are actually very similar. with this congress is really about, the debates in congress is really about the larger debates that we are having in the country overall, so looking ahead to 2020, i think it is important for the democrats to put their vision on the table, now that they have a foothold in the house. the reality is that any progressive legislation that

passes in the house is unlikely to make it through the senate, excuse me, unlikely to be supported by the president. the overture of collaboration coming from the white house is that they are probably not in good faith, and even if there were some common ground, i do not think it is probably what we would want in the long run for the country, so the suggestion here is that the house democrats use this foothold to set up in the ideas that they would want to run on in 2020 and beyond, and that means being unapologetic about what those ideas are. let's put on the table how we want to fix the economy and how we want to improve the democracy. host: let's go to bob who is calling from cooksville, tennessee on the republican line. bob, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i would like to ask your guest, it is obvious he is very -- and the magazine he contributes to, the "new republic," is founded

by herbert croly. i wonder if he falls into the same ideology that he had, which came from russo and the manifesto and karl marx. basically the progress progresse movement is focused on that ideology. life" in in "american 1909 at the best way to change the stories change his past, his heritage, and his founding principles. and it will come down to two classes of people, the ruling class and the ruled, just like communism. thank you. you raised herbert croly,

the founder of the "new republic ." the "new republic" was actually founded in the early 20th century. this is a previous time where there was a lot of deep concerns about whether our political system was working well or not, and actually the fingers and politicians of the time were thinking about similar questions as we are thinking about now, from a very american standpoint of -- how do we fix our democracy? how do we live true to the principles of the declaration of independence and constitution? as the economy has changed and as society has changed, we need to update our policy so we can have the kind of democracy and .conomy that our country was founded on trying to achieve i think that is kind of the time we are living in now as well. we are facing a changing economy and really deep concerns about our democracy, and we need to

reinvent. host: let's go to john on the independent line. john, good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call, and thanks for c-span. i heard comments such as the democratic vision for the future , and there is a lot of socialism and social justice 's comments.he guest i want to point out that a lot of this relates to the human condition and individuals and their formation of values and their striving for a better life. the points i think are that, one, the tax burden on the people of the united states right now is already too high. for most people are paying somewhere between 40% and 50% of their income to pay taxes at various levels, local, state, and federal government.

and in the i agree with the there that the economy is not working for everyone, that it should be a better economy for most, but i find that the real problem seems to be in the skills and character of the individuals who might be looking for jobs, that they are not up to the standards required by business, so they cannot get the jobs. skills andis a character issue rather than a government redistribution of wealth matter. in other words, there has to be ore assimilation of the bourgeouis values. guest: thank you for your call.

i think there are two things going on when talking about the inequality in our economy. one is that we actually have to do a lot more to make sure people have access to higher education, that can allow them to be full members of the economy. it is one of the reasons why debt-free college is a really important policy that needs to be developed advanced. the other thing of note here is that the economy is actually working really well for the very top. we are in the worst period of economic inequality in a very, very long time in the country. you are seeing lots of gains from the productive economy all flowing to the top 1% of the income persecution and also to the biggest corporations. that is the underlying problem here. so we need to change those policies to make sure benefits are flowing more broadly. this is really about opening up opportunities.

in the previous segment, there was some discussion about amazon and monopoly. one of the problems we are seeing in the current economy is that a lot of industries are highly concentrated with one or two dominant corporations, and what that means is there is less room for new businesses to start. there are fewer companies for workers to move to so that they can build their skills and grow their wages. so there are a lot of things in the background of our current economic system that just are not working. let's go to audrey calling from philadelphia, pennsylvania on the independent line. audrey, good morning. caller: good morning. it is very nice to see the show. i am very encouraged by what the guest is saying. these are exactly the type of changes the democratic party needs to make. i saw jeff weaver on video recently. he said when he and bernie sanders were on a campaign tour,

they spoke with someone from the democratic alliance, which is a group of democratic donors, and this gentleman told him that what the donors had thought was true for a long time was that we can only handle and only needed incremental change, and that one thing that the 2016 campaign showed a lot of the donors is that that is not true, because both sanders and trump, very successful candidates, were talking about old visions and big changes. bold visions and big changes. you can look around the country and see climate change and see that we do not have time for incremental change. inching toas been the right ever since bill clinton, and we need to move definitively to the left. that does not mean we will become communists. it means we want to invest in our kids, in an education, we

want to change to a green economy. we saw in the last election last week, we saw progressive measures pass, even when the democratic candidate failed. so i think the people -- and polls show this -- the people like progressive change, even if they do not like the word "progressive," even if they do not like the democratic party. we need to make the changes to invest in the environment, and education. the first set, i agree with you, is anti-corruption. i know it is painful for democratic politicians to stop hours a day for dollars, to stop kowtowing to their donors, but that is exactly what they need to do. guest: thank you so much for the comments, audrey. several things i would add to that is absolutely come of the ballot measures you mentioned are a really important indicator

here, minimum wage, voting rights, restoration of voting rights in florida, these are good data points for people thinking about the process for progressive reform. the other thing i would suggest here is in addition to what democrats do in congress, we also have a whole new wave of progressive leaders in state legislatures, in the governors states, a number of so there is a lot of room that i think it will be important to try out some of these ideas come up with them on a table in the state, where they can actually signed some of these measures into actual law. host: we would like to thank sabeel rahman, contributor to the "new republic," and president of demos action, for being with us today and talking about his article, "democrats, don't compromise with trump." thank you so much. guest: thanks, jesse. host: coming up, we will open

the phone lines and take your telephone calls on any public policy you want to talk about or anything maybe we talked about earlier in the show. we will open the phones and we want to hear from you on our lines. you see the lines there for you on the screen. this weekend on our c-span cities tour forms american story as booktv in american history tv travels to one of my hometown s, memphis, tennessee. the mayor talks about the city's history and race relations today. >> right next to the mississippi memphis, during the civil war, was the heart of the confederacy. in the 1950's and 1960's, the civil rights movement took off here. the leadership here was very strong and integrated city facilities. we are a much more integrated city than we were.

we have a long way to go. let me give you a hard, concrete example. fred davis was one of the first african-americans on the city council, and he told me 25 years up all the you add business transacted in the city, and i am not talking just by city government, i am talking about going to the grocery store, buying insurance, all of the business transacted in the city, 1% is transacted with african-american-owned business. that was 25 years ago. i talked to him a year or two ago. it is still 1%. in a city that is 65% african-american. it is not right, it is unsustainable, it is not good for the future of the city. so we have to change that number. obviously one of the factors for that low number is racism. we are working on that one

particular issue in memphis at city government. i am talking about contracting with african-american owned businesses. we have made it a priority. when i took office, 12% of our contracts went to minority and women-owned businesses. we double that to 24%. we have gotten a lot of recognition. we need to do more of it. that is just one example. i do think we have made tremendous strides in the city, and i am very proud of that fact. i am proud to be a ma memphian, but because we have such pride in the city, i want us to do even better. you tune intoe booktv as we travel to memphis, tennessee. to watch video of memphis and all the cities we have visited on our c-span cities tour, go to c-span.org/citiestour. also, go to twitter for @cspanwj

cities to see the balcony of the lorraine motel, where martin luther king, jr. spent his final moments. anything we about have talked about on the show today. once again, democrats, you can call in on (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. and remember, you can always reach us on social media, on twitter @cspanwj, and on facebook at facebook.com/cspan. who iso to stan, calling from west palm beach, florida, on the independent line. stan, good morning. caller: how are you today? just a few comments. i am a floridian, obviously, and i vote. at 70 years opinion

old, and i have always voted, it is hard for me to believe that people in florida are making mistakes on these ballots. the florida ballots are very easy to follow. if bottom line for me is they cannot follow the directions, make that line, i do not think they deserve to vote. i'm not think we can make it easier for people. that is number one. number two, i would like to see the democratic party, instead of hypocritical, why don't they just say they are the socialist party? at my age, at this point, i will not save the world or the country. i just finished steinback's book, which was president obama's favorite book, according to president obama. the people want, this is what it will get, and

far be it from me to try to stop them. you had on was a very nice and articulate man, and when you put his article on the screen, i saw that he referred to congresswoman cortez as a "smart congresswoman." she seems like a very likable person, very sincere, but i have heard her speak, and i am not too impressed with her intellect. i would like to see somebody asked her, as long as she claims she is a person of color, i would like to see somebody asked her if she has ever heard of julian bond, or what does she know about julian bond. julian bond, in my opinion, should have been president of this country. is by far the greatest intellect the african-american community has ever produced.

he should have been president, and it was not for the john lewis in the state of georgia who hurt his campaign by insinuating that mr. bond was a drug addict and got mr. bond's wife to come on board and say he had a drug problem, which she later contracted, he would have done well in politics. see people ino this country talk more about julian bond. and though his views are different than mine, he was the greatest black intellect and should have been president of this country. host: let's go to jonathan. good morning. caller: how are you doing today? host: just fine. go ahead. i am calling because i want to change the time avon you are using a lot when you talk about democrats and progressives policies.

asically word "socialist" lot, and it needs to be changed to "new deal democrat." new deal democrat, economic populist. that was healthy democratic party were able to get for terms under fdr and feet the society that gave us the jobs. seen a968, you have downturn in all of this. economics, especially for the day-to-day, the poor people, has gone steadily down. we need a living wage. when they talk about infrastructure projects, we need andse the federal reserve use that to give credit not to who have softened trillions of dollars in credit newthat, but use it to fund

deal policies, find small and opportunities, and we can do this through the federal reserve, as well as taxing wall street. because wall street pays no taxes on the buying and selling. that could fund a lot of these free medicaid fo policy and free college. we would be able to pay for all of. we need to start calling it a new deal. do not collect socialist or communist, because that is the a redhe -- is herring. call it new deal. host: let's go to kim. good morning. caller: good morning. i have been watching for most of my life. i love c-span. i would encourage c-span to devote a day or part of a game to laying out in detail how they finance their operations and how they keep their objectivity.

i have done my own research, and i have to admit it is a little opaque to me, but i would like to see a live presentation of how it is done. i know brian lamb is one of the most important people in the united states. i am concerned as to what will happen when he retires or leaves. we are roughly the same age, and none of us are permanent. thank you. host: let me tell you the funding for c-span is about seven cents from each cable bill. in morere interested about finding out how c-span gets its money, you can go to c-span.org, where you will find more information there. let's go to esperanza, calling from miami beach, florida on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am calling because i am very concerned. i love this country very much. i entered illegally.

i would like to send a message becausemerican people, i believe the party could be what it was in the late 1960's. it was a very party, democrat. i like it very much. but now i see the problem with democrats, it is going to much to the left. i think they do it because they think it is the only way they can win. what a terrible mistake. they could be winning elections without going far to the left. if anybody who knows about nobody canstory, who wantsw communists this great country in the world to become communist.

also, at registration time, if they were found in florida, the lots by illegal people who were illegal, that means whoever registered those people were committing the fraud. that anybody who registered, no matter what, they say within florida, new york, california, wherever, they should be going where they are checking that these people who registered in florida cannot register in new york at the same time. votelso, there has to be a to register to. prove citizenship as well as to vote to proves to

they are who they are asking to be. from let's go to shelton: freeport, louisiana. good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to raise the thing, the whole thing people have been talking about, socialism. know she did not have any problem with social security and the founding of the union was done by people calling themselves socialists. it seems like it has hearkened back to the 1930's, to try to scare people, this red scare. if you are talking about equality for all, if you are talking about fixing the environment, health care for everyone, if you don't agree

with those things, then something is wrong. you are trying to say that because people are trying to take care of the vast majority, the people in this society, looking for their well-being is a socialist idea? i am all for it. youa gun at red scare me -- gonna red scare me. i lived through the history. people raising the thing about universal health care. "how are you going to pay for it?" nobody raised a question about all these projects at the military has come of these new missiles, these new era names and stuff. -- airplanes and stuff. in the vast majority of people when you go to war, the differences the people that don't be fighting. host: this weekend, c-span2 will be live from they miami book

fair. we will be joined by peter in just a second with a preview. here, what can we expect to see this weekend? peter, what can we expect to see this weekend? jesse, good morning. it is 44 ° washington, d.c. it is not 44 degrees in miami. the miami book festival kicks off in about 10 minutes. you can watch it all on booktv on c-span2. booktv is 20 years old this year, and we have covered this festival for the last 20 years. here are some of the guests you will be seeing on booktv this weekend. we will kick off with david corn and michael issikoff talking about their book "russian roulette." you will also have a chance to

see and speak with justice sonia sotomayor. she has written a children's version of her best-selling autobiography "my beloved world," and she will be taking questions from students across the country. we have an educational department at c-span, and we solicited questions from teachers and students who participate in the c-span classroom initiative. she will be taking those questions at about noon today. some of the other folks you will michael, hislude newest book is about presidents during wartime. he will be taking your call. gina loudon have a book out called "mad politics ."'s,erin: ." she will be talking about her book and politics today and how she perceives it. john grisham will be speaking. we will talk to jonah goldberg. that is today.

tomorrow, john kerry will be on in the afternoon, julian castro as well. this weekend during the miami book fair, we will show you footage from michelle obama's book tour. -- kept it off tuesday night she kicked it off tuesday night from the united center in chicago. how much of the street scene we are seeing, but the book there is just kicking off, miami-dade college. area, happen to be in the come on down and pick up this book fair right here. it is a really boisterous festival. come on down and see us. make sure to turn to c-span2 in about seven minutes. we will see you then. thosebring me back one of great looking bags as well.

once again come booktv, you can watch it on c-span2 at 10:00 a.m., as soon as "washington journal" is over, and you can see it again at 10:30 eastern time on sunday. it will re-air saturday and sunday at 9:00 p.m. if you miss it, make sure you on come back to c-span later saturday and sunday at 9:00 p.m. to see all of those great authors talk about their books on both cd. let's go back -- on booktv. let's go back to our phones and go to james on the republican line. james, good morning. caller: good morning. and thank you. i have had about a 15 plus career hiring people for jobs. part of that of course is seeing the pride and the happiness that comes from having a job and feeding your family and improving. i cannot understand why the national media keeps calling president trump "racist,"

especially in regards to minorities and black individuals, americans, as well. because part of the whole goal of his administration is to lower unemployment so that a man and a woman have an opportunity to develop themselves economically, to reformulate household income, and we see household income going up for black hispanic families, specifically, much higher than in the administration that was previous, and yet at the same time we continue to hear this idea that the administration is "racist." all i am trying to suggest is i wish we had a fair representation from the media that the true racist action is to keep people dependent on government programs. every single person i have ever met of any race only wants the opportunity to develop their own financial means for themselves

and for their family to improve. i also wonder, if i look at major cities in this country, chicago -- since i have returned to connecticut miocene hartford, -- connecticut, i have seen hartford, a smaller city, i wonder how many of these major cities open and run by corrupt democratic organizations, like chicago, how many would risk their capital to open and try to lower the unemployment rate even more so, for more capital formation? i would like to see the media server deal more with the russian up -- why is it that these large and medium-sized crime that do have high problems, why are the continuing to elect democrats that are against capital formation for blacks? host: this weekend, our c-span cities tour explores american storiesqu as they travel, once hometowne one of my

spirit coming up at 7:00 p.m. eastern time on booktv, all of our programs will air together in one time block. about the final march of the civil rights movement in the late 1960's in his book "down to the crossroads: civil rights, plug power, and americans march against fear." americans march against fear, is the last time you see them come together with a common endeavor, creating mass march that creates national attention, becomes a locking tool for political change, and in that way, it is an and, innovative an an end of an, era. is also a beginning, it introduces the slogan of "black

, but it alsoiety becomes a tool for environment for african-americans, these two simple words come to mean so much in terms of black consciousness come of life history, black beauty, black political organizing, that just becomes part of the fabric of american life. crossroads" is the story that started right here in memphis, tennessee really with one man, james mayer. of marches through mississippi over the course of three weeks, is a story that is filled with tales of african-american people registering to vote, defying symbols of white supremacy, staking claims to freedom in new ways. host: let's go to barbara in new york calling on the image credit

line -- the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am not going to let people red scare meet with the word socialism. , socialur institutions security, medicare, police, fire department, they are all constructed by socialism. but my main comment is going to be who will be speaker of the house in january when democrats take control. i hope the black women voters in mississippi will stay hard about that contest for the speaker when they go in to the voting booth and decide the senate runoff base race in mississippi. nancy pelosi talks about women in congress, but when it comes to black women, there is a problem with her walk and her talk. you should go back and take a look at how she talked about donna brazile, or look at how she supported chris van hollen

in the senate race in maryland instead of donna edwards. is a problem there, and i hope the black women voters in mississippi, before they go and vote in the senate runoff, will give some consideration to that. thanks, jesse. host: let's go to ray calling from north miami beach, florida on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for having me. i am going to make a comment on the mayor of memphis. he was spot on when he said that the small business increased by the african community is the same today as it was in the 1960's. , ofthe major problem course, is discrimination by taxation. much more so. that is the financial relationship. suggests that small businesses on main street should

be at a disadvantage to the businesses on wall street by section 469 of the code, favoring wall street over main street. that law he is to be repealed, and then taxation discrimination would be eliminated. that is my comments. -- that is my comment. host: one of the issues that we saw in the news this week was reporter between cnn jim acosta and the white house ver jim acosta's press cap pass the and taken by the administra. on friday, office here is what the president had to say about the return of jim costa's press pass, and here is what jim acosta had to say in return. [video clip] pres. trump: they have to behave, and they have to do -- we are writing up roles and regulations.

i think you were treated unfairly, both of you, because you had someone interrupting you. the rules and regulations will end up back in court, and we will win, but more importantly, we will just leave it, and then you will not be very happy, because we do get good ratings. reporter: what does that mean? pres. trump: the koran. you cannot -- decorum. you cannot just take three or four questions and then stand up and leave. total freedom of the press is important to me, more important to me than anyone would believe, but you have to act with respect in the white house, and when i see the way some of my people get treated at the press conferences, it is terrible. we are setting a certain standard, which is what the court is requesting. always freedom of the press. always first amendment.

we always have the option of just leaving, you know. we feel things are not being treated properly, that people are not being treated really. we always have the right to leave your think the other media, the other press in the actually be happy if that happens, but i have instructed people in the room, if you are not treated properly, you have the right to leave the room. [video clip] jim: i am really grateful to my colleagues in the press who stood by us in this hour. me, was a moment that, to it just felt like a test for all of us, and it was gratifying to me that so many of my banditues, you know, together to make sure that we can continue to do our jobs over here at the white house. ray who is go to calling from tama, florida.

us what you want to talk about quickly. aller: i would like to talk about why i switched from the democratic party to the independent party. ahead, quickly. caller: all right. i think the democratic party rid of dead wood at the top of it, nancy pelosi, schumerer, who voted for this young lady cortez, i don't know. you keep going with the seem old people and same old ideas, i back to the me democratic party. you need some new blood in there. host: we would like to thank all of our guests who called in today. be sure to join us tomorrow at 7 episode of ther "washington journal." have a great saturday, everyone.