whether to include -- include border wallump's proposal and a temporary daca fix. on c-span3, there is a review of whichive service system, maintains people are eligible to serve in the military. house speaker nancy pelosi among -- participants, later coming up on today's washington journal, kevin erdman of the kit is that it talks about the housing market and how it played a role in the 2008 recession. he is offer of just author of the book shut out. pennsylvania representative brendan boyle joins us to talk about the government shutdown in

its fifth week. grants surly talks about the supreme court and the recent response to issues like gun restrictions, daca, and the trump administration's transgender military ban. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] goodncer: -- host: morning. it's wednesday, january 23. day 33 of the longest government shutdown in history. we saw movement on capitol hill pair of senate seeing a competing measures. it's unclear if either will garner enough support to pass. we are interested in seeing how far the ripples of the shutdown have spread across the country. give us a call and let us know how the shutdown is impacting you. phone lines split up regionally. in the eastern or central time zones, it is 202-748-8000.

in the mountains or pacific time zones, 202-748-8001. you can also catch up with us on social media. on twitter it is @cspanwj. on facebook it is facebook.com/cspan. a very good wednesday morning to you. you can start calling in now. we spent most -- much of the past month talking about the impact of the shutdown on the some 800,000 federal employees working without pay or furloughed and the nine agencies that have been impacted. this morning we want to hear from you how it is impacting the rest of the country. phone lines split up regionally. you can start calling in. as you are calling, some information about the pair of spending bills on the senate floor. this from the washington noting that the dueling spending bills passed for progress after more than a month of a stalemate in the senate. the last time the senate took a

vote on the shutdown was december 21, hours before funding ran out. will be mr.te aump's new proposal with three year deportation amnesty for about one million migrants here under the obama era daca program. yesterday on the senate floor, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell encouraged democrats and republicans to vote for the president's proposal. [video clip] >> it is a proposal the president will support as i have stated consistently over the past month. that fact will earn it consideration here in the senate. a fully reopened federal government, certainty and stability for federal employees once again. the bipartisan appropriations legislation this body worked out together, the full investment in border security the experts on

the ground say they need and changes to our immigration policies that are similar to the ones democrats have been fighting for in the past. to reject this proposal, democrats would have to prioritize political combat with the president ahead of federal workers. ahead of daca recipients. ahead of order security. and ahead of -- border security. and ahead of stable unpredictable government funding. democrats say they want this episode to be over and done with. is their plan to throw federal workers, daca recipients, customs and border control, and all americans under the bus to extend this run of political theater so they can look like champions of the so-called resistance? guest: host: senate democrats in while are countering with their

own proposal that would reopen the government for a few weeks perhaps giving the white house and congress time to negotiate a larger deal. here is chuck schumer, senate minority leader on the floor of the senate talking about that proposal. [video clip] >> for the first time, we will get a vote on whether to open up the government without any decision one way or the other on border security. the proposal also adds necessary disaster aid to states ravaged by natural disasters. people are saying isn't there a way out of this mess? isn't there a way to relieve the burden on the 800,000 federal workers not getting paid? isn't there a way to get government services open? then debate what we should do for border security. now there is a way and that is the second vote that will occur

on thursday. it would renew all of the portions of the government until february 8, open them briefly, but open them at will, allowing workers to get paid and to get back pay and it will allow us to then debate without hostagetaking, without temper tantrum, without anything how we can best do border security, get that done hopefully by february 8 and keep the government open. if you are looking for a way to open up the government, this is the way. host: as you heard from chuck schumer, those votes will take place on thursday. it is day 33 of the partial government shutdown. nothing expected to happen today to end the shutdown. we want to hear from you about the impact of the shutdown around the country. have you been impacted in your part of the country?

phone lines in the eastern or central time zones, it is 202-748-8000. if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones, it is 202-748-8001. roy is up first this morning from florida. go ahead. caller: yeah. the impact down here is at the airports. it's all over, government areas like nasa, everything like that, that is the impact. the biggest impact is not having a president that says he can negotiate and he is not negotiating at all. it is very unfair he sides with saudi arabia, his good friends, but then he worries about those poor people in mexico that have been coming here for 50 years. there is an asylum process, we do not need a wall. more detection. they should sign this bill until february 8, open the government and see what they are going to get. this is not going to end because

trump is not going to give up. he should and mike pence isn't helping. he calls himself a christian. he is not acting like it. what do you think we should do because there is no way out. i am going to ask you. host: we wanted to hear from our viewers about the impact around the country. how are you seeing it in hackensack, carol? caller: hello? yes, are you listening to me? host: yes, ma'am. go ahead. caller: i live near two airports and they are both shut down. people cannot get in and out of the state. i live in an apartment building. there is a pilot who lives here with his wife and child and he cannot afford to pay his maintenance. he is going to be evicted from the building all because we have a president who sits in the white house who lives in the lap of luxury complaining about how

lonely it is -- host: i apologize for that language this morning. of thefor the impact shutdown around the country. caller: good morning, c-span audience. i want to start with this. there is a song "i ain't too proud to beg." 77-year-old evolutionary elder will beg. i am begging mitch mcconnell and donald trump to do what is necessary to help those individuals, some of them are my associates, go back to work now. how does it impact me? i am the president and founder of a nonprofit organization

called academic resources unlimited. i do things to help young boys and girls as far as education is concerned and i have volunteers working with me. they are impacted. one of the things those volunteers have been helping me do is this. they have been helping me raise funds to get money to purchase caps,stribute t-shirts, pens, pencils dealing with the "negro national anthem." these individuals cannot help me now. i am sympathizing with them. host: why can't they help you now? caller: what is that? host: why can't they help you now? caller: they can't help me because they are distressed and don't have the money. they have been contribute money as well.

they have been contribute money toward my project. i started a project some time everyone singing. that is a project i started based on god directing me. they cannot give money. call individuals daily. they want to call the nba teams. i have been getting them to sing gro nationalne anthem. they cannot do that, so it is impacting them. it's also impacting me. host: that is eugene. we are hearing from you throughout our program, this first hour of the washington journal. want to hear your thoughts on how you are seeing the ripples of the government shutdown impacting your communities. a few comments from facebook.

we have a poll at facebook.com/cspan. joyce commented i am concerned about the safety of air travel with tsa agents not getting paid and many calling in sick. i am worried about air traffic controllers not getting paid. we don't want them distracted by anything. i have plans to travel outside the country and i am concerned i won't get my passport renewed in time. tammy saying there is no impact, so what a perfect time to downside the government -- downsize the government. my disabled friend got his food stamps a month early and now he doesn't know if he will get more. some republicans will say he can go to work and get off of them not knowing what that disability is and one more from mary, some people have no idea they have been impacted -- if they have been impacted yet. this story from the new york times by patrick, the government shutdown continues to put pressure on the air travel

system with as many as one of every 10 transportation security officers failing to show up for work. the rate of unscheduled absences of airport screening agents dropped to 7.5% on monday. that is down from 10% the day before. the agency still had to deploy backup officers to bake airports including newark liberty international in new jersey. the agency said many of the absentees cited financial trouble as their reason for not coming to work. a signal the callout rate is likely to continue rising until the shutdown ends. let us know what is happening in your part of the country. jenae in lancaster, california. good morning. caller: hi. am i on? host: yes, go ahead. caller: okay, sorry.

how it impacts here. i am at california and how it impacts over here from the government shutdown is that there is a lot of people over county andre on the it is like they are not really -- and i also have friends that noton the county that are theing their county checks, ebt. host: this is the food stamp program? caller: yes. and then, of course, i just andntly applied for housing it is probably affecting me because i have twins and they are babies and they were born preemies. host: how is it impacting how

you are applying for housing? caller: i am actually applying through the county. and i am basically doing this for my daughter's and myself. host: thanks for the call from lancaster, california. chuck in florida, good morning. caller: good morning. how this -- this is affecting people in a way that has been seen before. there is an amount of fear. even if people are not affected or do not know somebody individually who is affected by this losing wages or food stamps iswhat have you, there incredible fear and this president has created fear throughout. it is funny though that the issue that is coming up more than any in terms of impact is .egarding tsa agents

i really feel like it is more in relation to the people who want to fly and worried about flying. they are concerned about the tsa agents not getting paid and here they are showing up, but they are worried about their flights. on the lower level, people don't even think like the young lady talking about food stamps and then you have contract workers who don't earn a lot of money and they are the ones who are incredibly affected. well.ents are as i am just curious and maybe you can answer this question. are officials getting paid during the shutdown? the officials who supposedly run our government? host: you are talking about members of congress? caller: yes. host: the legislative branch appropriations bill was one of the few appropriations bills

that passed before the beginning of fiscal 2019. that is the bill that funds congress and where member salary comes from. members are being paid. some have said they will not take a paycheck during the shutdown and others said they will give the money to some charity or other organization. yes, they are technically being paid. caller: maybe a law needs to be put in after this that basically each member of congress, let alone the president, may be, him more than anybody, should be fined in addition to being basically -- not paid any money. lastly, the banks, since they put a number of people in jeopardy a long time ago, 2008, 2009, i don't see why congress can't with both sides, put together a package where banks

can provide loans to everybody. i am saying no interest loans because if there is interest, that has to be refunded in some way. that would certainly be a way to alleviate some of the tension and banks would put more pressure on the federal government. that is republicans read dominant leak, too, to solve -- republicans for a dominantly, democrats, too. hisnyone thinks he is in right mind, maybe they need to go see a shrink. host: you talk about loans from banks on the floor of the senate. senator chris van hollen was talking about federal loans and how it is impacting small businesses. here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> what you are seeing is that

businesses and startups and the engine of our economy are not able to access loans, the small business administration. it is estimated that the intdown delayed $2 billion sba lending. the ceo of an electrical components company in tennessee just heard her lender shutdown their $3 million line of credit. "our frustration is unbelievable . to keep us alive, i am borrowing from business associates who .ave worked with us for years we are hearing other small businesses that are just starved for lack of capital. others where small business owners are personally guaranteeing loans, but for the

most part, there are many that are just not getting the capital they need to open up their businesses, to sustain their businesses. as a result, they are laying off workers. that is a growing consequence of this shutdown. host: taking your calls in this first hour of the "washington journal." asking about how the shutdown has impacted your community. dennis in arizona. good morning. caller: good morning. i was wondering why is everybody worried about these government workers losing their jobs. we already worry about construction workers in the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's and 2000s who had -- destroyed by illegal immigration and we had to pay people to steal our jobs.

oklahoma.n in tulsa, how are you seeing the impact of the shutdown in tulsa? caller: i wanted to make a comment. i think trump put forth a declaration that he wanted the employees, the 800,000 employees to be paid whether they are working or not and i don't think the democrats wanted to go for that and the other thing is nancy pelosi and chuck schumer had a grand opportunity last before, aboutek the middle of the week and when he asked nancy pelosi and chuck schumer if he would -- they would give him the money for the wall and some other things they

had asked for and nancy pelosi said not one dollar. she really became -- it really became their shutdown. it became the nancy pelosi-chuck schumer shutdown at that point because they had an opportunity to open government back up and they chose not to. some of the people calling in act like they don't know that that meeting took place and it was on c-span. everybody saw it if they wanted to watch it. host: what did you think about the meeting in the oval office back in december where president trump said he would be proud to shut down the government? caller: that was back in december because he couldn't see there was a little bit of an attitude problem about lacking cooperation to work together so shut itht, okay, we can down.

i think he thought it was only going to last two or three days because i think he thought nancy pelosi or -- and chuck schumer were being honest and i think he thought they were willing to negotiate in good faith and really, they have not shown that. nancy pelosi was going to get on a plane and leave for a work -- for a week and go to belgium. she said she wanted to see the troops, but i hear she was going to take her family. that sounds more like a family vacation. i think she thought i will get away for a while and not have to face the music. we can see what is going on. watched c-span and that is where i get my news. that, to me, just wasn't right. she was going to leave the country so she would not have to

be around to face people calling her office. at that is not right. she is not willing to. she doesn't want him to have anything that we ask for. it is not him. the wall is to protect americans and i just don't understand why worrying moreis about people coming here illegally then he is worried about the safety of americans. -- he has really americans that live in new york. host: you mentioned nancy pelosi, this is nancy pelosi on the front page of the washington times today with chef jose andres help giving out food at the world central titian.

a not-for-profit organization in d.c. started to assist people affected by the partial government shutdown. there is video from one of the local news stations in d.c. of nancy pelosi walking through on that visit through that food kitchen. we will talk more about that and how it has impacted federal workers this morning. we also want to know how it is impacting your community. jordan in napa, california. do you see the shutdown in napa, california? caller: actually, the woman who was speaking of few minutes ago, she is a regular american. that is who we are. she was absolutely right in everything she said. especially the losey leaving the country. i agree with her -- especially pelosi leaving the country.

i totally agree with her. she was leaving so she would not have to deal with this. i watched all of these committee hearings for four years i have watched them. democrats me what the do. they call them democratic now, they are democrats and they don't even call them by their own name. i agree with the woman who was on last. you need to speak. you need to talk. you need to get in the middle of this and nothing is happening and it is shocking me. what really shocks me is what is going on with our society today because they are no better and it shocks me what happened. i had an old couple. i could not believe what was happening and i asked who they voted for and this was during the whole trump saying and they

would not tell me because they were afraid i was going to hurt them. iam a 46-year-old woman and could not believe. they were so scared. i live in napa. we are vintners, the whole thing. come over here and say everything. they were so scared. they lived here before and i came to visit and they were too afraid to tell me who they voted for. host: jordan also bringing up nancy pelosi. more on the standoff between the speaker of the house and the president over the state of the union address. the white house is forging ahead with the state of the union and preparations despite no commitment from nancy pelosi to hold the address. president trump is preparing two versions, one that could be delivered in washington and another that could be held somewhere else in the country. the administration is trying to

conduct advance work to prepare for an address in the house chamber that was originally scheduled for january 29 even though nancy pelosi has the power to determine whether trump and do so. on tuesday, the speaker of the north carolina house of representatives said president trump called him to thank him for offering the raleigh legislature as a venue for the state of the union. trump told more in the phone call that his staff was determining whether the address would be delivered and trump called the speaker of the michigan house of representatives who similarly offered up those chambers for the state of the union address. that was scheduled originally for next week. more tweets and comments on social media from those of you around the country. we are asking what the impact of the shutdown has been around the country over this past month. davey writes i asked people where i work when they came in

for it almost all came in and said they would not even know there was a shutdown if it wasn't on the news. a tweet from ernest saying we have all been affected. the fbi and federal courts are on skeleton crews. we aren't safe. tom going to donate $20 mel's diner the next time i am in town. one more saying the united states coast guard is not renewing mariner credentials. this affects me and every other merchant seafarer. give this enough time and congress will be seriously affected. one of those who commented on social media talking about the fbi. the partial government shutdown hindering federal law enforcement operations according to the organization representing thousands of fbi special agents. they said it is limiting pay --gators' ability to

the fbi needs to be fully funded so we can do our job, stop terrorist attacks, prevent criminal activity, arrest the bad guys. see more ond to that, today's wall street journal. tell us what is happening in your part of the country. it is 202-748-8000 if you are in the eastern or central time zones. 202-748-8001 a few are in the mountain or pacific time zones. in albany, new york, good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. waser: on the impact i looking at was the adult abuse and child abuse and child neglect and adult neglect. what put them above the government, above the law that they are arresting people for adult abuse and child abuse. what puts them above the law that they can hold these people?

the older people and the ones that these people are not working and cannot feed their children. isn't that child neglect and child abuse? host: you are saying this problem is getting worse because of the government shutdown? caller: child neglect if a man cannot go to work and take care of his family. it is the government that is doing it. host: this is richard this morning in augustine, georgia. good morning. caller: i believe this whole schumer is due to chuck . all of his -- on his ego trip. thats so infuriated kavanaugh got on the supreme this is histhink way of paying back trump because

kavanaugh got on the supreme court. it is just an ego trip for schumer. host: besides what you are seeing on the news, are you seeing any impact in augusta, georgia? caller: no, not a bit. host: it was a busy day at the supreme court. the supreme court allowed the trump administration to implement the parcel ban on ban onnder -- partial transgender military. justices agreed to consider a second amendment challenged gun restrictions, but delayed action on the president's effort to end deportation efforts for immigrants brought to the united states as children. we will spend one of our last segments on the "washington journal" talking about yesterday at the supreme court. lawrence hurley will join us and

take your questions about a very busy day at the supreme court. john is next in warrenton, virginia. what are the impacts in warrenton? ? caller: good morning. i have federal employees that are not currently getting paid. i wanted to talk about the bigger issue of what the federal government's budget is. trillion and weekly, just weekly, we spent billion in interest payments on the debt alone. all these callers calling about concerns about food stamps and housing and federal care, every time we keep bringing in these illegals, we are paying for their health, their education, their housing, their food. we are spending multiple billions of dollars in each and every individual state just to support them and trump is just

asking for $5 billion, less than one week's worth of interest. i think it is disingenuous on the democrats part, schumer and pelosi. if you go back and listen to the soundbites of various democrats, they were calling for border security and funding to prevent illegals coming in. end wellt not going to and the arguing and the divisiveness is only going to continue. i have a lot more to say, but that is the point. if you look at the big picture, $5 billion is nothing. it's not really the money, just this idea they want to stop trump and that will only to get worse. i see the 2020 elections getting violent and it will lead to the breakup of the country by 2032 and what are people going to do then without governments to provide their shutdown --food

stamps. host: why is that your estimate? caller: i follow a lot of geopolitical trends and the fact greatnancially, that is a question, thank you for asking it. it just as you see the european union collapsing under the debt burden, the united states will be the last empire to fall and based on time cycles, that is when the collapse of the u.s. will happen. it will be in this generation, the country will split up and our market is about to collapse over the next year or two and we will not be able to service our debt and we will default. all these people dependent on a government handout are in for a difficult awakening. that doesn't mean the people not dependent will have it eyes he -- easy either. ust: i will point you to

sdebtclock.org, updated numbers on the national debt, up to $21.9 trillion. almost $22 trillion. total u.s. federal spending this year over $4 trillion. you were talking about interest paid on the debt, the total interest paid on the u.s. debt over time is over $3 trillion. those running numbers all .vailable, u.s. debt clock.org johnson is next in morgantown, west virginia. johnson, has the shutdown hit morgantown, west virginia? caller: not so much in obvious ways. i think in other ways it is starting to affect us. host: what are the other ways, jonathan? caller: i think like the

airports and stuff like that. people are concerned about air traffic controllers. there is not a whole lot of federal stuff right here where i am at, so it does not affect our -- does not day affect our day to day. there is a lot of people on assistance and they worry about that. host: want to come back to this picture of nancy pelosi at that pop up food kitchen set up by chef jose andres in washington, d.c.. another member of congress who visited that food kitchen yesterday was senator tim kaine, democrat from virginia. he talked about that visit on the floor of the senate and here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> the president said he was proud to shut down government. i defy any thinking and feeling person in this country to go to seven sent pennsylvania between 11:00 and 6:00 and look at that

line in the middle of january and say you are proud. i have a lot of words i might attach to it. i don't think anybody could look at that. i don't think anybody could talk to people or work the line like i did -- and faces of people when they came through the line. all grateful that others were , but to provide some help many, embarrassed. certainly for their country and sometimes personally. i don't like asking for help or asking for charity. there were people there that are grateful, but they are embarrassed and some angry at how they are being treated and who can blame them for that? host: taking your calls in the first hour of the "washington journal." how have you been impacted by the government shutdown in your part of america? charles is next in indiana. caller: thank you for letting me

be on. i watched the vote and it is almost unbelievable that 26 people that voted for her is holding up this whole country. we need a better way to go. host: which vote in particular are you talking about, charles? caller: i am talking about voting for pelosi. i watched the vote. if it had gone the other way and we had a republican, we would not have the problem we are having. what we areciding looking at today. if those 26 people had not have voted for her, we would not be in this jam. host: you are talking about the first vote of the 116th congress? that vote was going to be speaker? caller: i am. -- withu think

democrats in charge of the house, that a democrat -- republican could have won that vote? caller: 27 more votes and it would be a republican instead of a democrat. we need a better way to do it than 26 people holding up this country. it is pathetic. host: to peter in san antonio, texas. caller: good morning. the real reason for the shutdown ion of justice. whitaker told donald trump if you want to stop the investigations, stop their funding. that is what donald trump is doing. the wall is just an excuse he is using to shut down the government and cut off funding to the investigators. he is hurting everybody for self survival. host: what is happening in san antonio, texas? caller: what is that? host: what is happening in san antonio, texas? caller: we are called military

city, usa. you know what is happening. we have tons of federal employees. everybody is being hurt because this man wants to obstruct justice to save his ass. host: to richard in chicago. how are you seeing the impacts of the shutdown? veterani am a disabled who has a mass of cancer, diabetes, and blood clots on my lungs. i don't want to get into nothing about who is right and who is wrong with pelosi and trump. programow is i am on a that they are not going to pay my rent, i have no family and i am getting ready to be in a situation where i am going to be out. i don't want to be homeless and all i want them to do is stop the shutdown.

this should not happen to someone who served their country. this should not happen to me. i don't care about a wall. i don't care about who wants to be on top of this or who comes out looking like they are running the show. i don't care about that. i am worried about how i am going to keep the roof on my head because i cannot get out to work anymore and i am too sick to have to go through this. host: that is richard and chicago. this is paul in west virginia. good morning. caller: good morning, sir. when my boss find out -- found out he could hire three illegals for what he was paying me, i was out of a job. that is how it affected me and you keep showing these soup kitchens and food banks for the people that are not working.

that is the way this country should be run, not dependent on the government for everything. democrats want people to depend on the government and the republicans want people to have personal responsibility and get out and work for a living. it is as simple as that and it's all about staying in power. democrats, as long as they can keep people dependent on the government, they will stay in power. it is as simple as that. host: we have a poll on facebook, facebook.com/cspan on this question we have this morning, have you been impacted by the government shutdown? over 3000 people voted in that poll. just 31% saying they have been impacted. not beeng they have impacted. we wanted to hear about your part of the country. skip in valley springs,

california. are you seeing the shutdown in valley springs, california? caller: hello, thank you for taking my call. i wanted to make a point. this is like a look from 30,000 feet. i live in the northern california bay area and i am telling you, this is getting ridiculous that we have bridges that were built in the 1930's. all around this entire area and these bridges are malfunctioning, there are -- they are draw bridges that get stuck in the upper down position alsotop traffic and they -- the international shipping that goes through. it gets completely stuck. they cannot even move. we are going to build a wall? a useless wall instead of fixing bridges? this is unbelievable.

i just read the article and it says -- there is nothing in article 2 that gives power to the president to actually stop the government. i don't think any of our founders wrote article 2 with the thought a person would become president and want to stop government. --is supposed to be there the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the constitution. how is what he is doing -- how is he getting away with doing the opposite of what his oath says? what he is doing right now is just as impeachable as the other things he is doing. host: about 15 minutes left in this segment of the "washington journal." you can keep calling in and tell us what is happening in your part of the country.

we found out the senate will have two votes tomorrow that might break the logjam over the spending impasse that caused this government shutdown. they are competing bills that would be offered and voted on on the senate floor. unclear whether either will get support. the first is a proposal that mirrors the offer president trump gave to democrats over the weekend of wall funding for a temporary protection for those in the deferred action for childhood arrivals program. those young people brought to the country illegally and grew up in this country. on the senate floor yesterday, mitch mcconnell talked more about the president's proposal and why he thinks democrats should support it. [video clip] >> we have heard members of congress on all sides demanding a resolution to the impasse and a planta quickly restore full funding to the government -- federal government.

we have a plan from the president that would do exactly that and quickly while incorporating both the bipartisan work of the appropriations committee and bipartisan proposals on current immigration issues. the opportunity to end all this is staring us right in the face. that is why we will vote on this legislation on the senate floor this week. all that needs to happen is for our democratic friends to agree it is time to put the country in front of politics, vote to put the standoff behind us. host: on the senate floor tomorrow, the democratic proposal will also get a vote. it is a proposal that would reopen the government and offer some time for negotiations over .order wall and border security chuck schumer, the senate was on the floor talking about the proposal and spoke about the president's proposal and why he

doesn't think it was a good faith proposal. [video clip] >> the president's proposal is one-sided, harshly partisan and made in bad faith. the president single-handedly canceled daca and tps protections. he did it himself, on his own, a while back. now offering temporary protections in exchange for the wall is not a compromise, it is more hostagetaking. when the president says i will partiallyaca and tps even though he created the problem on his own in exchange for the wall, it is like bargaining for stolen goods. the president did not offer the daca protections in good faith. the president's team sold of the protections in the bridge act, a temporary fix proposed by senators durbin and graham. it turns out the actual

legislation is more limited than the bridge action and would barely restore the protections president trump himself took away. the new york times reported ofphen miller, the architect the president harshest policies on legal immigration intervened to narrow the daca proposal as much as possible. when stephen miller is crafting the policy, you can be darn sure it is not a compromise. host: all eyes will be on the two boats when they take place on the senate floor tomorrow. today is day 33 of the ongoing government shutdown and over the past month we spent a lot of time focusing on federal employees and impacts by the 9 agencies that have been closed as a result of this shutdown. we are asking you to let us know what is happening in your community. how is it impacting you?

alan in atlanta, georgia. thank you for waiting. caller: good morning. i am calling for several reasons . personally, i haven't had much experience with problems with the government shutdown. some local places are closed. however, i want to tell a very quick story and i want to tell you how to fix the government shutdown in 48 hours with both sides winning. about five years ago, there was an almost government shutdown and i became so disgusted with nearlyernment i bought 600 baby pacifiers and sent one to each member of congress. i would urge my fellow americans to buy a few and send them to pelosi, schumer, and the president to demonstrate how disgusted they are with all of them. second, here is the fix. there are two elements. one is the nonessential ploys

are sitting at home and two is they are not getting paid. the first solution is you make all the nonessential employees essential employees so they go back to work and therefore the government shutdown is over. second is the bigger problem for the employees and that is that they are not getting paid and that is simple to fix. salariesbanks loan the to the government employees and as our government is guaranteed repayment -- the payment of the salaries when the shutdown is over, you have that money assigned to the banks. the banks get 1% a month in interest and repayment of those salaries are guaranteed to the banks. they will be very happy to make those loans and the problem is sidestepped and there is no

government shutdown anymore. wall, thect to the wall will not resolve the problem. the problem is people come into this country to make money, so they will find a way over, under, through, anyway they can to get into the country. when i was in mexico a few months ago, i asked a woman i met how much do you make on average? she said five dollars. i said how can you live on five dollars an hour and she gave me disgust -- if you cannot work here then people will not come. host: on the pacifiers you sent to members of congress, did you

ever get a response from any of those members? caller: i got one response. one of the congressman in georgia i spoke to and he said he thought it was funny. i made a point. theseint was that congress people are children, worse than children. at the moment, it is even worse. 538, three for the nonvoting members of congress and it cost me -- i spent about $800 on this project although i thought it was worth it to make a point. i really would recommend everybody listening to c-span sends one pacifier or three pacifiers. one to each of the -- the government and it will make a very strong point. host: that is alan in georgia

talking about putting some federal employees back to work. we have seen some efforts throughout the shutdown to reclassify some groups of federal employees from nonessential to essential. here is a press release from the department of agriculture a.sterday concerning the usd sonny perdue announced all farm service agency officers nationwide will soon reopen to provide additional administrative services to farmers and ranchers during the lapse in federal funding. certain farm service agency been providing limiting -- limited services for loans and tax documents for farmers since january 17 and they will continue to do so through january 23. all fsa offices will open tomorrow and offer a longer list of transactions they will accommodate. the quote from sonny perdue

yesterday accompanying that release saying at president trump's direction, we have been working to alleviate the lapse in funding as best we can and are happy to announce the reopening of fsa officers for certain services. that from the department of agriculture yesterday. we are asking for what is happening in your part of the country. let us know your story and what you are seeing. diane in new enterprise, pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning, sir. i guess i think at some point we are going to have to come to terms with the fact that we are leaving our children with a $21 trillion credit card bill. i agree with the earlier caller who said the dependency culture we have created in our society is not sustainable and will eventually implode. i guess my theory on the government shutdown is if these

people are nonessential, maybe we should, as a measure toward austerity, necessary austerity for the future generations, let some of these people get out there and compete in the private sector and see what happens because i have been laid off many times and nobody ever worried about me getting my backpay. i am paying $700 a month for health care that the government employees are getting for free on my dime. i guess that is my point and thank you for letting me weigh in. host: on a federal employee health care, they still have to pay for the health care they get. we lost diane. robert in alexandria, virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. i would just like to comment on try to putall in and responsibility for the shutdown on nancy pelosi and chuck schumer.

you cannot get mitch mcconnell or donald trump to go to one of those food pantries. they won't do it because they are responsible for the shutdown. host: what is happening in alexandria, virginia? you are just across the river from d.c.. one are the impacts you have personally felt? caller: i have not felt them personally, but my wife goes out to work and she says traffic seems a bit lighter. host: this is joe in harrisburg, pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning, sir. host: go ahead. caller: i just wanted to comment about the shutdown. it seems like it is between pelosi and mitch mcconnell or the president has hijacked the congress through senator mcconnell because congress is nonvoting on whatever bills they

.eed to pass actually, the senate is nonvoting on whatever bills they need to pass. i am just saying it is not between the president and pelosi. it is between pelosi and mcconnell. host: what did you think about the announcement yesterday we will see two votes on the senate floor tomorrow that could possibly end the shutdown if either funding bill gets enough support? caller: i think it is a mistake hijack you cannot congress and you should not hold people hostage to get your way. on --should not depend host: i think we lost the caller. you were talking about congress and the president as well speaking of the president, we have been monitoring his twitter

page. a few moments ago tweeting this out saying there is great unity in the republican party. want to once and for all put an end to stoppable crime. border security and a wall, no doubt. it a few minutes left to talk about the shutdown's impacts in your community. brittany in iowa this morning, go ahead. caller: i am not feeling it personally, myself, but i work with some who depend on some of the programs that they will not receive and i think we are forgetting about the people who cannot care for themselves or cannot get out and work. in stockton, california. the last caller in this segment. caller: good morning. echoing part of what the lady just said, caring, it has not

impacted me personally, but i do care about all the people that are hurting and suffering from the impact. correct me if i am wrong. i thought i saw donald trump say he would gladly shut the government down. host: you are talking about that december meeting with nancy pelosi and chuck schumer in the oval office. caller: he was talking directly to chuck schumer when he said it schumerept saying chuck tried it and it did not work, so he will gladly do it and accept responsibility. donald trump said -- it is like they called his bluff and this is what they got. the border wall is what he is saying he is doing it for.

if america ise is dependent on cheap labor like that, pretty soon this was going to happen eventually. something like this was going to happen. the people that want the cheap giving the wages, you know, paying us to do, we were doing a job before and we kept doing those jobs. think was doing them in the ferc put -- in the first place? thank you. host: that was mike. stockton, california, our last caller. stick around and more to come. up next, author and visiting rdmann discusses the role that housing supply played in the great recession. and later, democrat and ways and

means committee congressman boyle will bendan back to answer your questions. ♪ >> live, february 3, super bowl sunday at noon eastern. is ourand sports writer guest. , gamethor of many books over, and his most recent, jim standing.t man cressida dick many to fight for sports and reclaim them and -- take sports back. we need to know our history.

it is our greatest ammunition in the fight. -- we need to know the history of athletes, sports writers, and fans who have stood up to the machine. that ito other reason allows us to look at the world and see that struggle can affect every aspect of life in this system. three-hour lives conversation with your calls and -- uncle tv c-span2. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. as a publiccreated service by america's cable television companies. today, we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of the congress.

washington dc and around the >> washington journal continues. host: we step way from the shutdown for a couple of minutes. to talkdmann joins us about the role that housing supply played in the great recession, approaching its lowest point this month. start by explaining what a housing bubble is. when prices rise to a level that seems like it cannot be justified by fundamentals. i think we use priced income levels and that sort of thing. back tod looking thousand four 2005 at prices have written -- risen above fundamentals. when everything collapsed, it

seemed like it must've been the inevitable outcome. looking back, in a lot of ways, it was not as inevitable as it seems -- seemed. it was a lot more complicated than we originally thought it was. i think a lot of the things we thought were solutions to the bubble may have made problems worse. how policymakers and economists traditionally explained because of the housing bubble, it started in the mid-2000's and we sought in the great recession. it in the great recession. guest: we fund houses with credit, mortgages. that is just how we do things. it is how the housing market works. rise, youme prices will tend to see mortgage levels rise along with it. it is not just an american issue. if we look at canada or

australia or the u.k., a lot of countries have the same problem -- problem of housing costs. prices arise with it and that seems to be the issue. what i found looking back is there is a fundamental cause of home prices, income for corporations is the fundamental prices rising or falling in the stock market. a lot of times, i think we underestimate the effect it has. i think that is what happened in the bubble. core problemis the because we didn't have enough houses and because credit was rising at the same time and it let us to think it was too much credit and we had too much of everything. our solutions were about pulling back and getting rid of excesses.

with us thisrdmann morning. the lead story in the wall street journal is about housing prices in the country, a slumping housing price students signals market sluggishness. if you want to join our discussion and what it could mean for the future and what it meant for the great recession -- you can go ahead and start calling them as we show you the cover of kevin erdmann's book. down." talk about the housing shortage and where we were seeing it in the mid to thousands.

-- mid to thousands -- mid 2000's. guest: those cities have a different housing market than the rest of history and allow new buildings of lower rates than any other major city. today is even today, it is because they do not have enough houses. it is very economically successful and that is basically won.ding war to be one -- those cities really are the core of the problem. the prime trigger that set off what became the bubble. help me understand the housing shortage.

i want to show viewers this chart. it showed the monthly supply of houses in the united states going back to the 1960's. i want to focus on the mid to thousands just in a time before the great recession a year before it. houses for sale to houses for , 7.2. it climbs to over nine in the height of the great recession 10 years ago this month, 12.2 sales or sale -- for versus every housing shown. how does that show a housing shortage? guest: i think the main thing that shows is there was a lot of in the bubble, and it sucked credit out of the economy and intended to kill the bubble

-- the spike in inventory they still needed housing as tenants which is the interesting thing. indicator ister housing starts. l.a., you find that housing starts this -- in those cities are half the natural .verage or less they are the cities with the highest incomes and strongest income growth. because the housing expansion is so much slower than the rest of the country, they have created a perverse migration pattern were americans are migrating to place were incomes are lower instead of what we had hoped to be the case where they could move to places with more opportunity. out,"in your book, "shut you refer to that migration as something akin to a refugee

crisis. guest: yes. and 2005,ns in 2004 this sort of came to a head. really what was happening in the cities like l.a. and san francisco, i call them close to cities for short. what was happening is the migration pattern, this segregation of americans according to who can afford to bid their way into those places to get access to lucrative labor markets in tech or finance, this came to a head and there was a flood of households out of those cities for lack of housing. typically houses with lower incomes couldn't win the bidding war for access. they were flooding out by the hundreds of thousands. they were flooding in places like sacramento, las vegas, phoenix. on the east coast, florida

actually tends to get most of that outmigration from the northeast. florida is a center point of the bubble. it is sort of a secondary bubble that happened. you have expensive cities were people are moving away because costs are high. then you have bubble cities where people are flooding in. to havehose cities tend more generous lending policies, they were overwhelmed by the flood of households that were housing refugees in a way that they could not keep up. even a city like phoenix ran into the problem of not having enough houses. even the base of the problem was that there were not enough houses in l.a. and that led to the surge of migrants. abouti want to talk more the housing policies put in place after that and its impacts but i will let you talk to some callers on the idea this was a that housingage in

glut that was one of the main causes of the recession. new jersey, good morning. caller: i'm a realtor over here for a long time. your book sounds a great information but i want to make a couple of comments. the reason there is a shortage i in many areas,e they create zoning laws when they do not allow housing of different sorts to be built on that one level. a realtor, and when the crash came, i noticed the president at the time of congress on both sides did not do anything for real estate. stillet the banks everyone out of their homes and all they had to do was be on the therest of principle until crash was subsiding and i didn't do that. new jersey, we were number one in foreclosures for a long time because the banks did not even winterize the home spirit it through everyone out because congress let them do that.

we ended up with all the houses on the market that could not be sold or they were part of the inventory but they weren't. thoughtsring what your are about if congress had let people stay in their homes rather than be thrown out just to get more time to work out. what are your thoughts? guest: those are two great points. this, a lotpart of of other tools can be used in obstruct newto housing supply. it is not really even just an american problem. you see this in sydney, australia, or toronto or vancouver and canada. it is something about a new ways of organization in today's technology level and culture, the demand and all sorts of these countries are having -- our meeting that demand. thehe second point,

surprising finding of my research is what was happening then, what really was the best thing that could have happened, even as early as 2006 and 2007, would have been to just select -- let the mortgage markets continue to function. one thing i found that was surprising was there wasn't a change in the character of our worst during the bubble. homeownership rates were not really rising. all the new ownership was the house of higher incomes. , what happenedt was because we thought those were the causes, those were where the policy solutions were done. the federal reserve started pulling back on the money supply. we started tightening up credit markets and as things detent and

fannie and freddie were taken over by the federal government, and every point along the timeline, we were pulling back and saying we will not make loans to working class borrowers anymore, and you can see these after the crisis had happened, where people with scores under 750 or 760, the number of mortgages they were getting at that point is a fraction of what they had been. that is what cratered a lot of the markets, in every city across the country, whether they had a bubble or not during 2004 and 2005, the bottom into the markets crashed across the board. been doinguld have is letting fannie and freddie continue to lend to those markets and those foreclosures never would have had to happen. those houses would have remained fairly level and the households would not have had the problem of having a itse in negative equity and

would have avoided a lot of what we experienced. host: cameron, good morning. go ahead. caller: i have a question for your guest. the salesaddress market. i'm in the rental market at 60 years old. i've never owned a home. self-employed and never considered owning a home for a number of reasons predominantly because i owe the irs money going back to 2008 and i would i had no clients in them self-employed. result, i have tax debts that keeps catapulting. if i buy a home, they swoop in and take it. so i can't buy a home. the question is the rental market. i have been looking to move from where have lived for seven years, and the rental market

, out about a 30 year extreme percentage where you cannot find what you're looking for. the biggest reason for me is that i work out of my home, i am a programmer and need high speed internet. i have yet to get into my car once, not exaggerating, not once in the last three years of looking every day in washington property.check out a if you want something private enough where you won't hear your neighbors barking dogs and high-speed internet, it just does not exist. please comment on the lack of for renters. -- they of regulatory

tend to be dominated for rentals tend to be a part of the market. a lot of the markets could be homeowners. thatcould be families would go get a mortgage and their activity as homebuilders in those markets, it would loosen everything up. that would go get a mortgage and theirwe sort of created a housig market of have it has -- have-nots, with federal regulators basically decide whether you are qualified to be a homeowner or not. if not, you are stuck in this renters market. because we thought the problem was prices were too high and the solution was bringing down prices, if you think about what that means mathematically in the thatng market, the return the landlord makes on the property is rent divided by the price paid. if you make the price go down, it makes the return for landlords go higher. we have created a compression

because we removed all of the owners from the markets, rents have risen and prices have gone down and we forced the markets into landlord markets. they need a high-yield compared to home owners. we created a low-end of the market still adjusting to the we createdwhere have-nots who are not allowed to create new housing supply or be owners. rise for thecosts people stuck in that and you can see this, even in household sizes, which have been kind of slowly declining for several decades. you can see it where we have created this country of have's versus have-nots. housing prices for homeowners have declined.

they have increased because we forced them into a broken market where we cannot create new supply and rents are high and renters are retracing and have to regroup and the rents are going off and there are a bunch of problems. oddly, even though it is counterintuitive, is to loosen up credit, allow some people to be borrowers and owners in the markets, which tol actually create supply bring down rents and make units available for people like you. again, "shutk out." kevin erdmann is the author. a fellow at the -- center. it is at george mason university, a think tank that does a lot of work on markets .nd how they work a lot of economists are just doing great work there. in terms of trade and housing and monetary policy.

i was just recently added as a visiting fellow in the last couple of months. i happen working on these projects for the last couple of years. now i am working more full-time. host: now to answer more questions from our viewers -- bridget in kansas, good morning. bridget: thank you for taking my call. i have a question. on the shut down. on the shortage with the homes, i heard a bunch of people were , that the landlords would evict them, because they are not able to pay. goes to theit different programs and stuff, more and more people will be in trouble. it seems like that would be a renterslandlords to get

out so they could raise rents and even turn around and sell them for higher because they can show they are getting more money . it seems like it would bring a false value to the real estate. and it seems a if we let the government be shut down long enough, the prices on that real estate -- host: that is bridget in kansas. guest: i think the best thing for tenants to have is an alternative, the best thing to solve the problem is to have a house next-door that is empty that you can choose to live in instead of the house where the landlord is jacking up the rent. for a long time, it has been a problem in the closed access i mentioned just because there is not housing supply because there are local and political obstructions to housing. we have created a nationwide

problem because we created obstructions that prevent people from funding a new home and building a new house for themselves. all of the policy initiatives we put in place since the housing bubble have made the problem worse. they have taken away the alternatives in the best thing we can do for tenants is to build more houses and give them options. is l.a. a closed access city? guest: yes. host: good morning. caller: good morning. i'm in the land where you can or eat.fford to rent i heard the gentleman speak about migration. from california to arizona and all in between. being that i'm a native californian, it is too

expensive, right? i would submit to your guest that another equation may need to be brought in on this, immigration. if you have an immigration a milliont allows for people to come in, and you 400,000, whatis is the equation for the -- for what will be impacted by the type of influx of people who need housing? >> i think you're getting at a key issue that was not appreciated at the height of the .ubble if you think about it in terms of international migration, texas has a lot of migration from the south. arizona has a lot of migration. a lot of states have migration

and it did not cause home prices to double or triple over that time. in texas, they have looser building policies and can build houses to accommodate whomever wants to move to texas. so really, it is this fly issue that turns this forces of opportunity and people aspiring to a better life, the limit on housings of wide turned that into a problem. so, you can see migration patterns that happened during the bubble. if you compare that to the immigration issue, the international immigration issue, really it -- it is progressive if you think about it. it's like if you had a migration prices -- prices, if mexico's

trying to build a wall to stop the crisis into mexico, you think about l.a. and new york city, to get that sort of , it callsit is really for a solution to stop that from happening. for things to be dire enough that it would force migration reverse, it is something that needs to be addressed. in places like l.a., to find a way to have more housing constructed. the data released yesterday from the national association of realtors, u.s. home sales causing price growth to slip to the lowest level in six years, as the housing sector and the 2018 in a weak state for 2018, sales of existing homes fell to five .3 million units. the weakest total since 2015. after years ofed

strong price growth and moderate inventories are into the washington post. more properties are sitting on the market until the increase from 40 days a year ago. how do you read the data? classic gets to one of the core issues. it is important to separate price and rent. we tend to think of price because most of us are homeowners. about has ahinking expenses, we're thinking about mortgage payments and the cost of owning a home, the price of a home, but really, the act of consuming housing and consuming shelters is about rent. expenses and rent inflation skyhigh for the past couple of years. that comes from the lack of supply.

the rent of home is driven up because no alternatives are being built. you see the downshifts in prices people have sentiments changing and they do not have the funds available to buy houses and they still have demand as tenants and they are still driving up rent and it is important as we move forward to think about those two separate things and concentrate on rent of housing supply and demand, you see these things moving in opposite directions and it is probably a sign that funny and money and credit are drying up and being prevented from being buyers, it doesn't have a lot to say about housing prices themselves. host: go ahead. caller: yes. the housing market is purely a supply and demand proposition. economists believe

mortgage-backed -- securities everything else is dancing around on that. kenny respond to that? one of the pieces that gets to the heart of the one thing that was shared, the buyer's market and -- atice of the houses the national level, it looks as though rent was coming on a normal piece and then prices rose far above the norms. notooks like price was related to rant and that would cause us to think credit markets are causing an irrational bump in prices and that will naturally contract back to normal.

what i found is if you think about the different markets and the different cities, cities where we can't build enough houses so rents and prices are high and it other parts of the country, rent prices continue to remain moderate throughout the bubble, you see city by city that rent explains everything. the reason prices were high in l.a. and san francisco is because rents were high. you see the people are mad not poor people are being given loans they cannot afford come but because people with a lot of income are moving in and making rents go up. found that overturns that conventional wisdom is when he disaggregated by city, and really does explain everything. call, jennifer in colorado. good morning. caller: good morning. ok. i have the tv on. ok.

live in colorado and my husband is a real estate agent. is, istion this morning do not feel he get being addressed enough that in 1998 i believe i'm saying this right, clinton and a republican congress deregulated by getting rid of which was enacted 100 allowedfore and that big companies like aig and other in thees to get involved boxed up mortgages. there was, i have $10 million in mortgages and now i need insurance on that so you get these credit default that's in that kind of thing. when you look at people with older generations, people would

stay in houses for 40 years. the home when it -- up in value but very slowly. i feel like that is an enormous reason why we have a we had. guest: one of the mistress of what happened, there were deregulatory issues. there were some ways the lending markets loosened up a bit. this present thing comes from the data. deregulationis seems as though most of what it created ways for households to live in the dysfunction, the cities that have dysfunctional housing market where rent is outside the historic norm. if you look -- if you live in l.a. were san francisco, your housing expenses will be stressful whether you are a renter or an owner.

a lot of what the deregulation was doing was making ownership available for the households already in a stressful housing market whether they were tenets or owners. that was the trigger of the migration event. that wereouseholds actually able to make payments in the markets, it triggered a migration in a way that people were stressed and had to move to less expensive cities, you just do not see any sort of shift toward owners with low incomes or any sort of shifts that we would have thought looser credit markets would have created their they were mostly allowing high-priced homes for people with high incomes to rise to the national level and basically accelerating this by income we have created. the book again, "shut

out." kevin erdmann, market a center. you can find his work at market is.org. on the washington journal, we by ways anded means, brendan boyle. and reuters supreme court correspondent lawrence hurley. we will be right back. ♪ legend grew that he was a bad kid running amok on the waterfront of baltimore. he never lived on the waterfront of baltimore. so i think he internalized purity do not want to do too much psychobabble, but i think he internalized the idea that he

must be that because whilst would neither of his parents have wanted him? >> sunday on q&a, author and journalist jane levy with her book on the life of legendary baseball player babe ruth. >> 1932 world series, babe ruth withinto a back and forth the pitcher for the chicago cubs. it becomes a legend that he is standing at home plate and the cubs in the dugout are yelling at him, the thank you's are yelling at the cubs, and he for one strike or two strikes and that he points out, allegedly, that he points up to the bleachers to grandstand, allegedly saying i swear i will hit the next one. night onevy sunday c-span's q&a. >> live at noon eastern, author

and sports writer our guest on book tv's in depth. author of many books including a people's history of sports in the united states, "game owner -- over," and his most recent, "jim brown: last man standing." sports back. take we need to know our history. that is the greatest ammunition in the fight. ofneed to know our history the athletes, sports writers, and the fans who have stood up to the machine. if for no other reason than knowing this history i think allows us to look of the world and see that struggle can affect every aspect of life in this system, even the ivory tower known as sports. >> join our live three-hour conversation with your calls and emails and facebook questions live at noon eastern, book tv

passes in depth on c-span2. >> washington journal continues. host: pennsylvania democrat brendan --brendan boyle on the ways and means committee expected to hold a high-profile case with secretary steve mnuchin. that is before he declined to appear. what did you want to ask him at the hearing? guest: thank you good to be back. no shortage of things to ask. first would probably be an update on where our nation's policy is with respect to trade, and then specifically on china. indications, they will say one thing them then white house officials will say something else. president trump will tweet something differently -- very

different entirely. like tond is i would find out the administration policies specific policy on infrastructure. it is something the president talked about a great deal when campaigning in 2016. he talks about it subsequently. we have not seen, many people we have not aware, seen a real infrastructure proposal from the white house. by hold on hope that if there is one area where half democratic majority and president trump can come to an agreement on major legislation, it will be on infrastructure. off the top of my head, those are two or three. but there is no shortage of topics and that brings us a deeper question. the congress of the united states is a co-equal branch of the government. that is the first article of the constitution. the executive of the president is the second article. practicing and exercising isrsight over the executive

a core constitutional responsibility that we have. the last two years on the republican majority completely went to the wayside. that is wrong regardless of in the whites house. now under a democratic majority, there is an opportunity weather with the state department or the foreign affairs committee, whether it is with treasury and the and means, any realm of executive branch, we need a congress that is exercising oversight, it is the proper function of government. need is this something you a secretary for? severalhey offered .enior officials why do you need the secretary himself?

guest: past practice is the secretary comes before congress and answers these questions. i do not know why it is thisguer other areas that the trumpet administration continues previous administrations and previous congresses, that is the appropriate process. i have a ways and means committee, my understanding -- check your twitter page if that is happening on the other side of the capital, the senate side, two high profile votes on two pieces of legislation a could end the shutdown. the first would be on the president's proposal on the weekend and what do you make of that? is not a serious proposal. as itld be backsliding relates to the ability to claim asylum. now that we are more than a month into the longest

government shutdown in american history, this really is an accidental shutdown or the wednesday before christmas, the u.s. senate led by mitch mcconnell and the republican majority in past a bill we were ready to pass in the house. that was on wednesday. what happened was wednesday afternoon and wednesday evening of thursday morning, president eaten up by his face on fox in france and thursday morning, he flip-flopped. even though mitch mcconnell told senate colleagues to fly home, we are done with work, merry christmas, midmorning on thursday, the president had changed his mind paul ryan, then , into theere we are shutdown. under a democratic majority, he took over to his after that. we've now passed eight different times, bills to reopen the government.

bills passed unanimously that wednesday before christmas. president trump owns this. he flat out said it in the oval office that this is his shutdown. for whatever fight reason and he thinks is good for him put ugly. thead two years to build wall under a republican majority in the senate and the house. enoughrly was not priority than p now all of a sudden when democrats are on the verge of taking over, the house has suddenly become enough of a priority that he would shut down the government, more than 800,000 government workers going without pay. it is a political start. host: if you want to join into the conversation with brendan boyle, pennsylvania democrat -- host: why not use the president's's proposal as a

starting point for negotiation? why not negotiate until the government reopens? the position of the democratic majority is simple. we should not go down the road of holding government workers hostage for political debate. theave said let's end suffering and open the government right away and the government right away and then negotiate on border security and we support order security. i am one of the democratic members who has voted to increase funding for border security. but we do not think that spending over $5 billion on a border wall, which would just be a fraction of the actual cost come well north of 25 and dollars, when there are far more effective technological answers, i also believe some of the funding would be directed toward legal points of entry where we have a problem with drugs month -- smuggling, at legal points of entry.

we are happy to have this discussion, this negotiation, but do not shut down the government over it. let's get that open. there is a proposal in the senate that a number of democratic colleagues are pushing forward that says, let's reopen the government, not indefinitely, for two .5 weeks, and that will give us the ability to pay government workers who are going without pay right now. enable us to reopen the government and that gives us 2.5 weeks to negotiate this on border security. the last point on this, because i think sometimes we get into political discussions and debates, it gets lost that we're talking about real people's lives. email chain, a local group that i'm a member of, and they do not realize a member of congress is one of the people on this email list. folks were appealing for a food drive donation because of government workers not having enough to see their families.

i could not help but feel a certain sense of shame about that. here we have people who are working hard every day in very important jobs like the tsa and other areas, who now do not even ore enough money to pay rent to pay and feed their families pair that is a disgrace and should never be allowed to happen. i just introduce legislation called the band government shutdowns act. government shutdowns of only really existed in the last 40 years. it is only really been since the mid-1990's. i believe this is a terrible practice. is, there will be an end to the current government shutdown, everyone forgets about it and moves onto the next issue. i think this needs to be the last government shutdown or we need a systemic fix to the problem. i introduced the band government shutdowns act. something we need to ensure is the longest, lasts

ever government shutdown. kentucky, democrat, good morning. are you with us? we will go to alter. maryland, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i think the talking points the representative has been putting out have been all over the democratic side. i believe the infrastructure bills could be started from it is side of the house and the senate. i am not sure where infrastructure starts but you need to come up with your own plan, present them to congress, and let people then negotiate on them. right now, nancy pelosi has said no, even as the government has been open. it is hard for trump, i see both sides, it is hard for trump to come back at that point when she has already said no after the government israel thing. you guys really have to come to the table and start working

legitimately. thank you. thank you it we have already passed as we mentioned a different times recently in the past couple weeks, to medially real from the government. as number one p number two, we have said we will negotiate on border security. the latest proposal was $1.3 billion in additional funding for border security. increasen top of the funding for border security that has happened over the last 10 years. many people may not realize this, we spend significantly more on border security today than we did back in 2005 and 2006. a pretty dramatic increase. we are willing to negotiate on that. , the simply incorrect charge that we are not willing to negotiate. what we are saying very clearly is we are not going to reward hostage taking. we're not going to enter into

this while we still have a government shutdown and 800,000 government workers are not being paid. it is not just government workers but contractors. i was speaking to a small business present in my district in philadelphia who is in their real estate business. is trying to purchase a home, and it is with a agency,nt that mortgage suddenly that person will not get the paperwork signed off, it impacts the person trying to sell the house. you can see the spillover effects e.on the 800,000 that we are talking about. host: florida, independent, good morning. caller: good morning, representative. i have a straightforward question pertaining to the infrastructure funding, why the federalncreased gasoline and diesel tax for 25 years? why has that not been at least

adjusted to cost of living? i will get off and listen to your answer. guest: thank you. a great question. ever since 1993, we have had the same gasoline tax per for whatever reason when it was 1990's,ct in the early about 26 years ago now, it was not indexed to inflation. in real terms, the revenue we get from the gas tax, we, the government, collect drops every singly year, and it is estimated in real terms, essentially about half of what it was 25 and 26 years ago. that would get us about 85% of what we need to repair our roads and bridges. it is a good point and you typically do not have people clamoring to raise any sort of tax. i would point out in pennsylvania about five years we essentially did that in

my state. we have more miles than anyone who has driven, pennsylvania roads, you might be aware of this. we have more miles of road in need of repair than any other state in the country. and we had more structurally deficient bridges than any other in the country to we are in older state. we passed a major infrastructure bill, genuinely bipartisan, narrowly passed, about as many democratic votes as republican votes for it as well as democratic and republican opponents. it was a great boost to the state enabled long-delayed projects to finally take place. i believe we need to do that at a national level. florida, goodd, morning. -- hollywood, good morning. caller: i want to point out mr. boyle is not being completely honest when it comes to the

issue of what is going on between trump, nancy, and chucky. i think the three of the make up the bulk of the three stooges, moe, larry, and curly. two of them happen to be democrats. i just want to point out that that hes indicated would be in agreement to open up the government under the speak aboutat they the wall which nancy has refused to that was certainly brought a couplee news media of weeks ago. on trumpl the blame for this is incorrect and only helps to exacerbate the problem. guest: thank you for your question. i have to brag that one of the three stooges was from

philadelphia. a big threebe stooges fan and the is a museum in philadelphia. stop by and check out the freak -- three stooges museum. on the more serious point about the shutdown, this government shutdown began under full republican-controlled government. the first 2.5 weeks of it was under full republican control. even if nancy pelosi was not the majority, the wall is not being built or funded republicans have full control of government for two years and they could not get the votes for any sort of border wall. it is not as if it is just democratic opposition. i go back to what president trump himself said sitting in the oval office. he owns the government shutdown. he said he would be proud to shutdown the government over getting a border wall. for whatever reason he is

convinced that this fight is good for him politically clear debt. -- politically. that is why. we asked people this morning whether they have been impacted by the government shutdown in their part of the country. andave a scientific poll 4000 people have voted on the pole as of right now are just 31% saying ask him a they have been impacted by the government shutdown. haven't, does that surprise you? guest: not necessarily can sometimes people have been impacted and it is not immediately obvious. the further we go down the path, the more people who will be impacted. challenges, 31%, for the 31% who have been impacted, it is devastating. you are talking about regular, working americans suddenly going

33 days without being paid, not being able to pay rent, not being able to pay mortgage, not being able to shop for food, visiting food banks, i am getting calls from my office to donate to clothing drives and at the philadelphia airport, i know they are collecting food or for the people, let's say it is only 31%, the impact of not been minimal for them. it has been substantial. kudlow onwe had larry tv talking about the white house in admitting now that economic impact to the overall economy will be much greater than they thought. it affects all of us. it is the national economy. not people might immediately see the reality. it impacts all of us. i say democrat, good morning. martin, are you with us? caller: yes.

hi, congressman boyle, he is exactly right. is in threent parts, the legislative, the judicial, and the executive branch, right? so, you know, president trump is holding the whole nation hostage like he is the king and there is a monarchy. host: this is andy in new york. caller: good morning. to say the shutdown is terrible. it is not only causing destruction in the system and manipulating markets and hedging against american people losing money, mitch mcconnell needs to dump trump and think about his legacy that he is running with this. look at giuliani. it is terrible. ever since 9/11, the country has

been up and down. spendingan appropriations bill on the floor and we reopen the government. mitch mcconnell needs to step up his game. thank you. host: focus on mitch mcconnell for a second and what you read for two spending bills, obvious of the president positive pole of but a democratic proposal also. with andy, my simple ask for mitch mcconnell is to put on the floor exactly what he passed unanimously several weeks ago. you do that and that certainly .s a vetoproof majority the government would be reopened. that is number one. i cannot understand why mitch mcconnell continues to be so subservient to president trump. he is the senate majority leader . an incredibly important and powerful office in a coequal branch of government. trumpularly since the

strategy in the first few years 1974, more seats since when a number of senators were inin more competitive states 2020, i cannot understand why mitch mcconnell allows himself to be led. by president trump. you know the math was mostly on red state terrain. 2020 will be quite a different map. , if you had others the same map and 2018, i think it would be a different result. state house as well as legislative seats, it was pretty national. i cannot understand why mitch mcconnell does not assert himself more. in the last congress, you served on the foreign relations

committee and we talked a lot about foreign affairs in the past. suicidek on the deadly bombing in syria claimed by isis which killed four americans, the impact that will have on president trump's effort in syria. we made great progress against isis in the last several years. he continued in the first few years of president trump, integrated the ability of isis to launch an attack. that said, they are not defeated . the estimates are always a bit of a challenge. if the isis forces are down to 20,000. it is not zero and they are not defeated. for reasons of needing to see isis but also for reasons to make sure we do not allow a vacuum at russia and iran can move right into, a quick and immediate withdrawal that shocked the pentagon, would be a mistake i think. i think even thoughts americans, we sometimes think that we look

at the rest of the world and see it is a mess and we wish we could pull all of our soldiers home and say to heck with it al, the reality is we need strong, involved u.s. in the world. last 70 years the have been in peace in europe specifically, for example, is because of the institutions we have built. it is something we should be proud of. we should not be degrading nato for the institutions we helped to leave the building of. host: tony in georgia, republican. caller: yes, i find it horrendous that you people think we are stupid. we know what's going on here. our outside communities are being devastated by these drugs, y'all taking money from

them cartels? what is wrong with you people? guest: first, i treat every voter with respect, every constituent who comes into our district office, whether democrats, republican, independent. everyone has their in style, but i don't think the american people are stupid at all. that therehink is are very intelligent, well-meaning people who can look at a set of facts, the same set of facts, and draw different conclusions. my workplace happens to be a rather odd workplace, the hundreds of the united states, but i have colleagues that roughly half of us agree on the book of issues. roughly half of us disagree. i think americans would be impressed that on an impersonal -- on interpersonal aces, members treat each other with respect. i think we need more of that as a country. i do worry that our enemies like ifin and others realize that

we have a great weakness to be exploited, it is our ability to be divided on political or ethnic lines. toeel real responsibility use my voice and my position to try to bring people together. host: last call for you. chad, baltimore, maryland. . democrat. caller: good morning. i have a couple things. one, i feel like a lot of these calls are very uneducated. it is almost like it is a therapy for them to call in and dig in and hear themselves heard on television as if it is a blessed. -- as if it is published. i feel like people don't take permission with a critical mind nowadays, and that is a problem. i do have a question about trump's position on the wall. i can't understand how this is

possible. this positive political -- [no audio] host: chad, are you still with us? if you want to comment. guest: i think he was about to say that he couldn't understand how this is politically to his benefit. i don't understand it either, and polls are showing that it isn't. all the evidence is president trump believes that this political fight is to his benefit. as i mentioned before my he said he'd be proud to shut down the government. he absolutely owns this. he's gotten what he wanted. he now goes down in history as the president of the longest government shutdown in american history. i think it is not only a mistake for 800,000 plus government workers, not to mention all of the other contractors. i think it is a great mistake for him politically.

he's not exactly in the business of taking my political advice. boyle, democrat from pennsylvania, number of the ways and means committee, always appreciate your time. up next we will talk about a very busy day at the supreme court. we will be joined by reuters correspondent lawrence hurley. we will be right back. ♪ >> the legend grew up that he was this bad kid running amok on the waterfront of baltimore. he never lived on the waterfront of baltimore. so i think that he internalized. we don't want to do too much psychobabble, but i think he internalized the idea that he because why else would neither of his parents have wanted him? a,"uncer: sunday on "q and

author jane levy on the life of legendary baseball player babe ruth. >> what is the called shot? >> 1932 world series. babe ruth is into this back and forth with the picture for the chicago cubs. he isomes a legend that standing at home plate, and the cubs in their dugout are yelling at him. the yankees are yelling back at the cubs. he raises one finger for one strike, for two strikes, and then he points out -- allegedly -- out to the bleachers in the grandstands, pointing and allegedly saying i am -- allegedly saying that is where i am going to the next one. announcer: sunday on c-span's "q and a." announcer: live centauri third, super bowl's -- february 3, super bowl sunday, our guest on

,ooktv, author of many books including a people's history of sports in the united states, "game over: how politics has turned the sports world upside down," and "jim brown: last man standing." >> we need to reclaim sports. we need to take sports back. if we are going to do so, we need to know our history. that is our greatest ammunition in this fight. we need to know our history of the athletes come of the sportswriters, and the fans who have stood up to the machine, if for no other reason than knowing this history allows us to look at the world and see that struggle can affect every aspect of life in this system, even the swoosh-adorned ivory tower known as sports. host: join our conversation -- announcer: join our conversation live, sunday, february 3, at noon eastern on "in-depth" on

c-span2. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: it was a busy day at the supreme court yesterday, both are what the court did and did not do. lawrence hurley is the reuters court reporter, joining us to discuss. why was this such a busy day for the supreme court? guest: it was basically because a bunch of different appeals that have been pending at the court, and putting several high-profile cases brought by the trump administration, had piled up over the last few weeks. for court has delayed a bit on acting on them. every week they don't act on something, they get more they have to act on. they actually still haven't resolved all of them. there are still some big cases pending. sometimes even the court's in action means something. host: does the soul of the court calendar for the rest of the year?

is there any chance anything else can get added, or does everything get bumped to 2020? guest: we are pretty much done with the calendar arguments for this term, except for the fight over the trumpet ministration effort to add a citizenship question to the 2020 -- the trump administration effort to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. they filed an emergency appeal of sorts asking the court to add that. host: when will the court decide on whether to act on that or take it up? guest: that's a little unclear so far. they would need to act quickly because the census forms have to be printed in june, so they've got to issue a quick decision if they are going to do that. host: let's run through some of reuters' other headlines from yesterday. this one coming out of the court, "trump transgender troop limits can take affect,

according to the supreme court." explain the back story in what they decided yesterday. guest: basically another appeal from the trump administration challenging lower court rulings that have blocked trump's decision to restrict transgender military people from serving. the court actually refused to hear the case, but at the same time they granted an emergency application filed by the administration which allowed the restrictions to go into effect while the case is continued in lower courts. it basically means the policy goes into effect. host: come back to refusing to hear the case. the trump administration wanted this to go directly to the supreme court as opposed to through the system. why? guest: this is something the administration has done and quite a few cases, trying to leapfrog the appeals courts to get directly to the supreme court. for their reasoning, they are saying it needs to be decided by

the supreme court quickly. people may be a bit more cynical about their motives, which is that the supreme court has a conservative majority and may the more synthetic to their be mores -- may sympathetic to their arguments than the appeals courts. what does jim mattis's departure from the defense department mean for this case? guest: this was announced by president trump in a tweet that apparently was not expected anywhere outside the white house. the pentagon was a little blindsided by this. but essentially, former defense -- the formerp defense secretary ended up issuing his own version of that policy, which is what catapulted later on, and it got blocked by the courts. so mattis was broadly supportive of that effort. host: lawrence hurley with

reuters, the supreme court correspondent, with us until the bottom of the hour to talk about these cases. . give us a call. (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 four republicans, (202) 748-8002 for independents. the supreme court is to your the biggest gun rights case since 2010. what is this about? guest: it is about a new york city restriction on legal gun owners transporting their guns outside of the city to ranges or other places. in the scope of that, not necessarily the biggest case. but what is interesting is the supreme court has been refusing to hear gun cases are about the last decade. this decision comes right after justice kavanagh got confirmed. a new conservative majority with him and justice gorsuch, who

president trump also appointed. so that may indicate a new willingness on these conservative court to take up some gun cases and perhaps push the gun rights agenda more than has been done in the last decade. host: beyond the timing of this, are there other tea leaves to be read here i had of the arguments? when will the arguments be? guest: we probably won't get a ruling until 2020, but there's all kinds of gun related issues not been resolved by the supreme court since they decided in 2008, for the first time, that the second amendment meant there was an individual right to bear arms outside the home. they haven't decided how far that right extends. this case isn't going to decide that, but it could set become tone for future cases in the next few years. host: the cap supreme court making news yesterday for both its action and interaction. this headline from you from

reuters, "supreme court again dreamers appeal." guest: again, the trump administration is trying to get directly to the supreme court to challenge rulings that stop trump from resending the daca program that protects dreamers from deportation, introduced by president obama. the court has not acted on the appeal. as we were discussing earlier, the court needed to act on that case if it was going to hear it this term in the last few days, and they haven't done. so it looks like that case is either just not going to be acted on for a while because the court is not going to be deciding when to hear new cases for another month or so. , theyf they do take it wouldn't decided to connect term, so daca looks like --

decide until next term, so daca looks like it is going to stay on the books for a while. that as atrump citing reason not to put daca into play in the shutdown deal, this could reopen that. host: if you have questions on some of the cases we've talked about already, phone lines for democrats, republicans, and independents as usual. doug is up first in dayton, ohio. go ahead. doug, are you with us? caller: yes, hello. good morning, c-span. i just got a question for you. 1974, ok, the vietnam aterans of america filed civil suit against the united states government, and i would love to know what happened to that court case that was

supposed to be heard in the supreme court concerning the 1970 more -- the 19th of before vietnam veterans readjustment act -- the 1974 vietnam veterans readjustment act. host: how is your knowledge of 1970's cases? guest: a little before my time. host: jim is next in texas, a republican. go ahead. caller: yes, i am retired air force. i don't think the military needs to be a test tube. we are into things that normal jobs are not. conflicts, we have enough to worry about when you go on the front line. i support what trump is doing. how do you feel about this? host: lawrence hurley, do you want to talk about the reaction

to the transgender decision yesterday? rights,bviously the gay transgender rights groups are very upset about this. they were fully supportive of the obama administration efforts to allow transgender people to serve openly. it is likely to be an issue that is going to continue to be debated over the next few years. host: who are the plaintiffs in this case? defenseming the trump department is the plaintiff. guest: there are a variety of transgender people who already are serving or want to serve. host: in terms of when they filed this, did they just come together and decide to file together? is there a group representing them? guest: there's a whole variety of different lawsuits being filed by different civil rights groups around the country.

the cases the court acted on yesterday were two different cases. a previous appeals court ruled in favor of the trump administration as well. there's a lot of moving parts in these cases. host: let's chat about some of the reaction on capitol hill. i want to show some of the tweets. a democrat in the house from california saying "the idea that the transgender military band is necessary to place department of defense in the strongest position to defend the other states is completely false. the trump administration is engaging entrance gender discrimination, plain and simple." tammy duckworth saying, "when i was bleeding to death in my blackhawk helicopter on a dusty field in a rock, i didn't care if the troops risking their lives to save me work gay, straight, transgender, black, white, male, or female.

all that mattered was that they didn't leave me behind." guest: the democrats are quite critical of the trump administration's approach on this, partly because the original announcement was made by president trump in a tweet that did not appear to be backed the pentagon's analysis of the situation, which is some big we seen in other announcements by the president come over the administration is forced to go back and do the policymaking after the policy has been announced. host: about 10 minutes left with lawrence hurley of reuters. if you have any questions, now would be a good time to call. (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8002 for independents. beretta is an independent in georgia -- loretta is an independent in georgia. good morning. caller: good morning. i have actually a solution to

the immigration problem, and it's not being discussed. i think that if employers were held responsible when it comes coming into the country illegally, that's all the problem. if jobs are not available, people will not come into the country. this is not the discussed by democrats, republicans, or the media, and it seems like it would resolve the problem. thank you for allowing me to offer my -- host: stick around for our next segment of "washington journal." we will talk about the government shutdown, day 33. lawrence hurley on the supreme court's side and the role they could play here. you talked about the decision not to take up daca. i wonder how much that was influenced by president trump making an offer over the weekend that included some daca protections for a limited amount

of time. is this the supreme court saying this is something for the executive and legislative branches to work out? is that part of the reason they are staying out of this discussion, at least for now? guest: we don't know what the internal deliberations are, but it doesn't stop us speculating about it. i think there may be a sense that some of the justices on the court do not want to be in the business of deciding political questions that could be resolved if the senate and the house and the president can figure something out. these negotiations over the dreamer immigrants have been going back and forth over the last year. in fact, there was a previous offer to resolve it. all of the cases that the trump administration is trying to get to the court quickly, there is maybe also a sense among some of the justices , maybe including the chief justice, that they don't want it to look like they are the rubberstamp for the trump administration. they don't want to just take up every case they bring and ruled

in favor of the trump administration. instead, the trump administration is winning some of what it once as it did with se, but inender ca other cases is is not getting what it wants. host: in north carolina, sophia is a republican. caller: good morning. what is the supreme court position on getting everything for free to immigrants and people that have no right to be in the country? going through an immigration process is a long and expensive process, but why do we feel like we want to solve the problems for all the countries instead of taking care of what we have here? kids, peopleter that don't have a place to live. we should be focused on our people instead of absorbing other countries' problems. host: lawrence hurley on how

much the supreme court has wade into -- has weighed into the debate in this country. guest: whether the supreme court can weigh in, to what extent constitutional rights apply to immigrants, can become located -- can become located. -- can be complicated. there's a legal fight on whether people on the other side of the border who gets shot by border patrol agents, whether they have grounds to sue under the u.s. constitution for violation of their civil rights even though they weren't in the u.s. at the time of the incident. the person who shot at them was. host: what is the status of that? guest: there's a couple of cases headed towards the supreme court. the supreme court actually did take up this issue a couple of years ago and ended up sort of not deciding the question, which

they do from time to time. there's two cases that are likely to get into that issue in next couple of years. orders released yesterday were the result of a meeting of the justices late last week, correct? guest: they met on friday. they have a private meeting where they discuss what cases they are going to take up, and vote on which they are going to ur of thewhich fo nine need to vote on to take up. host: was justice ginsburg in attendance? guest: no. justice ginsburg is currently recovering from surgery for lung cancer. she is working from home, so we were told she was participating in the vote. she actually was one of the four liberal justices who all dissented over the decision to allow the transgender man -- transgender ban to go into

effect. host: from "the washington times," "supreme court declines a coach who was let go for preying on the field after games." can you walk us through what this case was and what the supreme court decided? guest: this was one where they declined to hear this case, which means the lower court ruling remains in place. basically this high school coach was let go from his job for leading prayers on the field after games, which i think included some of the players and maybe family members and other people involved, and he had a free-speech claim, although it has a sort of religious element to it as well. the issue before the court was actually a free-speech claim. the interesting thing about this, despite the court not hearing it, is the fact that some of the conservative justices issued a statement saying they agree with the court's decision not to hear

this case, but it is a little collocated procedurally. questions over whether the court should revisit some of its presidents that made it harder -- some of its precedents that made it harder for people to bring claims on the religious side of the first amendment. cited,uple of cases they and the employment context, they made it harder for people to bring these type of claims for unfair dismissal and so on. if the court was to go in that direction with a new conservative majority, that would be a big change in the law. host: a few minutes left with lawrence hurley of reuters. bill is in florida. good morning. caller: good morning, mr. hurley. i want you to give the pros and and itscitizens united influence or corruption on our election system. host: that might be longer than

a half-hour segment. if you want to remind viewers what citizen united was. guest: it was the ninth anniversary of that ruling on monday. the supreme court had a big campaign finance case where the supreme court opens the doors to increase independent spending in elections i corporations, unions, and indirectly led to the creation of super pac's, which are now a big feature of the election landscape. obviously much criticized at the time it came out. it led to a confrontation of atts between president obama the state of the union address, between him and the court directly, because he called it out with the justices there, and justice alito could be seen shaking his head. caller: good morning, mr.

hurley. i just wanted to follow-up with you on a question asked by a vietnam veteran just a few calls back. surely you could give the man a better answer than just that was before my time. can you explain to him how to find out about that case? you know, he deserves a little bit better than its before my time. thank you for taking my call. host: mr. hurley. guest: well, i would say that there's a good website called oyez.org, which has a good rundown of the supreme court rulings from over the years. i wasn't born at that time, so i'm not too familiar with it. host: what is scotus blog? guest: a go to site for supreme court docs, which has all the information on the court's current cases, papers and

analysis of the rulings and arguments, and so on. host: and reuters.com is the place you can go for all of lawrence hurley's work covering the supreme court. if you went this morning, you would see this headline from another case yesterday. "supreme court less mystery company file appeal under seal." explain why there is so much interest in this appeal. guest: this is kind of intriguing, almost because of what we don't know. it is a completely sealed case. it came out of the court in d.c. , and there is a suggestion it is related to the bob mueller investigation into russia influence in the 2016 election. host: why make that connection? what makes you think it is related to that? guest: the fact that it is from , that itt it is sealed is a foreign government owned company that is contesting a grand jury subpoena, that when the appeals court heard oral

arguments, the entire floor of the court was sealed off. there were reporters running around trying to figure out who the lawyers were and so on, and it was very difficult to figure out what was going on. so a lot of intrigue. what we know about it is it is a foreign government owned company contesting a grand jury subpoena. we don't know what the company or country is, but the company lost and is facing daily penalties for refusing to comply, so it is trying to get the supreme court to hear its case. the supreme court allowed it to file under seal the appeal, and issued a redacted version, which we were able to look at, which had a lot of black marks on it which didn't tell us a whole lot. host: at one point -- at what point does the mystery get revealed? guest: i'm not sure. if the case moves along, ultimately, if there is an indictment or something like

that, i guess we would find out. host: gary in arizona, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, gary. caller: i feel like the courts ought to stay out of the -- let's put it this way. i was in the service in 1967 with gay people, and it really didn't matter. i mean, they are all fighting for our country. they all stand for our country. and that's what our country is all about is individualism. individual is an under our laws. the governmentke ought to get into it. host: thanks for the call from arizona. lawrence hurley, can you talk us through a little bit on the next

steps in this case and what viewers should be watching for? guest: the case now goes back down to the lower courts because the appeals courts have not actually decided yet on the transgender issue. one appeals court has, but the others haven't. it is likely to be a case that will come back to the supreme court, and eventually they will perhaps agreed to hear it and decide on the merits, whether it is a constitutional violation by refusing to allow transgender people to serve. host: it is day 33 of the government shutdown. we've been talking quite a bit about it this morning. can you talk about the impact on the court system to my the judicial branch? has there been any impact? guest: there will be. the u.s. judicial system has been releasing updates on how long they can function as normal. they keep extending the time i little bit. the most recent one came out

last night, were they said they could continue operating until normal -- as normal until the end of the month. after that, things would be to change -- would need to change. the courts can operate in some form because they have a constitutional requirement, especially in criminal cases where people have a right to a speedy trial and so on. but if you were going to court, if you are a juror or in a civil case, jurors, for example, may not get payment. the services of the courts might be curtailed, like cafeterias and so on. also a lot of civil trials will probably be put on hold. enough, this goes long could there be a to bring justices of the supreme court don't get paid? guest: i don't think so because the courts do have -- they are a branch ofdent, equal

government. the supreme court itself, because it is somewhat independent from the rest of the judicial system, has its own budget and so on. it doesn't actually need a whole lot of money to get by, and the courts also have some of their own means of raising money. host: off the top of your head, how much does a justice get paid? guest: more than i do. i think it varies. the chief justice gets a little more than the others. it is probably about the same as what a number of congress gets. 170,000?ch is about guest: i can't renumber the exact number. host: betsy is a democrat. good morning. caller: thank you. i was just wondering about, since the courts ruled that the immigrant children must be united that were separated from their parents on the border, why

or, i'me government -- not sure if they would be held in contempt for not putting them altogether. host: lawrence hurley on the decision in that case. guest: it is not the supreme court, so i am not super familiar with how that is playing out. host: what did we miss from yesterday? what other cases are you following that we should know about? guest: the court did actually have a ruling which virtually no one paid attention to. it is a good example of how a lot of work the court does that is newsworthy or has a major impact is movement on deciding which cases to hear. it is one of those things a lot of people don't understand. the supreme court doesn't have to hear cases. they decide which cases they hear. decide tone have to hear the case. host: so what was the case they

ruled on? guest: it was an intellectual property dispute between two companies, which basically no one except for the two companies really cared about. host: lawrence hurley cares about it in a race about it for reuters -- about it, writes about it for reuters. always appreciate your time. up next on "washington journal," the house is in later today, but we will have open phones until our program ends at 10:00 for publicans, democrats, and a dependents -- and independents. we will be right back. ♪ announcer: live february 3, super bowl sunday at noon eastern, author and sportswriter zirin, author of many books, including "game over: how

politics has turned the sports world upside down," and "jim brown: last man standing." >> i love sports, and that is why we need to fight for sports. we need to reclaim them. we need to take sports back. we need to know our history. that is our greatest ammunition in this fight. we need to know our history of the athletes, sports writers, and fans who have stood up to the machine, if for no other reason that knowing this history allows us to look at the world and see that struggle can affect every aspect of life in this -adornedeven the swoosh ivory tower known as sports. host: join with your calls, emails to my tweets, and facebook questions at noon "in-depth" on c-span2. legend grew up that he was this bad kid running amok on the waterfront of baltimore. he never lived on the waterfront

of baltimore. so i think he internalized. you don't want to do so much psychobabble, but i think he internalized the idea he must be bad. white house would neither of his parents have wanted him? announcer: sunday on "q&a," author and journalist jane levy on legendary baseball player babe ruth. >> was the called shot? -- what is the called shot? >> 1932 world series. babe ruth gets into this back and forth with the picture of the chicago cubs. it becomes a legend that he is standing at home plate, and the cubs in their dugout are yelling at them. the yankees are yelling back. he raises one finger for one strike, for two strikes, and then points out to the bleachers and grandstands, pointing, allegedly saying, that is where

i'm going to the next one. announcer: jane leavy sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: and about 25 minutes, the house is scheduled to come into session. more live gavel to gavel coverage when the house does commence, but until then it is open phones on "washington journal." any policy issues, the phone lines are yours to do it. democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. as we've noted throughout the program today, we are on the morning of day 33 of the partial government shutdown, although there may be some light at the end of the tunnel. we will see what happens tomorrow in the senate. the senate will hold competing boats on two -- competing votes on two bills that could end the sat down -- to end the shutdown.

here's how it is described in "the new york times." "it will be the first time the senate has stepped off the sidelines to try to end the months long shutdown, and we will see what happens tomorrow on day 34 of the government shutdown." your calls, open phones. carl is in louisiana on our line for democrats. good morning. carl, are you with us? caller: yes or. -- yes sir. like i was telling earlier, i am a democrat. then democrat all my life. my family is democratic from louisiana. but you know what? really, i don't know what they doing anymore. host: when you say they, you are talking about congress? caller: congress, democrat. they make me sick a little bit.

i don't know what's going on with them. host: why are you still in democrat? caller: i'm not anymore, not since the shutdown. and a lot of people ain't no more. it is the ridiculous they are trying to play politics. it is just crazy. host: what should democrats stand for, carl? caller: for the people. you know, and try to do right for the people. not play politics. host: how do you do that in this debate over the government shutdown, over border security? what should they be doing to be for the people? caller: well, the security you need it. the walls do help. everybody news it. democrats know that. they know it from the past. wi-fi something you know that's right -- why fight something you know that's right? do your job that you get money,

you get paid. do your job and quit this politics. host: in kentucky, lonnie is a republican. good morning. caller: no, sir. i just dialed the republican line because i couldn't get in there. i was a democrat, but i am independent now because i vote for the man it does his job. i was wondering why a white man, from my own experience, can't get federal help because of his color. they told me when i went up for disability 18 years ago, i've been fighting 18 years, and they told me i couldn't have it because i'm a white man over the age of 18, under the age of 65. i have no biological children. i can read and write and have a high school diploma, and i am not a paraplegic. i'm not blind. i can still talk. i still have the ability to speak. there's other

people out here that can have kids and be different races and things like that, and i'm not racist at all because i have a whole different races inside my family, including african-american. i have native american and everything else in my family. i'm just wondering why it was like that, and they told me if i was a woman i could have it, and i wonder why men are losing their rights compared to women and compared to everybody else. host: line, who is they -- lonnie, who is they? caller: the rest of america. host: when they say they told you --. caller: the ones coming over the wall, too. host: when you say they told you that, who is they? caller: everybody in america. the white man is losing his rights. host: this is j in barstow, california, an independent. good morning. caller: good morning.

i hope you are all having a wonderful day out there. i have a question for you. are you still there? host: yes, sir. caller: ok. have they ever recommended for all of the illegal aliens coming into america to -- like here in california, i see a lot of people walking the streets with these ankle bracelets, minor criminal offenders they've deemed still able to be out safely of society -- have they ever recommended tag and release? i think it might be something in the future. if you decide to go into the country, it is going to be a requirement. you have to put a band on. you will be monitored everywhere you go. it could be a safety thing for you because then they could find you. host: so jay, how do you do that

with people who come into this country illegally? o, i'm talking about all the illegals you are catching at the border. , those illegally getting past, that is why we need i.c.e. to hunt them down, i'm sorry to say. it is a horrible thing going on in the world. the world is basically overpopulated. i'm a legally blind veteran who's got ptsd, so i look at things western ugly about everything -- look at things questionably about everything. has it ever been brought up where they've said, ok, this is part of the deal -- i understand the people they do catch and hold and put through whatever for the 22 days before they ,elease them onto american soil i'm sure they are doing all sorts of tests and taking dna specimens on everybody and

pictures and photographs -- why not say, ok, until you are found to be of a good personal and humane character and we have time to check you out, we are going to put this on you. it is going to have three lights. we are taking you as a person of your word. host: got your point. this is david in michigan, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. like thehe callers gentleman from kentucky, it is not the democrats not doing their job. it was donald trump got elected primarily because he promised over and over and over again that mexico would pay for the wall. let him pay for the wall. it it succeeds in doing what he says it would do, he gets to pat himself on the back. personally i don't think it is going to stop what is going to happen, and we should not be saddled with the cost for something he promised we would not pay. thank you. host: brian is up next in

pennsylvania, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for c-span. i guess i am further back than i thought and missed representative boil. he kept saying the republicans had full control of the legislature. the last person that had full control of the legislature was president obama in his first two years, when he had a super majority in the senate that allowed him to pass things without any votes from the republicans. it hasn't existed since senator kennedy died. thatt find it strange representatives that should know .ow the legislature works host: this is kenneth in

florida, an independent. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: i'm doing well. since: i am just calling illegal immigration is the biggest hot button item as far as today and yesterday and probably in the future, i am everof questioning c-span since all this immigration thing been going on. normally whenever there's an issue going on, c-span will be right on top of it. i have noticed that a few caller s have called before and say why hasn't c-span brought in a representative or someone that will talk about why, is immigration is such a problem, why isn't anyone going after the people that hire the illegal immigrants?

but c-span seems to avoid that all the time instead of bringing on a representative -- like one time a german called from arkansas -- a gentleman called from arkansas. he said they have pig farms and chicken farms, and yet his senator, cotton i believe, are talking about illegal immigrants, but in their state, no one is bringing on those representatives and saying since illegal immigrants are so bad, what are you doing in your state to these people hiring these illegal immigrants? c-span never brings the month. host: i hear you, but i encourage you to keep watching c-span or go into our archives. we talked about the subject. i think i read member the caller you were talking about. we talked about e-verify and have spoken to numbers of congress about it. i promise it is a subject we are not shying away from. appreciate the call.

john is in herndon, virginia, a democrat. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i just want to say one thing. as an immigrant, i think what the people going to the borders are doing is completely out of it. they say we are running away from gangs and rape. gangs and rape doesn't qualify you for political asylum. it has to be more than that. they have a government. they have police officers. honduras has a government and police officers. coming here and jumping the borders doesn't qualify. i think that we need to make some rules that if you jump the border and they find out you crossed illegally, you're not qualified for political asylum unless you go to immigration and file the papers. host: what do you think would be

plea foring asylum someone who comes to this country? what should it be? caller: it should be a list of countries like if there is a war , we know there is a war going on in the country. let's say, for example, in syria. libya. countries that we know there is a massive problem. that's what we have to do. but if you come to this country and say i can't go back to my country because i'm worried about circumcised. my parents want to circumcise me so i qualify for political asylum. my husband eats me. this is not -- my husband beats me. this is not how we do it. allowingld you be ok syrian refugees into the country? caller: i think if they come to the border, we as americans are very grateful people.

but i think especially the guys crossing the border, it seems to me that people abusing the system, and that is why american people are so angry. beforebout 10 minutes the house is expected to come in at 10:00 a.m. the senate also expected to come in. members in town this week for votes. a story about senator joni ernst, republican from iowa, from "the des moines register was put this morning. years before -- register" this morning. years before their divorce, she was assaulted by him. marriage,ir 26 your mentally and

physically assaulted her. "gail has been very cruel. this has been an extremely painful journey." she announced in august that they were divorcing, and it was finalized this month. back to your calls. john in florida, a republican. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. we need to understand that this immigration is an economics issue. we keep talking about the things that we are offering to the immigrants, which is a wonderful thing, and it does keep our economy and schools full with teachers and all these other things. but it is also hurting our economy in the sense that the prices for rent and these kinds i'm trying tohat get to is we need government to act like it should and do things, do bills one at a time. i see mcconnell is going to

issue two bills tonight, one with the wall and one without. that is what they need to go back to send a bottling everything together. host: in terms of these omnibus spending bills, what is the biggest concern? that too many things get thrown in, or that it is keeping compromise from happening? caller: i think it is that too many things are put in. from analytics today, we can see where every dollar goes. ai is studying every process the government is doing now. in the future we will know where every dollar goes. but we are not knowing where everything goes right now because they are putting them into these huge bills that just keep hiding everything. but we are going to find it because the analytics other. the data is there now. we are going to find all that. why not just do it line by line? that way we can look at it and

say this is what we are going to offer, this is what they are going to do. roads need to be built, and hospitals and all these other things. but why don't we do it in a way we can all watch and measure? host: that is john in florida. this is cherie in iowa, and independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to make a couple of comments. i am on social security and disability. because of my income, i qualify for a supplement also. bem figuring i am going to $21 in the hole. i would have been better off not even receiving payment for my section eight. they just notified after it went down tremendously. this is never discussed. on do they expect us to live $700 and change? i used to be a republican.

, asll no longer be there this is, i feel, the president's fault. he's the one that ordered the shutdown. he's the one that needs to open it up. think you so much. host: before you go, you talked about being on section eight housing. how long have you been on that? caller: i have been disabled since i was 29, so maybe 15, 20 years. and of course it goes up every year. host: what is the job you do where you get the raise now impacting your section eight housing? caller: i haven't had a job. eight, just the section social security and retirement, plus i apply for a supplement in the state of iowa. that publication is bumping you out of some of the other benefits? caller: yes. i figure i am $23 in the hole

with what i am getting because the fees on the apartment will go up in my benefits have dropped, so it is quite a problem. i am wondering what is going to happen to hud. what is going to happen to section eight with this mess owing on? host: is there somewhere else you can turn? caller: i don't know where i would go. no is going to accept a voucher. if i can't have it here, i can't have it somewhere else. even though you can take your voucher with you, you can't get any more public housing. so where am i going to go? i am disabled to the point where i am homebound and a so i have a problem. i am not bad enough for a nursing home or assisted living. i can't afford that. no one is saying anything about what is going to happen to hud. do we need to start doing this now to get out of our apartments or homes?

what is going to happen to hud? what is the president doing? host: thanks for sharing your story. alicia is in south carolina, line for democrats. good morning. caller: hello? yes. schoolteacher, and i just wanted to make a comment. all of us, in some respect, are immigrants. i wanted to say that that wall is only a destruction -- a distraction. all of the killings and things have not been done by people crossing the border. if president trump was that concerned about immigrants, he would not have immigrants working in his facilities. his wife is an emigrant. his mother and father in law,

who was just granted a visa not too long ago. that is only a political ploy to take attention off of governing the country. controlledtraction by his friend putin to destroy our system of government. the mission is to divide and conquer. i found out from teaching the kids that diversity is good. everyone has something to contribute to america. host: how long did you teach for, alicia? years. almost 30 some i retired. host: what did you teach? caller: business. host: appreciate your call this morning. thomas is in alabama, republican. go ahead. caller: yes, i've got a solution to the border wall problem. donald trump, when he was

running for president, said he money.e money, a lot of he needs to take it with his seanes rush, laura, and and foxconn and some other millionaires and billionaires, and build their wall. he likes to have his name on top of everything. ,ut trump's wall on top of it flashing neon red signs, where people can see it from miles away, and they would be afraid to get within 10 feet of it. and if they did get around it, underwritten or over it, use them -- under it, use them as a border agent. host: just a minute or two before the house comes in. did want to make note about the latest on the state of the union, originally scheduled for january 29.

the white house forging ahead with the state of the union preparations despite no commitments from house speaker nancy pelosi to hold the annual address at the capitol. of course, normally takes place in the house chamber come a we would take you in just a minute or so. president trump is preparing two versions of his state of the union speech, one that could be delivered in washington, and one somewhere else in the country, depending on the circumstances, according to a white house official that spoke to "the washington post." meanwhile, they are preparing for an address inside the chamber on the 29th even though policy has the power to determine whether president trump kenzie so -- president trump can do so on tuesday. the speaker of the north carolina house said that trump called him to thank him for offering the chambers.