deputy commerce secretary. on c-span3, acting epa administrator andrew wheeler "the washington post" to talk about environmental priorities for the trump administration. later, there is a house oversight hearing on the management of federal prisons with the justice department's inspector general in the head of the federal bureau of prisons. >> when the new congress starts in january, there will be more than 100 new house and senate members. the democrats will control the house. the republicans, the senate. new congress, new leaders. watch the process unfold on c-span. >> next, your calls and comments . at 8:00 a.m. eastern, indiana rep. king: congressman jim banks talks about his recent trip to afghanistan. then a discussion about the u.s. asylum process with sarah pierce

of the migration policy institute. and later, maryland democratic john sarbanes-oxley legislation he says will strengthen democracy, plus the priorities of the new congress. strengthen democracy and the priorities for the new congress. ♪ host: the number of republicans in the senate stands at 53 with the area cindy hyde-smith from mississippi. she defeated mike espy. this is the "washington journal" for november 28. on the house side, the first run of elections for democratic andership take place today it is expected by many that when the votes are counted, nancy pelosi will return next year as speaker of the house even if some democrats threatened to withhold support for a variety of reasons. we want to hear from democrats in the audience about this is

osi returning pel to the speaker position. do you support her return? in this hours know for democrats only. 202-748-8000 if you live in the eastern and central time zones. if you live in the mountain and pacific time zones. if you want to post on our social media sites. our twitter feed is @cspanwj and you can post on our facebook page at facebook.com/cspan. leading up to the leadership elections that take place today, at least the first part of that, it was the house minority leader nancy pelosi appearing before cameras before this event asking and answering questions about support for her speakership. here is some of her response when asked about becoming the

next speaker of the house. [video clip] >> i intend to win the speakership with democratic votes. that was your question. that was your question. i have overwhelming support in my caucus to be speaker of the house and we had many, many people in our caucus who could serve in this capacity. i happen to think at this point i am the best person for that. lead up towas the today and here to talk about the mechanics of the vote and potentially what it means for nancy pelosi joining us on the phone is mike lillis, senior reporter for the hill. thank you for joining us. guest: good morning. thank you for having me. host: if you go to your website and look at the headline regarding this story, it says it is a first test for pelosi in this bid for a second speakership. tell us why. guest: the speakership vote is a two step process.

the first step is the nomination decided for the democratic caucus. they nominate the speaker and the second step is it goes to the floor january 3 and that is a vote of the full house. two very different notes and different dynamics and the first step today, policy will pass easily. nobody thinks she will somehow be tripped up today, she does not even have a challenger. the insurgent group that is pressing to take her down is simply trying to display that she doesn't have the votes in january, so pelosi is trying to build her support. feet -- for all the anti-climactic outcome, there is a lot at stake, a lot of posturing and both sides trying to build momentum going into the more crucial january vote on the house floor. host: talk about this insurgent

group. what is the makeup of it? guest: it is not really ideological. there are members of the progressive caucus, the blue dogs, incoming freshman, it doesn't have an ideology, it has a problem with anti-pelosi being at the top for too long and they just want to get her and not just her, they want to see the top two lieutenants steny hoyer and james clyburn also go. their main focus is nancy pelosi right now. this is not a new push. when pelosi lost the gavel in 2010 and there was a small insurgency and she faced her first challenger back then, she won easily. she defeated a former blue dog from north carolina and over the course of years, there was this grumbling as the cycles continued and democrats remained

in the minority. said16, tim ryan from ohio enough is enough, we have lost quadra cycles in a row, i will challenge her. wastill got 63 votes, which seen as quite a large number for somebody as powerful and popular as pelosi is within a liberal caucus. the insurgent group has always been there and growing and restless and agitating and this year, they saw their break. what is confounding them is their singular argument has always been we cannot take back the majority with nancy pelosi at the helm and here they have just taken back majority. all the support you are seeing around pelosi is not so much the people disagree they need new leadership at the top, everybody agrees that needs to happen sooner than later, including

pelosi, but their argument has been undermined by the fact that pelosi won them back the house and did so while -- by raking in $135 million to get these people elected. andade it a lot tougher given pelosi a boost. the insurgents are small, but they have dug in. if they can demonstrate she cannot get the votes on the floor of the house, they will claim victory today. host: how many have to peel off to make that happen? guest: good question. there are 16 insurgents on that letter. no's againsttain pelosi. there are outstanding races yet to be called. of 15, 16, 17rea if they can peel off those on

the house floor to vote against or rather than voting present or doing some trick that would help her and then there are republicans saying maybe we would help and trump is tweeting we can get republicans help nancy pelosi win. there is all this strange politicking going on behind the scenes on the republican side of the aisle. if everybody voted on the house floor in january had if everybody voted for a person rather than present, the number area, 15, 16, 17 because democrats look like they will have 235 seats next year and she needs 218. she could lose 17 in that case. pelosi beenas ms. doing to reach out for those who may not support this bid? guest: the question is what hasn'tguest: she been doing.

she has been doing everything. we call it the pelosi machine for a reason. she has been around a long time and has a lot of friends in the democratic party outside of capitol hill. a lot of powerful people working the phones, al gores, john kerrys. president obama has not quite endorsed her, but gone out of his way to say she is a great legislator and would be great for this spot at this time. she has been meeting with groups of supporters in her office, opponents in her office, she has been meeting with the different caucuses, black caucus, hispanic caucus, democrats, blue dogs, all these factions within the party and essentially, she is running the show postelection as if she is the shoe and for the speaker and that is consistent with public statements she has been making. she projects nothing but confidence and says she will be

the speaker without a doubt. the math looks different right now. if she has a math problem, everybody knows that. the question is what can she do to peel off some of the insurgents that announced they would vote against her? she has made some strides in the last week. marcia fudge from ohio was one of the leading critics of pelosi until pelosi sat down and talked to her and promised to resurrect an old voting rights committee that was dismantled by republicans in 2013 and made marcia fudge the chairwoman next year and now marcia fudge is supporting her. that is one of the levers, one of the tools nancy pelosi has to go to these people and say what do you want? i can give you committee assignments, special assignments, office space, extra

staff. i can prioritize different legislation. brian higgins from new york was another strong the tractor of -- the tractor -- detractor of pelosi. the original letter that went out with 16 signatures and pelosi got him on the phone and promised to work on medicare legislation and infrastructure things higgins wanted to focus on and now he is supporting her. there is a long time between now and january 3. that machine is not going to stop. she will continue making phone calls and having her allies make phone calls on her behalf. we will see what happens. there is a long way to go. host: mike lillis joining us, telling about the democratic leadership elections. talking about nancy pelosi as well. thank you for your time. guest: thank you. always a pleasure. host: you heard our guest talk

about the position congressional democrats are in the house about nancy pelosi becoming speaker of the house. for this first hour, democrats in the audience about your thinking about nancy pelosi becoming speaker. if you support that, if you don't. usl us -- call us and tell why. if you live in the eastern and central time zones, it is 202-748-8000. if you live in the mountain and pacific time zones, it is 202-748-8001. inm maryland, this is jay easton. good morning. tell us what you think about nancy pelosi possibly returning as speaker. caller: good morning. i think we need a changing of the guard. a lot of new faces got elected and i think it is time to get new people and fresh faces. i am 58 years old. she has been there a good amount of time since i was a young man.

i think there needs to be a changing of the guard and maybe we will win some more elections. oft: aside from the winning elections, what makes you think a younger person would be better suited to become speaker of the house? caller: if you look at it, there has been a lot of people that have been in the house and senate. they have been there forever. for a long time. some of them since i was a little boy. new people, new fresh faces might make a change. in southie is carolina. go ahead, you are on. caller: i am saying why would you cut off your nose to spite your face? we have these young once coming in as democrats. you need to fight the person in the white house. that is what we need to fight. host: as far as the speaker of the house, should that be nancy pelosi? caller: we need someone with

experience. someone with experience to start things getting off in the right direction. host: ok. giving herie thoughts. it does cap thoughts on our facebook page. cindy when it comes to potentially speaker pelosi, absolutely no time for a novice. nancy knows what she is doing. rick said nancy pelosi is the most effective speaker in modern history, look at her winning the 38 plus democrats winning earlier this month. there is too much work for a novice to be stumbling -- fumbling around. nancy did a grace -- great job in her last stint as speaker. ie, maryland, this is catherine. , maryland,m in bowie and i did hear the previous caller and i agree with all he

said. think nancy has been very effective and i feel she has had negative things said about her because she is a woman and effective. i feel in this time of travel -- trouble in the presidency, we need somebody who is as effective as nancy pelosi. host: when you say she has been effective, what would you point to? caller: i feel she has been ineffective as the speaker before and this time, i want a known goodis deal. i support her as speaker of the house. host: daniel from san diego, california. firstats only in this

hour. caller: i believe she is a strong iron woman. if the -- she reminds me of ruth bader ginsburg and i believe she will be around a long time and very effective and i believe she should be speaker of the house. host: what do you think she will bring to this term as speaker should she get that position? caller: i am sorry, i don't have anything specific in mind. host: let's go to david in flint, michigan. hello. caller: hello. good morning. at first, later earlier this year i was thinking we should try somebody else. now i don't think we should. i think we should stick with nancy pelosi and i hope she tackles prison reform and the health care and i hope the young people -- i am kind of left wing myself.

i kind oferal, so help liking the poor. i hope she works on that. goodnk she will be a speaker. i have never heard so many people ask the questions about republicans. like that guy over the senate from kentucky. anything about him leaving and i don't think he knows how to work with other people. host: you said initially you were thinking somebody else should be speaker and changed your mind. why is that? caller: after the election i changed my mind and i thought about it. i am an older guy, i am 65 and sometimes young people are good in some positions, but sometimes they need to sit back and get experience from younger people. host: taking a look at nancy pelosi's bid to become speaker

under these -- headline in courting new hitter -- liberals, pelosi risks freedom caucus of the left. she risks creating a headache for herself down the road, a democratic version of the house freedom caucus that defies republican leadership making like -- the potential speaker may give voice to dissatisfaction with -- atream democrats closed-door meeting with incoming freshmen democrats on tuesday, she walked a fine line technology there idealism, integrity -- warning about the risk of being intransigent. a way that puts our best foot

forward on day one to show we can govern, make your fight, make your case, not every fight is the last fight. host: mississippi is next. we will hear from bobby. hello. caller: good morning. host: good morning. go ahead. caller: i think nancy pelosi definitely should be the speaker. she should be put back in because she has experience and knows how to get the job done. host: what should be the focus? should she become speaker? her focus should be on doing whatever needs to be done with health care. whatever needs to be done with environmental issues and doing whatever needs to be done for infrastructure. host: edward perkins off of twitter says when it comes to this idea of the resistance of

ms., pelosi saying it is a mischaracterization of the opposition. there are counterpart to conserve and the capacity. democrats for liberty says yes, democrats gained 40 seats in the house. it is hard to argue against her leadership with gains like that. off of our facebook page, there is a poll you can participate in. need less saying we corporate democrats and more progressives. caller: good morning. the reason i would like for her to stay as speaker is because republicans have lost their minds trying to get rid of her. if it had not been for her leadership, we never would have gone the affordable care act and what did president trump do?

the first thing they did with republicans was to get rid of the health care. here in oklahoma, one of the poorest, we are below mississippi. if we go any farther, we will be in the gulf of mexico. they have voted against health care, their children. 10, 50 years old who have never been to a doctor. through her guidance, she got the affordable care act into play and what have republicans done and how can you talk against? mississippi? what do they have? mississippi had more lynchings than any other state. , hello,shington state this is ray. actually, i live in

poland, but i am registered in washington state. i think they should keep her as because re-nominate her she has the experience to pull the big tent of the democrats together. you can see all these different voices arguing this way and that. i think she can pull them together and get them on a strong legislative program for the first year of her speakership and when that gets established, i think she will step aside and let some new blood come in as a speaker, fudge.y congresswoman we can see mr. trump wants her as speaker because she is his favorite punching bag. come the 2020 elections, i think she will step aside about a year

newre that to -- with the speaker in place and the legislative program she has established, democrats will be unified and coherent and i think they will be much more attracted to the electorate and this will sweep them even into the senate and the presidency. oft: the reporter at the top the program talked about resistance from 16 or so democrats about pelosi becoming speaker. how does she managed that into a cohesive caucus? caller: that is the whole thing. in manys are split different ways. i don't think anybody is strong enough to pull all these voices .ogether i think she has the wherewithal because the democrats have to

come off as a coherent legislative force to demonstrate to the american people they know how to govern. they are not a party of obstruc tion or a do-nothing party like republicans. get theirey need to act together. i think they learned a lesson they have to be unified, coherent, appeal to a broader spectrum of the american public. she can get them going, get them first yearing the and maybe step aside, congresswoman fudge can take over and this will put them in a strong position for the 2020, get him -- get her out of the way. ust: perhaps you are joining -- for democrats only, the first step of leadership

elections take place on the democratic side for house members today. nancy pelosi expected to be voted in as speaker of the house. if you live8-8000 in the eastern and central time zone. 202-748-8001 in the mountain and pacific time zones. we will continue on with those calls. senate related to the side, the results from last night are reported by the clarion ledger with lots of help by president trump, cindy hyde-smith defeated democrat runoff.y in the the first female elected to congress from mississippi. y would have been the first african-american mississippian elected to the senate since reconstruction. cindy hyde-smith talked about hopesctory and her

serving out for the people of mississippi. here is a portion of that speech. [video clip] >> the reason we won is mississippians know me and they know my heart. thank you for stepping up, mississippi. thise said all along, isn't about me, this is about the people of mississippi and what is afforded to the people of mississippi. aboutin tonight, it is conservative values and the things that made the most to all of us. it is the things i will take to washington, d.c. that i want to represent all of mississippians with these values and i will fight for it every single day. i am your warrior. from alexandria, virginia, you are next.

caller: my opinion is she needs .o step aside she is but -- good at collecting money from corporations, that is the only thing she is good about. the other thing she is good about is making partition deals -- the american people haven't noticed this gop in this administration are not going with any bipartisan deals. they already -- they have -- the leadership of the democratic party needs to change. host: some of the previous callers mentioned her role in

getting the affordable care act passed. caller: that was just part of it. it was a good accomplishment, yes. being -- really really accomplishing something, nancy pelosi hasn't really accomplished -- not much. the mainstream media loves her because she is like the diet coke of the democratic party and as i said before, she is only good at taking money from corporations. host: you made that point. this is claire in georgia. hello. caller: hello, how are you? host: i am fine, thank you. caller: i think nancy pelosi should be speaker of the house. i am glad we have more women. those people cannot do what they have done.

brings developed people, people together, solved a lot of problems then -- it would be beneficial for them to support her and all the young people should listen and learn because they can learn some things from her. twitterviewer off of saying how long has she been in congress? someone who has been there for a shorter while should have been trained by now. they are not in the business of training warriors to lead in their absence. another viewer saying since when do democrats care about rules? these are some of the postings in social media sites. for those of you in

the eastern and central time zones and 202-748-8001 for mountain and pacific time zones. martin in cincinnati, hello. this is not a time for democrats to start fighting each other. we just gained the house, why would we fight each other? i think she should be -- transition somebody else into the leadership. as long as we are fighting each other, we are not going to get anything done. they cannot go in and start it now. they need to work together and transition somebody else into a leadership that is what they need to do. we cannot win if we are going to fight each other. in new jersey.y

caller: yes, i think it is long overdue for nancy pelosi to go. i don't see these big accomplishments everybody is saying she has made. act put in.e aca years, people cannot even afford it anymore. she doesn't have no big legislative agenda or accomplishment. if she has been there way too long and it is time for the democratic party to evolve and have different ideas and fresh thinking coming in. it is long overdue for that. host: who stands out in your mind as someone who refracts -- reflects that younger thinking? fromr: i like tim ryan

ohio. i don't see anybody stepping up, which i don't understand that. what has she done? the democrats have lost everything. sure, they gained back the house now, but that generally happens with midterms went you have a new president. all she does is talk about the money she gets. there are strings attached to the money. host: that is harry in new jersey. with leadership elections today, there are other positions being elected as well. many of them running unchallenged. including steny hoyer expected to become majority whip. -- when it comes to the assistant democratic leadership position, ben ray lujan from new .exico running unchallenged when it comes to the head of the democratic caucus chair, a race

and hakeembara lee jeffries, democrat from new york to search the eighth district -- who serves the eighth district. in florida, evelyn, hello. caller: good morning. host: hi. caller: good morning. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: all right. good morning, i am a strong supporter of nancy pelosi and i think she should stay where she is. host: why is that? caller: before, i don't think she was given her just do. uue. i just think she is a strong leader. -- saysom social media,

maxine waters or davis were options as well. jack dean says we need new leadership for a better and different direction and ultimately for progress. kelly brian adding alexandria cortez is basically a new model of nancy pelosi. if you go to our facebook page, not only can you leave comments, but you can participate in a poll. it is not scientific by any means, but you can give your thoughts on our social media site and call us on the phone lines. tony isr, colorado, next. hello. we will go to alice in baltimore. caller: good morning. democrats fall in love, republicans fall in line. smartpelosi is a very

woman. imo old enough to remember when her father and her brother were mayors of baltimore city. she has been trained sitting at of those folks and i would certainly like to see her continue in her position as the .ext speaker also, i think perhaps there should be training for some other young people to get them ready to fill some leadership positions. host: young people such as whom? caller: maybe the young lady from new york, some of the are already there. the lady from connecticut who was elected recently. they all may have leadership potential, but they have to look .- be looked at carefully host: that facebook poll i told you about, this is what it would

look like if you go to our facebook page about 821 votes since we posted just before the start of the show, you can add your thoughts on the pole and the comment section if you wish. for those of you in the eastern and central time zones. 202-748-8001 in the mountain and pacific time zones. your thoughts on nancy pelosi as next speaker should she win election today and expected to do so and the second round in january. we have heard of some criticize her becoming speaker. you can add your thoughts. new orleans, angelo, good morning. caller: good morning and thank .ou for c-span i believe whether it is russia or ignorant republicans, there has been a campaign against

nancy pelosi, whether they feel she is too strong and has been too strong for years or whether they are just trying to disrupt because i really feel like they believe they are trying to divide us anyway they can whether by race, strength, or whatever it is. host: there is also a campaign by some democrats in the house side as well. caller: i think a campaign by house democrats is the knowledge of what was accomplished while she was in there. she is a strong woman and has some good beliefs. she is a fair woman. amove her, i really do and i 100% behind her and i believe anybody with their right mind would have to be that way, too.

host: if you want to keep calling in for the next up until 8:00 eastern standard time, you can do so. to give a sense of what is going on elsewhere in capitol hill, on the senate side there is a debate about a pop bash -- .ossible government shutdown the new york times highlights this debate between the various factions saying it is senator theard shelby of alabama, chairman of the appropriations committee floated the possibility of providing the $5 billion in funding -- dividing that over two years. saying they wanted to stick to a deal they negotiated with republicans to spend $1.6 billion on border security adding the president would bear the responsibility for any lapse in government operations.

he talked about this issue yesterday and the role republicans would play if there is a government shutdown. here is chuck schumer. [video clip] >> we are for strong border security. the bill we originally put -- we aren 2014 had for strong order security and we have made numerous proposals. billion for border security negotiated by democrats position.icans is our we believe that is the right way to go. if there is any shutdown, it is on president trump's back. republicans are in control of the presidency, the house, and the senate read a shutdown is on their back. $1.6 -- stick to the billion. >> do you think the $5 billion

request by the president is unreasonable? >> they haven't spent a penny of the $1.3 billion they requested in last year's budget. we are not negotiating in the press, this is our position. to see thosewant comments and others, democrats who spoke yesterday, go to our website at c-span.org and you can look for it in our video library section. in madison, wisconsin, john is next. cortez is think ocasio- president trump's nightmare and nancy pelosi is a politician that will lead the way to get rid of trump. host: why do you say when it comes to alexandria your cortez, why do you say that is a nightmare? he hung up. this is haley in virginia.

she hung up as well. the washington post printing a long ranging interview with president trump conducted in the oval office. highlighted in the front page of the washington post about president trump's dissatisfaction with the federal reserve. they are making a mistake because i haven't got in my gut tells me more than somebody else's brain can tell me. so far, i am not even a little bit happy with my selection of jay powell, not even a little bit and i am not blaming anyone, just telling you i think the fed is off-base with what they are doing. that topic and others if you go to the washington post website, that interview with president trump. carolyn stephens says when it

comes to nancy pelosi -- it looks like we are stuck with her. bill king says i am not an independent that supports democrats although i do not support pelosi as speaker. it is time for a younger democrat to replace her. those who say no about nancy pelosi becoming speaker, who is your replacement? you can answer joseph's question and add your thoughts on our facebook page and participate in that poll. in detroit, michigan, hi. caller: hi. i am calling on behalf of nancy pelosi because i heard she went to washington as a staffer running around collecting files she has young people

been through lots of presidents and she knows where the bones are buried. we need someone with experience that knows what to do and how to do it and how to get the votes test republicans are down --o cut her anybody they think is affected -- effective. she can train the young people coming up. if they learn what she knows, we are better off. host: do you think that training should have been taking place especially for young democrats to take these key positions. caller: she is always training people. she has trained a lot of people. they just haven't gotten to where they need to be.

these young people are energized and ready to go. we need her. we need experience and she has got that. that is all i have to say. host: newport news, virginia, this is morris. you are next up. caller: i think she would do a great job for the country and i believe we need to have the leadership that is in place that has the experience. we are going against the republican party who is using their experience to dominate the playing field. why shouldn't we? host: why do you think specifically she will do a great job? caller: she has been there, been through the fights. strong leadership following up on the programs that others have thought about when you say she hasn't done the taxes or the health care, she has, you have

to look back at what republicans did win you take finance away from the programs. host: that is moore's giving his thoughts in virginia. on the house side, one of the things spoken about by the president and republicans was this idea of an additional tax cut. house's topng the tax writers is looking to pass a new package of tax law changes hoping to strike a deal with democrats and preserve popular, but temporary tax breaks. the package released by the house ways and means committee, kevin brady includes what he called technical corrections to the package approved a year ago. we are hoping we can find a path of moving this bill to the president's desk. we are open to any constructive

dialogue with the house and senate on this package heard democrats were complaining they bill.lindsided by the this garnered the common of ron white of oregon saying this is not how you negotiate or try to find common ground adding if i had my way, would have dealt with consensus items a long time ago. you will find that story in the washington times, this idea of nancy pelosi becoming speaker of the house. chuck in herndon, virginia. caller: i am totally against her being speaker. it is kind of sexist the fact people are pushing for her to be speaker because she is a woman. thehe was a man during 2016, they would have been out. speakers are leaders and meant to a coppage thing and her entire tenure -- accomplish things and her entire tenure has

been -- it became a pharmaceutical health care system that benefited them and hurt us. she should not be the leader for those reasons. host: is there somebody else in mind who should take that spot? caller: thank you for reminding me, that is the most disappointing part of this whole thing. how politicians were , she has put the fear into these politicians and nobody wants to put their head up. people if they are not towing the line, she sabotages them. these politicians do not have the people's best interest in mind and we have to be aware of that. there is nobody stepping up to say i want to be a leader and that is shocking. we have all these people saying i want to be your of elected official and when they get up there, they don't want to show

leadership in that conference, that is scary. host: that is chuck in virginia, one of many adding voices to the topic for democrats only in our remaining 14 minutes. if you support nancy pelosi, you have heard many comments. if you go to our social media sites, it is facebook at facebook.com/cspan. you can post on our twitter feed @cspanwj. 202-748-8000 for those in the eastern and central time zones and guest: for mountain --202-748-8001 for mountain and pacific time zones. of the san francisco chronicle profiles nancy pelosi. you heard our guests previous hint at that and ads in the who workeds pelosi the phones, winning over some .ho opposed her

she probably announced support for pelosi. another democrat pledging to vote against her, brian higgins reversing his opposition and the -- y including massachusetts representative ayanna pressley ocasio-cortez of new york. won and open orange county seat called for new democratic leadership among the democrats who signed the letter of opposition giving her little margin for error. depending on the final majority, pelosi will be able to lose no more than 17 democrats. that for vote expected in january. the caucus votes take place today.

you will see the results as you go on today. in florida, good morning. caller: i want to make three points. the previous caller sounded like he was a republican. nancy pelosi has experience from being there before and would stand up to this president. one of the issues would be the wall and the president went around for the last two months behind him that said promises kept and one of his first important promises was he would reveal his taxes. if he wants that wall, the president needs to pay for it. him and his millionaire friends. that is the only way we get him to pay for it, to see his taxes. host: when it comes to the pelosi'sdeath -- ms. previous tenure, what makes you think she will be effective this time around? caller: on the night of the

election she came out and made a speech that was in line with democratic values and in line with american values. there was a time in this country when a number one song from neil diamond was "they are coming to were proud ofwe that song and now we have a lot of hateful people in this .ountry she, with her democratic values, will put en end to that -- an end to that. caller: i support ms. pelosi because when a she was speaker the first time, she did a great job working with the stimulus. they got no republican support. they got millions of people health care, no republican support. if she cannot do it by herself. expect pelosi is meeting with

donald trump much more than the guy from new york, schumer. schumer lost votes. nobody is looking at a man, they are looking at a lady. women made this election for democrats. i find it kind of stupid, to be honest about it. host: one of the comments on twitter comes from kevin saying experience matters, but i wish she would take a harder stance regarding president trump. if she thinks he is going to give her anything she wants like gun control, forget it. that is some of the comments made about nancy pelosi this morning, potentially regaining the speakership with elections this month and next month. curtis is in michigan. pelosi.i support ms. i love her and i disagree with ms. hyde smith.

host: why do you support her, specifically? caller: i think she did a real good job. host: give me a specific, what stands out. getsr: when everybody after you, you have got to be doing well. i love ms. pelosi. maryland is who we will hear from next. caller: how are you doing? host: i am doing all right. caller: i would like to talk to these people who say nancy pelosi is the greatest thing since sliced bread and i am a democrat. my issue with her is when mr. insistedpresident, she to people -- there were people camped out in her front yard when she said it, she decided for us that mr. bush's

impeachment was off the table and she is heading in the same direction. if anyone thinks she is any kind of advocate for democratic thiss, i think she is in for the money and the fame, but that is about it. i don't think nancy pelosi is the best choice by any means. host: who is the best choice then? caller: i don't know, no one has come forward. i sure wish it was somebody else. host: what kind of things have to make up or be demonstrated by a person to make them the best choice? theer: for one, that, impeachment issue. to me, that is first and foremost. and health care. at the same time, she does not

want to do the health care for all, medicare for all, which is the bernie sanders idea. i think that is the best way to go. everyone else, and that is a major issue. talking else is kind of around the idea of medicare for all and they clearly don't want to commit themselves to that. host: back on the senate side, a back-and-forth taking place byut the seat formerly held senator mccain before his passing and now held by john carl. -- jon kyl. it is the former senator appointed to replace john mccain. most of his fellow republicans are convinced he will not return in 2019 and governor ducey will have to appoint a senator.

toldor mitch mcconnell doug ducey if there is an opening, consider appointing martha mcsally, the republican congresswoman who came in a short for her bid for arizona's other senate seat. some republicans in arizona have reservations about appointing mc sally. they questioned her campaign positions and wondered why she was not able to win in a state president trump carried. kyrsten sinema, democrat from arizona. clayton in ohio, go ahead, you are next. caller: good morning. for support nancy pelosi speaker of the house, but i think i would also support her for president. i think she is imminently qualified. i would like to see her run. host: when it comes to specific

accompaniments, what would you site? caller: i was trying to think about what would be a positive or negative that i would think and i don't think i really know that much except she is a democrat and she seems to be more or less on the democrat side in issues. i don't think she has gotten a fair shake one way or the other and probably she has been vilified. do you think about these arguments you have heard about someone younger coming into the position or maybe someone outside of the typical establishment democrat? caller: that would be great in any organization, to allow the young people to have more of a greater say. i don't think that is something that is specifically tied to the democrats meeting. i would say corporations and other parties and just about

everybody needs to include more young people. you don't want to get rid of experience either and you don't want to have compromise that doesn't move things forward. i don't know if that is an age requirement. you say compromise that moves things forward, what issues are you thinking about? caller: like if you say immigration, i lived in texas and i am a democrat and i have a problem with the fact that everybody -- everything seemed to be in spanish and it was like .ot america i realized i was being a democrat from an ivory tower that is really living in a situation where it wasn't america. i voted for bernie in the primary and switch over to trump because i do have a realization that we have to have jobs. we have to have income and i

remember that part of the republican argument and it seems like so many democrats don't. on the other hand, it seems like so many republicans are not willing to understand that we need to be nice and kind of help people more. i am kind of on both sides of the fence and i don't understand unable tom to be logically understand the other side. host: that is clayton in ohio. let's hear from dennis in fort myers. go ahead. caller: i listened to the callers into c-span day after day and hearing, let's find some young person with experience, i have been looking for them for that, it always amazes me we want to kind of throw somebody under the bus because they have been around, they have

paid their dues. one thing about nancy pelosi that i think the other side of the aisle and the president of the united states don't like about her is she knows how to do the job and that is one of the things i always look for when i , thatconsulting engineer i wanted the best person that knew how to get the job done because we were always on a deadline. upant this congress to stand and do the work they are supposed to, get the budget done . that seems to be the issue right now. host: that is dennis in florida. one more call from delaware. bodie, hello. pelosi, three

reasons the republicans go after her. she is smart, she is effective, and she is a woman. i am a history teacher and if you recall 10 ago, when secretary of treasury hank olson had to get on one knee and begged her for the votes from democrats because they could not get republicans to sponsor the bailout -- she did not play politics. she put politics last. she saved the economy. pelosi.nancy this whole thing about, san francisco liberal. you know what they are saying? they are making the worst kind of stereotype. i am old enough to remember o'neill. how many commercials he appeared cigar,his big guy with a

so this is nothing new for republicans. she is effective, smart and she gets things done. compare her leadership of her caucus with paul ryan's. she is effective. they should be grooming younger people for leadership in the house. but that does not mitigate anything she has done. host: last call on the topic. republican,ndiana jim banks joining us, recently returned from afghanistan, discussing the security situation in that country and what he thinks needs to be done. later on, sarah pierce will tell us about who can qualify for asylum in the united date and -- in the united states and what it means for those along the border. those conversations, coming up on washington journal.

♪ sunday on q&a, we visit the washington library at mount vernon, for the 2018 debates program, featuring historians others brinkley and discussing what it means to be american. >> one nation indivisible was, aren't we altogether? that is somehow elemental to what it means to be american. >> the american character, to be able to improvise. i mean, when you look at george and december, 1777 at valley forge, the ability to improvise and be like a guerrilla fighter, to live off the land and be able to do what we need to do to get the job done. >> from the very beginning, not all groups were included in what

american means. minority groups, certain religious groups were not. really considered citizens. that changes over time. over time, more and more people are brought into the american family. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on q&a. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. 1979, c-span was created as public service by america cable television companies. today we bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white ande, the supreme court public policy events in washington dc and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. washington journal continues.

host: representative jim banks is a republican from indiana, member of the veteran affairs committee, recently returned from afghanistan. >> great to be here. 2014ved in afghanistan, and 2015 prior to being elected to congress. this is my first trip back as a member of congress. i led a bipartisan delegation. there were seven of us. we came home last week with a better picture of what is going on in afghanistan. still a lot of questions. we came home with a renewed sense, our efforts are as important as ever there, and in bipartisan fashion we came home with questions for the administration. host: as the picture good or bad? guest: i served in 2014 and 2015. the picture there today is worse than it was a few years ago.

it is more dangerous in afghanistan today. the threat has evolved. we are no longer dealing with just defeating the taliban. k, in, the rise of isis afghanistan is more startling than what we face. groupsrted terrorist have a foothold in afghanistan. isis k is the most dangerous threat we have ever faced in that country. that part of it was startling. i called on the administration in recent months to give us update and progress report on what has been achieved in afghanistan since the south asia strategy. they have yet to do that. we were able to get a better sense in afghanistan, ask questions to military leaders, about what the south asia strategy has brought about. i renew that call upon my return

home. the administration must give the american people, congress, specifically the armed services ammittee, a progress report, year later after enacting the policy to let us know what they have achieved, so that those of us who serve on committees related to national security have a sense of what we continue to invest in. 17 plus years later, the american people are weary and they demand answers. host: we have heard stories about isis, the taliban, being held at bay. what has changed? guest: this administration has done well to defeat isis in syria and iraq. but isis k has pushed into afghanistan. disruptws if they can the situation in afghanistan, perhaps there is nowhere else where they could cause harm to the people that would gain

headlines and news as much as it does in afghanistan. wednesday as we were leaving to attackme, there was an on a ceremony in afghanistan i killed 50 people -- in afghanistan that killed 50 people. isis k took credit. that is an example of the disruptive nature they are bringing. that complicates. it is why our military leaders find this to be as complicated a picture in afghanistan as we have seen in 17 years. host: three u.s. soldiers dying in attack by the taliban. guest: it is important for the american people to remember that we are at war. we continue to invest heavily in afghanistan and blood, sweat and tears. the financial investment by the united states and nato is substantial. it is not going to go away soon.

the situation is as dangerous and complicated as it has ever been. i came home last week with a sense that efforts are important, the situation has this administration owes all of us a progress report on what they accomplished. aboutour guest to talk the trip to afghanistan. questions, (202)-748-8000 for democrats, (202)-748-8001 for republicans, (202)-748-8002 for independents. you, afghanistan veterans, to give your perspective, (202)-748-8003. you can also reach out on twitter. in the photos we were showing, you spoke with military leaders and government leaders. who did you speak with? guest: the highlight was dinner with the president. he has been a great leader for afghanistan. he is on the ballot next year for reelection.

that picture is unclear. wellit will occur and how the president will do. there is hope for reconciliation. year thatfire last the president negotiated with the taliban, it was a short time but it did occur and it brought some hope that there is this momentright in for reconciliation with the taliban. some of the election picture next year plays into that. the special envoy is bringing hopes and afghanistan to achieve a civil society, a stable country. that is what is critical before we can create peace and go after the evolving threats like isis k. it is unclear when that reconciliation will occur.

host: what is isis k? don't have the correct pronunciation of what it stands for but it is the islamic region they envision for their territory, which includes much of afghanistan. it is the evolved isis threat, as they have been defeated in iraq and syria. the threat is serious. it must be addressed. host: first call from memphis, tennessee. this is rachel, democrat. jim banks. comment onanted to the representative's assessment. i have to 100% disagree. there has been more violence against afghan forces this year, palming constantly.

-- bombing constantly. we are not fighting terrorism. we are establishing a military, permanent military presence ultimately to encircle china. this has been discussed in various think tank papers. we have three more servicemen died for no reason whatsoever, while defense contractors are making record profit. we have no oversight from congress. lets the pentagon spend and do whatever they want while we have so much hardship going on at home. disagree andongly angers my frustration and at what we are doing there and how i am not being told the truth. host: thank you. guest: i appreciate the

feedback. i am not sure we disagree on everything in a sense that you are suggesting. i have called on this administration to give a progress report to the american people. this administration enacted a new strategy that many of us celebrated one year ago. the south asia strategy. conditions based strategy in afghanistan that according to the administration is different than what the strategy was before. after visiting and asking the question to military leaders, to the ambassador, to afghan leaders, it is still unclear to me what has been accomplished in the south asia strategy over the past year. i have renewed a strong call to the administration to give us the progress report sooner than later. i think it would be good for president trump to visit afghanistan. there has been chatter about whether or not this is an will visit a war zone. it would be healthy for him to

go to afghanistan and meet with military leaders, just like i did with the bipartisan delegation i lead. this president could put more of his weight behind the situation and bring it to a strong and successful conclusion during his administration. he would be a champion for that, if he did so. host: should he have done that visit already? guest: i have not been critical of him for not visiting a war zone. a lot goes into that. i don't believe a president needs a photo op to show he supports the troops. i think he can invest more efforts. he still has time. he has been focused on other issues. that were the president ended the longest war in american history, that would place him in the history books. host: line for afghanistan war veterans.

bryan, woodbridge, virginia. caller: a lot of these military people, the volunteer army does not have enough troops to secure the population from the commands -- the combatants. we should have learned that in vietnam. you have to have enough troops .n the ground all volunteers do not have enough troops. errand.rcising a fools peacehe population want and want the united states to be there but the other half are resentful. what the enemy does, they they getrate people, that can go on

forever. host: thank you. guest: no doubt, the situation is as dangerous as it has been in a long time. since theve seen obama administration -- i served in 2015 and 2014 where we move from and during freedom to freedom sentinel -- we took a backseat and pushed the afghans forward in a train, advise, assist nature. we have a today fraction of nato troops in afghanistan that we have had in years past, more isolated in certain places rather than on forward operating bases through the country. what the caller is suggesting is true. we do not have the troops there to create a safe and secure picture like we have had before. with the rise of isis k and other groups, the taliban

capturing parts of the country they have not held since 2001, it is a more dangerous picture today. host: if you call for the president to draw down, what happens to the vacuum? guest: that is the problem. i am not calling for that. i want the president to remain to focus. we would see the same result in iraq if we pulled out of afghanistan. it is important that the president provide us with a progress report on the south asia strategy. host: our afghan troops ready to afghan troops are ready to handle this? guest: we visited one of their training sites. we have been doing that for a decade plus, doing our best with

our nato advisors to train up afghan military. it is not adequate still. host: in georgia, joe, republican. i would like to ask jim. we lost a lot of people in afghanistan. costly. my question is, with all the money we are spending their, $21 trillion debt here, my main mission is to reelect donald trump and david perdue but what can we do to cut spending? i have been republican all my life. republicans are upset the congress has not cut one dime of spending. afghanistan may be fun. i don't know. -- may be fine. what about spending? this president would go down in history in a way few

presidents have if he ended the longest war in american history successfully by drawing a conclusion and afghanistan that would create a safe, secure, civil society there, and defeat taliban and isis and other groups that have a stranglehold. that would be electorally beneficial. historically, it would frame him in a good light as well. i hope he does that. i hope he visits. i hope he addresses the american people in a primetime presidential address that would explain what has been achieved there with the south asia conditionshe new based strategy he implemented one year ago. that would be good if he did that. as far as spending goes, our investment in afghanistan is a drop in the bucket of what it would take to reform spending programs on capitol hill to

address the $21 trillion national debt. we have to do that. i hope the president and this congress can be more serious about that movie forward. -- moving forward. there has been strong dissatisfaction. host: san jose, california, democrat. caller: you mentioned, you want the president to have a photo op in afghanistan. that is what he does all the time. bashing -- [indiscernible] now that we are good friends with saudi arabia, why can't we have saudi arabia help? a great point on pakistan. part of the south asia strategy was to put more pressure on pakistan for creating a safe haven for the taliban, which is

clear that continues to this day. we have cut off some forms of foreign aid to pakistan and that is one part of the south asia strategy i have been pleased with, that has been articulated anyway much of the rest of the strategy has not. i respectfully disagree. the more pressure put on pakistan to stop them from raiding safe haven for the taliban -- creating safe haven for the taliban, the more we can defeat the taliban in afghanistan. as far as the president needing a photo op, you have to remember this president is the president that negotiated the deal with congress earlier this year to rebuild the american military and restore what was a 20% cut to military during previous administration. that alone, as a veteran of the afghanistan war, navy reserve, serving and uniform, this

president does not need a photo op to prove he supports the troops. he proved it in negotiating a deal to rebuild the american military to begin with. the next step is for this president to show us what he has achieved in that progress report and what it will take to win in afghanistan. host: what was security like for you? did you have concerns about transportation? guest: i will give you a picture of what has evolved since 2015. often can'td, we void in vehicles -- conviyed in vehicles outside kabul. -- convoyed. our delegation traveled black box through the country to perform oversight duties as we asked questions of different aspects of the war in

afghanistan. we traveled from kabul, and throughout the country by helicopter. host: indiana, republican, preston. caller: hello. if you planondering to meet with the president or brief the president on your recent trip to afghanistan? guest: i maintain with the administration, especially at the pentagon as a member of the armed services committee, there is an avenue to communicate with leaders there. we will communicate with the president whenever i can, and to encourage him to provide that update. i have called on that update before. i am not criticizing the administration. as a member of congress, there are a number of us who would like this resident -- this

president, or secretary mattis, or others, to give us that update and report. host: foreign related matters. back and forth between ukraine and russia. what should be done and what is the united states position? what do you think? 48, mixedr the past signals. we need to stand with ukraine. i am pleased this president reversed the previous administration's orders and this tosident, giving lethal aid fight back against russian incidents like this. that is what has occurred in the past. everyone in washington, myself included, need to be more vocal in supporting ukraine. i have done that in the past 24 hours. hopefully the administration

will stand with ukraine as well. host: what has been your response to the administration's response on the death of jamal khashoggi? far, a mixture of statements. i believe, i have not been briefed yet. i was hoping to be briefed this week further on the situation. it appears our intelligence agencies, who i trust and believe, if they determine he was ordered assassinated by the crown prince, we should absolutely seek sanctions of some sort on those responsible for his death. i have not been briefed on that or seen the intelligence so i will withhold further comments. host: larger issue of maintaining ties with saudi arabia? guest: there are some who want to cut off saudi arabia altogether. others want to turn a blind eye to what appears to be the directive from the

conference. saudi arabia is an important ally. their enemies are our enemies. that is not mean we should turn a blind eye. we need to punish those responsible for that murder. thank you for taking my call. after 20 years of attacking today, there are concerned over trump's policy in the middle east. our government wants to ignore all the crimes, and some republican senators like mr. rand paul criticized trump. , should not be

ignored. what do you think? [indiscernible] i agree. tocannot turn a blind eye what intelligence agencies are suggesting was a directive from the royal crown prince. we should seek to hold those accountable for the murder who were involved and if our agencies are stating that he was responsible for that, we should absolutely target those sanctions at him and others responsible. host: the potential of a government shutdown at this stage? guest: i am optimistic that won't occur. we have a week and a half to make sure it does not. republican leaders met with the president yesterday. most of them are optimistic we will negotiate. host: it comes down to the price tag of the portable. the president looking for $5

billion. should that be satisfied? guest: i hope so. i believe it is important investment to secure the border, not just because of immigration issues but the illegal drug flow into our country and the real and serious national security threat that open border poses as well. the $5 billion investment is a worthy investment. i hope we negotiate a package that would provide the administration funding to do that. host: maryland, michael. michael fromis maryland. afghanistan, also about the of thefghanistan, 80% population is sunni muslim. why can't we use surrounding arab countries to assist us and help us stand up an army to

talibane surrounding and whatever that keep coming in from other countries? 2, to improve service within the v.a., we spent $160 and $40a year on va, billion goes into care. why not do some out-of-the-box thinking and basically privatize the entire v.a., increase care from $40 billion to $50 billion and give people a credit card to go anywhere they want? host: thanks. guest: let me start with the second question. what the administration has done with this congress to reauthorize choice act and expand choice for more veterans is along the lines of what you are suggesting, which is,

absolutely the direction we need to go. choice 2.0o the legislation out of this congress, veterans, 30% could access health outside v.a. with choice 2.0 and reauthorization of program under congress, 50% of veterans will be able to access health outside v.a. i agree, we need to apply common sense to how we modernize v.a. i chair a subcommittee related to modernizing electronic health records and modernization of technology at v.a. we can provide better care and access to veterans around the country. i am invested on the v.a. committee and on these issues. as far as afghanistan, training the afghan army, over 17 years we have failed to train them in a way that places them at the forefront of efforts.

that is why we continue to maintain presence. we do not have a stable situation. nato investment, other countries, important to those efforts. i hope this administration will nurture nato relationships that have led to investment by other countries as well. host: brian in massachusetts. caller: good morning, c-span. hello? host: go ahead. caller: i would like to thank mr. banks for serving, first of all. afghanistan is a corrupt country . 17 year failure. we pull out of their. that government will fall within a heartbeat. -- out of there. we have a heroin problem in the united states. it comes from afghanistan. that is odd. you mentioned supporting the ukraine and they are happy we are selling arms. -- loss-of-life overall

saudi arabia is an ally but they have mosques all over the world -- training this -- host: caller, we are short on time. caller: thank you for your time. there that comments are important to address. as far as corruption in ifghanistan, president ghan has been at the forefront of fighting corruption. i am pleased with his leadership. i hope he is reelected. he has been a reformer to go after corruption. that is important. it is important to create a stable situation in afghanistan that is fundamental to peace and achieving american and afghan interests. host: you are elected as part of the majority. guest: i have never served in the minority before.

i served in the state house for six years under super majority. this will be my first foray in minority. there are opportunities. i serve on committees that are the most bipartisan and congress. the armed services committee and the veteran affairs committee. i see opportunities to work with colleagues to address issues most important. he serves thes, people of indiana and the third district. thank you for your time. guest: thank you. host: coming up, what it means when someone wants to apply for asylum in the united states? sarah pierce joins. sarbanes john discusses what he expects to be the first bill passed in the new democratic congress next year. those conversations, when we come back. ♪

>> best-selling driller author, -- thriller author, his most recent book debuted at number one on the new york times bestsellers. his other books include, the book of fate, and the first council, plus eight other best-selling thrillers. join us for in-depth, fiction addiction with brad meltzer. book tv on c-span2. -- fiction edition. q&a, we visit the washington library at mount vernon for the 2018 founding debates program featuring historians douglas brinkley and others, discussing what it means to be american. weone nation indivisible,

are altogether right? that is somehow elemental to what it means to be american. to be american character, able to improvise. i mean, when you look at george ofhington and the dark days december, 1777 at valley forge, the ability of the general to improvise and be like a guerrilla fighter, to live off the land, to do what we need to do to get the job done. >> from the beginning, not all groups were included and what an american is. minority groups, religious groups, women were not. were not really considered citizens, at least. that changes over time. over time more and more people are brought into the american family. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on q&a.

>> washington journal continues. host: sarah pierce joins us. we are here to talk about the process of asylum. guest: good morning. host: a bit about the institute. guest: it is a nonpartisan think tank that studies the movement of people worldwide. i work in the u.s. emigration policy program focusing on everything that focuses -- that effects u.s. immigration. when a foreign national is requesting asylum, they are requesting protection. they are fearing persecution. host: when the government wants to question those who would come in, what are they looking for as proof they need protection? guest: not everyone who is fearing something at home qualifies for asylum. it is specific.

someone who is fearing persecution based on their political beliefs, nationality, ethnicity or political opinion or membership in a social group. the individual has to fit in that legal definition to qualify. host: there are two types of asylum. affirmative and offensive. -- defense of. -- defensive. host: affirmative -- host: affirmative is someone who is already in the united states. two types of defensive. applying before an immigration judge. ice, theyicked up by say i cannot go home. they apply for asylum before a judge. asylum type of defensive is a person at a port of entry,

trying to come into claim asylum. that would be a defensive case. host: for those at the border of tijuana, what is the process? guest: once they get into the united states, the issue with tijuana is that a lot of them are not being permitted into the port of entry immediately to apply. once they are, and they say they have a fear of returning home, they will be given preliminary asylum interview called a credible fear interview. most people get through that. it is meant to weed out bliss claims. at that point -- frivolous claims. at that point they apply defensively before the judge. host: then the process from application to whether they get a court date, how long will someone wait typically and what do they do while they are waiting? guest: that is the unfortunate thing. thatystem is so backed up

in that time, it stretches on for 3, 4, 5 years before they go before a judge. in the meantime, most are living in the united states and establishing roots. it is a problematic route. problem for the integrity of the system. it invites misuse. our guest is here to talk about the asylum process. if you want to ask her questions, (202)-748-8000 for democrats, (202)-748-8001 for republicans, (202)-748-8002 for independents. you can also tweet questions or comments @cspanwj. the justice department tells us in 2018, when it comes to defensive asylum filings, that

number growing by 13,000. guest: a lot of that has to do with what is going on at the border. we have had an increase of individuals approaching the border and asking for asylum. when you look at the number of individuals applying at the southern border, that has increased 1000% over the last 10 years. that increase is putting strain on the system. host: when it comes to those total claims done and the actual numbers of people brought in, customs and border patrol breaks it down by country. 2018, 9600dor for request for asylum. 27% ofla, 19,000 claims, total coming in. what is the average for those who apply and those who get it eventually? guest: ultimate approval rate.

once they get in and apply before the immigration judge, that approval rate is the lowest it has been in 20 years. overall, 33%. individualsifically from the northern triangle, those individuals are less, between 18% and 23%, el salvador, guatemala and honduras. host: what is going to stand out to me as an immigration judge, that this person cannot get asylum? guest: you have to assess how credible the claim is. does this individual have a well-founded era persecution on behalf of factors? court system the had put a percentage on it. 10% likelihood the individual would suffer serious harm if

returned to their country on behalf of the well-founded fear. host: calls lined up. first one from alan, democrat, brooklyn. you are on. caller: thanks. i heard recently the rules about applications were improved after experience of holocaust immigrants, people seeking to thepe nazi germany were on st. louis and they were turned away from the united states, from the current rules, and denied the chance to make application for asylum. the rules were liberalized after that disaster, from happening again. given that many people do not come in over the mexican border, someone like trump could say, wait on the mexican side before coming across to make your application, any situation where

people are fleeing persecution by air or sea, there would be no opportunity to hold them outside the border. either you allow them to comment and make the application or as in the case of the st. louis, you turn the people away and possibly send them to death. can is not a rule trump apply to most of the immigration thattions around borders may work temporarily with mexico. it does not work in general. it is not just. guest: touching on a couple things. it is true, asylum laws and rules as they stand are in evolution after world war ii. the national community came together and said, we need to be responsible for individuals fleeing dangers in home country, that gave way to the 1951 convention, refugee convention, and subsequent conventions and in the united states we had a

law in 1980, that was an evolution of those tragedies. that is how it stands today. it is true there is a different situation for individuals applying at border, particularly southern border, versus other individuals applying for asylum and the united. -- in the united states. we have to process applications for those on u.s. soil. for those arriving, it is more of a gray area. we have seen the president able to exert powers at the southern border, hold off individuals and refused to accept asylum applications initially. it is different when someone lands and asks for asylum. at that point they are on u.s. soil. host: when the judge in the ninth circuit filed a stay, what happened? guest: the administration had tried to change how we approach

asylum at the southern border and say, individuals who cross between ports of entry, illegally, are ineligible for asylum. that would mean anyone who wanted to apply at the southern border had to go through port of entry. the judge entered temporary restraining order on policy and said, that is not the case. as it stands, individuals crossing illegally at southern border can still apply for asylum. that is temporary. temporary restraining order from the judge, the administration is appealing. it will go through the system and heard by the supreme court. we have to wait and see. republican,rizona, lynn. caller: good morning, thank you. . i was wondering why people seeking asylum could not apply embassy may ben

down in honduras or guatemala or mexico, to be screened preliminary before they make the trek to the u.s. border so that we do not have this huge group coming across the border? guest: i agree. i think that would be a better policy. it would say people going through danger and heartache, especially those who go through the journey, get to the u.s., apply and do not qualify. if they could no initially they would not qualify, it would save problems. we do not have that as policy. if you walk up to a u.s. embassy in honduras, they will not allow you to apply for asylum. you need to physically be at a u.s. border or inside the united states. host: if another country offers migrants asylum, does it negate asylum and the united states? guest: not necessarily.

-- in the united states. willegal term, the judge eventually decide. if they had the opportunity and protection to and they safe country, did settle down roots there before coming to the united states in applying for asylum, they will likely be refused. host: independent, maryland. caller: how are you doing? let's clear up the fog. we have a system that works. we have people standing in line to come in. these people want to jump ahead. get in line like everyone else. we allowed tens of thousands if not more to come in every year. it is not like the line is standing still. shame in thisan country to make people who are white feel like they are prejudiced.

i am hispanic. that does not work with me. second of all, we need to do the right thing. if these people are being oppressed in their countries, do what we did, pick up arms, fight for your country, your children, your freedom. thank you. guest: it is a misperception that there is a line to get in to the united states when you're talking about different ways of getting in. through family-based means or employment means, instead we have little categories through which individuals can apply for permanent residency. three let in a large amount of individuals each year. one million people get green cards each year. -- we let in a large amount. four the large amount of people trying to flee problems, they do not qualify in these tiny categories. congressresource that

decided to extend to individuals. they're not going through -- they are going through legal means to apply for asylum. there is no alternative line they could get an. -- in. host: your organization put out a report saying that this is in crisis. guest: we were looking at backlogs. there are massive backlogs on asylum accumulated over the last eight years. in immigration court, you will not see a judge for 3, 4, 5 years. that invites misuse. 320,000log is over immigration cases, defensive. affirmative cases, backlog also at 300,000. these delays hurts the integrity of the system. it invites people who have less than asylum claims who might be applying fraudulently to apply.

in the meantime they get temporary permission to stay in the u.s. and get work authorization. for them it might be worth it to file fraudulent. the more the public distrusts the system, the more we end up inviting misuse. host: what is the responsibility of the justice department to provide resources to speed up the process of asylum cases? guest: the justice department is tasked with hiring more immigration judges. that will go a long way to adjudicate cases. that can only go so quickly. you need a qualified individual, highly trained. it is slow. we did not see a lot of investment in the court system in the past. we have seen more recently. it is not enough to keep up with the backlog. host: the previous administration? guest: both. presidents obama and trump have

pushed hiring immigration judges. under president trump, the timeline has decreased, which is great news. we will get more judges on the bench. host: does it matter that we haven't acting attorney general? -- have an acting attorney general? guest: not much. we had a recent policy decision saying asylum cases need to be adjudicated within 180 days. we do not know how that will play out at the moment. asylum cases will continue to take 3, 4, 5 years because we have so many. timeline for tight a heavily taxed court. maybe we will start working through the backlog more quickly. there is always major due process concerns when you were speeding up. will applicants have the full ability to prevent evidence and

have the claim heard? that will be a major question. host: is evidence a story from saying, they need asylum or is there something physical or tangible they need to produce? guest: it is anything they can use to corroborate their claim. if they have written threats from individuals persecuting them, that can be evidence. for witnesses who saw the abuse. -- or witnesses. when you have that great in between, a lot of that evidence gets dated. maybe you had a witness at first but you lost touch and cannot present. there are due process concerns with having cases so delayed. host: we're talking the u.s. asylum process with syrup years. with saraheepsie -- pierce. from poughkeepsie, new york, go

ahead. caller: i am listening to the process. it is interesting. i appreciate it. i am interested in the humanization information about the process. if you could please provide details as to what it is like for the human beings coming and seeking asylum on the other side -- what are the real details of the fears they are being faced with and the oppression they are being faced with, so we can increase empathy as long, i mean in addition to understanding what the processes? that would be helpful. guest: great question. i work at a bipartisan policy institute studying these things for a living. i don't work with asylum-seekers. i have to seek out stories like that to get the real humane

aspects and understand what is going on with these human beings. it is extremely difficult. specifically about the caravan, they have traveled over 3000 miles on foot to come to the u.s. border. they do not have a huge understanding of how difficult the asylum process is. they are confused and concerned by the fact of having to wait in tijuana. some of them are legitimate asylum-seekers who are fleeing persecution. it is creating a stressful situation. i recommend you reach out to people who represent asylum-seekers. they will be able to do justice to these individuals. host: illinois, independent, ruth. caller: good morning, everyone. down and were among these people. we are the people said, going to america for the jobs.

that was there thing. thatof them had flyers said we needed them as workers. the teargas stuff, five years obama used teargas every day on 1000 people in that caravan, and it was almost at the very same place, that they are at now. in, theye people come get counseling from lawyers that go down there, and they no longer want jobs. they want asylum. we, something ought to be done. host: thanks. guest: her concern is a common

one. maybe these individuals are coming to the united takes to work rather than -- the united states to work rather than fleeing persecution? it is confusing, when you talk to them, most would say yes to jobs even if they are legitimate asylum-seekers. they see themselves as human beings. they are fleeing persecution but they also want a better life for themselves and their family. concern thesemate individuals are not fleeing persecution and are just coming to the u.s. to work. some of them are legitimate asylum-seekers. we want to adjudicate claims, ideally quickly, that way individuals who fall under our congress created definition of asylum-seekers, are permitted to come into the u.s. and get protection and resettle. meanwhile, individuals do not

meet the definition are stout red forced to return -- a pushed out and forced to return home. host: is representation provided by the government? guest: there is no government provided representation. you need to provide your own, which is a difficult process. i am an attorney. i still get confused about asylum law. it is impossible for applicants to see their own way through the system, but at the same time they have to seek the attorney and pay. vet those is done to being considered for entry? guest: before they get a green card and permission to stay permanently, they do the same , biographical checks, biometric checks, checks on documentation, thorough fraud

screening. host: amy from orange park, florida, independent line. caller: good morning. theve a question about evidence. refugees, thee evidence is there, their homes, neighborhoods, have been destroyed and also we have the other people we work with on the ground, we know why there is a moral imperative to accept people from countries like that. honduras, wen in have at least one government agency down there, the dea works down there, what other government agencies are down there? what kind of knowledge do they verify thep

persecution that these people are experiencing? guest: we have the department of state that works in these countries as well and maintains knowledge of what is going on on the ground. is,thing you're getting at individuals from central america have a different type of claim they are pursuing. when you're talking about a refugee from syria, that individual is fleeing persecution from the government, which is traditionally how we think of asylum, while individuals from central america are fleeing persecution on the part of private actors, which is a part of asylum law that has developed over decades, in case law, but is not what we traditionally think of as asylum or refugee. that is a hurdle. host: independent line in

illinois, james. caller: hello. host: go ahead. , iner: i have got a comment the 1980's, i am 76 years old. in the 1980's i had a middle-class job in the meat acting industry. industry. after reagan's amnesty, they bought all the plants, wages were cut in half, tensions were over, insurance was done, everything. forced us out. they filled the plants up with mexicans. today, they pay less than they paid us in 1988. 75% hispanic. so, every time you bring an illegal alien into this country and put him to work, you put an american out of work. so when it comes to the

asylum process, your question or comment? asylum,this is not an this is chamber of commerce and big business bringing cheap labor into the country just like they did always. host: steve will be the last call from alabama, independent line. caller: the purpose of all immigration, legal and illegal, is to destroy the white race. it is a swarm with billions of nonwhites. africa, the same. host: ok. once the best thing to watch for the next couple of weeks with a group of the border, the larger assignment process overall? guest: the group of the border, we have a lot of people waiting in tijuana because the administration is engaging in a process in which they are only letting 60-100 asylum-seekers her day come in to the port of entry.

there's actually a case currently being adjudicated in california as to whether or not the metering process is legal. i think that is going to be an important thing to watch. there's also the legal case over the administration knew asylum bands for individuals applying in between ports of entry. we'll see if that continues to be adjudicated as well. and of course, we are going to watch the administration put in more resources to the agency and the court to try to speed up these cases and that new 180 day policy to see whether or not they can actually speed up these cases. there's a lot going on in a lot of different areas. the policy.org. if you want to find out more about the organization, thanks for your time. host: we will have open phones, and if you want to participate, it's (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 republicans and caller:

independent. we will be right back. announcer: this weekend, c-span cities tour cutera riverside, california. with the help of our cable partners, we will explore riverside literary scene and history. saturday at noon eastern on book tv, we visit the university of california riverside variety collection. it houses more than 1000 varieties of citrus. it has been at the forefront of u.s. agricultural research since the early 1900s. >> this is another that does not look exactly like citrus, but it's called australian -- micro citrus. the cool thing is when i cut it with my knife, and you open it up, the juice comes out like little bubbles. and you can see the seeds as well.

they look like caviar. -- announcer: on sunday at 2 p.m. eastern on american history tv, we explore the historic mission inn, posting u.s. presidents, celebrities, and mitchell's closer gatherings, including the wedding of pat and richard nixon. may just about three or four months after it opened, president teddy roosevelt was here in southern california. him hereler invited and he spent the night here in that room. at that time, they gave it the epithet of the presidential suite. that is historically how it was known for many years. announcer: watch c-span cities tour of riverside california saturday at noon eastern. on c-span2 book tv. on americant 2 p.m. history tv on c-span3. working with our cable affiliates as we explore america.

announcer: washington journal continues. host: it is open phones and again the numbers, (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8002 independents. c-spanwj andeed is our facebook page, and a related story from the last segment, a research center putting out new numbers when it comes to illegal immigration in the united states. fewer than 11 million unauthorized immigrants estimated to live in the country in 2015, the year for which they were able to analyze government data. that number has fallen steadily from a peak of 12.2 million in 2007 to the lowest total for any year since 2004. the number of people apprehended as illegaler viewed

entry fell to 310,000 in 2017. it's according to u.s. customs and border protection. that was the lowest total of any year since 1971. we find that story in the wall street journal this morning. kentucky is the first stop on open phones. what are for democrats, go ahead. caller: i'm doing well. and i'm calling because i'm just amazed at how america is going crazy about donald trump. when america created donald trump and as i watch the things goingon in mississippi, into the race as senator and around america, it just happened yesterday online to read an article about a person who had a -- she made a profound

statement. she said white people created and racial issue in america experienced responsibility for the problem. i'm an ever in american retired veteran, totally agree. donald trump is the making of white america. host: bill, illinois. republican line. hello? caller: o, i'm sorry. you cut out for a second. i wish somebody would give us an honest answer on this immigration. early 80's, my church and some individuals sponsors and vietnamese refugees and had to go through the consulate and had to be preapproved. here,ou brought them over you were to be responsible for

them for two years. and the other thing that i would understand when you are leading a country claiming asylum, for a limited number of reasons, you were supposed to go to the nearest safe haven. in other words, the nearest safe country that people take you as a refugee, and that's where you applied. somebody's going to have an honest answer to this thing. the way we are trying to take these. to me, it's just a double sham. host: michigan, independent line. hello. caller: hello. it seems to me that the republicans and the democrats are both using the wrong paradigm on immigration. they are talking about a physical wall. this country was built on

immigration from around the world. , give us has made us our strength through diversity and the work value. a workution should be permit system that welcomes gives people a welcoming hand, but not necessarily guarantees them handouts. if you want to work in the country, get a permit. file your federal and state income taxes if you want that permit renewed. verificationory and let lawyers enforce that with a $10,000 per occurrence find. after five years of paying your taxes and working you have the right to apply as a citizen. a test is given in english. the alternative might be if you want to join our military and if you serve in combat and give your discharge papers, you also get citizenship papers. but we need a social economic plan that gives a welcoming hand, not necessarily a handout.

moneyou can save enough to send for your family from thatcountry, then you do and welcome to our country. host: that's robin michigan. the secretary of state mike pompeo with an op-ed in the wall street journal this morning about the u.s. saudi partnership , arguing that the partnership, the kingdom is a powerful force for stability in the middle east. saudi arabia has worked to secure iraq's saudi democracy and keep tethered to the west's interests. one of mohammad bin salman first acts was to root out iran's destabilizing influence in yemen. in 2015, iran was establishing an entity in the arabian peninsula, and militant group with political power that can hold the saudi population hostage in southern lebanon. the secretary of state adding

that without u.s. numbers, the death toll in yemen would be higher, there would be no disagreements between saudi arabia and the coalition whose forces are essential to the war effort. if you go to that last part, the secretary of state also brings up the murder of jamal khashoggi saying of the u.s. does not condone the killing which is fundamentally inconsistent with american values, something i am told the saudi leadership privately as well as publicly. again, that's in the wall street journal. if you go to the washington times, it is senate majority leader mitch mcconnell breaking with the president over the death of saudi journalist saying "nobody ever believes we should completely and totally fracture our relationship with the saudi's." but some kind of response is going to be appropriate, we are going to continue to talk about that. the timing of the senate debate on saudi arabia is not confirmed. it could come as early as today.

in maryland, frank, democrats line. caller: i wanted to comment on the asylum-seekers and that is the issue that a lot of people are talking about. people are seeking asylum. there are not immigrants, they are not migrating to this country because they have a choice. they are migrating to this country because they can't live in their own country and as for of the other going to the nearest country, i would not want to live in mexico and migrate here because it's not very safe either. i think that kind of misconception, these are not migrants. these are people who are seeking asylum and the biggest issue with this is that they think we are going to take their jobs. people who are coming to the country to integrate or seek asylum, or even who are here illegally, the people who are out in the fields are taking our

fruit from the grocery store. these are the jobs that americans, but millennials, the generation x, the generation z, they do not want to work in because those are the low, low paying jobs. these are jobs that people do not want. so we need these people here in order to have fresh fruit in our grocery stores, to make sure that we can make pipes for our sewage. so that way we can have all of these jobs and as a person who comes from a family that immigrated from mexico, my family came here as fieldworkers. nobody in my family went to college until i went to college and after i graduated through college with two bachelors degrees and i'm working on a make overgree, i $100,000 per year and i contribute a lot of money to our system of social security, to

our social services. and that's the expectation that i see all of americans to really try to put forth, to make this country better. frank in maryland. let's hear from alabama, republican. audrey. audrey from is decatur, alabama. i'm 100% service connected. disabled veteran which is considered a priority one. and i have a problem with my sons insurance. he is the was known as civilian health and medical, the department of veterans affairs. and what i think is unfair about the affordable care act is my son loses insurance at 18. and all the medicated kids that are going to go, they are losing their benefits at age 18.

insurance,ve private i had a great insurance when i worked before i became disabled from the war, and excuse me, i'm nervous. you get to sell private insurance until you're 26. and i think that is unfair to the veterans. americans to our core here in alabama. ,'ve called the congress lady and he's my congressman, and it's just like they are not concerned. she says she is concerned about health care, but alabama did not expand medicaid nor is there thating in the future governer ivey would ever expand and i've made senator doug jones aware of these problems. like, when you

call, you are ignored. host: that's audrey talking about her experience with insurance issues over her son and other members of the family. for nbc news about activities that are going on in the senate concerning controversial, they describe a judicial nominee in danger of being derailed by the senate over his passport the on senate leadership refusal to vote on legislation aimed at protecting special counsel robert mueller investigation of russia. thomas, trumps nominee to be a district court judge for north carolina has come under fire because of the work of democrats that have disenfranchised african americans from voting. that issue, at least one gop senator of south carolina undecided on whether to support the confirmation and was asked on monday if he would support him, he said that the good question. , jeff flakeblican of arizona is blocking all judicial nominees.

senator flake telling the press "i was uncomfortable with moving ahead with the nomination in october because people are raising other issues, so it was delayed until this month. telling reporters he will vote no if they have not voted on a special counsel bill. in california, independent line, robert is next. i want to talk about this thing called the united states of america, what does that mean? south of texas, the borders of south america. how is it united, it's united in the spanish language through the catholic church. if it's coming across the border, because the pope was the catholic church to come into the united states to take over. about thewrote a book church of rome and you've got to read it to find out what sapling. immigration, it's catholicism coming across the united states. nancy pelosi and boehner and reiner, all caps.

host: silver spring maryland, democrat. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i just have two comments. number one is that i work as a driving instructor and i like the people that i teach. when i hear this story, i hear the callers ask why are they coming? and the majority of these people i've met are coming because of the gang activity in their countries. you have people for example, i've met people 16, 17 years old who their parents send them here not to work, but because there are gangs in the neighborhood and they wanted them to join the game. these gangs have rivalries, kidnapping, extortion and murder. want theirts don't kids to participate so they send them here because they know that the gangs are after them. another example is i've known

people that were small business owners in their country and the gang, they want for them to not mess with them, they want to all the profit that you may from your business. a lot of these people are running away from that. --on't really think that they are not coming here to work, but when they come here, obviously they have to work. back in the 70's or 80's, that's an immigration problem. the ones that set the wages are american. it thee not changing hispanic, they are changing it that's in silver spring a new report from the united nations from our country that have pledged to cut their carbon emissions to see if they

are on track or not. the headline says that both nations not on track to those pledges. if the document goes through, the group of 20 members one by one which ones are failing to live up to the promises they made three years ago, promises that they themselves are far too little to keep the planet forming in check, some of these countries are argentina, canada, saudi arabia, south africa, south korea, and the united states are off track to meet their promises for the year 2030. according to the report. so the entire european union, several other g20 countries, russia, india, and turkey are already on course to exceed the paris promises by a good measure , adding that the report questions whether this may be part of their ambition. and mexico and indonesia, it's just not clear where they are in for those fewen countries on target, brazil, china and japan, there is plenty of worry. it goes on to what topics will

be at the g20 summit later on this week. sheila in oklahoma, republican line. you made a comment when you asked on immigration, doesn't cost any money? and she said no, but it does. it costs us, the taxpayers. we are having to pay for that. i'm a schoolteacher, i see a lot of kids coming in. we can't ask if they are illegal or not. it doesn't matter. but we have to provide tutoring for them in our classrooms. there's not many for the state to take care of that or to render anything different. and our superintendent said if we have a teacher that leaves, we are not replacing them. -- it'sur united states such a country.

we are not rich, we are $22 trillion in debt. host: following up on the death of jamal khashoggi, this is their reporting from the website saying that when it comes to that briefing that the senate will get on the death of the isrnalist, the cia director not planning on being part of that saying that the white house her and others from briefing the senate on the killing of a journalist according to the guardian newspaper. the white house did not immediately respond to the request for comment. pompeory of state mike with defense secretary james mattis and brief senators on u.s. saudi relations following the murder during a closed-door session today. intelligence officials would normally be present at such a meeting especially given that the senate is set to vote on a measure that could end the support for the coalition in yemen and adding that her absence will be particularly noticeable because she was

dispatched to turkey following the death and has reportedly heard an audio recording of the murder. virginia, independent line. i want to comment about our foreign policy in the middle east and our relationship with saudi arabia. it's clear that our foreign policy in the middle east is driven by our undying, unconditional support of israel, so what sapling in yemen is a proxy war for saudi arabia, israel, and iran. one of the things that we americans need to understand and deal with is the fact that our foreign policy is not based on human rights or exporting our values. opposite.xact what we are doing in the middle east is exactly what we did historically in south america, .upporting despots states

we all know that saudi arabia does not emulate any of our values in terms of human rights and democracy and yet, why are they such a strong ally? americans, please connect the dots. the reason that we are allies with saudi arabia is because of our relationship with israel. we have blinders on when it comes to israel. host: ok. caller: that is why we have a huge problem in the middle east. host: ok, you made the point. this is from usa today section of the money section of usa today, taking a look at elective vehicles something of the comment -- the president commented on. saying that in the end when it comes to the sales of luxury bill goes, americans did not want small cars or gas prices. , he said heed gm wanted the company to build more than 100,000 per year.

the company missed that target from the start. last year, u.s. sales barely cleared 20,000. any material contribution to gm's fortunes for many years. former head of the obama administration auto task force that he wrote in his 27 book. .m has a new electric car in some ways, it keeps alive a bold start. jim favre the engine would help transitional consumers except electrical vehicle. as it turned out, traditional car buyers were never going to olt.a bold -- v from birmingham, alabama, this is democrat. caller: good morning, pager. -- pedro. i'm calling because, you know what?

we have lost all of our charity and our morals and our grace. some of these people just accepting anything. pathetic about the united states. i am a staunch liberal democrat. i am not ashamed of all that. but i will say this. if barack obama had gotten up to talkd a lie and then the things that trump is on, i would never, ever respect obama. you can say what you want about his politics, this man had class and character. for america.lues we have lost all morals in america. some of the stuff that trump is doing is a total disgrace. and i can't believe some people are going along with these lies. and they call themselves christians. and you say you are evangelical

and you are supporting these types of lies. host: let's hear from michigan, republican line. caller: how are you doing? a couple comments on immigration. dingell, aainst john 20 year moratorium on both legal and illegal immigration. immigrants,islike but i just saw our people suffering by the supply and demand of four labor. a senatorday, fox had from immigration studies on -- a guy from the center for immigration studies on. and he showed me was really going on is our tax dollars are going to usa, an organization formed in 61 by jfk. and that money is then going to the money is then

going to organizations in other ngo's and they in turn are funding the caravan. it has also been funding islamic terrorism in syria. you know, this stuff has got to stop. because it almost seems like we live in an oligarchy. they want the cheap labor on the republican side, if the democrats want voters, and it's doing an incredible disturbance. the final point i would make is that if you wanted to solve this , what has happened in central and south america is around 2009, they went to gmo farming. these are agricultural societies. the best thing we could do for the immigrants, we should not let any of them in. this is an invasion. and i think what we should do

instead is get rid of gmo farming. host: let's leave it there. caller: new jersey, independent line. i think we should have more water pollution control. i don't see much being done at all, some kind of sponge cleanups. i'm just thinking even with pollution, they could have some and takeorncob piping it to another place and burn that out. to make us live longer, it just doesn't seem -- global warming is something, but i just don't see -- host: is water pollution a big problem in your town? caller: i just don't see -- it's just that, even with -- they have fertilizer licenses now. you know, and i don't see cleanups for that. and they have all the things in that they turned upside down and you see all these, and i think

they should use some kind of out to amps to be sent washing machine pipe, where they can keep cleaning the waters. host: new jersey, last call with is ". joining us next, we will hear from democratic representative of maryland, he's going to talk about democrat efforts in the new congress, the first these of legislation they plan to put forward and some of the issues that legislation will address. we are having a conversation of washington herald continues. ♪ announcer: this weekend, c-span cities tour takes you to riverside, california. with the help of our spectrum cable partners, we will explore riverside literary scene in history. saturday at noon eastern on book tv. we visit the university of california riverside citrus variety collection which houses

more than 1000 varieties of citrus and has been at the forefront of u.s. agricultural research since the early 1900s. >> this is another citrus, it does not look exactly like citrus, but it's called australian line, micro citrus. and the cool thing is when i cut knife...f... with my and you open it up, the juice vesicles come out like a little bubbles. and you can see the seeds as well. but they look like caviar. announcer: on sunday at 2 p.m. eastern on american history tv, we explore the historic mission u.s. presidents, celebrities, and major social gatherings, including the wedding of pat and richard nixon. three,ay of 19 of president teddy roosevelt was

here in southern california. and frank miller, the man who invited himon inn, to come here and he spent the night in that room. at that time it got the epithet of the presidential suite. that is how historically it was known for many years. announcer: watched c-span cities tour of riverside, california saturday at new eastern on at 2n two tv and sunday p.m. on american history tv on c-span3. working with our cable affiliates as we explore america. washington journal continues. host: our final guest for the ,ay is resident john sergeants the chair of the democracy reform task force. good morning. guest: great to be here. host: you recently wrote an op-ed alongside speaker of the house nancy pelosi. about the legislative effort you

are planning on introducing first. what is that? guest: first order of business in the next congress that we would like to see put on the floor would be a broad democracy reform package. to address a number of areas where i think the public is starved to see that their voice matters again. we want to make sure that it's vote inugh, not hard to america. it should not be an obstacle course, people are trying to get to the ballot box. there's a lot of things we can do to strengthen the opportunity to vote across this country. the second thing we want to look at is ethics and integrity. i think people want to know that when you go to washington as a lawmaker, you should behave yourself. and there's a lot of rules that we needed to put in place, guidelines to govern behavior in the executive branch and legislative branch, but that's just about basic accountability. people who are elected ought to occupy those offices as an office of public, and not be

there for personal advancement or their own gain. and the third area which is really important, this is where people feel that they are really being disrespected every day, there's so much influence in washington by big money and special interests. this makes the average person feel like they are left out, but they don't really have a voice in the way policy is made. and so we got to address the influence that money has area and we can do that by putting curves on the way lobbyists operate, we can add more transparency and disclosure in terms of where that big money is coming up. that secret money come outside money. fundamentally, the power move by set up ac would be to new way of funding campaigns in america that is powered by small donors and matching funds. so candidates can step forward, turn to the broad public, say to them that you power our campaigns, we will work for you. instead of the candidates always having to go to the pacs and the lobbyist and the

deep-pocketed donors to fund their campaigns. getting that big money pushed back so it doesn't have so much influence in washington is another key elements. those are a whole set of democracy reforms that make a powerful statement to the public that we hear them, we want to give them their voice back. we want that to be the first order of business, hr one to come out next congress. host: those are the three main topics of what is known as hr one, the first bill to come out from the democrats if they take our next year. if you want to talk to the congressman about the severance and other issues, (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8002 for independents. by these proposals versus anything you could come up with first? the democracy reform task force which i've been able to share the last couple of years, was given an expansive charge. they will see what wrong with a broken democracy and see if we

can assemble that. we realized talking to people out there in the public that their confidence about our ability to do other things, whether it jobs or gun safety legislation or health care or immigration, whatever it is, their confidence that we can get , is reinforcedup if they feel like the whole system is functioning better. like the democratic machinery really works for them. so that's why we have to set the table first with something that says this is who we are, this is what we stand for as democrats. see that it works for the broad public and if we can do that, then all these other things that we want to see, they can actually happen. people are smart. they get it. you want to do jobs, you want to do these other things, you want to lower prescription drug prices but big pharma has too much influence.

to them that we are going to fix that system, make democracy work better, than when we go with these other proposals, they say no you are talking, let's make it happen. that's what we want to make it first. host: a partyline vote with democrats supporting this and republicans against the? guest: coming out of the democratic quarter because a lot of the proposals have let on traditionally. i would love to get bipartisan support for this. actually, when you talk to people out in the country, they support these kinds of democracy reforms across the political spectrum. it's not just democrats, it's not just independents and republicans, one group of them. if everybody who sees this as powerful reforms. in fact, the polling shows that for independents, the number one issue in the last campaign was corruption. they want to see washington work better for them and i think that's how everybody out there feels. let's go do that. let's restore democracy.

give it back to its rightful owners which are the people of this country. optimism of the senate and the president supporting this effort? guest: it's going to be top in the senate. unfortunately, mitch mcconnell in the senate for the republicans, he has fought against a lot of these reforms for years. i mean, he has made it easier for big money to come in and run the show in washington, so he will be pushing back. what if we come out with a strong, forceful declaration early in the next congress and we show that the people are responding to that, that they believe that where we need to take our democracy, that can put pressure on everybody here in washington. and mayberepublicans, we will get some of them on, and maybe we some pieces of this to the senate as well. host: democrats saying why not open with just an investigation, why not start with that? guest: oversight is going to be an important part of it.

was been going on in these agencies and so forth. that's certainly one track. at the same time, even as you are calling out lack of accountability on the part of this white house and friendly, and a lot of republicans in congress, you should be putting forward an affirmative set of positive reforms. they don't have anything to do really with specific scandals, but they are about broadly fixing, systemically fixing the way washington operates. people want to see that. they are fed up with this idea that they are somehow less of how decisions are made here. we can bring them back in, but we got to do these reforms to achieve that. call comes from california, san bernardino of the democrats line. walter, you are on. go ahead. caller: yes, i would like to talk about the citizens united. country,e, as a

finished out of politics and keep it within the state. the public we it local televisions to give some of these ads for free? without all this money involved. so people don't have to vote with them. years agoion that coming down the tram one morning, you that were the only one talking about change and i just wanted to say that. i know you are, and i respect you and what you do. guest: thanks very much for the question. obviously the citizens united case, coming up on the ninth anniversary of that case in the supreme court. it was really a tragedy in terms of unleashing big money coming into our democracy, kind of flooding the zone and having way

too much influence. as you probably know, there's an effort underway for a constitutional amendment that would allow congress to regulate big money in our politics and try to diminish that influence. that's a tough process to get a constitutional amendment, but i think it's a very powerful effort. we need to push forward with that because it's crazy to have in,uch money flowing flowing into our politics. it's bound to have a negative influence. in the meantime, what we can do is insist on more transparency and disclosure. where's that money coming from, who is standing behind it? so wee the major donors know who those millionaires and billionaires are? one of the proposal that we put into this package, this reform on moreis to insist disclosure. and transparency, so we know where that money is coming from.

i appreciate the question about citizens and there are ways to push back on that decision. it doesn't make sense to suggest the corporations are the same as people, or the money is speech when it comes to politics. that's where the court is right now, but there are things we can do to respond to that. host: washington, d.c. this is alan, hello. you're taking my call, i for ship to work that the congressman has been doing over the years. used to beocrats really good on the student loan issue. like 20 years ago, it seems like they are just not now. and they are looking at things that have nothing to do with the real-life american people, particularly the 44 million people who are being absolutely wrecked by the student loan problem. now, you know, every loan in this country has bankruptcy rates. but for student loans. this is in the constitution. the founders called for bankruptcy rights i had of the

cold war and in the constitution. and we're seeing that it was a uniquely away from student loans. and conservative people are calling for the return of bankruptcy, some democrats are. know, i'm looking over the next two years, and i'm not seeing any reason to believe that the democrats are going to do anything. this is gross neglect. host: we will leave it there, thanks. this: i care deeply about issue, i authored the public service loan forgiveness act a little more than 10 years ago. from would provide relief student loans, for people that wanted to go in the public service, it would reduce their monthly bills on student loans and would also give them a forgiveness opportunity. unfortunately, this administration is doing everything it can along with allies and republican congress to try to undermine that student loan forgiveness program. is that nowell you

that the democrats have a gavel in the house of representatives, and we are going to be in to control the docket in terms of the oversight committees, oversight in the oversight and government reform committee, oversight in education and labor, there will be hearings on this issue of student loans and student debt. we are going to get to the bottom of whether some of these private lenders who are in this space are making out like bandits at the expense of the borrowers out there. we should have a federal government whose agencies are protecting the borrowers, not industry, the lending which is what has been happening over the last couple of years. tuned, because that, i know is a priority item among many that democrats want to look at now that we have the ability to decide what hearing should take place, call witnesses, and insistingthat we are

on the accountability and transparency that should apply across the board including with respect to student loans. host: another democrat from chicago, this is mary. caller: thanks for taking my call. john, i would like to have you answer one question for me. and then go to washington and put it on the floor. would you not say that all in all, history books are going to obamatten wrong because was not the first black president of the united states. he is the first mixed president of the united states. what happened about his white mother? ok? did they forget about that? host: thanks. guest: i'm not going to jump into this debate which i think you are trying to start there, president obama was very transparent about his lineage on both sides of the family. i think the legacy of president

obama is that he was able to this out to people across country, of all backgrounds, of all ethnicities and races, and political persuasions. and put together a very strong support within the electorate. and i think that was a hallmark of his presidency. his insistence on reaching out to everybody, to every citizen in this country, trying to bring us together, wherever possible, rather than trying to divide us. and i think that's something that most americans appreciate from his time as president. host: a recent editorial from investor's business talks of a hr one, specifically what you are hoping to do with citizens united. saying democrats have attacked it, they want a constitutional amendment that would overturn the ruling and other related rulings. so congress can regular the risen and spending a blow to money, adding that senator ted cruz had it right when he called

this idea and assault on free speech and said "we give congress the power to regulate and ban speech by everybody. guest: you can have reasonable limitations on the way money is spent in our politics during i mean, the court has made this decision that they want to equate money and politics with free speech. i think most citizens out here to see a distinction. the fact of the matter is that we shouldn't have a system where the superpacs are allowed to come in and put millions of dollars, often hidden millions of dollars into our politics at the last minute to try to sway the electorate. americans, while they want to certainly protect the first amendment, and i'm among those who want to do that and keep it strong, understand that we can put some reasonable regulation and limitations on how money operates in the political environment. and that is what the response to the citizens united case needs to be.

that we are arguing for when people talk about a constitutional amendment. or when they talk about the idea of more transparency and disclosure. at least we know where that money is coming from. people have a right to know these things. host: let's hear from a republican in michigan. mark. caller: i would just like to comment on money in politics. and politics was the most important thing, hillary and beto the white house. and i don't see federalization of the voting. anytime there is better to anything it gets screwed up. thank you. guest: in terms of the federalization of voting, we can set some standards that states can aspire to some particularly if they want to give some of this federal funding, they can help support their election systems in their states and that's important just to help america vote act in 2002 which resources.

but if you're going to access those resources, you should meet certain standards about how voting operates in your state. there should be a certain number of early voting days, registration should be easier, not hard for people to be able to access. again, it's just removing this obstacle worse that in a lot of places exist when people just want to get to the ballot box. we are 240 years into this experiment of our democracy. and we still can't seem to get the voting peas worked out. so we can do it without a lot of drama every two years. those are the kinds of standards we want to put in place. on your other point, this idea that if money mattered, but certain people would be in office because they can raise a lot of money, yes, money matters in the elections, and it has an impact. we also got to look at how money influences things after the election is over. and i have been focused a lot on that, because what happens is when people are elected and get to washington, they often turn around and start doing the bidding of the people that have contributed to their campaigns, the big money crowd.

instead of doing the bidding of the voters that elected them. if we could create a new way of funding campaigns are everyday citizens are the ones that are powering those campaigns, then when people got to washington to represent everyday americans out there, they wouldn't get swayed by the big money, because they know that they are accountable to and are being powered by the broad public. this is about, where's the money coming from? where does the power reside? we think it ought to reside with the people, that everyday citizens with small donors using matching funds to help candidates so that it's not the lobbyists and the big-money crowd and the insiders that call the shots here in washington. it's the broad public, if the american people, that's the idea. host: from maryland, independent line. caller: high, how are you? i'm glad that you are my representative. a couple of things.

one, why don't the democrats use the word tension for social security? that basically is what it is. also, why hasn't anyone talked about the $3 trillion that has been taken from our security accounts by various administrations? and the last thing i'm going to say is, i have been working with the constitutional professors at university of maryland and we are going to file a suit against , unfortunately, you will be named. saying that if the corporation is a senator and they have access because of the money that they are given, that is fine. but they are knowledge voiding my vote, i am one citizen, they are one citizen. to pullre going to try citizens united into this by saying they are knowledge voiding millions of votes. i would like to know what about

the social security trust fund that has been mentioned to try to overturn citizens united. guest: well, thanks for those questions and i'm glad you appreciate the representation i'm trying to offer to laurel. when it comes to those addressing this decision, the citizens united decision, the prudence from this court is equating money and speech when you get into the political space. i think all the different ways that we can kind of attack that and expose that and try to push back on that decision makes sense to pursue. i would be interested in the actions, the initiative that you just referred to. thatrms of the circuit social security trust fund, it has happened over the last few years is the kind of accounting gimmicks. sometimes, the trust fund is

used to hide the deficit. actual moneyot being taken out of this trust fund, but it's used to camouflage the deficit, and that's not right, we shouldn't be playing around with the way the accounting works in terms of social security. we got to keep it strong, we got to keep that transparent, we've got to make sure that we are very accountable in terms of how the trust fund operates and certainly i advocate strongly for that. on your first point, i agree with you that a lot of times, social security is referred to and medicare as entitlement programs area i think it's better, it's fairer to agree to them as earned benefit programs because this is a bargain that if made by our seniors that you pay into the system over time, if you work and pay into the system, then you are entitled to those benefits and you get to your retirement years. and that's why we've got to keep them strong, because that's the fundamental bargain that the government makes with the people

in this country that we are going to make sure you have something when you are in your later years. we do need to strengthen the overall pension system in addition to social security. we don't really have a very good private pension system in america when you compare it to what other countries around the world have done. we can do much better with that. i think that's something democrats are interested in pursuing as we move forward with our legislative agenda. host: maryland, democrats line, brian. caller: this is brian. i was wondering, why hasn't any the conflictof before afghanistan -- there are people that have ptsd due to those conflicts. i was wondering why they don't do anything, that this is put on them? your: i a first get question about our veterans and

making sure that they are accessing the benefits and the support services that they are entitled to. focus ofvery important certain committees in the congress. that's an issue i have given a lot of attention to and there's a lot of veterans that live in the third district of maryland, as there are across many districts in this country. the v.a. as we know has had some issues over the last few years. when it comes to providing health care as well, sometimes those services and benefits are not delivered as rapidly as they should be. and can be difficult for our veterans to navigate some of the bureaucracy that is associated with this. we have to continue to bring transparency to that, we have an oversight responsibility in congress to make sure we are getting behind the curtain and insisting that those agencies operate as well as they possibly can and put the interests of our veterans first and foremost. to be perfectng

unfortunately when you have these large bureaucracies that are serving millions and millions of beneficiaries, but we can always do better. we have to understand that people could step forward to serve this country who made a decision, they ought to begin first priority when it comes to our government offering services to people out there, so thank you if you serve, i appreciate your service. obviously, the concerns of our veterans will continue to be front and center. got: we've got to let you into early for congressional elections but when it comes to democrats resisting nancy pelosi, how concerned are you about them and her potential to become speaker? guest: i think she's going to prevail. i think that nobody knows better how the political machinery works in washington, or the policy machinery it works. i think our caucus appreciates that she has got really deep experience when it comes to that on this issue are performed. she is their 100%, absolutely committed to improving our democracy. so i think her leadership will be vital over the next two years

as we respond. as we restore checks and good oversight, and as we deliver a positive, affirmative agenda of legislative initiatives for the broad public. host: for those resisting it, are you concerned about cohesion within the democratic party next year? guest: i think we will be very cohesive, we will be united again and making sure there is accountability with respect to how this administration is operating, but also putting forward ideas. how do we stabilize health care arc its and continue to build on the success of these of formal care act? reasonable gun safety measures in place which so many americans including gun owners want to see? immigrationx the problems, particularly addressing the needs of the dock a recipients out there? and how do we make sure that we've got a good, strong jobs bill that we are investing in our infrastructure and all that can come with that. those are important legislative

priorities. we are going to be a cohesive party and putting those forward. host: a democrat from maryland who serves the third district, thanks for your time. guest: appreciated. host: a new member of the senate that is cindy smith from mississippi, winning last night with at leastspy, 54% of the vote according to the associated press. here's a bit from her press conference and her statement after she won her victory. >> the reason we won is because mississippians know me and they know my heart. and thank you for stepping up, mississippi. [applause] i've said all along it, this isn't about me, this is about the people of mississippi and was important to the people of mississippi. you know, this win tonight, this victory, it's about our conservative values. it's about the things that mean the most to all of us mississippians, our faith and family. it's those things that i will

take a washington, d.c., that i want to represent all of you with these values and i will fight for it, i assure you every single day. [applause] >> i am your warrior. host: by the way, if you want to see that full speech you can go to our website at www.c-span.org . a story about representative federal who ran against ted cruz in texas however, those within -rourkeed as obama showing what they described as a lovefest for o'rourke saying that he is inspiring aids and allies of armor president obama who say they would support him if he tries to run for president in 2020. they have picked out similarities between o'rourke and obama. both are political upstarts with unusual names the seemingly came out of nowhere and inspired thousands upon thousands of people to be part of a movement. in many ways, they say obama

supporters, overwork is a 2020 version of their former boss. "the ability to make people feel invested in his campaign and his story does remind me of obama 2008 said david litt, who served as a speechwriter. you can see the crowd and enthusiasm, the kind of movement that is not about me, but about us." if you want to go to the website, there's more to the story. in fact, if you need a refresher course on where beto o'rourke stands, you can go back to our website, you will remember that he came up during the campaign including participating in debates. that and several of it all wrapped up at the website if you want to check out that, or other things concerning the c-span network, all of that available at c-span.org. that's it for our program today, another edition of this program comes your way tomorrow morning. we will see you then. ♪

c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. and today, we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c., and around the country. c-span is brought to you bay your cable or satellite rovider. >> headline from the hill today, pelosi faces the first test in pursuit of second speakership. and we're live this morning at

the u.s. capitol. this is a look outside the auditorium where house democrats are meeting today in the capitol visitors center watching as members have been arriving all morning long. the hill writing, democrats will vote behind closed doors on wednesday on whether to nominate house minority leader nancy pelosi to be the next speaker when they come into power in january. the outcome of the vote is not in doubt. pelosi is all but certain to receive a majority of the votes, making her the party's official nominee to lead the house democratic majority next year.

>> again house democrats arriving for the start of their meetings on their leadership elections. if the results do come in today, we'll certainly have them for you here on c-span. earlier this morning we spoke to a reporter about today's leadership elections. but we'll start with house leader pelosi's remarks on the pending elections. her briefing was earlier this month. adership elections that take place today, at least the first part of that, it was the house minority leader nancy pelosi appearing before cameras before this event asking and answering questions about support for her speakership. here is some of her response when asked about becoming the next speaker of the house. [video clip] >> i intend to win