current and future state of u.s. elections and how her state can serve as a model on c-span. on 1:00 p.m., national commission meeting to explore mandatory universal military national or public service. c-span2 at 8 a.m., the canadian-american business council looks at the chances of getting the u.s.-mexico canada trade deal ratified. speakers include the kentucky governor, and the premier of ontario, canada. at 8 a.m. on c-span3, a look at the usda agriculture outlook with sonny perdue and his counterparts from canada and mexico. coming up, former d.e.a. agent jack riley details his 30-year hunt for drug kingpin el chapo and the rise of modern international drug trafficking. at 9:00 a.m., george mason universitys michael farren on

amazon's decision to pull its proposed hq2 site out of new york city and the move by some states to re-examine financial incentives given so large corporations looking to relocate. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018]] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪ host: good morning. it's thursday, february 21, 2019. members of congress remain back in their home states for the president's state recess week but the senate will gather in for a pro session today. we will be with you beginning with family leave laws in the united states. when it comes to paid sun and paid family leave and whether you think this family should expand its family national leave policies. if you think, the phone number, 202-748-8000. if you think we shouldn't,

202-748-8001 is the number to call. you can also catch us on social media. and a very good thursday morning to you. you can start calling in now. we begin now with what is available nationwide when it comes to family leave laws in this country. it's called the family medical leave. it's been around 1993. it provides up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave during a 12-month period to care for a newborn or adopt ordinary a forrest child or it can -- foster child. the law applies to private employers with 50 or more employees. and the law also allows states to set standards that are more expansive than that federal law and plenty of states have over the course of the year. here's a map from the partnership, the national partnership for women and families. it's a group that's been pushing for more expansive medical loaf

laws and family leave laws on his country. i want to focus on new jersey for a second. because that's a state that not only has a plan in place, they expanded their family leave plan and it happened this week when it was signed into law by the governor. here's what that expanded new jersey family leave law does. it expands time off, paid time off from six weeks to 12 weeks. the maximum weekly payment increased from $650 to $860. it's guaranteed for workers at companies with 30 or more employees lowering that bar from he family medical leave act.

and it's funded by annual payroll deductions and it goes into effect in july of 2020. as we said, the governor of new jersey, phil murphy signed that law into law this week. here's what he said at the signing ceremony. >> there are a lot of miss throughout if you really take care of workers and you put your money where your mouth is but that will scare employers off. the opposite is true. more money goes into the and companies big and small realize that a happy workforce, a secure workforce is a key ingredient to their, and people are recognizing that around not just new jersey but around the country. host: and again, that law in new jersey going into effect, expanded law in july of 2020. went to hear from you this morning on the "washington journal" about whether the united states needs to expand national family leave laws. if you think we should, it's 202-748-8000. if you think we shouldn't, it's

202-748-8001. some comments on twitter and facebook already this morning from facebook. benny where is in to expand, you mean to establish basic stuff like maternity leave which does not exist in the richest country on the planet. sherry says no, we need less government in our lives, not more telling us what to do. and from andrew saying my company has three months for women, two weeks for men and even that isn't really enough. let us know what's happening at your company, in your state and whether you think we should stand family medical leave laws in general nationwide. george is up first bristol, tennessee, good morning. caller: good morning. yes. host: go ahead, george. caller: yes. yes, i do think they should actually be expanded throughout

the united states because this is families we're talking about. and when someone has that type of leave, i think that should be enforced throughout the united states and i'd also like to say something else this morning. 's not actually directly pertaining to this thing but i'd like to say that i'm not going to listen to c-span anymore because i've listened for the last two months and it keeps skating around the curtain which the current move is donald trump. thank you, sir. host: president trump actually medical leavemily law earlier this morning. here's what he had to say. president trump: i'm also proud to be the first president to include in my budget a plan for nationwide paid family leave so that every new parent has the chance to bond with their

newborn child. [applause] host: you could see the president's daughter, ivanka trump there in the audience. she's leading up that effort on the president's in the white house to look at leave laws in this country and to see what proposals are out there. the president has made a proposal in the past. he talked about it both at this state of the union and at his previous state of the union. his proposal back at the beginning of 2018 called for six weeks of paid leave for a new mothers and fathers and the plan calls for states to establish those programs. that plan which would be speculated to be paid for through unemployment insurance could result in higher taxes according to some analysts who have taken a look at that plan over the past year. ivanka trump is leading up that effort in the white house, met with members of congress last

week about that and we'll talk about some of those proposals in congress throughout the course of this first hour of our "washington journal" today. but we're asking you. just give us a call. let us know what happens in your company, in your state and whether you think those family leave laws should be expanded. 202-748-8000 if you think they should. 202-748-8001, you think they shouldn't. linda is in york, pennsylvania, thinks they should. go ahead. caller: yeah, good morning. you hear me? host: yes, ma'am. caller: yeah. many of years ago when i was still working and my mother developed cancer and i brought her up into my home and engaged to hospice care but the family leave write worked only covered a child, biological child, adopted child or a sibling. it did not include a parent. and i've had to use my vacation time. when i ran out of vacation time, i ran out of money and almost lost my house.

i had no money to pay any bills so much yeah, i definitely think it should include a parent. host: and linda, before you go, how long should it be and how do we pay for that? caller: well, when i was working, you build up vacation time. you build that up within the company. host: right. caller: that's what i had to use as if it was my own sick time. host: but if we're going to expand it in this country what, do you think is fair, i guess what is i'm asking. should it be six weeks? caller: it should include parents as well. and i also think that vacation time, you know, you could use up part of that. and there should be some type of fund, maybe within each company that everybody contributes to for their own purpose should they need to take family leave. host: linda, do you think there should be some sort of nationwide fund to fund this for all workers? because that proposal is out there as well.

caller: yes. yes, i definitely do because when you have -- it's a order thing. i watched my mother die. when she didn't want to go into a nursing home and i promised her that i would take care of her. so i did. and what it does -- when it doesn't include a parent, you have to watch -- it's hard enough to watch a child die or a sibling but if you don't have the funds to take care of a parent because it's not included in the family leave, i think that's kind of sick. it's not fair. and anybody who has gone through it only those who goes through it know what i'm talking about. i think it should be expanded nationwide, yes. host: and linda, before you go, back to this question. what would be fair? how long could somebody use that for? should it be three months? should it be six weeks? should it be six months? what do you think is fair if somebody makes use of that?

caller: well, if you know about hospice, a doctor has to certify that you have less than six months to live as did my mother. i think it should be a bear minimum of three months. i really think it should be three months. host: linda, thanks for the call from york, pennsylvania, this morning. our question again, does the united states need to expand its family leave laws? more comments from facebook and twitter as we've been having this conversation. meredith saying i don't understand how there can be a question of how to pay for it while giving rich people and corporations giant tax breaks, it seems like there is an obvious solution. carol says it sounds good me because happy workers would most likely do a better job and from liz smith. given a man family leave after his wife has baby is just giving him time to sprawl on the if a -- staffa -- sofa and watch

ootball. jeudy in montana. go ahead. you're next. caller: yes. recently my husband passed away nd he was an only child. and his land was given back to the percentages that he had less than 5% was given back to the tribe and the only one that -- i mean, out of like eight, the only ones that they gave me was his 50 acres that he had. host: judy, bring us to the question about leave laws in this country. caller: yeah. comes re does the wife

in? host: that's judy in montana. this is gregory, staten island, new york. go ahead, gregory. caller: yes. i have a question. i'm over the age to bear children. do i still have to pay into this for other people? host: there are -- some proposals that are out there with this expansion that it would if you're working. it would come from contributions from both employees and employers to set up this fund. that's one proposal that's out there, gregory. caller: well, i'm already an employee and i'm already paying into this fund. this is their new law. host: you're talking about what's happening specifically in new york? caller: right. i'm 64 years old. is not able to bear any children. and my two parents have already passed away. so i'm not paying into a fund for other people. host: gregory, do you know how much it cost you for that

specific new york plan? caller: oh, i think it's like $5 a week. it's a minimal amount. but, you know, when i bore my child, we -- i was one of the first to be allowed to get family leave but i had to take it out of my vacation pay. host: and gregory, can you talk about the debate in new york when this was happening and what you thought about that there? caller: i had no idea about a debate. i didn't know there was one. all i know is it received a new paycheck in first of the year and it was taking out of my check. host: gregory, thanks for the call from new york. new york, one of those states that does have a paid leave plan in place for the state. the maximum length of the paid leave for family leave, it's eight weeks in 2018. increases to 10 weeks in 2019 to 12 weeks in 2021.

it's 26 weeks if you're taking of your own disability. the national partnership for women and families is one of the groups that's pushing for an expansion of those family leave laws around the country. that's their chart there on the various aspects of the different state plans. we showed you the map earlier of the states that have that plan. kathleen this ohio in dayton. good morning. caller: good morning. yeah, you know, i mean i think it's so amazing for those people who call themselves pro-life and pro family. i mean pro-life means health care, means family leave. if we want our family, you know, i raise three daughters. they're older now. but if we want our families to be strong and solidly rooted, why wouldn't we -- i mean, how can pro-life people not want our families to be rooted together? and by that, you would give

family leave like denmark and either the countries up there in the north. i think and france and germany do it as well. we support our families when they're young, hello, that's going to make us stronger nation, stronger families. you know, i think teachers get off. i think they have to buy the time. i think the union only gets them like two months off. come on. if we're pro-life, we're pro family, let's support these young families when they can be there for their children, when they're developing and growing. host: kathleen, what is a fair amount of time? caller: well, you know what amazes me? there's this young couple from athens, ohio, who were both ph.d.s and they were working and i think it was in derrick and it blew my mind. they got a year. they weren't citizens, right? they were just working at a university there. they got a year off. the woman got a year off for the baby. 75% of her pay. and the husband, he took, i think it was one month or two

months off, she got another extra month off. so it was like, yes, let's support our families. and much of that of course was paid for by taxing super rich people. which so often, i'm sorry, so often really wealthy people are making money off the backs of cheap labor like wal-mart and amazon, even $15 an hour i and cheap labor. so yeah. i think we should give families that have just had children a year off, at least a mother and one of the parents to stay home. i'm taking care of my 90-year-old mom and i was combining it with taking care of my grandkids. so i was getting paid and taking care of the 90-year-old mom. if i put her to the nursing home, it's going to cost the taxpayers $10,000 a month under nursing home. so i think people should also get paid for taking care of amily members.

host: bill this pennsylvania. good morning. caller: hello. host: go ahead. caller: most of the people who need this family leave are going to be younger people, you know, for when they have babies. and i really believe that younger people today have a much harder time of it than when my family was young in the 1990's. so they really need that support. i don't agree much that president trump says but i do agree that families need that time to bond with their baby. we also need to have time for people to take care of their older parents as a society. we really don't do a very good job of taking care of our older people. i think employers should pay most of it. i would be all for a tax that would help out with that.

but i think the employers need o value their employees if they're women, they're mothers having babies. they should be valued as much as any other person and the company should pay while they have to take cough for maternity leave. host: phil, i want to focus on for a second that you think employers should pay for it. do you think employees should contribute at all for it? the new jersey plan, the expansion is being paid by some new deductions by employers and employees. caller: yes, i do agree with that. i'm saying the employers should pay most of it. but, you know, they shouldn't have to pay at all. yes, i agree with that. host: that's bill in pennsylvania this morning. bill mentioned president trump as we said, the president's daughter leading up this effort on family leave met with members of congress last week on capitol

hill. republican members of croning. she said it's encouraging to see members on both sides of the aisle working with the white house to advance paid family eave proposal. one of the members of congress that ivanka trump met with last month, senator marco rubio, republican of florida. he put out his own paid family leave proposal last year in the fall of 2018. it would apply to new parents, new parents would be able to use a portion of their future social security benefits to finance their paid leave. it would be up to three monster parent, per child and retirement benefits would be deferred by the parent who uses it to offset

the cost of the leave benefit. that's one other proposals out there from senator marco rubio. when he released that proposal, he talked about why he believe this issue was important. here's some from that video. >> it allows new importants to be able to afford taking leave from work by giving them the options to pull forward a small portion of their future social security benefits. it will also allow all new parents to take paid parental leave at some levels of 80% of their regular income. we need to do everything we can to help our children. i don't think that's an issue that has a left or a right. all americans want their children to have a better future and there is nothing that's better for their children is to have parents involved in their scomplifes that is especially true in the early weeks of their lives. for millions of children who are born into working families, that isn't what's happening. it is hurting our children to

have parents who can't afford to be with them after they're born and the overwhelming majority of parent, 85% at least docks not get paid because of a newborn child. his plan does not -- doesn't raise taxes on a single merican. host: that was senator marco rubio. it was in that meeting with ivanka trump on capitol hill, another member of the senate who is in that meeting as well. senator mike lee of utah, a republican. he put out his own statement after that meeting with ivanka trump. says our tax and entitlement systems penalize parents and growing families if young people can't afford to form a household and have children. then our very future of the nation was the jeopardy. he said it was great to hear

president trump mention this species and the continued interest in it by senior advisor ivanka trump is a fantastic sign . getting your thoughts on this issue. does the united states need to expand family leave laws in this country? paid or unpaid? give us a call on lines. if you think we do, it's 202-748-8000. if you think we shouldn't, 202-748-8001. larry is in colorado and that line for those who think we shouldn't. o ahead. caller: good morning, john. i'm wondering if anybody's looking at this from the perspective of the employer. let's say it have a body shop. host: go ahead, larry. caller: someone wants to take off for three months -- if i only have a few employees and one of them wants to take off for a few months to have a kid, who's going to paint the car? somebody has to paint that car. now if i have to pay somebody else to come in and pain that car and pay my employee to stay

at home, i can't afford that. an employer can't afford that. maybe a wal-mart can, but small businesses can't. if you want to have a kid, save your money, and then have a kid. it's not up to the employer to pay you to do it. host: larry, what about unpaid family leave in this country where your job is secure and you can take unpaid family leave up to 12 weeks under the family medical leave act. do you think that should be expanded? caller: how should that be expanded? ok. i'm running a body shop. you want to take time off. i have to hire somebody else to take your place. do i have to fire that person when you want to come back? no. it's life. you want to have a kid and take off, then take off. go find another job when you're ready. it's not up to the employer to take care of you. he's not your daddy. he's your employer. host: larry what, kind of work do you do? do you run a business?

caller: i was a body man for 20 years. host: did anybody -- anybody take time off after a child was born and how did that impact you? caller: no. no. you can't afford to. the shop simply can't afford to pay somebody to sit at home. you don't make that much money. you can't afford to do that. host: all right. thanks for the call. is on. orado, maurice go ahead. caller: to larry's point, he's talking about a company that has, you know, maybe 12 to 15 employees at most the law said at least 30 to 50 employees or more. so that's companies that do have people to cover those shifts. my point was in regards to same topic as marco rubio owes point where it's good for the child and people are forgetting to think about that part too.

so on top of that too, you're going to keep these employees. you're going to have people who will come back and keep working for you. and now they feel, you know, secure in their employment and they're going to stay with you and that reduces cost for the employers as well. host: so marie, you bring up marco rubio, what do you think about that plan? because paying for these things big issue. after you have a child and then if you to that, you then have to defer taking those benefits down the road. caller: i think that's a good idea. i haven't read into it and not to say for sure but overall, that sounds good especially someone in my age bracket.

i'm 27. so my social security future is not at all guaranteed for me and if i pay into it now, that's likely that that fund is not going to be able to keep up. so for me, that means oh, i could use my social security in a time period where it still exists as opposed to after the funds run and dry up and they tell us we can't use that. from skwlaust you guys have said on it, and that little video clips on. , it did sound like a good plan. host: danielle is next in washington, d.c. go ahead. caller: hello. host: good morning. caller: hello? so i'm throng this debate and my comment has more to do with a maybe. i like the idea of family medical leave, affording people going basically crime crunch intensive periods but how you pay for it and what the federal government does as far as laws is important.

because some of the proposals that people are talking about is the government passing a law to tell a company how it has to spend its money. and other laws are potentially telling each individual what a decision a -- makes and that could be considered government overreach if you think what the laws we're talking about are doing because companies should have autonomy over their profits and states should have autonomy over how they govern the people to a degree. host: so danielle, we're talking about proposals. here's another proposal that's out there. it is from senator gillibrand, a candidate for president in 2020 in the senate. she's a lead sponsor in the house. a democrat from connecticut. they've introduced their family leave bill this month. this is the tweet from february 12. without universal paid family leave, too many americans have to choose between taking care of family and putting food on the

table. she's reintroducing the family act from the last congress to make sure no one has to make that choice ever again. the only way is to fight for it. let's go, said the senator in her tweet from earlier this month. here's what that bill would actually do if it became law. it would provide 12 weeks of partially paid leave for new parents, sick workers and workers who care for sick family members. it provides 66% of your wages as a replacement and a cap at $4,000 a month funded by payroll tax increases on both employees and employers. that's her plan reintroduced in this congress. another one of these plans to expand family leave in this country. we want to know if you think that's a good idea. we want to know what happens at your company and your state. tom this waterford, michigan, on that line for those who say we shouldn't expand it. why not? caller: thank you for taking my call. i don't believe that senator

rubio is in tune to what he's talking about here. he's talking about deferring the social security that's already burdened by the baby boomers. your guest before, the 27-year-old talked about that. why not take it now because it might not be there when i'm old enough to grab it? when we start grabbing it when we're 27, when we're 65, it won't be there either. for the people that are currently on it. the daycare tax help would be something good. i think trump made an effort toward that, with doubling the tax credit for families with kids. i have grandchildren and i have great grandchildren and the absence of their mother and father during the day isn't too much of a burden on them because

they're in school. and the ones -- my great grandchildren are in daycare are having a wonderful time in daycare. now tax credits to help with that would be applauded. but to take a burden on the social security is, i think wrong in my opinion. host: tom, you're talking about the kansas of child care. let me bounce this proposal off you. it was released by senator elizabeth warren, democrat from massachusetts. her plan for universal child care that would limit american families expenses to 7% of income regardless of how many children they have in care paid for by a tax on the ultra wealthy. the massachusetts senator's plan which was unveiled on tuesday would make child care free for family with incomes below 2% of the poverty level. other families would pay up to

7% of income depending on how much they earn. the proposal marks the latest policy entry into the 2020 contest on these issues. what do you think of that plan, tom? caller: well, i think that we put a burden on the wealthiest people in america. then the burden's going to somehow fall down to the people that aren't wealthy. so it's easy to sit there and ask those people of wealth to give a little bit more of what they have, but i haven't heard of that plan and quite frankly, i would have to investigate a little bit more before i even have an opinion on that. host: tom, elizabeth warren posted about that plan on medium.com earlier this week. i believe it was tuesday if you want to read more about it. that's just another one of those proposals that we're talking about.

thanks for the call from michigan this morning. nathan is in plainville, indiana. good morning. caller: hello. yes. host: go ahead, nathan. caller: hello? host: go ahead, nathan. go ahead with your comment. caller: hello? host: i'm not sure if we have they thafpblet we'll go to john in massachusetts on that line for those who say we should not expand family leave laws in this country. why not? caller: oh, because european des sens. here we go again. you talk about people in other countries you don't want to help people in other countries but we got money for war, to go kill people of color in other countries, right? so you spoiled brat that came here and took fit the indians and the african-americans that they have pay leave? huh? you make your backs off of other people for war. you got money for war. and then you talk how christians you are. we got 20 something trillion

dollars in debt. host: so john, what's fair? what should the family leave laws in this country look like? caller: the native-americans giving their land away from a bunch of zionist fascist who are multinational? >> that's john from massachusetts this morning. taking our calls. does the u.s. need to expand family medical leave laws, family leave laws in general? if you think we should, it's 202-748-8000, you think we shouldn't, you can continue to call in, 202-748-8001. it's after 7:30 on the east coast. some surveys on this top frick variation organizations out there. we'll start with that national partnership for women and families. a group who's looking to expand some of these leave laws around the country. their survey on this topic from late last year. more than six in 10 voters say they would face a veers financial hardship say? had to take up to a few months

of unpaid leave for family or medical reasons. eight in 10 feel the family medical leave act needs an update. some 82% feel that way. half the voters believe they could benefit from a national paid family and family leave policy. that's from the national partnership for women and families. one other survey, i want to point you to is from the cato institute. their survey on paid family leave from last fall found that 74% favor establishing a new government program to provide 12 weeks of paid leave to workers after birth or adoption of a child. but those numbers change when those who are surveyed are presented with the cost of that program when asked if this program would cost you $200 a year in higher taxes whether you would support it, just 54% said they would. the cost were $450 a year in higher tax, 48% said they would

favor the expansion of that program. and if it was $1,200 a year in higher taxes to pay for it, that number originally at 74% goes down to 43%. that from the cato institute if you want to check out their survey, october first through fourth is when that survey is taken. george this california on that line for those who say we do need to expand family leave laws in this country. go ahead. caller: yeah, thanks, john. it's good talk to you again. and i have a couple of comments. number one is that marco rubio's plan fails to take into effect 20's, n you're in your your future social security benefits are not going to be very large to cover those expenses and one other comment about one of your earlier callers that complain that he didn't have kids anymore and he didn't have anybody to support, well, he was also one of those

people who benefited from free public education when people that didn't have kids paid for his education. and i thank you for your programming. i love c-span. thank you. host: george, before you go, the question we've been asking what's fair and how do you pay for it? we lost george. jeremis ohio. go ahead. caller: good morning, john. hey, my wife and i got married and she went to work. worked for two years and we decided we was going to have children. it's like old school stuff. but anyhow, we did so have children. and i said well, you're on the going to work. and she stayed home. we raised three children. after they were out of school and on their own, she went back to work for a shorts period of time and then was diagnosed with a hereditary disease. had several surgeries and then

she became totally disabled. i had to quit work and stay home with her and take care of her because of the problems from the surgeries or whatever. nd we lived on $550 s. sifment for eight years and people said how did you get into that if well, there's a lot of good people in this world whether you believe it or not. there are a lot of good churches and people just came forward and helped us. of course, finally my wife passed away. but i don't agree with the government getting more involved in our lives. i mean, we made a choice. where's the personal responsibility anymore, john? where is the personal responsibility? we took a personal responsibility. we were going to have children. she would stay home and raise the children. i worked. i even started a small business that helped a lot. we got everything paid for

before this illness came. and that's the way i feel ann it. i think the government -- -- i want the government out of my life as much as possible. host: what kind of work did you do and were you able do that work again? caller: no, i retired right about the same time as she passed away. host: jerry, thanks for sharing your story in ohio. amy this georgia for those who think we should expand family leave laws in this country. go ahead. caller: yes, i do believe that we should expand those even though we do have family leave law now, it does not pay for when you're out unless you have some vacation time. i know some folks that have had issues, medical issues and in georgia, you know, you kind of -- i guess anywhere, really, you're at the mercy of your employer that they're going to,

you know, be understanding and it's not that easy. i'm happy that this gentleman before me was able to have his wife stay home and raise his children. some people do do that and it is a choice. it's not always affordable for everyone. but i don't think the ultra rich are really going to be that impacted. and we're not talking about people, i'm sure over a certain income but a way. once you're saying ultra rich, i'm thinking it's probably somebody that's got enough money that it's not going to impact them as much. so i totally agree. i think it should be expanded. host: amy thanks for the call in georgia. tom in maryland. go ahead. caller: hello? host: go ahead, tom. caller: hello? host: go ahead, tom. caller: yes. i can't believe that a guaranteed annual wage something that was foreclosed by a guy named -- a communist many years

ago. make sure that everybody in this country got a basic salary to live off of. and for medicare for all, i think it would cover the power that these americans are having, trying to survive in this colony. this gentleman who just called, saying that he survived on s.s.i. for eight years by his wife was sick, i would like what he would have done with s.s. -- without s.s.i. he wanted the government out of his business. how would he survive? if the government had not help him and his wife during that period of time? we got so many people who call in who are oblivious to what america is about. history and their understanding of american values is something that came to somebody in russia who knows nothing about america.

i can't believe somebody can live in this country this many years and survive all the trials and tribulations that america have suffered and still come up with the belief that they don't need the government. host: tom, the made care for all, the guaranteed basic wage, how do you pay for all that? dollars.hrough our tax give to it them, give to it the people. host: peter in new jersey. good morning. caller: hi, morning! i'm a u.s. constitution course instruct we are the institute in the constitution. the issue is, yeah, that's very nice thing, leave. however, it's not an issue for the federal government to address. there's nothing in the u.s. constitution authorizing federal government to be involved in that. it's a state issue, between the employers and employees. like 80% of what the government

is involved in, it's not in the constitution. these legislatures need to read the document that they swear a solemn oath to uphold and defend. they don't have the clue what the limitations are. host: peter, what is the institute on the constitution? caller: based in maryland. they put together courses on the constitutions. they fundamental problem in the country is that people have been so dummed down they don't have a clue of what the proper role of the federal government is and the solution is to educate the people. it's a wonderful quote by thomas jefferson saying as a problem where the government, the answer is to educate the people. if they know what the constitution says, the limit os-constitution puts on the government, then they can elect leaders that are going to obey those rules. but if the people don't have a

clue, then the legislatures are going to be able to get away with anything and not be held accountable. they can't be held accountable if the people are ignorant. host: and peter, maybe it's played scombrour answers already but what do you think people misunderstood the most about the constitution and how is that happen -- does hat happen? caller: they think it's a democracy. most people even college grads asked what form of government do we have? and i either get a blank stare or a democracy. we're republic rule of law. 9 -- the legislatures don't obey it. they don't read it. they swear an oath. they take it as some archaic form till and do as they will and they get away wit this is why we're so many trillion dollars in debt and the government has a stranglehold on many small businesses with their regulations. trump understands what the

problem is. i don't know how much he understands the constitution but he understands that government regulations are crippling small businesses' ability to compete and even large businesses. and these are things that the federal government has no business being involved in. these are state issues host: how surprised are you about this headline today? the lead story in the "washington times," $22 trillion national debt low on the priority list and the advisor sees no problem? caller: yeah, well, that figures. that figures. hey don't have a clue. if government would simply obey powers,tations on their then we wouldn't have the problem with the debt. businesses will be booming. freedom would return. liberty would return. the people lost the understanding of what the principles were founded on.

it's very simple. we have god-given rights. the sole purpose of government is to secure those rights. and that's it. that's it. if it's not spelled out in article one section a, they got no business doing it. and people that would say those that would say it's under the general welfare claus. the general welfare claus is just an introduction to what follows in article one section eight. it's not a blank check. had it been a blank cheng, the ninth and 10th amendments of the bill of rights wouldn't mean anything. they can't do it. host: peter thanks for the call from new jersey. always happy to talk about the constitution on this program. david, from maryland is next. good morning. caller: hey, good morning. yeah, i think that it does help for people to be able to take off time to spend time with their families but i think that the government does not need to be -- or should not be responsible for people, you

know, for financial planning. my wife and i were both working. we made a conscious decision have children when we were ready. my wife can stay whom the children. we think it's -- we personally think it's better for the children to be raised by their families, by their mothers, grandmothers, somebody that's -- very close-knit family that doesn't exclude them from having lots of psychological problems in the future but it does help in general. and i think that, you know, we could have, you know, sent my wife back to work and made more money and, you know, probably be a little bit more financially secure in the future but we didn't want to do that. and i think people spend so much more money than what they make and that's why the government has to step in or think they need to step in to, you know, draw upon some future social security to help pay for child care. really, i think it's just people

need to be educated on how to manage their money a little bit better and i think that the kids would be best off with their mother than not some daycare somewhere with, you know, other people taking care of them. host: david, how do you feel about social security? caller: i am thinking that if i get some when i retire, it's great. but i'm not planning on the government supporting me when i retire. i have some minor real estate investments that i'm contributing into a 401k plan which my employer doesn't match anything. i'm just using it as a template to start saving money. but no, i'm not imagining that i will get anything. i'm 29 years old right now and i don't really have a whole lot of faith at that program there is going to do anything for me. if i get something, it's be a bonus, basically. host: david, thanks for the call from maryland. a few for tweets. karen where is in expanded medical leave and similar

initiatives sound nice but until we seriously address the widening wealth gap in this country and the diminished middle class, these programs are just band-aids on symptoms. they don't fix the problem. help says family leave whether paid or unpaid shows the problem with our inflated spotlighted economy that forces partners to outsource the love and care of their infants to strangers because working and middle class families need two incomes to buy necessities. and john smith saying it should be expanded because home home is where it starts if a parent can't have time to take care of new bornings how do we expect in the success of the child's up bringing? taking your calls, 10 minutes left on this segment of the "washington journal." does the united states need to expand family leave laws? as a reminder, here's what's available nation ride right now. it's the family medical leave act. it's been in place for decades. it provides 12 weeks of unpaid

leave to care for a family member or foster child or take care of your own serious health problems. it applies for review it private employers and allows state to set their own standards, expand their leave laws beyond that and several states have. we talked about some of them include new jersey and california, rhode island and massachusetts, among those states as well that have more expansive laws or laws that are in the pipeline that come down. we want to hear from you, whether you thing those should be expanded state wide or nationwide. michael is here in washington, d.c. michael, good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. host: go ahead. caller: yeah. i was -- i want to say yes, it should be expanded. but i think we should definitely take a look at the numbers before we expand anything. everyone has an opinion here

but it's a good thing for people to be home with their mothers or home with their children, able to take care of their parents. great. but how are we going to pay for it? well, let's look at it. we should look at all the ways we can pay for it starting with the government. the government's idea. they want to make it a law. let's make sure they do their part of it. so maybe the government should be a contributor the rest at like 25%. so that's basic bear minimum, 25%. if somebody has to take care of it because it's a law, coming from the government -- host: michael, where does the government get that money? caller: through tax. host: do you think there should be higher tax on people to pay for that 25% that you want the government to contribute? caller: yes, i think there should be higher taxes, especially on the ultra rich. 1%, the 1% of the 1%er. host: how else do you pay for

it? how do make up the rest of the percentage there? caller: i would say employee has a part to contribute and the business have a part to contribute. but on the sliding scale. it's not going to be a one size fits all kind of thing. look at the possibility of the -- profitability of the business. if we're looking at a hedge fund where the people are at the top are taking whole hundreds and millions of dollars, obviously, they should be -- it's going to be higher for them. they'll have a higher contribution rate from that type of business. but if it's a smaller business with 30 or 50 employees where the profit margins aren't as high, then definitely they won't crib as much from the employer -- contribute from the employer. that's where the government may have to step up even more in that sort of a business. but help to be offset by the other businesses. we have to look the numbers all the way around to make an agreement on. we agree that this needs to be

done. host: do you think we've reached that point in the country, michael? do you think the majority of this country knee agrees that this needs to be done? caller: yes. i mean, let's rally the trump base. look at the birth rates of people of european desen here. -- descent here. the birth rates are falling -- the death rates are faster than the birth rate. this is like negative population growth. i mean, you can attribute some of that to people not being able to afford to have children. people not being able to be home with their children and nurture them. you know, this is something that humans do need. host: michael in d.c. this is andrea, also in d.c. go ahead. caller: hello. so i just feel like now, a lot of people just don't want to take responsibility for anything. i mean, i'm a 35-year-old person

and i see like my friends having like big, big weddings and all those kind of things and like nobody planned for having a child and all that kind of stuff. and now, now like i have to pay taxes to just take care of somebody's child? that is like the p.r. lack of planning and just understanding how like money works and all that. so that's my comment. host: by the way, the district of columbia one of easy to locale ities in this country that has more expansive leave laws and paid leave laws specifically. the law in d.c. was passed in 2017. it goes into effect in july of 2020. it provides eight weeks of paid leave for parental leave, six weeks for family care, two weeks for employees' own serious hett

conditions. no more than eight weeks total a year for a combined family and medical leave. again, that gets enacted, effective in july of 2020. bob, tyler, texas, good morning. caller: yes. yes, i'm with a group called building blocks for tried es.org and we're the constitution in the last four years. there's nowhere in the constitution where family care, family leave is a numerated power in the constitution. that's to be left to the states. that guy that called in from maryland, he was exactly right. and so -- host: so bob, to follow-up on that, how do you feel about social security? caller: well, you know, that's unconstitutional too. and anybody that proposes a law, if you look at the third section three of the 14th amendment, that is subverting the

constitution because they're not following the constitution and in the case of our border security, we're aiding and abetting the enemy by doing these sanctuary cities. so the only thing we can guarantee in the constitution the reason america was formed was to protect each state from invasion. that's it. so anyway, there are new mexico rated powers in the constitution. they're very define. there may be up to 30 of them. and everything else is like that guy said, ninth and 10th amendment. host: how do you feel about states making these laws on paid family leave? are you ok with that? caller: i am just overwhelmed with that. those are supposed to be, you know, the crews basketball of our republic and -- crucible of our republic and whoever does it better, then they can do it. i was fine with romney doing it. health care in massachusetts, but when he tries to go it for

everybody, it just dunlt work. the federal government -- the people that they're promoting are just trying to buy votes with our public got and we cannot afford it. host: in the state of texas, there are many localities that mandate paid sick days. the state does not have a paid leave law on the books like california, like new york, like new jersey, like some of these other places we've talked about. that map you're seeing there from the national partnership for women and families. they're a round-up of the various both paid leave laws and paid sick days laws around the country. patrick, st. louis, missouri, you're up next. go ahead. caller: i feel that, yeah, the law could be ok -- could be expanded and that would be ok because, you know there, are families out there that are struggling because we live in a society of enormous debt.

and those of you that say slavery is gone, it's not. e live for slave wages under companies that don't want to pay their employees a fair wage. and they sit back and republicans say that oh, this will hurt small business. and, you know what, about the small businesses that are giving these illegals and they're hiring the illegals, you want to pay for all these things? you want to pay for your wall, you want to pay for other programs to help families? that's fine. tax and punish the people who are enticing the law breakers. those people who hire illegals and those people who are sheltering the illegals and sheltering them in the company and in the business, just because they're trying to save

themselves a little bit of we think e, why don't of account of you? host: that's patrick in missouri this morning. time for more calls. maria in tennessee. good morning. caller: thank you for having this topic on the -- on the program. before i state the reasons why i should -- why this should not be expanded, i want to let everyone know that i did utilize the current s.m.l.a. program when i s ployed and it was not paid by my employer. i had to use my sick time then i went unpaid. unfortunately, my employer had to let me go because my time was up and i was not able to return

to work. but i do feel that before that this one, it all gets to be expanded, i do feel that there are some loopholes that need to be closed up first. for example, there's confusion as to whether or not it requirement, whether or not you can use your vacation time concurrently with the smla. some employers want you to use your vacation first before you invoke smla. others want you to use your vacation time at the same time you invoke smla. d the other thing is for the smaller employers, let's face it. employers want you to show up for work and that's why i hold no animosity from my previous employer for having to let me go. they expect you to show up and

they expect you to work. can i t that? is secured for that 12-week period. how much longer would you have needed to return to the job? my employerally, allowed me to have initially part-time off until my medical condition increased and then i had to have it all the way off. total, my time was maybe three months partial and then another maybe two to three months total for i could not work. understood why my employer had to let me go. another thing is that is not

mentioned is there is a misconception that when you are on smla that you will have your job and you will have all your benefits and everything paid too. however, if you have any cost shares coming out of your check -- say you pay in a part of your medical insurance or you pay into pension, anything like happen if does not you are not earning a wage while you are off. you are still responsible for those. employer to to the pay for those things. not that i'm aware of. you have to pay that yourself. that would need to be clarified as well. host: what kind of work did you do? caller: i was administrative. i started out, moved up the

ladder, was a worker and then i became supervisor. as then both ends as far workforce. understanding that you needed to show up and understand you needed to make sure that the deadlines are met. host: what do you do now, maria? caller: currently i am semiretired. i have been out of the workforce for a while. i am going to have to go back to school. i could probably use some programs to reeducate myself in on the current technology. i was with my employer for 10, 12 plus years when this injury happened. -- i was devastated to have been let go. i understood why they had to. i understood the hardship that

was put on the other employees. so that is why when you talk about the small employers, they are right. they've only got 5, 15 people, it is not going to be enough to be a will to fill in for when someone is out of work for not just a week or two. i am talking to her three months. host: thank you for sharing your story this morning. soka, good morning. caller: good morning, sir. thank you for taking my call. i want to start off by saying only politician to talk the real truth about america today are bernie sanders and elizabeth moran. they are the people who keep saying the system is rigged in favor of the superrich. they are 100% correct. the reason they can say that is because they are not brought over -- bought by the big money.

they are free to talk. ofryone else is in a pocket a big bank or big pharma or big oil. host: this question of expanding family leave? caller: about that question, this is the greatest country on earth. i am a u.s. citizen. dream because of hard work. the greatest of richest country on earth, it was it rich for? is it for the very wealthy or is it rich for everybody who wakes up in the morning and goes to work? it should be those who go to work every morning that are the richest. blue $2 trillion on a $2 cut -- we just blew trillion on a tax-cut.

host: one more call in this segment. clarksburg, west virginia. caller: good morning. i'm against this mainly because i am against anything, any spending bill that they bring up unless they bring of a way they're going to pay for it. how are we going to get the tax dollars? i would like to talk to you for a second about social security. guys haveink you people on there that talk about it. i'm blind andld, on social security. i understand in parkersburg, west virginia, the government take the money and spend it for

what they have to pay every year. topic, we had an entire 45 minute segment just a couple of weeks back called our monday your money segment. the way you can check it out is on her website at c-span.org. i wanted to ask you, on social security, one of the proposals for expanding family leave is to allow for new parents to take their social security benefits early and defer their retirement. do you think that would be a way to expand family medical leave and do it in a way that pays for it? caller: i don't think it ought to be paid for. old and i had a job for 16 years and still never made over three dollars an hour in my life. never.

host: that is ed in west virginia, glass color in this first segment of washington journal. plenty more to talk about. we are joined by author and special agent jack riley to talk about his 30-your hunt for the drug kingpin el chapo, and the rise of the modern drug trafficking. later, michael farren will be here to discuss amazon's decision to pull out of new york city, and the move by some cities to re-examine financial incentives given the large corporations. we will be right back. ♪ this weekend, c-span has live coverage of the national governors association winter meeting. beginning saturday at 9:15 a.m. eastern with montana governor steve bullock on how to build a workforce of the future through his initiative good jobs for all americans.

host van jones on criminal justice reform and innovative strategies. shortly after 11:00, j.p. morgan chase chair and ceo jamie dimon on the intersection of public policy and the modern economy. on sunday, live coverage continues at 9:00 a.m. eastern as governors look at the new u.s.-mexico-canada trade agreement. 11:45, a discussion on education policy. watch the national governors association winter meeting with this weekend on c-span, c-span.org, for listen with the free c-span radio app. saturday on book tv, starting theoon eastern, covers of 12th annual savannah book festival from savannah, georgia. this year's authors include chris steigerwald, larry loftis,

and charles graber on his book "the breakthrough." sunday night at 9:00 p.m. eastern on afterwards, washington post's jason wyzion discusses the days he was held in iranian prison in his book, "prisoner." >> you recounted that day and a lot of details. it was a terrible day. you are arrested at gunpoint. you had masked men that ransacked the place. you are driven to one of those notorious prisons in the world. separated from your wife and told united will die in this place. that is a bad day. >> that's about as bad as it has gotten for me. dayi will tell you, on that i still assumed this would get worked out. that the goal of these people

that have taken us -- at that point we were unclear about which faction of the security apparatus had rated r home -- home, that at some point their goal was to scare us in this would end. >> watchable tv this week and on c-span2. continues.on journal host: jack riley is on your screen, a retired drug enforcement administrator special agent and author. the egg page you say you are compelled to write this book because of the "glorification of el chapo and the drug crisis." what the mean by that? -- do you mean by that? guest: good morning. i was troubled about all the time so many heroic dea agents

and policeman and prosecutors spent to bring el chapo to justice. if they go along the border of central and south america, in some cases he is revered as a robin hood figure. the attention he was getting, even in this country, was really getting my attention. if you connect that to his responsibility for much of the opioid problem we have today in this country specifically when you're talking about deportation of heroin and other more deadly form of fentanyl, el chapo is front and center on that. host: did you see that continue through his trial and his conviction last week? guest: i somewhat did, but i have to tell you -- first of all, let me make it clear. i knew the evidence, i knew the prosecutors and i knew the agents. i knew he was going to get convicted. when i took away from the trial that was somewhat positive was

the american people got a glimpse into just how nasty and vicious and cunning these major drug cartel leaders are. i think chapo, other than osama bin laden, i think he is the number one bad guy of our generation. responsible for thousands of deaths. it standszation as today is still responsible for killing people. host: when did you first hear the name el chapo? guest: 1991. i was attached to a special operations division and we began looking at mexican methamphetamine traffickers, which chapo had a piece of. what got my attention was his ability in terms of logistics. he is a mass murderer of grand proportions, no doubt about it. he is also one heck of a

corporate ceo. the did research on the u.s. market to make sure his organization could supply the demand. fruition atcome to the end when the opioid crisis spread. in the early 1990's, in particular we were concentrating still on columbia with the cartels. we were beginning to piece together the evolution of the mexican cartels. up until that point the cartels in mexico were really not cartels. we referred to them as the federation. they were loosely tied smugglers, not necessarily narcotics traffickers. they would smuggle anything they could to the border for profit. chile peppers, blue jeans, you name it. chapo honed his teeth in his early days as a marijuana smuggler. attended to the logistics of the border -- attuned to the logistics of the border.

host: the passage reads, "crime families new violence through unwanted attention to the illicit activity, but guzman never shied away from that attention and had no scruples about killing innocent people to achieve his goals. he built terror into his business plan." top about how he saw that when you worked around the country from chicago and el paso. guest: absolutely. when i was the boss for dea in 2006 or 2007, juarez was a battlefield. some said it was more dangerous than baghdad or kabul where we were embroiled in military operations. hundreds of people were killed. it was all because chapo was at war with the remnants of two other cartels struggling to control a corridor into the united states. basis and it'sy

seared in my mind the deaths that occurred on the streets of juarez. the threat that posed along the border. moving on to chicago a number of years later, of loss of their in boxx up there- up there,oxss for the first time we saw it was smoked and snorted. that's an important distinction. we so different user groups become addicted and get involved in it. it's an evolution he recognized long before many others. when you are addicted to prescription drugs, either through that prescriptions from a physician or pharmacist, or

you acquire it on the street or steal it out of your grandmother's medicine cabinet, at some point it becomes too expensive. but you're still addicted to opioids. what happens and happened for many people in the city and the affluent suburbs is you take the long road down to using heroin. i saw that take hold in chicago. the other thing chapo did was he formed a toxic alliance with the nearly hundred thousand documents treat gang members in the chicago area who really were his unwitting salesman. they did not realize they were working for him but they were putting the heroine and the drugs on the street. they were those responsible for the spike in violence and homicides and shootings as they begin to protect their area. chapo was pulling the strings from his mountain hideout. for me, i just cannot stand by and do nothing.

it started in the early 1990's. my push to make sure we kept an eye on him. i knew what he was capable of. i was afraid if we did not do something what he would become. 2007 was a tough year. i was in el paso. i had naively given an interview to a local newspaper. i said i am here on behalf of the american people and we are going to go after chapo and do whatever damage we can and hopefully we will apprehend him. itevidently took notice of and shortly after that some of our mexican counterparts contacted us and said they had developed information that chapo put a hit on me. he wanted my head cut off for $100,000, which is pretty cheap. me, even untilor last week, it was almost an obsession. my personal font to make sure --

hunt to make sure he got justice in united states. host: jack riley, former acting deputy administrator of the dea is with us until the top of the hour. we invite you to join in on this conversation. phone lines are of a different. eastern and central time zones, (202) 748-8000. noun or pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001 -- mountain or pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. if you have been impacted by the opioid crisis that is a big part of this book and the work that jack riley has done, (202) 748-8002 is the number. mr. riley, you were about to get there with the story about the pricing your head. can you talk about heidi began this book, the night on the road home from las cruces from el paso? guest: that is why i am so proud of the dea agents that have come before me now and will come

after me. it is somewhat of a dangerous job. you kind of get known to the to the fact-- numb that bad guys would like to see you hurt. that was a strange time in 2007. you could not blow it off. shortly after we got the information he may have put a hit on me -- you can never really verify these things -- i was on my way home late one night. we lived in las cruces, about 40 miles of interstate 10 outside of el paso. as i was getting on the road i noticed a couple of cars city in a closed down fast food restaurant. it was late at night and they driver.ked driver to my first thought was they look like undercover cops waiting for a call or doing their job. as soon as i got on the ramp,

their lights came on and away we went. that led me on about a 40-mile high-speed just trying to get away from them. ended up in a schoolyard playground south of las cruces where i thought of that yard i was in real trouble. at the last minute they pulled off and drove away. i don't know if it was intended to scare me or if they were carjackers. coincidental to what had occurred before. it made me concerned not just for my safety, my family's safety, but for our employees. not just the agents but the civilians who are just as important to our operation, many of whom live front of the border. we even had some that commuted across the border everyday. it changed my mind about how we really have to attack these

organizations, but we have to put safety first. host: the book "drug warrior", jack riley with us until 95 this morning. mike is in laguna woods, california. go ahead. caller: good morning, gentlemen. it strikes me that drug prohibition is a foolish replay of alcohol prohibition, causing all the same social problems. high crime. 's ofpowers the el chapo the world and provides them with billions of dollars. now --been for decades four decades now we have been pursuing this war on drugs. one of the other things that occurred to me recently was that contrary, atdly war with america's founding principles. can i have your comment please? guest: yes, thank you.

i will say one thing for me. when i hear the term "war on drugs," it drives me crazy. that the notes a beginning and an end. i don't know that they will be an end to addiction and people misusing drugs, and certainly people that profit from it. i tend to have changed my mind over the years. i would have told you as a young agent, blood on the streets of chicago, we can arrest our way out of this. i am telling you right now we cannot. i think it is important to have a robust law enforcement presence, both domestically and foreign. foreign is really important because we do a lot more than just narcotic and oarsmen overseas. you talk about the rule of law, institution-building and places that lack that and can affect the security of the united states. i want to make sure you understand that i think we have to rethink a lot of things we

are doing in the whole context of the whole drug issue. the wayour education, we are doing it now needs to be really refocused on the most at risk groups. a lot off gets me when people think the only thing we do for education is send a jolly local policeman to a third-rate school. that is somewhat important, that we need to work on our at risk groups, especially with the opioid considerations now that come from both illegal and legal sources. so we attack the people, we get to the people that are most at risk, young adults, high school age, college kids, young professionals. people who are finding themselves in the grips of addiction. we need to follow up with universal treatment for those and want it, that need it, maybe it is not available or can't afford it.

i am not talking about repeat offenders, violent offenders. those problems he to be taken care of with an our correctional institutions. some of the best drug treatment programs are in prisons, which is alarming. but ihinking differently don't think regardless of what we do on legalization, and as i told congress many times, i am a cop. i don't write the law. i took an oath to enforce the law. that is up to the governing bodies to change that, but i don't think it would eliminate the black market. we are beginning to see that with domestic marijuana sales. host: not jack riley's first time on c-span. testified as the acting deputy administrator of the dea before congress. you can go back to our archives and watch that testimony at c-span.org. thomas is on the line for those who have been impacted by opioids from greenfield, massachusetts.

caller: how are you today? guest: good. caller: i'm a little nervous so give me a minute. i personally have been impacted by the opioid crisis. on a personal level. it got me -- he got to my soul. -- it got to my soul. i only use heroin for a small amount of time because of prescriptions. medoctors overprescribed because of my tonsils being taken out. i knew a friend that happened to be selling heroin. he told me it would take the pain away. i did note i knew it, want to take it anymore but my body needed it. my mind needed it. that i had the

family and friends i did because i found recovery and i have been in recovery today for three years. i have a great relationship with my daughter, my parents. hadt my life back because i great people in my life pulled me back from that addiction. host: thank you for sharing your story. guest: first of all, congratulations. i think what you have been through is a living hell and the way you have emerged really gets my attention. the massachusetts-new hampshire area, the east coast has really been almost for me ground zero for the opioid problems. there are some really innovative programs going on in that part of the country. i can think of several in new hampshire where we are really starting to see community effort except this as an illness and

not a crime and make sure we use all of our resources we can to get people back you want to come back. my hat is off to you, sir. you did great. host: your book is about el chapo, that how much blame to you place for the crisis in this country on overprescribing doctors, on pharmaceutical companies, on pill mills? guest: i was talking to somebody from the american medical association. he said for years physicians going through their medical training were given maybe eight to 10 hours of pain management instruction throughout the whole training. if you look at a veterinarian school, they received 40 to 80 hours on how to treat animals with pain. i think there is an issue clearly with the medical profession. i know they have done a lot in the last several years to try to

provide training for physicians to use alternatives to opioid-based drugs. i think that has to continue. you bring up an important thing and it's kind of a pet people of mine. i think the cozy relationship that congress sometimes has with big pharma, the big pharmaceutical companies, is really something witty to examine. far too often it dea the great work of the agents and investigators will look at these large companies and in my opinion i wanted them to be prosecuted criminally and send them to jail, like the drug dealers i believe they are. but far too often we had to settle for civil fines. when you're suing a $1 billion corporation and you win a civil fine of $100 million, that's like taking a truckload of narco dollars from chapo. effect.ery little

it is built into the bottom line and it is the cost of doing business. ceos whok one of those knowingly and repeatedly violates regulations and we prosecuted criminally, i can guarantee you a billionaire ceo will not do too well playing kickball in the prison yard real felons. if we send a message across the industry that we are serious about it. i think it is something we have to work on. i think we have to work on education and treatment and bring it into the realm of this is part of society's fabric and we have an obligation to help those who want help. host: bob, good morning. caller: good morning. mr. riley, let me see if you are familiar with this. they ran ayears ago the pillry on -- about mills in west virginia.

the dea was right on top of them to stop. 15 millionelling pills in a county had a 7100 population. dea whenama told the they were fixing to bust them, barack obama shut the dea down and he done it because he was getting kicked back money from -- drug drum dealers dealers. he was a conspirator. do was involved letting drugs kill 70,000 people in this country a year. to shut it down. host: mr. riley? isn't anything you know about? guest: i know about the investigation. wehink there is a larger one

took care of in south florida where he had pain management clinics. they would move from spot to spot to spot. we had people from all over the country traveling down there to get opioids and returning home and selling them. s in pharmaciesll that are doing this are every bit -- let me make this clear -- every bit as guilty as the guy with the pistol and announce of heroine standing on the corner. we have to do a better job legislatively to make sure we have got the ability to go after them and shut them down quickly. that wehe criticisms took was we did not move quick enough. we can only move within the constraints of the law. i think that is something we should look into. host: i want to come back to el chapo's story. a passage from your book.

"few people knew how much information we have collected about el chapo over the years. we knew so much about him, his habits, his inner circle, his taste for food and entertainment. burriotos and corn did him in." guest: for the first 15 years, he was kind of an old-school trafficker and stayed off the radar. ineloa, butremote se then he started making mistakes. he would come down to the more highly populated resort areas, cabo san lucas in particular, and he began thinking he was invincible. he had a security apparatus that was probably as good as many mid-level city police departments in terms of visibility to collect information and move around. towards the end he did have a

women and certainly other entertainment. he made some mistakes. i think what is important about that part of the book and what we did was we really targeted the people around him. in terms of the way they communicated. his doctors, his lawyers, his girlfriend. all those things really important for us to build a pattern of life on this guy so we have a better chance of zeroing in and working with our mexican counterparts to try to hook him up. we were able to do that twice. host: what happened after the first time? hest: after the first time did what he has been doing for 20 years. to use all of his money and influence and corruption and rode a motorcycle right out. that was the worst day of my

life. host: hatted you find out? -- how did you find out? guest: he had been out for about an hour and a half. my sun called me and he said, dad, chapo is out. there is no way. i turned on the cable news and there it was. obviously we started -- i called our command center. they called the chief of hadation and the mexicans not even notified our guys in mexico for several hours, which i was not happy about. i think they thought they could apprehend him or they were trying to figure out what to do for damage control. several months before that, i had traveled to mexico city for a meeting. i had an opportunity to speak to the head of the federal police. about too much before he escaped, we were hearing some chatter and information he might be tunneling out. i took the opportunity to tell

the head of the federal police at the meeting. he looked at me like i was from mars. how dare i tell them how to do his job? several months later out the tunnel he went. i found it strange that kept them in the same ce the wholel time he was incarcerated on the first floorl. if you put two and two together of chapo's history, it was not a good move on their part. host: are you concerned he will escape again? guest: not in this country. he is where he prolong. -- belongs. i'm sure there will be callers that will say what is the thing to sineloa, and we can talk about that. point is we were not only able to capture him once, the build trusting relationships with some of our mexican counterparts which was a tough thing to do and took years and years to do. and to extradite him, have been

face justice in the united states and hopefully get a life sentence and then go to a place where he is going to have the rest of his life to think about it, i think it is worse for him then taking a bullet from one of his rivals. what he is about to endure. for me personally, i like where he is sitting. host: brought in, massachusetts. brian, good morning. caller: good morning, mr. riley. there is so much i would love to say. i was first going to mention going back to the 1800s and the dutch american robber barons and the lpn moores -- opium wars in china in the 1800s and many people profited from it and how it will never stop. just like prostitution. the other thing i wanted to mention was the pendulum swings one way. the guy from alabama blaming

obama and the tennessee drug dealer and how much they were trying to help people with chronic pain. i familiar with a person with chronic pain. it makes me think of when we were in afghanistan and the pakistani guy had to carry water to the well was addicted to heroin and how heroin is different from any other drug as far as addiction and the stigma attached. it is delicate physical choice this person may. i need a drink today, i need to store that cocaine today. -- snort that cocaine today. there is no choice. if you're in chronic pain and you take an opioid for more than a week or two, your mind chemically changes to need the drug. that is of no doing of any person, any class, any color.

i wondered if you could speak to that. paolo escobar seemed like a robin hood, loved by his people. what else was i going to mention? host: mr. riley? guest: i think you got a good point, i really do. that is why for me that heroin problem and now fentanyl which is just alarming, 40 to 50 times stronger, a synthetic heroin so there is no growing season. they can be produced 24/7. it is also produced in china and mexico. i do agree with the caller. this is the worst addicted drug i have ever seen, and i have everybody justke ruin and decimate communities. the important thing is that understand it is now in every

corner of our country. for city,t matter large, small, rural or urban, it's a problem. we as a country of to stand up and take responsibility at all levels because it is everyone's problem. it only law enforcement's, is policy makers, doctors, educators, coaches, creatures. -- preachers. inryone has to take a role educating everyone about this and doing what we can do is communities to help the people that are unfortunately caught in it. host: patrick in south carolina good morning. caller: yes. i want to ask you about these olivers of chapo, like stone, sean hannity's movie penn and these movie stars. younger people look at them and think they are hanging around

with chapo, its ok. he's a good guy. can you talk about that? guest: definitely. i think that is an important part about how we found ourselves or we are. for years i used to say hollywood can make great movies but they don't need to show people snorting coke and shooting heroin. it sends a very conflicted message, almost as if it is being glamorized. i do agree. there is a part in the book penn andbuddy sean how that meeting with chapo put many good hard-working mexican law enforcement and to some extent u.s. agents who were helping them in peril, in jeopardy. i was very vocal at the time.

i thought they should be prosecuted for obstruction of justice. claimed, and evidently the powers above me believed he was there as a journalist and therefore should be protected. i don't understand. what i was worried about is what the caller is talking about. it was not really him. it was the message he sent by being allowed to do that and writing what i consider to be a worthless article in rolling stone. it said nothing new. his interview of chapo was such a softball. trio of asked him, is a you murdered 10,000 people and are murdering people today? you torture them a cutter has often put their bodies and acid and you kidnap young girls for your own pleasure. these are the types of people these guys are. even to connect that with legitimacy, i think it is a real mistake. host: joseph in new jersey, good

morning. caller: i had a question for mr. riley. i like his take on the legalization of marijuana. this drug is considered illegal as far as the federal government is concerned, yet you have individual states passing their own laws legalizing the consumption of marijuana. yet the government nor the dea does anything about it. host: mr. riley? guest: that's a great question. let me clarify something. misunderstood dea has nothing to do for it is legal or not legal. status of the other agencies based on science and what they look at in terms of helping being a medical assistant. all we do is enforce the regulations congress imposes on us. i do agree with you.

i'm a firm believer that the cartels are involved in marijuana. at 1.i think it was a number one cash crop. as these states begin to russell with their own version of marijuana, i think they are under the false delusion it will generate long-term tax benefits for the states. in reality, they are just trying to see the overall effect. maybe they were able to collect a billion dollars in taxes, for what they are seeing in social services, emergency room admissions, loss of productivity, car accidents in colorado are becoming more and more of people driving impaired. than the other side of it. the edibles, the oils taken, the thc extracted and is extremely potent. all of these things are byproducts of our decision at

the state level to make these laws and make marijuana available. i think it is a slippery slope. that if it ispe going to be done, it is done with proper regulations and services required to keep it consistent with the law. for me, federally, we have criteria. we still go after marijuana traffickers. don't think we don't. has always been a misconception that the dea guys are looking for guys in the basement with a bong. we go after the major organizations involved. the states, i think, we'll have to struggle with their decisions for some time to come. host: 15 or 20 minutes left with jack riley this morning.

if you're in the eastern or social time (202) 748-8000. mountain or pacific, (202) 748-8001. if you have impacted by the opioid crisis, (202) 748-8002. the book is "drug warrior," jack riley about's hunt for el chapo. his 30 years fighting drug cartels. i want to ask you your thoughts on what president trump had to say less week when he declared the national emergency on the border. his comments about how illegal drugs or boot into this country. [video] president trump: but big majority of the big drugs don't go through ports of entry. they can't go through ports of entry. you have people, some very capable people. the border patrol, law enforcement looking. you can't take human traffic, women and girls. be can't take them through ports of entry.

you can't have them tied up in the backseat of a car or truck or a van. they opened the door and look. for it can't see three women with tape over the mouth or whose hands are tied. they go through areas where you have no wall. everybody knows that. nancy knows it, chuck knows it. they all know it. it is all a big lie, a big con game. you don't have to be very smart to know you put up a barrier, to people come in and that's it. they can do anything unless they walk left or right and they find an area where there is no barrier and they come into the united states. welcome. ?ost: esther riley -- mr. riley guest: i'm not a politician. i'm just a 30-year dea agent who spent time on the border. unfortunately the statistics show the majority of the drugs, heroin, fentanyl --

fentanyl, marijuana come through existing checkpoints. it just does not in my opinion make business sense for the large cartels to move the volume of drugs through isolated areas. i do think the wall will have an effect on the illegal alien migration. i'm hoping the president does this, that if we enhance our technology and manpower at checkpoints, i think we can make a difference. the only have to look three weeks ago. at one of our checkpoints the --gest fentanyl caesar occur seizure occurred and it was in a compartment in the floor of a truck. had we not been able to x-ray it we probably would not have been able to catch it. a guy like guzman put this together. if we are only searching up to 35% or 40% of the vehicle

traffic, and there are thousands of trucks and cars they go in and out of the country every day. if they are only searching that percentage and your businessman, there's a pretty good chance of i sent 10 cars 3 were vehicles through in one day, i might get six or seven through. 300 to gete to bat . into the baseball hall of fame. once you clear the checkpoints, you have access to major highways which is handy can take the stuff down the road. i'm not saying drugs come through on walled areas -- un walled areas, but from all the informant we have talked to, all the corroborating defendants and from legal wiretaps where we are listening to bad guys talk to bad guys and telling us what they're doing, there is not a lot of evidence that drugs come through unwalled areas.

caller: i lived in south texas for about 13 years in the corpus christi area in spent time along the border. brownsville to del rio. the violence, not all of it is reported other. these guys will blow you away for the slightest reason. they are not playing. why we are talking about allowing these folks to come across the border, they are here now, but to allow more to moving we arein and out, inviting a cancer into this country that needs to be stopped. a fortunately or unfortunately have known a lot of folks over the years. most are dead so i can name some names. a friend of mine was leasing their clients -- airplanes. when they crashed, they would turn around and buy the middle east them.

these guys are working here now on connections from canada to miami. that is what it is about, the dollar. how much they can get. guest: i think he is exactly right. that is why i think on the immigration issue, yeah, much of the border already has walls and barriers. i think there are ways to do it but i don't want to dismiss enhancing the checkpoints with technology and manpower. i think he has a very good point along the border. one of the things i was worried about the short time i was the boss in el paso was spillover violence. things that really scared me were a number of cartel people who happen to be on our side of stopped byand where a lonely deputy sheriff in the middle of nowhere everybody just going to write a speeding ticket. lowered the hold, you are

dealing -- low and behold, you are dealing with these guys. that is the fear we have across the border. i do think law enforcement in general in many isolated areas has got a tough job. host: nicolas from pikeville, maryland. caller: i wanted to speak about over prescription of drugs. i understand it is the policy makers that have scaled back the ability of doctors to prescribe various certain quantities of these pain medications. i suppose if the patient needs more, they will have to go back to the pharmacy or the doctor for a prescription. i think this model could be used for many other drugs. i believe the tremendous over prescription of drugs -- a lot of pharmaceuticals are wasted. nce the patient is given the

prescription and it is filled, he cannot return any unused medications to the pharmacy. there is a tremendous waste. perhaps the model we're seeing in the pain medications can be withinross the board reason and save a tremendous amount of money. riley?r. guest: that's a good question. one of the things dea has done over the last several years is the national take back where we provide -- i think it was some 2000 outlets in one day two or three times a year people can return unused prescriptions anonymously. then we destroy them. well, iften thought,

50 oxycontin because you have your wisdom teeth pulled and you only use four, what happens to the rest of them? our fear is the end up on the street. the other issue is there ought to be a mechanism within the medical profession to immediately turn those in. i think that is not a bad idea. it occurs everyday. my father passed away of a pretty that cancer. he fought it for a while. when he died we went into clean out his house. how thetounded narcotics he had been prescribed over a couple of years that was still sitting in his medicine cabinet. i think that is a big issue. companies -- the pharmacy companies are getting involved in taking back unwanted prescriptions. we have to be careful with it

because we don't to flush it down the toilet or dump it in the garbage because they can do some damage to the environment. that is why i think these takeback programs have been so successful and we have to continue. on thectually -- ashley life is affected by the pope your crisis. caller: i live in an area that has been highly impacted. the area has been devastated by this crisis. what i have noticed -- i became addicted and what i found was how hard it was to get into treatment. when i went the first time they would not let me into rehab is it did not have enough of a history of encounters of trying to clean up. i see that. there is not really an interest in treatment. there seems to be more of an interest in pushing this message that this is a crisis, this is a

crisis. they are using this crisis as an it as a wayushing to get people on board with changing our privacy rights in regards to health information. i have seen reports where if it wasn't for the functional -- fentanyl, the opioid medication, it has decreased significantly in the past few years. host: mr. riley? guest: i think the whole treatment apparatus in this country really needs a tough look and needs an infusion of federal money to be dispersed. from what i have been able to see, and again i'm just a cop, i have been able to see in areas i have been impressed with what they have done is the local attention by communities or states for treatment programs that are tailored for their cities.

whether it'd be urban or rural. the government to do a great job of funding some of that. treatment now is an issue, although there are some private equity companies beginning to buck of to make a blo providing good treatment. i have a friend who helps them set up clinics in hard-hit places. it has made a difference where they have done it. this also goes back to the issue between how do we provide patients with the medicine they need but don't over -provide. i think they need to do more. i think what is important is you are beginning to see patients or family members of patients who are on chronic pain management question the amount of narcotics being prescribed.

by think that is a real good thing and i hope it continues. host: staying on the line for those who have been impacted by opioids. caller: hi. about a year ago i was in a bad car accident. my legs were crushed. from the hospital i got a seven-day supply of opioids. i'm not sure what kind now. dr. i gotrom the hand another seven day supply. i had to take those pills and ahead to break them in half because i could not get no more. after 14 days of breaking up those pills i was only on medication for a month maybe and since then the doctors -- i

could never get no more prescriptions because they said they were restricted by laws. so now it is either aspirin all a friend i'm lucky, will come by or i will go to somebody's house and maybe smoke a joint. it is the thing about marijuana. if people were allowed to grow it and spoke in their own home home,ke it in their own you would not have problems with people going to the doctor all the time trying to lie their way into getting pills. when people really need them, the don't get them because of the laws people make that they don't even understand. host: thank you for sharing your story. think,unfortunately, i

again, dea agents are cops. we are not doctors. we'll prescribed or diagnose. -- we don't prescribed or diagnose. i'm worried about a physician who is intimidated and not using good medical practice because of what he perceives as restrictions. that is the balancing act we have to do. on the marijuana side, i think that is up to the states to try to mitigate this. caller brings up a really important component. all of these things are interrelated. until we begin to connect the dots and deal with the problem in its entirety, i don't think people make substantial changes in this country. i have said this for years. this is a marathon, not a sprint. it is a deadly game on both ends. thinkk we have to really

what we do, rethink what we have been doing and put the resources where they need to be to make a difference. get to bothl try to colors quickly. lee, go ahead. the thing i am concerned about, i understand this opioid crisis, killing people, getting her drugs, taking them back and selling them. what about the people that need the medicine? they cut us off, i am bedridden because of it. at least marijuana would help. i have not had that. i know it would help me. they cut the pills. what do we do? what is the alternative for the pain? yyy aaa you know one of the things they're doing now, some of the pharmaceutical companies are putting a lot of money into this, is looking for alternatives for pain management.

frankly, for the last 50 years, they never had to. they never had to invest in that because what they were producing was making money. and getting people addicted. hope thatw there is there will be some alternative medicines available that will be addictive and we will be able to you -- to ease the patient's pain. i just had an extensive knee surgery and when i came home i was dead set on not taking the pain medicine they gave me. i made it for about an hour. i was very careful not to go very long. i ended up getting rid of most of what they gave me. it is a slippery slope in the medical profession. they are becoming aware. i hope there is some alternatives to controlling pain. host: last call. mississippi. go ahead. caller: good morning.

i want to say it is an honor to speak with someone who has served our country so diligently. successful in bringing down such a violent person. question?you have a caller: just an anecdote about living with someone who was addicted to heroin. i moved to florida a few years , i had anwas apartment and i was looking for a roommate. i love these folks to move in with me. after they moved in, i learned they were addicted to heroin. it was really shocking to watch how they would constantly be in this position of not having enough pills because they would trade pills to other people, they would exceed their dosage. every month, it would be the same story. they would start out in a good place and have enough pills and by the last week, week .5 they

would -- 1.5 weeks, they would start going through withdrawals, spent their time thinking about when to see the doctor next, it would go on and on. eventually i got rid of them because they were stealing money from me. with someone else moving me was also addicted to heroin, but she was on something called and she -- i watched her go through withdrawals over the course of several weeks and she successfully kicked her habit and was able to move on with her life. host: thanks. first of all, thank you for your kind words. i want to clarify i did not single-handedly do anything. with honored to work ,undreds of heroic dea agents policemen, and prosecutors. it was an honor to do that. i think what you are describing is what a lot of people go through. having witnessed that, you

understand the depths of what addiction can be. and how it can control people's lives and change their destiny. i think it goes back to the company dated way we have to do something. we definitely need a law-enforcement involved domestically and overseas, which is crucial. we have to look at how do we identify and get treatment and help to the people who want it. the people who need it. and try to get to the medical profession and all the other public service people to think cohesively on how to do it. i heard the color say that she was in an auto accident. theyaw two surgeons and both prescribed things. clearly, they were not talking to each other. again, that sometimes leads to over -- overprescribing. this is a complex issue we will deal with forever. i think everybody that calls and today has got a good point about something.

had,w from the job that i there is so many people out there in law-enforcement risking their lives everyday and they believe they are doing it to help people. i certainly did. and still do. host: the book is inside the hunt for el chapo. the author, jack riley. thanks so much for your time this point. guest: thank you. it was an honor. will be joinedwe by join -- george mason university's michael faron to discuss amazon's decision to pull its proposed headquarter site out of new york city as well as the move to raise financial incentives given the large corporations. we will be right back. announcer: this week, at 8:00 eastern on c-span, we look at the political careers of the

four congressional leaders. using video from the c-span archives and analysis by congressional reporters. tonight, we wrap up the week with a look at charles schumer. watch this week beginning at 8:00 eastern on c-span. i admire him because he is sellable and often, though not always, but often will own up to that. he will own up to failures. professor atglish the united states military academy at west point. on her annotated edition of grants memoirs. ofi had a moving experience reading the menu script alongside those notes. what you see there is the dissolution of his physical body and his desperate clinging to all the energy, the reserves of energy had left and an iron determination to give every last

ounce of strength to the memoirs. to the completing of this book. of course, he is -- he does not want to write his memoirs but is compelled to buy a few calamitous circumstances. in the last few years of his life. including bankruptcy and diagnosis of his fatal cancer. announcer: sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q and a. >> the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. >> ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. and the people who knocked these buildings noun will hear all of us soon. -- down will hear all of us soon. announcer: the presidents, noted historians rank america's best and worst chief executives. into the livest

of the 44 american presidents. true stories gathered by an years with noting -- noted presidential historians. events thatlife shaped our leaders. challenges they face and the legacies that have left behind. published by public affairs, c-span's the presidents will be on shelves april 23. you can preorder your copy as a hardcover or e-book today. at c-span.org/the president. or wherever books are sold. washington journal continues. host: michael faron is a resort -- researchate fellow. he studied the use of economic development subsidies by cities and states last week. amazon canceled part of its headquarters expansion that would have brought the company to queens. remind viewers what amazon walked away from him canceling that expansion. guest: amazon walked away from

new york city's best base of tech talent. that was the most important thing that walked away from. they also walked away from 3 billion and subsidies. that is much less consequences. -- consequential. what they really walked away from was the political rancor and community opposition. that was what ended up driving them away. host: 3 billion and subsidies. break that down about how it would have been given to amazon and in what form. guest: a lot of the modern subsidies that are given out are based on job creation. for each job created you get an additional piece of subsidy. a lot of the time, it is created in a way such that the taxes of the worker pays on their payroll taxes just end up flowing back to the company. the government just redirects it. also always infrastructure investments that are made to accommodate the company's new headquarters and

things like that. host: what do you think the pull out tells us about how much amazon value those dollars in subsidies? us that it was not worth it to stay in new york for the 3 billion. and they could have located across from manhattan in new jersey if they wanted 7 billion and subsidies. it is not the same thing as queens. they are relatively quick close. in arlington, amazon is being given 1.1 billion in subsidies. they could have gotten eight point 5 billion or more just by locating on the opposite side of the sea in montgomery county, maryland. that tells us that the decision from the beginning was not about subsidies. it was about access to tech talent. wrote that the subsidy packages may be good politics but they are not necessarily good economics. >> there is three major problems with targeted economic develop and subsidies. the first is that they don't work.

they don't sway where a company will locate. of a vaste basis number of studies by academics and scholars across the u.s.. only workat they about 2% to 25% of the time. subsidies5% of the did not actually change. factors like a skilled workforce or access to customers are much more important. secondly, the important thing is they carry cost on other taxpayers local residents and businesses. int have to be accounted for government funds. the other problem is they incentivize more cronyism. our current structure is politicians encouraging businesses to locate in different places and the business are already going to do it. the politicians, the only way they can claim credit for the jobs created is by giving the subsidies per that is the real problem. host: if you want to join the

conversation, phone lines. if you are a new york or virginia resident, (202) 748-8000. if you are in other time zones, (202) 748-8001. in the pacific, (202) 748-8002. what is the market us center for folks who may not know? is an economic policy research center that strives to be the bridge between academic research and real-world policy. to answer the questions that politicians face and give them the economic translation of economic research. for these incentive packages, can you walk through how they are normally put together and what usually gets offered first and second in these sort of way is to sway companies to move to a district

or city. is three broad pieces of an incentive package. first is subsidies for job creation. that is the case that i already mentioned. often, there is also subsidies for investment. capital investment. for the two point 5 billion that amazon would have put into its hq2 inn new york city -- new york city, they would have gotten a portion of that back. foxconn in wisconsin, a 1.3 billion is earmarked as incentives to build more effective -- factories and buildings. the last part of it, infrastructure investment. adding subway stations or additional roads in the foxconn situation, there is $160 million grant that is going to redevelopment of federal around foxconn. we are actually all on the hook to pay some of foxconn subsidies. host: when did cities first are

doing this? -- first start doing this? guest: they started with a mississippi tax credit in the 1930's. it started longer before that early 1800s. the states started subsidizing railroad countries that companies and canal companies. essentially, underwriting their debt. when those companies, they made a lot of bad bets, went under, then the state had to come up and pay that debt and it resulted in about eight states and one a defaulting on their debts. callf that grew what we constitutional gift clauses. most states have it written in the constitution that they are not allowed to use public dollars to finance private enterprise. the definition of what constitutes a public use of money has gotten water down more and more over the years. that is why by the 1930's mississippi and other states

were starting to subsidize economic development and that just has accelerated until what you see today where north carolina could have offered amazon up to $12 billion. host: what is the most controversial subsidy offer? has been the most controversial because of the fanfare and limelight that amazon put itself into when it was first trying to court cities to do this. day, the new the york hq to pull out, kind of illustrates this, amazon was always looking for the right workforce. number two, it was looking for the place that i could call home. the plays were politicians in the community would value it. what is all happening in new york was just a repetition of a was happening with the public opposition it has experience in seattle.

they said this is exactly what we are trying to avoid. that is why they pulled out. host: we have the phone line for those who live in virginia and new york. (202) 748-8000. we have split up our phoneline for the rest. central time zone, (202) 748-8001. mountain and pacific time zone is (202) 748-8002. eddie is in miami, florida. good morning. caller: i used to live in new york when there was -- when walmart wanted to put one of their stores there. there was this tremendous battle going on because they did not want unions and they wanted all these tax breaks. this is about 10 years ago. it seems since then this kind of model has spread to so many places where they feel that if they bring jobs that they don't

have to pay any taxes and that it is ok for the people that live in these cities to pay for the roads and pay for the police department. a lot ofto me that this began with this walmart model. it spread all around the country. i have seen it happen. that: it is certainly true it has been accelerating in recent decades. i am not sure it has a started with walmart or it became worse with walmart. that is entirely possible. it is certainly the case that there is not much economic development that happens. at least at a large-scale or with a large company, that does not get some sort of local subsidies. you are exactly right. this is the trade-off and the cost to other taxpayers that i was talking about. new york city, for its 1.3 billion in subsidies, could have

increased the size of the police force by another 240 police officers. or it could have paid for the education of another 1400 public school students for the same time. new york state, for its 1.7 billion, could have funded the educations of 11,000 state university of the next 15 years or paid for all of the road maintenance costs throughout the state for another entire year. he's kind of subsidies create these trade-offs in public funding that mean that other people have to pay higher taxes. in a was a poll released news story last night that came out right after the amazon hq decision that showed about 65% of americans think that the subsidies that are given to individual companies for these economic development incentives should actually go to individual

taxpayers as tax breaks or they should go to all businesses as tax breaks. host: lambert is in brooklyn. caller: good morning. i have been listening to the program. very interesting. of amazon the pullout there. i think it is sad. for the simple reason is that a person or a company that , better a lot of people than these little community mom and pop stores that only employee maybe their immediate relatives. the unemployment situation in installed,f it was would alleviate in a great deal. i think that you are right. this sent that amazon is not

locating in new york, not only for the new york residents that would have benefited from the accelerated economic growth that would have occurred because that is the case. is going to benefit and a norm us amount from the amazon expansion that is happening there as well as places around the country that will take the jobs that new york would have benefited from. painsis always growing that come with it in terms of increased traffic congestion and increased housing prices per that motivates other economic growth to take care of those challenges as well. i fully agree. it is a shame that it is a shame that is not going to new york. it would have been better for the nation's economy given that new york would be -- was the first place that amazon chose, it probably would have one more profitable and productive in new york than any place else. host: any surprise in seeing an

advertisement like this? mr. bezos, think big. build a city, take another look at our proposal in tampa, florida. no income tax, unrivaled lifestyle. show the world how it should be done. essentially, what you are saying is multiple cities coming out and saying consider us again. take another look at our subsidies. local quality of life and own tax environment, all businesses but -- benefit from. that is not a bad idea. is we have this idea of courting companies to come to a particular place. the fact of the matter is the vast majority of economic finds these kind of

things don't work. subsidies don't work. trying to sway companies to locate in one place does not work. there is a science behind it. there is an art. there is an entire industry andnd location consulting trying to figure out the best place for firms to locate. they will pick those things because access to customers, to the resources and ports that they need are far more important than and -- than most of the factors people think of. and ports that they need are far more important than and -- than most of the factors people think of. host: asheville, north carolina. caller: i would like to thank i would like to thank the gentleman for coming out and expanding some of these issues to the general public. i had a couple of statements. is if the subsidies did not

matter to amazon then why put out this bid at all? i would also like to thank him i would also like to thank him for his comments regarding the i would also like to thank him for his comments regarding the issue regarding jobs in new york. i don't think the new york has a real employment issue. it has a housing issue. i think a lot of the developers were really disappointed in amazon not coming to new york city. were really disappointed in amazon not coming to new york city. the real question i have is whether or not it gives you any insight regarding the data that amazon collected from all of these bids from various cities around the country, what can you tell me about that? guest: these are all good questions. i initially thought, like most people, the reason for the big beauty pageant kind of approach to amazon's hq2 competition was that it was chasing the best subsidies. or trying to extract the most subsidies from the place that it was already likely to go.

that is what the research would suggest. the subsidies don't matter, they are going to go wherever they want to go. the competition is an excuse to extract the highest amount of subsidies they can out of their already predetermined location. they are an icing on a cake that has been chosen. in this case, we have learned more information about hq2 composition. amazon was looking for a place that it can call home and that it would be appreciated by the local community and the local politicians. what they ran into in new york same sort ofexact problems that they had been facing in seattle for a wild. i think that is the major reason behind them leaving. the, it tells us that competition was about finding the right environment that is going to appreciate them. an economic developer in denver had a quote in the note -- new

york times saying that he got the impression that amazon executives felt like a scapegoat for every single problem that came up in seattle. whatever it was, it was somehow amazon's fault. amazon wants to avoid that. intowant to keep growing the biggest company in the world differentnterest in vast amount of industries. they are moving into health care . the news on that released last year around this time. amazon wants to keep the kind of pr, good pr coming. that is why they exited d.c.. it is why they have the competition being so public. host: about 10 minutes left. if you have questions, he is in plato, texas. good morning. caller: good morning. this is a problem throughout our nation. i have seen it here in dallas. jerry jones built at this huge football complex.

he built it in frisco. raise some money and raise your taxes, he was going to build it someplace else. the city build this thing, with the texas, and they made billions of dollars. when it came time to open the schools up last year, three brand-new schools, the city could not pay for it because they did not have the tax money to do it. this is what happens. what is not cheap is to maintain the roads, highways, the sewage. all the stuff that goes with this corporation. these guys get away free. they end up billionaires. they wonder why we can't -- for crying out loud. guest: i think that the point he was making was really valid.

the trade-off of these economic development subsidies have real effects for people in the real world. in the case of the stadiums built for the cowboys, they had to use eminent domain in a lot of those cases to move people off of their property in order to make room for the stadium. a lot of people would argue that the blatant misuse of government authority to use something that should be used only for public purposes and rare events to be used for something that they claim is economic development but really is probably the very .efinition of cronyism the same thing happened in foxconn in wisconsin where about 4.5 square miles of agricultural land was -- with scattering of homes, was declared blighted in order to use the threat of eminent domain to you -- move people off of their homes. in the meantime, foxconn is looking at scaling down their operations and it may not build

the same size of facility that it was originally going to build. the problem is that politicians believe that they benefit from economic development subsidies and they help people believe that they are doing something to make the community better. we need to change that dynamic and hold politicians accountable for the handouts they give to large corporations that costs ordinary people in the same way that you just described. the issue in detroit where they just gave hundreds of millions of dollars to a couple new stadiums, they are actually redirecting money from taxes that would have an going to public schools and sending that to fund the stadiums. meanwhile, the state itself is coming in and taking care of the money that would have been captured by property taxes in the city and going to public schools. it is an elaborate shell game. it comes to the point that public schools desperately need more funding. some of the funding is going to fund the stadium.

host: in northern virginia. caller: i agree with the former caller. glad to have him. a lot of people don't realize that it takes almost a decade of virginia to recoup the subsidies due to tax payer. those employees would be paying a bit of taxes. the corporations will be paying any taxes. it will take almost a decade for their salary of employees to recoup the billion dollars of giveaway. aresecond point is there housing impacts. while 60% of the people in northern virginia there are mostly retail and service employees, they don't make those high wages. they are being displaced because of the housing issue. dollars ofbillion the government virginia giveaway to a corporation that does not

need it could have been better thet on making sure that roadways employees have affordable housing so they can stay and work in the area. without hardship. that is the real tragedy of this. guest: absolutely. i agree that the subsidy that is being given, even the former -- smaller subsidy that virginia gave is not worth it because it is highly likely that amazon would have chosen arlington, virginia anyway. based on the preponderance of evidence from past academic research. the matter is arlington virginia, the county, was essentially ordered by the to give animals -- amazon 51 million in local subsidies as well. arlington county board still has to vote on whether to improve

that are not or there -- and there is movement to try to get them to not agree to that 51 million. you have to think that 51 million is not going to be enough to cause amazon to change where it will go. very likely, amazon would have picked arlington anyway. i think that it actually makes complete economic sense for arlington to not choose to do that. if they did that, they could increase their local police budget by 4% over the next 15 years. for and additional money housing or for teachers or students. that sort of thing. the same sort of thing, like you said, a lot of the population in arlington county is service and retail employees. one of the things that arlington can do to make housing more itsrdable is up zone zoning. residential zoning the way that minneapolis just did by allowing up to three residences to be built on single resident land.

most of minneapolis was single residence housing that keeps housing really expensive and really exclusive for more wealthy people. what you could do instead is follow minneapolis model and allow up zoning. more flexibility and zoning. the area around crystal city were a lot of amazon operations are going, very wealthy suburb called del ray, you always face the kind of local opposition against changing zoning policies. if we want affordable housing, we need to become more flexible in zoning. host: time for one or two more calls. i have a straight question for you. it is about small communities giving established businesses and how that has helped. can you answer that? guest: let me explain a little bit. that is a tax increment financing district.

if the local business agrees to expand, that the municipality property taxesre in order to the company fund that expansion. most cases, that is not a good idea in the same way that subsidies for relocating firms are not a great idea. the issue is most businesses are going to relocate or going to expand regardless of the situation. they are just using the fact that politicians get to claim credit for the job by offering the tif as a reason to get tax money back from taxpayers. it is shifting the tax basis from the company to other companies and other local taxpayers. that causes other local problems because there is not enough money for public services. you either have to see taxes rise for everyone else or a degradation in public services that the government provides. michael faron is a

research fellow at george mason university. always appreciate your time. up next. for the remainder of our program today, we want to hear from you about what you think is the biggest problem facing the united states. you can start dialing now. phone lines are on your screen. we will be right back. there are over 100 faces in the u.s. capitol after last year's elections. including josh hawley. he previously served two years as the state attorney general. earlier in his career, he worked for a nonprofit that does legal advocacy for religious freedom issues. he taught at the university of missouri law school. he is the youngest number of the u.s. senate. she is also an intern --

attorney who worked on tribal issues. she is the first openly gay person to represent kansas in washington dc. and one of the first to native american women elected to congress along with new mexico's deb haaland. the second district of kansas elected republican steve watkins, a former u.s. army captain and military contractor who suffered both a traumatic brain injury and posttraumatic stress disorder from his service in afghanistan. took up dogsled racing while stationed in alaska and participated in the iditarod twice. climb outed to everest. six members of his team died in the 2015 earthquake stopping the ascent. kevin herne adjoined congress slightly ahead of most other house freshmen last year, replacing his predecessor jim. he resigned to become the nasa administrator. congressman herne has in interest in space. he was pursuing a phd in astronautical engineering when

the 1986 challenger explosion changed his career plans. instead, he purchased a mcdonald's restaurant. that led to buying 18 more mcdonald's in the tulsa area. representative kendra horn has strong ties to the aerospace industry. she is a former executive at a nonprofit that advocates for the industry. earlier in her career, she was press secretary to a former congressman brad carson. she has also been an attorney in private practice. before her election to congress, representative horn was a consultant for a communication technology company. new congress, new leaders. watch it on c-span. announcer: washington journal continues. host: for the rest of our program today, a question for you. what are the most important problem facing the united states , asking it today, this thursday, in a week in which gallup history -- issued its latest results on the monthly polling's on this question about

america views on the top problems facing the united states. 35% of respondents in their february survey said the government and poorly -- leadership was the biggest problem facing the united states. the highest percentage gallup has recorded for that concern ever edging out a previous high of 33% during the 2013 federal government shutdown. the other problems listed in order of the largest percentage respondents, immigration, 19%. health care, 6%. race relations, 5%. unifying the country, 4%. poverty, hunger, homelessness, also coming in a 4%. the environment and pollution at 3%. and so on down the pole. onare asking you to call in phone lines for republicans, democrats, and independents. tells what you think is the most import and problem facing the united states. we will go through more data from nepal for both the february survey and historical numbers. let's start with dylan in new

york, an independent. go ahead. name is dylan. i'm 24 years old living in new york. i'm going to go ahead and talk had. the opioid crisis we we have an issue with heroin. and opioid does not cause by el chapo. heroin is grown in the middle east. opioids are prescribed by doctors. doctors are given incentives by big pharmaceuticals. to prey on vulnerable and weak people and keep them strung out on medications and keep them sick because we have a for-profit health care system. every other country in the world that is a first world nation has free health care for their people. host: why don't you believe the heroine is coming from mexico? caller: i'm sure some heroine is

coming from mexico. times2000, there has been where 90% of the heroine grown in the world was in afghanistan alone. bill, in florida, republican. caller: i think it is the border. i think there is a sure way to fix that. nine people in their black robes with dashed down to the border and see for themselves, that would say -- take the supreme court out of the occasion. mike is in rockford, illinois. independent. caller: good morning. it seems the biggest problems are our legislators that have been paid twice. once from us, 3000 a week. corporations. 30,000 a week. they are not really looking out

for us. author thing, you had an , he says they are building a new city on the tip of africa after leveling three villages and our politicians are investing over there. donald trump. the clintons. it's supposed to rival dubai. nobody talks about these kind of things that our politicians can be working against us because -- they are talking about bipartisan, they are talking counsel being a troubleshooter with stuff like that. they're not talking about why we are being sold out. why they are carrying for these illegals. more than our veterans. it is unbelievable. is it true that they are building a new city? , maybe thatssibly

is our true problem. they are selling us out because they're building a new city. the name of it is ocean breeze. it is supposed to be cutting edge. a level three vote -- they leveled three villages on the to of africa. host: if you want to go back and watch any of our c-span programming, all available on our website at c-span.org. 35% ofe information, respondents saying it is the government and poor leadership and it is a bipartisan group of respondents who feel that way. americans have different things in mind when they name the government as the most important problem. and analysis of the verbatim responses to that question in the latest survey, let percent of americans say donald trump as the most important problem while 5% named the democrats or

liberals and 1% saying congress. half of those who say the government is the most important problem, 18% of u.s. adults claim both prop -- parties are gridlocked for a lack of cooperation or the shutdown more generally. that is from the latest gallup poll on the most important problem facing the united states. one other number from nepal, the federal budget and federal debt listed as the most important problem by some 3% of respondents to that poll. a front-page story on today's washington times takes a look at the debt issue. and how congress is or is not dealing with it. $22 trillion national debt is low on capitol hill's priority. petersburg, virginia. democrat. caller: the most important problem facing america, the most think aboutif you

it, all the complex and complicated issues that the legislative's is dealing with right now, can be traced back to one thing. that is money and politics. the bottom line is right now, big corporations and the rich are making legislative decisions that affect this country. that is what has got immigration all screwed up. that's what scott health care all screwed up. that has what has got everything all screwed up. you have the rich and powerful, big corporations playing the country. the supreme court has already shown there were not -- they will not help with that because they have already indicated that corporations are citizens. that is probably the worst -- other than eminent domain that supreme court has ever made. it is absolutely ridiculous. host: scott in north carolina. republican. i think that the

division of the united states is our biggest issue. we have had past presidents try that did notand get them done. , just get them done. host: what are those certain things? caller: his work on the immigration issue. he has actually succeeded with it. unemployment. the actuallyith the getting along with other countries. scott in north carolina on the immigration issue.

19% of respondents in that gallup poll that came out just this week saying immigration is the top problem facing the united states. john is in florida. good morning. what i would like to say is that businesses get cheap labor, make lots of money, and by our politicians. immigrants coming into this country were driving up the price of labor, they would not be coming into this country. thank you. maria is next in shelton, connecticut. democrat. what is the most important problem facing the country? caller: migration. i am there to support them. with the congress and the representatives. they don't represent the people. united states. they don't care how many people enter into this country. how many people are legal, i believe that president trump doing so far, i see a good job for the american people. and that they are against them. peoplethey listen to the

and do the people well. host: fuller in maryland. caller: good morning. i think i am a first-time caller. anyway, the biggest problem is ethical, moral standards and values, that is not necessarily a democratic thing that people promote. it is for me, as a democrat. it is character. have problems that are incurring, including financial challenges that people talk about, money and politics, the problem comes from greed and selfishness and things that aren't based on a solid immutable values, mine happens to come from christianity. that, to me, is the problem. host: the poll listing ethics,

morals, religious and family decline as the biggest problem facing the united states. that is some 3% of respondents saying that is the biggest problem. well below the government and poor leadership as the number one issue cited by respondents. theercent saying it is biggest problem facing the united states or joe, what do you think in hollywood, florida. independent. caller: people feel like nothing's going right. they are depressed be do have a lot of -- the opioid use is part of that. -- somethingething i was missed today is the wheren case in maryland he is a white supremacist with a statue of weapons. tramadol.cted to he is an open to -- opioid. tramadol. he is an open to -- opioid.

fake urine taken past his -- passes drug test. he is not some loser or loner. he is an established guy and he is off the rails. he his heart on opioids. there is something wrong with american people and they are reaching out for drugs and whatever they can find weird it is not just white supremacy. people are reaching of her medications be it i think they are making it worse because it takes away your inhibitions. you feel like you can do these crazy things. i think people should step back and really question when the doctor is telling you to just take this, it is all drugs. maybe the cannabis is the answer. it is something that is not going to make you go crazy and kill everybody. just saying. host: that is joe. this is dan. republican. conservative. i realize that profits should only be made on those things are optional. health care and a number of

other things like that are not optional. pride -- pride in the word entrepreneur appeared entrepreneurial is a 19th century -- 19th-century pejorative french term. we have just got too many takers in the middle between the producers and the consumers. in the only ask that case of basil's and his company, they are taking a little something from everybody to add so much for one person. we should really consider that it may be the time that we can -- conservatives should welcome ,ernie sanders as a socialist as a balance. he is not a communist, but socialist who would balance against some of this crazy stuff that we are seeing going on now where the entrepreneurs are everything. it is the acceleration of profit rather than the level of profit

that makes a corporation valuable. that means that it does not matter how much of a profit they make. last year, what make -- what counts is that next year, they are making twice or three times as much. it is the acceleration. it has got to go faster or higher. we can't live like this. pretty soon, the profits will be greater than the product. the economy has a limited capacity. if we compare with the chinese, we have a lot of entrepreneurs. they have got a lot of good holes by the government. we don't want a system like that. we want a system where health care, for example, is not-for-profit because education, and people need those things. they cannot live without them. it is like somebody taking over all the oxygen and all the water and selling us at 10 pounds a drop. some of the historical numbers from that gallup poll on the most important problem facing the country. gallup began asking about the most important problem.

a few other issues have matched or exceeded the 35% who currently mention the government has the biggest problem in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. mentioned of terrorism topped the list in the most import and problem peaking at 46%. mentions of the situation in in early 2007. the highest percentage naming iraq as the biggest problem was 38% in february of that year. the year leading up to and after the global financial crisis of 2008, the percentage of americans naming the economy reached record heights for any mention in gallup's reaching 58% in november of 2008. this is all from the gallup report that is available at gallup.com pier 1 of the most important problems facing the u.s.. what do you think it is. -- south bend, indiana, a democrat. caller: you are right, government. the reason why we have the problem and the government right

now is because of how the district's in each state are derived. we need to do something about how we draw the district. the independent commission no longer is how we have been doing it in the past. that is why, in this district, more on that, the one i am in, andrict two, -- has a lock he needs to go. that is why we need district reform on how we draw these districts. thank you. greg in texas, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to complement on what is going on in our society. that you caning is sit here and be on cable hill and, you there? you sit there and pay a cable

bill and you have -- they force you to -- you are an indication. everybody calling and listening and people may just call in. this is what they listen to. not fox news, not pc why, not america. fox business news. they need to call in and listen in to you. you have people that call in on this showed that make sense. that can put this country back together. if you look at bilbo location and make america great, millions of fox news candidate and skinner, we show colors on blast, people on the other side, they say we can use the word, shoot up with stools, they do not put that in there, little kids harassing people. that is what i like about this show. to other newsget going on, it is fox news and other, always doing is putting

cash pulling our country apart. this show right here, thank you for pitching in. we need a town hall meeting. host: anthony is next. chicago. you know what one of the biggest problems is? big companies like coca-cola and all these plastic bottles on the street. they should be made to make $.25 for every bottle pickup -- picked up on the streets from illinois to alabama. i am tired of polluting the oceans. the woods, everything. let's start by letting these companies be held accountable. five minutes left in our program this mine. you can keep calling in at c-span viewers -- as c-span

viewers note to congress is away this week on a recess. expected back on monday. already, stories about what they expect next week in the week ahead in washington. one high-profile hearing will certainly be this one. michael:, president trump's former lawyer, agreed to that testify public before the house oversight committee on february the 27th. in his testimony before the health -- house oversight committee, he is expected to criticize his one-time's, a man for whom he once said he would take a bullet. the story in the wall street journal today notes that the oversight hearing will come a day before mr. cohen speaks privately to the house intelligence committee. he has also been subpoenaed to appear privately before the senate intelligence committee. earlier this month, he postponed that testimony following shoulder surgery. another story about michael collins -- michael cohen and his prison sentence. this from the washington times per president trump's attorney, michael cohen will report the president and may instead of

next month. after a federal judge approved a delay yesterday. the u.s. district judge approved the request by cohen's legal team pram him to surrender to prison on may the sixth instead of march the sixth third it is a three-year present sentence. back to your calls. what is the most important problem facing the united states? two minutes left. alicia is in columbia, maryland. >> -- caller: good morning. thank you for taking our calls spend our the time to concerns. good morning, america. i think one of the things that is troubling this country is grown.eat has really especially the ones who already have so much. , in reference to

the, your guests that you just had previously, he was talking about amazon. isn't the owner of amazon the same guy who owns washington post? host: jeff bezos. yes. caller: you know, how much can you get before you are satisfied? most of us have worked hard and save a little and that is what we are living on besides social security and pensions. that is sufficient. what you buy your house, have your car, furnish your house, you educate your children here it how much more do you really

need? i think the greed is really a disease. it goes from top to bottom. jerry in new york. a republican. caller: jerry in new york. a republican. caller: we can start with the drug problem. prescription drugs. i feel that i would like to initiate what i call a no pain campaign. that is that individuals can decline taking prescription drugs that are highly addictive. house rules cap -- hospitals can decline to prescribe them. and leave the fda to ban the most dangerous ones -- prescription drugs that are articulate. thank you. host: lisa is in greenville, south carolina. go ahead. caller: good morning. it is poor

leadership. i agree with the lovely lady about when you go so high and they don't think about the ones lower than others. i live in greenville. i'm am in a lot of low income families that are not qualified for jobs. we need to focus on jobs and different parts of the state and city. the most important thing of all is the cities. the state is a big issue of the size of where you are. the city is not just in the respect that we need as a government or mayor that supposedly, people doing their jobs, but they are not doing what they need to do. they are not communicating what -- with their local low income families. of towns.ent portion host: is that a failure of the

local city leadership? andt a failure of the media what they cover and how much attention gets paid to different problems? caller: caller: yes. it is a failure of leadership of the government for what they call secretariat. they don't, they say they work, they do not work. if they was working we would not have the issues what we have today. because, they close the door or they say we don't have the funds. funds, you helpe are like your skin and that is discrimination of all peoples of different nationalities of different cities or towns. host: we got your point. : i heard democrats talking about all the lobbyists should be banned, none. no more.

this is such a greedy country. that is a very important thing to go one. the guy talking about the drug .ar, the opioids 480,000 people die from cigarettes every year, but they are talked about that. because theylegal kill more than all of the other drugs put together? you can't people know that because then we won't make millions of dollars from the money anymore. has many in colorado helpful things. i have an article in my scrapbook that says doctors are petitioning the federal government to have more test on marijuana because they had more patience with seizures.

that is better than any medicine they have ever had in their life from any doctor. host: that was our last caller. we will be back here tomorrow morning as usual, 7:00 a.m. eastern. will not take you live to the center for american progress. oregon governor kate brown is at an event this morning. she'll be discussing for the precipitation -- participation in the 2020 election. that is the beginning momentarily here on c-span. >> good morning and thank you for joining us here at the center for american progress. our program will begin shortly. please take this time to silence all cell phones. after the conversation, there will be a brief time for

questions.

>> we are like this morning. several oregon state lawmakers introduced a bill that would ask the organ constitution to lower the voting age from 18 years old to 16 years old. governor kate brown is expected this morning to offer her thoughts. this is an event hosted by the center for american progress. live coverage on c-span. we expect to start just a moment.

>> we are live the center for american progress this morning awaiting remarks from oregon's governor kate around. she's expected to talk about voter precipitate -- participation in the upcoming 2020 election. lawmakers introduced a bill wanting to lower the voting age from 18 years old to 16 years old. this is live on c-span.

>> welcome to the center for american progress. today, the fundamental right to vote is being attacked from all directions. wh