kaiser family foundation to talk about -- to discuss president trump's pledge to end the hiv/aids epidemic by 2030. [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] ♪ host: a majority of americans say gun laws should be stricter according to a recent pew research poll and house democrats are hoping to pass legislation that would beef up gun laws. do you support stricter gun rules? if you live in the eastern central part of the country, 202-748-8000. if you live in mountain, pacific areas, 202-748-8001. gun owners, special wine for you, 202-748-8002. you can -- special line for you this morning, 202-748-8002. you can also go to@or -- go to

@cspanwj or facebook.com/cspan. we will start with the hearing in the house judiciary committee. jerry nadler of new york opened it saying this. [video clip] >> gun violence impacts all of our communities. no place is immune from its reach including our homes, streets, schools, even places of worship. we must change our approach to combating gun violence. as challenging as this problem is, we have the ability to address it. what we lacked in recent years is the political will. we should remember the second amendment does not prevent the government from enacting legislation to prevent gun violence. --even justice scalia's -- in hisnowledged opinion for the court he wrote " like most, the rights secured by

the second amendment is not unlimited. congress has done almost nothing in recent years to address gun violence, citizens across the country have been organizing and demanding action. several states have strengthened their gun laws. i am disappointed that in his lengthy state of the union address, president trump did not see fit even to mention the need to protect our citizens against gun violence. as evident from the energy in the crowd of this room that the public is demanding national register -- legislation. host: house democrats touting this hearing as the first one in eight years saying republicans when they controlled the house didn't hold a hearing on gun violence. this is who lined up to hear the hearing. hey democratic congressman took a video of the folks lined up to get into the hearing room

yesterday. he said it consisted of folks for march for our lives and moms demand, those groups advocating for stricter gun laws. we turn to all of you for this conversation. let's hear from a republican on the committee, doug collins, who made the case against any new restriction. [video clip] >> i appreciate the efforts of those who want hra and many who signed on. they would not have prevented columbine, san bernardino, or other tragedies. we are far too comfortable offering bills that constrain law-abiding citizens without protecting them from the people who mean them harm. we are to conquer will talking learninggedy without the clearest lesson. we need to address the human factors. this mean acknowledging attempts to criminalize the second amendment do nothing to address these factors.

first acts in congress was to ask federal power why -- president obama who i federal power failed 30%. chicago prosecuted only 25 federal firearm crowns -- crimes in 2011 and solved 506 murders in 2012. if we are going to be in the business of writing laws to prevent violence, we should committed to enforcing the laws we already have. host: 59% of those surveyed said they would support stricter gun control. 76% of those were democrats, 22 percent republican and those that oppose this idea of new gun laws were 37%. 76% of them were republicans, 22% democrat. let's start with daniel in washington, d.c.. what do you think? more gun laws or less? caller: good morning.

i have been saying for quite a -- it says a well regulated militia, and organization of the people or tote and they have rights well regulated gun ownership. right inno individual the second amendment. can people read it? there is no individual right ever. the supreme court struck down the heller laws in the district and they are wrong. the supreme court has been wrong many times if the supreme court wasn't wrong, we would still have slavery. we come up with a delusion to support what we like to do like have automatic weapons. delusion -- called

manifest destiny. these are delusions. .here is no individual right ,ost: david in millersville maryland, who owns a gun. caller: good morning, america. good morning, c-span. i don't understand why good citizens are not allowed to have an sustain gun ownership in the long run. if you chip away those rights, it empowers criminals. you are always going to have guns on the black market and you eliminate the black market by having a police state. i was disappointed steve scalise distinguish his opinions on -- at the hearing

yesterday. there was a young lady who was a college student and she was raped giving her testimony and said i am allowed to be a gun owner now and it will never happen again and i encourage all men and women everywhere to be good citizens and arm themselves. i thought that was good for the country to hear. you are always going to have criminals who will be able to have guns. some people don't even trust to the police and yet they are going to call the police to help them when there is a criminal with a gun. -- steveve gillies scalise tweeted out i survived the shooting and it solidified my support. house today sherry democrats would not let me share my experience today. liberals try to silence -- there is a link to it on fox news' website. host: larry, also a gun owner.

caller: hello. host: you have got to turn down the tv, talk through the phone. caller: how about that? host: you are on the air, please go ahead. caller: yes, i am a gun owner. i have a carrier permit. i believe everybody that needs a gun needs to have a background check. they need to go to their local courthouse, have a background check run on them. that sells guns and you can buy guns and ammunition. if you don't have a carriers permit, you sit there and they run a background check over the telephone. that is not right. believe people have the right

to defend themselves and their home. host: on the background check aspect, you research says many gun proposals are politically divisive, but there are some which republicans and democrats agree. according to a fall 2018 survey, nine in 10 republicans and democrats say people with mental illness should be prevented from buying guns. nearly as many in both parties no-fly or federal watch lists should be barred from purchasing firearms. proposals bring up stark partisan risk. republicans are far more likely than democrats to favor allowing teachers and school officials to carry guns and allowing people to carry concealed weapons in more places. democrats are much more likely than republicans to favor banning assault style weapons and high-capacity magazines.

gun ownership affected americans abuse of gun policy. republicans who don't own guns are much more likely than gop gun owners to favor banning assault style weapons. among democrats, gun owners are more than twice as likely to favor expanded concealed carry. we want to hear from all of you on this topic. steve in new jersey. what do you think? caller: hi, how do you do? i want to talk about something different. people talk about gun control, but they don't talk about shooter control, the people doing the shooting. i was on the doj website, department of justice for the last year of obama and about 50% of homicides in the united bytes by a gun are committed african-americans or black .eople in new jersey, we have a

senator, cory booker, who was the former mayor of newark, one of the highest crime cities in new jersey. a homicide would occur in new arkk and cory booker -- new and cory booker would say i am getting tough on the nra and this and that and everything else. people like booker and obama, all they have to do is go out and say -- that is all i have to say, thank you. host: back to the coverage of the house judiciary, they went -- matt gaetzrs of florida argued building a wall would be more effective than background checks. [video clip] >> i am encouraged by legislation passed in florida that focus on red flag circumstances, mental health and

look at people that go through the jails and do everything we can to ensure when their time in incarceration is concluded, they don't go back to arsenals where they can do harm to themselves or others. as i review hr 8, it seems there is nothing in the bill that would have stopped many of the instances we have been discussing. if we are looking for solutions, we ought to allow state to do what florida did and analyze the impact on our mental health system, recognizing they are different across the 50 states. i hope we will not adopt this federalization of deprivation of constitutional rights and i think we will allow states to innovate and five -- find ways to keep communities safer. as we hear the stories and circumstances, i hope we do not forget the pain and anguish and sense of loss felt by those all over the country who have been the victims of violence at the hands of illegal aliens. hr 8 would not have stopped many

of the circumstances i raised, but a wall, a barrier on the southern border may have and that is what we are fighting for. >> the gentle man will suspend. is here at the -- as a guest of the committee and no matter what you think of what a member of the committee may say, you must not comment. host: that was yesterday's hearing. if you missed any part and you want to watch it, you can go to our website. these comments you saw from congressman matt gaetz caused one member of the audience, it was the father of a parkland shooting to stand up and he was removed from that hearing.

larry in maryland. caller: good morning. i am a gun owner and a member of the nra and the media is not telling the truth. in this legislation, they are going to send you to prison for five years if you do not turn over your weapon. -- if somebody is trying to break into your house, if you don't have a gun, you are dead. these people are making dumb stations -- statements. that is -- this is what nazis and communists like to do, they take your weapons. host: congas been gaetz was referring -- congressman gates was referring to hr 8.

doing nothing is not acceptable. urged congress to act on the issue of gun violence saying our streets and neighborhoods are truly drowning in the blood of our victims and the tears of their loved ones. february 14 will mark the anniversary of the marjorie stoneman douglas shooting in parkland, florida, which claimed 17 lives. several young gun control activists from that movement attended the hearing as we showed you yesterday. mike in oklahoma. nice to talk to you again. have is everynt i time they talk about sales on the internet, they have it wrong. you have to send that again to a licensed dealer and you will go to that dealer and fill out the receive thatork to

a gun. if you do not fill out the proper paperwork, you are denied purchase of the gun. that gun is sent back. you cannot buy a gun off the aternet unless you go through background check. i wish the politicians get up there and these facts will get it straight -- hi,: jerry in california, jerry. caller: gun deaths in japan last year were 2. the united states should learn .rom that -- tod a strong, serious stop the slaughter of people like this gunman in las vegas

that killed -- this is out of control. they have got to take it ng tously, quit cowtowi the nra. americans are divided over restricting gun ownership would lead to fewer mass shootings. debates have followed recent mass shootings, but americans are split over whether legal changes would lead to fewer of them. half of adults say there would be fewer mass shootings if it was harder for people to obtain similarally while a share say there would be no difference. -- americans are also split on a related question about the potential impact more americans owning guns would have on crime more broadly while 30% of adults say there would be -- 33% say

there would be no difference and 29% say there would be less crime. we are asking all of you to weigh in on this topic. matilda in maryland. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i wanted to mention a couple of things. i wish you all would play the part of that hearing afterwards where they asked one of the experts about how many of the mass shootings that have occurred over the passed few years were in fact committed by ," first of all to answer that nra topic. my other comment is on c-span a number of years ago there was a woman. i believe her name was carol bell and she wrote a book about the bill of rights and she talked about the purpose of the second amendment and the arguments they had at the time of the writing and what she said

was the point of the second amendment was -- first of all, there would be a standing army if resources were exhausted after the evolutionary war. the purposes were to put down any kind of external invasion. the second part was to put down internal uprisings. in opposition to what you see on facebook, the purpose of the second amendment was not for individuals to fight a to radical government. if the government wanted to be able to fight off the government after having shed blood and fortune, it was a brand-new country that was very unstable. that is not why they wrote it. there were internal uprisings that were put down. the other -- the other reason was to hunt down escaped slaves. the arguments over the second amendment in the writing had nothing to do with individual gun rights.

the arguments were about compelling people who have religious objections to participate in the militia as to whether or not to compel them to do that. i feel like our interpretation and peopleso twisted treat the subject as if it -- as if it is all or nothing and it is not. i appreciate your time. host: is this an issue you think about before you go vote? caller: absolutely great absolutely. i feel like the fact that there moneyun lobby that makes off of engendering fear of people and getting them to buy a product that is deadly win 60% of gun related deaths are suicide, i think it is blood money. i don't understand it. i don't understand it. thank you so much.

host: let's go to carl in spokane, washington, a gun owner. welcome to the conversation. caller: hello, how are you? in ar one, in order to be militia, you had to have your own weapon. in those days, you needed to protect yourself from indians, people who would rob you, and all of that stuff. also, old gun laws must be enforced. if we enforce old gun laws, must -- most of this stuff would be covered. thank you. host: moving on to james in fort worth, texas. caller: good morning and thanks for c-span. i am a veteran and a gun owner and i believe every gun should be registered. we register boats and cars. my final comment for people who

keep screaming how dangerous young black men and -- black men are, -- thanks for c-span. host: alberto in bakersfield, california. caller: good morning. got top laws on guns. if you get caught with a gun in mexico, you get two years in jail. the problem is not that rid of the problem is all these criminals have a gun and they are hurting other people -- the other people, they don't have a gun. i don't know -- in mexico, they have a fear of criminals because criminals have guns and the poor people and all these other people don't have any guns. they get killed every day in mexico, everywhere -- i was talking to my sister here today and they have three people killed in one city in the morning.

it doesn't make sense -- if people have guns, they have to protect themselves. i support the law that everybody and let thea gun people take care of the problems. host: the new york times reported in december there were 39,773 gun deaths in 2017 come up more than 1000 from the year before, nearly two thirds work suicide, it was the largest year total on record in the cdc's electronic database which goes back 50 years and reflects the shear number of lives lost. the rate of gun deaths increased slightly to 12 deaths for every 11.8 pereople up from 100,000 in 2016. ron in florida, he is a gun

owner as well. hi, ron. caller: good morning. thank you, greta. i am a gun owner. i am ex military, marine. i had a gun from my neighbor and i took it and registered it. that is because i am a respectable gun owner. the last few people have been right on. only respectable gun owners do what they are supposed to do. it is the ones that fall between the crack's the people -- cracks the people are trying to take care of. it isn't about the respectful gun owners, it's about the non-respectful gun owners that show it on -- sell it on the internet or the gun shows that need to be taken care of. i have a car, it can kill somebody. i have insurance on it. every gun should have insurance on it. if you want to go back to the

second amendment, one-shot, that's all these guns had in the 1700s, one shot. back then, we did not have an army and that is why they had to take and hurry up and get a militia together. that was to fight invaders. host: as a gun owner, you support background checks, you supported banning semi automatic rifles and high-capacity ones, sounds like, correct? caller: correct. in the military, when you use your weapon anywhere in the united states, you take it back to an armory, you do not take it back to your barracks, you check out ammunition, you take and use it up or you take it back and it is checked in. host: why do you think that is? caller: that is because you need to take and respect the weapon.

it is a weapon of mass destruction. it should be in capable hands. even in capable hands, they have to be taken and locked up at night, period. it has to be respected, greta. people have to take and get insurance on them, i think, and they must be registered. thank you for your time. host: we will go to anthony in that nylund. inler: good morning -- staten island. caller: good morning. this morning in new york, three people were shot with an illegal handgun. you cannot stop this. somebody has it in their head they are going to kill, they are going to do it. people ought to look for the happy -- at the happy land disco. he killed people with gasoline.

he went to jail. what are you supposed to do? stop everything? you cannot control what people are going to do. as for gun control control, gun control is useless. somebody has it in their head they are going to kill, they will do it, no matter what. in new york state we have the red flag where cops can take your gun. there is no judge or jury. the cops take your gun and you have to fight for your gun. once new york state takes your guns, you are never getting them back whether you are right or wrong. host: anthony's thoughts in staten island. yesterday we heard from a parkland shooting survivor. here is what she told the lawmakers. [video clip] >> i was in my fourth period holocaust history class and we

presenting our projects. when the gunman shot into the classroom, nicholas was in front of me. the bullets killed him. i matched his every movement and hid under his lifeless body. god toid there, i begged make it fast. when the shooter moved on, i rolled nicholas on top of me and placed his head on my arm. i called my mom and my dad to say what i thought would be my last goodbyes. i told them how much i loved them and my brothers. i will never forget nicholas who protected me and saved my life. the effect of the shooting did not end february 14. days later, the stress took such a toll on my mother that she experienced a miscarriage.

gun violence and thousands of lives every year. it's an epidemic that extends the yacht high-profile shootings. my family knew this long before parkland. shotars ago, my uncle was in the back and killed per he was 18 with his whole life ahead of him. i asked you give my generation a chance he never had. host: yesterday's hearing on capitol hill. if you missed this and want to watch parts, go to our website. let's hear from sidney in alexandria, louisiana. good morning to you. toldr: your first caller me to read the constitution. apparently he did not read the constitution. the constitution which you put up there says a well regulated militia, being necessary for a , the right of the armse to keep and bear

shall not be infringed on. it does not say the rights of the militia, it says the rights of the people. these people need to start reading the constitution before they quote it. there it is, you have it back up, the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. host: chris in wyoming. call.: i just wanted to wasn't that stop and search law in new york -- wasn't that shot down because it was unconstitutional? does anybody know that? host: i am not sure off the top of my head. your point being? caller: if that is unconstitutional, how can any of them -- any lawmaker say they have the right to seize your guns? the shooting in the school in

florida, there were so many balls dropped and it was horrid. the guy dropped the ball, the sheriff department dropped the ball, the police department drafted. those people tried to get help read they knew this guy was going to do it. it wasn't the guns, it wasn't gun owners, it was all the fbi, the bond enforcement around that area and that is what is sad about it. i am not naive to the facts of gun ownership or guns in the wrong hands. that was killed by my uncle when she was two years old. friend pull aear shotgun out of the backseat of my car. it was loaded, went off, it killed him. my son shot himself with a gun. none of these would have been prevented by taking people's

guns. all of them were accidents. all of them were the fault of somebody else not securing a weapon. that does not mean my guns ought to be taken away and it doesn't mean that i reject owning a gun. host: how do you make people more responsible or can you, with their guns? caller: you cannot make them more responsible. you cannot make them more responsible with their vehicle, for setting a fire, setting off a bomb, there is no way of making people more responsible. if they don't use a gun, they are going to do it another way. host: chris in wyoming with her thoughts. we will keep taking your phone calls this morning until the top of the hour on our conversation with all of you about whether or not you support stricter gun laws in this country.

in other news, catch you up what is happening in the newspapers, the washington post with the headline border deployment may cost $1 billion at the end of this year. trump said on tuesday he ordered 3750 infusion of active-duty troops to the border to prepare for a tremendous onslaught. the cost of this could come to $1 billion by the end of the fiscal year and goes onto say that figure is within the range of at least one past deployment. george w. bush deployed up to 6000 national guard troops during operation jumpstart at a billion.bout $1.2 the $1 billion price tag for the border deployment through the end of september is a small slice of $716 billion defense budget and a tiny expenditure compared with the amount of money the pentagon spent on other military missions.

in the 17 lawmakers, democrats, republicans, house and senate members negotiating right now trying to secure a deal on border security funding to avoid another government shutdown, the headline from the washington times is democrats signal openness to barriers along the border. the second government shutdown looms over this deal. nancy pelosi telling richard shelby that if they come to a bipartisan agreement, she would support it. in the paper this morning, new york times said the president's nafta deal faces headwinds in congress, not just from democrats. the republican pennsylvania senator said without significant changes, he would not support it. the agreement inhibits free-trade, citing weight requirements on automobile

manufacturing. democrats don't like -- and they say it does not include workplace protections and environmental protections as well. back to our conversation about gun control. let's go to john in massachusetts. all you have to do is rewrite the second amendment and bring it into the 21st century. get rid of the word militia. i am all for owning a gun, handgun, shotgun. i don't need a military weapon. rewrite the constitution. arguingearlier collars about the militia. bring it into the 21st century. host: kevin and chicago. what do you think? caller: good morning. journal ishington

the most important program on television and here is why. we get -- every morning we get people what the american supporting or not supporting an issue really sink. what i learned this morning is what i have always known in my 60, -- you had a collar that is really, really honest, it is the black people. if they weren't such criminals, we would not need guns. when we get rid of our guns, we will get rid of our guns -- when they get rid of their guns, we will get rid of our guns. it is fear, it is racism, it's a lot of things, but it is not about the constitution. the constitution is clear. a well regulated militia. 70% plus of americans support stricter gun control and yet i

am a legal on owner. if you live in rural america, we get it in cities. a cop cannot get to you, the marshals cannot get to you, protect your home and property. you don't walk around a city or a mall with a weapon trade we are not a third world country. if that is the america you want, you really don't belong here. host: kevin's thoughts in chicago. frank in maryland. onler: that guy who was just completeuy was a racist -- not the words i wanted to use. it to say that black people are the ones causing the majority of the violence. black people are the majority of people locked up in prisons disproportionately compared to white americans. on the whole issue of gun control and people who hide behind the second amendment, it

is absolutely appalling they do that and use our constitution in that way. when the constitution was written, it was written in the 18th century. we are in the 21st century for all those who did not realize that and they did not have rapidfire weapons and large capacity magazines in that time. why are we still abiding by this constitutional rule that is stating we are allowed to have any type of weapon and thinking that this is okay? that doesn't make sense at all. next time you get a racist like that on the phone, can you immediately kick them off? all that does is feed into the hate and negativity going on in our world. we don't need any of that. host: frank in woodstock, maryland. bill in connecticut, a gun owner. hi, bill. caller: i am for some or the sensible gun laws we have.

let me tell you about connecticut, what they have. if you want to buy a box of license and need a you have to go to nra or some kind of school, it costs $400 and you have to get a permit from the town. i want to give an example with this. let's say a poor woman and her child have a restraining order on a crazy boyfriend or husband or whatever and he is going to get at them no matter what, no matter how many restraining orders they put on. this woman has got to wait two months to get a gun. sad story, but she is gone. to the guy before, the people that commit the crimes are the ones in jail. thank you. hearing,terday at the

a previous caller mentioned this ohnent where congressman c asks about who is using guns to kill people. [video clip] >> you are familiar with most of the mass killings in this country in recent history. there are some noted here, thousand oaks, 12 people killed. a 17 at parkland, 25 in sutherland springs, texas, mandalay bay, 58. orlando, 49. those people came across our southern border and committed those crimes? ofto my knowledge, none those. >> none of those people were illegal aliens? was whenression illegal aliens got here, they went straight to a taco shop and

started shooting people. that doesn't happen? >> not that -- i am aware of. tweeted outpelosi before yesterday under republican control, the house did not hold a single hearing on gun violence prevention. murphy, senator from connecticut tweeting last week, america experienced five mass shootings in five days and it barely broke through the news cycle. we cannot stop working to fix our gun laws. firsteek will be the house hearing on reducing gun violence. what areas would you focus on to keep us safer in our communities and he kicks off the topics we have been talking about -- talking with this morning, background checks, restricting guns, et cetera. let's go to mary in south carolina. say they canted to

take all of our guns away from us. and aeads to tyranny takeover by the federal government, that does not get it. look at venezuela. at the poor people down there, if they had guns, maybe they could protect themselves and take them back. they are starving and don't have any food or medicine. they don't even have toilet paper. we don't want to live in that kind of country. host: do you think they can take back their country from their military? caller: if they could turn the military, if the military did not want to kill people since the military is made up of common people, possibly, they could. host: speaking of the front page of the wall street -- speaking of that, the front page of the washington journal has this image, no access. the in a military blocked a bridge on the border with columbia ahead of an expected

opposition leader vowed to deliver. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have three brief points. the first one is the constitution is the constitution. if we want to amend the constitution, there is a process in place for that. we do not get to simply ignore parts of it we don't like or that we and our self-proclaimed superiority sink don't -- think don't apply anymore. we have to amend the constitution through the legal process. it's important we remain faithful to the constitution because it protects all of our rights and guarantees our liberty against possible government tyranny. is i feel sorry

for the people who are victims of mass shootings, but to parade them in front of congressional committees and have these, for lack of a better word, cheap emotional appeals, that is no basis on which we should be deciding the validity of our rights under the constitution. we need to think about what we are doing in relation to our rights and protection and our liberty. my last point is we have an american left and democrat party and media who tell us on one hand that there is a right to get married. it does not exist in our constitution. they tell us there is a right to have an abortion. it does not exist in the constitution and yet when it comes to a right that actually is in the constitution, they tell us we should ignore it or it no longer applies.

at the bigger question i want everyone listening to ask themselves is if we simply act nor the second amendment and the right to keep and bear arms, what other rights will these totalitarian leftists deem no longer necessary and what will be -- will be -- will we be? asked to ignore next? the right to freedom of speech? the right to freedom of religion? words hurt people. why not have the government regulate speech? have a government dictate to the american people what we can and cannot say based on what the government deems is appropriate for us. this is the slippery slope we begin saying this right no longer applies and this doesn't really mean what it says. it is absurd, we have to stick to the constitution. thank you. host: richard in california. caller: that last guy is kind of

an extremist on the right. a first of all, the second amendment is kind of arcane since it was over 200 years ago when it was put into effect. all these people that are for guns think gun control means taking your gun away. commonsenses legislation of the type of weapon the average citizen should be able to have. it just like the military person said, any kind of automatic or semi automatic weapon that can be made into automatic is for mass killing. no average citizen needs a gun like that. you can have your 6 guns, your 45, your dear rifle, nobody is saying take your guns away. for somebody to parade people of mass shootings -- say parading people of mass shootings is some kind of emotional teaser, i pray

for that guy and his kids or wife or whoever. people say we take the guns away and we will be taken up -- taken over by the government. what about europe? what about all these countries that do not allow guns or in small capacities? they are not being overtaken. toe on, we just need to get what is going on and a lot of this is being said by the nra. they have russian money that went into the campaign that went to a bunch of republicans. it is shameful. guneed sensible legislation, registration, and the type of weapons. not take your guns away. host: richard's thoughts in california. we want to give you an update on the former congressman john dingell. 92 years old and according to his wife, who took his seat in

congress, his health has worsened and despite that, he wants to remain on twitter. he sent this tweet last night saying the lovely deborah is insisting i rest and stay off of here. after long negotiations, we worked out a deal where she will keep up with twitter for me while i dictate messages parade i want to thank you for your incredibly kind words and prayers, you are not done with me just yet. let's go to mike in atlanta, georgia, gun owner. caller: hey, greta. i only watch when you are on. you are my favorite host. i have to agree with everything the guy from west virginia said. i wish there was something like -- you know how when we get our drivers license, if the government can do something like a processe states for like that. one more quick thing is as a black american, i agree with the

one caller who said black males and guns, it is true. population, but our lack males are committing a lot of gun violence. this is true. that is all i have to say. about gundid a study violence and race. this, between 2008 and 2016, black men were more likely by gunash likely to die violence -- say --icle goes on to make up a large amount of gun deaths. found to be higher among white men than black men. researchers found white men had nine more firearm suicides per

100,000 people annually nationwide. 6 of the 10 states with the largest disparities were in the southern part of the country. steve and south carolina. steve owns a gun. welcome to the conversation. caller: thank you for c-span. most of your viewers do not appreciate that most of the things they think they know about the gun issue are in fact incorrect. they are part of a carefully orchestrated campaign of disinformation put out by the manhattan island media to mislead and miss conform us on the issue of citizen gun ownership and one of the biggest of these myths is the militia myth. when the constitution was ratified in 1791 and the first congress convened, the first thing they did was put together

a bill of individual rights, which was then debated up and down the lengths of the east coast by all the former 13 colonies for months and it was clearly understood that what was being debated was the listed rights of individuals. now the new york media wants us to believe that somehow the second amendment isn't just a clerical error that slipped in just a clerical error that slipped in there. it had nothing to do with individual rights, it was really about militias. this is absolutely unbelievable. host: i am going to leave it there. made your point. also want to share this headline, the president lashes out as democrats step up their oversight. there are panels investigating the president's finances, cabinet, and policies and adam schiff yesterday, the new chair

of the intelligence committee said they were opening a wide investigation into russia, the president yesterday told reporters that was harassment. schiff saids -- mr. i can understand why the idea of oversight terrifies the president. we are going to do our job and will not be distracted or intimidated by threats or attacks. in president weeding out response, now congressman adam schiff -- tweeting out now congas and adam schiff announces he will be looking at every aspect of my life, both financial and personal. never happened before. unlimited presidential harassment. the dems on the committee are going nuts. republicans never did this to president obama. i hear other committee heads will do the same thing, even

stealing people who work at the white house. a continuation of the witchhunt. presidential harassment should never be allowed to happen again. nancy pelosi said when the president in the state of the union talked about these investigations, she viewed that as a threat and you saw adam schiff say the same thing. let's go to joe in kansas. we are talking about whether or not all of you support stricter gun laws. what do you think? caller: i want to go back to the second amendment. so many people so far have gotten it totally wrong. the second amendment does not give you the right to bear arms, the second amendment upholds your right. the right to bear arms was there before the constitution was ratified. it was a god-given right to self protection. everyone in america has a god-given right to self

protection and no other man can tell another man how he can protect him or his family. thesecond amendment says right to bear ours. it doesn't say a right to bear arms. we have always had the god-given right to self protection. that is what the second amendment does, it just affirms your right to carry a gun. host: on twitter, mylan burke, i have been a gun enthusiast for 20 years for it support stricter gun laws, most notably, expanded background checks. bandsse restrictions and on certain type of gun -- clearly more laws are not the answer. the right to bear arms is an individual freedom in our constitution. anthony in minneapolis, what do you say? caller: i am kind of surprised. i listen to all these educated

people talking. we live in a country basically filled with hate every day talking about the most armed country in the world and we have people sitting around. i am african-american and veteran. the thing i have a problem with, these people say i need a gun to protect my home. these people have never been under fire when you have lead thrown at you. you don't know how you are going to react. have issues with people, they shoot at that person. white america has been shooting up everybody. you don't just shoot the person you are mad at, you go at everybody. we soast thing, why are stuck on the constitution that was written all those years ago? everything evolves, people. everything. --t: anthony in inapt

minneapolis. malcolm. caller: good morning. i lived in the philippines for eight years. i have seen firsthand -- when they get the second amendment right upside down. in the philippines, you have to prove to the government you have a need for a gun. in that case, only the wealthy and the powerful get guns and what it meet -- what it leads to is a loss of the first amendment. in the philippines, a lot of the dictator. your friend down the street might support this dictator who has shot over 12,000 people on -- in the back and it is on the news every night. every night at there is a new shooting by the police, new victims of the government shooting people. you you are in your home,

cannot talk about an issue without having to whisper it because you don't know if your neighbor might be coming up to the door and here you talk about something. not only do you lose your second amendment, you quickly have lost your first amendment right to even talk quietly in your own home about major issues. that is my point. host: malcolm in new hampshire. the president is speaking at the national prayer breakfast in about 30 minutes. this annual gathering -- about 8:45 a.m. eastern time. our coverage on c-span 2, c-span.org, or you can listen to his speech if you get the c-span radio app. you can download and listen along. we will take a break. when we come back, we will hear from representative rob woodall from georgia to talk about the

trump administration's legislative priorities and later, i presented of ro khanna of california will discuss u.s. foreign-policy and voting rights legislation. ♪ >> this sunday on american history tv, the treaty of versailles, the moving of a historic building and the 1960's. the 1960's. eastern, film, we will never turn back, about the violence and intimidation that civil rights leaders experience over registering to vote. >> lots of people in this county are scared to go and register our vote because they are afraid of being killed.

>> being killed by a state representative from mississippi for trying to vote. >> then at 6:00 on american artifacts, we will to were the -- we will tour the oldest synagogue in washington, d.c. which was moved to a soon to be built using them. -- museum. >> put this up and dedicated it on june 9. president grant attended the dedication. >> and at 8:00 on the presidency, a look back at the 1989 joint session of congress speech by george h.w. bush. >> one thing that is so striking about how the founding fathers look at america, they did not talk about themselves. .hey talked about posterity they talked about the future.

we must think in terms bigger than ourselves. >> at 9:00 p.m. eastern, margaret mcmillan on the treaty of versailles and its impact on world war ii. >> what you had was a whole this new small wars as state struggle to grab territory from their neighbors. said, the churchill war of the giants has ended and the war of the pygmies has started. >> on american history tv, on c-span3. >> "washington journal" continues. host: at our table this morning is representative rob woodall, a republican of georgia and transportation committee member. thank you for being here. let's start with infrastructure. the president called for legislation. what would you like to see? guest: we've got to fund infrastructure. we cannot borrow that money.

this is one of those things everyone in metro atlanta cares about, everyone in metro los angeles cares about. we have a funding string today that does not meet the needs of the american of the -- meet the needs of the american of the 21st century. when he could change the volume of the revenue stream and the method. cars are coming off the road as ridesharing services go on the road, so the occult miles traveled taxes seem like the future. the transportation committee has been one of the most bipartisan committees on capitol hill. we got a lot done with the obama administration and we will get a lot done with the trumpet administration. host: did a republican just call for a new tax? guest: changing the way the tax passes. if you want good roads in your community, you have to pay for the infrastructure to make that happen.

but today, we have the same gas tax we had in 1993 deal in the cars are getting twice the gas mileage they were getting. that is not a sustainable model for the future. i'm a big fan of user fees. taxes hit everybody whether they are involved in the benefits or not. who fees hit those folks use those resources. the local miles traveled tax takes those folks who use the roads and puts the burden of funding the roads on them. we all buy goods at walmart or t.j. maxx or home depot, so we are all using the roads to have those products shipped in. if the shippers are paying those fees, we are ultimately paying those fees as consumers. host: how would it work? guest: that is the challenge we are facing. we have pilot projects going on. when i fill out my vehicle registration form every year, georgia wants to know how many miles have i traveled, what is my odometer reading?

you could do a lump sum fee at the end of the year just like the accord registration. i had 10,000 miles last year, 22,000 miles this year, so i would pay a miles traveled tax on those 12,000 miles. you could do tracking as trucking companies do. they are tracking their drivers. you could pay that fee incrementally. right now, chairman fazio is talking about raising the gas tax in the short term. republican chairman talked about raising the gas tax in the short term as a part of a transition to a new 21st century funding scheme. host: let's listen to defazio, now the new chair of the infrastructure committee at the chamber of commerce this week. [video clip] >> there is a huge reluctance among many of my colleagues and you can help with this. they are afraid. they are scared. if we raise the federal gas tax,

i might lose my election. and therward a proposal chamber has been much more bold and hopefully we can go bold. price let's look at what do you think you could get away with? i came up with something called penny for progress. that is to index the existing andand diesel taxes obviously the escalating costs of investing in infrastructure, adjusting for construction cost inflation, and then cap it. i cap it at one and a half cents per gallon. i said raise your hand if you think that if it goes up one and a half cents you will lose your election. none of -- no one raises their hand but they still think it. senseswent bold to two -- two cents -- host: let's take a look at what

it is right now. per gallon of gasoline, 24.4 cents per gallon of diesel. what is the chairman saying? that is the pitch he is making to the chamber of commerce. on the diesel side, every andker, ups will come in say we are willing to pay more if we get more. what i need to see is the second half of chairman fazio speech where he answers the question for the american taxpayer, if i give you an additional dollar in texas, and i going to get an additional dollar of value in infrastructure, and today we are not in that proposition. we see the orange cones go up but never come down. we see something that should have taken a month to get done take a year. we have to get that conversation going. how do we streamline the permitting products -- process

and the info structure process. host: so you want that included in any proposal. guest: absolutely. folks don't mind playing -- paying for value they get. they just want to pay for value. if we can demonstrate we are going to get you a dollars worth of value, they don't mind paying for those roads, bridges, and resources. host: i wonder what our viewers have to say about that. i invite them to call and participate in this conversation. are you willing to pay more to see better infrastructure where you live? what is the timeline, do you think of getting legislation through the house, and you think it could be bipartisan, that this is something democrats and republicans come together on? guest: i expect the chairman will run the committee in the same way previous democrats and republicans have run it. every bill that moves through

has the signoff of the chairman and the ranking member, and the chairman and the ranking member of the subcommittee as well. . i hope it moves quickly obviously -- i hope it moves quickly. obviously congress is not off to a fall this start. there are those who believe the republican congress should have started with infrastructure. instead we started with health care and never got around with transportation. it will build relationships and trust among serious legislatures -- legislators. host: let's talk to marion in virginia, a democrat. caller: thank you for taking my call. i just finished talking to my accountant and my accountant told me that i am a middle-class , don't make a lot of money and i am going to be paying more taxes than i did in the last years. i am one of those middle-class people that apparently is one of the losers.

when i was one -- what i was going to ask you to do for your thatstructure spending is $1.5 trillion in tax cuts, $.83 of every dollar went to the rich. apparently i am paying for it because i'm getting much less back this year. why do we that for your infrastructure? just go ahead and get rid of that silly $1.5 trillion that we didn't take or i guess the middle class are going to take to give to the rich, a big tax break. i am sure i am not alone and a lot of people are going to feel like i am once they find out given,at money that was the $40 or $50 more to my paycheck, well now that only is that being taken away but even more. it really was a con job on the middle class. host: respond to that but also

what does this mean for selling an infrastructure built where you are saying trust the government, we are going to change the tax system? guest: it is a big ask. we promised the middle-class tax benefits across the country. i am hearing that from my constituents, but of course we changed the withholding tables. you talked about your tax burden in terms of what you are getting back because we withheld less from every check you got last year. it should be true that you get less back but your total tax bill should be less as well. to answer your question about the tax cuts from last year and the infrastructure bill from this year, the infrastructure today is a user fee. we can absolutely do what you have suggested and that disconnect, those who benefit who trained -- those who benefit from transportation and those who pay for transportation.

everyone feels like taxes are unfair, that they are paying too much. when we have a strict user fee system, where those who use pay, we take away those misunderstandings about where the burden falls. it would be a great mistake to leave the user fee system we have today. host: where would the burden fall? who would pay the most? guest: if you were a user of mass transit for example, you are paying a fee every single day to get on that bus or train. you are not going to be paying the tax directly as i am, commuting 45 miles in my car but that bus is still paying for diesel fuel. you are still paying a vehicle miles traveled tax. it is going to fall on us as consumers which is where every tax falls. there is no tax that somebody else pays. we all have to pay that as consumers. it would be proportional to how much we use the system. if you pay extra to live on top

of the metro line so you can commute to work, you might end up paying less in a transportation tax than somebody who drives on the highway. host: how our state's going to respond when they have their own gas taxes? guest: we have had a very positive response from our state. we are seeing states driving the debate on funding. since the gas tax has not changed since 1993, but we have had roads and bridges in need of repair since 1993, who do you think is picking up that additional burden? the answer is states and localities as the federal government has been doing less. they are very supportive of us finding some permanency to a funding stream that they can count on as a federal partner for a decade or two. our next next guest -- caller is a republican from new york. caller: i have a question about the gas tax and user fees of the

roads. i don't own a car because i am a disabled veteran. if i had to pay a user fee for public transportation, how come the amish do not pay user fees, they use the roads all the time. i see them go by all the time. these gas stations like to price gouge. i know one gas station that is like five cents cheaper than the one down the road. guest: what i love about gas stations, and your location in new york, you may not have as many street corners as i do in metro-north -- in metro atlanta. we have gas stations on every corner. there is no ability to price gouge.

it's him and lowers the price by a penny, everybody else is lowering the price by a penny. if you try and take you much money from me, i will drive a mile down the road and get a better deal. we do try and keep our energy prices competitive. you should be a beneficiary of a vehicle miles traveled tax. you are not leaving the house to get those goods and services as many of us are. today it is very easy to raise the diesel tax on business because voters don't feel it directly. if walmart is paying the tax, walmart prices go up but voters don't know it is because the diesel tax went up. by moving to a vehicle miles traveled tax, we can distribute it fairly among all consumers. folks like yourself who don't use a vehicle as often should be a beneficiary. host: one of you are getting everything shipped to your house? are you going to end up paying

that tech somehow? guest: absolutely. if i never raised the gasoline tax again but just raised the diesel tax by five dollars, then every amazon delivery is going to have that built into the price. every walmart store, every home depot store. they have to build it into the price. , ther than hide the tax transparency of a vehicle miles traveled tax is going to engender more trust between the american voter and the government that is trying to provide the infrastructure. host: we will go to new york, lee, a republican. caller: i was concerned because maybe i'm just pessimistic but it seems to me that when obama had the $800 billion infrastructure money that he said was -- if you were going to use federal money, could states use it as miscellaneous

, and alsoary spending at the same time, how do we know that the states will be using federal funds for what they are supposed to be using it for? i live in a rural community and i have to travel 60 miles to see a doctor. it is a 120 mile round-trip. gas tax, wouldn't that be punitive to me? guest: you raise a lot of important questions. 18 4 we already have that -- 18 point four cents per gallon gas tax you are already paying on your journey. if you are driving an older car and a young millennialist driving a toyota previous that is getting 60 miles to the gallon, you are paying more for your journey. that young person with the new car is paying less. that is the unfairness we are trying to solve nav local miles

traveled tax. if we are using the roads the same amount, we should be paying the same amount. you should not be disadvantaged just because you are driving an older car. as for states, what we found in states use dollars more efficiently than the federal government does. one example from georgia. transportation corridor through atlanta, we had a bridge fire that collapsed the bridge. i thought it was going to take a year to rebuild that bridge. you put out a contract that said that you get it done in eight weeks. they got it done in even less time -- that said that they could get it done in eight weeks. they got it done and even less time. they got a bonus for getting it done under time and under budget. do you know how many republicans complain to me about that bonus? zero, because it was the first time we had a federal construction project done under time and under budget.

voters will pay for performance. it is paying for non-performance makes everyone so suspicious of federal dollars. i can build a county road or state road for less than i can build a federal road because of regulatory burdens. pushing those dollars down to the state level should save you money. host: let's go to ohio, robert, independent. caller: hello. thank you for taking my call. as far as increasing the gas tax, i like the bank for your buck thing for the taxpayer but i am a big-time libertarian. i think the federal government should be a lot more limited than what it is. rather than increasing a gas tax, why doesn't the government just cut funding from other things? we gave $56 billion in foreign aid to other countries last year. we can't use some of that for infrastructure?

welfare programs cost federal government and taxpayers a ton of money. things like medicare and medicaid. medicaid i am not really against because it helps poor people but trying to get welfare programs and social security -- host: let's have the congressman jump in. isn't there money somewhere else? today the roberts point, we are not funding -- to robert's point, today we are not funding with the gas tax, we are borrowing from the general fund. that has long since run out and so as a libertarian, you appreciate the challenge. we tell people they are paying for what they are getting inroads but it is not true. we are borrowing that money to the tune of about $50 billion from our children and grandchildren. when we talk about raising a gas tanks, we are not talking about raising it to do more, we are raising it so that people are

actually paying for what they are getting instead of passing the bill on. watch the house floor today. we are to begin debate on a veterans bill. this bill passed last year unanimously in committee, in a mislead on the house -- unanimously on the house floor. it found a way to pay for veterans benefits. this is coming back to the floor today in a democratic house, providing the exact same benefits, but all the ways to pay for it have been taken away. instead we are going to end up either borrowing additional money or cutting other veterans benefits elsewhere. finding ways to pay for things is always the hardest thing on capitol hill. if you think about what is going to happen over the next two years, remember we had a unanimous agreement that mysteriously slipped away this year. your continued push to pay for what we are doing is absolutely

necessary and i hope you will not stop. host: doug is a republican in texas. you are on the air. i think the thought of increasing the gas tax is foolish. it should be predicated primarily on mileage driven because everybody is advocating going to electric and that would cover that and get rid of the antiquated gas tax and revert to something else. host: we will have to take that. guest: i think doug is right. that is going to be, you heard chairman defazio, the democratic leaders of the committee talking about increasing the gas tax. if you had gone on to the rest of his discussion or certainly to come to the republican policy papers, we are talking about abolishing the gas tax and moving to that vehicle miles traveled tax. that is the only fair way to fund the system as there are

more hybrid and electric vehicles on the roads. you can count on me and the entire texas delegation to keep pushing in the direction you are advocating. host: if you want to listen to more of what the chairman had to say, you can go to c-span.org and find his speech there. marty in indiana, democrat. caller: hello? host: hi. question or comment? here in indiana, we charge $15 per registration. i own five vehicles, no kids, no wife. i am the only one who can drive them. i would rather pay a per mile tax or per gallon tax than i would per vehicle. they are having me pay for the married people. same thing with property tax and school funds.

i would rather see them go to a gallon.r or a per i can't drive five vehicles at one time. host: let's have the congressman respond because our states going to do away with their revenue streams because you in washington past this new user fee? are they going to say we won't have to charge you to register your vehicles? guest: it is an open question about how states respond. i agree 100%. we would never support a federal law that mandated how your state handle those issues. states would be free to handle those issues how is best for the state. states piggybacked a state gas tax on top of the federal gas tax. milese moved to a vehicle traveled tax, it would not surprise me at all if states moved their system to our vehicle miles traveled tax. the goal would not be to dictate state behavior. it would be to lead by example.

host: omaha, nebraska, chris. independent caller. caller: i am trying to figure out why we have done absolutely nothing with high-speed rail or bullet trains. when i was in tokyo last year, thatems to me a no-brainer you take space along i-80 and run a huge high-speed rail. is it just a dollars thing or a lack of interest or what? rail is absolutely the most expensive way to build mass transit. it is the most glamorous, the most direct, if you can build a train from one location to another. look at things that are happening around the country. look at what is happening in california with their high-speed rail system. billions of dollars invested with nothing to show for it yet. cost overruns that would make us

all uncomfortable. look at what is going on in florida where they have a private rail line that has recently gone in. it was going to be high-speed when they created it. there is a wonderful demand for it. they created the path for it and every single's long -- single small town along the route wanted a stop. i can only put so many stops on a high-speed train before it becomes a slow speed train. in the northeast in court or where amtrak -- northeastern corridor, there is a lot of support for rail. in georgia, if i want to drive him atlanta to savannah, it takes four hours. if i want to take the train, it is going to take three days. where we don't have much rail already, there isto put that infrastructure in. florida has done the best job of that but states are struggling. host: our next caller is a

democrat. caller: i am in favor of increasing the gas tax because our highway infrastructure is necessary to our fundamental economy. second, i am opposed to the tax we spent last year on ethanol. we are forced to consume 15 billions of -- 15 billion gallons of ethanol which only moved our vehicles as far as 10 million gallons of gas. i would not mind so much if it was actually an environmental improvement although it did not decrease auto emissions because of growing -- the growing cost of corn and turning it into ethanol entails more environmental cost. worst yet, the policy is to go from 10% to 15% ethanol.

if you are really a free market -- have a chance to compete. engines thathanol are very efficient and could compete if they were given a chance. guest: i think they are absolutely right. the future is ethanol, it is an underdiscussed energy source. you know that republicans who opposed moving to an ethanol-based -- ethanol mandate 20 years ago are the same republicans who represent farm country where folks are making billions of dollars on corn production moving to ethanol. we changed the voting dynamic in that debate. it is very hard to unwind ethanol. i agree with you, it might have seemed like the best choice we had in the time we created that

mandate. ethanolnce has eclipsed and we have better choices going down the road. we don't have the votes to eliminate that mandate today. host: on our line for independents, jake from texas. caller: i am going to say -- good morning. say about our president and his legislative priorities is bad. and -- make am great united states, we reach a much more better country in the near future like what we can see in our economy right now. i want the american people to cooperate with their president because we can get everything through.

there is no benefit in division, thank you. guest: you have observed the toxicity in politics today. it was true with president trump and true with president obama. folks would call in and say i want you to support a bill, then they would find out president obama supported it and they would call back and say rob, you have to get off that bill. this is happening with president trump. we have to get past the idea that poking each other with sharp sticks is what makes america great. congress must lead but the president must put his or her .ignature he opened more doors that he closed during that state of the union speech. that is what we have been crying out for, those opportunities to

work together. tuesdaymore of those night than i had in the last two years. go, youfore we let you are proposing the civics learning act. what is it? guest: we have to talk about what makes america great. introduced with a democrat from florida. we are good friends on the rules committee. while we disagree a lot on individual public policies, we agree that there is something special about america. one of those things is that the bosses not live in the capital. the boss lives in the communities all across the country. we teach children with those obligations are, what those responsibilities are as a citizen. not just what your rights and privileges are, but what your duties are to your community, to your state, to your country.

we have american history classes but we don't have those responsibility classes. some states are doing it better than others and what we proposed are some pilot programs to make sure we are teaching america and -- american exceptionalism. we have opportunities here that nobody else has. there is still more that unites us than divides us. the day that we forget that is the day the sun begins to set on america. host: congressman rob woodall, a republican from georgia. thank you for the conversation. we are going to take a break. when we come back, we will speak with representative ro khanna about foreign policy and other issues before congress and later, we turn our attention to one of the themes from the state of the union address. jennifer kates of the kaiser family foundation talks about president trump's vowed to defeat hiv and aids by 2030 -- aids byefeat hiv and

2030. ♪ >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies and today, we continue to bring you until -- unfiltered coverage of house, thehe white supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. >> it seemed to be happening just about every week that somebody, either a famous person or an ordinary man on the street was getting subjected to social media condemnation.

they would find themselves in the middle of a shame tornado for some kind of misbehavior, either genuine or perceived and that these pylons -- pile-organs were much bigger than they had ever -- pile-ons were much bigger than they had ever been. >> the managing editor of the washington examiner magazine experience online shaming. she is our guest sunday on q&a at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> it was a tough decision to write this essay because it brought back what was a very traumatic syrians in my own life, but the hinge event was a headline i read in the new york times about a man who had committed suicide in a parked car in the west village and not been found for seven days. , the worstellow moment of his life was when he threw a sandwich at a server at

mcdonald's are giving him the wrong order and she turned out to be pregnant and this funny little story make the local newspapers, but it was at the top of his google search for the rest of his life from then on after it happened in 2013. he could not get a job because anytime summit he googled his name, this story came up. any prospective employers thought i did not want to hire this guy, throwing sandwiches at pregnant servers. >> online shaming, sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. >> "washington journal" continues. host: back at our table this morning, congressman ro khanna, democrat of california, serves on the armed services and oversight committee. you had a meeting about hr one. remind our viewers what this legislation is. guest: hr one is the democrats reform package which has some

basic things. it says every person in the executive branch should have basic ethics. you should not be able to work for the president and then go work for a lobbyist. we need basic campaign-finance reform to overturn citizens united and make sure people who are giving small dollar contributions get a match so that small dollars fund campaigns as opposed to large special interests. we need to have same-day voter registration and have an election holiday and improve voting registration and voting rights. it is a package to strengthen our democracy. what we learned is that many experts thought that these were needed reforms. some of them were executive orders that previous presidents had but we wanted to make them into statute so no president has the discretion to not follow them. host: let's take one of those issues. during yesterday's hearing, a congressman from georgia had this to say about automatic voter registration.

[video clip] , when ananeously illegal alien fails to decline, fails to recognize that they are here illegally and ineligible to vote, despite the ineligibility, they cannot be prosecuted. this bill is just going to make it extremely difficult to maintain accurate voting records. it is going to open a floodgate for fraud. what we have here is a proposal that will lead to more illegal aliens registering to vote, making it virtually impossible to prosecute them for doing so and making it difficult for states to clean up their voter lists. in process what that does to the american citizen, it waters down the power of their vote by allowing illegals to do so. it makes those who are eligible,

their vote to have less impact. host: congressman? guest: i disagree with that. it is pure assertion. there is nothing to prove or suggest that having automatic voter registration leads to more undocumented folks registering. what it does is it allows more low income americans, people who don't come from privileged to participate and register. there is no data. it is a blanket assertion that is false. host: what else did you hear from republicans yesterday in the hearing? they made several arguments against this legislation. guest: one of the arguments was that this violates the first amendment. there was a professor who said that donors have a moderating influence on our democracy. i was on the committee and i read a quote about who first proposed public financing. it was theodore roosevelt in 1907. i said your view is that donors have a moderating influence,

that is not my view. my view is we can trust the american public. there is a real difference of opinion on the role of elites. some people feel that those who have had economic success deserve a larger say in our democracy. i fully reject that. we need to give every citizen an equal say in our democracy. host: what changes would voters see if this legislation passes the house, passes the senate and the president signs it? guest: there would be confidence of the people regulating industries are not going to work for those industries. right now you have read all the doors. the guy regulating chemicals is coming from the chemical industry. people regulating pharmaceuticals are coming from the pharmaceutical industry. people working for the fcc are coming from telecom.

second, it would get rid of or diminish the role of special interest money. i say get rid of it on both sides. i don't want billionaires on the democratic side. i don't want them on the republican side. for those who complain about george soros or liberal funding, they should be for this bill. this bill says anyone who matters is a voter, not billionaires. host: how would you stop that money? guest: if you overturn citizens united, that would do it. thatlegislation would do and provide an alternative path which is empowering small dollar donors. there is a program which says every voter should be a donor. give every voter $50 that they can spend on elections and that would dwarf all the special interest money. sat -- seattle has tried it and it worked. boston is thinking about it. voters should have an equal say in this country, not people who

are pouring millions of all -- millions of dollars. host: why do you have to give money in the first lace? guest: campaigns cost money -- first place? guest: campaigns cost money. the question is, how are you funding that? that money should come from ordinary citizens giving $50 or $100. a lot of the people who voted for trump should before it. the big-money candidates like jeb bush who went around raising super pac money did not win. i am for grassroots fundraising whether it is bernie sanders or whoever and getting rid of the donor class. host: if you missed yesterday's hearing, c-span covered it. you can go to our website and find it there. we want our viewers to call in and ask the congressman questions and give us your concerns if you have any over the legislation that he is talking about. republicans, (202)-748-8001.

democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. you have been in congress for two terms. you have a few freshmen on this committee, names that people know. cortez, eliana tlaib.y, rashida guest: you got them all. host: i am wondering what you thought of their line of questioning and also tell our viewers who were those witnesses? guest: the questions they asked were terrific. how does andrea cortes had a line of questioning where she played a game and said imagine if i was a bad guy and what that would mean for the election system. one of the things these freshmen are doing is demythologizing

congress. we often speaking congress. they make politics fun and interest -- we often speak in jargon. they had politics fun and interesting. they speak in language that old people and millennials can understand. service, to make politics more relatable and accessible. the people who were testifying, one is from common cause, an organization devoted to campaign-finance reform. there were a couple professors and academics who studied the first amendment and issues of campaign-finance. there was someone from ethics who served previously in the obama administration on ethics issues. a great group of panelists. host: let's hear from callers. our first guest from montreal, canada, republican. caller: good morning. last year, house resolution 1071, 70 5% of democrats did not

vote for it which says a ballot -- doesn't that mean that 75% of democrats in the house support illegal immigrants voting in american elections? guest: i don't think so. that was a last-minute partisan resolution introduced by kevin mccarthy three weeks before the election. i certainly don't support the people who are undocumented voting in our federal elections and many folks on the democratic side don't. we did not want to both -- to politicize the issue and that was a blatant attempt by the republicans to politicize the issue. it is not a political issue. people who should vote our citizens. host: tennessee, democrat. caller: hello. this money in politics, i was watching free speech tv and a guy came on and evidently the

trouble with these people giving all this money is a big deal but the guy's proposition was the supreme court has pretty much backed up congress's ability to tax. visibility was to start taxing -- his ability was to start taxing certain large donations, over a certain amount at like 99%. that way they can donate all they want but they get taxed real heavily on it. guest: that is an intriguing idea. it may be constitutional to put a tax on large contributions. i don't think it would be a sufficient deterrent because some of these billionaires who put in money, even if you tax it at 100%, they stand to gain so legislation, the real

small donorsmpower to overwhelm special interests. this is something that nobody -- our founders would never have imagined we would have billionaires with this kind of influence in our democracy. host: -- in maine, independent. caller: how are you doing? first of all, i did vote for president trump but i could get behind laws and legislation that takes big money out of politics. 1.i want to make is there is a big difference between big money , apolitics and a group lobbying group, the only lobbying group set up for the citizens by the citizens. when you demonize the nra, you are demonizing grandparents and sheriffs and law-abiding citizens enrolled -- citizens in rural areas.

i am not a member of the nra, workers, teachers, police officers, it is people paying membership dues to have some influence in congress and we have that right and that is basically the point i wanted to make. we can't keep demonizing each other. guest: i'm glad to hear that you agree with getting big money out of politics. that is not a democratic position. theodore roosevelt was the first reformer who talked about getting big money out. in terms of demonization, i don't think anybody should be demonizing any group, but we do need commonsense gun safety laws. i had a town hall in my district with the coach of the warriors and one of the parkland kids talking about the need for background checks in the needs for getting assault weapons off of our street and there was someone in my district from the nra who got up and said i have a

daughter who is in school and i care about common sense gun safety. we need to have a conversation with civility for people who are law-abiding gun owners about what measures we can take to keep this country safe and listen to some of those parkland kids who say they should not be a political issue. host: you can listen to both of those kinds of conversations. we have them earlier on the washington journal but we also cover the house judiciary committee yesterday where they heard from a variety of people including parkland shooting survivors. go to our website, c-span.org. phil in california, democrat. caller: good morning representative. i just wanted to ask a question about uninformed voters. i know the push is to get everybody out there and voting but i have a hard time wrapping howind around the logic of

it is beneficial to all of us if we have a lot of people voting that really don't know a lot of the issues and they just fill out the scantron and they are just picking bubbles. how does that benefit society? guest: as we have expanding -- expanded voting rights, people have stepped up to the challenge. the republic, people sit on the property owner should vote because they actually understand the issues. as we expanded franchise americans time and again, they have stepped up to their civic responsibility. as more people registered to vote, they will take it seriously. i agree, it has to start from kindergarten and elementary school. i remember in elementary school, we had field trips to independence hall and the liberty bell. we had civics classes about how pennsylvania and the country was founded. that needs to be ingrained in young people from a young age,

and how important the right to vote is and the responsibility. florida,o is in republican. caller: good morning. thank you for allowing regular citizens to have a voice in national politics. i promote the idea that republicans should start cooperating with democrats to move around president trump. it is called the moose-herder coalition in honor of teddy roosevelt. i want republicans who will cooperate with democrats to start calling themselves moose-herders. our agenda is infrastructure first. we're looking for mitt romney to be the leader of the republicans in the senate who are willing to cooperate and go around the incompetent, inconsistent, unfit president trump. we have to have congress override his veto's and go

around him. do you agree that democrats can start lobbying mitt romney to be a leader to organize some republicans enough to cooperate? host: did you come up with the idea and the name or did you hear that somewhere else? caller: i invented that name. i loved teddy roosevelt and what he stand for -- what he stands for. democrats can invent their own name. cooperate.ll to -- has an idea for an infrastructure bank that would help get the infrastructure. ideas from the benefit of c-span presenting her to the public and cooperation between republicans and let's push mitt romney to get those publicans organized in the senate.

i have several letters to the editor. host: let's take it. guest: let me know when you are running for congress. we can use more republicans like you in our body. the infrastructure bank is something alexander hamilton created and i share your admiration for teddy roosevelt. i am skeptical of mitt romney because when i was at the state of the union, i saw him seated next to ted cruz and i thought what are they thinking with donald trump speaking? they both ran for president. up and applauded on every line that the president said. i don't think he has shown independence. if he is willing to work on infrastructure for prescription drugs or high-speed internet and expanding broadband, then i would be willing to work with him. woodallvious guest, bob is someone who i have worked

with. there are those who want to get over the partisanship and get things done. host: matt in mechanicsville, maryland, independent. caller: this is a good topic, one of those classic campaign-finance reform topics. most of these proposals to do any kind of campaign-finance reform is just part of the two-party dominance system of our politics. the framers never commented ariously on the fact that in capitalist society, you would not be able to use your money where you want to use it. but they did comment on was that they never envisioned the party system the way they are. campaign finance reform, but the importance of respecting third and fourth parties into the debates and putting in term limits on some of these politicians. this idea that you can tell

somebody where they can spend their money, it is antithetical and it has been ruled on by the supreme court. guest: i agree with the point on more parties. i have always supported third parties or independents getting into elections. they make our country stronger and our democracy stronger and a don't think there is any reason to just have two parties and you may see the emergence of more parties. in terms of funding, i don't think our framers envisioned somebody who started a coffee business could run for president because they made a billion dollars. they thought it was a serious thing to be in public service. this idea of unlimited money coming in to distort the public process is not something our framers envisioned, it is not something teddy roosevelt envisioned. ronald reagan got elected president on taking public financing for federal elections.

it is only in the last 10 years that you have this explosion of special interest money distorting our democracy. i saw an interview with jimmy carter who said he would never get elected in the current system given the amount of money you had to raise. host: you are also in the armed services committee. the president went to the state -- toment to talk about talk with members of the global coalition to defeat isis. this is what he had to say. [video clip] >> when i took office, one of my very first acts was to go to the produce and ask them to and show me a plan to defeat isis. under the new approach we developed, we empowered our commanders in the field, enabled our partners on the ground and directed confronted isis's wicked ideology and we are doing that today, except in even

greater numbers. as a result, as i noted in my state of the union address yesterday, the united states military, our coalition partners and the syrian democratic forces have liberated virtually all the territory previously held by isis and syria and iraq -- in syria and iraq. it should be announced, probably sometime next week, we will have 100% of the caliphate. host: from your seat on the armed services committee, do you believe that that will be the situation and what the , a fullon times says battlefield defeat of the islamic state in days? guest: i wish the president were more honest. president obama started the strategy with isis, the same strategy president trump criticized on the campaign trail , he continued that strategy and

it is true that ice is now on the controls about 15 kilometers of territory and that it is time to bring our troops home. it is not that trump started something different. he continued the obama policy. when the president was boasting about the economy, on the campaign trail, he criticized those very numbers he is boasting about. in certain areas, he has had a continuation of obama policy. it has worked in syria and it is time to responsibly bring our troops home. host: we will hear from james in mississippi, independent. caller: good morning. guest: good morning. caller: if you don't mind, i have an anecdote that highlights the importance of your legislation and i also had a question in regards to your committee. first the anecdote. i am not going to name names but there was a certainly night show several years ago where there

was a very wealthy and artist on the program and the host of the show was highlighting the fact that so many conservative billionaires are very influential in local, state and for -- and federal politics and he aroused a rallying cry asking where are our billionaires to fight back? i think that speaks to the importance of what you are trying to propose. , i amards to the question wondering out of curiosity if there is any discussion or idea of one day, there being a secure government controlled application that can be downloaded to a phone from which an american citizen can vote? if that is something that is even in the realm of possibility. guest: i appreciate your

anecdote and that is exactly the problem. we don't want our democracy to be a war of billionaires. the great premise of american democracy is the genius of ordinary individuals. whether you are a member of congress, administrative assistant, a ceo, you have an equal and important perspective and voice and that is what is being distorted. this is about returning the sense of equality to people and their voice in a democracy. your idea about internet voting is an intriguing one. i think estonia and some countries -- we would have to make sure it was not subject to interference. interfere inssians our elections and i would be concerned to make sure the security was enough. of paperwant some form verification, but i do think we should research technology that can make sure it was secure and if we could do it, it would

certainly make voting easier. from --, a watching democrat. caller: thank you for putting forward this legislation. big donor money from both sides is corrupting the democratic process. i have been dismayed since the early 2000's at what it is doing to our country, so thank you for the legislation. i hope it gets through. to the previous caller who rich donors,ing that is an intriguing idea. i think it sidesteps the real problem but the only way it would really work is to spend that tax money on something distasteful to many large donors, which is fighting climate change, putting in infrastructure, mitigation, etc..

i think we would see big donors drop away like flies. guest: i appreciate that. i want to make clear that this was john's bill. we all support it but he has been a great job to lead our efforts on hr one. i agree with the caller on climate change. it is an existential threat to our planet. the intergovernmental panel for climate change has a report that says if within the next 12 years action, then we are going to be digging ourselves in a very deep hole that is going to have catastrophic impact in different places around the planet. we know what we need to do. that is why several of us are getting behind a deal to push for renewable energy, planting trees, pushing for weatherization and energy efficiency. these are policies that every american should support and every person should support.

host: it is a headline on the front page of newspapers this morning. 2018 continues warming trend roberta in san diego, republican. caller: i do not know where to start. you a fewke to ask questions regarding the state you represent. recently ined a law the democrat is simple he of california making vote harvesting legal. how do you say that is a good thing for our country? the last election, i am 82 years old and i have voted since i was 18 and never saw such a crooked thing in my life until this election. anyone in california should be 100% ashamed of what you are

saying when you go there. district have people power washing the streets because people like urinating in the streets. if this is the best we having california to lead the democrat party, i do not know what to say you wantoung man, if to think people are honest and we can depend on people to vote when they are supposed to vote, we also know that in san francisco people who are not citizens are voting on local options. host: we will have the congressman respond. guest: thank you for calling in and voting in california. i would say, no one supports voter harvesting, it was a scandal in north carolina when a republican candidate who harvested votes and collected votes. the california law does not allow people to go collect people's ballots in an artificial way. you have to sign your ballots

and no one is for voter harvesting. california more generally, i am very proud of the state. we produce more economic activity than in any other state of the country with extraordinary growth. we are responsible for the technology sector. think if apple and google and facebook and tesla were chinese companies or european come to these and not american companies. most people should be proud that the technology companies are american and -- host: you can follow his work on twitter. thank you for the conversation. when we come back, we will talk about the president's vow to end the hiv/aids epidemic. jennifer kates will be here. we will be right back. ♪

>> the c-span bus recently traveled to alabama, asking folks what does it mean to be american. >> it means to stand up for the citizens. we did people of the united states in order to form a more perfect union, this is about our country, debate, discussion, solving issues for the citizens at the grassroots level. >> to be an american means to maximize the opportunities and benefit other people. is the factamerican that my culture and voices of all minorities who do not have chances to enjoy the luxuries of being an american because of typical stereotypes and racial

profiling which are things that can be eliminated and then that -- make america better. >> what does -- being on the an americanbeing means to me that i have the liberty to be free and worship where i want to worship. and also to go to school to do what i am right now, working on my masters degree. to it means we have a right life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. >> it means to have the ability to express oneself to whatever issue we have in the country that we private citizens have a say so. some of the most important things i see to be an american, especially in this historical university where i am, is the

fact that the support we get to be able to establish activities for the public to reach out to the constituents and provide very valuable services that is lacking in other countries. that is the greatness of being an american. >> voices from the road on c-span. journal"ngton continues. host: we are back with jennifer kates, the global health and hiv policy director for the kaiser family foundation. andheadline, can the u.s. the hiv epidemic in a decade as donald trump says? is it doable? , important question for the hiv epidemic with the president talking at the state of the union about his goal. the top one answer is, it is

possible, yes. but a lot of things would need to be in place and one of the key ingredients would be new resources and that was not announced. the elements that were announced are important, there has been a lot of advances in hiv but we do not know what the new budget resources will be. we will not know for a few weeks. host: what are the advances that have been made? the initiativeon was announced because what has dramatically changed in the last three years is what we know works. we have all the tools in place. entry -- anti-retroviral treatment, if you are hiv positive, you should be a treatment right away. if you sustain treatment, you will be virally suppressed, then you are healthy and moreover and what we know from new data, if you are virally suppressed, you will not spread hiv.

you are not only taking care of your own health, it is a prevention intervention. that is new in the last few years. pre-exposure,ep, if you will be exposed to hiv, you can take and try -- medication to prevent transmission. those are very dramatic advances. host: how did they come about and when? guest: anti-retro viral therapy, the first hiv treatment was used in the 1980's but not very effective. the era of no information and not knowing what hiv exactly was at that was going to happen. most people who became infected would get aids soon and die and there were no effective treatments. it was not until 1996 when a new approach combination anti-retro viral therapy was introduced.

that dramatically changed hiv in the u.s. and around the world and rates came down and people live longer. the idea you can take it for your own health and that would prevent transmission to others was something that was thought may be the case but not shown until the beginning of 2011. subsequent studies have shown, ,f you are virally suppressed nondetectable, you will not transmit hiv to a negative partner. that is a dramatic rate through. -- breakthrough. undetectable, and transmittable, that was 2011 and on. the data are clear on that. exposed, negative and that is recommended since 2012 and the cdc has guidelines in place of who should be eligible and take it. both of those are relatively

recent. host: are you talking about vaccinations? guest: there is no vaccine for hiv, no cure and no vaccine. eradicatetions do not hiv. they treat hiv. they can suppress the virus if you have it from replicating, and you will have trace amounts. on prep, it is a medication that will prevent you from becoming infected. but they are not the same as vaccines. we are not at the place we can eradicate hiv. this initiative is eliminating it. looking on focused parts of the country and trying to prevent transmission. host: different things. let's get our viewers involved. if you are hiv-aids patient or family member of one, your line is 202-748-8000. eastern and central part of the

country, call 202-748-8001. mountain and pacific regions call 202-748-8002. jennifer kates, talk about resources because you said is -- you said that is a big obstacle . guest: the initiative is focusing on intense efforts in hard-hit places in the country and we know from the history of hiv and what we have done globally and in the u.s., you have to focus and target where people are most at risk and living with hiv. there are great elements. what has not been announced is new resources and the funding for hiv in the u.s. has been flat for many years on the prevention and on the treatment and ryan white program, the main program people with hiv who are not insured or underinsured rely on that funding which has been flat. host: how much money? which $2 billion per year

has stayed for many years. five or more. it has not increased. cdc prevention funding, that goes to states and local jurisdictions, $900 million, $809, maybe a little less which has not changed. both programs are critical. -- $800 million, maybe a little less, which is not changed. both programs are critical. dedicated resources for hiv and this new initiative, there will be new resources. there will be additional resources channeled and focused on the 48 counties. host: how much more is needed? some people say $2 billion a year is a lot of money. guest: one million people have hiv in the u.s. and many more at risk of hiv in the u.s. and expenses -- medications are expensive. a larger conversation about drug pricing. people have trouble affording their medication.

this is a lifelong illness without a cure or a vaccine. it is not a lot of money. how much new is needed, there is an estimate i have seen but it would have to be at a level that would really make a difference. without new resources, it would not do the trick. it will be interesting to see how much. where it will be targeted. and will they go to cdc, the different agencies. the administration -- host: how much does it cost for these drugs for people to take typically? guest: if you have hiv and want to be on the recommended regiment, it could be $12,000 per year. a little less or a little more. insurance mainly covers that and you may have copayments. what has been critical in hiv in the u.s. is the ryan white program which provides

medication for people not insured or underinsured, they have insurance but it does not cover everything. or it has high co-pays. ryan white can help. host: why is the kaiser family foundation involved in this work? guest: our foundation, a nonpartisan independent foundation that does policy resource -- research on health issues and media and public health education, we have been involved in addressing hiv since the 1980's. it has been a commitment on the part of the foundation that this is a critical issue for the u.s. and around the world and we want to provide resources and information to help form the policy discussion. we know it continues to be a critical issue and it is important to our foundation. host: look at the numbers she was talking about. and the u.s. is population by race and ethnicity in 2017. david in phoenix, arizona.

you are a patient, correct? caller: correct, and fellow. -- hello. i want to thank c-span for allowing patients like myself to have a voice. survivor and i see a lot of problems within the public policy of hiv and aids. while i am excited about the idea of a cure. in 1994, i was diagnosed with having aids-related dementia because a bad drug interaction. found that you cannot give it to people with previous head injuries and it caused because native -- attacked the cognitive part of my brain and learning new things has been very difficult. even though i have never spent a night in the hospital and i have job and i volunteer in my community, the medical

community still puts me into the category of aids, without the opportunity of becoming categorically healthier. you always have aids after an initial aids study misses. this means -- aids diagnosis. someone with cancer gets cured and that is a survivor, an uplifting idea, i lived 25 years after an aids diagnosis, healthy, striding forward, and continuing to serve my community. but i still have to carry the stigma of aids. i must watch out for the community's fear and misinformation. these are the things that bother the patient's because now myself, even though i am on the program, irity work am trying to keep myself going. most people find that very cumbersome and intrusive.

and they do not want to do it. i talked to many patients where i volunteer at, i volunteer for a food bank for hiv and aids patients. i cannot get any of them to ever even try to get a job. job, theyf they get a are hassled with the employer trying to constantly, like myself, give them 40 hours a week, which disqualifies them for ryan white or any other assistance. it becomes a struggle for us patients in the middle to not know what to do. most of us just stand still. and do nothing. , good toank you, david hear from you and you raise a love complex and important issues. you are a survivor.

you mentioned something so important. there is so much stigma around hiv in this country and around the world that is a barrier to public health and efforts. when you were diagnosed, that was a time when almost anyone who became hiv-infected progress to an aids diagnosis and it was before the point of time where we know that if you could get affected -- effective antiviral treatments, you would not get an aids diagnosis. the mechanisms has carried over. ande is a new vision recognition among public health professionals. you are right, when you try to access programs in this country, there are complex programs, different requirements, but it is great to hear that you are feeling well and working. but all the things you touched on are so critical. i hope that this new initiative stigma and work

with communities of people living with hiv and at risk. hhs said that was their intention and that will be important. we need to hear from people like you and your experiences to inform what is needed going forward. host: white plains, new york, victoria. caller: thank you for taking my call and my heart goes out to your first caller. i have a very, very close friend of the family who has had hiv. was diagnosed with hiv and is going through what your first caller was going through. hasow that president trump allotted congress to a lot a lot of money to hiv. it has been a passion of his for many years from what i've heard. -- for many decades from what i've heard. since the start of hiv and aids. melania trump has gone to

hospitals. withu -- can you partner trump,a trump -- melania it would bring more attention to the cause, and help to raise more money for research if there was more -- if there was someone as powerful as the president and his wife behind you. i would also like to say that, the importance of the foundation comes through very wealthy people so please go to anyone and everyone who listens in the democrat party to stop trying to destroy the wealthy because without them there would be no research, there would be no science, there would be no foundations, they support in the biggest way the foundations. it is very important to stop trying to destroy the wealthy and i am so poor i cannot tell you but i need to know that we

have the foundations behind all science.lness, the caller: thank you, victoria, and i hope your friend is doing well and is able to get what they need. thank you, victoria, and i hope your friend is doing well and is able to get what they need. on the initiative that was announced, having a president talk about it in the state of the union is a really important thing. it brings new attention to problems that would not get the same attention. you are right, this is a important point for that to happen. i will draw an analogy with president george w. bush who in 2003 made an historic announcement in his state of union to launch a global hiv initiative that the u.s. launched which has -- it is still ongoing and a major

initiative of the united states government and around the world and has changed the trajectory of the hiv epidemic in the world and a credit to one of the biggest successes in global health. having the president talk about it then and launching it has made a huge difference. we saw that this week, with presidential attention to something, you have the hss talk about this -- hhs talk about this, there is a real opportunity. resources will be a key part and we will not know until next month. we will get out information about that, how much is being proposed and where it will be going. host: to follow along go to the kaiser family foundation website ksss.org and follow the story, r also on twitter. laurie, and corpus christi, texas, a patient. caller: thank you so much.

i would like to thank your guests from the kaiser foundation, they have been instrumental in helping people with hiv and aids, thank you for that. i have been an educator in a foundation and corpus christi for the last 34 years. i have taught a lot in high school and in colleges and elementary schools. and into the school system to be able to teach and educate. there is a lot of focus on long-term survivors and a lot of focus on living longer with hiv. but what are we doing today in the schools and in the high schools with our youth to teach them and educate them so they never have to reach this? where they become infected? i did teach and i'm now disabled and retired. especially because my boyfriend died of aids cancer five years

ago. what is happening now in the schools? i am interested in how we can help them and what the government can do to help them not become infected in the first place. thank you for your help. caller: thank you -- guest: thank you. young people are at rest for hiv, particularly some pockets of young people in communities, young days and bisexual men and people of color in different parts of the country. you raise an important country, what is being taught and how are people learning about hiv. we have looked at surveys and there is a lack of knowledge and part of the challenges that at the educational system, it is differentiated around the country, what you may learn in one school you will not learn in another. there is not a national standard that is applied throughout the country, nor is that an area that has gotten enough emphasis. you raise a good problem.

the new initiative does not take on the educational system as far as i am aware of. it is trying to focus on those who are at risk, young people included, trying to reach them. talk about officials young people in high school and how they need information. there is an awareness that that is the challenge but i am not sure there are resources in the initiative to address that but you raise a critical problem and i am not sure we are there yet. host: how much money is given to research of hiv and aids and who does it? guest: research is really critical. the u.s. is the biggest funder of hiv resource in the world, i think $2 billion per year. research at hhs is the main hiv research institute in the world. many advances i mentioned

earlier were learned about through nih sponsored research. that money has gone up concern times and remain flat at others. there is a lot more to do because -- i mentioned there was no cure and no preventive vaccine. we need to work towards those things and that will be on the research side. host: robert in california. welcome. caller: thank you and jennifer, thank you for being on the show. i have a peripheral question. i took shrapnel during the gotnam war and specifically in for my wounds to the v.a. kaiser,laucoma, i go to i love them. i have always loved magic forson bringing the need

hiv. about, i i am scared was watching the new democrat kamala harris, and these other people say they want to take over kaiser, blue cross, and everyone. what would happen to kaiser if they were to take over? i want kaiser to be kaiser? host: you are confusing kaiser health insurance with the kaiser family foundation. not affiliated with kaiser permanente. the health plan, i cannot speak about that. i think you are raising a bigger issue that we are talking about today, what happens to insurance available throughout the country's and my colleagues at the kaiser family foundation do analysis on that and you can get

information on our website. host: james in pittsburgh, a patient. caller: in 1993, i was discovered to be hiv-positive. i was tested in singapore because i was working for the department of navy. i was able to retire from the department of navy. here is the problem, as a long-term survivor, i find that there are other effects with the hiv drugs. example, your legs hurt. this hurts. all of this other stuff. i am 70 years old. pharmacies have not done to make better drugs for older people who are hiv positive. that is all i have to say.

caller: we are getting so many -- guest: we are getting so many long-term survivors, it is an important reminder of how far we have come. the medications are great, especially the newer ones but they are not cures and their medications, you have to take them every day for the rest of your life to be healthier and stave off viral replications. they are not going to be great for everyone. it is a real challenge and it points to the need for research to continue for a cure and a vaccine. i am sorry you are having those problems. i hear this from a lot of long-term survivors. host: beverly and washington, d.c. good morning . -- i haveam calling had experience with working with people and we had a lot of

county counselors who had aids. yes? host: please just listen through your phone? ignore your tv. caller: and of course, in his works, the people he counseled, reverend, theid, medication i am taking appears to make me much sicker and they never recovered. believe, i is, i do am telling you the truth, if the medicine is not coming from a or come from humans just like mothers give milk. planteared to me that the that is used to make the

medicine with should be able to appear a human being. guest: thank you for your question. people hadto hear difficult experiences on medication. the general experience is very positive, particularly with medication available now. you can often take a pill once a day with very little side effects. for people with other medications that were introduced years ago, you can switch medication if they are not working or there are side effects. i am sorry to hear that happened but for anyone who is listening who is hiv-positive and not on treatment, please go see your doctor as there are medications and it is recommended by the department of health and human services that you be on medication if you are hiv-positive, for yourself and for prevention. host: how long does it take to get those money if you access the ryan white program? guest: in many states and

communities, you can get it to the aids drug assistance program at primed white and if you are not in short or underinsured and not able to get the medications, you can't and it should be very quick. -- can and should be very quick. if you are not able to access medication because you do not have insurance, because you have insurance that does not sufficiently allow you to afford it, you should be able to get medication. no one should not be getting medications they need. the ryan white program. gov, the government website, a ton of resource, people living or are at risk and can get resources. host: ian in oceanside, new york. caller: good morning. with george bush junior, when bono thanked him, i believe i

heard no more babies was being born in africa with hiv. with the right to try. maybe by 2030, we will be done with this scourge and something we all wish was done yesterday. we can get rid of cancer and aids and all of these things that are very painful not only to the person but the family and the friends that see somebody waste away. it is good to set goals and dreams because without dreams there is no need to work towards anything, and without the dream of, we will end it, and it is a positive, glass half full mentality, that is good by president trump. host: thank you. guest: i want to hit on one thing you said that is important for people to understand. before there were medications, a woman was pregnant with hiv, there was a significant risk to her baby being born hiv-positive. not in every case but enough where there was a risk.

in 1984, it was learned through resource sponsored by the nih, that if she took antiretrovirals during pregnancy and during labor and afterwards, during breast-feeding, the risk to her baby would go down to under 2%. very low. that has dramatically -- in the united states very few transmissions that way anymore. if they ever occur, because somebody did not have access to care. around the world, it has been a big part of an initiative. we have not gone to the point globally where there is missions yet because women do not have access to treatment everywhere they live around the world. until that happens, there will still be those transmissions. host: kss.org is the website. jennifer kates, thank you. we will take a break and when we come back, what is happening in washington today and get your thoughts on a republicans --

republicans call 202-748-8001. democrats call 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. we will be right back. >> i am always enthralled by the speak, whatey could would they tell us. >> the senate transport you into the senate, revealing rich architectural details of the senate chamber, its ornate hallway, private workspaces, and a leopard historic meeting rooms . it is filled with beautiful color photos of the art and architecture in the senate space and offers lots of information about the rich history. to order your high-quality paperback copy of "the senate"

visit c-span.org/senate book. matthew whitaker has been acting attorney general since november when he replaced jeff sessions. on friday, he will testify before the house judiciary committee on his role overseeing special counsel robert mueller's investigation, his first appearance before the committee, what's live friday at 9:00 -- 9:30 a.m. eastern on c-span2, c-span.org, or listen live with the c-span radio app. "washington journal" continues. host: happening in washington today, the senate judiciary committee is expected to vote on a nomination of william barr to serve as attorney general. the vote likely to be along party lines and we will have coverage of that. after the committee approves the nomination, it will head to the full senate.

that vote is expected to take place next week. barr served as attorney general from 1991-1993 will replace jeff sessions. also happening today, the house ways and means committee hearing tax returns and the headline in the washington post on that this morning is -- the president lashes out at democrats. they will look at the president and vice president's tax returns. the first hearing, our coverage at 2:00 p.m. eastern today on c-span3, c-span.org, or listen with the free c-span radio app. also, house energy and commerce committee are having a heating -- is having a hearing on the administration's family separation policy for migrant families at 10:30 a.m. eastern time on c-span3 and find it on the website this morning.

schultz,cs, howard former ceo of starbucks, will be giving a speech at purdue and we will have coverage of that this evening around 8:00 p.m. eastern time. the president right now in washington at the national prayer breakfast delivering remarks. our coverage has already started on c-span2. charles in new jersey, independent. your thoughts on what is happening in washington. caller: first time caller, pretty cool. host: welcome, glad you called. caller: i hope the democrats and republicans come to a conclusion so our government will not close down. that they get their stuff together and put their petty things aside and get this country back where it belongs. host: he is talking about the 17

lawmakers who have been tasked, democrats and republicans, to come up with a deal for homeland security funding, may be a possible wall, and immigration policy. yesterday, the 17 received a briefing from homeland security officials about what is happening along the southern wall and we heard from several of them who came to microphones to talk to reporters. no deal, but the chair of the committee told reporters that the figure of the house, if there is bipartisan agreement, she will get behind it . lils, regret, california, good morning. , democrat, california, good morning. caller: i am an older person who lives on medicare and i get

medi-cal. cost-of-living, i get social security and ssi. by,he years have gone people used to be live halfway we are notd now keeping up with the cost-of-living. people are barely able to find food. i have not purchased clothes and other things for a long, long, long time. there are more people living on the streets. it is very frightening. i hate to think that the american people, a lot of us have to live in fear. it seems like so many, for so many different reasons, people are living in fear. that does not seem right for this country. thank you very much. host: we will go to sean in

connecticut, republican. caller: good morning. i was watching earlier and got disconnected. guy with a white concealed carry permit in 30 states. i collect guns and have been collecting them since i was a teenager. i am also the victim of armed gun violence, i lost a sibling to suicide. i have a lot of a strange with firearms in my family and elsewhere. the main reason i am calling, a musician,believe is a he started the foundation called the black guns matter. he goes around and gives talks in black communities and lets

people know how to exercise their second amendment rights. i would love to see you have him on your show. host: ok. caller: thank you. host: california, independent. good morning. go ahead with your comment. let me move on. are you there? go ahead. caller: yes. here it is. -- i am here. host: go ahead, please. caller: when i was saying is, america has a problem overall with the african people. you have to understand that we are physically strong but not crazy. testosterone a

that makes larry, curly, and moe. the weakest race -- host: let's move on. talking about public policy debate in washington, your opportunity to call in and tell us what you think of them. ida in longwood, florida, democrat. caller: how are you doing? host: morning. caller: i am particularly calling because i would like for -- prior to the investigation -- prior to the meeting in vietnam, i would like for c-span to look carnegie endowment national institute meeting with putin and his whole design for creating russia. host: she is referring to come i

think, the meeting between kim jong-un and president trump, the president said it would take place february 27 of february 28 in vietnam. he made the announcement at the state of the union address. a story in the new york times is a picture that was taken by a new york times photographer who was the pool photographer on the state of the union night. feared viral immediately the television cameras did not catch it. it has been described as a walrus class and a clap back. nancy pelosi goes under the spotlight from the president. the new york times says some took offense and said nancy pelosi sarcastic calp is the example -- cla is an exact -- clap is a lack of respect.

back and official clap the republicans can use it. the daughter of the speaker weight in on twitter and said, that clap took me back to my teen years. she knows and she knows you know and she is disappointed you thought this would work. wendell in louisiana, republican. caller: how are you doing? host: morning, i am fine, go ahead. caller: i used to be a democrat a long time ago but i quit being a democrat because they are baby killers. we do need to secure our borders. these people are coming over killing us. all of these democrats that oppose this, they need to get out of office. we need america back. we need god in our country. destroying ourre

country. we need to take our country back. host: all right, window. -- wendell. the syrian -- the hearing this afternoon at the house, house ways and means committee taking on the president and vice president's tax return at 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3. a reporter with the hill newspaper joins us to talk about it. tell us what will take place at this hearing today. hearingrats call this -- called this hearing because they have a large government type bill they are pushing forward called hr1 and a section of the bill would require the president and vice president and major party nominees for those positions to release 10 years of tax returns. that was what prompted this hearing.

interested in obtaining donald trump's tax returns by the ways and means committee. i am sure people will be closely watching to see how that issue comes up. or is addressed in this hearing. host: what has the chair of the ways and means committee set about that? >> richard neal says he will make the request but he is taking a fairly careful approach -- he wants to build a case before he makes the request because he thinks the issue is likely to end up in a long court case. he wants to make sure, when there are legal proceedings in the future, he has built a case that can win and democrats will eventually be able to obtain the tax returns. host: is that part of the hearing today, to make the case? guest: i think democrats have called the hearing with the

stated purpose of focusing on the hr1 bill but i imagine the other issue will come up. host: what is the leadership, nancy pelosi, saying about this strategy for house democrats? is she on board? guest: i think leadership is supportive of requesting donald trump's tax returns and i think they will defer to the ways and means committee on the timing. host: how has the white house responded? guest: the treasury department has said that, if there is a request, steven mnuchin will review it with the treasury general counsel and determine whether it is legal and that is how they would respond. there are reports the white house is planning on pushing back. president trump is the first president in decades not to release any tax returns. he has said he will not do it while he is under audit and the irs has said that audits do not

prevent people from releasing their tax information. host: what are you watching for today? guest: one of the things i'm interested in seeing, if there are any divisions between democrats on how hard and how quickly to push for president trump's tax returns. judiciousan is taking caution in this approach. democrats whor would like him to move faster and some outside of the progressive organizations that are pushing for this to happen quickly. i am a to sit in seeing how -- i am interested in seeing how immigrants navigate that and if they are united or if there are divisions. follow heran reporting on the hill.com. thank you.

back to our calls. you can talk about the president's tax return or the legislation hr1. or any other public policy debate until 10:00 on the east coast. linda in myrtle beach, south carolina, independent. caller: how are you today? host: fine, thank you. caller: i wanted to comment on the person that called in and said she is having problems getting food for her and her family. i live on a small, fixed income and take him $700 per month with two children i have to feed. i am not saying it is easy but i do not go shopping for a pay $30 and $40. people complaining they do not have money for food. you ask them how much wear sneakers, $80. how much was that shirt, $25.

people feel they should be of the shop anywhere they want but my food comes first, my children come first, i make them look like they bought their close, they were $100. you go to thrift shops and goodwill. you go to walmart and use coupons at the food store. they have places where they can teach you to live on $25 or $30 a week for food and they give you good meals with a lot of vitamins and a lot of vegetables. i never realized how much you could do with a pound of hamburger. host: assad in minnesota, democrat. caller: how are you doing? i would like to make this comment -- i am a first-time caller. host: ok. caller: i wanted to make mention of what i noticed to be the

moral and spiritual bankruptcy of the country. display anydo not more moral or spiritual leadership than the people they are leaving. -- leading. it seems the country has gone totally politically to be politically correct, leaving the spiritual and moral makeup that made this country great. i think we should return to established institutions that would return us to a path of moral and spiritual well-being. host: some other issues to put on the table for our conversation deals with vaccinations, the headline in is anw york times, diesel

emergency in the northwest. -- measles is an emergency in the northwest, it has reemerged this winter in the pacific northwest and other states where people have brought leeway over whether to vaccinate their children with 79 cases reported by the cdc since the start of this year, 50 cases of the highly contagious disease or in washington state. also, the new york times says dealthe president's nafta faces headwinds in congress and not just from democrats but republicans as well who believe it would curtail free trade. that is the headline in the new york times this morning. two issues to discuss any remaining minutes. andrew in brooklyn, republican. caller: good morning. host: morning. caller: i have been reading over this green new deal proposal.

it is more of a resolution. to acknowledge that climate change exists and we need to do things about it. however, the resolution does not give any answers. does not give any detail other than we just need to do it. how? just do it. platform, she talks about giving everybody a $15 per hour job in parks and childcare. if we will actually contribute something to climate change and actually making a product like batteries or wind turbines, everybody will have to get training. everybody will have to be graphic miners and battery manufacturers. how workingerstand

in a park will contribute to saving the world. it is very bizarre. host: jim in springfield, illinois. republican. caller: and my on? host: you are. caller: wow. i watched c-span every day and every morning i watched the whole show. i am retired. i just wanted to say something on the guns, second amendment. i am a city guy. i moved in the country when i married my wife and we have a nice place. i did not have much to do and was lost with myself but she wanted me to get a hobby. machine or something along those lines. i do not have the patience for fishing, it is boring. ,he told me about shooting taking up firearms and setting up a gun range. i did. i have been into it for three

years. it is the most fun we ever had. i have my coworkers out here who drive with me. we just have a good time. it is unfortunate that chicago itself and the politicians do not understand, when you get south of the i-80 beltway, it is a different world. we do not have the violence they do up there. backgroundou open to checks to not allow high-capacity gun rifles or semi-rx -- semi automatic? aar is not an assault rifle and i have a couple of them. we do not really shoot them. but we do have them. it is a single trigger. you pull it just like any other rifle. there is not much of a difference.

politicians want to take everything down to a 10 round magazine. if you do that, you will been a 70% or 80% of the firearms in the state because her handguns alone hold 15-17 rounds. concealed and carry gun has 7-8. there are millions of guns that hold 15-17 rounds. just normal handguns. if you been that, you will turn -- ban that, you will turn many citizens into criminals. host: the attorney general in virginia said that he too had once worn blackface in the 1980's. headline in usa today show the virginia governor and lieutenant governor and attorney general scandals.il with the washington post today editorial board in the virginia region calling on ralph northam

to step down. it says he must step down as his racial behavior disqualifies him to lead come even as other scandals emerge. democrat.ilwaukee, caller: good morning. i would like to address -- go back to addressing taxes that are paid in this country. if the congress wants to investigate one specific person on taxes, which i understand has to be done because we have to know if he has been bought out by somebody or is under pressure by some other power. once they get the answers, why don't they take a look at everybody that is making in the billion dollar category, all of that, and make them pay their fair share of taxes instead of the middle class and hard-working people leaving them

to have to take care of the burden of the country and paying for programs necessary to help the poor or elderly or the handicapped. tothe congress really wanted address this in the senate, the senate and the house, i wish that they would change the laws and close all of the loopholes for the ultra-rich can write off because they do not pay their fair share of taxes. if they did, we would probably solve a lot of problems in this country with money, infrastructure, climate change, you name it. host: speaking of climate change, news from politico, the speaker of the house has named members of a climate panel. she built of the democratic roster for her special panel on climate change, pulling from a mixture of old and new lawmakers and leaving off the highest profile freshmen like alexandria focus your cortez.

the names, which arrived on the same day as the proposal for the green new deal lands on capitol hill further boosts energy behind democratic efforts to bring climate change to the forefront of their agenda. democratic numbers of the panel are ben ray lujan, suzanne bonamici, not saying that gregory, julia brownley, sean casten, mike levin, donald mceachin. kathy castor of florida will chair the committee on the climate crisis. let's go to matt in new hampshire, independent. caller: thank you and good morning, america. i know we are running out of time. clap by nancy pelosi, it is tradition for the figure of the house to introduce the president. this president decided not to allow nancy pelosi that

privilege. i am sick of the take for tax. i am sick of the revenge politics. host: i have to leave it. the house is coming in and we have to go to the house. they are coming into the legislative session with live coverage on c-span. from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., february 7, 2019. i hereby appoint the honorable stephanie n. murphy to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 3, 2019, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties. all time shall be equally allocated between the parties and in ve