c-span, the national archives mark's bill of rights day with supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg. 21 candidates will be sworn in as u.s. citizens. at 12:30, the conversation about the future of iran. commandant ofe the coast guard. a little later at 9:00 a.m., a daylong forum gets underway looking at online privacy, surveillance and a top administration's assertions of a deep state in the intelligence community. on c-span3, the helsinki commission holds everything on child protection and intervention strategies. >> up next, live on "washington journal," your calls and comments. at 8:00 eastern, we focus on and collection. data

economically distressed communities in the u.s. later, former south carolina congressman bob inkless on climate change policy. policy. ♪ host: good morning. nancy pelosiader secures the vote to retake the gavel as speaker of the house after agreeing to step down in 2020. theresa may survive day no party -- no-confidence vote in her political party, but will step down after brexit breed joni ernst said women are moving into positions of power in the senate despite the boys club. women only, we want to know what challenges you face in advancing your career. in the central or eastern part of the country, 202-748-8000. mountain and pacific,

202-748-8001. join us on twitter @cspanwj or facebook.com/cspan. we will get to your calls in just a minute. women only, what challenges have you faced advancing your career? the headline from earlier this week, nancy pelosi, struck a deal with rebels, will step aside by 2020 to win speaker votes. here she is yesterday answering a question about that deal. >> you have spoken in the past about not wanting to put an end date on your speakership and last night you struck a deal to be here from no more than -- for no more than a maximum of four years. i am saying.s what i feel comfortable about what they are proposing and i feel responsible to do that whether it passes or not, that is what i will say about that. susanto the editor from

from berkeley california in the new york times, i went to bed in 2018 and woke up in 1975. should not be admitted to architecture school because i would "just have babies and waste of the opportunity a man could use. two of the most powerful women have been forced to agree to an end date in their role of government to -- to keep their positions in times of stress. i don't remember a single male politician forced to compromise on the length of his service. the world may have changed for women, but not enough. what do you think of this? what challenges have you faced to advance your career whether child care, lack of education, too much education, bias, etc.? what has it been like for you? senator joni ernst had this to say about her ascension into the gop leadership ranks. >> i do like to believe that

women are greater influencers now then maybe in the past several decades and republican or democrat, we have a lot of women moving into powerful positions, positions of authority whether they are chair chairwomen, i have moved into leadership for the republican conference. i think we have a little bit of a changing demographic. is it still an old boys club? maybe in some areas. i like to think there are strong women who are engaging. we are taking those positions. we are earning those positions in the united states senate and we have the support of our colleagues in doing that. i think we are starting to see a surge of qualified women that are moving into those positions of authority and i think that is

a really powerful thing and much more reflect the of our society at large. host: that was senator joni ernst, republican of iowa. jeanne went down with shaheen for that conversation and the two of them talked about being in the senate as women and .hat their experience is like if you are interested, go to our website, c-span.org. fromso, yesterday, heard prime minister theresa may after a no-confidence vote where 117 members of her own party voted they have no confidence. she won that vote because 200 say they do have confidence in her leadership. look at the headline out of the u.k. theresa may to resign, prime minister promises to step down once she has delivered on brexit . after that no-confidence vote,

she went before the cameras and here is what she had to say. [video clip] >> this has been a long and challenging day. at the end of it, i am pleased to have received the backing of my colleagues. whilst i am grateful for that support, a significant number of colleagues did cast a vote against me and i have listened to what they have to say. we need to get on with the job of delivering brexit to the british people and building a better future for this country. host: theresa may went to brussels the next day -- yesterday to talk to e.u. leaders. the commissioner of the e.u. said the british demands were abulous and imprecise and in declaration, the 27 leaders of to deal were not "open negotiation" and directed all levels of the government to prepare for all outcomes, including a chaotic departure that could set off a european

crisis. challenges to advancing in your career. we will go to savannah, georgia. good morning to you. caller: good morning. how are you? host: what do you do for a living and what has it been like? caller: when i was working -- it is so hard for certain women. when you are on a job -- looking -- working in the workplace, you can have harassment and all of that if you don't do what they ask, you can lose your job. host: was that your experience? caller: that is my experience and my granddaughter's experience. host: did you lose a job? quit.: i just had host: what was it that you were doing for a living? was a singing

companion and a cook. 1 what did you do next after you quit? caller: i went on and retired. in savannah, lucia georgia. on pelosi's ability to lead as the democratic leader, this piece in the washington post this morning. it pelosi, 78, clenched of the votes she needed wednesday after announcing support for a term limit. here is a quote "the fact she has been speaker and will be speaker again is testimony to her ability, toughness, work ethic, and her ability to negotiate with people and come to a conclusion. she worked harder than any human being i have ever known."

the washington post says over the course of several long phone directed the, he discussion toward what a transition plan might entail. a date certain for her departure. a new leadership election in 2019, forget about it. term limits for the democratic leadership writ large, that was something she was willing to negotiate. in taylorsville, utah, good morning to you. what has it been like for you? what do you do? caller: i am in the educational field and many times there are not opportunities for leadership. host: why not? galler: women are not givin other women opportunity. host: that was your experience? other women not giving women opportunities? caller: yes. host: what were you trying to do? caller: leadership.

host: why do you think that is? caller: i think sometimes other women don't like other women to be in competition with them. therefore, many times opportunities are not there. host: what did you do next? caller: retirement. host: did you retire early? caller: yes. impact dideconomic that have fun you retiring early? caller: half income, you know. host: half the income. caller: yes. host: did you teach? you said you were in the education field, were you a teacher? caller: no. host: what did you do? caller: i worked in the cafeteria. host: thank you for sharing your story. iowa.l go to kim in

good morning to you. caller: good morning. me, is feeding off the power of men. it is serious enough as a woman to have the strength not to be bold. you have to be determined. i don't have a problem with women feeding off the power of men. we have to know our own values, our own strength. figure out how we are as a person, as a woman. when the last caller was talking about women is competing with women, yes, they are competing with the wrong people. enough work competing with men. we need to know our own self-worth as women in if we does not remember our self-worth

, where are we going to advance our career? the me, i believe i have strength within. host: how did you personally use that? caller: i personally use it because i take no holds barred. i have dignity and respect and i don't ask for respect, i demand it. host: what do you do for a living? caller: i am a retired nurse. host: what sort of forces did you come up against as a nurse trying to make more money? saw my skills, my leadership skills. that moved me up in nursing. then i was fortunate enough to

marry a beautiful and handsome man that retired earlier. he likes my determination. he said, you have power. i have power within home, i have power with my children. as god gave me that power, i pass it on to my daughters, to know their self-worth and never give up. host: what do you think would make it easier for women to be able to advance? is there anything the government can do or companies can do to make it easier to balance all the things you are juggling? caller: because you have to have confidence in yourself. when i started in the work field at the age of 15. i have been in the work field since i was 15.

when i became an adult, i knew my skills, i knew my self-worth. going to college and showing i have to have my self-worth within me and have confidence in myself of what i can do. blaming other people for us getting ahead and i don't like to place lame. i look at things within themselves and then i can know what to do next. host: how much did your education play into your self-worth and confidence? caller: quite a bit because i met different people with different personalities. some had the same thoughts as me and some of them did not. when you go into the workforce and all this competition coming here, that makes your confidence -- meeting other people brings

it up. when i walk into a job and i love talkingse i to people and you have to show your personality, the good part of your personality. for being in nursing, we have to deal with the public. you don't take your personal from home into your job. you have to have a cheerful face. i looked at the good part of the job, working with elderly and listening to their stories and their lives. that is what makes me -- as a person, i learned from men and women. brothersband and my taught me something and i don't take it as a personal thing, i take it as an experience and it

keeps me going. jacqueline in hawaii, good morning to you. caller: hi. calling to tell you about my military service. host: please, go ahead. caller: well, i was in the navy i only did one enlistment. to my advancement was the over sexual is -- over sexualization of women. women that even stay passed the first investment, the -- and lisman, there is no female leadership. not only are the young sailors, in my case, being sexually objectified being an 18-year-old

woman on a ship of men of all -- there is no other women to stand up for you or say these things are not right. i have had friends where they ed and put under scrutiny and sent out and the were off the hook. i remember being verbatim -- as a witness at court-martial for one of my friends, do you think this is worth ruining this young man's career over? that tells you the priorities of the military. host: have you stayed in the military? oneer: no, i just served enlistment. i am a veteran currently.

host: you are a veteran? caller: yes, ma'am. host: did you get out for those reasons? caller: yes, yes i did. host: what will you do next? caller: honestly, i have worked v.a. and helping other veterans. 18.: this is when you were may i ask how old you are now? caller: 28. host: thank you for the call. pat in los angeles. caller: how are you? host: good morning. caller: good morning. the reason i wanted to get on this line. i did not want to get on the line, but all these women talk about, i worked in a cafeteria, i did housekeeping work, all these types of menial jobs. in the workforce, there has always been a glass ceiling.

he you never can get a head because the men always make more money than the women. the thing is, how do we fight to make more money? person, too.ous i talked to my father and said what do i do? he said, go back to school, get your degree and get more education. go in the political arena because in the political arena, it will give you access to know how to fight. i went and took -- got my degrees, got my peddlers -- aa degree and my bachelors degree and went into psychology and. that degree and turned around and got a theology agree. all these degrees i got, that education. that was in the 1950's.

when i got that education, i did not stop. they had that glass ceiling and they never wanted me to get any jobs. i never could get a good job that was allowing me to make the kind of money i made. what i did was i said, let me become an entrepreneur, let me become an organizer and let me organize people because organizing people allowed me to not only deal with me with the glass ceiling, but other women that had the same things and by doing that, guess what i did? it empowers women to go to the next level. they did not like me when i did that. i ended up getting fired because i am powered so many women and they were getting so many good jobs. i left and guess what? i am organizing still like obama did in the neighborhood to help the neighborhood get ahead.

when i help the neighborhood get me to own thats american dream, to own that home because now i am an entrepreneur and i opened up my own business and i don't have those big corporations controlling me. i make the control. i set the standard. that is what we have to do with women, set our own standards. god gave us the talents and the tools to do that. all things are possible. get out and do it and watch how the help comes. host: you went from $12 an hour to making how much now? caller: now i make $25 an hour. host: that was in what time frame? forer: i worked at kaiser about 1980 -- host: we are listening. caller: 1980 and i stayed there for 25 years making that $12 an

hour. i had kids and had to make sure they had medical and dental. when i decided to make that transitional change, it took 25 years. guess what? i am doing it now. [laughter] change excited because doesn't happen overnight. you have to work for the long haul. it just doesn't affect me, it affects that next generation looking at me and i have generations of baby boomers -- i am a baby boomer. i have a generation of millennials looking at what i do and they are doing the same thing. host: pat in los angeles. senator ernst, jeanne shaheen, democrat talking about women pursuing positions of power and challenging men. [video clip] >> we have to encourage women to step forward and sometimes that means challenging very powerful men that have served in

leadership before and that is ok . we have got to be a little more .ggressive about what we do if we want our voices heard, we have to decide we are going to engage. [applause] challenges and i think joni is absolutely right about that, one of the challenges is -- in the senate is so much is determined by seniority. until we change that, it will be really hard because women have been later to get elected. one of the reasons that barbara mikulski was chair of the appropriations committee is because she was the longest-serving woman in the united states senate. unless we can recruit women and get them to run and into positions of leadership, we are not going to be able to take over in those powerful

positions. one of the biggest challenges about term limits is they have been really hard for women. to 2000 orrly 1970's so, there has been an increasing trajectory of women in elected office throughout the country in legislature and statewide offices. that leveled off because of term limits. because it takes us longer to get into positions and win term limits wipe us out, it takes longer to get back. host: we covered the women rule politico summit. if you want more, you can go to our website, facebook.com/cspan. congress passes sexual harassment bill, but house members want more. congress approved new rules to tamp down on sexual harassment on capitol hill. some said the measures don't go far enough.

investigators will be sped up and lawmakers will have to reimburse the government for harassment settlements or court awards paid because of their actions. by rules, when you signed president trump, will be binding on the house and senate. house negotiators say they want to do more such as holding house lawmakers personally liable for discrimination claims in addition to the harassment claims covered under the bill. we are asking all of you to share your stories and the obstacles you have faced in moving up in your careers. brenda in indiana, pennsylvania, you are next. caller: good morning. i am going to try and get my thoughts together. i am retired and i spent almost 40 years working in a predominately male -- predominately male workforce. i started working at a steel mill and i went on to work at a coal-fired generating station. i started the steel mill back in

the early 1970's when affirmative-action was -- had come into being and it was being enforced. whenever i started at the steel mill and whenever i went to the coal-fired power plant, the fact that i was hired because of affirmative action was always thrown in my face. when a woman from them -- the woman from the military talked about the way she was treated, that was something the women in the power plant had to live down because it was always thrown in our face that the only reason why we got hired was because of affirmative-action. i am here to tell you, it took 30 years at the power plant working my rear end off to as an equalccepted employee, as a peer, as a

coworker. whenever i retired, there were still some guys at the power plant that even though i had ,arned my shrikes -- stripes there were still guys that believed women did not belong in those types of work environments. for the last 10 years i worked at the power plant, they did a .ass amount of hiring they weren't hiring more employees, they were just replacing retirees. over the last 10 year period, they hired almost 120 new people and they hired no black people and they hired three women. that is all, over a 10 year period. affirmative-action isn't really the law of the land, it's more about hiring suggestion. i don't know what women can do to change that.

laws don't change the hearts and minds of people. like i said, whenever they talk about black unemployment being down, you need to look at the kinds of jobs black people are getting because no black person got a job at the power plant and the power plant was very good pay, extremely good benefits. did: over your 30 years, you move up and make more money over those? 30 years? did men hired at the same time as you move up faster? caller: the power plant was a union. i moved up and went to a different, better paying positions at the plant because of my seniority. like i said, it was a union plant. i wasn't held it down or anything like that because it was a union. any advancements i made was based on my seniority.

us an idea of what you started out at and how much you ended up making. 1978.: i started in i was a new hire and everybody starts like a utility worker -- a laborer and i started making 5 $5.25 an hour. when i retired, i was a maintenance mechanic and when i retired, i was making $35 an hour. that took 30 some odd years. as the union pay scales, we got raises -- whenever i retired, i was making $35 an hour as a mechanic. believe me, i did the work the guys did. you had to. you had to work right alongside the guys at keep pace because if

you did not, trust me, they would make your life miserable. you had to earn your stripes. host: nicole, maryland. caller: good morning. . feel like i have been lucky i am in my 40's and i started working in my career in my early 20's. i have been with the same company the entire time. i had jobs before that, i guess. iat i seem to see is although have an opportunity -- i am still afraid to speak up because i notice although they are giving more women opportunities, they are listening to certain women more. being a black woman, i am worried about being labeled the angry black woman if i am too aggressive. then i see a caucasian coworker, who i am happy for, and a lot of

times i will let her argue because they will listen to her before they listen to me. that is my challenge and there have been times i feel like, i can do something -- i do couldnce, i feel like i leave, but i have two children and that is my concern. it has been frustrating to watch certain people come in years after me and things i have been trying to go through -- have a new person, in and they are listening and you cannot help but wonder met -- what made them.words go passed you don't question it because you are afraid to. i live in the washington, d.c. area and it is not new york or ally, but it is expensive and i know i am lucky to be able to afford and have this lifestyle. it is frustrating because i know i could maybe do more and do

better. host: what holds you back from trying to go to a different company and what would make it easier? caller: what holds me back is starting over. , now it is work i do being very computerized. my skill is being able to draw. go to a new if i company, they will make me do it all on computer and i will be miserable. do you stay at a job you love and maybe opportunities are not advancing like they should or switch to the other job question mark i could get to that point, but then i am on a computer and not happy. happy, ite are not eats into their soul and permits and other areas. host: kathleen in montana.

good morning to you. caller: i am going to try to say one example of what i have come to believe. i don't think it is about males and females. i give an example. i am from way out in rural montana. we have a few state schools, which i try to be very of -- i finally got schools ande state what do i find, sitting there is a female and she has the power professor, to the garcia, that i need to speak with. i don't have all day, i don't live in billings. what i find is there are certain females -- i hate saying this,

there is certain females that have the ability or -- i don't she what to call it, but has never studied any more advanced studies, but she sits there and she does not let us even speak to the professor we need to see before we go 8 or 10 miles back home in our big state of montana because she is totally confident. she sits there looking pretty, she lives there, she has a husband taking care of everything anyway. i don't know what to call this, but i am almost 70 now and every place i have gone, i find this. i hate admitting it, but it is very true. i am glad you guys do what you do. montana.hleen in

we are asking women only to join the conversation as we begin on "washington journal" on this friday morning. what challenges, obstacles have been in your way to advance your career? how have you overcome them? is there a role for government in here? business insider, there are only 25 women ceos in the fortune 500 and this headline from fortune.com, female ceos are more likely to be fired than men even when their companies are thriving. this headline as well from inc.com. if you on must work a woman, he would have been fired already. the differences of treatments of -- in treatment of chief executives is startling. claire mccaskill delivered her farewell address on the senate

floor yesterday. here is what she had to say about the state of the senate. [video clip] >> i would be lying if i did not say i was worried about this place. it just doesn't work as well as it used to. the senate has been so enjoyable for me, but i must admit it puts the fun in dysfunction. iser morgan said no family complete without an embarrassing uncle. we have too many embarrassing uncle's in the united states senate. lots of embarrassing stuff. the united states senate is no world's greatests deliberative body and everybody needs to quit saying it until we recover from this period of polarization and the fear of political consequences. host: claire mccaskill on the floor yesterday. you can watch all of her

farewell remarks if you go to our website, c-span.org. we are asking regional -- women only to call in paris to regional lines, in the eastern or central part of the country, 202-748-8000. in the mountain and pacific area, 202-748-8001. i hope i got those right, i might have reversed them. please keep calling with your experiences, your stories. the front page of the new york times, inquiry shifts to committees tied to trump. the reporting by sharon, maggie, and adam goldman, this inquiry focuses on whether people from middle eastern nations used straw donors to disguise donations to two funds that paid for the president's inaugural ceremony. federal law prohibits foreign contributions to political campaigns, medical action committees, and inaugural funds.

the trumpet horrible -- the trump inaugural spending is probed, investigating whether the 2017 inaugural committee misspent some of the record $107 million raised from donations. the probe also is examining whether some of the committee's top donors gave money for exchange to access to the incoming trump administration. those two stories on the front page of the new york times and wall street journal. in wyoming. share your story with us. caller: thank you for taking my call. host: good morning. caller: i am in my early 60's and i would like to say, pat, women can be real bullies.

i can totally sympathize with what your previous caller talked about with women taking power and holding it over other women. i think feminism is a joke. i think it is used as a political tool. when it comes to women, watching out for each other is just not real. host: why do you say feminism is a joke? caller: because it is just a power tool. it is just another power tool. host: used how? caller: to lord it over somebody. groupn draw people into a for a reason, for a cause or something to get people together. cause.dcast a when it comes to women really looking out for each other, it does not happen.

that holds women back. host: what do you do for a living? caller: i would rather not say at this point. it is in the medical field. i have worked pretty much since i was 18 years old. i am in my early 60's and i have seen the progression. i have seen it change. it is a little better now, legally, then what it was years ago. still, there is this hierarchy. host: and you think it is mostly because of other women holding women down? caller: women hold other women down. host: kim in wyoming. lauren in maryland. it is your turn. lauren.hi, i am lauren. first, i want to say, thank you for sharing. i think it is up to other people like kim and other women, like

myself, to hold other women accountable. mym in my early 20's working first job outside of college and i have the opportunity to work for a women's empowerment organization. i see women ceos every day working to empower girls and young women. i have had the opportunity to have a company believe in me and start my young professional career and it is really awesome being able to hear other people saying their challenges in their workforce. i am excited to hear that. i don't think feminism is a joke. it can be a joke, some people treat it that way. it is up to the people like us to recognize and hold other women accountable. if we think they are not doing it, we can reach out and help another person. she is in her 60's and i am in my 20's, maybe she could have stood up and talked to someone

about it. that is my opinion, but i am glad she shared. working, just started is that correct? caller: about a year now. host: have you had any experiences you feel were because you are female? caller: for me, no because i had the opportunity to work for an organization that works to empower girls and women, fortunately. my mom and other family members have been working professionally for several years and i see the types of things they have to go through. luckily, i will -- i have not. i know that will probably be coming because of the world we live in. host: the appropriations committee for the 115th congress will be led by a woman, democrat from new york. she is the incoming house

appropriations committee chair. we spoke with her yesterday about her priorities and this is what she had to say. [video clip] >> you mentioned you are the first woman to chair and second woman to be the ranking. with two females in charge, do you think it will make a difference? if so, how? >> there is no question in my mind we will be able to work things out. we cannot agree on everything and maybe because of the andcrats have one agenda republicans have a different agenda, i hope to work together and build consensus because we are there to serve the american people. we have work to do and the $1.3 trillion we spend on appropriations is making life better for people, making this a better world for everyone, children, adults, seniors. host: the democrat of new york

will be leading the appropriations committee in for allf the spending the federal agencies and on the republican side, the ranking gop member will be kay granger of texas. usa today front page, this is not reflective, we need to do better. that is a quote from elise stefanik, republican of new york. representative elise stefanik stood up and asked her colleagues to look around. this is when she said this is not reflective of the american public. the overwhelmingly white group of new and returning lawmakers that only included 13 women. one of those issues is getting females to run for office in the first place. usa today notes congress should

address issues such as flextime and housing allowance is that would make it easier for women to have families and serve in congress. "there are a lot of women that should be the ones in the state legislature or congress. instead, their husband is doing it." that is a quote from tom emmer who has taken the reins of the national republican campaign committee because they have made the decision they will be the one operating the household. women only this morning. let's go to fayetteville, georgia, sylvia. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: when i started my career and my father was a contractor, i did not know how hard the career was going to be because i .anted to be an architect i started in architecture in a small firm and i did not see a problem then. i realize later that i had two

strikes against me. the field is mostly filled with as a men and minorities whole have a problem. my colleagues that were black males had the same problem i had. hadr, i found out i also the problem of being a black woman and in order to solve this, i decided to go into a more governmental job and i started talking to build schools. i loved this position. however, i was making more money than my male counterpart and shortly thereafter, i was released from this position. downsizeme for them to

. however, i was the one they downsized, the other three males were kept on. later, because my husband applied for the same job, he had more opportunity. i thought maybe that had something to do with it, gender had a lot to do with it. host: thank you for the call. let's hear from gretchen in new york. .aller: good morning i just want to say that this february, i will be 70 years old. in an all-female office at a fabulous hotel here in the hamptons. boss.r-old the rest of the staff is all-female at the front desk and the housekeeper, we also have

groundskeeper, whatever. we all get along and everything runs smoothly. also, it must be a sign from the holy mother of god this morning. i woke up just now and saw what you were discussing, i dialed and hoped i would get in and on the first ring, it happened. host: good. caller: it is a wonderful thing and i am the whole just -- oldest of the five girls. i went to private all-girls school. all i knew growing up was whoever was the best, got it and whether it was when i was playing basketball and our team won or lost. there was no like i think they did this for that just because there is that, simply, they were better and we all got along -- got on with our lives. i will tell you one other thing. when hillary did not win being

the most qualified, the best educated, everything, i never would geti knew i over it, but it was a hard, hard defeat and i see what is in the white house now and what we could have had. thank you so much for letting me be able to say something like this. as i said, i will be 70 in february and i will be at work. host: happy early birthday. connie in florida. hi, connie. caller: hello and thanks for taking my call. i wanted to call in and say i believe with the article about if elon musk were a woman he would have been fired long ago. my personal experience and observation of other women is that women are not allowed to ofress anger or any kind

disagreement sometimes in corporate america especially. i think in any mixed group. i think women need to come together as sisters. that is how i try to treat the females i work with. i try to mentor the younger ones and help the ones that need help . i don't have any rivalry with female workers. worked --ices, i have they have been priority -- primarily -- to lookthat woman needs up the definition of feminism. feminism is we want to be treated equally and i don't see how that could ever be a joke. experience of working in small corporations, government, nonprofit and larger corporations is if you go on any website of any organization, be it nonprofit or corporate, you

will mostly see the top -- the leadership team is all white male. they may have a token person of color, a token female, usually the hr director or the person who deals with "communications." it is always white males and that is not by accident, that is by design. host: connie in florida. keep dialing in and hold if you are already on the line. this is from the world news section of the wall street journal, senate votes to cut yemen war aid. the resolution is unlikely to directly alter u.s. military policy as house republican leaders stop an effort to force a similar vote. it marked a bipartisan setback for the middle east policy. the cease-fire was announced before the vote, a result of the first direct talks between the

.ides in two years -- agreed to withdraw troops from the red sea city, a conduit for 77% of yemen's imports and a major sense of rebel in -- the united nations will oversee the cease-fire. also, the headline of this story is that the lawmakers angered by the khashoggi killing act as .hese two sides reach a truce if the senate upset by the killing of the journalist ignored appeals by the present administration and past a resolution thursday to withdraw u.s. support for the coalition. that is in the wall street journal and there is this headline, saudi arabia has been pumping up the stock market after bad news.

saudi arabia's government has been spending billions of dollars to prop up the stock market and counter selloffs that followed a series of political crises in recent months and not made these public. this is a wall street journal analysis of trading data that brought this to light. the new york times, u.s. to saudi pay this bill. taxpayers have been footing the bill for a chunk of the saudi led air campaign in yemen. the gas for the warplanes flying combat missions and the jets that provide midair refueling. the pentagon sent saudi arabia and the main partner a bill for the overdue charges, $331 million. the united states refueled saudi warplanes from march 2015 until november 11th. a resolution approved by the senate would keep the pentagon from restarting that support.

the senate voted to cut off all other american military support to the air campaign. let's go to michelle in manhattan, kansas. what has been your experience in advancing your career? caller: good morning. i just wanted to share -- i joined the military when i was 18. i had the fortunate opportunity above meo's showing me how to be a soldier when you happen to be a female or of color. i had mail nco's who expected me nco's who expected me to do the same as other soldiers. i went to work as a clinical social worker and i always feel confident to say something i have questions about or question

whatever is going on. i think that early exposure to strong women in my leadership allowed me to be able to be confident in doing so. host: when you were in the military, did you get the same opportunities as your male counterparts? caller: i believe so. to be one female on a team of seven, a maintenance support team. we went with our unit and that unit of all males all the way down from the colonel to the lower private treated me with respect because i was a soldier doing the same thing they were doing. whatever task came up, i had the opportunity to serve on a u.n. mission back in 1995 when the

political unrest over the president was going on and that has just been my experience in my career field. host: thank you for sharing. michelle in manhattan, kansas. jeanne shaheen and joni ernst shared their experience at politico's women rule summit this week and talked about being female and serving in public office. [video clip] >> when the democrats were in the majority, the chairs of the money committees were all women. we had barbara mikulski, who chaired the appropriations committee, patty murray who chaired the budget committee to mow with the exception of finance not chaired by a woman. that is a real sign of influence and power. it is when women control the money. [laughter] as we know, so much of what

happens in congress is about money and funding and when women are in charge of the funding, that is when we see they really influence decisions. host: if you want to hear more from those two senators, go to our website, c-span.org. in political news related to our conversation, here is the washington post. for arizona governor's make 's star may bely fading. even as gop leaders in washington championed her. lly,ade no decision in mcsa remaining a finalist to fill the seat john mccain held for decades. her stock has fallen in the eyes of the governor. as ducey approaches one of the most important decisions in his political career.

it could also affect his relationship with senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. as well as other party leaders who want to see more republican women in congress. there are several reasons have faded.ances one is a memo her campaign strategist provided which attributed her defeat to external factors. outrage insided ducey's circle and broader swaths of influential republicans. let's hear from all of you. linda in texas, what has been your experience? caller: good morning. i am 65 and i have banged my head on the glass season a number of times when -- my trip up the ladder from the military

in the early 1970's on up to being a lawyer. it has been my experience that men still control the world. women are getting into power positions more and more. i think there are basically three types of women in the workplace. we have women who are there for themselves going up the career own steam.heir you have women who cater to men to fluff their feathers and sometimes are their own worst enemies to women and then you have women helping other women. that has been my experience and my observation. host: how old are you? caller: i am 65 now. host: that has been your

experience over the years. what did you do? caller: i worked in the military in a male-dominated field in the 1970's. i was a mechanic. i worked in the medical field. i worked as a social worker and a lawyer later in life. t born with a silver spoon in my mouth, so i had to work my way through college and become a lawyer. host: when did you go to law school? at what age? caller: i was 42 years old. host: how did you balance all of that? caller: it wasn't easy. it wasn't easy, but i did. host: thank you for the call, linda. a couple other political headlines i want to share and that is speed dating, democrats ooingng at 2020 w strategists. it says in the washington post

that hickenlooper's effort has been so aggressive his team interviewed 80 potential hires with the governor speaking to 30 himself. it soon became the talk of a tight group of operatives facing down unemployment after devoting themselves to congressional races the last 2 years. governor hickenlooper looks serious about running for 2020. another headline on that in the they both agree they are probably running for the white house in 2020. we are going to take a break. when we come back, the future of privacy's forums jules polonetsky will be here to discuss data collection and privacy. will be here to discuss data collection and privacy. later, economic innovation group's john lettieri will

discuss his recent report on economically distressed communities. first, members who are returning from the 16th congress have been delivering best returning for the 116th congress have been that little -- for the 116th congress have been delivering their will speeches. -- delivering farewell speeches. here is senator jeff flake. flake: we viewed the original signed copy of the first bill ever enacted by congress, as well as other landmark pieces of legislation and memorabilia. documents and artifacts related to the civil war and segregation, when separate -- women suffrage, and the civil rights movement. it was an affirmation to me of the tumultuous seas through which our ship of state has failed for more than 200 years,

with many brilliant and inspired individuals at the helm, along with personalities ranging from , but ourto malevolent system of government has survived them all. will echoed then, and today, that serious challenges by any honest reckoning of our history and our prospects, we will note that we've confronted and survived more daunting challenges than we now face. ours is a durable, resilient system of government designed to withstand the foibles of those who sometimes occupy these halls , including yours truly. so i start a new chapter in the coming weeks. all forteful most of the privilege of having served with all of you here. it is my sincere hope that those in this body will always remember the words of lincoln, who said, "we shall nobly save

or meanly lose the last, best hope of earth. ,he way forward is plain peaceful, generous, just. a way which, if followed, the world will forever applaud and god will forever bless." i fueled the floor -- i yield the floor. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: at our table, jules polonetsky, chief privacy officer for american online and double-click. for folks who don't know, that is a brand of google. , what is thesky future of privacy forum? guest: we try to be the center of the world of privacy. we work with companies' chief privacy officer's to make sure when companies use data, they are doing it in a responsible

way. we also work with economics and civil society folks who worry that those folks are taking us down and out -- that those companies are taking us down an orwellian path. don't like our privacy being intruded when companies do things that are surprising or unexpected. host: we want to talk to you about this "new york times" story. how concerned are you about this? guest: in some places i'm a little concerned, and some places i am very concerned. first of all, nothing very new year. that apps andy online tracking have worked for a decade, and we still as consumers don't understand it. it is complicated, it is hard, and we don't have the time. we just want to turn on our phones and get where we need to get. we don't need to be technical

experts. in the background, complicated and detailed business models have been built that depend on our data being sold and shared and traded. some people don't care. my app is free. whatever. nothing bad seems to be happening. likes on a fairly, are what is going on? there's a market of companies bidding and buying my data? key is first understanding what works so policymakers can decide if we need legislation. the federal trade commission can decide if we need to do any enforcement. some of this is tricky. there are companies obviously keeping people in the dark. do people understand what they are agreeing to? data how is it that this -- or what is happening to the data, first off? are there any regulations? guest: many years ago i was the commute -- i was a consumer

affairs commissioner in new york. free,we told people that don't get too excited. nothing is free. businesses are not giving you free things. businesses are getting your stuff in return for something, and if it isn't money, it is something else. it is probably your information and your data. first of all, the federal trade commission has the authority under its current statutes, even if we don't give them even more authority, and i hope we do -- we could talk about the legislation that is perhaps coming our way in washington -- but they have the authority to freeze things that are unfair or deceptive. if in the big print i say here are the nice things i will do for you, and then i bury deep down what the real deal is, the reality is the ftc can look at many of these apps who probably

say to you -- we've all had an app that has that pop up that says this app would like your location, yes or no. we say yes, we say no. app, ofs a mapping course it needs my location. sometimes an app really doesn't need your location. there was a case the ftc brought against a flashlight app that asked for your location. it was selling that location to advertisers who were buying it and trading it, and it didn't say anything at all. saavedra that case and said, no. that is illegal. you can't say and i have your location, thank you, and then go sell it and hide that disclosure elsewhere. i'm hoping the ftc takes a hard look at many of the examples that were highlighted in "the new york times" and says, wait a

second. is this deceptive? we have the authority today to act on it. the ftc could probably use some more authority. there's an effort away in washington. this year's eve like it is getting real traction. everybody seems to agree that we need privacy legislation. and everybody seems to agree that the ftc needs more staff, more authority, needs the ability to issue fines. when it is kids that are involved, the ftc can issue ites, but in most cases needs to sue you and say you may not do that anymore, and unless it shows that people are actually hurt and there is money to get back -- which usually is -- the ftc doesn't have as big a bite. it is probably time, certainly

time, to give them that authority so they can use a bigger stick and send a stronger message. host: we want our viewers to join this conversation. if you have any questions or concerns about your privacy and what you are downloading, call in. republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats -- excuse me, we are going to do this eastern and central. know whatd let us your questions are for jules polonetsky. about that consumers can't show they've been hurt, necessarily. credit go to the point where your data is being used in a way that harms you economically or otherwise? guest: yes. the harm question is important. in most countries around the world, we don't say did you get hurt. we say you've got privacy rights here. you got a human right to have some control over what happens to your data, and we don't

tolerate things that are intrusive or in violation. you don't have to actually lose money or be particularly damaged. in the u.s., the courts have held that our current law only gives us that amount. we do need to go further than just harm and recognize that this is an intrinsic right, number one. number two, and most of these cases, what is happening is you are getting a targeted ad elsewhere. businesses are going to know you are passing by their premises and you are going to get an ad. we've all been in the major pharmacy chains. your phone for maybe the news or to price check something online, and the ads are from that venue. that is typically what's happening. i worry that foreign governments , people who want to do ill come the data is quite accessible, and as the reporters for "the times" showed, they were able to

find individual paths of people traveling around. that obviously could be risky. here's what i worry about. i can target ads just to members of congress, just to reporters who leave tv stations, just to people who may be left a military base. that is a very powerful and dangerous step. there was another country that was -- and other company that was targeting people at abortion clinics with a message trying to persuade them not to do it. making decisions about where i am and messages to show me when i am at places that maybe i don't want to be reached and tracked, that really could be incredibly distressing to people. host: the google ceo was testifying on capitol hill this week. i want to show our viewers what he had to say about data-gathering practices that company.

>> is it true that the android operating system sends google information every few minutes detailing the exact location of a smartphone within a few feet, the speed of movement, the altitude, the position to determine what floor of the building the phone is on, the temperature surrounding the phone, and other readings? with americans carrying phones with them at virtually all times, doesn't the collection of this volume of the killed information really mean that google is compiling information about virtually every movement and individual with a smartphone every hour of every day? >> mr. chairman, thank you for the question. , for any service we provide our users, we go to great lengths to protect their privacy, and we give them transparency, choice and control. android is a powerful platform, and provides smartphones for over 2 billion people.

, it usesf that applications users choose to use. if you are using a fitness application counting the number of steps you walk, it is a choice users make. host: your reaction to hearing that from the ceo. guest: we have the supercomputer in our pocket and we treat it like a phone. our congress member is right in pointing out that there's an enormous amount of data being broadcast every second i have this phone on, even if i am not actively doing anything with it. some of it is data we want broadcast. we want our location to be useful to us. we want things being personalized. we want our assistants knowing where we are and taking us to the next location. the question is what is the further use. we get that there is an exchange and servicest apps

need data to function well, and we want them for auctioning well. we get annoyed if we open up our location and it has us across the street or on an overpass. the reality is the way these devices have gotten so good, years ago when you used one of his gps things in your car, it had you nearby. you waited if it was cloudy. they were beaming off of satellites. what has made these accurate now is they look around the space you are in, they recognize that local wi-fi network. the reason it always knows where you are when you are at home is you use your wi-fi network. but your phone also knows all of the wi-fi networks in the world because google and apple and microsoft and other companies have mapped the addresses of those networks. when you turn on your phone, you are contributing to this global database of wi-fi networks. --r phone is looking around

you probably agreed to it without knowing when you set up --r you probably agreed to it without knowing when you set up your phone -- so every time you turn on your phone, you are volunteering not just your location, but all of the wi-fi networks or bluetooth beacons near you that going to these giant databases, and as a result, companies who want to know where you are, your phone sees those and situates itself exactly are hats in the room. the answer to the congressman might have been if the wi-fi network for that particular room wasn't local to that congressional building, indeed not just google, apple, anybody working with your phone knows it. what can we do about it? you say, well, i don't know. i like the ads. find. but if -- fine. but if you are going to places where you don't want to be known , or you don't like the notion that companies or app developers can find them, there are

millions and millions of apps that are also accessing that location around the world. they are in china. they are in europe. some of them are teenagers in a garage. so you may want to be thoughtful about, do i know this brand and trust them. so what do you do? we don't want to turn off our location. sure. if you can recover to do so and want to save your battery, all power to you. but typically you turn it on because you need it and then you forget about it. what you can do is each of the major operating systems, android and ios, will let you go in and turn off location per app. if you go in the settings, you will see there are all sorts of apps you gave locations to because you were looking for a bank or had some reason and then you forgot about it. many of them are continuing to collect location.

turn that off. if you need it again you will turn it back on. obviously your map and so forth you want directions right away when you are in traffic. again, for people who want to do that, all power to you. i know i always get lazy. number two, if you want those apps getting your location but don't let this tracking business , we all knew about cookies, right? we should understand that every website i see is working with different tracking companies, and because a unique idea is being set on my computer, that's unique id is being set -- unique id is being set on my computer, those companies can see where i am. those third parties, how do they know it is you? they have location, but they need to know it is you. it is the advertising id that is sort of your social security number on the internet. you have some ability.

apple gives you the ability to turn it off forever. somebody can get your location, but they don't know who it is. google allows you to clear it. you can reset it so all your previous history isn't there anymore. not too tricky to find, but what you need to do is look for what is called the advertising id. we all know about turning off location, and the fact you turnell a specific app to off a location, but the companies getting this are typically using this cookie type .hing, a mobile advertising id on apple phones you can turn it off and it is like clearing your cookies forever. on google, you can at least reset it and wipe out your previous history. host: let's go to calls. ken in michigan. caller: hello. talk about google.

i was just wondering, you google your name and is all kinds of sites for nine dollars and nine cents to sell you more information about yourself. guest: there's a whole sector called the people search industry. they all work with databases, most of his that is data that is available about you. there's a lot of information that is easy to hoover up about you. it might be data buried deep down in google, but their this datais hoovering and then they try to come out in the search results to charge you for information about the person you are googling or searching. these companies a few years ago and said, people aren't going to like that. people do search. you see somebody in the news, you want to find who they are. but certainly the notion that

there's this database that somebody can access with data about you, you should be able to get out of those. some companies agreed that they would. others didn't. let's create one central place because you don't even know the names of the companies. finder you go to people and this and that and opt out of everything one of them? unfortunately, you end up getting in there again as there's some new data. to know thatvial this john smith is the same john smith. i thought it was an important effort. unfortunately we couldn't get the companies to all agree. today many of them will let you opt out. some of them force you to show id. some of them want you to send your drivers license. it is really an area where i legislation, and i hope that what we do is not legislation for every little

sector like this. we need a general privacy bill that says you have the right to opt out to the sharing of your information. the good news is california just passed a very strong law. it hasn't taken effect yet. it will require every company to guarantee you a right to opt out of them sharing your information with anyone else. i am optimistic that will help. of course, because of that strong california law, companies are pushing congress to override it because they don't like it and create a national law. it is probably fair for us to have a national law. why should it be different in each state? that will be one of the big things in 2019. host: in washington, mary is watching us. caller: hi. i have a comment in a question. i guess by your standards, i am actually a neanderthal when it comes to data collection and with mycause i stopped

desktop. i don't have a smart phone. i don't do any of these mobile things. media, mainlyial because i'm old and my circle has shrunk and i don't have need for them. , and io need my desktop do my banking and shopping and stuff online. like what the previous caller said, that i can pay money to get information about me, including my social security number. i was wondering if that is even legal. but the experience i just had, i happened to need some money to repair my car. pension wasn't coming for three weeks, so i went online to one of these companies. i got a letter in snail mail about applying for a loan where they can put money through your bank account. i noticed that the application -- first ofry bit

all, they don't give you any information about interest ,ates, acceptance conditions until you've given them all of your information first. the way they do it is they ask your name, address, etc. then they say save and continue. then they ask your income and your job. all of that makes sense for a loan. but then they also say save and continue. after theye stop asked for account and routing number, which again makes sense if they are going to deposit into it, they are asking for my password and username into my account. that made me stop because that means everybody in that company or whoever is handling it now has access, if i give it to them, to every little detail of

my bank account, my deposits, etc. host: mary, hang on the line. i want to get jules polonetsky to respond. guest: a few important things happening here. first of all, you mentioned somebody asking for the ability to access your bank account. huge red flag. you really want to know who you are dealing with when you give away that information, and in almost no cases do you want a beginning giving that some company online you've never heard of. passwords, social security numbers. that is information that responsible companies know need to be dealt with very sensitively, so they want to call you, mail you something. you really want to know you are dealing with a bank that you know and so forth. number two, it sounds like was happening is something that is very common. what has been interesting about the internet, wonderful as well

as distressing, is people get very good at doing very specific little niche things. somebody might be good at making loans. making loans means understanding whether you are a good risk. how much can we lend you? are you going to repay it? are we a bank with the resources to lend the money? marketing and finding you so that when you search for an account or loan online and showing up at the top of google, that is a whole other sector of people who become very good at that. what you are probably dealing with, frankly, is not a bank or a lender, but one of the many companies that makes a living originating these leads. this happens not only in lending. areas.ens in so many they get very good at showing up at the top of search results. maybe the even by ads so they are always at the top. you are searching for a loan, a car, you name it.

they are sort of brokers. the way they sell it is not just, here's somebody, i don't know if they are good. they are going through the effort of making sure you are a valuable lead, and in the time you are filling in the information, they are auctioning that data off. they might have a deal with one big partner. they might literally be having some bidding. oh, here's somebody who says they have this and that income, and then they are handing you off to the real company at the end of the day who is making the loan. that happens all the time. you are probably dealing with , so you certainly want to be careful. this is the way a lot of online commerce works. they are making money selling you to a lender who hopefully is a legitimate lender, but certainly be careful about giving out your name and password anywhere. host: jerry in orlando, florida. caller: hi.

longtime listener, first time caller. host: great. caller: i had a question. this is a great program. he's really giving a lot of information about these niche operators, i guess you might call them, on the internet. the gdpion was is this are that was passed -- the gdpr that was passed in europe? is that what happens as far as privacy goes? is the general data privacy regulation in europe. europe has always had stricter privacy laws that the u.s. they really look at it as a human right. in the u.s. we look at it as consumer protection. the federal trade commission today, the attorney general of our country, they enforce laws to protect consumers. people trying to rip you off. the bush -- colonies shouldn't

be unfair to you. charging you too much money, selling you a broken product, or doing unfair things with your data. in europe, it is about your right, your autonomy, your dignity, and you don't get to sell that just like that. you really want to think carefully. you want to be warned of the risks. you want to actively choose. more recently, because they didn't think the law was being well enforced, the european union passed this very strict, with penalties that can be tens or hundreds or billions of dollars, so please woke up. the law gives you some very significant rights. you can access all of the data a company has about you. you can take it with you from one company to another. you don't like your bank? today it is a hassle. moving it all over. the log is you the right to move it. many global companies have spent a fortune getting ready to

comply with this law. and guess what? they realized they might as well do it globally. you may have noticed that you were getting lots of emails starting may 28 saying, do you agree to still be on the female list? they were -- this female list -- this email list? they were doing it because they were asking your permission to keep emailing you. so you can download all of your information now from facebook and google and twitter. they will dump years and years of every place you have been, every ad you've seen. you name the data. it can be surprising. it can be shocking. but you now have the right to take that, and those companies are saying if europe is going to let you take it with you, how can we tell americans not to. we got a number of companies that maybe were not eager to see strong privacy laws in the u.s., but they are doing it in europe.

the european model is influencing other countries around the world. japan, south korea, brazil. india is working on privacy legislation. the companies will let you do it once so they try to comply everywhere. that has kicked off this support in the u.s. where they are already doing some of this, so it is not so scary to say we should have a law that lets you access your information. that plus this new california --, and a lot of companies again, who doesn't do business in california? a lot of companies are getting ready for california, and actually doing a nationally. host: david is in california, los angeles. caller: it really pleases me to know that we do have such a law on the books right now because, if you give me a second, i was trying to relocate a rental property and whatnot. i was having a hell of a

time trying to secure a place. fortunately the place i'm in right now asked me in to go over this credit report. can telldit reports all types of personal information, right? from so-called criminal background, you name it. it would be safe to say at least 50% of that information was false. so as i'm sitting down with this guy interviewing about this , he shows me all of the stuff that pops up on my name. so like the lady a couple of calls back, i'm one of those seniors that i've just got the smartphone. this so-called brave new world aboutbeen stepped into just strangers and companies to yourotal access

name, and they put this stuff out with the push of a button, just totally blew my mind. it is like, who gives people the right to do this? host: let's take that question. guest: i told you we try to be the centrists understanding everybody's point of view to try and make some progress. so why should companies have instant access to your information? let's talk about some of the benefits so we can decide the right way to fix it if we think they are going to far. you want a mortgage. a lot of countries in the world it is very hard to get all the information about you, and mortgages are hard to get or expensive. people who buy homes put down a majority of the money, or when a couple gets married, the big thing is everybody chips and so they can try to buy them an apartment. right? we have, for better or worse, easy access to credit. sometimes too easy.

we have people taking loans they can't afford, the whole mortgage meltdown. -- you can go online, hopefully not dealing with a fraudster like the caller earlier, but you can go online and instantly learn that you can borrow money for a mortgage. you can go to your bank and instantly get a mortgage. storeho hasn't been to a and they give you a big discount if you apply for their credit card? and while you are at the register, you give them your license and id, and they tell you you are preapproved for the credit card and you can get your discount. there are a lot of reasons why have met quick access is important. on the other hand, bad information in there can really hurt you. employers typically look at credit records because they ,ssume you owe a lot of money you are probably not going to be a good employee. maybe you had a lot of bankruptcies. you do have some rights.

fcra, the is called fair credit reporting act, companies have bad data that can be used in ways that prevent you, so if a company allows its data to be used for credit, for employment, for a real legal decision about you, you have the right to get that report in advance. not a bad idea, if you are someone thinking of applying for a mortgage or a job. they are going to be pulling your credit report. you are now under law able to get that credit report for free. all of the major credit providers have to give you -- you used to be able to get it, but they would charge you and so forth. be aware they've turned that into a business, so there is the free option some of it they will try to sell you all kinds of credit protection. but there is a free option. if there is information that is not accurate, you have the right

to object, to say this is wrong, to demand to get corrected. it is not a pleasant and easy process, but you do have those rights, and it is worth doing at least once a year just to make sure something surprising didn't stink up your record. just go to the agency's. n, two or three others. host: what can people learn if they go to your website, spf.org ? guest: our focus is primarily policymakers. if you watched any of the congressional hearings this week and i you regulate a google or a facebook if you don't understand how it works? policymakers, regulators, consumers understand that there's information about how this works.

sometimes even the companies don't understand. the understand what they do, but they may not know mobile. maybe they are bank experts. we spend a lot of time helping even the companies because a lot of our peers are the chief privacy officer that companies. the job is to figure out how to do this right. so if we can help them understand how it works, they can give people a good choice. they will trust us if we give them a choice. maybe even give us more money, more data so we can serve them well. and companies want that data to be right. it doesn't help anybody if there is bad data and you don't get a job and you are a good employee. so everybody's incentive is for good data. host: jules polonetsky is the ceo of the future of privacy forum. thank you for being here. when we come back come we will open up the phone lines to talk about any political or policy issue you've heard on the program this morning or that is happening here in washington

this week. later, economic innovation group's john inglis -- john lettieri will be here to discuss a receipt report on economically distressed communities around the country. first, members who are not eturning to congress are getting farewell speeches. here is what senator claire mccaskill said yesterday. lyingccaskill: i would be if i didn't say i was worried about this place. it just doesn't work as well as it used to. the senate has been so enjoyable for me, but i must admit it puts the fun in dysfunction. an author said "no family is complete without an embarrassing uncle." we have too many embarrassing uncle's in the united states

senate. lots of embarrassing stuff. the united states senate is no longer the world's greatest deliberative body, and everybody needs to quit saying it until we recover from this period of polarization and the fear of the political consequences of tough votes. writing legislation behind closed doors. giant omnibus bills that most don't know what is in them. k street lobbyists known about the tax bill manager's package before even senators. that is today's senate. and no amendments. solving the toughest problems will not happen without tough votes. we can talk about the toughest problems. we can visit about them. we can argue about them. we can campaign on them. but we are not going to solve it without tough votes. it will not happen. my first year in the senate was 2007. we voted on 306 amendments in 2007.

yesterday, weof voted on 36. that is a remarkable difference. something is broken. if we don't have the strength to look in the mirror and fix it, the american people are going to grow more and more cynical, and they might do something crazy like elect a reality tv star president. i'm not getting. that's 1 -- i'm not kidding. that's one of the reasons this happened. power has been dangerously centralized in the senate. we like to say we can't change the rules. we're just like the house. we kind of are like the house. a few people are writing legislation. a few people are making the decisions. we have to throw off the shackles of careful, open the doors of debate, reclaim the power of members and committees, and most of all realized that

looking the other way and hoping that everything will work out later is a foolish idea. "q&a"cer: sunday night on -- hadhis american nazi party hundreds of supporters that came to rally at madison square garden. stormtroopers giving me nothing salute with swastikas next to a picture of george washington. there was a very active american fascist movement in the 1920's and 1930's, earlier than people think, associated with the phrase "america first." announcer: sarah churchwell looks at the history of the terms america first and the american dream and her book, "behold america," sunday on c-span's "q&a." announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: we are back.

want to get your reaction to the news in washington this week, whether it is related to policy or politics. start dialing in. ,epublicans (202) 748-8001 democrats (202) 748-8000, and independents (202) 748-8002. you can join us on twitter as well or on facebook. john kerry, former presidential candidate and senator from massachusetts, writing in "the new york times," "get trump, act on climate. instead of tacitly accepting in action is preordained for the remaining trump presidency, congress should send mr. trump deflation addressing this crisis. it will force him to make decisions the american people will longer member. to solar power that would turn the american midwest into the saudi arabia of solar?

a manufacturing revolution that could put west virginia back to work in ways that cold never will? make him choose, and let's find out. senator chuck schumer's right to demand that infrastructure legislation actually hasten the transition to a clean energy economy and increase climate resilience. in nancy pelosi he has a partner who wrangled the votes in the house in 2090 pass a landmark cap and trade program to limit emissions of heat trapping gases, though it never made it out of the senate, and can join him in seeking investments in low carbon infrastructure. if mr. trump no, make climate change the galvanizing issue in 2020 for millennials who will depend -- their vote as if their lives depend on it, because they do." all, i would of

like to say something for the last topic when that one guy was on there with the computer thing. theink that my tie in with election from russia. i think more effort needs to be made to constrict that. people do have a right to cast their votes and not be interfered with about that. then this thing with the wall, there's got to be a better way. there's got to be a better compromise, something that is more reasonable between trump and everybody else he's dealing with. one last thing i would like to say, when it comes to the football national championship,

it's all about the alabama crimson tide, baby! host: [laughter] ok. maybe that is political in some world. this headline, "congress headed down road to shut down nowhere. alabama's richard shelby, who will be heading up the appropriations committee, says he thinks a shutdown is all but inevitable. partial government shutdown is all but inevitable, he said thursday. looks like we could be headed down the road to nowhere because we have nine days to go. the alabama republican told reporters there are a lot of thoughts about how to keep the nine departments and assorted agencies that don't yet have full spending bills open beyond december 21, but said none of those had crystallized into a plan. shall we set the options being included passing a continuing resolution until andary 3 at midnight,

passing a stopgap spending bill until late january or february. there are also discussions about advancing a continuing resolution that would last until ,he end of the school year 2019 september 30 -- and of fiscal , september 30. ed is an independent. good morning. caller: there's a couple of topics i would like to touch on, if i have time. the first is just a suggestion about the migrants, the caravan or -- the human beings trying to come into our country and across the border. me i hear that they are leaving their countries because of moore's -- because of wars and the drugs and violence and everything. if we want to help these countries and these people, i have a suggestion. when they come to our borders, just like in the country of , every person in israel

gets to serve in the military. if you are an able-bodied man or woman at a certain age, you have to serve in the army. why don't we take these people that come to our borders and take all of the able-bodied, single men and women and start training them as military forces, and let the others, the children and the woman, come into our country while their husbands serve, and then go back down to their country? host: why do you think that should be a requirement, ed, and not for american citizens? caller: because they are coming. we should have it for american citizens. i think every american should serve in the military for at least two years. --on't think we should allow we keep sending the same soldiers back to conflicts over and over and over again.

why are there only a few that have to serve our country and defend our rights? everyone, just like in israel, should serve. i served and a lot of men have served, but everyone should serve. i think if we train these people to defend their country, we can let them fight for themselves and defend their countries, and then they can go back to their free countries. the other topic i would like to touch on is the opiate crisis. his show this week talking about the opiate crisis in this country. and what to do for it. there were several callers that theed in asking about medical benefits of cannabis, or medical marijuana, and the use getting addicts off of

opiates and how there are many benefits that they are finding that will help with the opiate crisis, unlike the hysteria of the 1950's and 1960's, where marijuana was a gateway drug. it is not that way. studies have shown it. i would like to see c-span do a show on the benefits of medical marijuana. i am not advocating for the legalization of marijuana, but i to medicale it science to study this plant and find out what is good and what is bad. host: i have to leave it there so i can get in more calls. tom is in north carolina, a republican. caller: hi greta. my first point real quick was on the "new yorks --

times" on climate change. i got a laugh here quoting the "new york times." they wouldn't be biased on the left, wouldn't they? host: i was reading john kerry's piece. caller: john kerry? ok. [laughter] i will just say the climate change, they need to listen to the scientists and the positions that are climate physicians and scientists in sin of every position out there. there's a lot to discuss about climate change, but i can tell you this, the democrats, the john kerrys and -- who was the vice president? al gore, who started all this carbon stuff. look at what they are flying in, private jets and so forth. the bias is overwhelming. this carbon tax -- who is that

going to tax? us middle-class, correct? host: we will talk more about it, and i hope you keep watching, from 9:30 a.m. eastern time, with the director of energy and a warship. he believes -- and entrepreneurship. ,e believes in climate change and talks about how he didn't before, and his efforts to get other republicans to believe it as well, so i hope you keep watching. bill in washington state, a democrat. caller: good morning. merry christmas. host: merry christmas. caller: i have a very good thing i want to tell the nation about. once a year we put on a fundraiser for disabled veterans. go tof these donations crippled veterans. 2 it iscoming june

going to be on youtube. the whole crowd is jumping in on this to help out. it is like the old hollywood days. it this is the same way. they went to war to fight for our democracy, and they come back wounded, maimed. congress is not doing enough. so i thought maybe the american people ought to pay back their debt. so we are having this fundraiser . you will see it on youtube to see how to do this. host: ok, bill. the editorial of "the wall street journal" this morning, "a court filing shows the ugly tactics employed by james comey's fbi. flynn filing describes documents

describing the meeting when mr. flynn supposedly lied. it turns out the meeting was set up by then deputy director andrew mccabe, who personally called mr. flynn that day on other business. accounts, he's told mr. flynn he felt he needed to have agents sit down with him to talk about his russia communications. even urged mr. flynn to meet without a lawyer present. i thought the guest way to get this done was to have a conversation between mr. flynn and the agents only. i further stated is he wanted to include anyone else in the meeting at the white house counsel, that i would need to involve the department of justice. mr. flynn stated this would not be necessary and agreed to meet without any additional participants. according to the fbi summary of the interview, mr. mccabe and fbi officials decided the agents would not warned flynn it was a crime to lie during an fbi

interview as they wanted flynn to be relaxed and were concerned that giving the warnings might adversely affect the report. we also know from fbi director james comey this was his idea. this is something i probably wouldn't have gotten done or gotten away with any more organized administration, mr. omey posted -- mr. comey boasted. there would be discussions and approvals on who would be there. i thought, it is early enough. let's just send a couple of guys over." street journal" editorial board calling that "the flynn entrapment." caller: i would just like to say the democrat party is so hypocritical about this russian collusion when they got it in their own party with the debbie

wasserman schultz, the fixer for clinton, and nothing is said about that. thank you. host: fred in new jersey, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have a couple of things to say in reference to what it was saying about the migrants. i think what we need to do is help the governments of honduras and el salvador combat crime in their countries so that people won't have to flee. the second thing is about the john kerry op-ed. i could not agree more. when you to do something about climate change, and we can't wait until after the next election. if we were to make that the first order of business in the house of representatives with nancy energy and put solar into an infrastructure bill, what mitch mcconnell

actually go along, and maybe the president would have to sign it. there would be a job creator. it would create jobs in a growing industry and not a dying industry l'ecole. -- industry like coal. host: ok. has just c-span2 released the most-watched book 2018 onf www.c-span.org. videos, jamesed comey and jerome corsi. these are available to watch on weekend, c-span2 every 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors for serious readers. kenny in south carolina, and independent. caller: i was wondering if trump gets this $5 billion he wants

for his border wall, how about we just trade him the officers that work on the border? if you put a wall up, those guys aren't going to need a job anymore. that is what they are claiming. so let's just shift the money around, you know? we don't need a wall, but if he really wants one, that's fine. this just fire all the guys he's got working down there. host: all right. bernie in ohio, independent. you are on the air. caller: hi greta. how are you this beautiful morning? host: good morning. caller: i've had trouble getting through to you guys, and it's really been frustrating. but number one, i will try to talk really fast because i have five quick points. them toleman who wants join the military, people coming , came very close to the correct answer to the problem. dennis kucinich said let's start

a department of peace. i voted him in one time because of that. if we did go to different governments like honduras and the central american governments , and other places in the world, and said let's start a department of peace were we can help you build your economy, schools, hospitals, judicial system, etc., there would be no reason for people to leave their countries. but about a week ago, there was a republican representative on, and he was talking about choice for health care. as i get older, i want less choices. i would like a consulting firm to come on and say, hey, here's what you need in the way of cell phone, health-care, car insurance, homeowners insurance, all these different decisions we have to make. it gets so confusing that many years ago i did a lot of training and sales and used to

say, if you confuse, you lose. there's so many different numbers as we get older and get more and more decisions. 13 million people have lost their health care. benjamin didn't even talk about that. tax reform -- that gentleman didn't even talk about that. 1%.reform gave money to the they are getting so much credit to mr. trump for the economy when it is actually trending exactly like it was under obama. so he shouldn't get all the credit for our economy. host: on your comments and others about the migration from central america, here's a headline in several papers this morning, this one from "the wall street journal." "watermelon girl dies in u.s. girl dies guatemalan in u.s. custody. a seven-year-old guatemalan girl died last week a day after she

and her father were arrested for crossing mexican border illegally. she suffered from septic shock and dehydration. the girl and her father were arrested in a group of 163 people in new mexico near a remote desert area about 160 miles west of el paso, texas. the girl reportedly had eaten or had anything to drink for several days and began suffering seizures about eight hours after being taken into custody." let's go to william. caller: yes, i think illegal aliens are coming here because of the benefits they receive instead of running away from crime and the potential for harm in their own country. i think they are being enticed to come here with rewards of welfare welfare, food stamps, and that sort of thing. if we would just stop giving away benefits to anybody that crosses the border, i think you would see less illegal immigration. host: ok. this is from the "new york

times" this morning. the national security advisor for the president vows bigger u.s. role in africa. goal is countering china's sway. we covered his remarks on c-span . you can find them on c-span.org. coming up next, the economic innovation group's john lettieri discusses a new report from his group looking at economically distressed communities across the country. later, former representative bob inglis, a republican of south carolina, discusses climate change policy. , but, on our cities tour tv and american history tv travel to lawrence, kansas to look at the city's history and literary culture. we talked to the mayor, discussing the city's universities and downtown. [video clip] >> lawrence, kansas is in eastern kansas. we are about 35 miles from greater kansas city and about 45

miles from topeka. what lawrence is known for his our universities. we have haskell innovations university and the university of kansas. those are wonderful institutions of higher learning. comee from all around around to haskell indian nations university. tribalrve 506 or seven organizations, i believe. and the university of -- they tribal organizations, i believe. and the university of kansas is a wonderful economic driver here. the growth i've seen is a growth of the city. we have added a lot of people. the population has grown. we have expanded. downtown plays a vital role in our community. it is the heart of our community. best place.is the

best ways.eet is the you go down there and see everybody you know. you can get great mood, you can shop. there are really great shops down there. and it is human scale. that is what is wonderful about mass street. to be able to get out and move around and enjoy life, that is what we want. >> c-span. where history unfolds daily. was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. today, we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and about policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. " continues.journal the: john lettieri is

founder and ceo of the economic innovation group. what is your mission? guest: to work with policymakers to forge a more dynamic u.s. economy. we care about declining economic dynamism, startups and business formation at a historic low. the other is rising geographic inequality. host: you did a report on this -- economically distressed communities. where are they in the country and what makes them economically distressed? you can find them everywhere. our index look at seven different measures of community well-being. good news -- most americans do not live in a distressed community. the smallest category of our five categories are proper is to distressed is the distressed tier. the bad news is there are 50 million americans who live in that tier. in the gap between prosperous and distressed communities are growing wider.

thehe poster session era, gap between places doing very well and distressed areas is growing wider. we are seeing a different type of growth pattern then we have seen in different years of growth. as the national economy used to grow, most places grew with it. that is no longer true. host: howdy to find distressed? guest: we look at this seven indicator index and rank every zip code in the country against that index. and you 9% of the u.s. population falls somewhere on this index. it is around 28,000 zip codes. it looks at poverty rates, business creation rates, median income, agitation -- entertainment. and there is a wellness index. in everyind is category, the chasm between prosperous categories and distressed categories is not just wide but growing wider. host: what is making that gap widened? -- widen?

guest: in many ways, it is the lack of recovery from the recession. the maps of jobs in business growth not map to where they were lost during the recession. we are seeing a concentration of growth in a relatively small share of places, leaving the rest of the country behind. in the distressed tier, it has really been a bad 21st century. the recessions have hurt them more, but the recoveries really have not showed up. on either of the previous two recessions. host: what kind of jobs are in those areas? guest: they tend to be lower skilled. you tend to have less entertain ash education attainment. today's economy is hurting them. most job creation since the recession goes to college educated workers. so if you have fewer of those workers in your local communities, means fewer of your employers are looking in those locations. likewise, you see lower labor

force participation. host: we will learn more about what john lettieri and his group things. what is it like where you live? in the eastern part of the country, your number is (202) 748-8000. mountain-pacific, your number is (202) 748-8001. tell us what it is like in your area. tell us what it is prosperous or why you think it is distressed. the president announced an executive order to steer money to opportunity zones. what is this executive order, add how will it work to try to boost up these areas? guest: we think this is very positive. it is intended to coordinate interagency effort in that how do we provide resources and support to that have fallen behind? new falls in the heels of a project that creates a private capital incentive to get job craters to look at areas

generally passed over. -- whether drop training programs, loan guarantees for small businesses, brownfield cleanups from the epa, and make sure those are coordinated. these communities have a vast array of needs. it is not just private capital missing. this is potentially a big first step in the direction of a more coordinated and thoughtful effort. strategy, ag a national strategy, over how we address this growing issue of regional decline. host: what is the strategy? guest: we know they have they -- we know they have a wide array of needs and they have not been on the ball in terms of policy. was a creation of a strategy to identify a wide array of solutions and policy.

but this is just the first step. they did not advance a solution, just the architecture that what up's two solutions. host: what do they hope will happen in these communities? if you live in an economic distressed area, what does your community look like now, and what are they hoping by targeting federal resources to these areas? what do they want to see change? guest: one of the things you hope to see to begin with is positive rates of business creation. in much of the country, you are seeing more business deaths than births. that is huge in terms of access to employment. you have to reverse that to make positive momentum. that would be one clear area. if the federal government said we would have a bigger focus on low business entrepreneurship -- host: startups. guest: startups. this has not been a policymaker authority at any level.

we tend to focus on incumbent rather than bottom-up growth. this is important to distressed areas, which need a diverse and stable business base. you cannot just hope on the one company in town or approaching amazon and pinning your entire economic future on that. that needs a coordinated effort between local visit to sheehan and local government. the federal government can come here with education training, skills training. also to things that can come alongside local efforts. this is a first step. for so long, we have had our eye off of the ball, especially when it comes to such partnership, that it will take a while before we understand where policymaking can make a difference. host: in the index you put together, you talk about a vacancy bellwether. guest: that is right. we found the single indicator most predictive of being in a stressed community was vacancy rates. rural communities have a vacancy crisis that now of -- approaches

what you would associate with postindustrial cities. ruralpart of a broader challenge. as the economy recovered from americansrecession, in distress became more rural. moreound over a million rural americans living in distressed communities. with business creation rates, in rural counties, you found a dismal recovery. between 2007 and 2016, fewer than 20% of counties had recovered. this is a profound shift from where we were in the 1990's and calls for a more targeted set of solutions. host: what is it about rural america? guest: the economy rewards different things today than it did a few years ago. it rewards density, knowledge skills, clustering where you have knowledge economies.

overall, as publishing growth slows and more people who can leave rural areas. that disconnectedness really swings against many rural areas. host: let's get to calls. mikey is first, from new york. caller: how is it going? host: good morning. caller: why do you think the economy is so inefficient for noncollege age, and educated adults? now, they just do not work. guest: part of this is the failure of our education institutions ourselves. we expect to many people to go to college who probably should not go to college, saddle them with a lot of debt, and then there are not jobs waiting on the other end. it is not an efficient solution. we should be more focused on vocational training and other workforce skills are a better fit for a much larger number of americans. and we need to honor that type of work more.

there has -- there is too much of a bias towards a college degree as the end-all, be-all. the other part is there is a profound shift in the american industry to a more knowledge-based economy. for certain skills and industries, particularly those with high growth, you need certain types of education attainment. that shift is manageable if we have a better architecture to deal with it. but right now, we have been focused on getting people into college, regardless of if that thing.right host: west virginia -- what is it like? caller: it is a very poor area. $15,000.le earn under that was in the 2010 census. i've watched my little town the destroyed over the past 30 years.

by bit, the schools do not educate. 46% of the people who start school here, high school here, 46% graduate. that means over 54% -- or 54% do not. they just drop out. they get on drugs. we have terrible schools. i think that s.t.e.m. program, looking at my niece, was a bad thing. my knees couldn't do division. simple division. i had a pack of cigarettes, 20 of them. i said how much would i be paying for each? she went into this long, complicated thing and did not come up with the right answer. as a result, she has essentially dropped out. she was a very smart kid, interested in everything when she was young. somehow or another, it just completely went off the rails. i think education is the most important thing.

also, i owned a business for about 10 years, on-and-off. i owned from businesses. taxes early 2000's, my were so high -- my employees were making more money than i, because i guaranteed a wage. it was a hair salon business. and i guaranteed an income rather than them work just straight commission. that at the end of the year, after a 60 hour, 70 hour week, it is constant. that is a natural way. in a business, it is 24/7. i finally just gave up. i really was paying more taxes than i could handle. host: two issues that we can talk about their. -- there. guest: she made a great point that education attainment is critical. when you look at the geography of prosperity in this country, places where -- the are

prosperous tend to have tremendously high education attainment rates. more important, high school completion. what she mentioned about the majority of high schoolers in her area not even finishing high school is deeply troubling. it speaks to the need for reaching people where they are and helping them understand a career path for themselves. this also speaks to potential policy interventions on the other side in the labor market. have suggested wage subsidies that would help lure people off the sidelines into work and give them a direct boost to their paychecks. host: michael in california, what is it like there? caller: good morning. i am not sure if this is a state issue -- i am sure it is, by wonder if you could speak to rent control. i live in imperial beach.

when i first moved here, it was about six and a what are to live in a trailer. now, i approached $900. i am on a fixed income. i am single, luckily. if i had a family, i couldn't do this. i couldn't support children. i wonder if you could speak on rent control becoming a federal issue as well as a state issue, to solve this problem. host: thanks. guest: he is highlighting there is an affordability crisis and much of our country. for many americans, they cannot access affordable housing close to where they work or want to live. i do not think federal rent control policy is a solution. a big part of the solution needs to be more aggressive building of housing in general, not just affordable housing on the local level. this gets to local zoning policy. typicallynities, prosperous ones, tend to be restrictive and how much they build and how many they welcome

into their community. this forces middle income citizens further out from communities, further way from their job, lowering quality of life. in terms of federal policy, i would love to see the federal government take a more aggressive approach to what kind of incentive they can give to local communities to build new capacity. that is what we need. new housing in more places, particularly prosperous ones. tennessee.na is in welcome to the conversation. caller: hi. businesses areur spending a lot of money on insurance, which is outrageous. they are having to pay high premiums, and they are struggling to even stay open. we already lost our textile mills, most of our car companies. afford to operate here and be able to compete in a global market --

host: because of health care costs? caller: no, because of the insurance. i am talking about unemployment benefits, workmen's comp, insurance you buy through the companies. when you get that insurance, half the time, it does not cover what you need. you have to pay a big premium. and you cannot even get to the doctors you need to see. host: we will have john lettieri respond. guest: there is no doubt americans and american businesses are facing rising health care costs. nerve ford on quite a many americans, who feel like they are spending more and more of their paycheck towards health-care costs, even if their paychecks are not rising in proportion to that. that is a challenge for business owners as well. as we have seen in washington, there is not an easy solution to that. it is one that as we think about the broad scope of things to

help them scale and thrive, this is one of the issues that demands more attention. host: bob, fredericksburg, virginia. caller: good morning. in our area of fredericksburg, which is a very prosperous area -- stafford county is one of the ,ichest areas in the country and it is predicated on the government, military and government businesses. but in fredericksburg city itself, 39% of the household in the city, around 10,000, make between $24,000, poverty level, and $61,000 per year. that is 39% of the households. it is not any better in the five surrounding counties. within fredericksburg, add to that 70% of the population lives below poverty. of have approximately 56% the households in fredericksburg live on $61,000 or less per year. the average rent in

for aicksburg is $1200 two-bedroom apartment. a cheap apartment is $750. regardless, the cost of housing is such that, for the working poor, excluding the poverty, a population for the working poor, rent is consuming a large part of their annual income. it is putting us in an awkward position -- it is putting them in an awkward position. we need government at the local, state, and perhaps federal level to incentivize landowners, developers, and those who already own apartment, boxes or rentals to drop or slow the increase in the value of rental renting tos far as individuals. this is killing people. these people are not going to prosper very much. these are people who most likely -- a few will rise to higher economic levels, but the majority of these people

continue to be the working poor. we need assistance. we do not need federal developments, we do not need state developments. we need people being offered the opportunity to rent or even by property within their means. thank you very much. onst: i think he has touched this challenge that affordability is a huge crisis and much of the country. there is a large proportion of americans who are redbird and, spending a huge part of their paycheck on cost-of-living for housing. part of that solution has to be building more, because the scarcity of available housing is driving upper pressures in prices. a also touched that even in prosperous area, you have a large proportion of the community living at or near poverty levels. that speaks to one of the growth challenges we are facing. even if the economy grows in a specific area, it passes over the most consistently poor places. most poor places tend to stay

poor or get worse. very few improve. revitalization is very difficult. historically, that is a big driver of displacement. poor places displays a lot of their local residents over time. it is over 40%. that is a challenge we have to grapple with area not just looking regionally but community by community. what can we do to ensure that as a larger area grows, we are doing the most for the people who need it? host: fort worth, texas. caller: thank you for taking my call. my concern is the poverty, as a gentleman stated, poor communities stay poor. they tend to stay in that distressed situation, because a lot of it, i believe, is education. if you look at immigrant children who come here, their families -- they come here with yet they seem to climb

up the ladder a lot quicker than our kids, our u.s. citizens. the reason is they take education really seriously. it is a priority for them. are giving mixed messages to our students. that college is not that important -- yes, it is. you can do both. i've seen it. i am a retired teacher. i see immigrant children -- they can work right when they are out of high school. even before they graduate from high school, they take courses at the community college. part of the day they go to the community college. then they come to the high school for classes. they can do both. it is easy for them to transition from that the college and then go on to get their associates degree, bachelors, and so on.

i see it time and time again. host: that is evelyn. let's hear from colette as well, from oregon. forestry, were in mostly. there are many communities up and down the east cascades that are in terrible poverty. a lot of it was due to when they were logging -- they shipped our resources overseas and did not keep them here. it devastated our communities. now, there is hardly any logging, and most of the mills have shut down. it has really hurt our communities. a lot of it was due to mismanagement of the forest, by shipping the logs overseas. host: do you have an idea of what kind of jobs that used to be and how much people got paid

versus now? caller: there are no jobs out here now, unless it is county or state or the school. a few businesses. ande used to be logging road building and sawmills. now, they are all gone. host: after listening to these phone calls, and the ideas you are hearing, what does your -- what is your group recommended? should this be a state, local, federal response ability? guest: it is across-the-board. federal policy can set the right baseline for local solutions to work. local communities need to be more aggressive about not just trying to approach a company from afar but building from the ground up. using anchor institutions, educational institutions, and civic institutions to stitch their communities back together. in some cases, they need to reinvent what their economy is

organized around. there are some businesses, industries that are just not coming back. who communities a disservice by giving them false hope, that by one flip of the switch, you can bring back businesses from the 1950's and 1960's. a lot of what we have heard is about globalization. this is where the political debate gets divorced from the facts. globalization and trade has been mostly good for most people in most places. immigration is clearly one of our national advantages. but across-the-board, we do not have a policy to ensure we are not only reaping benefits but also addressing blind spots when they occur. if we do that better, they were the last concentration and more of a national buy-in. particularly on rejuvenation. we could have more coherent immigration policy. the solution is not just a financial solution, it is human capital. they need skilled workers. you have this national advantage

of people wanting to come here. that is usually the problem most countries are dealing with, how to get people to come to this country. we get to skip that step. host: when you look at education, your noted that education attainment is one of the clearest faultlines separating u.s. communities. guest: absolutely. if you live in one of these prosperous areas that we note in the report, you can see how the advantages start to compound. they already have. 45% of the nation's advanced degree holders. they are not accelerating to 50% of all new advanced degree holders went to that communities. they are also capturing the lion's share of new immigrants. you see this clustering of advantage, and in terms of employers, they want to go to where high skilled workers are. education attainment and broadening that map is part of the solution. it is also knowing to distinguish between workers who should go to college and pursue

an advanced degree and those who should go into vocational work. should not say it is a binary russian -- if you want to go to college, we will help you, and if you do not know we wont, we have to have a broader answer. host: kathleen, welcome to the conversation. caller: host: good morning. -- caller: good morning. trump signed and a ticket of order for the revitalization of urban communities. on the campaign trail, he was talking about a new deal for black america. we have been talking about poor communities at least five decades. we have been talking about education for black america since the 1800s. black americans have been in this country 460 years. today, in los angeles, we never make a connection between someal immigration -- and listeners, it is lack of jobs.

all of these black folks who call in our democrats and who are for the immigrants -- they cannot connect the dots. that these immigrants are coming to take your job, black man. are is why we have -- we seven or 8% of the population of black americans in los angeles, and we are 40% of the homeless. why should we be 40% of the homeless? we have been talking about opportunity for black america for five decades, and we are going backwards. host: we have to leave it there so we can get an a response. guest: i think what you're hearing is many americans and americans feel disenfranchised here they have seen the story before, where you have folks say we will focus on this issue, and they are used to being disappointed. some is -- some degree of skepticism is warranted. all of that speaks to the need to be more focused in a sustained way on how do you use

all of these different policy levers. it should not be a zero-sum exercise with native born americans. but we have to be able to communicate those benefits and ensure we are covering our blind spots in a more effective way. that has clearly been part of the challenge and disconnect we have seen politically. where people do not trust the system is giving them a fair shot. this is why we care about this regional issue. it speaks to the question of, as americans, is it the lottery of birth, where i happen to the board, or do most people in most places have a fair shot at the american dream? policymakers need to do better on this. host: viewers can learn more if they go to eig.org. is the president and ceo of that group. thank you for your time. when we come back, we will talk to former congressman bob inglis on climate change policy. first, rock long on what fema

has learned in two years of major hurricanes and all fires. [video clip] >> it was not designed to be a first responder. nor should it be. it is my job to ordinate the firepower of the federal government down to a governor, to help that governor meet his or her preparedness goals are responsive -- response goals, to the local level. >> we know 2017 was a very big year. hurricane irma, hurricane florence, hurricane maria cost the government more than $265 billion worth of damages, especially with california wildfires. what did fema learn because of the hurricanes that occurred in 17? and what are ways how you can respond to natural disasters? >> we learned a tremendous amount. before i took office, the country went 11 years without a

major hurricane making landfall. i guess i am bad luck. but to put the magnitude of what happened, we basically have packed 38 years of our entire history into that 16 month time period. the amount of disaster resistance we have provided is the equivalent of what the agency has done in its entire history. it is forcing us to think everything, our entire business enterprise. notlieve a bigger fema is the answer. it is a whole community approach that has to be put into play to be able to properly prepare but also recover. it starts with a prepared culture. properly insured, and neighbor helping neighbor, all the way up through a strong local emergency and is meant program, a strong state-level program, then putting them a in a position to support for big events, not the run-of-the-mill everyday disaster we typically deal with. >> "washington journal" continues. at our table,is

former congressman of south carolina, a republican, resulting -- representing from 1994 to 2008. now you are the executive director of republicen. what is this group? guest: conservatives reaching conservatives on climate change, showing a free enterprise solution to the challenge. it is republicen.org. host: what is your mission? guest: to help conservatives see it is a challenge, but it is a challenge free enterprise can answer. ande put of the costs leveled the playing field, then watch competition within their free enterprise is them drive itn costs to future fuels, will probably display some income and fuels, but that is the way the free enterprise system works. it is a call to conservatives to really believe in the power of free enterprise.

host: here is what you said about your previous view on climate change was. it was pretty easy to decide, you said about yourself. if al gore is for it, i am against it. i admit that it sort of ignorant, but that is who i was for six years. guest: really all i knew was al gore was for it. since i represented a very red district in a very red state, that was the end of the inquiry. i admit that was ignorant. i was in for six years, came out, then went back in for another six. my son was telling me into thousand four, voting for the first time, he said dad, i will vote for you, but you got to clean up your act on the environment. motherr sisters and his agreed. the second step for me -- that was the first step in a three-step metamorphosis. the second step was going to an

article with the science community and seeing the evidence there. the third step was another science committee trip, and something of a spiritual awakening. there was a scientist who inspired me by his love of faith and love of god and people that we need to do something about climate change. so i came home and introduced the raise wages cut carbon act in 2009 as an alternative to trade. it did not go well for me in the republican primary. those were the darkest days of the great recession. so i get tossed out. but ever since, i've been out on the streets saying it is not a heresy. this is exactly what conservatives believe, that you illuminate all of the subsidies, then watch the free enterprise system drive costs down as it innovates. it is quite different now than it was when i got tossed out.

the economy is better. we have all had more experience with climate change. now there are groups like ours on the eco-right that balance the environmental left. host: what specifically do you think republicans can agree to? revenue neutrality and to border adjustment and a price on carbon dioxide. those are the key things. very revenue neutral. as conservatives at republicen. org do not want to grow the government. we are not looking to add new money to the system. negativeo internalize externalities -- attach hidden costs to the burning of fossil fuels. then, be the cause of the interviews -- innovation that will come. so it has to be revenue neutral. that is what conservatives can get behind. it has to be border adjustable, which means you have to get a way of collecting the taxes on

imports that were made here. china and the wto will change that. but we think they will lose based on precedence in oil. later,re right, 24 hours they would have the same price in carbon dioxide. the whole world would follow. america would be leading the world to a solution. we have 7 billion people, not just 205 million people plus demanding future fuels, asking their free enterprise system to supply clean fuels. so it is an exciting opportunity. it is not just doom and gloom. it is an incredible opportunity for free enterprise. host: a republican viewer said carbon tax will impact the middle-class class more than anyone else. guest: that is not correct. the people who would be most impacted, for example, if you reach revenue neutrality by cutting the payroll tax, which

is what my bill would have done in 2009, it is the bottom 70 percentile that do better in that system then in the current system. that wouldop 30% pay, according to the congressional budget office. because they have heated pools and large houses, and they fly orbit jets. those are the ones who would pay more. but if you cut payroll taxes, the bottom 70% would do better. it is an incredible opportunity to actually improve people's lives and take-home. host: do you agree with john kerry, former secretary of state, writing forget trump, act on climate. he says give the president a choice. send him legislation that would make him a choice, whether or not he would say no to deploying solar technology that would turn the american west into the saudi arabia of solar, no to turning the midwest to the middle east of wind power, no to a manufacturing revolution that

would put west virginia back to work in a way his beloved coal never will. he has a good point. it can be summarized by our suggestion -- my suggestion r.p.e.e to increase funding, the innovation program from the department of energy. we all live in the show me state, not just folks in missouri. if you can show me innovation will work. r.p.e. isat r. p. -- about. that is essentially what don kerry is saying. that is something house democrats could do. .e.reased dramatically r.p funding. that hold constructive hearings with conservatives about how do you solve this? believe.hem do you

if you have a hearing about do you believe, what you are asking , some conservatives to say, is you are right, i am the dumb kid in the class, the last one to get it, i am so much your lesser. that is such a heart set up. better to say let's forget all of that silliness -- and really, it is getting silly, let's just forget all of that and move on to the discussion of solutions. those would be constructive hearings. our viewersget involved. we want to know your thoughts on climate change. richard is in springdale, arkansas, you are first. caller: hello, c-span. an mr. inglis. wo ave two fax i have -- t facts i have come across. all you talk about is carbon. one is from the national arboretum -- national audubon

society. wobble thatear affects the climate. it causes ice ages and warming. in the second point is the magnetic field of the earth. izzy's the only thing that protects us from the sun's radiation. -- it is the only thing that protects us from the sun's radiation. it is shifting towards siberia and has diminished 10%. if you have some magical way of increasing the magnetic field of the earth, then fine. but this "carbon, carbon, carbon" is nothing more than a money ploy. these forces that are working on us, we must learn to live with them. these are forces we cannot control. thank you. i would like to hear your answer off the air. host: all right. guest: what i was adjusted goat two is skepticalscience.com.

you will see discussion of those points. myths onthe top ten climate change. i know you have one of them. if you look at skeptical science, the top left corner of the homepage, you will see the answer to your question. briefly, if you wanted, but also in great detail, if you want it. briefly, why do we search for alternative explanations when this is something we can solve? i would understand it if we felt we could not solve it. it is sort of like we all delay going to the dock or if we think the diagnosis is going to be doctor if -- to the we think the diagnosis is going to be really bad. but we go to the doctor if we think the doctor can fix it. we can fix climate change, so let's go to the doctor. let's not go searching for magnetic field nations, which

you will see are just not indicated. the deeper question is why search so hard for alternative explanations, when the one at hand is pretty clear. we are increasing the temperature of the earth by adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. host: sam is in rochester, new york. a republican. caller: i do not buy one second of you. first of all, global warming, they couldn't solve that, so it goes to -- they couldn't sell that, so they go to climate change. when you can explain that atmosphere,in the -- carbon actually helps plants grow. i do not buy one second of global warming, or climate change. most of these studies are based on financing from globalists

paying scientists to come up with this story. i buy not one second of you or this. thank you. guest: it is hard to reach you, then. it is also hard to reach -- i hope people listening know that the chemtrail thing, for example, is really a bunch of nonsense. it is not like why do we go searching for these things? it makes a good novella, if you want to write a good novella with a good plot. it would be a fun book to read. but we have to deal with facts and data. i am a member of a party that used to be characterized by facts. we seem to be departing from that. republicans were the ones who said let's talk about facts and data. what you have just done is gone into some space way beyond data

and facts. for other listeners, please, do not go searching for chemtrail's. you put in a search for chemtrail's and some word that indicates harm or conspiracy, google will return to you all kinds of results that say it is real. you will be convinced, based on those results that there is some chemtrail thing going on, when in fact, there is a whole other body of data that says note -- total nonsense. search is thegle idea. host: you can also read the national climate assessment, the latest one that was released under the trump administration. it reads the continue warming that is projected to occur without substantial and sustained reductions in global greenhouse gas submissions is expected to cause substantial damage through the economy, especially in the absence of

increased adaptation efforts. with continued growth in omissions at historic rates, annual losses and some economic sectors are projected to reach hundreds of billions of dollars by the end of the century. more than the current gross domestic product of many u.s. states. guest: it is incredible. host: what is the economic impact? guest: if you read the study, we could lose 10% of gdp by the end of the century. that is a massive hit. some people say end of the century, i am not sure i will be here. but that is where we need to gry's to a better level of concern for people after us. some people say this is such a devilish problem of climate change, because in a darwinian sense, a species can only care about the current generation of the species, it cannot care about the future generation.

but that is a very low view of humanity. i think we have to rise to a higher view and say we are doing this for our prosperity. even if you do not have kids or grandchildren, rise to the occasion and care about people coming after us. host: let's go to georgia, independent. caller: thanks for taking the call. you are a very nice man. i am from the south. you remind me of so many people i know who are kind and trying to do the best they can. listening tojust the two calls before, i think that is so much evidence that this country is never going to get on this climate step -- get rid of this climate skepticism. it is not going to happen. as a christian nation, i do not think we are going to put that much faith in that sort of unknown science and i would also like to say some of these things you are talking about in terms

of knology -- and i have extensive background in the systems, there is a bit of a perpetual motion machine and what you are talking about it there is only so much that can be gotten out of the system by putting in the inputs you are talking about. some of thel you, gas engines i am around are extremely efficient. extremely efficient. i see no reason, from any evidence, that should just give combustible engine. guest: i just finished reading david mccullough's book, "the wright brothers." substitute "climate change" for "flight," in the conversation you are having is the same facedsation the wright's through their early career. people cannot fly. that was a consensus. and the wright brothers said,

"oh no, we can." thank goodness they persevered. it is analogous -- analogous to where we are now with climate change. it can be done. why do we have to rely just on what we have got? are we not creative enough to break through to something better? we relied on whale oil. then we moved to cole. then we figured out that petroleum was better and more transportable than coal. what is next? let's be the wright brothers. those were great americans, believed you could do something with innovation. the christian nation,, i think it is very important not to see a contest between faith and science. my faith is affirmed by science. it is backed up by data.

archaeology backed up a lot of the claims of the bible. why get into this fight between faith and science? faith is affirmed by science. science is part of the search for truth. host: the peer research center said the majority of adults say climate change affects their area. 31% say it affects them personally. marsha and wyoming, a democrat. caller: hi there. my favorite subject. morning. i am a second time caller, both on the same subject. son works in -- my gas and oil. aware oflely -- freely what the needs are out there. what i would like you to talk about, when you talk about facts pleasea, could someone

start inspiring other people to of theto the problem death and dying of entire species of animals due to heat and drought? it is getting to be more difficult to relocate. they are running out of space. and it is too slow, dirty, lousy death, whether you die of thirst or hunger. there are millions of people out there who care about endangered species and other species. host: we will leave it there and get a response from that. guest: you are right. it is something we should be concerned about. you are a steward of the creation, why did you make it so corals% of the earth's may be gone by 2050? to richard's point about how he

does not see the evidence, the reality is it is not like the coming of the ice age, which did eliminate a lot of species. this is happening extremely fast, at warp speed, when it comes to geological time. in our time, it seems slowly coming, but in geological terms, this is warp speed that this is happening. the corals have a relationship with an algae -- you increase the temperature by one degree celsius, and coral kicks the algae out of bed, and they both die. it is too hot for them. if this were happening slowly, the coral and algae relationship change and they would adapt. but this is happening so fast that they will both die. so what a tragedy, by 2050, 90% of the earth's coral is gone. host: scott is watching, a

republican. caller: i would like to bring up the scandal of angola university, the hack that it was proven that scientists were fudging data to get funds. and number two, the biggest climate change that ever occurred was 700 million years ago, when there were no suv's, no man-made co2 emissions. the earth naturally changes. this is a way for politicians to create a new tax and take money. host: i will have you respond to drew after hearing from anthony, an independent. caller: i happen to live where they had an earthquake the other morning, in tennessee. it was an earthquake i had never had. i had been here since 1999. it shook my house so bad.

it felt 50 foot. hurt in the morning. here has changed phenomenally from the time i moved here in 1999 to yesterday. a little over 16 degrees on the ago,or, and three days that's a little over 60 degrees on the back port -- a little over 60 degrees on the back porch. three days ago, it was 19. guest: i think you are showing something that is really happening for all of us. we are all experiencing climate change. we are seeing it. if you live at the coast in north carolina, you have 50% more rain out of lawrence than what it would have otherwise been. that is an impact. so we are experiencing climate

it is just some of us apparently do not think we can innovate and do anything better, so therefore, we are sort of like saying earlier we do not want to go to the doctor, because we think we will get a bag diagnosis. the reality is we can fix this. i think if you scratch a climate skeptic, like drew was evidencing, you find they just do not think we can do it. that is more of the reason they are a climate skeptic. it is not that they have looked into the data. they have relied on may be a few sources at fox and friends or something6 they have not looked -- or something. if you look at the east anglia thing -- careful how you search it. if you search it with any word that dictates conspiracy, you will have returned to you a whole bunch of articles that are not the main body of the matter. the main body of the matter, i look search you -- -- you

anglia.y emmanuel, east you will find people like kerry, a credible scientist, to look into the matter. there you will find that it was not what was reported in some of those sources that want to dispute it. the question is why do they want to dispute it so hard? it is because there innovation pessimists. they do not think humans can do any better. they do not think another wright brothers are out there, ready to fly. host: steve in west virginia, democrat. caller: yes, thank you. three things i would like to talk about. but i would like to go right to a solution. they have figured out a way to create carbon neutral hydrocarbon fuel. fromhave a way to take co2

the atmosphere using solar energy. they can break down water, get the hydrogen, using solar energy. they can combine that to make a carbon neutral hydrocarbon fuel. in other words, you burn that, but the co2 back, take it back out. what is incredible about these co2 outs they can take of the atmosphere and store it in the ground. they do not have to make fuel that day or night, they can also use it to extract fuel from the atmosphere. i think bill gates heard about this, and he is getting involved, too. host: we have got to run, so i just want to have mr. inglis respond to you. guest: i am with you on innovation. ion not familiar with that particular concept, but you are onto the right kind of people -- i am not familiar with that particle concept, but you are

onto the right kind of people. i would not bet against bill gates comes to technological innovation. thank goodness there are people like that who really see the opportunity at hand, and they want to deliver that kind of innovation. and you are into a key aspect, which is probably if you are doing that creation -- doing that, creation of hydrogen would be in off hours, when you otherwise would not need that power, because it is very energy intensive to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. host: what are you watching for next? you have the united states pulling out of the paris climate deal, but other nations moving forward. what are you watching for? .e.st: an increase of r.p funding. another thing is these hearings that can get beyond this question of you believe and into how can we solve this? of conversation.

the question i am grateful for, for all the mayors and governors that are continuing in the commitment -- the challenge of all of those things is getting it nationwide our constitution says you cannot do that border adjustment i was mentioning anywhere but here in washington from here in the federal government. that is the challenge, when you are dealing with state and local efforts. thank goodness they are engaged in those efforts. it causes people to say we can fix this, let's go to the doctor. this can be fixed. it is like melanoma -- a deadly kind of cancer. unless you catch it early. if you catch it early, it is no big deal. but if you wait, it gets to be a very big problem. climate change is just like that. let's go to the doctor and get it fixed. host: sam in minnesota, an independent watching this. what is your question or

comment? caller: hi. i wanted to respond to the guy in georgia, because he made the comment i do not see the reason why -- and he seemed so authoritative and i like your response. you talked about people as being innovative. see -- all the politics aside, i see this as the natural step for the human race is to come up with new ways to make power. new ways to live in harmony with our environment. could -- thatit is about it. host: let me go to robert in california. i am a nonvoter. there are 6 billion people in

the world. all of us are 98.6 degrees. the average temperature is 58 degrees. i believe it is overpopulation. that is what is causing this climate change. yep more bathrooms, more underground structures. everything man creates is multiplied 6 billion times. host: let's take that. overpopulation. guest: there is some truth to that. we are putting a lot of pressure on the planet by the number of us. it is also true that if you increase economic prosperity, birth rates go down. it is not a matter of stopping people from having babies. it is a matter of giving them prosperity or giving them something else to do like buy a tv.

reality is that economic improvement usually results in a decline in birth rate. the reason people have a lot of children in poor places as they do not have any sense of security that they will make it to adulthood, those children. it is a strange thing. you are right, we are putting a lot of pressure because of the number of people, but if we were have better economic performance and better prosperity, we would have less of a birth rate. it is a rather complicated thing. i do not want to underestimate -- tim earlier was asking how big is the problem. i do not want to give the impression it is as simple as melanoma. and it a huge problem will take a massive amount of focus. innovation is going to deliver the best first steps and then we will have to do some direct air

capture of co2 in order to reduce the amount of co2 in our atmosphere. a lot of work needs to be done. let me not act like it is going to be easy and we will get this done by next tuesday. this is a huge challenge. it is one we can undertake together if we pull together. host: let's get involved in texas, republican. caller: thank you. when i was a graduate student in oceanography i worked with the father of global warming before he coined the term global warming. it is his contention that in the 4.5 billion years of earth's geological history there have been 10 climate cycles. my question is if man is causing this cycle, who caused those others that amounted to thousands of feet of ice over

many of our continents? guest: a great question. you can see it skepticalscience.com, is that those were naturally caused. we humans are now affecting the planet. before it was some of those things that richard mentioned. activity,ty -- as , things sun activity that would've explained massive changes in earth quiet -- in earth's climate. if you look at our website, you will see a great analysis and graph done by bloomberg that will show you interactively, sun spots, how much would be explained by that. you can see for yourself as they

plot it out whether it correlates with the temperature and the answer is it does not in the current situation. the thing that correlates as you'll see in the bloomberg graph is co2 levels. that is the correlation. it is rather tight. change wereods of caused by some of those things that of been mentioned, by people that are skeptical, but it pretty clearly is us doing this right now. host: a republican in lincoln hills, illinois. scott, if you could make it quick? caller: i do not see co2 is being the issue. co2 is heavier than air. it has a 44.1% milligram and that pulls it to earth. how is it in the atmosphere? it doesn't make sense. host: let's take the point.

guest: interesting. it is clearly in the atmosphere. i would suggest you go to skepticalscience.com. it is interesting. people that are afraid we do not have a solution are looking for other explanations so it goes off some other way. eventually we will realize this is the problem and we have to deal with it. better to engage with the data rather than run looking for other explanations. host: the group is called republicen.org. you can find more information on their website. , a formerive director congressman, bob inglis. we will take you live to ruth bader ginsburg delivering remarks to mark the celebration of bill of rights day which is

tomorrow. at the ceremony there will be a naturalization ceremony taking place with 31 candidates from 26 nations. a lot of coverage on c-span. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪

>> we are live at the national archives in the rotunda for the .harters of freedom the declaration of independence, the constitution, and the bill of rights kept in this room. if it seems like it is dark, that is for a purpose. those are original documents behind the speaker podium flanked by the federal police officers. this morning, justice ruth bader ginsburg will participate in the national archives naturalization ceremony marking bill of rights 1791hich is december 15, when the first 10 amendments to the constitution were considered ratified.

♪

>> here on c-span, waiting for the start of the naturalization ceremony with supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg participating. she has arrived and we will get underway shortly. they are marking bill of rights 15, december -- december marking the day in 1791 when the first 10 amendments to the constitution or ratified. the house and senate are not in but arizona central is reporting that u.s. senator jon kyl will resign from the senate on december 31. that sets up a second appointment by the governor to the seat once occupied by john mccain.